National Assembly for Wales

Good afternoon, everybody. I call the Assembly to order, please. 

The first item on our agenda this afternoon is item 1, which is questions to the First Minister, and question 1 is Llyr Gruffydd.

Thank you. May I begin by thanking those volunteers who’ve worked so hard during the very inclement weather, and especially those who have helped to transport health service staff to their places of work, and those who have worked so hard to ensure that there is less pressure on the NHS, local government and, of course, the emergency services? 

We are providing full funding of £27 million to local authorities to enable them to meet the care and support needs of those who currently receive payments from the Welsh independent living grant.

People with disabilities who are in receipt of this grant tell me that their greatest concern is losing that element of independence that the grant provides them on a personal level. They appreciate the independence more than anything else. So, what assurance can you give that they will continue to enjoy the same independence when that grant is brought to an end by your Government?

We’ve been monitoring what the local authorities have been doing, and that monitoring will continue in the current situation, namely the transition period. From the beginning of that period in April of last year to the end of that period, we will be monitoring the actions of local government. We know, of course, that individuals have been assessed during that same period. I know that the Minister is aware of the need to monitor the experience of individuals as regards the process at present, and the Minister is considering the way forward in order to ensure that there is assurance for those in receipt of the grant.

Thanks for that partial clarification. The independent living fund, pre-devolution, was about giving individuals choice and control over how they spent their money, their fund, to live independently. Initially, the Welsh independent living grant worked that way, but, unlike Scotland and Northern Ireland that have developed their models in partnership with the third sector, you're requiring local authorities to meet with people receiving the grant to agree the support they need to do this. The Save the Welsh Independent Living Grant campaign says that independent living is a rights issue and closing the Welsh independent living grant is a betrayal of disabled people, their families, friends, staff and community because it takes their voice, choice, control and independence away from them. I know that the leader of the campaign met Huw Irranca-Davies in January, and the leader of that campaign subsequently said that this was probably the most important meeting of his life. That's how important this is. Will you, at this final point, please listen to this community and recognise that independence means giving them choice and control, and not having to agree how they should spend their money with well-meaning experts in county hall when they are the real experts in their own lives?

In terms of how we got to where we are, there was an advisory group, as the Member will know, which recommended providing future support through local authorities' social services. Now, the principle behind that was to ensure that all disabled people in Wales were supported to live in the same way, and to ensure that the finite funding—let's remember that transferred from the UK Government—is used directly for that purpose and not on the operating costs of separate arrangements for only some disabled people. We've made sure in Wales that every penny of that money has gone to recipients. That has not been the case elsewhere in the UK. 

First Minister, I've been contacted by a number of constituents who are also concerned about the future working of the grant. My constituents are not concerned as to where this funding comes from, whether it's Welsh Government or local authorities. All that concerns them is that they will be given the same level of support. So, what can the Welsh Government do to monitor this new system to ensure that local authorities continue to provide that level of support?

Well, that monitoring is continuing. We know that local authorities had reviewed, or were in the process of reviewing, the future support needs of just over 350 of the former ILF recipients in Wales. Out of these, just over 30 had already agreed and were receiving their future support either direct from the authority or by receiving direct payments in order to obtain their support themselves. Now, there is a need, of course, to continue with the monitoring arrangements, as I mentioned earlier on. We want to monitor recipients' experience of the process, and that is what the Minister is considering at the moment in terms of how that might be taken forward.

First Minister, many local authorities appear to be struggling to meet their obligations under the Social Services and Well-being Act (Wales) 2014. For example, many carers across the country have not received carer assessments. The end of the independent living grant places additional pressures on local authority social services. First Minister, can you guarantee that those in receipt of the independent living grant will receive support that is equal to or better than the support they currently receive once local authorities have to provide that support?

Well, the money has been transferred to local authorities. We want to make sure that the level of care remains at least as good as it has been in the past. And I remind the Member, of course, that the amount we spend on social services per head in Wales is significantly higher than in England.

Well, we consulted on lowering the voting age for local government elections recently. That change will be implemented for the next elections, given effect through the local government Bill in the autumn. And I know the Llywydd is consulting separately in respect of elections to the Assembly.

I thank the First Minister for that reply. There are strong arguments for reducing the voting age to 16, but would the First Minister agree with me that consistency is also an important element in the law, and if somebody is adult enough to be able to participate in choosing the Government of the country at the age of 16, they should be able to drive a car lawfully, to decide for themselves whether to get their bodies tattooed or pierced, they should be able to buy alcohol lawfully, they shouldn't be subject to any rules on film censorship, and so on and so forth? If we are not to have any consistency across the whole range of the law, what possible justification could there be?

Well, there's no consistency in that case now. I believe that 16-year-olds are well able to vote. They're able, for example, to give their consent for medical procedures. Why then should they not be able to form their own minds, make up their own minds, in terms of who to vote for? They can't drive until they're 17, they can't consume alcohol until they're 18, they can't be a competent driver until they're 21, they can't ride any motorcycle of any engine size until they're 24. There are inconsistencies, of course, but, nevertheless, to my mind, 16 is an appropriate age, and the Scots showed this in their referendum, for young people to be able to vote at.

First Minister, perhaps you've noted that, in Scotland, in the referendum on Scottish independence, the number of 16 and 17-year-olds who voted was 75 per cent. That compares to 54 per cent for the age group just after that—18 to 24—and a very similar differential was present in the 2017 Scottish local elections. Do you agree with me that engraining a habit to vote early offers great benefit to society and allows us to focus on the responsibilities of citizenship, but also our ability to influence what goes on around us in the world in which we live?

Absolutely. In Northern Ireland, in many years gone by, the slogan was, 'Vote early, vote often'. The second bit of it, I suspect, we need to leave out. But the figures speak for themselves. The fact that 16 to 18-year-olds turned out at a far higher rate than those in the immediate age group beyond shows how enthusiastic they are, how engaged they are with the political process, and how important it is that that sense of engagement continues as they get older.

Plaid Cymru supports extending the franchise to young people at 16 and 17-years-old, certainly, but we want to encourage people of all ages to vote in higher numbers, and, to do that, we need to give them good reasons to vote, and you can’t just expect people to vote because you’ve given them the right to do so. So, in your proposals for reforming local authority elections, where are you putting the priority? Is it by ensuring that all votes count via a proportional system, by changing the voting system, elections on different days, electronic voting, voting using different methods? Where do you think you will not only get young people to have the right to vote, but how you will encourage them to vote, too?

Well, there is scope to consider the methods that people use to vote. For example, there’s no reason why every election has to be on a Thursday. Why can’t we have elections on the weekend?  That happens in a number of other countries. Historically, Sunday would be difficult in Wales, but voting happens on the weekend in a number of countries, where more people can go out to vote. In time, I’m sure we will see people being able to vote electronically. Of course, there are issues regarding the security of doing that, but I’m sure they will be resolved. What is crucial is that we ensure that people want to vote, that they understand how the system works, that they have a desire to vote, and then, of course, consider how we could facilitate that further.

First Minister, the proposals announced by the Welsh Government in January to lower the voting age to 16 in local council elections achieved wide cross-party support, and, as the Cabinet Secretary for Local Government and Public Services has stated,

'Local democracy is all about participation.' 

First Minister, it is our duty to ensure the political rights that we bestow on all our children are allied with commensurate political activity and literacy. What actions, therefore, can the Welsh Government take to ensure that every Welsh child, wherever they are born and educated in Wales, has access to comprehensive and universal civic education at the heart of their education to ensure that they are politically literate on the governance of Wales and the United Kingdom?    

Well, we are developing a new curriculum for Wales and one of the four purposes of the new curriculum is that young people leave education as ethical, informed citizens who are able to understand and exercise their human and democratic responsibilities and rights. Of course, making sure that happens in practice will be an important part of the curriculum, because we know that education is about qualifications, yes, but it's also about developing the whole person and the whole person's knowledge of society around them. 

We'll now turn to the party leaders to question the First Minister, and the first up today is the leader of Plaid Cymru, Leanne Wood. 

Diolch yn fawr iawn. First Minister, the media has reported today that at least 271 highly vulnerable mental health patients have died over the last six years after failings in NHS care, and that 136 NHS bodies have been given legal warnings by coroners. As is often the case, the report refers to patients in England and Wales. Can you tell us whether any Welsh NHS body has been subject to a legal warning by coroners regarding the death of a mental health patient? 

I'm not aware of one, but I will write to the leader of Plaid Cymru with more information on that. 

Okay, thank you for that.

There have been many calls for an inquiry into these deaths, including calls from your own party. Now, we know that there have been failings in mental health care in Wales. We can all remember the Tawel Fan scandal. So, I don't think there's any room for complacency on this question. Suicide rates are higher in Wales than they are in Scotland and England, yet we also know that a minority of people who lose their lives have had contact with mental health services in the year prior to their death. This suggests that the mental health needs of all, but possibly young people in particular, are not being met. Can our public services be more proactive in identifying and supporting people who are experiencing mental health crises to get help earlier, and do you have an access problem with your mental health services? 

I think there are issues with certain sections of the population not accessing services, not wanting to or not recognising where they may have symptoms that imply a negative state of mental health. Of course, through the schools, we have a support system now that helps young people, and we would encourage GPs, as they talk to people who come to see them perhaps with physical ailments, to actually try to identify whether there is something deeper that is affecting a person's overall state of health. 

I think you can do much more than that, First Minister. We know that children and young people with mental health difficulties go an average of 10 years between first becoming unwell and getting any help. And many of us here in this room, I'm sure, will have casework of patients who have had to fight to get any support at all.

Now, I've got reason to believe that the number of people detained by the police under section 136 for their own safety, which is due to be published soon, will have gone up dramatically. I've also been informed that because some patients are not deemed to be at immediate risk, despite having been sectioned, they can be waiting days for transfer. Service capacity is clearly inadequate to deal with crisis, and reducing the usage of section 136 has to now be a priority for your Government.

I will come back to this issue when those figures are published, but wouldn't you agree with me now that it's a good time to have a wider inquiry into our emergency mental health system to identify these failings? Isn't it time to stop pretending that everything is fine, when clearly these figures demonstrate that it's not?

I think it's important to wait to see what those figures actually show, and then, on the basis of what we find, to see what action needs to be taken. In terms of mental health in Wales, we've seen the provision for children and young people improve substantially with the extra money—£8 million, if I remember—that went into those services, and, of course, what is being done in schools to assist young people as well. She mentions figures that are yet to come out. I think it's important to wait until those figures are out and then make an assessment of what more needs to be done in order to bring the figure down—those who are subject to section 136 orders and, of course, those who, tragically, take their own lives. 

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

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. First Minister, I join you in your comments earlier, when you answered question 1, on the heroic efforts of the emergency services and everyone over the winter weather that we had back last Thursday. There have been some heroic stories, but also some heart-warming ones as well. Equally, it boils down to the fact that what local authorities, health boards and other public bodies are facing once the clean-up operation is complete is a rather large financial bill that will land in treasurers' departments the length and breadth of local authorities across Wales. What discussions, if any, at this very early stage, has the Welsh Government had with public sector bodies—health boards and local authorities—in helping them meet this financial bill, which they weren't expecting this late in the winter?

There have been discussions with local authorities. At this moment in time, we have asked local authorities to quantify what the extra pressures might be in order for us to better understand the situation.

I take it from that that there will be Welsh Government support coming forward for local authorities, First Minister, in particular some of the ones here in the south, which seem to have had the biggest quantity of snow dropped on them.

But I would like to ask you a question about the National Procurement Service, which the Public Accounts Committee looked at yesterday and which the auditor general has highlighted as being particularly poor value for money for the Welsh pound. When it was first brought forward, the then finance Secretary to the Welsh Government said that this was going to be a collaborative model to actually deliver savings in public procurement—£4 billion of public procurement goes on here in Wales. The initial sum allocated was to try to save money—around £1 billion of public procurement on electricity costs and other costs that are met. It was deemed a

'very Welsh way to meet Welsh business needs but also value for money for the Welsh pound'.

Well, virtually on all counts it seems to have missed its goals. What are you doing, First Minister, as a Government, to either make this system work better or actually reform it totally so we can get better value for the Welsh pound?

First of all, it has to be said that the NPS hasn't lost money. It's not yet at the point where it can pay for itself from levy subscriptions, but the service is on target to secure the public purchasing services envisaged, and that's about £40 million so far. The NPS actually belongs to its 73 members across the public service. It is governed by an independently chaired board, comprised of representatives of the membership. We have hosted the service and we have supported it financially, but we don't actually own the NPS alone.

I can say that uptake of NPS frameworks has increased steadily since it became fully operational in 2015, and it's still increasing. An indicative figure for spend for 2016 was £234 million, an increase of over 50 per cent on the previous year, and that means indicative savings of £14.8 million. So, we know that the service is growing. It wouldn't be the case to say that it has lost money, but it's not yet in a position where its levy subscriptions are covering its costs.

First Minister, it's unable to pay the initial capital that you made available to it of £6 million, or its annual running costs of £2.5 million. In its first year, it was only able to attract £330,000 of levy money, as you put it. It has missed virtually every target that was set in its first year—it's now in year 3. By any measure, what could have been an exciting National Procurement Service, actually delivering real value back to the taxpayer, has failed to achieve its goals. If you look at Welsh Government procurement, only 32 per cent of its own procurement is localised here in Wales. With your document 'Prosperity for All', you talk about delivering greater payback to communities across the length and breadth of Wales. Well, using the procurement service, you've failed in its first three years. How are you going to actually meet the policy initiative that is in your 'Prosperity for All' document with, obviously, delivering that Welsh pound back to businesses?

We're confident that the NPS is on target. What the NPS needs to consider is whether to increase the subscription in order to provide more revenue for itself to cover those costs in the future. But we're confident that it's on course to meet its target and, as I say, the public purchasing savings that are envisaged as part of that target we believe we will meet. What we do know is that around £40 million has been saved so far through the procurement service.  

The leader of the UKIP group, Neil Hamilton. 

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. All Members, I'm sure, are pleased, albeit in varying degrees, to see the return safely of the First Minister from the United States of America. I read the written statement that was published this morning by the Welsh Government of what he did on his trip there, and I was quite surprised to see that there was no mention of any meetings with members of the United States Government administration. And on the very day President Trump announced that he was intending to see tariffs introduced on steel from all parts of the world, the First Minister was meeting the person who lost to President Trump in the presidential election, Hillary Clinton. Shouldn't the First Minister be more interested in playing power politics than the politics of impotence? 

I'm not sure whether the leader of UKIP thinks I should have broken down the door of the White House in order to demand a meeting with the President of the US. It doesn't work that way, I can assure him. But, of course, the issue of steel tariffs puts a very big hole in his view of the world, a post-Brexit world, because we were told by him and by others that the way was now open for us to do a deal, a free trade agreement, with the US, and yet one of the first things the US has done is impose tariffs on steel that we actually export to the US. It's not a very friendly action, is it? 

The First Minister knows that the United States' concern about steel exports to the United States is not with Britain, because actually there's been an 11 per cent reduction in the volume and value of steel that is exported from the UK to the US in the last two years. The quarrel is with countries like China, which produces half the world's steel and where there's massive excess capacity equivalent to the entire consumption of steel in the United States over one year, and countries like Vietnam and Canada, which export to the United States 10 times as much steel as we do. The President is concerned about the effect of the North American free trade agreement with Canada and Mexico. We happen to be caught up in the slipstream of all this. The response of the European Union to the President's announcement is likely to be disastrous whilst we are within the customs union, because the European Commission now says it wants to retaliate by introducing tariffs on cars, perhaps, and other manufactured goods, which could have massive impacts upon British workers' jobs and Welsh workers' jobs over many parts of the country. If we had an independent trade policy outside the customs union of the EU, we would perhaps be able to strike our own deals with other countries, in particular the United States, which is our biggest single trading partner apart from the 27 countries of the EU.     

Let me try and educate him. First of all, US businesses want to see free trade. That much is true. The US Government does not. It does not. These steel tariffs are being imposed on all countries. He may be right in saying that China and other countries are the main target, but this is a blunt instrument that's being used against all. No-one has said in the US administration that the UK will be exempt in some way, or the EU will be exempt in some way. This is a tariff against all. He then criticises the European Union for suggesting that there may be retaliation. What does he expect? Is he saying that if the UK was not in the EU, there would be no action by the UK Government? Because if he wants a definition of impotence, he's just given it. 

The question is whether we should attempt to solve these problems by diplomacy and sensible talking to other parties, or engage in the kind of megaphone bellicosity that has come out of Brussels in the last few days. There are very serious issues at stake her. Other countries like Germany and Spain export far more steel to the United States than Britain does. So, Britain is not the cause of the current problems and concerns in the United States. Whilst it's true the announcement that's been made so far is on the basis of this tariff applying universally throughout the world, the details of what's proposed are not yet published, of course, and those are up for negotiation. The US commerce secretary has said as much.

So, I revert to the first question I asked the First Minister: does he not think it would have been sensible to open some channels of communication, even if it wasn't at the level of the President of the United States himself, who is very pro-British—it's obvious from the things that he's said in the time that he's been in office—[Interruption.] Well, Members can laugh, but the United States is globally a vastly important influence upon the economy and in particular on jobs and the livelihoods of people in this country. We should surely want to get on as well as we could with the leader of the free world and with one of our most important trading partners. 

Well, he talks about megaphone bellicosity without any sense of irony and blames Brussels for it. I have to say, the reality is that the current US Government—I don't believe this is a view shared by US businesses at all, nor those who invest in Wales—wants to impose 24 per cent tariffs on steel from the UK. I agree with him; the UK is not the main target for these tariffs, but is caught up in it anyway. Now, the Prime Minister herself has spoken to the President, to no effect at all, in terms of these tariffs being lifted. Now, is he really saying that if the US imposes tariffs on goods coming into the US, that the UK and the EU should do nothing at all in response? I'm afraid that's not the way the world works.

I'd prefer to see a situation where the US has freer trade with the EU and, by definition, the UK, but it may have escaped his attention that the US has the most protectionist Government it has had for many, many decades. It is not interested in free trade deals that are not wholly of benefit to the US. When I was in the US, one of the themes that emerged was that the NAFTA negotiations are based on the US demanding everything for itself and no flexibility as far as Canada and Mexico are both concerned. You cannot be a protectionist Government on the one hand and then say you want to have free trade on the other. I very much regret the announcement that was made by the US President in terms of steel tariffs. It may have an effect on the Welsh steel industry, but to sit back and do nothing is the most impotent response imaginable.  

Thank you. We now move back to questions on the order paper. Question 3, Mark Reckless. 

Yes. I refer the Member to my written statement, which was issued earlier today.

The First Minister went to the United States promoting a free trade deal between the UK and the United States. He came back saying we have to leave it to the EU. Isn't the truth that his policy of a new customs union with the EU is the worst of all worlds, in that we would have no independent trade policy yet we would have no say and no vote over the EU's trade policy? As with Turkey, the EU would set our trade policy and we would have no say. The US or Russia could specifically target UK exports and we would have no power to respond. How on earth would that be in our interests? 

Well, size and mass are important. The UK is just 60 million. The EU is far, far bigger. The US is far, far bigger. We are surely in a better position when we work with other countries in order to develop a common goal. That seems to me to be perfect common sense. But I have to say to him—. He mentions the customs union. Once again I say in this Chamber: offer a better alternative to the customs union—none has been offered—and secondly, solve Ireland. How many times have I said it? I was saying it three years ago in this Chamber, that Ireland was at the heart of the problem when it came to a deal between the UK and the EU. Nobody has come forward with any suggestion that involves the possibility of an open border between the north and south in Ireland and yet still have the UK out of the customs union and the republic inside the customs union. That would create a situation where smuggling would be rife, there's no question about that. That is the question that was never answered in the referendum, hasn't been answered now and still has no solution, apart from the obvious solution which is to stay in the customs union. 

During your meetings with representatives of the Government of Quebec last week, did you have an opportunity to discuss the veto that they have in Quebec over international trade deals? You, in your comments to date, have said that you want Wales to have an influence, but not the kind of veto that territories of Canada, for example, and, truth be told, European regions such as Flanders and Wallonie have. Have you changed your view given your visit?

Well, it wasn't raised during the discussions. Of course, the Quebec Government is one that believes in the unity of Canada, but they don't view it as any kind of a problem. But, of course, one of the things I did discuss with them was the system of shared sovereignty that exists in Canada. And that is a system that, in my view, should be considered in the United Kingdom.

First Minister, the leader of the UKIP group has already raised the issue that President Trump tweeted about the trade tariffs on steel. Unlike him, I and my constituents—many are steelworkers—have deep concerns about the content of that tweet and the implications it has for the steel industry. Will you raise as a Government with the UK Government as much as possible the actions to be taken within the UK to protect the steel industry because the cost to the UK steel industry is unacceptable? It might be 10 per cent going out to the United States because of Tata, but that 10 per cent has major financial implications for steel and implications for Port Talbot. Will you therefore protect the steel industry as much as you can and make sure the UK Government does so and works with the EU this time, rather than hinders it, in actually addressing this issue?

Absolutely. I know that a letter has gone from UK Steel to the UK Government emphasising this point, saying the obvious point that whatever is not able to be exported will seek to find a market within the EU, and that will inevitably mean a depression in the price of steel, and that will have an effect on all European steelmakers, including, of course, those in Wales.

I very much regret the blunt imposition of tariffs that has been imposed by the US Government. Look, I have argued for tariffs in the past against steel from China. I've said it in this Chamber. But the whole point is that you look to be selective in order to make sure that you protect your industries against those products that carry the greatest risk. Welsh steel is not a risk to US steel. It's not a risk to American security, it's not a risk to the US steel industry because we produce products that, by and large, are not manufactured in the US, and yet here we have the US Government trying to use the blunt instrument of a tariff against all goods coming into the US, and that is a point that we have made to the UK Government, that this is something that's not acceptable. In fairness, the UK Government has accepted that point. We know that the Prime Minister has spoken to the President of the US expressing her grave concern at what's being proposed.

We expect the Welsh ambulance service to work with partners to deliver sufficient emergency ambulance cover to ensure all patients who require an emergency response receive that in a time commensurate to their clinical need.

Well, I thank the First Minister for that answer, but does he feel that it is unacceptable that one of my elderly constituents, after suffering a fall, had to wait over 10 hours for an ambulance to arrive? This was before the recent inclement weather. During this time, she was advised by response staff not to move in case she exacerbated her injuries. Dutifully, she lay on the bathroom floor until the ambulance arrived. I would like to state here that the care she received from the ambulance crew once they attended was excellent in all respects. Nevertheless, does the First Minister not agree with me that it is totally unacceptable that, in twenty-first century Wales, a patient has to wait 10 hours for an ambulance response?

It's very difficult to offer an answer to the scenario that the Member has posed because I'm not familiar with all the facts. However, I'd be more than happy to investigate this for him, if you were to write to me with further details, to see what happened in this—. I've got no reason to doubt what he's saying, of course, but in order for me to give him a full answer and his constituent a full answer, if he were to write to me, I will provide that answer.

A specific question on waiting times during the bad weather that we've just experienced—we are aware of the particular pressures put on the ambulance service because of the snow. I've heard one particularly concerning report about the impact of waiting a very long time on a specific patient. Heavy snow isn't something that happens on a weekly basis, but neither is it something that's entirely exceptional. Can the First Minister refer us to information that will provide us with assurances that the ambulance service does plan as much as possible in order to cope when we do experience circumstances of extreme weather as we had last week?

I will give you some of the background and then go on to say what actually happened during the bad weather. First, there was an increase in the number of calls, as Members would expect. There were 103 red alert calls on the Sunday, which was 20 per cent higher than the previous week, so there was an increase in calls, as people would expect. What, then, did the ambulance service do? They worked very closely with the health boards and their emergency service partners, through the gold command, because that is how it is resolved and co-ordinated, in order to ensure that every resource is used to support them. What does that mean practically? Well, a 4x4 vehicle and also, of course, the air ambulance helicopter to ensure that they could reach people who needed emergency treatment during the last week.

So, what happens is that the response is co-ordinated through gold command to ensure that all the emergency services work together to help each other and, of course, to help the public.

Thank you. Sorry, I was just listening to the end of the translation, which was slightly behind you. Question 5, Mike Hedges.

Through their teaching and research activities, Welsh universities are contributing to the wider prosperity and well-being of Wales, raising the country’s profile internationally and attracting investment. And, of course, they have an important role to play in delivering our economic action plan.

Can I thank the First Minister for that response? Across Europe, North America and parts of England, universities act as major drivers of economic development and not just as major employers. For example, Mannheim has the Mannheim Center for Entrepreneurship and Innovation and provides a founder and incubator platform for students, young entrepreneurs and investors. Aarhus has, like Cambridge, a research park fostering innovation and employment. Does the Welsh Government have any proposals to emulate those two successful European cities within the two city regions of Wales?

Well, I would argue, of course, that they are already in place, to a great extent, and are being developed. If we look, for example, at the Menai science park development around Bangor University, it's one example of collaboration between Government, industry and Bangor University itself. Other examples? Well, Swansea University's second innovation campus, of course—one of the largest knowledge economy developments in the UK, which, I know, before the Member for Aberavon points out to me, is in his constituency, but nevertheless, of course, it's an important driver for both neighbouring constituencies and beyond.

We have the Trinity Saint David SA1 innovation quarter and that is estimated to contribute more than £3 billion to the regional economy over the next 10 years. We have SPECIFIC, based, of course, at Swansea University, collaborating with Tata Steel, with NSG Pilkington and AkzoNobel, and that focuses on the generation storage and release of energy related to buildings, and, of course, more widely, a compound semiconductor cluster infrastructure between Cardiff University and IQE and Aberystwyth's innovation and enterprise campus. So, we are seeing now the development in a number of universities of innovation and—the example I've given in Bangor—science parks in order to turn intellectual property and research into jobs.

The approach to strengthening local government is under consideration at present. Proposals will be set out in due course.

Thank you. Here, last week, your Cabinet Secretary for local government confirmed that he will not proceed with the earlier proposals made to regionalise on a mandatory basis, and therefore, to all intents and purposes, his predecessor’s proposals are going to be binned, as far as I can see. Is there an agreement within your Cabinet on this fundamental change of direction?

Well, the situation hasn’t changed with regard to the way forward. What everybody accepts, I’m sure, is that we must consider the way in which local government works. Nobody’s arguing that the current system is one that works well, and, of course, we want to work with other parties to ensure that the structure is more sustainable ultimately.

Yes. This is one of the areas the Minister for Housing and Regeneration will be looking at as part of a wider review of leasehold and service charge issues.  

I'd like to take the opportunity to commend the Minister for Housing and Regeneration on the work done to minimise the leasehold contract. There is one area where leaseholders actually have more rights than freeholders and that is where leaseholders can challenge what they see as unreasonable service charges by estate management companies. Freeholders' rights in this regard are much more limited. Indeed, when a freeholder constituent in my constituency e-mailed an estate management company to complain, they had an e-mail back from the company director of the estate management company telling them to get a life.

I'm introducing a Member's legislative proposal in this Chamber next week to enhance the regulation of estate management companies and to strengthen freeholder rights. I don't expect the First Minister to commit the Welsh Government to support it now, but would the First Minister be willing to meet with me and the Minister for Housing and Regeneration to discuss this in advance of next week?

Yes, the issue he raises is an important one, because, increasingly, what I'm seeing is that new housing estates are built and instead of the local authority adopting not just the roads but the environment, a service charge is imposed on all residents, even though they own their house as a freehold, which they have to pay. Now, it's not clear, of course, what arbitration mechanisms are in place in order to make sure that the amount paid is reasonable. Some developers will insert in the contract of sale that there will be a particular increase in the level specified every few years or so, but that's not universal practice. So, I think the Member has identified an important point here. Usually, we assume that freeholders have greater rights than leaseholders, but this is one area where that doesn't happen. If we are to see a situation in the future where more and more housing developers develop houses on the basis that they say to local authorities, 'Look, there's no cost to you', then the issue becomes more acute, and I'd be more than happy, of course, for discussions to take place with him in order to see how this can be taken forward.

We are moving forward with our ambitious vision to reshape public transport infrastructure and services across Wales, including local bus services, following their devolution, rail services through the next Wales and borders franchise, and, of course, the south-east and north Wales metro projects.

Thank you. First Minister, in the past 12 months, the A55 has now been closed 55 times. That, of course, brings about huge delays for our bus services, our commuters and, generally, really affects business, our tourism industry and everything. Can you provide an update on the works to follow the A55 resilience study and confirm how many of the quick wins that have been identified will be carried out by your Government?

First of all, the A55 was built to a standard below the standard that would be build to now. But it's there, and we have to deal with it as it is. What can we do, then, to improve the flow of traffic along the A55? Well, there are two specific projects that I'd refer the Member to: firstly, the removal of the roundabouts in Llanfairfechan and Penmaenmawr. That work is ongoing, in terms of the design stage. That will help to move traffic more quickly. And, of course, the work that's being done to look at a third Menai crossing that would turn the A55 into a proper dual carriageway, rather than having one section where it's reduced to one lane either way.

We set forward a coherent approach in the context of the Wales Bill, but the UK Government didn't accept those arguments. It's why I have established the Commission on Justice in Wales to provide an expert, independent, long-term view.

Thank you for that answer. As you say, the criminal justice system is more than just one piece; it's made up of various elements, and one of those elements actually is the prison service and that's something that I believe should be devolved to Wales.

The conclusion from the research into the size of prisons is that smaller prisons have better outcomes than larger ones, both for prisoners and communities. Small prisons are very often more effectively run, have lower levels of violence, better staff-prisoner relationships, greater focus on resettlement and better facilitate contact between prisoners and their families. In other words, they're totally better than the larger prisons. And that's supported by the experiences we are seeing in HMP Berwyn at the moment, which opened last year, as you know, in Wrexham. It's faced substantial problems, despite currently holding fewer than half the prisoners it should hold: 15 fires, 46 cells have ended up out of use due to damage, and three call-outs to the national tactical response group. Clearly, superprisons do not work. Therefore, do you agree with me that superprisons have no future in Wales and that the proposals by the Ministry of Justice for the one in Baglan should be withdrawn and the land used for real economic growth, just as the covenant on it says?

Well, the Member has been extremely strong in his view on this, and it is a matter that's not devolved, but I will seek to answer some of the questions that he poses. When the Parc prison was opened in Bridgend, in the council ward that I represented, it did not work well. It did not work well for its first few years. There were a number of serious incidents within the prison. It went through prison governors at the rate of knots. One prisoner escaped by hanging onto the underside of a lorry and was never found, and staff from Swansea and Cardiff had to be brought in to deal with unrest within the prison. That is something, clearly, that nobody wants to see. But he raises an important point, and it's this: if we get to the point where we are looking to devolve criminal justice, then we need to develop a Welsh penal policy. I've always argued that you can devolve the police separately, but if you take the courts, then you have the probation service, you have the prison service, you have sentencing policy, the Crown Prosecution Service—it all hangs together; it's all part of the justice system. It is time, I think, as he rightly points out, for us to start the debate on what a Welsh penal policy might look like if criminal justice is devolved. He makes the case for smaller prisons. I've got no reason to doubt what he is putting forward, but I think it's hugely important that he has started a debate on what Welsh policy would look like in the event of criminal justice being devolved.

Thank you very much, First Minister. Thank you. Diolch.

Item 2 on our agenda this afternoon is the business statement and announcement, and I call on the leader of the house, Julie James.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. There are no changes to this week's business. Business for the next three weeks is shown on the business statement and announcement found amongst the meeting papers, which are available to Members electronically.

I call for a single Welsh Government statement, hopefully from the health Secretary, on multiparametric—or mp—MRI scans for suspected prostate cancer patients from NHS Wales. When I wrote to the health Secretary regarding this, he wrote back to me last week saying that the current guideline from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence—or NICE—doesn't recommend pre-biopsy mpMRI, and there's no clinical consensus on the optimum design of a prostate cancer pathway including this.

When the community health council for north Wales wrote to him, welcoming his commitment to expect health boards to revise their diagnostic pathways to incorporate these scans, if recommended by NICE in revised guidelines after April 2019, they also expressed concern that this would be too late, that patients in north Wales will continue to be left behind, and their discussions with neurologists in north Wales suggest that we need to be developing the service now in preparation for NICE accreditation. The reply on this occasion was,

'Once the clinical benefits have been assessed, and if the guidance is updated, I would expect health boards to revise their diagnostic pathways.'

However, the current guidance says that the key priorities for implementation in the prostate cancer diagnosis and management, from NICE, includes:

'Consider multiparametric MRI...for men with a negative transrectal ultrasound 10–12 core biopsy to determine whether another biopsy is needed.'

Well, last Friday, I met constituents—patients—who have had to spend large sums of money after that guidance was followed by a consultant in Wrexham, but the NHS in north Wales would not fund the essential scans that they ultimately received across the border in England. One told me he'd spent £1,020. He also told me that these scans were more than twice as accurate as those currently available. That gentleman was from Flintshire. Another one told me—a gentleman from Llangollen—that the buck stops with the Welsh Government because they put the the health board into special measures, and that he is amongst nine men from north Wales who have now had to pay for this despite it being available in England and south Wales. They want to meet the Minister. They say that they want him to accept that the same should be happening in north Wales, and they ask why people like him aren't being refunded when they've had to pay for this potentially life-saving procedure themselves.

Waiting for 2019 is not good enough, Cabinet Secretary. These men's lives are at risk. It's available in parts of Wales. You say you believe in a single NHS Wales. Well, please deliver on that now.

Well, I'm not entirely certain what I was being asked, but the Cabinet Secretary was here to listen to the Member's constituency case load, and he's obviously in correspondence with the Cabinet Secretary, which, I imagine, will continue.

Can I just say this to the business manager? I note from the business statement that the Government has still not stated when it will make a statement and publish the report on producer responsibility as regards packaging and recycling, which was promised by the First Minister in February. So, can the business manager confirm when this will be?

Yesterday I visited Natural Weigh in Crickhowell along with Kirsty Williams, which is the first zero-waste shop in Wales, and a very welcome private initiative. But the odds are stacked against shops like Natural Weigh because the supermarkets at the moment can package what they sell us in whatever they want and it's the taxpayer that picks up the tab for paying for it to be recycled, hopefully, but in many cases, of course, not recycled but disposed of in general waste. So, the key report on producer responsibility unlocks some of the ability for shops like Natural Weigh in Crickhowell now to make their way and be successful, and of course I wish them all the best.

Secondly, can I request a timely debate on the serious problems experienced with the north-south rail service last week? The very bad weather, which I admit would have led to service cancellations anyway, did obscure what, in fact, I think, was the most serious maintenance failure on the Wales and borders franchise that I can certainly recall. Last Tuesday a fault was found in a train wheel, which led by the end of the day to the withdrawal of 27 train units and the suspension of the south Wales to Manchester service, which is a vital link for those travelling from north and mid Wales, and vice versa, of course. It took until Monday this week—six full days later—for this to be resolved. It seems a fault at the track at Maindee, Newport was damaging train wheels.

Now, when you think about it, this is actually an absolute disgrace. Can you imagine what would have been the reaction had the east coast main line in England been out of action for six days? I don't know who's responsible, though as it was a track fault, Network Rail have some serious explaining to do. I do know, however, that it's shameful that we have to put up with such a sub-standard service in a modern economy.

This is the price we pay for an atrocious under-investment in our rail infrastructure, running at at least £1 billion. It's what you get with 5 per cent of the rail infrastructure but 1.5 per cent of the investment. And as we see huge investments in England in Crossrail and high-speed rail, we're left with track that actually damages trains and no service for a week. It's an appalling state of affairs, so can we have an opportunity very soon to debate these issues? I appreciate there have been written statements from the Cabinet Secretary, but if we debate these issues, we can also explore the possible ramifications for the new franchise, the financial investment profile of which I still think has yet to be made publicly available. We may also seek answers as to what compensation may also be available.

Finally, Deputy Presiding Officer, on a very different topic, can I say I was moved to host a meeting of Kurds living in Wales last week, focusing on the attack by Turkey in and around Afrin in northern Syria? They had moving and very powerful stories to tell and, as citizens of Wales, it is right that their stories and experiences are heard in our Parliament. So, would the First Minister please convey their concerns as Welsh citizens directly to the UK authorities and make a statement on that to the Assembly? To see a NATO ally attacking our allies against Isis, and those working for a secular democracy in Syria and Iraq, which is a very fragile flower indeed, is an abomination. It would serve the Welsh Government well to speak out for our Welsh citizens from Kurdistan.

The Member raises three very important and very diverse points. On the producer responsibilities, the Minister is indicating to me that she's in negotiation with producer organisations in Wales and will be bringing a statement forward once those negotiations are complete. I would like to just say that I do share the Member's frustration at some of the producer packaging that we have, and in some ways our modern, digital way of living has made that worse, because when we order things over the internet they do come rather ludicrously packaged. If you'll forgive me, Presiding Officer, just for one moment, I ordered a small lead for my phone—I won't mention the make of my phone—and it came in a box this big, and it had quite a lot of completely unrecyclable packaging inside it that, if it had contained a fragile piece of china, might have been understandable, but it was a piece of plastic lead. I've actually written to the company in question, complaining, and with lots of photographs to say, 'What on earth was the purpose of this?' So, I share his frustration, and I know the Minister shares his frustration as well, so I'm sure she will be bringing forward that statement once those discussions are complete.

My Cabinet Secretary colleague for economy and transport is indicating that he'd be more than happy to have a Government debate on the subject of the service failure, and in fact the franchise in its entirety and our aspirations, if you like, for what sort of control we should have, and indeed some calls for further devolution of some parts of the network. I think the service in question is one of the areas in which it's not entirely certain whose responsibility it is. I share some frustrations of that as I'm from Swansea and we have the Great Western issue as well. So, I think we are saying that a debate in Government time would be a very good way of exploring some of those issues and seeing what level of consensus there is across the Chamber on that. 

And in terms of our Welsh citizens who have Kurdish links, I also share his sorrow and regret at some of the things that are going on. I'm more than happy to pass on his concerns and the concerns of this Chamber to the First Minister, who I'm sure will act accordingly.

I had two points I wanted to bring up with the leader of the house. I'm very pleased we're having an individual debate tomorrow on prisons and I'm hoping to use that opportunity to talk about women prisoners, but I wanted to draw to the attention of the leader of the house the activities of the Koestler Trust, which is a prison arts charity. This week, I'm expecting a painting to go up in my office that has been painted by a woman prisoner, and is there to mark International Women's Day week. So, I thought this initiative has got such worth that I wondered if it would be possible at some point to have a statement about initiatives like this in Wales, which as well as the intrinsic merit of the paintings themselves, are a form of rehabilitation. So, I wondered if there was something we could look at there.

Secondly, a week ago, hordes of women descended on the Whitchurch rugby club in my consistency. The roads were blocked and they weren't able to get into the room that had been set aside. This was for a meeting organised by our MP, Anna McMorrin, addressed by Carolyn Harris MP and myself, and this was all to do with the absolute fury about what's happened to their pensions—the so-called WASPI women. It did seem to be such a matter of such huge concern to so many women, and I know so many women throughout Wales, that I was wondering whether there was anything at all that we could do through our business here in the Assembly to look at this issue and to look at the huge implications it's having for women in the planning of their lives, such as whether they give up a job or not, affecting their roles as carers—all things that do impinge on our devolved responsibilities, although of course the issue itself is non-devolved.

Indeed. Well, two very important points indeed. In terms of the art project, I'm delighted to hear that there's a painting going up in her office; I look forward to having a look at it. Of course, it isn't devolved to us, but it impinges on a lot of devolved Government services: employability, social services, caring, and so on. So, what I'll do is I'll have a conversation with various Cabinet colleagues to see what we can do in terms of a cross-Government response to that, and I'd be more than happy to come and look at the painting and have a further discussion with her about what can be done. It seems like a very good project indeed. I'm sure we can do something with it. 

In terms of the WASPI women, as they're called, I must declare an interest at this point, Presiding Officer, to say that I'm actually one of the WASPI women. I'm in the age group of the women who've had their pensions moved. Mine's been moved by seven years. And that's fine if you're actually still in employment, but not if you're not still in employment, or your whole family responsibility was predicated on your being able to retire at a particular point in time. The issue isn't that we don't have pension parity, which is what we're often asked. That's not the issue. The issue is the amount of time with which you have to prepare and plan for the amount of income that you'll have. So, it's not the move to parity across the genders; the issue is how long you had to plan for that and how much you would have had to save in order to make sure that your plans stayed in place. I think it's really important to make that point, because the issue here is that was not long enough for people who are not fortunate enough to stay in employment past their sixtieth birthday to be able to put those plans into preparation. And as a result of that, a very large number of people are actually suffering severe hardship as a result of not getting their pension for those years. So, it isn't a devolved matter, but it does impact on our services very, very much. I know that my colleague the Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Transport has made our views on the impact on the Welsh economy overall well known. I'm more than happy, as the equalities Minister, to make that point again forcibly to the UK Government.

Leader of the house, I would like to ask for a statement from the Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Transport on support for businesses affected by the proposed M4 relief road. I have been contacted by a manufacturing company in Newport that would suffer considerable and irrecoverable loss of business, as well as incurring relocation costs, due to the forced closure of their existing site in Newport. Although this company has been in contact with the Welsh Government since 2016, they are deeply frustrated about the lack of clarity with regard to the level of practical and financial support they can expect to receive to enable them to continue to operate in Wales. Leader of the house, could I ask you for a statement by the Cabinet Secretary on this matter as soon as possible? Thank you. 

Yes. The Cabinet Secretary has already said that there will be a debate on the floor of the house about the M4 and all of its ramifications as soon as the outcome of the public inquiry is known. So, I'm sure that that is an aspect—businesses displaced by the proposals, whatever they might be as a result of the public inquiry, I'm sure will form part of that debate. 

I'd like to ask the leader of the house for a Government statement from the Cabinet Secretary for local government if possible, and, indeed, for further guidance on the obligations on local authorities under the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015. I'm sure the Cabinet Secretary will be aware that in our community the leisure centre at Pontllanfraith is under threat of closure. It's had a last-minute reprieve temporarily because of the hard work of local people campaigning to save that asset. It does enhance people's well-being. It's had record numbers of users in the last financial year, but the local authority, like every other, is caught in this position, due to the fiscal policies of the British state, of desperately trying to raise money, and they would like to sell off the land for the leisure centre in order to sell to developers to make money to pay for services. And Caerphilly council is now having an overall leisure and well-being review, and I think, as part of that review, having greater clarity on their obligation under the well-being Act would enhance that review, and would make it very clear to them their obligations, and, hopefully, will lead to an outcome where citizens can continue to enjoy the outstanding facilities at Pontllanfraith and elsewhere for the future. 

The Member makes a very important point. It's one of the very desperate effects of the austerity agenda overall, and although councils in Wales have been protected by this Government in a way that hasn't been possible for councils in England, nevertheless the austerity agenda bites hard. And it bites hardest on some of our hard-fought-for and much-loved community facilities. And that's happening right across Wales, and lots of councils are indeed struggling with that. And it's a real dilemma between supporting statutory services that councils must maintain and the so-called discretionary, but nevertheless absolutely essential, services that the Member points out. 

It's not for us to second-guess the individual decisions of different councils and so on, but I know that my Cabinet Secretary colleague is in constant dialogue with the Welsh Local Government Association and with individual councils about their well-being duties, and I'm sure that he'd be more than happy to write out again to them expressing the overarching strategic nature of their duties under the Act, although I would emphasise that individual decisions are very much a matter for the local democratic institution. 

May I thank the leader of the house for her statement and pursue an issue that is important these days? Air pollution continues to be a problem facing many people in my region, as you will know, coming from Swansea yourself. In Hafod in Swansea, in Morriston and in Port Talbot, air pollution causes ill health and unnecessary deaths. Now, when ClientEarth took this Government to court, it was admitted that the Government’s lack of action on air pollution was unlawful. We are now waiting for the clean air plan for Wales and the clean air zones to be launched. Can I ask you, therefore, for a debate and an update as soon as possible on this plan, and ask when this Assembly can expect further information on the clean air zones? Thank you.

The Minister's listening to your remarks, which I'm sure she concurs with, and she will be bringing forward a statement for the house to consider shortly. I would like also to say, though, that there's very much an equalities issue here as well. One of the interesting things, if Members have access to university studies about clean air, is that, in Swansea for example, much of the pollution generated by the cars on the seafront in Swansea, from the very wealthy parts of the city, actually flows up the hill in a perfect storm to the poorer part of the cities at the top. So, the pollution generated by the wealthy parts of the city actually impacts heaviest on the poorer parts of the city. So, I'm not sure that everybody is entirely aware of quite how air flows work in that way, and the complexity of actually managing variable traffic speeds, for example, in order to reduce the way that air flow actually happens, given particular climatic conditions. We didn't suffer from the snow in Swansea particularly over the weekend, but we had severe wind, and that caused some very serious pollution issues in the city in pockets, as it pocketed in particular aspects of the city. And Swansea University has been very proactive in its pursuit of that as an issue. And I know the Minister is very well aware of these issues, and she will be taking those into account when she brings her statement forward.

Thank you, leader of the house.

The next item, therefore, is the statement by the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Services on valuing the NHS workforce. And I call on the Cabinet Secretary, Vaughan Gething, to make his statement. Vaughan Gething.

Thank you, Llywydd.

A statement on the NHS workforce is, of course, timely, particularly given the extraordinary weather experience over the last week. I am grateful for the opportunity to join the First Minister in placing on record my gratitude and appreciation for the response of public service workers across local government, the national health service, emergency services, the third sector, and, of course, the wider public. The extraordinary commitment shown by NHS staff that we have all seen in the past few days is just another example of why they are held in such high regard by this Government and, of course, the people of Wales.

I want to highlight the work already under way to support, develop and expand the workforce, both now and in the future. We regularly discuss the recruitment challenges facing the national health services. The challenges are real, and, of course, I expect scrutiny. However, it is an undeniable fact that, despite eight years of austerity at the hands of the UK Government, tough financial choices made by this Welsh Government have seen the NHS workforce grow to record levels. Official statistics show that we have a record number of total staff working in NHS Wales. We have record numbers of qualified nurses and midwives, hospital consultants, and ambulance staff.

And this Government continues to take positive action, through our 'Train. Work. Live.' initiative, to support NHS organisations to train and recruit the workforce that they and we need. Already our return on investment has been significant, particularly in terms of the number of doctors choosing Wales to undertake their GP training. This May, I will be in Belfast for the launch of year two of the nurse 'Train. Work. Live.' campaign. And, later in the summer, 'Train. Work. Live.' will expand to include allied health professionals, with a focus on increasing the mix of healthcare professionals in primary care.

As well as recruitment initiatives, the continued investment that this Government has chosen to make in the education and training of the current and future NHS workforce is critical. Members will know that the budget for non-medical healthcare professionals has grown year on year. In December last year, I announced a £107 million package of support for 2018-19, and that is a £12 million increase on the year before.

And this continued investment during the past five years means that there has been a sustained increase in training places in Wales. This includes, over that time, 68 per cent more nurses in training, health visitor training places have more than doubled, an increase of 42 per cent in midwifery training places, 51 per cent extra occupational therapy training places, and an increase of 53 per cent in physiotherapy training places. We have invested and will continue to invest in training for healthcare scientists, dental hygienists and therapists, and in key emerging areas like training in genetics.

The role of the paramedic is changing, and will continue to evolve within a wide variety of care settings. There will continue to be a greater emphasis on critical decision making, treatment and management, rather than the historic focus on transporting patients to accident and emergency. And we are supporting those changes in the paramedics' role, and, since 2014, the number of paramedic training places available in Wales has increased by 139 per cent.

Unlike some other parts of the UK, this Welsh Government recognises how important it is to support our healthcare students during their study. That's why we have kept the NHS bursary. Last year, I announced that we would consult on future plans for the longer term financial support for healthcare students. That consultation will begin in the coming weeks, and I look forward to receiving a wide range of views from organisations and individuals to help inform future arrangements on a long-term basis.

As Members will of course be aware, there has been significant interest in the level of medical student places available in Wales. And in north Wales the debate around a new medical school has, of course, continued. And I have made the Government’s position clear. Our view is that Bangor University, working with Cardiff and Swansea medical schools, can and will deliver increased opportunities for medical education and training in north Wales. I know there has been a significant amount of work already undertaken to inform proposals for the future. 

I hope to be in a position to say more about those proposals in the coming weeks. But I want to make sure that we have a plan that is both deliverable and sustainable, and a plan that delivers the ability for students to undertake and complete their medical degree programmes in north Wales. While much of the focus has been on north Wales, many of the challenges we face in the north are also present in other parts of the country, particularly in west Wales, and I want to ensure that we also address those as part of a coherent plan for Wales. 

Despite the record staff figures, we know that demand continues to grow. That is part of the reason for our need to reform health and care services. We need more staff in certain professions and specialties, but we know that is only part of the answer. The fact that the challenges we currently face are taking place within the context of record numbers of staff demonstrates this. We owe it not only to the citizens of Wales, but to our NHS workforce too, to do this. We need to create a system that allows them to succeed in delivering the best possible care. That is why, when discussing our workforce, we cannot separate it from real and meaningful reform, including, of course, the need for new models of care that were highlighted in the parliamentary review. 

Part of the system reform we're committed to, of course, specifically in relation to the workforce, is the establishment of Health Education and Improvement Wales. This is a major and significant change. It demonstrates this Government’s commitment to a new, multidisciplinary approach to our health services. HEIW is not simply a structural change. It is a new, strategic approach to the long-term future of the health workforce. I was pleased that the recent parliamentary review recognised, in a number of significant ways, how the creation of HEIW could be harnessed to deliver the vision of seamless health and care in Wales. The review also identified the opportunity for HEIW and Social Care Wales to lead the way for partnership across the health and social care system. I expect those two bodies to be working as one across many of the challenges that will face our care workforce in the years ahead.

Like all of the public sector workforce, staff in NHS Wales have suffered at the hands of UK Government austerity. That is why we have repeatedly called on the UK Government to end the cap on public sector pay and give workers across the UK a much deserved pay rise, and it remains our view that that pay rise must be fully funded by the UK Government. One of the strengths in Wales is our commitment to social partnership and collaboration between the Welsh Government, the NHS and trade unions. This strength is something we will build on in moving forward once we have received the pay review body's recommendations in May to agree on a fair and affordable pay award.

Our NHS looks forward to its seventieth birthday this year. It remains a truly great achievement of political will and community values to create and sustain our national health service. The NHS that we celebrate is, of course, the story of our staff: people drawn from all communities and all corners of the globe. I am tremendously proud of the people who make up our national health service and I look forward to continuing to serve them as we redesign the future for health here in Wales.

Thank you very, very much for your statement, Cabinet Secretary. Apologies that I'm not Angela Burns for you today. Can I just associate myself with your remarks thanking the NHS staff for their work, particularly during this last week? I think we've all been surprised and delighted in some ways by the pictures of people stumbling through the snow in order to fulfil what they think are their duties to the population of Wales. 

I think one obvious way perhaps to recognise that commitment would be to fast track the staff in the NHS when they need the services of the NHS, not least so that they can get the quickest treatment or attention that they need for themselves, but because of the potential effect of that in making them able to come back into the workforce as soon as possible in order to offer their services, perhaps, in so doing, reducing the strain and stress on health boards when they're having to consider taking on agency staff. We know that 330,000 days were lost to stress-related conditions only last year, 2016-17, and, if those could have been acted on a little bit sooner, perhaps it would have been quicker or easier for those members of staff to come back into the workforce and continue offering the exemplary care to the people of Wales. I think agency staff cost £178.8 million last year. That's quite a big saving, if you can get people back into work as quickly as they would like. And, if you're worried at all that this sounds like preferential treatment, I'd ask you to consider the effect of behaving in this particular way, because it means that those NHS staff are back in work sooner and offering their services to the people who need them. 

We also talked about—. I appreciate that this is a statement on the NHS workforce here, but, following the parliamentary review, I think it's become a little bit less meaningful, if I can put it like that, to talk about the NHS workforce in isolation from the social care workforce. I certainly welcome the investment in the training places for the prevention and rehabilitation professions, and for those training in medical care, but if you're looking at a seamless service—you mentioned it in your statement—I think these kinds of statements need to start talking also now about the impact and career paths of those in non-medical care. So, I was wondering whether we might have a similar statement fairly soon on the social care workforce, not just the NHS workforce.

I'm very, very pleased to hear about the growth in the NHS workforce, but could you give us an indication of where that growth has been concentrated geographically? Where are the staff in certain disciplines, and has reconfiguration and some of the noises off that we've heard fairly recently, not least with Hywel Dda, already been seen to have an effect on where people are interested in working, particularly in the hospital setting but not specifically?

Yes, we certainly do need more staff in certain professions and specialities. The role of the deanery has come up several times in arguments on this in the past, and I'm wondering whether you can give us some indication of whether there's a specific issue—I'll call it that, as there's not necessarily a problem—with the deanery promoting those specialisms that we need at the moment.

Just two more, if you'll bear with me, please, Llywydd. Obviously, I'm very pleased to see that more people are doing their GP training in Wales. Can you tell us how many of those people are actually from Wales and what we're doing to keep them once they've been trained here?

Then, finally, paramedic training—I was very pleased to see that. Can you confirm whether the pay rise that paramedics have recently been proffered, if you like, is conditional in any way on the particular training that you've referred to? Is it a generic pay rise or is it specifically allied to this new training that you mentioned in your statement? Thank you.

Thank you for that series of questions. Again, I think the commitment of staff that we've all seen—stories of people walking miles and miles through the snow to get in—and the tremendous support of the public, with people giving lifts and going up and down roads to give staff lifts as they've seen them coming in, really is tremendously heart-warming, which, again, reinforces the public value that is placed on the service.

I'm going to deal with the range of points. On your point about whether we could fast-track treatment for NHS staff, there's a piece of work already looking at this following previous comments made in the Chamber. I do think that we need to add a note of caution about this, because if we decide to advantage groups of staff, wherever they're from—whether it's the NHS, or whether it's the emergency services, carers or whoever it may be—and if we say that it won't be their clinical need but who they work for that will see them advantaged in the system, I think we need to think very carefully about what that means.

So, I certainly wouldn't stand up in the Chamber today and say that the NHS workforce will get prioritised over and above other people, but there are challenges about the NHS as an employer in any event. Any employer should support their employees with good occupational health support either to keep them in work or to help them return to work if they're out of work, and to understand the reasons for that as well. That's a different point to, potentially, seeing them leapfrog other citizens of the country for treatment.

On the social care workforce, actually, Rebecca Evans, in her previous role, made a number of statements about promoting the social care workforce and a career path for them. You'll hear more from Huw Irranca-Davies on those points in the coming months as well. Also, that will be linked into the commitments that the Government has made in 'Prosperity for All', about the social care sector being a priority sector as part of the foundational economy. So, you will hear more about the social care workforce individually as well as together, as I've indicated in my statement about the development of skills for and with that workforce that is, understandably, integrated, and will be more so, with the national health service.

On the geographical growth in numbers of staff, some of our areas have actually done particularly well with this. In nurse recruitment, for example, Hywel Dda have done particularly well on actually recruiting more nurses in the last year or two. Part of the challenge in different grades of staff is that it can be difficult recruiting in different parts of the country—that's why 'Train. Work. Live' was designed, because you can actually have a great life living in the western parts of Wales, whether north, mid or south, and it's about how you make those opportunities available and then understand what that means for those healthcare staff and their families to move there and to make a positive choice to live in or near that part of the country.

Some of that also, though, goes back to the points that I made in my statement about the models of care that are provided, because there's something about understanding and taking on board the challenges the parliamentary review set out for all of us that if we want to try and run our current models of care, then they won't work—they won't work for the staff or the public. So, our current way of running the whole service isn't fit for the future, and changing that really does matter. And I've given previous indications in the past of models of care that have changed that have made recruitment easier. Stroke care in Gwent is a good example of where change in the way care is delivered has made it easier to recruit the right staff to deliver that improved quality of care. 

I can't tell you what the percentage of Welsh-domiciled GP trainees is, but I'll investigate to see if I can give a meaningful figure and write back to Members on that. And on band 6 and paramedics, you'll have seen that England announced a band 6 paramedic status some time ago. They've yet to agree how to get there, though, so that isn't in place there. We went through that, and, again, in social partnership we had a conversation with employers, with trade unions as well, and we not only agreed a road map for band 6—so, what that should mean—but, actually, how to get there too, because it is about new skills and those skills being consistently applied to have the band 6 pay that goes with it. Not every paramedic will want to do that. There will still be a role for band 5 paramedics within the service. So, we're in a good place, and that is money for reform and improvement. It's good for the workforce to do a job they will find interesting and the skills we will all benefit from in the public at large. We made a difficult choice to invest money in doing so, and that means there is money that we've invested there that isn't available in other parts of our workforce, but that is a choice we have made, again, for the future of the NHS and the people that it serves.

I think the stories that we've heard from across the NHS in the recent extreme weather conditions show the extreme dedication of staff to provide care for their patients, and I hope that they hear our gratitude for their commitment to their work and the service they provide. 

Thank you, to all the NHS staff, for your commitment.

I have a number of questions to ask. One could insist that everything was fine in terms of staffing levels in the NHS in listening to this statement, but I do have a number of issues that I think are important to emphasise and to highlight here. This claim that there’s a record number of staff working in the NHS. We still have fewer GPs working in the NHS in Wales than we had in 2013. StatsWales hasn’t published figures for corresponding numbers of full-time posts for three years, whilst they are looking at the quality of the data. We have fewer hospital doctors than we had in 2014 once you remove that 'general practice doctors in training' category from the figures—something that was added from somewhere to the figures in 2015.

It’s true to say that official figures do show that there are more people working in nursing, midwifery and health visitor roles. It isn’t clear, however, from your statement this afternoon, how many qualified nurses are working—that is to say, fully qualified nurses—within our national health service. And we know from a freedom of information request from the Daily Post recently that 750 fewer nurses are fully qualified in the Betsi Cadwaladr health board than we had five years ago.

And add to that concerns about Brexit, and we haven’t felt the impact of that as of yet, although there is anecdotal evidence about the negative impact it will have. But would you admit that the picture that you painted in your statement is incomplete? Would you also admit that we must give consideration to the full picture, including those negative elements—the problems in terms of workforce planning—rather than just looking at the positives that there undoubtedly are, or we can’t truly get to grips and resolve some of those problems?

In terms of training places, once again you refer to paramedics, nurses and other health professionals in relation to training places. I celebrate any increase in training places, but we can't avoid the difficult question on GP and doctor training specifically. I am very eager to see this Government bringing us a figure as to how many doctors you hope to see trained in Wales in ensuing years, wherever they may be. What is our output to be in terms of the number of doctors trained here?

And that brings us on to plans for a medical centre in Bangor. You’re entirely right in saying that the west is also very important in terms of increasing the numbers trained, but, in terms of Bangor, I’m very pleased now that talk of medical training in Bangor is a central part of any statement on NHS workforce planning. Siân Gwenllian and I are certainly pleased to see that we are gaining ground here, and I’m very confident, having had discussions with Bangor University, that we are moving in the right direction. But, as I always do, I will ask you for a little less ambiguity. You talk about training opportunities; tell us once again that full training will be available in Bangor from year 1 to year 5, because that’s the direction we need to travel in—and I’m confident that we are going in that direction. Also, a bird in the hand may be worth two in the bush, and perhaps I should not just focus on doctors, because I can tell you that there is  pressure already to include dental training in the new centre in Bangor. Again, last week, I was asked about introducing an element of pharmaceutical training in Bangor. So, it’s not just doctors that we’re talking about here, but the whole range of professionals across the health service.

And just very briefly in terms of nursing, can you comment on continuing professional development for nurses specifically? I know it’s something that the RCN is concerned about, namely the lack of time and attention given to CPD. Also, there was no reference in the statement to provisions for the safe staffing levels Bill. Is there a statement on where we are with that?

Thank you for that series of questions. I'll try and take them in a sensible order. I want to start at the outset by saying that I don't think my statement does avoid the reality of some of the challenges we face. I'm very explicit about those challenges in this statement as well. It's certainly not any desire on my part not to paint the full picture. If you wanted a complete, detailed picture, I'd still be on my feet for some time, which I might be happy to be but other Members may not be so. But, it is an undeniable fact, not a claim—it is an undeniable fact—that we do have record numbers of NHS staff. That is an undeniable fact. But, within that, we recognise there are challenges within different staff groups and also how we get our staff groups to work in a different way now and in the future. That's so much of what we have to spend our time upon.

I'll try and deal with your questions about doctor recruitment at this point as well, and training. I don't think we have really been ambiguous about our expectation for north Wales. I've been clear that I wanted to see as much medical training and education as possible taking place within north Wales. I've deliberately not committed to saying absolutely what that would be because I don't have a plan in front of me to do so, and I need to understand the evidence of what is possible, the discussions that I've indicated in my statement that are taking place, and then there will be a signed-off plan. At that point, there'll be more detail.

Not only that though, but hearing the Cabinet Secretary for Education intervene, there's a serious point about the work that we have to do together—that we have to continue to do together—on funding, because there are pressures in the budget, as everyone in this room will know. So, it's not just about having a plan that looks and sounds great, but actually we have to fund it. If we're going to fund a plan to do that, about who we expect to take up those places, and really then see a benefit for us as a whole and actually see more doctors from Wales being able to train, work and live within Wales, but also more doctors then staying in Wales, wherever they come from, at the end of their period of study, we can't avoid these very real and practical discussions that we need to have and it can't simply be that I announce a great policy position and I then say to the Cabinet Secretary for Education, 'You now need to pay for it.' It's not as simple as that and nor should it be.

On the broader point about the future of the workforce, that's why I made reference to Health Education and Improvement Wales, and actually what will come from that and the long-term plan for health and care in Wales. We'll need to understand, for that future workforce, the models of care we want to have and the staff we'll need to be able to deliver that too. I just want to make this point about—. You mentioned GP challenges; well, that's why the first phase of ‘Train. Work. Live.’ with GPs has been so successful and such good news for us that we overfilled our places as a country. But it's also worth pointing out when we talk about GP numbers that the great majority of GPs are not employed by the national health service. They contract with the national health service to provide services, and part of our challenge in delivering a future NHS workforce is having models of employment that allow us to do that.

I'll deal with your questions about nurse recruitment as well. We do have a record number of qualified nurses right across the national health service. Some of that varies from one health board to another. I recognise that you were making points about north Wales, but I'm really clear that this is about qualified nurses, and this goes back to the point about the Nurse Staffing Levels (Wales) Act 2016, which will be commenced in April. Commencement is not being delayed, and I expect to report in the future to this place on the early stages of doing that to see the impact of that and to see whether we are seeing improvements in the quality of care as a result, because that was the point of the Act. It is to make sure that we see improvements in the quality of care delivered. But there's something about saying that those will be qualified nurses, so we're not moving down the track with the NHS workforce that they've been taking in England where they're introducing nurse associates. The Nursing and Midwifery Council have agreed to regulate them, but I am genuinely concerned, as are indeed the chief nursing officers of Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, about whether this is really about role substitution and really about the financial saving rather than having appropriately qualified staff to do the right jobs and deliver the right quality of care.

I'll make one final point, because you mentioned Brexit. We have real challenges in nurse recruitment in Wales and across the UK and across the wider western world. We know that we'll need more nurses. It's part of the reason why we continue to invest more money in nurse training—because we know we need to grow lots more of our own. But also, to keep the service running, we need to continue to recruit staff from other parts of the world. That's also why I made it explicitly clear that the national health service has always relied on staff from every community but also from every country around the world as well. It's part of our success story that the national health service has actually made the country more cosmopolitan and multicultural. If you look at the people who exist within Wales now in different communities, they're here because of the national health service.

That's why I really do hope at some point for an outbreak of common sense on Brexit and the position we will take on actually having equivalence in both standards, whether it's pharmaceutical issues or about qualifications, and our ability to recruit staff from within the European Union and also much further afield than this. I don't often say pleasant things about Jeremy Hunt in public, but I actually think that, on the challenge of recruiting staff from outside the European Union and the wider world, I think Jeremy Hunt wants to be able to do that in a way that's sensible. The challenge is that, within the UK Government, the Home Office continue to stand in the way of doing that. That is a challenge for all of us. I really do hope there'll be an outbreak of common sense within the UK Government for the Home Office to get out of the way of recruiting the right sort of healthcare staff for every part of the national health service in all four nations of the UK.

Thank you for your statement, Cabinet Secretary. The past weekend highlighted just what amazing people we have working in our NHS and the wider health and social care sector: doctors and nurses doing double shifts, GPs sleeping in their surgeries, staff walking miles in blizzard conditions, all to ensure that patients continued to receive world-class care, despite sub-zero temperatures and snowdrifts. Therefore, I wish to place on record my thanks to all our NHS staff for the amazing job they do, day in, day out, whatever the conditions and the pressures they are put under. I may disagree with you from time to time on policy, but I will always stand shoulder to shoulder with you in defending our NHS staff.

The only problem with our NHS workforce is that there aren't enough of them. Cabinet Secretary, I welcome the additional investment your Government has made in non-medical healthcare professionals and the increase in training places in Wales. However, there are increasing shortages in some areas of our NHS. As our NHS evolves, the staff requirements will change. Therefore, Cabinet Secretary, how will the LHBs and Health Education and Improvement Wales work together to take a more strategic approach to workforce planning in our NHS? Planning is essential to embrace the changes ahead. Will HEIW be undertaking an audit of staff within each speciality in order to address any shortfalls? When we look at diagnostic staff, Cancer Research UK tell us that there is no data on vacancy levels within endoscopy. If we are to maximise the effect of the faecal immunochemical test on bowel cancer, we must ensure that there are sufficient numbers of staff able to conduct colonoscopies. Cabinet Secretary, do you or HEIW have any plans to create a non-medical endoscopist training programme within NHS Wales?

Of course, the majority of patient interaction within the NHS comes at the GP surgery, despite the fact that general practice receives just over 7 per cent of the NHS budget. Cabinet Secretary, do you support the Royal College of General Practitioners's call to increase the spending on general practice to at least 11 per cent? The royal college have also stated that GP training places need to be around 200 per year. You have made progress in increasing the number of training places in recent years, but do you have any plans to increase this further?

Finally, Cabinet Secretary, NHS England have announced a state-backed indemnity scheme for GPs over the border. Therefore, do you have any plans to introduce a similar scheme for Welsh GPs? As we celebrate the NHS’s seventieth birthday, it is important to highlight that it wouldn’t exist without our excellent staff, and we must do all we can to show our NHS staff how much we value them, both in monetary terms and also in terms of increasing staff. 

Thank you for the comments and questions. I'll start with your first point about, 'We don't have enough staff'. Well, we have record numbers of staff. We will always need to be thinking about how we have those staff organised in the best way to deliver the best possible care, regardless of the financial picture or otherwise. We always have a responsibility to do that, but we are eight years into austerity, and the choices that we are making to put more money into the national health service come at a real cost to every other part of public services and public spending in Wales. If the Cabinet Secretary for Education were on her feet, she would tell me about real pressures, and if the local government Secretary were on his feet, he would tell you about pressures in those sectors as well and beyond. So, let's not pretend that this is simply a matter of political will; this is a matter of our budget being reduced deliberately. You know, people voted for a Government that promised to impose austerity in three successive general elections, and I wish they had not, but that is the choice that people made and I really do think that people who have stood up and campaigned for a Government to do that over three successive general elections need to take some responsibility in those parts of the country in Wales where they are now faced with having to make choices that are as a direct consequence of United Kingdom Government austerity.

On Health Education and Improvement Wales, the purpose of this is to improve strategic planning of the workforce. That's what they will do. As they move into the shadow form for the first six months, I will have more to say specifically about that, so rather than talking off piste now I'll come back, I'm sure, in the future with more to say about them and their way of working.

Just briefly on your point about non-medical endoscopists, we already have some within our system already. I've met a nurse endoscopist within Powys. I think it was actually in Russell George's constituency. So, those people do exist and our challenge is how we have a route for them to continue to do that, as opposed to that person being a one-off.

On your point about the percentage for primary care, I've stood on my feet in this Chamber more than once in the past and talked about the percentage of NHS spend that goes into primary care—it's actually more than 11 per cent. The regular response then back is from the Royal College of GPs, who are actually talking about the general medical services side of it, so a specific part of primary care, not primary care in total. But you will have seen the ambitions that are set out by this Government, but also within the Parliamentary review, to have not just an increasing level of activity within local healthcare, but to actually make sure that resources follow that and we have a plan to deliver more resources in local healthcare where more activity will take place.

On your final point about GPs, I just want to go back to the points that I've made about where our workforce comes from. Many of our GPs, from the implementation of the national health service, have come from other parts of the world. Myself and many other people meet BAPIO, the British Association of Physicians of Indian Origin—a huge part of the history of the national health service and of its future. They too are concerned, as are all GPs, about indemnity. The state-backed scheme that was announced as a preferred option for the UK Government in England is still something we don't have clarity on in terms of what it means and its application. I say again: if there is to be a scheme that is negotiated with the British Medical Association and others to support GPs in England, and the UK Government and the UK Treasury stand behind that, I would expect no less favourable terms to be made available to GPs in every other part of the United Kingdom. But those discussions are not complete. So, I'm not in a position to tell you, because I know that the UK Government Minister is not in a position to tell anybody else whether there's agreement on what that will look like. But there is recognition that indemnity is a real mischief for us to conquer.

Like others, Cabinet Secretary, can I also join you in thanking the health and social services staff, emergency responders, public service workers and volunteers, of course, in the efforts that they've shown over this winter and especially over the last few days?

In my former role—I may have mentioned this once or twice—I was a trade union official, and I did represent NHS staff. It's particularly pleasing, I think, to see the paramedic band 6 coming to fruition. I was there at the outset of those negotiations, and seeing that come to fruition is really quite pleasing, and I'm glad that's now happening. When I was in that role, I was aware on a daily basis of the kind of heroic efforts that we saw NHS staff performing over the last few days. It has perhaps been more in the news, it has been more public over the last few days, but actually, if you're in the service, you see people going a step further than they need to every day of every week. I remember very clearly having to talk to some politicians and political parties about the need to be careful in their criticisms of the NHS, which play out, intentional or not, as criticisms of the staff who deliver our service, and the demoralising impact that that had then and continues to have.

So, I'd certainly echo your views, Cabinet Secretary, that if the Conservatives in particular are so keen on supporting and thanking our NHS workers for the terrific job they do week in and week out, then their move certainly should be to lift the pay cap and make sure that all of our NHS staff get the pay rise they so richly deserve. And I'd certainly also echo your views that just calling for extra staff in a vacuum is not going to take us any further forward when we are, as you've said, eight years into a period of austerity that one particular party in this Chamber seem to continue to advocate.

But my questions to you, Cabinet Secretary, are: despite the undoubted record numbers of staff, the pressures are still huge for all the reasons that you've set out, and given those types of pressures, specifically, that we've just witnessed, would you agree that staff well-being has to be a very high priority and that people will need now some time and space to recover from these recent pressures so that we can sustain the services over the medium to long term? And can I ask you what more you think we can do to help manage those pressures on those hard-working staff, both in health and social care? 

Thank you for the comments and questions. You're right about the band 6 conversation; I remember you in a different role when those conversations started, and I recognise you are in Unison and suffragette purple today as well. I do recognise there's something about the good will and the commitment of staff. It's a regular part of what keeps the service going, because NHS staff do not work to the letter of their job description; they go above and beyond it on a regular basis. If that stopped, then large parts of our service wouldn't take place in the way that they do.

On the point about the negative public and political debate, it does impact on staff. I remember meeting, as the then Deputy Minister for health, paramedics, and they were particularly downcast for the way that they felt they were talked about. They didn't feel it was the Government that was being talked about every month when ambulance response times were published, and it did affect their morale in a real and material way. There's something about the wider public debate and the impact it has on the current workforce, but also, potentially, the workforce of the future, because there are some people who are opting not to pursue a career in medicine or in the health service because of the way the NHS is regularly talked about. They see that on the first few pages of newspapers on a regular basis—and the distance and the speed at which the negative news travels about the national health service. So, that's why I try to take every opportunity to thank and praise NHS staff for what they do.

On your point about the pay cap, I know that matters too, and there's something about the value that people feel placed upon them as well. Having seen teachers having the continuation of a 1 per cent pay cap and having seen other public service workers having that pay cap continue, what next happens with the pay review body's reporting, and the terms on which any pay rise is offered, will matter a great deal to today and tomorrow's workforce as well. I sincerely hope the UK Government recognise their responsibilities and do the right thing in providing a fully-funded, decent pay rise. 

On your point about staff well-being, I recognise this all too well. For those staff who work really hard, you can't keep going at 100 mph every single day, because at some point people end up breaking. So, they need to have time to recover and the space to do so. That's why we have decent terms and conditions for NHS staff, but it's also why it's important to look again at what the parliamentary review said about staff well-being. I think it's really interesting their proposal about the emphasis that we should have on the well-being of our staff and how they're treated and managed, and, actually, how they feel genuinely empowered to make choices about the future of the service because that matters too. So, there's a range of things.

It comes back to my point about the NHS as an employer, employing over 90,000 individuals in the country, and it needs to make sure that it's a good employer and looks critically at itself and the way it treats all of its staff and recognises opportunities for improvement. I've never said the NHS is a perfect employer because it is not, and that is something we will always continually need to look at and that will definitely form part of our response to the parliamentary review.

Can I thank the Cabinet Secretary for his statement on valuing the NHS workforce? Following on from Dawn Bowden about staff well-being, I was going to concentrate on junior hospital doctors and their continuing well-being, and ask specifically of the Cabinet Secretary what he is doing to address the concerns of junior hospital doctors in Wales today and to explore the culture of how their rotas are managed within our hospitals.

Obviously, there's been mention of 70 years of the NHS this year, and some of us have been working in the NHS for more than half that time, now, I shudder to think back. But anyway, back in the day, as junior hospital doctors, we worked in fixed firms—consultant, senior registrar, registrar, senior house officer or SHO and house officer. It was fixed, you had the same team day in, day out, and it was the same team for six months. There was no problem with rotas; we worked very hard—over 100 hours a week. There was no problem getting time off for study or exams and there was no problem getting time off to get married. Even the administrators were there all hours, helping us all out—one big happy family. Fast-forward to today and our juniors feel undervalued and unloved. They no longer work in fixed teams. Modernising medical careers has wrecked that firm and juniors now work with different people every day; they're not in a fixed team. Litigation has risen, they're held to blame, as individual errors, for systemic failures, when the gaps in the rota mean that they have to cover two or three and sometimes four or five wards on call. If something happens, it is automatically their fault and not the fact that there just weren't enough doctors around and they were having to cover multiple wards.

There is a schism between hospital administrators, particularly the ones who arrange the rotas—they're no longer part of the team, so juniors now have to battle to get time off for holidays, time off for study leave, time off to study for the exams that they need to progress in their careers, and even have to battle for time off to get married and have a honeymoon and things. Now, that wasn't the way it was; there's been a subtle change in culture. Juniors feel harassed, bullied and exploited and that's why they're leaving. So, in terms of valuing the NHS workforce, Cabinet Secretary, can I ask what you're doing specifically to address the concerns of junior hospital doctors in Wales today? Diolch yn fawr.

Thank you for the comments and questions. I think it's a reflection of the fact about how much the NHS has progressed in terms of the level of activity that now takes place—the level of demand that comes through the doors of the national health service in local healthcare and in hospital settings and the ability of the national health service to do more. This is part of our challenge. It also goes along, of course, together with the demographic rise and the fact that more of us live longer—a celebration, yes, but also a challenge for the health service. But also the fact that the health of the nation has not improved in every single aspect. Part of the challenges we see coming through our doors are driven by poor population health outcomes.

I agree with you that individual staff, particularly—and this is almost always where it happens— . I go back to my previous life when I, at one point, represented some of Dawn Bowden's members and others in and around healthcare services, in Health and Care Professions Council and Nursing and Midwifery Council hearings and fitness-to-practice hearings, and, actually, you tend to see more junior staff carrying the can for individual system failures and you tend not to see senior registrars being brought for those regulatory hearings. I don't think that's right and we need to think again about the culture we create and the regulatory environment that recognises individual and collective responsibility in doing so.

I also recognise that part of the reason why juniors feel particularly put upon—. I don't think you can really underestimate this, but I'm still struck, even in Wales, by the anger that exists about the junior doctors' dispute and strike. Even though lots of juniors said they felt grateful for the fact they were in Wales and not in England at the time, it really has poisoned the well in terms of how juniors feel about the whole health service and their willingness to not just train here but then to commit to remaining within the UK as well. That contract is part of where we are in our conversation with junior doctors. So, I meet the British Medical Association on a regular basis and they regularly bring the chair of their junior doctors committee to that, partly because it's time we had a conversation about the contract and the dispute, but it's more about what we then do, because rotas—that's all part of the conversation that we have. So, I continue to have an open and constructive conversation with the British Medical Association, and I expect to continue to see representatives from their junior doctors, because we need to particularly understand the particular challenges they face, because, after all, they're part of the future of the service.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for your statement today, and I think it's important that we remind ourselves of the importance of the workforce in the NHS. Can I join you and others across the Chamber—and I'm sure I'm speaking for everybody who might not even speak today about the support we give to the NHS staff, the appreciation we have for their commitment, particularly during recent days and the difficulty in travelling? Even at times when police have said only to travel if it's essential, NHS and care staff believe their attendance to look after patients and clients is essential, and they've made that effort. I was at Neath Port Talbot Hospital on Friday morning—we weren't as badly affected—dropping my wife off to get into work, but I saw staff bringing in overnight bags, because they'd come from areas that were affected and they knew that they needed to be at that place of work to deliver the care for the patients. We should always appreciate that and never forget that.

You also highlight today that, clearly, there are record levels of staff in the workforce. I totally agree. There are record levels of staff in the workforce. But we also have to recognise that we're no longer generalists, we have a lot more specialists in different areas and, therefore, we have large numbers of staff, but some of them now specialise in areas that were far more general before. I will take my wife's area as an example. In radiography, we've got ultrasound, MRI, CT—computerised tomography, nuclear medicine, ordinary extra diagnostics, radiotherapy—[Inaudible.] There are so many specialisms in that one area that we might have more radiographers, per se, but perhaps less per different area. So, I'm also pleased to see the intent statement yesterday that highlights the work being done in that particular imaging area, which is good news, as well. We do have to recognise that that means there are going to be shortages elsewhere.

Dai Lloyd mentioned junior doctors, but let's not forget the out-of-hours GPs, which are also a big issue we have to address, because we are facing challenges with out-of-hours GPs. That's not necessarily the number of GPs, that's just some people being able to have time to do out-of-hours work and not feeling so stressed in their normal day work. That's part of the problem we need to look at.

But we also have to recognise that training is great, but it takes years. It doesn't happen overnight. There are several years of training and then they need experience, and, sometimes, we need the cover now. So, I'll go on to one of the issues for nursing, for example. Banking is an issue I think we need to look at very carefully across all health boards to ensure banking is consistent. I have met with trade unions that have concerns that—there is a limit on banking, or if you're going to do banking, you actually take out a new contract, so you're not being paid overtime. Therefore, the value of NHS staff—make them feel valued by simply not saying to them, 'You can't have overtime, you've got your own different contract and therefore you're getting flat-rate pay for maybe working 70 hours in a week.' We need to look at banking to ensure it's consistent across Wales and it rewards staff, because it's cheaper than having agency staff. Many people don't do banking now, and you get agencies in, and that costs you a lot more money. So, please will you look at talking to the boards to address this issue on banking?

You also talked about paramedics—fantastic news about paramedics, but we are also seeing a wider range of paramedics now—they're being used in GP practices as well. So, as we train more, they are being spread across areas more. So, I think we need to increase the numbers of paramedics being trained.

Similarly, as has been mentioned by Suzy Davies, the deanery—. The Welsh Government need to address some of the issues the deanery raised, to increase the number of doctors being trained to be GPs. The numbers have to go up to the limits of 170 that were being talked about. Now, I understand—. Can we fill the 170? That's the question, but if we don't put the number there, we'll never know. So, I think we should be addressing that as well.

Llywydd, I'll stay at that, because I see I'm out of time. But I think it's issues of valuing staff, not just simply saying the words, but putting into action the value we have for our staff.

Thank you. That's a really helpful point about the appreciation and the value that we do place on the staff, not just at extraordinary times, but, as Dawn Bowden has mentioned, all throughout the year, and the remarkable service that we are privileged to have within this country. I recognise your point about the balance of generalists and specialists to see—[Inaudible.]—about the shape of training in the medical field, but it's a part of what we need to understand and part of the work that Healthcare Inspectorate Wales will be there to understand and help the system to understand as it plans the different levels of staff and the different numbers of staff and how we then expect them to work together.

I'm pleased to hear you recognise the imaging statement of intent. I think you're the only Member to have mentioned that, but it is an important step forward, and it's been worked through with staff in the field as well to have a coherent vision for those staff in the service that we know that we'll need them to deliver. This impacts on a wide range of the national health service.

On the bank arrangements, I recognise there's a challenge for us here, and a real challenge about the rates of pay, how it's organised, how convenient it is, and I think there's a link to e-rostering as well—how we can make it work for staff to undertake shifts that work for them and for the service. There is a piece of work already under way on those areas. So, in the coming months I expect to be able to report back on those for you in any event.

On GP training numbers, you're right—I'm interested in seeing how we go this year, and if we again fill or overfill, we'll then have a different conversation about the infrastructure we have for how many training places we could accommodate, as well as an understanding of how many more people we think we can actually have to undertake GP training numbers here within Wales, and, of course, that conversation about the budget to support those people as well.

I'll finish with the point about paramedics. Again, there'll be comments about the numbers of paramedics we need to train. Paramedics themselves are a highly desirable commodity, and lots of people look to recruit them outside the Welsh system as well. But also the roles—and you're right, the roles are changing, as I recognised in my statement. There's something also about the rotas and how we expect them to work. Because if you take a paramedic out of the emergency ambulance service and you place that paramedic into primary care, if they're there for a long period of time, they may not be able to easily move back into the emergency service, and there's a potential to de-skill them for all parts of their role. There's something about understanding how experienced paramedics, in particular, have a rota and a job description, and a role map that allows them to move into different parts of the service and to continue to add value to those parts of the service. If it's about a regular rotation in different parts of the service, we may well see greater value both in terms of the delivery, but also for that person still feeling valued and having a job that they want to do and not being burned out by one part of it or the other.

Thank you very much, Cabinet Secretary.

Item 4 on the agenda is a statement by the leader of the house on International Women's Day. I call on the leader of the house, Julie James.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. International Women’s Day, 8 March, is recognised around the world. It is a day to acknowledge and celebrate the achievements of women and girls everywhere. This year’s theme is Press for Progress. I want to take this opportunity to highlight the progress we are making in Wales and the challenges we continue to face. 

Gender stereotyping is both a cause and consequence of gender inequality. All too often, women and girls are still not given the opportunities to fulfil their potential. We are working hard to change and challenge this on many fronts. Our work around STEM—science, technology, engineering and mathematics—is an example of how we are working across the Welsh Government to tackle gender stereotyping. We are training physics teachers across Wales in gender-inclusive teaching methods. We fund computer coding classes, including specific workshops to engage and motivate girls. Gender equity is now being addressed in all our STEM-related funding. It's also being raised through the national networks of excellence in science and technology and maths. Our STEM Cymru 2 programme aims to encourage more young women to progress into engineering careers. To date, over 3,000 young women have engaged with the programme.

We are committed to delivering 100,000 all-age apprenticeships. Tackling gender bias is at the forefront of our approach to apprenticeships, and we have employed an equality champion to take this work forward.

This year, International Women’s Day coincides with the National Apprenticeship Week. Our network of training providers have a number of events taking place to encourage women to consider non-traditional routes.

We need more women at all levels of management in our private sector businesses. The Agile Nation 2 project aims specifically to develop women to take on management roles. It is supported by £8 million of European funding. Through this project we have seen that the right combination of leadership training, one-to-one support and encouragement can really pay dividends and help women to obtain a better job, a promotion or a pay rise. We've also seen how women, when they reach the top levels of management, can help lead organisational change to promote equality for their whole workforce, such as introducing flexible working arrangements.

We also need more diversity in decision-making roles and in public life, but progress is being made. In 2016-17, 47.8 per cent of new public appointments and 50 per cent of reappointments were female. Following the May 2017 local elections, four councils are now being led by women. We confidently expect to see more in the future.

All the organisations funded through our equality and inclusion programme have committed to delivering a more diverse pool of decision makers. As a part of this work, the Women’s Equality Network Wales has launched a mentoring programme for women, which begins later this month. Like many of you, I have signed up to be a mentor and look forward to supporting the participants to become the leaders of the future.

The Welsh Government has pledged its commitment to the 50:50 by 2020 campaign. Signing up to the campaign shows employers’ public commitment to working towards equal gender representation in decision-making and influencing roles in Wales. We have also pledged our commitment to the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s Working Forward campaign. We are committed to ensuring women do not face discrimination in the workplace in relation to pregnancy or maternity. I believe the public sector in Wales can lead the way and be an exemplar in showcasing good practice and by promoting the benefits of discrimination-free workplaces.

We are also working hard to support the women who face barriers when trying to access training and employment. We recognise re-employment is the best route out of poverty, and our key focus is on maximising people’s employability. The Communities for Work programme provides bespoke support to those who face significant and often complex barriers that prevent them taking up training or employment. It will provide over £70 million in employment support services in the most deprived communities in Wales until 2020. As of January, 5,730 women had received support from the programme.

The Parents, Childcare and Employment programme aims to support parents become more employable and to move into work when childcare is their main barrier to accessing education, training or employment. Over 95 per cent of PaCE participants are female, and over 84 per cent of the participants are lone parents as well. We know that affordable, available and accessible childcare will give parents greater employment choices, enable parents to work, and support our drive to increase economic growth, tackle poverty and reduce inequalities. This is why we have committed to provide 30 hours of Government-funded early education and childcare to working parents of three and four-year-olds for up to 48 weeks a year. 

We must also ensure that children are taught about healthy relationships from a young age. The new curriculum for Wales includes, as one of its four purposes, that all young people should leave our education system as healthy, confident individuals who can form positive relationships based on trust and mutual respect. Learning about healthy relationships at a young age is an important step in tackling gender stereotyping now and for future generations.

And, finally, I want to highlight the very important work being undertaken to tackle violence against women, domestic abuse and sexual violence. Statistics show that women are more likely than men to have experienced all forms of domestic abuse and sexual violence. This includes forced marriage, crimes committed in the name of honour, and female genital mutilation. Following on from the landmark Violence against Women, Domestic Abuse and Sexual Violence (Wales) Act in 2015, the national training framework was published in 2016. Over 70,000 professionals have been trained through the framework so far. That’s 70,000 more confident, more aware and more knowledgeable professionals working in our public services.

In January, the This is Me campaign was launched to tackle gender stereotyping and to encourage people to live fear free from gender constraints and gender norms. In the four weeks following its launch, it has been viewed over 200,000 times and use of the Live Fear Free website has increased by nearly 2,000 per cent. I will be making an announcement on Thursday, on International Women’s Day itself, highlighting the next step in our work to tackle violence against women, domestic abuse and sexual violence. It is important that those for whom this policy is made are able to influence and guide that policy and share what works for them. The next step will be to make proposals about how we do this. Ultimately, we intend to build a society that does not tolerate violence against women, domestic abuse or sexual violence.

But to come back to the focus of today, it is about celebrating the women of Wales and their contribution to all areas of Welsh life. Our role as a Government is to press for progress and to ensure that women and girls have the same opportunities to fulfil their potential. We are pressing for progress, and we are making that progress, but we are not complacent. There is much more to be done. We all have a duty to tackle gender stereotyping, in all its forms, to ensure that current and future generations are not subjected to it, limited by it or harmed by it, to create a Wales where everyone can aspire and achieve and be the person they were intended to be. Diolch.

Thank you very, very much, leader of the house, for your statement today. It's very difficult to criticise anything in there, and I don't intend to do so. And I certainly welcome the list of activities that the Welsh Government has been involved in, and the number of women that have been encouraged to take part in those activities. I've no doubt that they will feel the benefits of that and progress well with those ambitions in their lives. But I'm wondering if there's any way—or even whether it's appropriate, actually—that we could monitor the progress of the women, and particularly the younger women, who have been involved in those programmes. I certainly don't want to spy on them, and of course their choices are their choices, but if we can come up with strong evidence—I don't know, even in 10 years' time—to prove that these have been really, really worthwhile and repeatable activities, then I think that that's good for all of us.

I'm really pleased to see that there's a focus on apprenticeships in the statement you've made today. I'd like to do a quick shout-out for Bridgend College, which has just won the apprenticeship provider of the year award—I've done my duty to my constituents there.

But there's still some very concerning information out there about gender stereotyping, and I refer in particular to a piece of work done by the Careers and Enterprise Company very recently, which found that young people have more, not less, gender-conservative views of the world than their parents did. Fifty-six per cent of young women aged between 17 and 19 believe that their gender limits their career options—only 37 per cent of young men felt that. And the research went on to confirm that career aspirations showed particular gender disparity, with 18 per cent more young men than women wanting to be engineers and IT professionals—perhaps not something we're surprised to hear here. But it showed that those biases are projected onto others by young people themselves, so that it's peers, in one way, who are encouraging young women in particular to go into careers that perhaps they went into. And the fact that gender equality, if you like, isn't a given, I think, is demonstrated in these brand-new figures, and a good reason why these debates, and these statements that you make, Minister, are still essential. I'd love to say that the job is done, but we're miles away from it, judging by these new figures.

As well as apprenticeships, I wonder if the Welsh Government has given some consideration to returnships as well—I don't know if that's a word I can use. The UK Government's just announced some money to support people back into the private sector after time off for caring. Of those people, 90 per cent are women—perhaps again no huge surprise. And I find this interesting if we're asking women in particular to go back into careers, rather than jobs, as certainly when you consider the recent statistics we had from 'Who Runs Wales? 2017', despite the good work that we're doing here, only 6 per cent of chief executives in the top 100 per cent businesses are women—that's in the private sector. Surely, we can be doing better than that. So, if there is a particular work stream here that you think you might be interested in developing, we'd be certainly happy to support you in that.

On childcare, obviously we want this to work. And I'm wondering if I could just draw attention to the pilot on childcare in my area—which, of course, is yours as well—where it seems that nannies aren't included in the scheme, for reasons of registration; I completely get why they're not. But it would be easy to jump to the conclusion that nannies are just for families who can afford them, rather than, on occasion, it is the welfare of the child that demands it. And the reason I'm raising it is because, apart from potentially reducing the number of jobs available to nannies, who tend to be women, there's a risk that it's the women in those families who will choose to stay at home to look after the children, rather than going out into the workplace, because of the needs of that particular child. So, I'm hoping that's something—I believe that it's an unintended consequence of the policy—that could perhaps be looked at.

And then I just want to welcome your very important comments on violence generally. I'm very pleased to see the level of training taken up by professionals, which you referred to. But even that's only going to pay dividends if you get the healthy relationships part of this right. I appreciate what you say that the curriculum will now involve that, but we do have the sort of pre-Donaldson gap, which I think—you may not be able to give me information today—we need to have some information on, particularly at secondary school level, where both young men and young women will have missed the opportunity for this to be very normalised at primary school level. So, if you're able to share any information on that, that would be great. Thank you.

Well, going in reverse order, because that last one is very important indeed, I do think there's a real issue about teaching healthy relationships, in the context of gender stereotyping, and some of the cultural things that are going on in our society today. We are running several schemes across Wales, actually, pre-Donaldson, as you put it, and I went to see one run by Hafan Cymru only very recently. And the young woman running it was amazing, I have to say; I had the privilege of sitting through one of the sessions. But she told me, Deputy Presiding Officer, something that really cuts to every one of our hearts. Before the session—and this was for year 5 and year 6 students—she asked a mixed gender group whether boys or girls were better, and it will be no shock to anyone to know that the boys thought the boys were better and the girls thought the girls were better, because that's what you do. But then she asked the boys why they thought they were better, and they said that they thought that boys were better because they were stronger and better at sport. And then she asked the girls why they thought girls were better, and they couldn't come up with anything, which is really horrible, isn't it?

I had the privilege of being there, so I asked them if they'd heard of Jessica Ennis, and I happened to have a photograph of her on my phone, because I'd been at a different event. And they had heard of Jessica Ennis, and I asked them if they thought she was both strong and good at sport and they agreed that she was. So, we had quite an interesting discussion about what that gender stereotype was about. But it was quite shocking to me that those young women wanted themselves to be better—if 'better' is the right word—but they couldn't actually come up with anything, because already at that young age they'd been subjected to such gender stereotyping that they struggled to say a characteristic that is associated with femaledom that is 'better'. 

This is not about being better, this is about every single human being being able to be the best person that they can be regardless. It's nothing to do with your gender. I happen to like mucking about with cars. My son happens to like cooking. Apparently, that's against the gender stereotype. Well, that was news to me when I was growing up and it's news to him as well. And that's the point, isn't it? 

So, we support in the Government a large number of these schemes. We support the campaign Let Toys be Toys, for example, where we don't encourage people to gender stereotype their toys. If you want, in your shop, to segregate your toys for ease of shopping, then do it by age appropriateness. I'm sure you all know my anecdote about stopping in a local shop in Swansea, and having a go at the manager and asking him what was in the aisle of boys' toys and girls' toys and telling him that he and I were going to have to go outside if there were engineering toys in one aisle and domestic appliances in the other. And he cordially invited me to have a cup of tea, while he checked and sorted it out. So, he wasn't too sure himself, is the point. In fairness, when I went back to that shop the next week, they'd organised it back into age, so, he took the point straight away. I was very grateful for that. But it shows you how pervasive this stuff is and how destructive it is of relationships. We know that domestic violence is driven by some of this gender stereotyping as people try to live in to roles that actually don't suit them and they are stressed by trying to do that. It's a very important part of that. 

In terms of some of the specific things she said, I was delighted to see that Bridgend College had won the award, and it is very well deserved. We have worked very hard to put some equality gender stereotyping awareness into some of the apprenticeship things and we have initiatives that encourage both boys and girls to take part in experiential learning across the gender divide—so, programming a robot, plaiting hair, planning childcare activities—for both genders simultaneously regardless, because, why not? And that's been very well received and very well taken up.

Just in terms of returnships, it is worth mentioning the Sêr Cymru scheme at this point, which is now being copied by the UK Government—I'm always delighted when they do that for Wales. One very large part of the Sêr Cymru programme has been to encourage researchers who have gone out of research—usually because of a career break, but sometimes just because they've gone some place else—to come back in to science. And you'd be amazed to discover that about 95 per cent of those returnships are female, because they've taken career breaks and are coming back. So, we are on that, but I think there is undoubtedly a great deal more to do before we get anywhere near, unfortunately, gender equality. 

Every year, we do mark International Women’s Day. We recall the successes of our predecessors, and pledge to do everything within our ability to improve things for the women who will follow us. I do believe that this year feels different. In light of the scandals in film and television, in politics, journalism and many other areas of life, there is a new conversation that has started, and I do believe that the Me Too movement has created a new awareness of behaviours that have been seen in the past as being acceptable. Now, younger women and younger men are challenging these stereotypes and are calling for an end to sexual inequality, sexual harassment and violence based on gender. There is change in the wind, and we will no longer accept sexual harassment as an element of life that is unavoidable. I don’t believe that we can avoid having that conversation here in Wales, either.

We should be in the vanguard of taking forward the progress that has been hastened by the Me Too movement. So, I’d like to know, leader of the house, what work has been done to better understand the experiences of women in Wales of discrimination, and, specifically, of harassment. We need to learn more about the best way of changing inappropriate behaviours, as individuals and as a broader society. So, one idea that I am looking into this afternoon is whether the Government would be willing to carry out a national survey as a means of starting the national conversation that we need, and specifically around sexual harassment.

Unfortunately, violence against women and domestic abuse is still a part of the lives of too many people, and I know that you share the same aspiration as me to see this eradicated, but, unfortunately, it is increasing. More than one in four women in Wales and England suffer domestic abuse during their lifetimes—13 per cent of men. If we’re to change behaviour, we need to start from the early years, educating children and young people about healthy relationships, and provide comprehensive sex education. You’ve just described that problem, because there are deficiencies in terms of that sort of education, but I am seeking solutions here. So, will the Welsh Government cease flip-flopping on this and commit to introducing compulsory, comprehensive education on sex and healthy relationships in our schools as soon as possible?

We don’t have to wait for changes to the Welsh curriculum. We need to take action on this as a matter of urgency. We also need to tackle the barriers that prevent young women from taking full advantage of the educational opportunities available to them, and something as simple to put right as having problems in accessing sanitary products can have a huge impact on the confidence and well-being of women. So, will you join with me in thanking Councillor Elyn Stephens for her campaign in the Rhondda to introduce a policy of free sanitary products in schools? Her work will assist young women who suffer period poverty and will tackle the shame that occasionally still holds women back in this area. And will you, as a Government, assess this situation and also consider introducing a similar policy to what is being introduced in the Rhondda, and do so across Wales?

Finally, we need to take positive steps to create equal representation between men and women as elected representatives. How on earth can it be right that half the population is under-represented so appallingly in public life? Only 27 per cent of councillors are women, for example, and we should be setting an example of equality, which would then help in generating change in other areas of public life. So, would you agree with me that we do need positive discrimination if we are to do away with generations of imbalance between the genders?

Yes, I largely agree with everything you said, Siân Gwenllian. There are some nuances, but the nuance isn't awfully important. I'm going to jump about all over the place just because that happens to be the way my particular papers are, but, for example, in the diversity and democracy programme, we ran that programme and we have kept in touch with the mentees—I should have said that to Suzy Davies, actually—because they voluntarily want to keep in touch with us, and we know that a large number of those stood for election in 2017, and four of them were elected and they were all women. Those programmes work, so we're going to pursue those, and I hope that we all take part in the mentee programme, men as well as women, because actually the larger the number of young women who we can make understand what public office looks like, the more likely they are to put themselves forward.

I've also asked Chwarae Teg to refresh a piece of work it did under the previous Minister around equality and public life for me, and they should be bringing that forward very shortly so that we can accelerate the progress of equality in public life. We have done reasonably well, but reasonably well is not where I want to be. I want to be equal. So, I don't see any reason why, in this Assembly term, we shouldn't get to 50:50 on every public body sponsored by this Government, and Chwarae Teg is going to bring some proposals forward for me to consider to see how we might manage that, and that's very important indeed.

In terms of period poverty, I've got officials working very hard indeed on what we can do here, alongside education officials. We're closely looking at RCT; they have done something that is very interesting indeed, and we have been having long conversations with the Trussell Trust—that's hard to say, Trussell Trust—about where they are with work with homeless young women as well, but I'm determined to do something very soon in that regard. So, as soon as I've got some data together, we will be announcing some schemes that we can take forward to see what works best. Even if we provided free sanitary products to every woman who requires them in Wales, that's not that many people. This is a thing that I'm determined to take forward in one way or another. So, it's just about the best way of doing it, which is where we are at the moment.

In terms of sex education—absolutely right, we do need to do something. We've just had the sex and relationships education panel report, and it was a very good report in my view. The Cabinet Secretary for Education and I have been considering that for just a little while. She'll be responding formally to it shortly, but I don't think I'm pre-announcing too many things by saying that we both thought it was a very good report indeed. And, as I said, we are sponsoring some organisations already to take forward some of that work in healthy relationships. We will be considering what the best way of getting that into the education system is, and that may well be that we make a change to the Violence against Women, Domestic Abuse and Sexual Violence (Wales) Act 2015 itself, or we include it in the curriculum reforms that we'll be taking through the Assembly shortly. There are a number of ways of doing it, but we will be doing that as fast as possible.

Then just to say at the end, because we know—all the research shows us this—it's this gender stereotyping thing that's actually at the bottom of all of this. People are taught, from the second they open their eyes, that their gender matters, and actually it doesn't matter—unless you're actually looking to form a family and have a sexual relationship with a person, why on earth does it matter? I just really don't understand that genderisation of five-day-old babies and so on. We've really got to work very hard as a society to stop that happening. We need to make sure that all of our processes in Government don't in any way assume that that's a good thing to do, and that they afford equal opportunities right across the piece. But I'm not in any way complacent; we have a long way to go yet.

Thank you to the Government for bringing forward this statement today. With permission, I'd just like to put on the record that, four months ago today, we lost a true advocate for women's rights and someone who stood up for women's suffering, domestic abuse and sexual violence. I don't think there's any one of my dad's suits that doesn't have a white ribbon pin badge on, and I'm very proud to be standing here today in the Chamber wearing mine. 

I have three questions for the leader of the house. Firstly, we know my dad supported the White Ribbon campaign, and that my colleague Joyce Watson has played a vital part in that, with her annual event. Will the Government join me in my campaign to ensure that all public service providers in Wales, like the police, like the fire service, follow south Wales police and fire service and Gwent's lead in having white ribbons on their vehicles all year around?

Secondly, I also want to pay tribute to RCT council and all the campaigners that made the announcement that free sanitary products could soon be available to all schoolgirls possible. I know that my colleague Jenny Rathbone just here has been a vital advocate in that as well and she was working closely with my dad on this issue. So, I also wanted to know if the Government will commit to ensuring this is replicated across Wales and help make that happen.

Just finally, I'd like to finish with: can I just urge the leader of the house and all Members and staff who work in the Assembly to read Rachel Williams's new book, The Devil at Home? Rachel's story as a survivor of domestic abuse is devastating but truly, truly inspiring. Her story of hope tells all of us how you can always find light, even in the very, very darkest of times. She's a true inspiration and I urge you all to read that book at your leisure. Thank you, leader of the house.

Absolutely. I hadn't actually realised it was an anniversary date, but we all very much remember your father's contributions here in the Senedd. He managed to be both amusing and forthright and also compassionate and committed on a subject that he clearly cared a lot about, and I'm very proud to have inherited some part of his portfolio and to be able to, in some small way, step into his shoes and take that forward. I do have a great photograph of him, actually—talking of gender stereotypes—wearing the worst red high heels you've ever seen in all of your life. I had to support his weight on my shoulders as we tried to walk a mile—it wasn't a mile, it was about five steps—in somebody else's shoes. [Laughter.] I'm not too sure whether I was worse at standing in high heels or he was, but we weren't—it wasn't a great sight, but it was funny. So, it's a fitting tribute, and I hadn't realised it.

In terms of the White Ribbon campaign, I know that the Cabinet Secretary for public services has been working very hard with first line responders and other public services on this, and I'm sure he will be taking it forward. We're very proud of the police for having done what they've done and the multi-agency work that they're undertaking and absolutely committed to taking that forward as fast as possible. It's a very important symbol, actually—it's not just about the campaign; it's a very important symbol of the commitment of public services to that kind of equality, and, of course, just to remind ourselves—Joyce has worked endlessly in this regard as well—of that pledge about never committing violence or condoning or being silent in the face of violence. The white ribbon is a very public reminder of that pledge, which is very important to have, especially for first responders, who are often going into situations where domestic violence is the issue.

In terms of period poverty, as I just said to Siân Gwenllian, we are looking at it very carefully. I'm absolutely committed to doing something. I'm not yet convinced that one scheme fits every single woman in Wales, so it's just a question of trying to tailor it so that we get it right and to persuade the Cabinet Secretary for Finance that we can afford some of it. I'm sure he—. Look—he's not demurring. [Laughter.] But we are committed to doing it—absolutely committed to doing it.

In terms of Rachel Williams's book, I haven't read the whole book, but I've read extracts from it. One of the things that's absolutely front and centre in our policy in terms of tackling all kinds of domestic violence and sexual violence is to have the survivor's voice right there in the centre of the policy so we can understand the effect that it has both during and after, and in the recovery phase, for all of the victims of that kind of domestic violence. So, I certainly am hoping to read it when I do have some leisure time—I'm not too sure when exactly that will be—but I have read extracts from it, and I've heard Rachel talk, actually, and she's a very powerful voice. We're very keen that our policy takes that survivor voice into account, and, in fact, Carl Sargeant, your father, was the first to put that right at the centre of our policy, and I certainly will be carrying on in his good footsteps.

Thank you very much for your statement, leader of the house. I certainly welcome the work being done to encourage girls to enter non-traditional professions, to study STEM subjects and to tackle gender inequality and stereotyping. I note the STEM Cymru 2 scheme and would like to ask: out of the 3,000 young women who have engaged with the scheme, how many of those have gone on to a career in engineering? I really do welcome these efforts, but girls need to have the confidence in maths before they can excel at subjects such as physics, and it's essential that we get the basics right.

The more girls who leave primary school and enter secondary school confident in their ability to do maths, and the more who are encouraged to think about studying for STEM subjects and to go on to study STEM subjects, the more women we'll find in engineering and the scientific professions. So, I would be really, really interested to know how you're monitoring the effectiveness of the programmes that you've introduced. I think, potentially, they're very good programmes, but we need to know how effective they're being and, hopefully, there'll be some very good news there.

What worries me, and I'm sure you're also concerned about this, is that it's been more than 40 years since the advent of the Equal Pay Act 1970, and women are still earning 80 per cent of men's pay. Roughly about 20 years ago, women were earning 75 per cent of male earnings, which means that the narrowing of the gap by 5 per cent over 20 years is progress of sorts, but at this rate it's going to take another 80 years to eliminate the gender pay gap. The Welsh public sector could lead the way here and empower working women in the public sector by introducing pay transparency, so I'd be interested to know what your thoughts are about that.

I welcome the programmes that the Welsh Government have set in place to tackle gender stereotyping, but I'd suggest that gender stereotyping needs to be tackled much, much earlier, and I think you probably agree with me there. Girls and boys absorb gender norms along with all of the other norms and values that they learn from the people around them, and this process begins at birth. So, how are staff in nurseries and infant schools, as well as adults working with older children, being trained to spot gender stereotyping and how to avoid it?

I welcome the efforts made by the Welsh Government to tackle domestic violence, and the training of professionals is a very good move. Can the leader of the house give us an update on the progress of those schemes in due course? I realise that you wouldn't be able to give a detailed update now. 

But coming on to another big issue, no practice exemplifies the subordination and abuse of women more than female genital mutilation, and yet there have been no meaningful prosecutions. So, can the leader of the house please tell me what Welsh Government policy is regarding referring cases of FGM for investigation by the police? And can she also tell us what Welsh Government is doing to directly challenge the patriarchal cultures of the communities in which FGM occurs, and that result in FGM? Thank you.   

The Member makes a very important point—that last point, in particular, is a really important point. We have been working extremely hard in a range of areas to make sure that reporting and prosecution takes place. They tend to be very complex cases to prosecute and, actually, prevention is better than prosecution anyway. So, we've been rolling out our training across all professionals who have contact with young girls, particularly young girls who are in the at-risk category, so just before puberty, to spot the signs of a young girl that's at risk and start the protection programme as early as possible. But also, we've been working very carefully with the criminal justice authorities across the UK to make sure that we have the right training in place, so that the police and the first responders also pick up the right signs. And also that we work inside the communities so that communities themselves start to self-police. So, it's hugely complicated, but we will be seeing some more prosecutions shortly. I don't think it is just about the prosecution. It's much more about changing the culture—as you say, the patriarchal culture—in some of those, although, actually, in a large number of the cultures, it's the women themselves who are actually involved in it. So, there's a huge cultural issue here that we have to be very cognisant of and we have to work very hard to change. That's partly why we're having the whole-society approach to the gender stereotyping issue, because that's the fundamental basis of this. 

In terms of some of the specifics that you asked me about—in terms of physics, for example—one of the contributors to the Val Feld plaque unveiling that we had just outside the Senedd now said something that really resonated with me. She said she was looking forward to the day when somebody addressed a young woman about her figures, and what they meant was her contribution in maths or scientific advancement, and not what she looked like without her clothes on. I, too, would second that. I hope you've all seen the film Hidden Figures, which was a very good demonstration of the contribution that women have made throughout scientific history, which is then hidden over completely. I have to say that I was completely unaware of the contribution of black women on the space programme until I'd read the book and seen the film.

That's what the unveiling of that plaque was about. It's about making sure that young women across Wales understand the contribution that women have made in those fields, and therefore aspire to that contribution themselves. Because if you haven't seen it, how can you aspire to be it? So, I think the plaque was a very good first step. My next step, Deputy Presiding Officer, is to make sure that we have one of those QR codes on the bottom of it so that when you put your phone up to it, it gives you a biography of the woman being honoured in that way, so that young women across Wales can have the positive role models that will make them succeed. 

But in terms of how we'll know we're succeeding, when the number of women in Wales goes above 20 per cent taking A-level physics, that will be a very standard place. That hasn't moved for 40 years, so I'm very much hoping that, in the next five, the measures we're putting in place now will move that. 

Thank you. We have nine minutes left on this statement to run and we have five speakers, so I shall leave you all to do the maths on that. So, what I'm asking for is: can we have short contributions and short answers? Then we'll get you all in. Dawn Bowden. 

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and I will try to keep it brief, but I do have a couple of points I want to make. Firstly, can I thank you for your statement and the positive actions that, clearly, the Welsh Government have been carrying out already? And can I say in particular that today was absolutely fantastic when we saw the unveiling of the purple plaque for Val Feld, and that campaign to deliver other purple plaques across Wales for remarkable women? I'd like to congratulate Chwarae Teg for taking that campaign forward. 

It's in that same spirit of recognising remarkable women across Wales that I'd like to ask you, leader of the house, to join me in making that call for action towards women across Wales, for me particularly in Merthyr Tydfil and Rhymney, obviously, but across the whole of Wales, to celebrate the contribution of women to all our local communities. In my constituency, for example, we could look at perhaps women from the past like Rose Mary Crawshay, who was a suffragette, or women who served civic life as councillors, mayors and leaders. It could be the contribution of women, again in my constituency, like Laura Ashley, in design and fashion, Marion Jones, leading the fight for equal pay at Hoover, Winifred Agnes who was the international president for the confederation of midwives, the amazing Aberfan wives, and, of course, those incredible women that supported the miners through the strike through Women Against Pit Closures. In truth, we have very little public recognition of many of the incredible women who have made a mark in my constituency throughout the years.

On International Women's Day 2018, can I ask you to join me in making that call to the whole country to work together to celebrate the contribution of women in our local communities so that we see purple plaques and other forms of recognition in all our communities right the way across Wales?  

Indeed. Very swiftly, Deputy Presiding Officer, I would say that absolutely, I agree with that. There's an enormous list in every constituency of women who've been absolutely instrumental in moving every walk of life in Wales on. I'm looking forward to the 100 notable women campaign that WEN Wales will be putting forward and we've already said that we will put Government money behind the purple plaque campaign to get as many of those purple plaques as we possibly can, and there'll be a public appeal to do that as well. I'm determined to get those QR codes on as well, not just the name and the fact that they lived there. I want somebody to actually be able to understand what that woman actually did and what you, therefore, can aspire to in each of our communities across Wales. 

I think the thing about the plaque unveiling today, for me, was the enthusiasm with which Val Feld's granddaughters were taking part in the ceremony—that's absolutely wonderful.

Anyway, just moving back to period poverty, there's no doubt in my mind that there are people who are amongst the most disadvantaged in society who are having to use socks and rags and other materials in order to deal with their period. In the sixth largest economy in the world, that is completely out of order. I'm delighted to hear that you're working on that with the Trussell Trust. I read with great interest the RCT report, which included the input from retired teacher Jayne Brencher, who's obviously very experienced in the matter of period poverty and schools. I think there were several things to take away from the report. One is that I'm not convinced that it's period poverty that is keeping some pupils away from school during their period; I think it's much more to do with dignity and people feeling good about themselves and confident. So, I know that RCT has allocated £50,000 for the trial period in their schools and up to £98,000, but most of it is to do with making sure that there are bins for disposal of sanitary pads and towels in schools, which one would expect to see as a matter of course.

I think that it's very interesting to hear from the girls themselves. Nearly 800 pupils took part and I was really interested to see that 15 per cent of them said they would like Mooncups to be made available, which is obviously the most sustainable solution because otherwise we're simply adding to the refuse mountain, which we've got to put to landfill or incineration. So, I'd hope that you might look at that as a sustainable solution for ensuring everybody has a method for dealing with their period. But, obviously, if you're going to have Mooncups in schools, you're going to have to have hand washing facilities in the toilet. So, it is a complicated issue. I was very surprised, however, to see that whilst most schools do provide sanitary towels or tampons in a few cases, and most of them for free, they didn't have any sort of budget for this beyond, in some cases, £100. Either staff were buying them themselves to ensure that girls who were caught out were not embarrassed or they were getting it reimbursed from petty cash. And 17 per cent of headteachers reported that they did not provide sanitary bins for disposing of towels and tampons, which is just a recipe for a blocked drain, frankly.

I think this is a really interesting issue. I think it's fantastic that we are able to talk about it today in light of International Women's Day, because we have to remember that, around the world, girls are not able to take part in prayer, they're not able to take part in school. In some cultures, they're actually thrown out of their house during the time of their period because they are considered unclean. Instead, we must be celebrating periods as a demonstration of women's fertility, which is what it is. Therefore, it's really important that everybody understands the importance of periods and that it is a natural process. Girls don't need to be missing school because of it. They need to be provided with the wherewithal to ensure that they're able to do it with dignity.

I completely agree with absolutely everything you've said. There is an issue about dignity and embarrassment, and that's very much part of the sex and healthy relationships agenda. Actually, there's a real issue in primary schools as well, because many girls start menstruating before they're 11 and move on to secondary schools, and that's a real issue for them. So, it is about making sure our entire education system is geared up to make sure that people have dignity and respect and privacy and the right equipment of whatever sort.

We are investigating the whole sustainability agenda as well, which is a huge issue, and the issue about sanitary protection, both for the individual and for the disposal and washing facilities and all the rest of it. That's why I'm saying that we want to be sure that when we bring a scheme forward it actually works for everybody in Wales, because we have various women in different stages of their menstrual and reproductive cycles, obviously.

So, it's a very important point. We are working very hard on it. We will be looking very closely at some of the trials that are going on in RCT and elsewhere, and we are talking to various homelessness charities and so on, and I've been working with the Minister for housing on some of this as well. We will be bringing forward a scheme; I just want to make sure that that scheme works for everyone and fits in with our sex and healthy relationships agenda in general.

Minister, I'd like to ask about automation, which, as far as we can tell, is likely to have a hugely gendered impact. There is no reliable study or prediction about what is going to happen, but the World Economic Forum estimates that, for every new job created, three male jobs will be lost but that, for every new job created, five female jobs will be lost, because many of the jobs with a high chance of automation are back-office administrative functions, and many of the new jobs are in STEM professions, where women remain vastly under-represented. So, will the Welsh Government commit to undertaking a wholescale gender impact assessment of automation in Wales? As Annalise Moser reminded us,

'what gets measured is more likely to get addressed',

and undertaking a gender impact assessment won't just reveal the extent of the challenge we face but will spur action to ensure simply that women aren't left to feel the brunt of automation.

Yes, indeed, that's a very important point. I've actually been discussing with the First Minister and a number of other colleagues various gender impact assessments that we should be making—budget gender impact assessments not least—and we will be bringing forward some proposals in that regard. I had not thought of automation, but I'm more than happy to include that in it. The real issue there, of course, is just making sure that we have the largest number of people with the flexible number of skills necessary to be able to ride that wave rather than be pushed under by it. That's very much part of our STEM agenda in general. We need more engineers in general, not just women engineers, but clearly we need everyone with every kind of protected characteristic to have the best chance available to make sure that we actually stay on top of that curve. So, I'm more than happy to say that we'll do that.

I thank the leader of the house for her statement. This year, we are celebrating the centenary of women getting the vote, but of course it wasn't every woman, was it? Let's be clear. It was those with property and older than 30. So, immediately, we see the Representation of the People Act 1918 deliberately excluding working-class women from voting, and that, in my opinion, set immediately the difference and the fight that women would have to have thereafter. Feminism has always been aligned to social justice because they are two sides of the same coin. International Women's Day is rooted in a fight for workers' rights, and it did begin in a garment workers' factory in New York City, protesting pay and conditions. In 1917 in Russia, women protesters started a workers' revolution. So, we must remember where those fights started. I don't suppose many of you here—if any of you here—have heard of Rachel Parsons. She was the first woman to read mechanical science at the University of Cambridge in 1910. So, if you take that then, I don't suppose she actually had her degree because she would have been denied it, and I think that we need to clearly understand where the fight has come from.

The fight has come here, because we are all aware of the unveiling, and rightly, of the Val Feld plaque today, where it was immediately embedded that we would have equality within our system. And it is always a process when we're talking about equality, and women's equality is no different. One of the issues I believe that requires legislative attention right now is something that is called 'upskirting', whereby intimate pictures are taken underneath the victim's clothes. At the moment, it is not a criminal offence, but it is extremely offensive, and it is extremely disturbing for all those individuals who are affected. So, whilst we seem to think that we travel a road and we reach equality, somebody, somewhere, thinks about the next way of offending another person by the new tools that they have in their hand. So, could you please have some discussions with the UK Government about bringing forward some legislation to make upskirting a criminal offence? The report in The Guardian either today or yesterday clearly states that this isn't only women, but these are girls as young as 10 who are being subjected to this. Thank you.

I think that's appalling, and I most certainly will do exactly that. I'm very happy to do that. Deputy Presiding Officer, I will just say this, because the clichés sometimes make the point: we've all heard of the congresswoman's sign on her desk in America—'To do this job, you have to be twice as good as any man. Fortunately that's not difficult.' But, actually, I was taught while I was at university by a feminist woman called Cora Kaplan, and I know that the Cabinet Secretary for Finance knows this quote, but she said, tellingly, and you have to really think about the phrase:

'We'll know that we have true equality when there are as many mediocre women in power as there are mediocre men.'

Deputy Presiding Officer, we have a long way to go before we get to there. [Laughter.]

And finally, Jane Hutt. 

How do I follow that, leader of the house? I just want to thank everyone who attended the purple plaque ceremony today; it provides now a lasting memory of former Swansea East AM, Val Feld, a champion for equality. Now, Cerys Furlong, chief executive of Chwarae Teg, was at the event. She spoke about her commitment to progressing women's equality, very much in line with your statement today. Do you welcome the Chwarae Teg LeadHerShip initiative, which brought 16 to 25-year-old young women into the Assembly last week, shadowing many of us as Assembly Members—young women like Nia Watkins and Chloe Pierce from Barry and Llantwit Major in my constituency—inspired by what they saw and how they could take this forward? And secondly, will the Welsh Government sign up to the Chwarae Teg fair play employer benchmark? It was launched last November, and obviously, the Welsh Government needs to be at the forefront as an exemplar employer, and I think the commissioner's already signed up, so Welsh Government must follow suit.

Yes, on that second one, I'm in advanced negotiations with the various parts of the Government in order to make sure that we do sign up to that initiative. I was very proud to be able to speak, if only briefly, to the LeadHerShip event last week. I did say to the protagonist there that I was about to do FMQs and I was completely and utterly terrified and that I was going to do it anyway. The same feminist who taught me at the University of Sussex all those years ago introduced me to a book called Fear of Flying, which I could recommend to people even now, which is 'feel the fear and do it anyway' expressed in modern-day parlance. 

One of the reasons I was delighted to be at the Val Feld plaque unveiling was because Val was just such a person—she was an incredible human being, she was really funny. When she related back some of the tales that she'd—you know, when she'd taken her current campaign to those on high and she'd come back and tell you the story afterwards, you'd be in stitches—literally in stitches—but it never took away from the seriousness with which she pursued equality. I thought her children and grandchildren were a real inspiration to us all. And we are indeed standing on the shoulders of the women who went before us, Deputy Presiding Officer, and, as I said earlier, we have a long way to go before we get that equality.

Thank you, leader of the house. 

Item 5 on the agenda this afternoon is the Waste Enforcement (England and Wales) Regulations 2018, and I call on the Minister for Environment to move the motion. Hannah Blythyn.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I move the motion to approve the Waste Enforcement (England and Wales) Regulations 2018. Whilst most of the waste industry operate responsibly, we see significant problems from a small part of the industry that fails to meet the required standard or that operates outside the law. Illegally deposited waste and poorly managed sites pose a risk of fire, pollution of water courses and can cause odour, litter and fly infestations. Sadly, we know that it's the surrounding communities who suffer and that it's public bodies and owners of land who are left to clear up the mess and deal with the consequences.

We've worked with Natural Resources Wales to identify what more can be done to prevent problematic and abandoned waste sites. I've listened to the views of industry, who responded to the consultation of new enforcement powers for the regulators, and I'm now pleased to introduce these regulations that are part of a suite of measures aimed at tackling waste crime in Wales.

The regulations provide two new powers. The first power will enable Natural Resources Wales to restrict access to a waste site and stop further importation of waste by physical means, such as locking the gates or barring access to prevent a risk of serious pollution or to stop pollution from continuing.

Natural Resources Wales estimate about three sites a year are abandoned. To reduce the impact of abandoned waste, the second power enables Natural Resources Wales and local authorities to serve notice on an occupier or landowner to require them to move waste that is unlawfully present on a site, regardless of whether they were originally deposited lawfully. They will also have the power to make occupiers and landowners take action to eliminate or reduce any consequences caused by keeping or disposing of the waste on the land.

Following consultations with the industry, I've introduced a two-month transitional period before the power to remove waste from land will come into force. This will give occupiers and landowners time to understand the changes and new legislative powers. It's vital for the regulation enforcement of the waste sector to be underpinned by legislation if we are to protect the environment and human health, and to reduce the impact of abandoned waste sites.

Increased powers to take action against illlegal operators will also help create a level playing field in the industry and help ensure legitimate operators do not lose out to those who undermine and undercut the law-abiding majority. I therefore urge Members to support this legislation. Diolch yn fawr.

Plaid Cymru will support the regulations and particularly welcome the new power that NRW will have to prevent the further use of an illegal site. Many people would be surprised that that power does not exist with that body by now to do that. Certainly, it will be a means of avoiding further pollution, and I welcome that.

I do have one question for the Minister in relation to these regulations. Clearly, any landowner who has allowed his or her land to be used for this illegal purpose should face a penalty where necessary, but there are examples of land that’s been used for the illegal depositing of waste, over a long period of time sometimes, without the knowledge of the landowner, and occasionally the landowner is excluded from the land. So, I just wanted to ask the Minister what kind of safeguards will there be in the system to ensure that someone who isn't aware that their land has been used for this purpose isn't caught up under these regulations.

The Minister to respond to debate.

Thank you very much, and thank you very much for the question. I don't think it would be a debate on regulations if Simon Thomas didn't ask a question or contribute.

I'm grateful for your contribution, and these regulations will help our regulators tackle poor-performing and illegal waste sites and reduce the impact of abandoned waste sites on the surrounding communities.

You raise the landowners who may not be aware—we expect the regulations to make those leasing land aware of longer term implications, and having the forward-looking power gives landlords an opportunity to make the changes, and the way they lease and manage land will provide for change in the future. And there will be steps that Natural Resources Wales will be able to take to make sure that landowners are in a position to best protect themselves going forward. Steps could include making sure that landowners are aware of what the implications are. Some landowners may not be aware that they are committing an offence by allowing waste to be stored on land or certain property without the relevant permissions, and this cost could leave them liable to prosecution and significant clean-up costs. Part of that is raising awareness and that's why we're having the transition period—to give that time to landowners to be able to make those adjustments that they may need to make, so that, hopefully, they don't find themselves in a position where they are penalised. 

We know that more needs to be done to improve the performance of the waste industry and remove that rogue element, when we know that most operators and landowners do behave within the letters of the law. As a Welsh Government, we will continue to work with Natural Resources Wales to identify where any further action can be taken to lessen the impacts and the cost of waste crime on the surrounding communities.

These regulations are not the end of the work to tackle waste crime. In January, I issued a further consultation jointly with the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs on further proposals to improve performance of the waste sector, including reform of the exemptions regime and the competency arrangement for people applying to operate a waste facility. I look forward to being able to bring further legislation proposals to the Assembly in order to boost our efforts to tackle waste crime and actually fulfil our ambition of an effective circular economy in Wales.

Thank you very much. The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? Therefore the motion is agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Item 6 on the agenda is the Children (Secure Accommodation) (Wales) (Amendment) Regulations 2018, and I call on the Minister for Children and Social Care to move that motion—Huw Irranca-Davies.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I move the motion.

The Children (Secure Accommodation) (Wales) (Amendment) Regulations 2018 amend the regulations on secure accommodation for children that were made in 2015. Secure accommodation forms a small but important part of residential provision for looked-after children. Placements by local authorities are only used where a child is likely to abscond from any other type of placement and is a significant risk of harm to themselves or to others. In each case, the local authority must apply to the court for a secure accommodation order. Now, this should only be done where absolutely necessary and where other alternatives have been considered.

The amendments brought forward today seek to achieve two things. Firstly, there are amendments consequential upon a change to section 25 of the Children Act 1989, which allows local authorities in England and Wales to place children in secure accommodation in Scotland. Now, I should stress that our policy remains that children who need a secure placement should, wherever possible and appropriate, be accommodated within Wales. However, due to the specialist nature of this provision and its short-term nature, placements of Welsh children in England are fairly common, and occasionally, placements are made in Scotland. Although these placements from Wales to Scotland are exceptional, we would still wish this option to be open to Welsh authorities. We consulted on this in the autumn and most responses, including that from the Children's Commissioner for Wales, were supportive of this provision, provided that it was used on an exceptional basis only. 

Secondly, Dirprwy Lywydd, we are making some technical amendments to the 2015 regulations that are aimed principally at ensuring that there is clarity about the way the regulations operate for cross-border placements. These are desirable to guarantee the cross-border application of the regulations, especially in respect of placements from Wales to England and vice versa. In effect, they ensure that the Welsh and the English regulations dovetail together seamlessly and work in the very best interests of children.

I therefore commend these regulations to Members.

It was just to comment, basically, on what you've said already in relation to the exceptional circumstances. We agree with the direction of the regulations, as you say, in dovetailing with England, Wales and Scotland, but I think, for the record, we want to make it clear that it would only be for exceptional circumstances where finding provision in Wales would not be possible. And do you have statistics that you could share with us at some point as to how many children are then moved to Scotland? Because, of course, I'm sure we speak positively of Scotland on many occasions here in this Chamber, especially on these benches, but we want to be assured that, because it's a distance from Wales, they have the support mechanisms in place. However difficult that child may be, they do need those support mechanisms to follow them through when they are moved to that country. So, that was the main point we wanted to make sure that we heard here today.

The Minister to respond.

Bethan, thank you very much for that, and we concur entirely with what you're saying. It needs to be on an exceptional basis. We'd only want secure accommodation used when it is the appropriate option and other things have been ruled out. We'd want secure accommodation used in Wales where it is available, but because of the nature of this, and very often the temporary nature of this specialist accommodation, sometimes we need to extend—in fact, it's not infrequent that we'll extend into England and, very exceptionally, to Scotland. But in that situation, we would expect options to be looked at for returning that child closer to their local environment as soon as possible, but sometimes it's a necessary position.

At the moment, the process of doing that, particularly in Scotland, is highly convoluted. It requires an immense legalistic process to go through. What this will do now is, pursuant to the legal changes that this house is considering this afternoon, actually put in place a much more seamless way of making that effective. But, yes, I agree with you entirely, it should be used on an exceptional basis. The children's commissioner made that clear, we agree with that as well, but it's just making this technical amendment so that it can be done where it needs to be done, when everything else has gone out of the window and everything else has been considered.

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

We now move on to the next item on the agenda, which is a debate on the second supplementary budget of 2017-18, and I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Finance to move the motion. Mark Drakeford.

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. The second supplementary budget is a standard part of the annual financial management process. It is a final opportunity for us to adapt the budgetary proposals for this financial year, which were approved by the Assembly last year. I would like to thank the Finance Committee for their scrutiny work on this second supplementary budget. I will be responding to the Chair in due time.

This budget is mainly an opportunity to make the necessary changes, as a result, to financial management during the year, reconciling the resources available with the Government’s priorities. The majority of the changes to plans are mainly administrative.

The second supplementary budget, therefore, Dirprwy Lywydd, details adjustments as a result of transfers within ministerial expenditure groups, transfers between MEGs, allocations from reserves, changes to the overall departmental expenditure limit, including consequentials and other adjustments resulting from HM Treasury decisions, and latest annually managed expenditure forecasts agreed with HM Treasury.

As for reserves allocations, the NHS remains a key priority for this Government, and this budget includes revenue allocations of over £146 million from our reserves to support the Welsh NHS. This includes the £50 million announced by the Cabinet Secretary for health in August, to support improvements in referral-to-treatment, diagnostic and therapy waiting times. A further £10 million was announced in January to help relieve winter pressures in the NHS. Additional funding has also been provided to help the same MEG respond to deficits in two local health boards and the estimated shortfall of income from the pharmaceutical price regulation scheme.

In other revenue allocations, Dirprwy Lywydd, this supplementary budget allocates £4.1 million revenue for the coastal communities fund, £4 million for public sector broadband aggregation collaboration and makes provision for the new Welsh Revenue Authority.

Turning now, Dirprwy Lywydd, to capital, an additional £41 million has been allocated to the Welsh health service to support its all-Wales capital programme, including the Grange university hospital development, neonatal developments in Cardiff and Vale, the Velindre transforming cancer services programme and ongoing works at Ysbyty Glan Clwyd.

Addressing housing needs in Wales is a major priority for this Government. This supplementary budget therefore provides an additional capital investment in housing of £49.8 million and continues to support our commitment to provide 20,000 affordable homes. A further £10 million of financial transaction capital has been allocated for the Help to Buy scheme.

We continue, also, to find new and innovative ways to support our objectives. For instance, this budget provides financial transaction capital of £32 million to support a total £40 million investment to set up a Wales stalled sites fund. This will provide a development loan to sites where financial viability is a barrier to progression and where the market fails to provide affordable financing.

Dirprwy Lywydd, as discussed with Plaid Cymru, this budget provides further capital investment of £30 million for projects dedicated to supporting and growing the use of the Welsh language in education. It will contribute to the growth of Welsh speakers, supporting this Government's Welsh language strategy.

Earlier this year, the Cabinet Secretary for Local Government and Public Services announced a £30 million investment for local authorities to maintain and prevent the deterioration of the local roads network. This will support a substantive refurbishment programme and improve future resilience of the local authority roads network.

Deputy Presiding Officer, as I said earlier, these supplementary budgets are mainly administrative, and this budget provides details in terms of various adaptations that are to be made to our budget during this financial year. These include any changes to the Welsh block grant, reviews of the annually managed spending forecast, and other transfers between and within ministerial portfolios. I'd like to, once again, thank the Finance Committee for their scrutiny work on this supplementary budget, and I ask Members to support it.

Thank you. Can I now call on the Chair of the Finance Committee, Simon Thomas?

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and I thank the Cabinet Secretary for outlining the priorities of the Government for this supplementary budget. The Finance Committee did meet to scrutinise the budget with the finance Secretary, and the committee was relatively content in considering this supplementary budget, and we haven't made any recommendations this time, but we have come to four conclusions.

First, we have concluded that there is a lack of detail, even though the Cabinet Secretary did mention them. There is a lack of detail in the supplementary budget about prioritisation and how decisions are made by the Government in line with programmes such as 'Prosperity for All', the programme for government and, of course, the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015. This is a recurring theme in all our budget scrutiny, and we would urge the Government to provide as much evidence as possible of how allocations meet the objectives of these programmes. Additionally, we believe that it would be useful and more transparent if more explicit details were made available to explain how commitments are funded; for example, whether funding is coming from reserves or underspends in other areas.

Our third conclusion relates to financial transactions capital. During the scrutiny process, the Cabinet Secretary outlined the problems associated with this funding stream—and he's just mentioned one answer to those problems, of course—and he updated the committee on his discussions with the Chief Secretary to the Treasury. The Finance Committee considered financial transactions capital in our scrutiny of the original 2018-19 draft budget, and we recognised the limitations of this funding stream at that time, concluding that we were—and I quote:

'concerned by the issues associated with the repayable financial transactions capital, and how restrictions around the use of this funding may limit the Welsh Government to get best value for money in allocating these funds.'

During this scrutiny process, we again acknowledged the constraints of the funding streams, but we would urge the Cabinet Secretary to continue to explore all possible avenues of using the available funding.

Our last conclusion relates to supplementary budgets submitted by the directly funded bodies—the Assembly Commission, the Wales Audit Office, and the Public Services Ombudsman for Wales. For Members who haven't realised, you don't just have the Welsh Government's supplementary budget before you, but the supplementary budgets for these three bodies as well. As a committee, we took an in-principle view on the supplementary budgets of each of these bodies prior to the publication of the supplementary budget motion, and this approach of having a preview of the supplementary budget was helpful, in our view, and we would commend that approach for future use. Thank you very much.

Thank you. There are a number of speakers in this debate, and the debate is for 30 minutes only, therefore, I am going to ask Members to consider their contributions being at three minutes. I realise that some of you may have prepared for more than three. I will be lenient, but I won't be lenient to the point of—once we get past four and a half minutes I will ask you to come to a conclusion. So, we'll see how we go. Nick Ramsay.

I don't think you have to worry about me going on, Deputy Presiding Officer. I was going to make a joke, but I won't.

It will not surprise the Cabinet Secretary to learn that we will not be supporting today's supplementary budget. I think we've been over this ground before, so I know he'll understand that. Although I will admit there are some aspects that we welcome. We certainly welcome the changes brought about by the UK Government's 2017 autumn budget, under which Wales has benefited from an extra £1.2 billion in financing over the next four years, along with an extra £160 million for the Welsh NHS and local authorities over the next two years as a result of Barnett consequentials.

There are of course increases in fiscal and capital allocations, as the Cabinet Secretary has outlined. And we do fully appreciate the pressures that the Welsh Government has been under. I know often in this Chamber we banter back and forth about the failings of—well, in your case, the failings of the UK Government, and in ours the failings of the Welsh Government. Of course, all Governments, UK and Welsh Governments, have been under pressure due to the need to deal with the deficit over recent years, and to balance the books. It has not been an easy time, but we do know from the good economic news of the last few days that there is now a £3.8 million budget surplus—a modest surplus, but nonetheless the first surplus for some considerable time, getting on for 20 years. So, that is to be welcomed.

We support the Welsh Government in receiving more funding via the block grant, and we do welcome, as the Cabinet Secretary knows, the fiscal framework. The Cabinet Secretary knows that I have supported that from the start and I'm more than willing to say that I commend both the Welsh Government and the UK Government for the hard work that went on in developing that fiscal framework over a long time. I know a lot went on behind the scenes that wasn't always public, but I think that it was in the interests of Wales, and this place and the Welsh Government at their best. So, there is good news.

If I can turn briefly to the Finance Committee's report, I concur with the words of the Chair of the Finance Committee. We would like to see more transparency in the way supplementary budget allocations are arrived at. This is going to become increasingly important with the devolution of tax powers now imminent next month—a process not an event, to coin an old phrase from Assembly history. It's going to be very important with those new tax powers, and the devolution of income tax powers, that the process is as transparent as possible, and that the Finance Committee under the Chair, Simon Thomas, has a full part to play in that. I'm pleased that the committee report has urged the Cabinet Secretary to continue to explore all avenues to utilise the available funding within the UK Treasury rules.

Supplementary budgets are strange beasts by their very nature, and probably always will be, but I think that there are good suggestions in this report that could be taken on board for future supplementary budgets, and I know the Finance Committee looks forward to working with the Cabinet Secretary in future budgets to try and improve the structuring and the system of forming budgets.

Of concern in this budget before us is something that's been highlighted in the past, and on page 16 of this report. The deficits being run by the local health boards across Wales have been an issue of concern for some time now, and it looks like they're still going to be an issue of concern. We, the Welsh Conservatives, are concerned that the additional funding for the NHS, whilst welcome, if we're not careful, will go into plugging deficits and not necessarily raising the standard of healthcare as we'd like to see. This isn't just a party point from me. I know Mike Hedges himself has expressed concerns about the ability of the NHS to absorb money without it always being completely transparent where all of that money is going. So, I make that caveat, although we do welcome the extra spending on the NHS. So, it would be good if we could have an assurance from the Cabinet Secretary that this new money will be made the most of.

Anyway, I set out at the start that the Welsh Conservatives' position on this budget is that whilst we welcome the additional funding today, we will not be supporting the budget. We will be abstaining, because as far as we are concerned, whilst a supplementary budget, it does follow on from the previous, main budget that we did not support.

I can also confirm that my party will follow our consistent pattern in terms of this budget and will abstain on this vote as part of the agreement that we have.

There are things to be welcomed, of course—specifically, as the Cabinet Secretary mentioned, the £30 million in additional funding for Welsh-medium education as part of the agreement between Plaid Cymru and the Government. By its very nature, a supplementary budget, as the Cabinet Secretary said, tends to be technical and administrative. Despite that, I would echo the main thrust of the message that we heard from the Chair of the Finance Committee: the need, to tell you the truth, for us to understand better the story behind the figures. That is, figures are vital, of course, to any budget, but words, the narrative, are vital as well for us to understand the process of making decisions about transfers and allocations and so forth.

Specifically, of course, this arises in terms of how the principles and objectives of the well-being of future generations Act have been implemented. That’s something that the committee’s report did refer to specifically, and it came up, of course, in evidence from the Cabinet Secretary, and he was able to give some examples of where the principles had been implemented. But I do think that we need an approach that’s more systematic, something along the lines of where, perhaps in the explanatory memorandum or in a corresponding report—that there is an analysis of how the Government has implemented the principles in coming to its recommendations on the budget.

Just on a couple of specific points—. Simon Thomas referred to the financial transactions. I do understand that there are restrictions about how you can use those, but, when there are restrictions, you then have to be creative, and I do notice that, in Scotland, the Scottish Government has used financial transactions for loans to small businesses, for example, and to fund investment in terms of low-carbon industries. Now, they have announced an intention to create a national investment bank for Scotland, with capital of £2 billion—£2 billion—so, rather more in terms of scope than the development bank that we have, and financial transactions are what they’re going to use in order to reach that ambitious aim. So, I wonder whether there is scope for the Government to have a discussion with the leaders of the development bank to see whether we can emulate Scotland in that sense.

I referred to the additional funding for Welsh-medium education, and that’s to be welcomed. There is some money also for a development project with Mudiad Ysgolion Meithrin, which is also to be welcomed. Just a technical question—if the Cabinet Secretary can't answer it now, perhaps he could write to me—there is a transfer in the motion of £2.3 million from Welsh in education to the promotion of the Welsh language. There is already an existing budget, of course, through the agreement between us, but there’s £300 million for other projects related to promoting Welsh. We’re talking about additional funds in addition to the £2 million for promotion of the Welsh language that we negotiated as part of the agreement, I assume. I would be grateful if the Cabinet Secretary could confirm that to us.

One negative thing that I’m concerned about in your budget is two transfers: from the science fund or the expenditure line for science to property in general, and £1.7 million being transferred from innovation to information for business in general. That’s at a time when the Government in the next budget is going to cut the funding available for innovation by 78 per cent. I’m concerned to see more funding being transferred from the science and innovation funds when, in truth, we should—with Brexit on the horizon, and so on, shouldn't we be investing more in our science base and our innovation base?

By this stage in the financial cycle, I feel that the Cabinet Secretary is a bit like the man who follows the Lord Mayor's show with a shovel to tidy up the streets after the main event. So, although we voted against the main budget, like Nick Ramsay I can say on behalf of my party that we will not be voting against this supplementary budget. Although it does make some substantive changes, a lot of it is just tidying up.

We certainly support the additional £30 million for Welsh-medium education to provide a capital funding stream for the Cabinet Secretary for Education in future years, which is an essential part of realising the Government's objective of having a million Welsh speakers by 2050. I certainly support everything that the Chairman of the Finance Committee said also, and, indeed, Adam Price, in relation to understanding the methodology by which changes in priorities have taken place, even though they are at the edges of the budgets concerned, in relation to the broadly stated objectives of the Government in documents like 'Prosperity for All'.

I'd like to commend the Cabinet Secretary also for the evidence that he gave to the committee in this respect and his obvious willingness to work with the committee in that respect. Certainly, the main thing that came out of the consideration of the budget in committee for me was the evidence that we received in relation to the overspends in the national health service and the local health boards. This is clearly an endemic problem, and I had sympathy with the Cabinet Secretary at the time with the difficulties that it causes him when we have these unplanned deficits, which, therefore, constrain the Government in other areas as well. Given the importance of health to the public at large, and the scale of health spending as a proportion of the Welsh Government's budget, any significant overspend by local health boards is bound, therefore, to have repercussive effects on other parts of the budget.

Sadly, things do seem to be getting worse rather than better, because, in paragraphs 25 and 26 of the committee's report, as we say:

'The aggregate position for all Local Health Boards for the three-year period to 2016-17 was a net overspend of £253 million',

and, for the period to December 2017, the defict was £135 million, with

'an estimate for the full year...of over £170 million',

which compares with an actual deficit for the previous year of only £147.8 million. So, this is clearly something that needs to be dealt with on a longer term basis than merely in a supplementary budget, so I hope that there will be some recognition of this in the next full budget next year—clearly, it can't be dealt with in this supplementary budget.

So, with that, I'm at my three-minute limit, Deputy Presiding Officer, and I will show an example that others may not have done to keep to the suggestion that you made. So, we will, therefore, be abstaining on this vote.

Thank you. I'm not issuing gold stars today, so sorry about that. Mike Hedges.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I speak in support of the second supplementary budget and the Finance Committee's report. I agree entirely with the Finance Committee's recommendations, and would welcome more detail around how significant new allocations within the supplementary budget have been prioritised. I would, however, go further and ask: what are the projected outcomes of this expenditure? Because we talk a lot about the money going in, but we don't often talk very much about what we're actually going to achieve by it.

We are agreeing to see additional money for health—£146 million revenue, £41 million capital. I think we've reached the stage where additional money for health in the annual supplementary budget is just something we've come to expect. The deficits were just gone through by Neil Hamilton, so I will not go through them. I'll just go to Betsi Cadwaladr, £75.9 million predicted deficit, and Hywel Dda, £88.3 million predicted deficit. I ask this question: are they underfunded? is that where the problem is? Are they badly managed? Or is the health board structure fundamentally wrong? Or is it a combination of all three? Unless the Cabinet Secretary can give me another reason, I can see nothing outside those three to be a reason why they're having those problems, and they're fairly substantial problems. 

I agree with the Finance Committee when it acknowledges the constraints of financial transactions funding, and I agree that we urge the Cabinet Secretary to continue to explore all avenues to utilise the available funding, and I think the Cabinet Secretary is committed to doing that. 

Can I quote a Westminster document? In 2012-13, the UK Government introduced an additional type of capital funding in order to boost investment, the so-called financial transactions capital. Financial transactions capital transactions do not strictly add to capital expenditure per se, as they are not regarded by Her Majesty's Treasury as spending transactions. The distinguishing feature of financial transactions capital is that the funds can only be deployed by the public sector as a loan to, or equity investment in, a private sector entity. 'Private sector' is defined by Office for National Statistics classification guidance and is determined by where control lies, rather than by ownership or whether or not the entity is publicly financed.

Transactions capital cannot be used for building new schools, cannot be used for building new hospitals and, under the current ONS classification, cannot be given to housing associations for building houses. This is a self-imposed Treasury rule that allows expenditure, but not to add it to the total capital expenditure of the Government. It makes no sense whatsoever that it's treated as a loan, but it does constrain the ability of the Welsh Government and us as an Assembly to spend money on the things that we want to do. 

Finally, on student loans, the committee noted the increase in non-cash revenue relating to the student resource accounting and budgeting charge in relation to student loans rose by £300 million in this supplementary budget. Can I give a prediction? Another £300 million next year. While this additional non-cash allocation is provided by Her Majesty's Treasury to cover student loan debt and is not money that we could actually spend on anything else, I would hope everyone would share my concern that the percentage of the student loan book that is anticipated not to be paid back, and hence written off, is increasing annually. This is a problem that will not go away. Tuition fees were a huge mistake, but increasing them to £9,000 was a disaster. 

Thank you. Jane Hutt. 

In your second supplementary budget, Cabinet Secretary, you were able to release some funding as a result of your careful preparation for the Chancellor's 2017 November budget and other fiscal factors, and I'm particularly interested in positive outcomes for education and housing in relation to Welsh Government priorities. Can you clarify what you were able to achieve via capital and/or revenue to support these priorities? 

Can I take the opportunity, Dirprwy Lywydd, to comment on the challenging context of the second supplementary budget, which I fully support and, indeed, fully support the Finance Committee's report as well? I note that the Institute for Fiscal Studies has acknowledged the overall UK deficit budget has been eliminated. Due you agree that this is by no means an achievement, as George Osborne has declared, when the impact of balancing the budget has fallen most severely on women and low-income groups? And do you agree with economist Ann Pettifor that this so-called achievement has decimated our public services, and under George Osborne's watch total managed expenditure was cut by £14 billion in real terms, and public sector investment went from £60 billion in 2010 to £35 billion in 2016? This is the context in which you have had to work, and do you agree that the UK Government needs to acknowledge the real needs of our public services and health, education and housing and change track after nine years of austerity?     

Thank you very much. I now call the Cabinet Secretary for Finance to reply to the debate—Mark Drakeford. 

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. May I thank Simon Thomas for his contribution? I look forward to considering the conclusions in the Finance Committee report. I'm sure that there are things there that we can learn from, and I look forward to responding to that report.

I heard the comments of the committee Chair on financial transaction capital and capital more generally. We are trying to work creatively to use the funds provided to us through that avenue. I can tell Adam Price that we are working with Ministers in Scotland. I met with Derek Mackay before Christmas just to share ideas. They are facing the same problems as us in trying to use the funds approved through that method, as Mike Hedges explained when he was setting out the regulations applicable to that capital. 

I'm very happy, of course, to write to Adam Price on the specific points that he raised.FootnoteLink I believe I'm right in saying that the changes within the education MEG are designed to support the agreement that we've reached with Plaid Cymru, and that's why you see money moving around. It's as a result of our agreement to make sure that we can deliver it, rather than anything else.

On some of the other points that Adam raised, I think we will find—but I will check the detail—that those changes are as a result of us being able to bring forward some European funding. So, it's not a reduction in spend, it's just using other money while we're able to for those purposes so that we can release money then to do other things as well. 

Just before he moves on to other matters and we still have financial transaction capital in our minds, the Finance Committee hopes to do a little bit of extra work around this about the funding mechanism behind this. Is he able to share with us any more information he has from the Treasury around the expectation of paying this back, and at what rate or percentage he's expected to pay it back? There's obviously some risk involved in some of the projects that he's mentioned so far and I think some of the projects mentioned in Scotland as well also have risk built into them. 

Yes, they do, Dirprwy Lywydd, exactly that. I did set out in my letter to Mike Hedges, which I've placed in the library, the rules that surround financial transaction capital, including the fact that 80 per cent of it has to be paid back, not the full amount. That is a bit of a recognition by the UK Government that there is a risk involved and that not all FT capital will be repaid. There are varying interest rates that you can use depending on the risk involved in the use of the money and so on. I hope that any Member who is interested in some of the more arcane detail of financial transaction capital will take a chance to look at the letter that Mike Hedges caused me to write. [Interruption.] I was pleased to write it.

In reply to Nick Ramsay, he is right to say that we are beginning to see the first fruits of the fiscal framework, and I'm happy to acknowledge that that was joint work that we did together there. Neil Hamilton referred to the second supplementary budget as sweeping up after the horse has passed by, but people who do that serve a useful social purpose so I take his remark to be an endorsement of the work we do in bringing this budget in front of the Assembly.

A number of Members have referred to the NHS. I'll never make an apology on behalf of a Labour-led Government for investing in the health service and making sure that, in those parts of Wales where the struggle is greatest to live within the available means, the consequence of the struggle is not felt in the lives of patients who rely on that service. That's why we've worked so hard to find the extra money that is necessary for it and why my colleague Vaughan Gething works so hard to try to make sure that we get the very best value for the investment that we make. 

Jane Hutt asked for some further details in relation to housing and education investments, and Mike Hedges referred to some of the same matters. In housing in particular, it's my top priority in relation to capital to support the determination of this Assembly Government to provide 20,000 affordable houses during the lifetime of this Assembly. Housing is such a fundamental building block in the lives of our fellow citizens, and we're determined to find the money to invest in that. Nearly £50 million moves in this supplementary budget to support that. In education, as you have heard, there are a range of different investments in the supplementary budget, but £30 million to invest in capital, in Welsh-medium education, will allow the Cabinet Secretary for Education to draw forward investments into this financial year and then to create a stream of investment in Welsh-medium education in the future. She has ambitious plans to make sure that we are able to create the next generation of Welsh speakers, to which we are committed around this Assembly Chamber, and that investment is there to do exactly that.

Let me end, Dirprwy Lywydd, by just echoing what Jane Hutt said in her final contribution: the spectre that hangs over the whole of this supplementary budget, as it does over everything we do, is the age of austerity. Why we should be expected to stand up and cheer after eight years of austerity because the Tories are finally able to say that they have reached some point of surplus in the budget—. They've done it because of the way that they have slashed and burned their way through public services. Had this Assembly had available to it the growth in budgets that every other Government since 1945 has provided—in other words that the investment in public services simply reflected the growth in the economy as a whole—we would have £4.5 billion more to invest in our vital public services than was available to us in our budget that we set before Christmas. That is such a telling figure: £4.5 billion that we do not have for our health service, for our social services, to invest in our education services and everything else that we need to do. Jane Hutt was absolutely right to point to the fact that, underneath all the detail we've discussed this afternoon, that basic fact remains. There is so much more we could do had we had a fair sense of investment in the services on which we all rely.

Thank you. The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Therefore, we defer voting under this item until voting time.

Item 8 on the agenda this afternoon is a debate on the Estyn annual report, and I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Education to move the motion—Kirsty Williams.

Deputy Presiding Officer, I open this debate today by thanking Meilyr Rowlands for his third annual report as chief inspector of education and training in Wales. As well as providing evidence on performance and standards, the chief inspector's report will inform policy development and drive improvements in education. Estyn's 2016-17 annual report looks at progress over the past seven years, back to 2010, when Estyn's current inspection cycle began, and the inspection findings for the sectors. I welcome this long-term approach. It is encouraging to see that the biggest trend over the last seven years has been the move towards a culture of self-improvement, and this remains a key priority for me and the Government.

The report shows increased collaboration between schools, particularly in the way the new curriculum is being developed. We are supporting schools to collaborate and play their full part in a self-improving system, and this effort is facilitated through the educational regional consortia. I welcome the findings that show that many strengths exist in nursery settings, maintained special schools and further education colleges. The quality of education is good or better in most cases, and there has been continued progress with early years provision, literacy and numeracy, behaviour and attendance and the performance of disadvantaged learners.

I am pleased to see that, between 2010 and 2017, there were also improvements in primary school performance, particularly of boys and those pupils eligible for free school meals. It is encouraging that schools and settings are committed to good foundation phase practice. Children make good progress and show increased motivation and enjoyment of learning where settings get it right. I note, however, that the application of the foundation phase has been inconsistent. I recognise that more needs to be done to embed consistent practice across Wales and to ensure that the right framework exists to support effective teaching and learning through foundation phase pedagogy. Last year, I announced the development of a foundation phase excellence network, which primarily will support the sharing of effective practice and work closely with the networks of excellence in science, technology and mathematics.

Deputy Presiding Officer, it's heartening that looking after pupils' well-being, care, support and guidance and the learning environment are strong features of our education system. We know that well-being is strongly linked to educational outcomes, and children with higher levels of emotional, behavioural, social and school well-being, on average, have higher levels of achievement and are more engaged in their schooling.

I note the report's findings that seven in 10 primary schools inspected this year are good or excellent, which is similar to last year. While this is positive, and I recognise the dedication and hard work of our schools in achieving this, there is clearly more to be done. Half of the secondary schools inspected are good or excellent, which is an improvement on last year. I'm also pleased to see the report's findings that there are good and excellent providers in all sectors, including in areas of relative poverty. We are committed to creating an inclusive education system for all learners, regardless of their needs, to ensure that all learners are able to access a high standard of education. The report is clear that we are making progress, although I believe, Deputy Presiding Officer, there is still too much variability in some sectors and challenges still remain in raising standards in numeracy, raising standards in Welsh in English-medium schools, improving pupils' progress in digital skills, and in continuing to reduce the attainment gap.

The report, however, does show that there are now far more examples of schools collaborating to improve aspects of provision, such as literacy and numeracy projects, improving teaching and developing leadership, which will, I believe, all help reduce variability in the system. There is now a more systematic approach to planning opportunities for pupils to apply and practice their numeracy across the curriculum, resulting from schools' implementation of the national literacy and numeracy framework.

Standards of Welsh in many English-medium secondary schools are improving, with the numbers achieving qualifications in Welsh at the end of key stage 4 increasing by over 12 percentage points between 2010 and 2016. However, the chief inspector's foreword notes that some schools focus too much on examination technique rather than on providing broad education, and this is because the secondary schools' accountability system is linked to external examination results, and I recognise this. We are continuing to work with key stakeholders and partners to develop a new evaluation framework and a new model of accountability. We will establish constructive evaluation and accountability mechanisms to reinforce the purposes of reform and bring system alignment to curriculum, assessment and accountability arrangements.

I note that in 2016-17, the number of trainees on both undergraduate and postgraduate initial teacher education programmes fell short of intake targets. Recruitment to primary programmes was around 90 per cent of the target, and secondary programmes only attracted 66 per cent of the target. Therefore, I have established a new teacher recruitment and retention advisory board, which will consider these issues and how we can support a high-quality education workforce, able to meet the demands of the curriculum and wider education reform. Let me be clear: our teachers are absolutely integral to our national mission. A profession that collaborates is always learning and, therefore, always raising standards. It is clear from the report that the policies we have put in place are helping to drive improvement, but it's really important that we maintain momentum to secure further and more consistent advances across our education system.

The Estyn report will play a key role in highlighting areas in need of improvement and supporting the implementation of our wide-reaching reforms. Our focus must continue to ensure that we properly implement our national mission of education reform to drive up standards and help every learner, whatever their background, to fulfil their potential. Deputy Presiding Officer, I'm grateful to all the teachers, the school leaders and managers throughout the sector for their contributions. We all share the same ambition for our children and young people: an excellent education system. Therefore, it only remains for me to thank Meilyr Rowlands and his team for the work that has gone in to producing this annual report. Diolch yn fawr. 

Thank you. I have selected the amendment to the motion, and I call on Llyr Gruffydd to move amendment 1, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. 

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. May I move the amendment in the name of Plaid Cymru? And may I thank Her Majesty’s chief inspector for education and training in Wales—to give him his full title—for the annual report, which certainly makes a great contribution to our understanding of the situation? It is something that we place great importance on and appreciate very much. I also endorse the recognition of the Cabinet Secretary of the excellent work happening in the sector, in difficult circumstances—circumstances that are becoming more difficult because of the financial limitations that have become a reality in the budgets of many local authorities over the past few weeks. I think it’s important that we recognise that reality for those working on the coalface.

I think the Cabinet Secretary has given us a fair summary of the situation. There are positives, and she was right to refer to those, and particularly this focus on the culture that is developing now in terms of more emphasis on self-improvement and collaboration between schools. Although it is perhaps something that's at a very early stage, it is certainly taking us in the direction that we would wish to travel in.

On the other hand, she’s also recognised there are less positive elements, and one of the most disappointing elements for me is—. Clearly, half of secondary schools and 70 per cent of primary schools are judged to be 'good' or 'excellent', but that, of course, means that half of the schools—as she recognised and acknowledged—are only 'adequate' or 'unsatisfactory'. And in that context, of course, Estyn reminds us that that is consistent with the results since 2010. So, although she said that it’s an improvement on last year, we haven’t seen the progress that many of us would have liked to have seen—over the longer term, anyway.

Variability, of course, is still a problem. It’s an issue that’s raised every year, nearly, when this report is published, and one does feel now that we should be seeing a little more improvement on that front.

Time is relatively short to deal with all of the issues, so I will just focus on a few specifics.

The comments on the foundation phase are ones that the Cabinet Secretary’s referred to. Everyone acknowledges the importance of high-quality early years education as a priority, and the impact that that has on the long-term achievement of pupils. Seeing statements in the annual report—. For example, the one that highlights the fact that in 75 per cent of schools heads don’t fully understand the principles and best-practice pedagogy of the foundation phase is quite frightening, as I’ve said. We need a greater focus on this, in my opinion, and we do need to tackle the issue, because the foundation phase has had difficulties in the past, as we know. But there’s also a reference in the report to the direct impact that some of the budget cuts are having in that area. For example, there is mention that there are fewer qualified teachers now working within the foundation phase because of some of the budgetary cuts, and that goes entirely contrary to the narrative that we heard and the narrative that many of us want to see delivered, in terms of creating the even more qualified workforce, so that that can have a positive impact on the educational attainment of pupils.

In that context, if I may just ask the Cabinet Secretary about the childcare offer. Now, I know it’s not directly a part of her portfolio, but the implications of the success or otherwise of that policy on the early years in education and in schools will have a direct impact. Clearly, we as a party want to see that as an offer extended to all, not just to working parents. The Cabinet Secretary for health and the Minister for children, in the children and young people committee, refused to share that ambition as a long-term aim. I would just want to know what your views are on that. Do you agree with the children’s commissioner, for example, and Save the Children in Wales, who all say that there is a very real risk that the attainment gap will have widened even further between the most disadvantaged children from homes where the parents don’t work, of course, unless they too have access to the childcare offer—perhaps not immediately, but certainly as a medium-term ambition?

I admit that the Plaid Cymru amendment is possibly one of the least contentious amendments this Assembly has seen for quite some time, but it does summarise for me one of the main aspects that gets to the very heart of the report. I know that the Cabinet Secretary has recognised that, to a certain extent, in her opening comments, namely the need to improve the support in terms of professional development, and also to improve recruitment and initial training for new teachers. There’s almost a list of examples of weaknesses in that area that are having an impact on, for example, numeracy—there’s mention of a lack of confidence among teachers, which is something that needs to be resolved; that teachers aren’t properly prepared with the skills they need to provide the range of information technology required in schools. I’ve already referred to some of the comments on the foundation phase, and also, of course, the lack of planning in Welsh-medium education, which is something that the Minister has referred to—the lack of recruitment of Welsh-medium teachers. 

More of the same problems have been highlighted in the report, truth be told, as we've heard in previous years. So, progress in these areas hasn't happened as swiftly as many of us would've liked. One recognises that the Cabinet Secretary is taking steps to address some of these issues, but the core message that I take from this report is, of course, that unless we truly tackle some of the fundamental problems, such as sufficient funding for schools in Wales, such as recruitment and retention of teachers more effectively within the sector, then the risk is that some of the improvements that we start to see emerge in the sector will be nothing more than building a house on sand.

Can I thank the Cabinet Secretary for having this debate in the Chamber today? Indeed, I fully support the amendment that has been tabled by the Plaid Cymru group.

I always get concerned when I pick up an annual Estyn report and see a refrain of things that have been said in the past, because it suggests that insufficient progress is being made, and I know that that's a concern of the Cabinet Secretary and others in this Chamber. We must remind ourselves that, yes, we've had some improvements, but we must never forget the failures, really, of successive Labour Governments, in recent years, to get to grips with the problems in our education system across Wales.

We know that our PISA results, back in 2016, were worse than they were a decade before. We know that last year, we saw our worst GSCE results for a decade. We know that this Estyn report suggests that, when you compare the numbers in there, there were 160 fewer primary schools in Wales than there were back in January 2011—160 schools have closed, many of those were decent schools with very good standards. Now, of course, some schools, quite rightly, had to close because they were not meeting the needs of the local communities, but I've got some concerns about that. I'm also concerned that if we look at the schools that are in special measures in Wales, it would appear that the inspectorate, the regional consortia and local education authorities are failing to get those schools turned around quickly enough. We've got two schools, for example, in special measures in Wales at the moment—one of which is in the Cabinet Secretary's constituency—that have been in special measures since 2014. That's a long time for children to be in schools that are not performing satisfactorily. That's unacceptable. So, there's clearly a significant challenge that we have in Wales in getting to grips with these problems.

I know, Cabinet Secretary, that you have a review of Estyn, as an inspectorate, which is under way at the moment, and I'd be grateful if you could provide us an update on where that review is at, and when you expect to receive some recommendations from that review, so that we can make sure that Estyn is fit for purpose. I'm grateful to Estyn for the work that it does, I'm grateful for the interventions that it necessarily makes in our schools, but I do think that some of these issues, frankly, ought to have been dealt with by now with the support of Estyn. And, of course, as I say, I'm grateful that there is some progress being made in some areas, but it's not nearly rapid enough. It's not nearly rapid enough for those youngsters who are in our education system at the moment.

Now, part of that is, of course, as Llyr Huws Gruffydd quite rightly said, as a result of funding. We know that, for every £1 spent on the education system in England, £1.20 comes to Wales so that we have the opportunity to spend more on our children here. And yet, in spite of that, according to the unions, there's a spending gap of £678 per learner in Wales versus the investment that's made over the border in England. I think that that's partly why we've got such poor results here, frankly, in terms of the outcomes for our children. It's not good enough and we need to understand why education isn't getting the sort of priority from the Welsh Government that it needs to be getting in terms of the Welsh Government's cake being carved up when it comes to budgets.

I know that the Cabinet Secretary, just in this last week, has made an additional £14 million available to our schools, and that's a very welcome move, particularly given the £15 million cuts that are going to be made as a result of the change in the education improvement grants. But, again, I think, even with that, we still have this very wide gap per learner with England, and I think we need an explanation from the Government as to why that is the case.

Llyr Huws Griffiths has already made reference to a number of the points that I wanted to cover, but one of the startling ones, I think, that we need a great deal more focus on is adult learning and the further education sector. Now this, I think, is the one part of the education system in Wales that is leading the way, if you like, in terms of the quality of its leadership, in terms of the outcomes that it has for our learners, and I wonder, Cabinet Secretary, when you will harness the opportunity that there is to work with the FE sector to bring improvements and to drive improvements in our schools. We know that we have an industrial strategy here in Wales. That needs to be complemented by some of the work that goes on in our FE sector, and particularly when it comes to adult learning, I think we need to make sure that we are tracking people through the system to see how many youngsters are going through FE and getting into employment. This is information that isn't routinely collected by the Welsh Government, and, of course, Estyn have mentioned this in their report. I think it is something that we would like to see you reflecting on in the future.

When it comes to initial teacher education and training, perhaps you can give us an update on where things are at with the accreditation of the new courses, as well, in our universities. I know that this is something that the Education Workforce Council has been looking at at the moment, and, very clearly, we need to turn around the reputation of our initial teacher training in Wales. I wonder if you could tell us how confident you are that the new courses that are being accredited are going to help get us out of this problem that we've got with recruitment, because we're not able to attract the people into the profession that we need to in the future.

I'm grateful for the opportunity to contribute to the debate on Estyn's annual report. It is important that the Assembly has the opportunity to scrutinise the work of the chief inspector, both in this annual debate and in committee. The Children, Young People and Education Committee is itself taking evidence from the chief inspector on the annual report next week, and I'm sure that what has been said in the debate today will give the committee much food for thought ahead of that session.

This annual report has been written at the end of Estyn's seven-year reporting cycle and reflects on that period. As the report sets out, a lot has changed in education over that time. However, as we are all aware, some of the most significant changes are yet to come. One of the key messages in the report, which has been highlighted in the Plaid Cymru amendment, is that ensuring the quality of teaching is crucial as we move forward with curriculum reform. Estyn's report also states that

'Improving teaching requires better support, professional learning and staff development'.

The preparedness of the teaching profession for curriculum reform was one of the main concerns raised by the Children, Young People and Education Committee during its recent inquiry into teachers' professional learning and education. The committee's report makes a number of recommendations to help ensure that the teaching profession is prepared for the forthcoming changes. Our report also contains some key recommendations about improvements that could be made to the delivery of professional learning and development for the education workforce, all of which we believe will help ensure better quality of teaching and a better learning experience for children and young people. It is clear that urgent action is required to give our teaching professionals every opportunity to thrive through their careers, creating cultures of personal development and returning esteem to a profession that so vitally needs it.

On 14 March, the committee will hold its Plenary debate on our report into teachers' professional learning and education. I look forward to working with the Cabinet Secretary to help deliver the improvements needed in teachers' professional learning, a concern that is clearly shared by Estyn.

I'm grateful to Estyn for their substantive annual report. Reading through it, I wasn't always clear whether Estyn is a mechanism through which Welsh Government seeks to secure its policy objectives, or whether it's more of a law unto itself, its degree of autonomy and independence, and the extent to which it may be judging the implications of its own assessment criteria. So, for instance, the assessment and how Estyn assesses schools is of huge significance in terms of what teachers do and how schools prioritise different objectives. I just wonder the extent to which those objectives are those of the Welsh Government, or whether Estyn, at least in some areas, ploughs its own furrow. I hope this review that we are having will clarify some of those issues—whether there's the right degree of autonomy or independence for Estyn, whether there is an argument for, Cabinet Secretary, you having more powers subject to this Assembly to set down what the priorities should be for Estyn, and I think, in some areas at least, there may be some sense to that.

If I may just take an example—it's an area where I think my view and perhaps the view of many, at least in the Conservative group, may be different from yours, Cabinet Secretary, and from the Labour Government, but it's about accountability for schools and transparency over how they are doing. We have Estyn's own assessment and the rating it gives. We then have this red, amber and green, which I think comes from Welsh Government. And the messages coming from those two measures—at least for some schools—I find sometimes contradictory. Then, there is the harder evidence of what schools are getting in terms of their results. At least relative to England, there is less transparency about what those results are. There seems to be this huge fear of there being league tables whereas, to me, it is obvious that, if you are transparent and if you are accountable, and if you are open with information rather than suppressing it and hiding it from parents, then that is likely to assist your school system in becoming better. I speak with a certain degree of frustration, as a parent myself, in seeking to compare schools.

But what I don't understand is the sort of mixed system that we've ended up with where, since 2014, Estyn has changed its approach and, in its inspection reports on individual schools, has become more transparent in how much it tells parents and others about what results those schools are getting. Before 2014, there were very vague comparisons of key stage 2 results. It was a family of schools, and it wasn't clear how it went to the nation as a whole, and it didn't tell you actually what the results were for a particular school. Since 2014, that policy has changed, but I'm just a little puzzled by it because I don't see any evidence of the approach of Welsh Government particularly having changed or our having won the argument in Wales that schools should be more transparent and we should be open about this data. It just seems that Estyn took a decision. Perhaps this was approved by Welsh Government. Perhaps the Cabinet Secretary can tell me, but since 2014, you do have this information on individual schools, but then if you try and compare it to other schools, the information is taken at different dates, making those comparisons less reliable for parents. I just don't understand what is the purpose of that or how that helps anyone.

Two areas I just want to comment on, briefly, about the report is the increased emphasis that Estyn seems to be putting on the need to give better support to able and talented students, and particularly the absence of this at primary level in many schools, and particularly those schools that are performing particularly poorly. To some extent, it may be understandable, if a school is doing very badly in terms of its results, that it focuses on lifting the floor or trying to get perhaps the average of those results up, but if at the time, through doing that, that perhaps a number of children who are able and talented in that school really aren't getting support and aren't having their particular needs met, I think that is a concern, and if you are able and talented and are in a school that is doing poorly, things are going to be so much worse because of that lack of focus. I hope Estyn will also look at how it can, at the secondary level, link in support for able and talented students with the Seren network, and ensure that schools engage with that properly and actually push and encourage their pupils to link into Seren on a more consistent basis.

Finally—and excuse my cough, Llywydd; I think others may be suffering from that too—just looking at the career and the future educational advice that children get, Estyn seems to be relatively satisfied with what's happening in year 9, but there are some more criticisms of what happens in year 11. While Welsh Government seems to be sort of pushing against school sixth forms and encouraging mergers and amalgamations and a focus on further education colleges for A-levels to a degree—I may perhaps just be talking about some local examples in my south-east region—Estyn as a whole seem to be suggesting that schools are biased, or some schools at least, to pushing children to go to their own sixth form. Of course, I understand why a school would want to promote its own sixth form, but we also need to ensure that young people are getting proper advice and an ability to consider other options on a fair basis. I would welcome, Cabinet Secretary, if you could say a few words on perhaps what more we could do to ensure that young people do get that.

I was very proud to read in the annual report that the Bryngwyn and Glan y môr confederation in my constituency in Llanelli and Burry Port has been cited for its good practice on leadership; the Cabinet Secretary's own old primary school, Ysgol y Bynea, highlighted; and the Heol Goffa special school was also singled out for special mention. We do have some excellent leadership and practice in Llanelli and across Wales.

But I'd like to focus on the significant areas of concern in this report, and in particular around digital. I think, as Darren Millar implied earlier, there's no point us soft-soaping this debate; we need to be rigorous and unforgiving in looking at the weaknesses, and I am frankly alarmed by what this report says yet again around digital learning.

In just under two thirds of primary schools there are, I quote, 'important shortcomings' in the standards of ICT. Two thirds of primary schools—important shortcomings in ICT. This is what Estyn says: 'In these schools'—and in many secondary schools—'teachers lack knowledge and confidence.' There is

'a lack of a clear vision about ICT from senior leaders.'

Pupils are not being given the chance to apply skills in relevant contexts. It goes on: across Welsh schools as a whole, pupils' progress in ICT has not kept up with advancements in technology, and 

'pupils do not apply their...skills well across the curriculum and their ICT skills are often limited to a narrow range of applications.'

It also says schools are not auditing the digital competence of their staff to allow them to train and upskill teachers, and nor do initial teacher training centres equip trainee teachers with the skills they need.

We should let that sink in, Llywydd. In two thirds of primary schools there are important shortcomings and in many secondary schools teachers lack knowledge and confidence. This is alarming. Any one of those sentences should, in any normal news day, grab the headlines as being a massive cause for concern, especially given what we know about how vital digital skills already are, and are becoming more so by the month. This is a deeply worrying account of the way our schools are teaching young people. I really do think this is a stop-the-clocks moment, Llywydd. We talk of a self-improving system, but there is little sign of improvement when it comes to digital skills. Last year's report said much the same.

Now, there is criticism due to the Welsh Government here, and I'll come to that in a moment, but most of all there's culpability on the whole school system for its failure to rise to this challenge: on the consortia; on governors; on heads; on individual professionals. This is not good enough.

I've raised this with the First Minister and the Cabinet Secretary—the need to equip pupils with coding skills—on a number of occasions, and this criticism goes way beyond coding; it goes across the whole digital spectrum. Coding is just an important subset. Last June, the Welsh Government launched 'Cracking the code' with £1.3 million spread over the whole Assembly term to help develop these skills before the new curriculum is brought in, and a further £930,000 for the technocamps—together, just over £2 million for the whole of Wales over the next three years. They're also piloting Minecraft for Education to inspire first-time coders with Minecraft code builder, and given the enthusiasm my own kids have for Minecraft, I think this is an excellent initiative, just the sort of thing we should be doing. But it's being run in 10 schools. Ten schools. There are more than 1,600 schools in Wales, and we are running this coding project in 10 of them. Again, this is not good enough.

Just as oil fueled the industrial age, data and digital are fuelling advances in the artificial intelligence age. There is a reason why China is teaching artificial intelligence and deep learning in their middle schools. We are hugely disadvantaging young people by not giving them the skills and confidence to thrive in this world.

And we are missing a trick also, Cabinet Secretary, by not harnessing advances in artificial intelligence and machine learning in the way we teach. So-called edtech innovations offer the promise of relieving teachers from the tyranny of marking, data tracking and developing differentiated teaching strategies for individual learners. Edtech can do all of this. Teachers can be freed from all this to do what they came to do—to teach. We should be all over this like a rash, but, as Estyn’s quite frankly terrifying findings yet again this year show, we are not.

I welcome the chance to debate Estyn's annual report today. Having spent 16 years in a classroom as a secondary school teacher, I know all too well the anticipation caused by an upcoming inspection. It is therefore a welcome change to now be in the position of considering the work of Estyn in turn.

Despite the disruption, school inspections have a critical role to play. They shine a light on best practice so we can praise what is good, and more importantly work to spread the exceptional throughout the Welsh education system. They also offer us the chance to monitor progress, to expose what is wrong, unacceptable or just not working, and make changes where these are needed to ensure better outcomes for learners and the educational workforce.

This report shows we can be proud of much in our education system. The commitment to drive up standards is shared across the board. Indeed, the report notes the spirit of co-operation in terms of the new curriculum. The report also describes a positive momentum behind improvement. Policy interventions and reforms from Welsh Government are having beneficial effects. Actions to improve leadership are welcomed.

For my substantive remarks, I want to focus on three areas of the report. The first of these is tackling the effects of disadvantage. The report notes that this is one of the main priorities for Welsh Government, and this is rightly so. From my own teaching career, I have seen first hand the disparity in outcomes between pupils who are eligible for free school meals and their peers. Such differentials are unfair and unacceptable. It should be welcomed that schools are now more focused on tackling this than they were seven years ago, making interventions and determined to improve performance. As Estyn notes, this means the outcomes for EFSM pupils are improving at each phase of education.

However, as the report notes, some schools are leading the way on this. Positive measures are taken around attendance. Actions are taken by working with the local community. Interventions are even, in a few cases, taken before children have started school. These lessons must be cascaded throughout the system. This is also an area where we must ensure a joined-up approach across all policy areas, tackling the effects of disadvantage requires a truly holistic approach. 

The Welsh Government lunch and fun clubs are an excellent intervention, offering eligible children worthwhile summer activities so that any progress made during term time is not lost in the summer months. Importantly, they also contribute to tackling holiday hunger. We know that food bank usage spikes during summer months. I mentioned in FMQs last week a pilot project being held in North Lanarkshire that aims to feed EFSM pupils a full 365 days a year. I hope that the Welsh Government will pay close attention to this project. Children and young people cannot learn effectively if they are hungry. 

Secondly, I want to refer to the section on secondary schools. Estyn found that over half of Welsh secondary schools are now good or better. Similarly, it is welcome that the percentage of excellent schools in 2016-17 is higher than the 2010-17 average, but conversely Estyn has also noticed a general increase in unsatisfactory practice. This cannot be accepted, and these schools must be supported so that they can swiftly turn around and ensure their students can truly fulfil their potential. The positive approach to learning that the report notes amongst young people in good schools must be the minimum we aspire to and deliver for all in Wales.

My teaching career also involved a significant pastoral role, and I know full well how important this is to ensuring the well-being of our pupils in the round. It's good to see that pupil well-being, care, support and guidance were such positively marked features during the longer term cycle of inspection.

Thirdly, I want to touch on the report's comments on work-based learning, which I think is a really important strand if we are to deliver the nimble and upskilled workforce that we need for the future in Wales. Estyn state that, during 2010-17, standards were good or better in around half of providers. However, of the three providers inspected in 2016-17, only two were adequate and the third was unsatisfactory. Whilst the number of providers inspected during the year means that we're dealing with a very small sample, we can't dismiss these findings out of hand. As Estyn notes:

'Where standards are unsatisfactory, learners do not make strong enough progress.'

Provision of work-based learning is something that the Economy, Infrastructure and Skills Committee has briefly considered during our inquiry into apprenticeships in Wales. I hope it is a topic that we can return to, as Estyn shows clear grounds for concern here. I hope it's an area where outcomes are more positive come the next Estyn inspection. 

I call on the Cabinet Secretary to reply to the debate—Kirsty Williams.

Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. Could I thank everybody for their contributions this afternoon? 

We're both struggling.

Yes. [Interruption.] I'll try to get through as many of them as I—

The Cabinet Secretary is struggling with her voice, as I am. If you're quiet, I'm sure we can hear her.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. I'll try to get through as many of the comments and questions that were raised as possible in the time allowed.

I think that what's really important, Llyr, is that the chief inspector recognises that there is a significant shift in the culture of education in Wales. We have to rely on those people out on the ground to make the changes we need to make. Whether you stand in this position and berate, as some have done in the past, or you stand in this position and you try and cajole and persuade and support, the system has to want this for itself. The thing that gives me hope that things are improving is that I believe the system does want this for itself, and there is a renewed sense of optimism, commitment and professionalism to drive change forward. For me, that's the bit that I see recognised by Estyn, and that's absolutely crucial to go forward.

Now, the foundation phase findings are really worrying to me. Where people get it, it's delivering really well and making a fantastic difference for those children, but there is still a tendency in too many schools to formalise learning too soon in year 1 and year 2 and go back to old ways of delivering education. That's why I, last year, before I'd even seen this evidence, recognised there was more to do in the foundation phase, and we are setting up our national network of excellence in this particular sector. That was due to be formally launched at a school last Friday, which, of course, formally we weren't able to do, but that doesn't mean that there isn't significant work going on to build that network, and we will do a formal launch later on this month.

Again, with the Welsh in education strategic plans, this is something that the Welsh Government is alive to and alert to, and that's why early in this Government Aled Roberts was asked to come in to independently review the robustness of the WESP plans, and there is action in that area.

There are improvements that are recognised in the inspector's reports, in terms of the quality of our initial teacher education, but there is a way to go—that's, again, why we've established the new panel and why we have new recruitment incentives, especially for those teaching through the medium of Welsh. We continue to look to see what we can do to make the profession as attractive as it possibly can be.

Darren, you talked about the review into Estyn. It's not my review into Estyn—it's Estyn's review into Estyn, although I welcome very much that they had the foresight to ask Graham Donaldson to look at whether the current regime is fit for purpose as we go forward. I understand that Graham Donaldson will be reporting later on this springtime. Obviously, the recommendations he made will be a matter for Estyn, but, obviously, I'm keeping a close watch on this whole circumstance. 

Now, I don't shy away from the fact that there are challenging financial circumstances facing our schools system, but I think it is fair to say that it is not possible to make direct comparisons. I know, because that used to be my favourite trick when I used to sit over there and I would regularly ask the First Minister about this issue. But when there was then a publication by the chief statistician, independent of Government, that said, 'Actually, you can't do this any more on a fair basis', even I had to leave that one alone. But I recognise that these are challenging circumstances for our schools, and that's why I use every opportunity to get money to the front line. That's why we have made the £14 million available to local authorities to get to their schools to address issues around repairs and costs and small-scale maintenance, because I don't want that money being spent on that when it could be spent on teaching and learning. 

I recognise that there are challenges around the education improvement grant, and that's why, in the new financial year, following discussions with the finance Secretary, we recognise that some of the changes will have particularly disadvantaged certain local authorities, and that's why we will make an additional £5 million available for that too. I will take every opportunity to get money to the front line, as the finance Minister knows all too well.  

With regard to ITE, I have visited all ITE providers since Christmas to see first hand what they're doing at the moment and to challenge them on their preparedness for the new regime. That process is ongoing and I'm not involved in that process at this date; that has to be independent of me. But let me tell you: my challenge to universities delivering ITE is that it's not just about the accreditation of their course; it is about sustained investment in their education faculties. Too often, that is seen as a workhorse of universities. It's not the glory department. It's not the likes of the other high-profile subjects. I want education faculties to be the glory departments in our universities if they're delivering ITE. I want to see more universities in Wales in this area submitting research, for instance, and applying for grants so that we build up the capacity of education research in Wales. That's my challenge when I go around them. It's not just about accreditation; it is improving the strength of our universities in this sector that is also really important. 

We are going to introduce, as part of our accountability regime for post-16 work, tracking mechanisms. We need to know where those children go, and that'll be part of the work that we're doing to have an increased focus, actually, on outcomes at post-16 level, something that has not been particularly strong in the past. In the past, people, for instance, who did A-levels were seen perhaps as a minority and they could look after themselves. With so many children now doing A-levels, that's not good enough. We have to have a much greater focus. 

Lynne, any education system cannot surpass the quality of the teachers that work within it, therefore continual professional learning is absolutely key. And I recognise that the inspector said that some improvement has been made, but there is more to do. 

And, Mark Reckless, Estyn is independent of me, as we would expect it to be. They don't pull any punches, as we've seen; where we do well, they tell us, where we're not doing well, they don't, and, how they judge their regime, they consult us on it, but it is a matter for them. I do not subscribe to the fact that publishing league tables will help our education system improve. This report says it's all about collaborative and supporting school-to-school working. You're not going to have that where schools are competing against one another. It undermines that ethos that we're trying to build in our education system of the self-improving, collaborative system.  

Will the Cabinet Secretary give way? 

Yes, of course. 

Rather than that able principle, where I don't think we'll reach agreement, what is the point of this middle way where Estyn tells you what the results are if the inspection was after 2014 but not before, and how does that help anyone if parents are comparing schools on less than accurate or up-to-date data?   

It is a matter for Estyn what they include in their report—it's not a matter for me—but I do not believe that going to a system of league tables that pits school against school, teacher against teacher, will help us to build the collaborative system that we need, and what the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development tells us that we need here in Wales. But what the inspector does tell us we need are better accountability measures. The inspector talks at great length about the accountability measures that we've had in the past, determined by external examinations, that have led to teaching to test, narrowing of the curriculum and not giving kids what they need. And the challenge to us is to find an accountability regime that aligns Welsh Government accountability with Estyn and our regional consortia, and I'd be very happy to talk to headteachers at their conference tomorrow about how we're developing that. 

MAT—I will refer you to the statement I made last week. There is more we need to do on more able and talented, that's why I announced the investment in that. Let me be absolutely clear: I'm not on a mission to close sixth forms. I believe in a mixed economy of post-16 provisions. For some places and some pupils sixth forms are fine, in other places, local determination has said something different—but I am not about closing sixth forms; I'm about a mixed economy. What I am about is, wherever that child studies, it has to be high quality and children have to get the right kind of advice so they can make positive choices about their future and not be railroaded into the FE sector or staying on to the sixth form. There is more work that we can do to ensure that children and parents have a wide variety of access to information about what is best for their child. But please don't say that I'm about closing sixth forms; we're about a mixed economy in this Government.

Lee, you are absolutely right: there is so much more we need to do about digital. That's why the digital competence framework was the first part of our curriculum reform that was published. I met last week with our National Digital Learning Council to look at restyling their remit and their function so that we can drive improvements in this area because, clearly, what we see at the moment is not good enough. That's why we've established the national network of excellence for STEM as well, because I recognise there is so much more we need to do and we will not serve our children well unless they are literate, numerate and digitally competent. That's what we need for their futures. 

Vikki Howells, you're absolutely right: we can have the best school buildings in the world, we can have the best teachers, the best curriculum, but, if we don't address children's well-being, they're not in a position to make the most of those opportunities. I am glad that Estyn recognises that, actually, we've got a good story to tell on well-being, but there's always more that we can do. 

Presiding Officer, I will close there in saying that I agree with the chief inspector's comment that there is much to be proud of in the Welsh education system. However, I also recognise that there is still much more for me and this Government to do. We must continue the momentum behind our national mission to raise standards, to reduce the attainment gap, and deliver an education system that is a source of national pride and enjoys public confidence, Mark. The Estyn annual report will play a key role in helping us on that journey and informing us of where we've made progress. Thank you.

The proposal is to agree amendment 1. Does any Member object? Amendment 1 is therefore agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

The proposal is to agree the motion as amended. 

Does any Member object? The motion as amended is therefore agreed.

The next item is the motion under Standing Order 26.95 that the Bill to be known as the Law Derived from the European Union (Wales) Bill be treated as a Government emergency Bill, and a motion under Standing Order 26.98(ii) to agree a timetable for the Bill to be known as the Law Derived from the European Union (Wales) Bill. In accordance with Standing Order 12.24, I propose that the following two motions under items 9 and 10 be grouped for debate. Does any Member object? No.

I therefore call on the Cabinet Secretary for Finance to move the motions. Mark Drakeford.

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. The UK's exit from the European Union represents the most significant and demanding challenge, constitutionally, legally, economically, that we in Wales have faced since the advent of devolution. The uncertainty that surrounds both the process and the outcome has the potential to cause enormous damage to our nation. It is the scale of the challenge, the continuing uncertainty, the rapid movement of events and the potential dangers surrounding Brexit that form the backdrop to the motions that have been tabled before this National Assembly this afternoon. Llywydd, these are highly unusual times, and it is the nature of these times that explains the highly unusual proposition that the National Assembly consent to an emergency Bill. 

As set out in the statement that was tabled alongside the motions, the Welsh Government has accepted, ever since June 2016, that the outcome of the referendum takes the United Kingdom out of the European Union. But the vote to leave the EU was not a vote to reverse devolution. It is this Government's duty, and I believe that of this Assembly, to ensure that, in the act of leaving, the interests of Wales and its people are given every possible protection. 

Will you take an intervention?

I will.

In the negotiations and the JMC meetings that you have with the UK Government, will you give us an undertaking that you won't sell Wales short? And so will you only agree to withdrawing this continuity Bill if the EU withdrawal Bill either protects or enhances this devolution settlement?

Llywydd, of course I never go into any discussion looking to sell Wales's interest short, and I'll continue to work with colleagues elsewhere in the United Kingdom to make sure that the EU withdrawal Bill can be put in a position where we could recommend it to the floor of this Assembly, and if we can't achieve that then we will make no such recommendation to you.

Llywydd, the Bill in front of the Assembly, should it be agreed today, does not aim to frustrate Brexit, it does not aim to delay Brexit; rather it embodies our recognition that legislation is required to provide legal stability and continuity as the UK withdraws from the European Union. It is critical that the statute book ensures clarity and certainty for citizens and businesses during this unprecedented period of change.

It has long been the view of the Welsh Government that legislation on a UK basis would be the best way of achieving continuity, stability and certainty. It has therefore been a huge disappointment that the UK Government's European Union (Withdrawal) Bill, which should have been the vehicle for ensuring that legal continuity, has instead been drafted in such a way that it undermines the existing devolution settlement and is itself a source of instability and uncertainty.

The prohibitions and restrictions that it places on the powers of this Assembly and the Welsh Ministers to legislate on matters that have long since been devolved to us are simply unacceptable. The powers it provides for the UK Government to take control of laws and policy responsibilities that are devolved are equally unacceptable. Since the UK Bill was introduced last July, the Welsh Government has worked tirelessly to see it amended so that it properly respects the devolution settlement. The UK Government has been given every possible opportunity to come to an agreement on this issue and to accept either the amendments that we published in conjunction with the Scottish Government or bring forward suitable amendments of its own. Indeed, it promised to do just that in December of last year. Here we are in March and still nothing.

So, Llywydd, although, as I reported to the Assembly last week, progress has been made on this matter in recent weeks, we have not yet reached a point where we can be satisfied that the withdrawal Bill will be amended so as to meet all concerns. We are therefore left with no choice but to bring forward our own continuity Bill, the Law Derived from the European Union (Wales) Bill, the LDEU Bill, which both ensures the law in Wales remains fully operable after exit day and provides that decisions about devolved laws are made in Wales and by this Assembly, hence the need to bring forward a Bill and to do it on an emergency basis.

Having given the UK Government as much time as possible to make the necessary changes to its Bill, we have left the introduction of the LDEU Bill to the last possible moment, but that last possible moment has now arrived. Implementation of the Bill will require a substantial, indeed a wholly unprecedented, volume of legislative action on the part of the Welsh Ministers and the National Assembly. The limited time left between now and exit day means that the application of the normal Bill procedures would defeat its own object by leaving too little time for implementation once a Bill had been passed.

We also need to allow space for Parliament to respond to the Assembly's voice on this matter. Should the Assembly decide to pass this Bill, it will demonstrate the strength of feeling in Wales that those decisions on preparing devolved legislation for Brexit are a matter for the National Assembly.

Will the Cabinet Secretary take an intervention?

I will.

I'm listening with great interest and, obviously, I support the general principle of what he's setting out today, but emergency Bills are sometimes not good law because they're taken through to meet a particular objective and don't necessarily stand the test of time. Should an emergency Bill such as this contain a sunset clause? 

Well, Llywydd, I hope that the Bill has a sunset clause built into it in the sense that I still hope that we will reach an agreement with the UK Government and with the Scottish Government on amendments that we could jointly see put down in the House of Lords that would render the continuity Bill unnecessary because we would have achieved our objectives by an alternative, and we have always seen it preferable a route. However, I am always going to be keen to listen to points that Members make about this Bill and ways in which it could be further considered should the Assembly decide today to allow it to go forward on an emergency basis and with the timetable that that requires. The timetable that we propose allows space for dialogue between legislatures to continue and for Parliament to reflect on the strength of feeling in Wales and, therefore, to take the steps necessary in respect of the EU withdrawal Bill.

Now, Llywydd, of course I recognise that bringing forward the LDEU Bill as an emergency Bill is less than ideal, and that's why I say that, again, our preference remains to have a UK Government Bill that respects devolution, and we will go on working to that end until every possibility of its successful amendment is exhausted. But the UK Government's failure to act to address our concerns means that the LDEU Bill is now required urgently. If it cannot be treated as an emergency Bill, it cannot be brought forward at all. The cost of not doing so could be very high indeed: the fundamental undermining of the current devolution settlement.

As to the timetable motion, I ask Members to support it because it is necessary to get the Bill into scrutiny and onto the floor of the Assembly as soon as possible. Once we have a timetable, then I will listen very carefully to what Members say about it, including what is said this afternoon, but, without a timetable, this Bill is stuck without a starting line; the train will never leave the station, and its whole purpose is defeated before it has begun. I therefore ask Members to agree to the use of the emergency Bill procedure and to the proposed timetable to get the formal process under way.

More broadly, Llywydd, the decision to publish the Bill in draft last week means the discussion of its contents has already begun. I was grateful for the opportunity to answer questions in front of the EAAL committee yesterday. If today's motions are agreed, formal introduction of the Bill will follow tomorrow. On Monday next week, I will attend the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee, where the Bill will be scrutinised. On Tuesday, the whole Assembly will be able to debate the substantive controls of the Bill against the Stage 1 motion. But, Llywydd, none of that can happen unless agreement can be reached today to the use of the emergency Bill procedure and its associated timetable. I therefore ask Members to support both motions so that this vital work, work of great urgency and high importance, can begin. 

I start by saying where we do agree with the Welsh Government on this side of the Assembly, and that's as has been outlined in a statement, and I quote,

'It remains the Welsh Government’s view that the best approach to this issue remains an amended EU Withdrawal Bill which can be given legislative consent by the National Assembly.'

And I do agree that this should be approached on a UK basis with the full and proper consent of the National Assembly for Wales and, indeed, the Scottish Parliament. I also agree with the Welsh Government when they say, and I quote,

'The costs of legal uncertainty and a lack of continuity would likely be considerable.'

I think, in all this, we do have to, as best we can in a complicated area, seek the clearest line possible. May I also note, Presiding Officer, your determination on competence and that that was not straightforward, as it was recognised that there are significant arguments both for and against legislative competence existing for this Bill? A typically wise and balanced judgment, if I may say so.

Where we take a different approach from the Welsh Government is that the proper check and balance here—and it is a great test of the devolution settlement, I agree with that—is in the LCM procedure. We do not believe that an EU withdrawal Bill can successfully proceed without the consent of the National Assembly and the Scottish Parliament. It is an appropriate device, the LCM, and it is one that gives us the constitutional protection that the Minister is seeking, in my view. I give way.

I thank the Member for giving way. Do you agree with me, therefore, that, earlier this year, there was unanimous support for a continuity Bill for the Welsh Assembly? Can you just give me an indication as to what's changed from just over a month ago to now, when there is still a continuity Bill?

There wasn't unanimous support. There was a take-note motion that we did not want to divide the Assembly on because, in the tactics of this, we have been keen that the Welsh Government's attempts to negotiate effective frameworks and effective framework governance get the maximum support from the Assembly. So, we took a very pragmatic decision, but that was not a decision to approve a continuity Bill, and we now have a continuity Bill before us. And I will make some remarks of where I do think it's important we speak with one voice here.

Therefore, I have to conclude that the Welsh Government's decision to introduce this Bill can only add very considerably to legal uncertainty, and that is not going to be in the best interests of the people of Wales, organisations and businesses in Wales. As I said, the appropriate lever—and it is a huge one—is the LCM process.

Can I just make some practical observations, Presiding Officer, about scrutiny? As you have said, these are not straightforward matters, which is another way of saying they would need extensive scrutiny to ensure that we are acting in an appropriate way and are legislating rigorously. Arguments exist on both sides. The situation in Scotland is that they've taken a different approach, and this could well result in a referral to the Supreme Court, and that itself will add to any level of uncertainty we may face.

So, I have to say that, for these reasons, we urge caution, given the ambivalence that currently exists over this whole matter. But the biggest objection has to come back to how we would scrutinise an emergency Bill on such a major constitutional matter. Just reflecting on the timetable, it would be so lightning fast that scrutiny would only be cursory, where it was possible at all, over a certain number of limited areas. Next Tuesday we would have Stage 1, the Tuesday following, 20 March, Stage 2, and the day after that, 21 March, Stages 3 and 4.

We have to make a decision today on whether to invoke an emergency procedure without an explanatory memorandum. The Minister is right: we have had the Bill in draft, but, you know, there is an explanatory memorandum, and it's been withheld. I do not think that adds very much to these proceedings, and, Presiding Officer, it may be something we want to look at in terms of Standing Order reform, that, in the exceptional circumstance of an emergency procedure, the explanatory memorandum has to be laid then. I know at the moment it's difficult and it's done on introduction, but this has not been a process where we've had maximum opportunity, at this stage at least, to make a sound judgment.

Can I just conclude—

Will you take another intervention? I can see the time is very short.

I will if the Presiding Officer—

Thank you very much. Is it not the case, though, that this legislation in emergency form would not perhaps be necessary had the UK Government responded to our demands from Wales to take into account the needs of Wales moving forward after we leave the European Union?

Look, there's no way around this. What's been proposed today is that, in whatever it is—20-odd days, or less actually—we would pass some form of continuity Bill. It's going to take nine or 10 months through the Westminster procedure, and we're supposed to do it in 14, 15, 16 days or whatever. I think you need, Rhun, if I may be so bold to say, to look at the big picture here. We should not be making in this fast and furious way constitutional law.

I do want to conclude very quickly on the outcomes that we do need to achieve, and those are UK frameworks accepted everywhere—Scottish Government and Welsh Government—and that there needs to be effective shared governance on frameworks accepted in Scotland and Wales. That's the real battle we're having with our colleagues in England who are not, perhaps, as familiar with some of these concepts as we are, and there we've given the Welsh Government every practical assistance.

Finally, to achieve the legal certainty and full rigour that we need, we have to proceed on a UK basis and work through a UK withdrawal Bill that gets the consent of the National Assembly. With regret, we will not be supporting either motion on this matter this afternoon, Presiding Officer.

Today, we vote on introducing the Law Derived from the European Union (Wales) Bill as a Government emergency Bill. This fulfils Plaid Cymru's call for the introduction of a continuity Bill and it's a significant moment for our nation and our response to the EU withdrawal process. This Bill provides the most significant leverage we have as a country in this debate at this present time.

I'd like to take you all back to 8 November 2016. That's when the idea of a continuity Bill had its genesis—when it was first proposed by Plaid Cymru as a way of preventing a Westminster power grab. This was before the introduction of the UK Government's EU withdrawal Bill, and demonstrates that those of us on these benches predicted that there would be a threat to those powers returning from Brussels. And now, more than a year later, we're finally in a position where this continuity Bill is going ahead. This has only happened because of relentless advocacy in favour of the Bill, and because of the UK Government's failure to provide a solution to the real problem of a Westminster power grab. They've failed to satisfy the Welsh Government or the Scottish Government. It's important to note that in both Wales and Scotland, support for a continuity Bill is not just from the Government; in both cases, it comes from a majority of the Parliament. This is not just about Executive power and the power of Ministers; this is about the whole Assembly. It's about Welsh democracy and the successive votes in favour of devolution and law-making powers.

Plaid Cymru will, of course, be voting in favour of both motions this evening. But, Llywydd, I am of the view that it is unfortunate that the vote tonight will not be unanimous. We will still have a clear and overwhelming majority of Assembly Members in favour of this Bill, which is positive, but as David Melding has already conceded, a much stronger message is sent when all parties are united. The legislation does not depend on supporting or opposing the principle of leaving the EU. This is not about that. I would welcome voting alongside the other opposition parties on this after the Member's legislative proposal received unanimous support earlier this year. But despite this, we must now move forward with an effective two-thirds majority in support of this Bill, which represents a strong vote of confidence in favour of protecting Welsh democracy.

Llywydd, I agree with the argument that the emergency procedure could've been avoided, but that is now too late. Plaid Cymru would've supported this Bill being introduced much earlier; we wanted that to happen. But introducing the Bill under emergency procedure is better, in our view, than having no Bill at all. At this stage in the EU withdrawal process, there is no convincing argument for sitting back and allowing Westminster to intercept the powers that are already devolved. We have learnt the hard way, time and time again, not to trust Westminster. How many promises? And Westminster has already ignored a legislative consent motion from this place on police commissioners. Any devolved powers that are to be shared on a UK or GB basis must be co-decided by the Governments of the UK. We urge the Welsh Government to hold fast to that view and to resist any attempts to try and override the decisions of this Assembly in the courts.

Llywydd, to conclude, Plaid Cymru continues to call for a continuity Bill and will vote in favour of today's motions. We will always, always protect our hard-won democratic institutions and our national democracy—always.

My view of this Bill is formulated against a background—and I think the overriding priority, constitutionally, is that we respect the will of the people, and that referenda, even though they may not, in form, be legally binding, are certainly morally binding once Parliament, whether it be at Westminster or here, has put on the statute book the legislation that gives them legal force—

Will you take an intervention?

Yes.

Do you accept that the will of the people as conveyed in the 2011 referendum on powers should also be respected?

Well, the leader of Plaid Cymru has anticipated my next sentence, because that's exactly what I was going to say. There is a natural meeting of minds between us; we're on the same wavelength.

I was about to say that that applies as much to the EU referendum as to the two referenda on Welsh devolution. And although I took a different view of devolution at the time, I accept the will of the people and I will do my best, as I hope I've done in the time I've been in this place, to make it work. I see advantages that can come to Wales from it. Very often, this is true in life; that there are advantages as well as disadvantages, however much we might not want something to come about.

I struggle to understand quite why the UK Government has put us in this position today. We do have a Cabinet that is dominated by people who wanted to remain in the EU, and so one part of me wonders whether this is all part of a general sabotage of the whole process—to try to create as much friction as possible, which undermines the objective that I want to see achieved. But I think that the cock-up theory rather than the conspiracy theory is generally to be found in Government, and so I prefer to put it down to their natural incompetence.

But it is, I think, deplorable that the lack of understanding at Westminster—I think this is what came out of David Melding's speech—the lack of understanding at Westminster that he seems to think is there, and I agree with him, is responsible for playing down the results of the referendum that gave rise to this place coming into existence. We have to accept the reality that Wales does now have its own Parliament, has its own Government, the same as in Scotland, and consequently, when we are out of the EU legally, the frameworks that will be desirable, if not absolutely necessary, in many respects, in relation to powers that are devolved to make life more convenient for us all, have to take proper account of the views of the Welsh people, as represented in this place and the Government that is elected from amongst us. That seems to me to be a wholly unexceptionable statement of constitutional affairs.

I agree with what's said in the statement that was published on 27 February by the Welsh Government, that

'the Bill’s principal objective is to ensure, as a general rule, that there is continuity in that the rules and laws that apply in devolved areas immediately prior to exit and those applying immediately after exit, thereby providing certainty for citizens, businesses and other organisations.'

That's plainly in everybody's interests. Therefore, I can't really see why this should get in the way of the Brexit process. I did have a suspicion at first that it was a ploy to try to make the process of leaving more difficult than it need be, and perhaps even to frustrate it altogether. I have, some time ago, abandoned that fear, and I accept the bona fides of the Government in this respect that this is a genuine attempt to force the UK Government to the table to do the decent thing that all parties in this house, even the Conservative Party here, accept should be done—that the EU withdrawal Bill should be amended to bring about the result that we all want to see achieved.

So, this is not about a great issue of principle, this debate. We all agree on the general principle and the outcome we want to see from the Brexit process. So, if this does have the effect of forcing the UK Government to speed up the process of bringing that about, I think it would be a very good thing. The UK Government, at the end of the day, does have the power to steamroller over us. We know that. So, what this seeks to do is to make it more embarrassing for them than it would otherwise be if they're put in that position. That's as much as we can do, and on that basis I'm more than happy to lend my support to the Welsh Government in this rather unlikely rainbow coalition and become somewhat of a poster boy, as I understand it from reading the Scottish press, amongst Scottish nationalists, and with Nicola Sturgeon, as a result of what I said here just a few weeks ago. This is not a position that I ever thought possible, let alone desirable. But there it is; we have to accept plaudits in life, where they're given, even from the most unlikely of sources.

So, on that basis, I will be supporting the Government in putting the Bill through this Assembly, and I hope common sense will very shortly be found at Westminster.

Llywydd, can I first of all commend the drafters of the Bill and the considerable skill and work that has gone in? This has been an incredible learning curve for them, but it shows the resources and the skill that exist within this legislature.

Can I also say that I agree with very much of what David Melding has said? He has raised all the correct constitutional points in terms of our role, in terms of scrutiny of powers, and the way in which Government operates. I make no criticism at all of the points that he has raised, other than that the area where I do disagree with him, which is that I don't think we're in a position where we can afford to sit back and do nothing. I think that takes us back really to the starting point of what the dilemma is, where the dispute arises, where the problem arises. And it goes back to, really, the initial understanding of what the true constitutional nature of devolution is within the context of the UK constitution.

There is no doubt, in my view, because I think it is upheld by nearly all the constitutional and legislative committees, from the House of Lords, the House of Commons, in Scotland and in Wales, which I think, by and large, all accept that the Welsh Government's constitutional analysis is correct, and that is that those powers, in the absence of the withdrawal Bill—all those powers that are currently in Brussels that relate to devolved areas of responsibility come back where Parliament has already decided they belong, and that is decided by the various devolution statutes.

The withdrawal Bill, if it is not amended, is, in fact, a centralisation of powers Bill. It drives a coach and horses through the devolution settlements. This is a point that has been made time and time again to the UK Government. We have to go back to the very beginning of this whole process, post the referendum: that is, we were promised that there would be proper engagement and consultation. That didn't take place. We were promised that there would be amendments that were put in. Scotland were promised key amendments with regard to clause 11. That hasn't come in. We were promised that all sorts of arrangements would come in hand—that this would be resolved. [Interruption.] Yes, I will.

Thank you very much for taking an intervention. If the Welsh Government was so concerned about this lack of action on the part of the UK Government, why didn't they introduce this sooner?

Well, I think the reason is because we had the belief—and I believe it was right to have the belief—that the UK Government would listen to the legal advice that was coming forward and would do the right thing. Now, I believe there probably are those in the UK Government who want to do the right thing but have been incapable of actually delivering the sorts of changes that are actually necessary to resolve this, and proposals have been made.

Now, I hope that there is an arrangement, but I see three scenarios that take place. The first one—and I hope no-one's going to intervene, so I have to go back and say, 'No, there were four scenarios'—but I see three key scenarios. The first one is that there is no agreement on clause 11. Therefore, we will not be able to give legislative consent. Therefore, we must take steps to protect the Welsh interests and the devolution settlements. The second scenario is that there is agreement, that we are able to reach agreement, and, no doubt, this proposed Bill will contribute significantly to achieving that, if it is achieved. And if that agreement on clause 11 is achieved, then the continuity Bill need not proceed, because the correct devolution arrangements and powers will have been established.

The alternative—and I think it's unlikely, but it is a disastrous alternative, but nothing is beyond the competence of the current Government that we have in Westminster—is that the withdrawal Bill fails for some reason, and that would leave us with no arrangements whatsoever the moment we leave the EU in terms of all those areas of our responsibility. In my view, it would be wholly irresponsible not to actually bring forward this legislation, and there are good reasons why it wasn't brought forward, not just that I think we've held the high ground—we've worked in the best interest to achieve agreement and are still doing so—but it is also the case that it enables this Bill now to actually exert the influence and show the determination that we have, that Scotland have, that the devolution arrangements, the constitutional arrangements we have, have got to be upheld. We've been promised they will be upheld, but, unfortunately, the withdrawal Bill in its current form is a form of constitutional mugging, where the sole promise that is given is to say, 'We've mugged you of your powers and responsibilities, but don't worry, as we run off, we'll give them back to you at a later stage.' That is not good enough. It is not respectful to the Parliament that established the devolution settlements, and it's not respectful to the devolution Governments.

There are difficulties, there are problems with it, but the continuity Bill has to be started. I believe if we do not take this step today in passing it, it will not happen. That will weaken significantly our negotiation position, and I remain in full agreement with the position that the Cabinet Secretary has taken that we still hope we will achieve agreement. But let's be absolutely clear, if that agreement cannot be reached, if we cannot reach a stage where there should be an LCM, then we have to protect Welsh interests, and that's what this Bill does.

As the person chairing discussions between the UK Government and the devolved Governments on the EU withdrawal Bill, Cabinet Minister David Lidington MP stated, at Airbus Broughton in Flintshire last week, we must protect the UK internal market whilst respecting devolution. As I noted last week, he also said that eight out of 10 goods lorries leaving Wales go to the rest of the UK, highlighting the importance of the UK common market for Wales, as well as the rest of the UK. Mr Lidington, in Broughton, added that

'we have to ensure, as we are determined to do, that Brexit means more powers going to the devolved governments and not fewer...So our proposal is to amend the Bill before Parliament to make clear that while frameworks are being agreed, the presumption would now be that powers returning from the EU should sit at a devolved level. Westminster would only be involved where, to protect the UK common market or to meet our international obligations, we needed a pause—I stress pause—to give the governments time to design and put in place a UK-wide framework.'

Governments—in plural. Responding to me in the—[Interruption.] Sorry?

[Inaudible.]—on that point? 

Yes, I'll take one intervention.

I'm grateful. Just on that very point, he's talked about a pause, a need to look at this new creature called a UK common market, but, more importantly, who decides if that pause is needed and who decides whether we need to retain powers at Westminster? Is it just Westminster, which I think he's suggesting, or is it the four countries together agreeing that? If it's the four countries, I'm with him, but I think he's suggesting Westminster.

As I said, to give the Governments—plural—a time to decide and put in place a UK-wide framework.

Responding to me in this Chamber last week, the finance Secretary, Mark Drakeford, stated that Mr Lidington's speech

'did move a step forward in relation to our clause 11 concerns.'

Mr Drakeford then added,

'What we now need to do is to have a detailed discussion with the UK Government about some of the practical ways in which that would operate, and the key issue at stake remains that of consent'—

we agree—that he will go to the next meeting of the Joint Ministerial Committee on EU negotiations with constructive proposals as to how those questions could be resolved, that his preferred course of action remains an agreed amendment that all three Governments could see put down at the House of Lords, that if an amendment cannot be agreed he will continue to pursue the amendments jointly laid with the Scottish Government in the House of Commons and will re-lay in the House of Lords, and that only if they don't succeed there, then they have to protect the position against the day when this National Assembly would not be prepared to give its legislative consent to the withdrawal Bill.

Having already achieved so much, it's therefore apparent that there's a will in both the UK and Welsh Governments to conclude an agreement that would allow the EU withdrawal Bill to go forward. I'm sure that a final push, combined with constructive engagement with Scotland, will enable this now to happen. Of course, we, the Welsh Conservative official opposition, fully recognise the constitutional principles at stake. We have consistently called for agreements on common frameworks between the Governments of the UK as a basis for a UK free trade agreement, and argued that there is no reason why the EU withdrawal Bill could not state that the restriction on devolved competency would end when common agreed frameworks come into force. We also welcome the finance Secretary's response to me in yesterday's meeting of the Assembly External Affairs and Additional Legislation Committee, to which he referred when he stated that

'very detailed work has gone on at official level',

involving Welsh Government, UK Government and Scottish Government on the consent issue, and he added that there was

'more than one way in which those different positions could be bridged',

and that Thursday's meeting of the Joint Ministerial Committee on EU negotiations will be focusing on practical ways that could be done, where all share the same ambition to get an agreed amendment. We also understand that discussions on this will go forward at a meeting attended by both the Prime Minister and the First Minister next week. In noting both this and the inappropriateness of introducing major constitutional legislation under emergency procedure, which would make necessary and effective scrutiny impossible, we must oppose these motions. In so doing, however, we recognise that the view of this Assembly, including ours, can be expressed by voting against the legislative consent motion if our collective concerns are not then addressed. The constitutional integrity of this Welsh Parliament must be protected, and the Welsh Conservative official opposition won't hesitate to vote down the legislative consent motion, alongside other parties, if that is compromised. Thank you.

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

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. Can I thank all Members who have taken part in this very thoughtful debate? Let me begin with the last contribution by Mark Isherwood and confirm to Members of the Assembly that I will indeed be going to a meeting with the UK Government and the Scottish Government on Thursday of this week, and that I will go to that meeting in exactly the spirit that Mark Isherwood set out, looking to find ways in which we can craft an amendment between us that both secures continuity, so that EU law can be transferred into domestic law in an orderly way, but also that respects devolution in the United Kingdom. And I'll go there to do that in as determined and purposeful a way as I can.

This Bill is about what happens if that does not succeed, and I want to go to David Melding's contribution, because David Melding identified two issues that are directly relevant to this debate. He argued that the LCM process is where the proper check and balance in the system lies, that what we should do is to rely on the LCM process—and you've heard Mark Isherwood say that his party would have no hesitation in voting against legislative consent if the UK EU withdrawal Bill didn't respect devolution. But the question I have to ask the Conservative Party is: what happens then? What happens if this legislator denies legislative competence? Leanne Wood said that the UK Government had already ignored, once, a refused LCM, but they have never refused to respect an LCM where they themselves had said at the beginning that an LCM was required. They denied it was necessary in relation to policing, arguing that it wasn't devolved, but the UK Government itself has said that it requires the consent of this legislature. So, we have to assume, in taking David's point, if the checks and balances are genuinely to work, that if we denied legislative consent, then those parts of the Bill that affect Wales would no longer go forward, and where would be the certainty then?

I assume you've given way. [Laughter.]

I certainly do.

I apologise. In our view, it's simply not plausible for a UK EU withdrawal Bill to operate if it doesn't get the express consent of this place and the Scottish Parliament. That's the reality of the political situation, and that's what we should rely on.

It just is not sufficient, Llywydd. It just doesn't measure up to the seriousness of the position. Mick Antoniw got it exactly right, that if there is no agreement, if this legislature could not provide its legislative consent, then we have to act to put in place a set of arrangements that would operate for Welsh businesses and Welsh public services in the event that the UK Government did what they should do, and respect the decision of this National Assembly. That's why this Bill is a necessity, and that's why, in the end, it is not enough to rely on the LCM process, important as that is, because if we were not to give consent and the UK Government were to respect that, there would be no statute book for Wales to provide the continuity and certainty that this Bill, the continuity Bill, provides. 

The second point that David Melding made was about scrutiny, and I share lots of his anxieties about the timetable that we are now having to operate against, but the real finger does have to be pointed at the UK Government. Had they operated in the way that they told us they would and gave us the certainty that was needed earlier in this process, we would either have not needed this continuity Bill at all, or we would have been able to offer this Assembly greater time in which to scrutinise it. In the event, Leanne Wood asked why we didn't bring it forward earlier. She will know how closely we have acted in concert with the Scottish Government on this matter, how we have worked together to try and give the UK Government as much opportunity as possible to bring forward an amendment with which we could agree, how we have acted with the Scottish Government to a common timetable in introducing our continuity Bills, and how we are now in the position where speed will have to be of the essence. An explanatory memorandum will be published tomorrow alongside the Bill, if it is to be introduced.  

Leanne Wood rightly pointed to the fact that Plaid Cymru have long advocated a continuity Bill, and I think that she will recognise that part of the impact we have been able to have at the UK level has partly been by working together with Scotland, but also by being able to demonstrate the unity of purpose in this National Assembly on these very important matters. That's why we were so pleased to publish jointly 'Securing Wales' Future' with Plaid Cymru, and I'm sure that she will recognise that the First Minister responded positively from the very beginning to the concept of a continuity Bill, and has taken responsibility himself for the oversight of the development of that Bill, and the formidable amount, as Mick Antoniw said, of work that has gone into its preparation, including liaison with the Scottish First Minister along the way.  

I've heard what parties have said here this afternoon, Llywydd. I know we will not be unanimous. I regret that. I think it doesn't help us in getting the maximum leverage that Leanne Wood referred to. But I think there will be a substantial majority here on the floor of this Assembly so that we can bring this Bill forward, we can bring it forward as an emergency Bill, we can attend to it as best we can within the timetable that we have got, and if we are in the position that we do not seek, where we cannot secure agreement of the UK Government to a proper amendment to its own Bill, then the future of Wales and legal certainty and continuity here will have been secured through this Bill if we are able to take it onto the statute book. 

The proposal is to agree the motion under item 9. Does any Member object? [Objection.] I will defer voting on this item until voting time. As we have not disposed of the vote under item 9, I will defer the vote under item 10 until voting time. 

And unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, I will move immediately to voting time. 

The first vote is on the debate on the second supplementary budget 2017-18. I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Julie James. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 29, 23 abstentions, none against, and therefore, the motion is agreed.

The next vote is the motion under Standing Order 26.95 on the Bill to be known as the Law Derived from the European Union (Wales) Bill, and that that should be treated as an emergency Bill. I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Julie James. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 44, no abstentions, 10 against, and therefore, the motion is agreed.

The next vote is to agree the timetable for the Bill to be known as the Law Derived from the European Union (Wales) Bill, and I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Julie James. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 43, no abstentions, 11 against. The motion is therefore agreed.

And that brings today's proceedings to a close.