National Assembly for Wales

I call the Members to order. 

The first item on our agenda this afternoon is the nominations for a committee chair. Yesterday, you’ll recall that the Assembly agreed a motion under Standing Order 17.2A to allocate the Chair of the Committee on Assembly Electoral Reform to the Labour group. I now invite nominations under Standing Order 17.2F for the election of the Chair, and, just to remind you, only a member of the Labour group may be nominated as Chair and only a member of the same political group may make and second a nomination. Therefore, I invite nominations from the Labour group for Chair of the Committee on Assembly Electoral Reform.

I nominate Dawn Bowden, Presiding Officer. 

I call for another member of the same party group to second the nomination.

I would like to second that. 

Are there any further nominations? Does any Member object to the nomination? I therefore declare that Dawn Bowden is elected as Chair of the Committee on Assembly Electoral Reform, and I wish her well and wish her the best of luck in that work as Chair of the committee.

The next item is questions to the Minister for Education, and the first question is from Michelle Brown.

Since the 'One language for all' report in 2013, Estyn published a report on Welsh in key stages 2 and 3 in 2018, and two further reviews will be undertaken during 2019-20, looking at language acquisition in primary schools, and the teaching and learning of Welsh at A-level.

Thanks for that answer, Minister. On the day GCSE results came out over the summer, school leaders said that they were extremely concerned at the fall in the percentage of 16-year-olds passing Welsh second language at A* to C, and their association called on the Welsh Government to work with them to find out what has caused the 10 per cent fall in grades. But it wasn't just Welsh they were concerned about. The 4.3 per cent drop in English results also prompted them to call for more work from the Welsh Government. The director of the Association of School and College Leaders Cymru seems to be blaming the changes you have made, when he said, and I quote,

'We can assure the public that there has been absolutely no let-up in the commitment of schools to produce the very best outcomes for their pupils, and it is important to understand that these results come at a time of enormous change in the Welsh education system.'

And the National Association of Head Teachers Cymru also said that more work needs to be done. The two languages of most importance in the country are Welsh and English, and you seem to be failing our pupils on both. Can you tell us how you're going to stop the education system delivering worse results for these subjects year on year?

With regard to Welsh second language GCSE results, I'm sure the Member is aware that, this year, we saw the removal of the short course GCSE, and that undoubtedly has had an impact on attainment this year. But the percentages that she has quoted are misleading, due to an increase of a third in the number of learners entered for a full course exam. Many learners would have previously accessed the short course, and the arguments around the need for change in that regard are well rehearsed here in this Chamber. What is really encouraging, Presiding Officer, is that, when looking at raw numbers for passes at each grade, we have seen an increase in the grades of A*-A, up 9.7 per cent, and at A*-C, up 12.5 per cent, which suggests that the increase in entry numbers is resulting in more learners attaining a good pass in Welsh second language GCSE—an improved and more challenging qualification. 

With regard to English, I'm pleased to see an improved outcome in English language, particularly at A* to C, but, clearly, there is always room for improvement, and we shall be working with regional consortia, schools and Qualifications Wales with regard to more steps we can take with regard to improving results in English language. 

Minister, I was, I must admit, a little surprised to see in Stats Wales that, as well as those who are qualified to teach Welsh as a first language, 40 per cent of our teaching workforce is qualified to teach Welsh in English-medium schools as a second language. Whether they're using those skills, of course, is a little let easy to ascertain. The number of new entrants choosing to train in Welsh has been falling, and the number of people who believe that learning Welsh should not be compulsory is still disappointingly high. So, what practical steps are being taken now, with the current workforce, to ensure effective teaching to a new Welsh language continuum, to produce young people with higher Welsh language skills, which they will use confidently after they've left school?

Well, it's important to recognise that we have increased investment to support the development in the Welsh in education workforce to a record amount of £5 million in this financial year. So, in 2017, we spent £4.2 million, then £4.8 million, and, as I said, this year that's risen to £5 million. This allows us to provide continuous development of practitioners' Welsh language and teaching skills. For instance, one practical way in which we do that is through our sabbatical scheme, which provides intensive Welsh language training to practitioners across Wales. And funding is also being made available and provided to regional consortia to offer a range of opportunities to develop Welsh language and the Welsh language teaching skills in our workforce. For those wishing to enter the profession, to teach either Welsh language itself, or to teach other subjects through the medium of Welsh, we offer the highest level of financial incentive for them to do that.

Thank you, Nick. I place great value on vocational qualifications being available for 14 to 16-year-olds. The Learning and Skills (Wales) Measure 2009 requires all learners to be offered a minimum of three vocational courses at key stage 4 in the local curricula offer.

Thank you, Minister. You've been quite clear that your move away from the five A* to C English and Maths measure was designed to encourage schools to focus on realising the potential of every child, not just those on the C/D/C borderline. Your new measure—the capped 9—puts value on vocational courses, which is very welcome, and, as she says, so many young people can secure a rewarding and successful career through the vocational route. However, we're still some way off, as I'm sure you would recognise as well, between achieving that university-recognised parity between academical and vocational qualifications. So, what are you doing to ensure greater availability of such courses in schools and colleges, and to ensure even more effective signposting for younger people, at an earlier age, so that we do see, over time, that the loss of—I was going to say 'prejudice'; that's probably too strong a word—the loss of that difference between vocational and academic so that both routes are equally acceptable?

Presiding Officer, I'm very glad that the Member has recognised, in the interim accountability measures, vocational qualifications do count towards a capped 9 score. So, there is no disincentive for schools to be able to offer these courses to pupils, where that is the right thing for those children. I'm very pleased to reassure the Member that all four secondary schools in Monmouthshire are meeting the requirement of the learning and skills Measure, and that that choice is available to learners in his area. For example, in King Henry VIII Comprehensive School, in Abergavenny—which I had the privilege to visit on GCSE day, and to celebrate with them a record set of GCSE results for that school—learners in that particular school are offered eight vocational courses at key stage 4. But the Member is right—there is more that we need to do to sometimes overcome perceptions of the value of vocational courses. And that's why we are currently piloting a new approach to information and advice to children and young people, so that we can ensure that all children are making the right choices on the basis of a real understanding and knowledge that vocational qualifications can help them achieve their career aspirations and fulfil their potential.

Minister, in your answer to the question from Nick Ramsay, I'm very keen and very pleased to hear that you actually recognise vocational education as being equivalent to academic pathways. And it's a shame that not enough young people—or their parents in particular, sometimes—understand the same thing. Because to ensure that we have that parity, to ensure that the skills that we need in Wales are available to people—and young people in particular—we also need to educate some of the older generation, and the parents, to ensure they also understand that. Because many people over the last 20 years have been pumped the message, 'Higher education, that's the way to go.' But actually there's a mix that is available, and equally treatable are both qualifications—vocational and academic. And they should not be seen as separate pathway, but as a single pathway with perhaps different outcomes at the end of it, but, at the end of the day, equal outcomes. So, will you also expand the discussions you're having with young people to their parents, to ensure that parents understand the importance of both pathways, the quality of both pathways, and the outcomes that children can actually achieve in their long-term careers?

Certainly. David Rees makes a very important point on the influences that children are put under when making choices about what courses to follow in school or in colleges. Often, children are listening to their peers—they're very interested in understanding what their peers are doing—but obviously parents and family are a huge influence in helping children make decisions. As part of the Gatsby pilot, which is currently being delivered in the Rhondda Cynon Taf local authority area at the moment, which is looking to really test and improve the system of information and advice, those schools are indeed working not just with pupils, but working with local employers and with parents to be able to ensure that children are exposed to that wide range of options that are available to them and recognising that taking a vocational course at 14 is not a barrier to higher levels of study. Indeed, taking a vocational course from 16 to 18 is a perfectly normal way in which you can then go on to attend a degree course or a higher level apprenticeship, if that's what you want to do.

Questions now from party spokespeople, and the Conservatives' spokesperson first—Suzy Davies.

Diolch, Llywydd. Minister, last week, the finance Minister made a statement setting out her thoughts on the implications for Wales of the UK Government's 2019 spending round, and in that she reinforced the Government's view that budget spending decisions should be predicated on eight areas of priority. Why isn't school-age education one of those priority areas?

What the Minister was referring to are the cross-cutting priority areas that the Government has. One of those includes early years. Early years is part of our education system. My priority is ensuring schools have the best budget possible. The finance Minister has announced that, now that we have some details of our revenue budget, we will bring forward the budget for the whole of the Government in November.

Bearing in mind the huge changes that will be happening in schools, not least with the change in curriculum and the preparation for that, but also the long-standing and very acute complaints made by schools now about their direct funding, I have to say I was disappointed not to see that more explicitly in even the cross-cutting themes of Government, because, of course, if you get education wrong, it has an effect on every other area of spend as we go forward.

The UK Government has announced that 2.3 per cent above inflation boost to the Welsh block. There's also over £2 billion due to come to the Welsh Government from the UK schools budget—specifically schools, not education. That's over three years, and I accept the annual settlement is a restriction on planning. You've seen the CYPE report on funding for schools, which concluded that there is a very real and present danger on the sufficiency of school funding. I'm sure that the Minister for local government will be making the case for more money for her portfolio, more money for councils. Are you going to be leaving it to her to find the extra direct funding that schools need?

I'm grateful that the Member has acknowledged the difficulties that have been placed upon Welsh Government by the decision by her colleagues in Westminster only to give us an indicative budget for one year for education, whereas they have afforded the education system in England the courtesy of an indicative budget for three years, and that does indeed make things more difficult for us.

The Member will also be aware that I have welcomed very much the CYPE committee's work on education funding. I have accepted all the recommendations of that committee report, including a review into education funding in Wales. When that report is debated later on this term, I look forward to giving more details to Members on how we will respond fully to that. 

With regard to this year's budget, both I and the local government Minister are at one on the necessity and the priority in ensuring that both local authorities, which are the main source of funding for our schools, as well as education in totality are a priority.

I'm grateful for that response, Minister, because, as we know, the concern that actually the CYPE committee had was, while we recognised that the local authorities are responsible for the majority of direct funding, that is not protected in any way. It'll be very interesting, when you produce the results of your review, and in fact respond to the debate, whether you're going to be in a position to say how any direct funding can be protected within a hopefully enhanced local authority budget.

I just want to ask you something different now, because this weekend we saw media coverage of concerns over the content of sex education lessons to very young children in parts of England. I know that making religious and sex education a compulsory part of the new curriculum is contentious already, but I have to say even I'm a little bit squeamish about the potential of drawing masturbation to the attention of six-year-olds, especially when we are also asking them to understand and speak up about inappropriate touching by adults. Now, I've no idea how accurate these reports are, but I think families and teachers across the nation would appreciate a statement from you to reassure them what you think age-appropriate sex education will look like in Wales. 

The Member is absolutely right; if we are to achieve the goals of a purpose-led curriculum, and if we are to ensure that every child leaving our schools is a happy and healthy child, then age and developmentally appropriate RSE I believe is an important way in which we will achieve the purposes of our curriculum. Clearly, this is a sensitive subject, and the Member is right to say it is also an issue around child protection also. But I want to assure her and all Members here, and indeed the wider community, that the content of RSE will be developed very sensitively and carefully, with the best advice from professionals and those who have advised the Government to date on the necessity of ensuring that RSE is available to children in Wales.  

Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Siân Gwenllian.

Thank you, Llywydd. The Labour Party has said that they will abolish private schools, redistributing their properties to the state. A motion was passed in their conference to integrate private schools into the state sector. Now, given that only 2.2 per cent of Welsh children are educated in private schools, do you agree that it would be a relatively simple matter to move immediately to scrapping private schools in Wales?

I have no plans to scrap private schools in Wales. 

Okay. Well, it’ll be very interesting to hear the debate, or it would be very interesting if we were able to hear the discussion in Cabinet with your fellow Labour members on that issue, where there has been clear guidance provided by their conference. So, it was interesting to hear your response there.

Labour too would campaign to abolish the charitable status of private schools, and I note that a consultation is ongoing with the Welsh Government on this issue and I look forward to seeing private schools paying tax. And this, of course, raises questions about Ysgol Gymraeg Llundain, the Welsh school in London. I look forward to seeing how you intend to allow Welsh-speaking parents to continue to receive Welsh-medium education in London.

Suzy Davies referred to this issue, which is another issue altogether, but, in the Children, Young People and Education Committee last week, you mentioned that there was a strong lobby, or at least a strong response, against including religious education and RSE as a statutory part of the new curriculum without the right for parents to withdraw their children from those lessons. I do very much hope that you are not considering giving in to this pressure and that you agree with me that these are two crucially important areas and should be retained as statutory elements of the new curriculum as we aim towards creating healthy, confident citizens and a society that respects diversity.

Well, luckily for us, Presiding Officer, education is devolved and we don't need a party conference in Brighton or, indeed, Bournemouth to tell us how to run our education system. I see no problems with the Welsh Government's commitment to continue to support Welsh-medium education in London. We know a number of those families return to Wales and place their children in Welsh-medium schools here, and I have no plans to change the support for that. And I can assure the Member that I have no plans to change my mind with regard to the statutory nature of both religious education or RSE in our curriculum reforms. 

Excellent. I’m extremely pleased to hear that last answer, certainly.

Turning to another issue, which is transportation-to-school policy, in response to points raised by Llyr Gruffydd last week, the Minister for International Relations and the Welsh Language stated that there would be a refresh of the Learner Travel (Wales) Measure 2008, and that we can expect that in the autumn. There are examples of the need to create change arising across Wales, particularly in terms of pupils in Welsh-medium education. In Flint, for example, it is disappointing that the cabinet there is going to be charging sixth-form students for their transportation to school, which will particularly impact pupils in the sixth form at Ysgol Maes Garmon, and there's a possibility that parents will face an increase of 400 per cent in the cost of sending pupils to Welsh-medium sixth-form provision in Neath Port Talbot.

These issues are at risk of undermining any investment in Welsh-medium education and attempts to reach a million Welsh speakers. So, can you expand on what the Welsh language Minister said on this intention to refresh learner travel policy? When and how will any review happen? Can people express their views during this review, and is the aim, ultimately, to strengthen the access of our pupils to Welsh-medium education?

The Member will be aware that school transport, somewhat curiously, does not fall under my portfolio, but falls under the portfolio of my colleague Ken Skates. But, I, Ken Skates, Eluned Morgan and Julie James are working collectively on a policy solution to the situation that we find ourselves in. Moves in Flintshire and Neath Port Talbot have been a cause of concern to me. I understand that the policy in Neath Port Talbot has been put on hold at the moment, and that is very welcome.

In the case of post-16 transport, it is an undeniable situation that to access Welsh-medium post-16 provision children are having to travel significant distances. We should be ensuring that there is a transport policy that allows them to pursue their education continuum through the medium of Welsh, and should not be putting barriers in their way in their ability to do that, which is why the Government is committed to looking at a policy solution to this problem.

Thank you, Jayne. To support schools in making effective decisions on their school uniform policies, I have developed new statutory guidance for schools and governing bodies on school uniform and appearance policies. This guidance aims to encourage a more consistent approach across all schools in Wales to the affordability of school uniforms.

Thank you for your answer, Minister. The affordability of school uniforms is a big issue for many parents across Wales, and I know the Welsh Government's pupil development grant supports families on low incomes to buy new school uniforms. I'm sure you've seen some of the fantastic examples of parents in parts of Wales creating successful donation systems, enabling parents to donate and recycle old school uniforms to other parents to buy at a fraction of the price. Not only does this help families, but it helps the environment as well, stopping those from going to landfill. Will the Minister commend this work? How will you ensure that that consistent practice that you mentioned will get across to all local authorities in Wales?

Thank you, Jayne, for that. You're right—this is a real issue for many parents across Wales. That's why we have increased the money available to support parents via PDG access, providing support to an additional 14,000 learners at the start of this academic year. But it's also correct to say—and many of us who are parents will be well aware how quickly children grow, and sometimes their items of clothing are perfectly serviceable, and it's a real shame that other people cannot enjoy the benefit of using those items.

Therefore, in our statutory guidance, we draw schools' and governing bodies' attention to the fact that there are many very successful second-hand school uniform shops or swapping arrangements, which, as you say, is good for the purse of individual parents, but it is also really important for our environment. As part of the statutory guidance, we draw schools' attention to that good practice and would encourage many more of them to undertake that facility within their school.

I welcome the publication of the statutory guidance that came into force at the beginning of the month, and it makes the school uniform more affordable, accessible and gender-neutral. While there's more flexibility within the system, those in receipt of grants can be compelled to just go to one supplier; that is the case with one school within my constituency in the Rhondda. I also know that some schools do not give permission for the logo to be embroidered onto generic garments, which is often the more economic option, and something that is particularly important for families on low incomes. So, does your statutory guidance need re-examining to allow more flexibility for parents, whether they're in receipt of a grant or not? 

The statutory guidance that has come into force at the beginning of this academic year applies to uniform across the piece, regardless of whether you're in receipt of a grant for your uniform. Indeed, it does actually draw schools' attention to the fact that they should be able to offer a range of options that allows parents to make individual choices. And with regard to embroidered or branded items, it asks schools to really question whether that is needed—so do you need a branded polo short, or is a plain polo shirt in school colours appropriate? Again, asking governing bodies to question whether the ability to embroider on or to buy a patch that can be sewn on, rather than directing people to an individual store—those should be considerations that governing bodies are making when setting their uniform policy, and to think about the impact that that does have on individual families. There are often cheaper ways in which families can buy a uniform if they are given that flexibility, and that's what the statutory guidance urges governing bodies to do: to provide that flexibility and not to have some of these restrictive options that add cost to families. 

Minister, further to Leanne Wood's question, I fully support you in your laudable aim of keeping the cost of school uniform down. However, I note your guidance allows schools to decide whether their logos are strictly necessary. I believe that logos express the mission and the spirit of a school, and are a source of pride for students, parents and staff, and create a sense of community among the children of those schools. In view of this, would you join me in encouraging as many schools as possible to retain their logos as a symbol of their identity? Thank you. 

As a Minister, it is not my role to dictate to individual schools what they can and cannot have on their uniform. What is my role as the Minister is to publish the statutory guidance, which we have done, and to impress upon school governors the issue of thinking about affordability when designing their school and appearance policy. Indeed, we do ask schools to question whether it is appropriate or necessary for every single item of clothing to have a logo on. I think back to my own time when my children were in primary school, when I used to send them in a generic white polo shirt and they had a logo on their sweatshirt. I did not see it was necessary to have a logo on both of those items. What we're saying to schools is, 'Think—before you make these rules, think about the issue of affordability for all of your parents'. I agree that uniform can bring a sense of identity, and can bring many, many benefits to schools, but, when designing a uniform policy, be aware of the added financial burdens you may be placing on those parents, and what that can mean to the well-being of children in their schools who may be really concerned about whether their parents can afford all the kit and the uniform that is being asked of them. Because we know, if children's well-being is detrimentally affected, that their learning is detrimentally affected.     

Our rural education plan sets out our approach to rural schools, pulling together actions from our national mission. This includes our small and rural schools grant, which is benefiting over 400 schools, and our e-sgol pilot project, which is being rolled out to other local authorities and schools across Wales. 

Thank you for that answer. I've been contacted by concerned parents in Llandrillo, Corwen whose village school, Ysgol Gynradd Llandrillo, was amalgamated with Cynwyd school. My question today is about the situation that arises when the new schools created as a result of amalgamation and rationalisation are no longer able to cope with rising demand when they are victims of their own success. This is tearing two rural villages apart. In Llandrillo, the old school building stands empty, and I'm told that the new school is oversubscribed and local children are not getting the Welsh-medium education they require. What steps are you able to take to address this situation?

Well, the planning for provision of school places is not a matter for Welsh Government; it is a matter for the local education authority, and in the first instance, the Member should address her concerns to the local authority at that place. With regard to Welsh medium, it's very concerning to think that parents who want that opportunity for their children are being denied that opportunity. That is a huge source of concern to me. Parents should be able to exercise their right to a Welsh-medium education for their children if they desire. If the Member does not receive any joy in her communications with the local authority, then I'll be very happy to have correspondence from her in this regard.

Minister, with the school reorganisation code, as revised, when business cases come before the Welsh Government to be signed off, what weight does the Minister place on the policy imperatives that Welsh Government have put in place at that stage of the process? Or is it merely that you're looking at the financials around such an application? I'd be grateful to understand exactly how big a policy initiative is weighed when the business case is signed off, finally, by Welsh Government for new school developments.

Well, there are very clear criteria when deciding to grant twenty-first century schools and colleges funding to any local authority for their project. That's done by an independent board that makes recommendations to the Minister. The primary purpose of the twenty-first century schools and colleges fund is to ensure as many children as possible are receiving their education in buildings that are fit for purpose and are able to deliver our new curriculum to great effect, and to address what is, in some cases, in some schools, the very poor state of buildings that children and teachers are currently working in. But it is not correct to say that you have to close a school to have access to that fund. There are many, many examples across Wales where like-for-like provision has been put in place. But if the Member has a particular issue, I'm sure he can raise that when he's in one of his Vale of Glamorgan county council meetings.

Thank you, Mr Hamilton, for your question. I meet with the regional education consortia annually as part of regular evaluation and improvement sessions. I am due to meet them again this autumn. My director of education meets regularly with each region and provides feedback. I also meet individually with regions to discuss matters of importance when they arise.

I'm grateful to the Minister for that response. She'll recall that a short time ago, the leader of Neath Port Talbot council described the improvement consortium in his area in less than glowing terms. He said that it was set up to improve schools but the opposite had happened: the schools that needed improving haven't, and those schools that were doing well have dipped in improvement. The Association of School and College Leaders said the consortia are duplicating funding and functions provided by the LEAs, and they put a figure of £450 million on the cost of this. When the Minister appeared before the Children, Young People and Education Committee a few months ago, she said that getting money to the school front line is a priority, and if sufficient money isn't getting there, is it not time for this Assembly to do something about it? If we're not getting money to the schools and pupils, isn't it time for this Assembly-created quango of management, consultancy, apparatchiks and buzzwords to be scrapped so that the money can then go directly to local councils who are wholly elected and perhaps in a rather better position to estimate the school community needs in their area?

Presiding Officer, it's disappointing that Mr Hamilton doesn't seem to understand the governance arrangements of regional consortia. The consortia work on behalf of local authorities to lead, orchestrate and co-ordinate the improvements in schools across the region. Local authorities established the regional school improvement service in 2014 under the national model for regional working. Regional consortia, I should stress, are not an additional layer of bureaucracy. Where they follow the national model, they consolidate the school improvement activities of their constituent local authorities and provide them on a regional basis.

I can tell you, Minister, that teachers and headteachers that I meet in Aberconwy continue to regularly question the actual effectiveness and value of the regional consortia. Concerns, indeed, have been raised in the committee during the funding inquiry, and I look forward to a review of the regional consortia. Neath Port Talbot Council voted to leave the educational consortium ERW, and GwE has not yet reached a number of targets in its 2017-20 business plan. These include the need to provide good leadership and management, ensure that schools are well prepared to deliver the new curriculum and guarantee that a value-for-money framework consistently is implemented by all. Those are fundamental basic requirements of any taxpayer-funded body. The latter is impossible for my schools in Aberconwy, as they are actually, as governors in Conwy have stated today, being cut to the bone. Extra money needs to reach our schools and our pupils urgently. So, will you commit to welcoming any potential review of the education consortia in Wales, and will you actually be open and welcome and look at any recommendations that we come up with and work with us, as a committee, to perhaps not have a blinkered view to what the regional consortia are, whether they're good, bad or indifferent? Let's have a look at this once and for all, and let's let them prove themselves to be effective and a good use of taxpayers' money.

Presiding Officer, the Member has clearly missed my written reply to the committee's report, where I have accepted all the recommendations of that report. Rather than welcoming a review, I shall be setting it up.

Question 6 [OAQ54353] is withdrawn. Question 7—Rhianon Passmore.

Thank you very much. As set out in my statement of 17 September, the statutory roles created by the Additional Learning Needs and Education Tribunal (Wales) Act 2018 commence in January 2021, and the new ALN system will commence, on a phased basis, from September 2021. The code and regulations will be laid for National Assembly approval in 2020.

Diolch, Minister. Thank you for the confirmation, then, that the additional learning needs system will commence on that phased basis from September 2021. Teachers, parents, educators and teaching trade unions will, indeed, welcome the fact that the Welsh Government has listened and acted constructively on their feedback and the many conversations that have taken place. And I know, Minister, that you passionately believe that it is essential that time is taken to listen and respond to the views gathered during that consultation so that the code and regulations are fully fit for purpose. Minister, what actions will the Welsh Government take to ensure that, as this process moves forward, there will continue to be ongoing, constructive open dialogue with all interested parties to ensure the greatest possible potential of success when the additional learning needs system comes into force?

Well, the Member is correct in saying that we've had to take very seriously the response that we have had to the draft code and amend our timetable accordingly. I can give her and the Chamber an assurance that we will continue to work with all stakeholders to address the concerns that have been raised and to ensure that the new system is effective and provides the change that parents and children need. My officials are aiming to conduct, over the coming weeks and months, meetings and events with key stakeholders to refine specific aspects of the code where concerns have been raised during the consultation period. If I can give some specific examples of what that would include: in relation to required use of educational psychologists, the boundary between school and local authority maintained individual development plans and the operation of systems within the pupil referral units and Welsh education otherwise than at school more generally. So, that's to give Members some flavour of the specific areas of work where we're going to have to engage once again with stakeholders in preparation for the drafting of the code.

Llywydd, I remind the Chamber that I'm on the governing body of two special schools. We are in that in-between zone. I do welcome the shift away from statements, particularly for the flexibility we require. Children have a variety of issues, sometimes, and some of them may not get quite to the statement threshold. Where do they go? They still need real interventions. But I noticed the balanced remarks of SNAP Cymru, saying that we are in this difficult period between two systems, and I am concerned that some children will not be receiving the support in education that they require, and that has to be—. In the next year, we must emphasise that the system that is in place at the moment goes until it's replaced.

David, you are absolutely correct. Local education authorities are bound by the law as it stands now, and simply because we are transitioning to a new legislative framework, that does not allow them not to attend to the needs of children who are in the system now. My expectation is that they apply the law to children who have a range of special educational needs as it is currently stated, and they simply cannot leave those children dangling in anticipation of the new legislative regime that is coming into force. I have been very clear in my communications with the Welsh Local Government Association, with education portfolio holders and directors of education, who I met last Friday morning, on my expectations in this regard. They have to follow the law as it currently stands, as we wait to introduce the new law.

Thank you, Hefin. I made a written statement updating Members on the roll-out of online personalised assessments on 3 September. By the end of the summer term, over 268,000 learners had successfully taken online numeracy procedural  assessments. Following extensive development work and trialling, reading assessments will be available to schools from October.

In addition to that, the Minister will know I wrote to her on 16 July on behalf of a cluster of schools in Caerphilly county borough, particularly Glyn-Gaer in my constituency. They had concerns about the way the tests were happening in the school, the fact that you couldn't carry out certain activities within the tests, and that the results were difficult for teachers to interpret easily and quickly. She mentioned in her statement that changes have been made and improvements have been addressed. But with that in mind, can you confirm that you've met with the schools that wrote to you, or your officials have met with the schools that have written to you, and what actions have been taken directly with those schools as a result?

Well, I'm grateful to the Member for making the representations that he has done on behalf of that cluster of schools. We have acted on that feedback, not only from yourself, but from other schools, and we have, over the summer, made a number of refinements to the system that should address the concerns that were raised in your letter. By introducing assessments on a phased roll-out, we are able to use the experience of maths to ensure that we don't fall into some of those bear traps as we roll out with reading this autumn. As promised in my response, officials are already discussing with the relevant regional consortium how they can best engage with that particular group of schools, and I understand that, in response to the invitation in my letter, a teacher from one of the schools has already confirmed her attendance at the next teacher panel for the review of the online numerical reasoning assessment, which will be held in October. So, those teachers are actively engaged in the process, and I'm very grateful for them taking the time to do just that; it's really helpful.

Minister, I welcome, too, the value that these online assessments can add to the assessment programme the teachers undertake, but one of the concerns that have been raised with me is that, obviously, there is a bit of a digital divide in our country between those children who perhaps will not have the opportunity to be as skilled as others in the use of computers and don't even have access to a computer in their home, or access to broadband at home, where, of course, others will have, and they could potentially gain an advantage. What have you got built in to these systems to make sure that those sorts of issues are considered in the way that these assessments are undertaken?

Firstly, the Member will be aware that the first part of our new curriculum is the roll-out of the digital competence framework and, therefore, there is an expectation on schools to address these skills with their entire pupil population. With regard to information technology facilities within schools and ensuring that there is equity of provision across the piece, you'll be aware that the Government has invested heavily—tens of millions of pounds—to ensure connectivity for our schools. I'm very pleased to say, and I'm sure every Member of the Chamber will be pleased to hear it, that our final school in Pembrokeshire, which was the last outstanding school in the programme, has now been connected, and in doing that we've also solved some of the community connectivity issues as well.

Our attention therefore has now turned to supporting schools with the IT infrastructure within their schools, and the Member will be aware that, prior to the summer recess, I announced a £50 million capital investment project in edtech. Each local authority at the moment is conducting individual school surveys so that we understand where individual schools are with their infrastructure within their schools, and therefore Welsh Government will then be working with local authorities, with that £50 million, to ensure that there is equity of provision within schools.

Outside of schools, the Member will also be aware of the deal that the Welsh Government has struck to supply Microsoft Office software to all schools in Wales, paid for by the Welsh Government, and that software is also available for pupils, to be able to use on devices at home, so parents will not have to buy a licence for Microsoft Office software and their children will be able to use their log on in the home. Again, that helps address same of this digital divide, if a parent is struggling to find money to pay for those licences.

The final question, question 9, Paul Davies.

The Welsh Government's supporting service children in education Wales fund helps schools provide additional support to mitigate the challenges that children of armed forces communities can face because of their family's military lifestyle. I have made available £250,000 for applications this academic year.

I'm grateful to the Minister for that response. You'll be aware, of course, of the calls from the Assembly's cross-party group on armed forces to establish a service pupil premium here in Wales, and I believe a service pupil premium would go a long way in supporting those children who are disadvantaged as a result of their parents' service in the armed forces, either due to their frequent relocations or the impact of active service. I know that additional support would be welcomed as the armed forces play a key role in your constituency, Minister, as well as in my own. Therefore, can you tell us whether the Welsh Government is considering introducing a service pupil premium here in Wales, and if not, can you tell us what additional specific support the Welsh Government can actually offer to service children in Welsh schools?

Presiding Officer, I am very alive to the issues faced by children of serving families, which is why we have made this fund available. That fund this year is supporting three projects in the county of Pembrokeshire, and I'm sure the Member would be glad of that. If he's not aware of the individual projects, I'm happy to write to him with details of the schools that are in receipt of that grant.

We continue to look at the needs of our entire cohort of children when deciding educational budgets, and he will be aware of the challenging financial situation that the Welsh Government has found itself in. I'm committed to doing what I can to find resources to support the projects that are ongoing at the moment, and crucially I have started the process by which we will systematically begin to collect data on armed service families' children in our education system. That is not collected at the moment. It's very difficult to keep track and provide the evidence that we would need to support additional investment in our schools. We have started that process now, where pupil level annual school census data will be amended so that schools can record children of military families, and at the same time we will be amending PLASC data so that families who have adopted children will also be recorded. It's a long and tortuous process—longer than I would have liked it—but that process has now begun, which will mean that we will have better data so that we can make informed policy decisions in the future.

Thank you, Minister.

The next item, therefore, is questions to the Minister for Health and Social Services, and the first question is from John Griffiths.  

Thank you for the question. I made the decision to improve cancer diagnosis, with Wales being the first country to introduce the single cancer pathway. This reports on the time a patient waits from initial suspicion of cancer to the start of treatment. Our latest data shows that 75.1 per cent of patients started treatment within 62 days of the initial point of suspicion.

Minister, for the eight most common types of cancer, survival is three times greater when diagnosis is early and it is detected at the earliest stages rather than the latest stages. Of course, patients and their families go through absolute agony from cancer being suspected to eventual diagnosis one way or the other. I very much welcome what you mentioned in your initial response, because that’s real progress that’s very significant and important, but I know that capacity constraints continue, such as workforce shortages, and that is limiting the NHS’s ability to diagnose. Amongst the asks of some of the organisations representing people with cancer and their families are that the Welsh Government conducts an audit of diagnostic staff within the Welsh NHS and then addresses the gaps that exist. Is that something that Welsh Government will commit to?

The point that the Member makes about earlier diagnosis is exactly right—it’s a key section of our cancer strategy here in Wales. And, of course, the single cancer pathway will give us a better idea of the points at which we need to improve across the service. There is always going to be a workforce challenge that is simply not going to be resolved by new treatments or new technology. So, the workforce strategy that Health Education and Improvement Wales are working on will of course take into account the steps that we are already taking, for example the imaging academy and the work that we discussed here in this Chamber last week on improving endoscopy services, all of which will have an impact, not just on improving what we're able to do, but on our need to plan for and then acquire the numbers of staff. So, I think I can give the Member the assurance that we are looking at our current numbers of staff. The information we'll get from the operation of the single cancer pathway will give us further information and, of course, you'll see that when we publish the draft workforce strategy that HEIW are working on together with Social Care Wales.

Minister, Wales has now a single waiting-time target for cancer diagnosis and treatment, which I welcome. However, it is well known that we lack capacity in diagnosis services, and your Government has failed to meet its own targets for cancer waiting times via the urgent route since 2008. Minister, what action are you taking to deliver this significant investment in cancer facilities across Wales to build up the capacity required to meet this new single target for cancer diagnosis?

Well, I think much of what the Member asked was covered in my response to John Griffiths. It is a fact that when you look at cancer waiting times we've comparatively done better than England. If you look at our single cancer pathway new figure, it’s actually only a couple of percentage points lower than the old target on offer in England, and for only some of the pathway. And the reason that we introduced the new single cancer pathway was because we recognised that there were hidden waits within the system within the 31-day figure. So, we've got a much more honest reflection on where we are, and we have invested in the past and we continue to invest now. It’s a matter of fact that we've invested 6.5 per cent in the budget to train healthcare professionals in the last year. It goes back to the points I made to John Griffiths about having a proper workforce strategy, understanding what we're already doing and the investments we've already made.

NHS Wales has not taken the approach the Member refers to. The All Wales Medicines Strategy Group has developed guidance identifying several treatments that are poor value for money, ineffective or dangerous. Doctors use their clinical judgment and other prescribers to offer the best possible treatment options to their patients.

Thank you for that answer, Minister. Welsh eight-year-old Sofia Bow was born with the genetic disorder cystic fibrosis, which affects one in every 2,500 babies born. This Government has refused to fund the drugs Orkambi and Symkevi, even though they have been proven to improve lung health and reduce the need for hospital admissions, saying they're too expensive, while the Scottish Government has managed to negotiate a discount with the manufacturers so that the drugs can be prescribed to sufferers in Scotland. Sofia’s family are considering leaving their Welsh home to move to Scotland so that their daughter can get the life-changing treatment she needs. So, will you now copy the Scottish NHS in prescribing Orkambi and Symkevi? If it is just down to the money, once you've worked out a reasonable price for a child’s life, will you arrange a discount if required, or do you need the Scottish health Minister to do it for you?

I'm afraid the Member's question doesn't just depart from her initial one in not referring to low clinical priority treatments and a list of prescribable treatments, but actually it's a significant misunderstanding of the position around Orkambi.

I have said in correspondence to all Members and in public statements that I continue to express my frustration at the choice that Vertex have made—the manufacturers of Orkambi and Symkevi—to not engage with the appraisal process here in Wales. It's not simply a matter of money. Members here, but also those watching families who are directly affected, this is not simply about money; it is actually about the refusal to engage in a process to provide the clinical evidence of the effectiveness or otherwise of these medicines. Frankly, if they were making the medicines available for £1 a go, as opposed to £100,000 a treatment, we'd still need to know what is the effect of the medicine.

On the deal that they've struck in Scotland, having had their own Scottish appraisal process not grant access to Orkambi, they've then gone back and struck a different deal. That's in commercial confidence. I have not had sight of that, so I'm not in a position to copy the same deal or even to comment properly on the relative value provided to it.

I'd say again to Vertex to engage with the appraisal process here in Wales as they have indicated in the past they would do, to not place families in this invidious position, and to allow us to properly understand the effectiveness of the medication that they have available, and for us then to make a properly evidence-based choice. I don't want any family in Wales to be put in the position that the Member describes because of a refusal of a pharmaceutical company to engage in our well-respected and well-understood appraisal process.

Minister, I welcome the approach that's been taken by the Welsh Government to the prudent healthcare agenda. One of the principles of that agenda is, 'Only do what you can do and let others do things that you cannot do.' Of course, one of the ways that the NHS could be reformed would be to enable pharmacists across Wales to do more of what is currently being done in GP surgeries. Today is World Pharmacists Day, what do you have to say to those pharmacists across Wales who are looking for a new contract in order that they can deal specifically with this issue once and for all?

As I've indicated previously when discussing primary care more generally here, the reform process of contracts in primary care, including pharmacy, is an important part of our ability to meet our shared objectives. Actually, pharmacy contractors here in Wales who are community pharmacists are engaged in a regular and constructive conversation with the Government. I expect the next stage of the future pharmacy contract to allow us to invest more in the future of pharmacy and in a wider range of services, some of which, you never know, may form part of the questions that other Members will ask later on the order paper.

Questions now from the party spokespeople. Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Dai Lloyd.

Thank you, Llywydd. Minister, are you content with the quality of the information that you have about the NHS workforce?

I don't think the current workforce data that we have allows us to have the most robust means to plan for the future. That's part of what we're considering. In fact, I had a discussion on this very point earlier this week. 

Thank you for that. As you know, in the recent report of the health committee on community and district nursing services, we received evidence that predicted—and I quote: that despite recognising the key contribution of our community and district nurses in the provision of healthcare for the future, we don't know much about this invisible service, as it’s described. We don't have a detailed picture at a national level of the number or the skills mix within the nursing teams or the level of illness of the patients receiving care in their own homes. Now, naturally, this will have an impact on workforce planning efficiency.

That’s what the evidence tells us. In addition, we received direct evidence from community nurses being overworked, facing stress, overextending themselves to meet demand, whilst the heads of health boards predicted a far rosier picture of a service achieving its targets. We don't have full data either on the number of physiotherapists or occupational therapists in the community either. So, how can you plan to move more healthcare into the community in future when you don't know the number or the skills level of the healthcare staff working there at the moment?

Well, I wouldn't say it's a blank piece of paper and we don't know anything about the current workforce or indeed the current nature of demand. The Member will know that, in terms of our agenda for moving more care closer to home, it does involve continued investment in primary and community care. It involves the new models of care that are being trialled, both within the transformation fund and outside it as well. That's not just anecdotal evidence about particular parts of the country, it's actually a part of our system-wide reform. We've deliberately chosen to take a path where only those projects that have the ability to scale up will be supported through the transformation fund. So, of course, the evidence that we'll have from our cluster plans as well—where they'll have to plan at cluster level—will inform our medium-term planning process and health boards, in addition to the workforce strategy that is being developed by Health Education and Improvement Wales. So, you have a range of different sources of intelligence on what is currently happening, and what we need to do more of in the future.

But the Member will know, both from his time within this place, and the career that he regularly doesn't mention before he got elected, which he still carries on at various points as well, that this is never a static point in time. And our ability to reform as rapidly as we would like in this place often grinds up against reality. But I do think that the agenda we set out in 'A Healthier Wales' is one that we have commitment across the board for, and we'll continue to make investment choices to support that.

The same kind of pressures of work and gaps in rotas, stress and the terrible tiredness that emerges from overworking because of staff shortages also impact on doctors in our hospitals—exhaustion, huge responsibilities for life-and-death issues, no rest periods, an intensity of work without a break, the dangers of driving having finished and all-night shift, and the feeling of a lack of support and a lack of recognition of the huge commitment to their patients, and also the feeling that hospital administrators don’t take regard of this and are insensitive on occasion. So, what are you, Minister, doing to promote the well-being of our hospital doctors?

Well, we're taking a broad approach. On the one hand, when you look at the quadruple aim, staff are one of the four pillars within that quadruple aim. Specifically, when it comes to the medical side of the workforce, we have engaged already with the British Medical Association on the fatigue charter. I spoke with the BMA in the last few weeks—and that work is ongoing—to try to make sure we deal with some of the points that the Member raises about the incredible pressure and commitment that our medical workforce face. And it's only because of that commitment, not just our medical workforce, but the wider workforce, that the health service continues to provide the quality, breadth and compassion of care that is there. But we don't take that for granted. That's why we've had those discussions with the BMA, and we've have those discussions with other workforce representatives too, because I would not pretend that everything is rosy and everything is fine. Our challenge is how, with the additional demands we see coming in to our system, with all of the other issues outside the health service that both drive demand and affect our workforce, we do still do all that we can and should do to make sure that we are a good employer, and that we do properly take account of staff well-being at all levels.

Conservative spokesperson, Janet Finch-Saunders.

Diolch, Llywydd. Deputy Minister, you'll be aware, of course, that Care Inspectorate Wales have the key role for inspecting and taking action to improve the quality and safety of services for the well-being of the people of Wales. Now, according to the chief inspector's annual report 2018-19, 2,499 inspections were undertaken. That is 456 fewer than the year before. There were fewer services regulated also. Now, this decline in regulatory and inspection activity comes despite staff costs having increased by almost £150,000, and the percentage of that budget representing inspection and regulation activity having increased. So, how do you, Deputy Minister, justify the increase in staffing costs, whilst there has actually been a significant fall in the number of inspections, and what steps will you take to reverse the decline?

Well, obviously, the work that CIW does is absolutely crucial. It looks after the standards that are in our care homes in particular, and it's absolutely important that all the inspections they carry out are done to a sufficient depth, and are done in a very considered way. And I think what they are doing is doing very considered inspections, and I have every confidence in them.

Well, Deputy Minister, thank you for that response, but I have to tell you, here and now, that I do not share your confidence in them currently. According to strategic priority 2, in CIW's strategic plan 2017-20, the organisation is striving to be a great place to work. However, there are serious allegations of bullying and harassment within the organisation, and intense pressure on the inspectors themselves. In fact, I know of an inspector who raised concerns, triggering a so-called investigation. And this is how the senior manager responsible for the investigation responded:

'It has been concluded that, as your grievance focused on the breakdown in relationships between your line manager and senior manager, and as you took the decision to resign from your position as an adult inspector in CIW, that these professional relationships will no longer be present, as you are no longer an employee of CIW and Welsh Government'—

so, you can see the very close-knit comment there, about CIW and Welsh Government—

'therefore, it has been considered that it serves no useful purpose to continue this investigation.'

So, it is alarming that the investigation was abandoned just because the person concerned resigned from CIW. And, technically, being as they themselves—the senior manager—said 'CIW and Welsh Government', technically the buck stops somewhere with Welsh Government. So, I ask you, Deputy Minister, will you commit to undertake an independent investigation into staff treatment, the intense pressures that are burdening them, and also how they actually go about carrying out investigations when somebody has actually been a whistleblower, and brought to their attention concerns about the lack of correct procedure in the carrying out of inspections within a care home establishment?

I can reassure the Member that I have regular meetings with the head of CIW, when we discuss all aspects of CIW's work. Obviously, the job that staff in CIW carry out is a very pressurised job, because they are looking at how our most vulnerable adults are looked after. And they take any evidence of any poor care that they see very, very seriously. And I can assure the Member that, in situations where they've had to intervene—I absolutely accept that they are very stressful situations—they take the job extremely seriously, whistleblowing is taken very seriously, and I can assure you that there is a good relationship between the Welsh Government and CIW, but that they do act independently.

Thank you, again, Deputy Minister, but we also know too that there have been some documented articles on the Y Byd ar Bedwar programme about their concerns—CIW—and about their ability to actually carry out robust inspections that do protect our most vulnerable in those situations.

Now, finally, I have reason to believe, from a reliable source, that these internal difficulties are negatively impacting on social care service users too. For example, it has been alleged to me that even though concerns about providers appear on a radar within the organisation, and despite inspectors allegedly flagging this up to managers, some situations can allegedly go ignored for weeks. In fact, one concern raised about a particular establishment—it took six months for the organisation to take any action whatsoever—six months—where it was felt that vulnerable people were potentially put at risk.

Deputy Minister, the fact that such serious concerns about a regulatory body, designed to protect the most vulnerable, have been raised with me, brought to my door, in the way it has been, as an elected Member of this establishment, I would ask that you take these—[Interruption.] Well, it is a Parliament, you're right. So, as an elected Member of this Parliament, I am asking you, Deputy Minister: please, will you consider a review into the fundamental workings of CIW? Will you look to the issues I've raised about allegations of staff bullying, intense pressures? But, more importantly, will you look at CIW, with a view, independently, to look whether it is actually doing what it's intended to do—to protect our most vulnerable? Thank you.

I would ask the Member, if she has got any very serious concerns about any way that any vulnerable people are being treated, that she should write to me about those individual situations. And it's not possible to respond to 'a reliable source'—it's not possible to respond to those sorts of incidents. And if you have serious concerns, please would you write to me?

The Brexit Party spokesperson, Caroline Jones.

Diolch, Llywydd. Minister, our NHS buildings are in a bad state of repair, and some are falling down. There is a £0.25 billion backlog of works deemed to pose high or significant risk. Thirteen per cent of the estate is not safety compliant. Of the Welsh Ambulance Services NHS Trust buildings, only a little over a third of them are deemed to be functionally suitable. Minister, you have committed around £370 million in health capital projects this year—how much of that will be spent ensuring NHS buildings are safe for patients and staff?

The significant chunk of NHS capital, as the Member will know, has been spent on the creation and completion, which is on time and on budget, of the Grange university hospital. I have already published a range of other statements setting out, for example, our capital programme in primary care. And NHS organisations have discretionary capital to try and undertake their backlog maintenance. So, I recognise the challenges that do exist, but this is part of what health boards themselves need to address within their allocations.

Thank you for that answer, Minister. There is at least a £0.5 billion backlog in building maintenance. I say 'at least' because most local health boards cannot even afford to do the assessments necessary to determine the extent of maintenance issues—maintenance issues that are impacting upon patient care. BBC Wales heard from staff at the University Hospital of Wales who stated that there were infection risks because hospital waste had to be transported in patient lifts. Minister, what is your Government doing to assess the risks to patient safety due to poor maintenance, and what will you do in future years to eliminate the repair backlog, which has been growing year on year?

Well, the Member mentioned the £370 million figure available and, of that, £80 million is available for health boards and trusts to undertake exactly this sort of maintenance work. It's within their discretionary capital allocation. And it's part of the job of health boards and trusts to properly understand the estate they have and to understand the risks they have. It is, though, the case that, where there have been immediate issues, for example the immediate collapse of a roof in a facility in Wrexham within the last financial year, the Welsh Government provided additional assistance to make sure that alternate facilities were available while the health board planned to properly replace that facility that had a significant impact on endoscopy capacity on the site. So, the Government gets alongside health boards when we can and should do, but this is part of the job that they have to do in properly managing and running the estate of the national health service.

Yes. Recruitment and retention is a priority for the Welsh Government and the national health service. Health boards and trusts are leading on initiatives to improve retention, such as return to practice and improving staff well-being. The Welsh Government has also put in place a range of measures to increase the supply of healthcare professionals.

Thank you, Minister. Through written Assembly questions, I have unearthed an alarming fact about the number of nurses in Wales: 4,727 have left the Welsh NHS since 2016/17. And get this: in 2018/19, there were more leavers than joiners. We need more registered nurses to deliver care, and as the Royal College of Nursing in Wales has advised, this requires a focus on both recruitment and addressing retention. As it stands, however, increasing recruitment is not sustainable without improving retention rates. So, Minister, will you commit to investigating why there is such a high number of leavers in Wales, and will you develop an NHS workforce strategy that is focused on providing safe working conditions and more flexible working to actually help our hardworking nurses across Wales?

The Member may have picked up and forgotten, when reading out her supplementary question, that we talked about the NHS workforce strategy in response to two questions earlier on today. I recognise that, last year, the last year for which we have figures, there were 65 more leavers than joiners in terms of the nursing workforce; that is in contrast to a steady trend of increases in nursing numbers. Between 2009-18, nursing numbers have gone up by 3.8 per cent in total. The Member reflects figures of people who have left the service, but, of course, we are recruiting each year as well. The Member will also know that we have regularly rehearsed within this Chamber the work that we are doing on looking to recruit further nurses. The ‘Train. Work. Live.’ campaign has been successful. In fact, the Royal College of Nursing themselves have been complimentary about that particular campaign. It's also a matter of fact that, in the last five years, we've increased nurse training places by 68 per cent in Wales. So, we are doing all that we can and should do to increase the number of nurses coming into the profession, as with, indeed, the work that we are doing—the Member referred to some of it—on making sure we have more flexible patterns that reflect the reality of someone's work to try to make sure that we retain the nurses that we currently have as well. The big factor, of course, that will affect some of our ability to recruit nurses in the future is our continuing relationship with Europe, where we still recruit and have a number of European Union and wider economic area nurses within the NHS family.

Minister, I'm very pleased to hear the answer you've just given and the efforts the Welsh Government are putting into developing and training more nurses across the area. I speak to nurses—it's not just nurses, but other professionals across the health service—and I want to praise the work that they do, because many of them, if not all of them, go above and beyond their normal working conditions and actually put a lot of effort in, but it takes a toll on the nurses and other staff. They get to a point where they just can't take any more, and they have to, therefore, look to get out early.

You've talked about flexible working. I've raised this with my own health board on occasion. Will you look at opportunities, because some of the nurses who are leaving and going to agencies do it because they want to have greater control over the hours they work? They want to have the ability to have, actually, a better work-life balance with their families. Therefore, will you look at the flexibility of working contracts so that nurses can, actually, have that within the NHS, without having to go to an agency to have that work-life balance that makes the difference to them? It shows that they are cared for and they are well respected by the system, not just by the patients.

I recognise the points that the Member makes. This is something at different points in the training cycle of members of national health service staff, but also when they're at different points in their working life. That's why it's been important for me to retain the NHS bursary. We've seen the impact of removing the bursary in England, where, in particular, it's had a catastrophic impact on recruiting learning disability nurses, who are often more likely to be mature nurses.

There's also the point about that flexible working pattern that'll be important at various different points in someone's life, whether it's about caring responsibilities for adults or children, or, actually, just people wanting to be in a different stage of their life towards the end of their career as well, because we do rely on staff goodwill to provide the service

So, yes, that is part of what we are looking at, not just about the future and into the distance, but it's part of what health boards are already trying to address today. But it goes back to one of the points that I made to Dai Lloyd about our ability to make the system-wide reform that we think we could and should do, and how quickly we're able to do it, because this is a priority in the here and now, and not just in two or three years' time.

Yes. Cancer mortality is improving across Wales, including the north. The European age-standardised mortality rate for cancer in north Wales has fallen from 348.3 in every 100,000 in 2001 to 276 by 2017. That represents a 21 per cent fall over 17 years.

Those statistics are very welcome indeed, but, unfortunately, as the Minister will know, we're still well behind other countries in terms of our five-year survival rates. In fact, for bowel cancer, we're twenty-fifth out of 29 countries in Europe for that five-year survival rate. You will know that catching cancer early is critical to people's opportunities for survival. Cancer Research UK have indicated that you're three times more likely to survive your cancer if you're diagnosed at stage 1 or 2, rather than stage 3 or 4.

So, in order to drive that improvement in mortality, we clearly need to address some of the issues that we face in the diagnostic workforce. We know, for example, that there are shortages of radiographers, of consultants and of specialist endoscopy nurses in Wales. Can you tell us what specific action the Welsh Government is taking to address the shortage in the workforce in order that we can drive up this early diagnosis to improve those mortality rates and move us from the bottom of some of those European league tables right to the top? 

I think it's broadly the same question that John Griffiths asked earlier on, because we are, of course—. I referred to it earlier—the response to the committee's report on endoscopy. It notes the action that we are taking and need to take on widening the workforce. I've met a number of staff who are taking part in the work of the endoscopy board about the work that they want to do. Using your point here about prudent healthcare—do only what only you can do—means that doctors, who have almost been the exclusive workforce in this area in the past, should be less and less undertaking those procedures. There are more and more nurse endoscopists and others that we need to train.

Actually, within the leadership of the profession, there's a recognition that that's what we should have—we need to plan to do so. It's the same in terms of our imaging professionals as well. That's why the imaging academy is so important to us. So, there are specific steps that we are taking. We expect to see more of them in the workforce strategy when that comes out. You can also see us making investment choices to support that strategy not just in this year's budget, but in the future.  

I'd like to start by congratulating Jayne Bryant and, in particular, Mr Bryant for his excellent choice, and wish you all the best for the future.

There were between 42,000 and 58,500 problematic drug users in 2015-16. According to the national survey for Wales for the year later, there were 81,392 harmful drinkers. I should make clear that harmful drinkers are defined as men drinking over 50 units a week and women drinking over 35 units a week for women, but not all harmful drinkers are dependent.

Thank you, Minister, for all of that answer. [Laughter.]

I visited, along with my colleague John Griffiths, last week, the Kaleidoscope project and the Gwent drug and alcohol service in Newport. GDAS is a single integrated service providing substance misuse services in Gwent. Sadly, they've seen a big spike in referrals and an increase in older people with alcohol dependency. While every preventable death is one too many, according to the Office for National Statistics' latest figures, the number of deaths related to drug misuse in the Gwent local authority areas are among the lowest in Wales. GDAS treatment programmes are set up for recovery. They ensure that people are able to access substitute prescribing in a time frame that's appropriate to their presenting need. Would the Minister join me in praising the work that GDAS does and look at how we can share this work across other parts of Wales?

Yes, absolutely. I've visited Kaleidoscope myself during my time in ministerial office to see directly some of the work they do on a range of areas, including image-enhancing drugs and a range of different dependencies and challenges that people face. It's part of our approach in bringing together the third sector with statutory bodies in area planning boards to understand the local intelligence that needs to exist, and then to make investment choices accordingly. So, they're not made centrally by the Welsh Government, but we've actually increased the budget available to area planning boards to provide front-line services. So, yes, it is a good example of a model that works. It's a good example also of the continuing need coming into those services, and we need to continually review our capacity to further support front-line work as well, of course, as the demand and the reasons for that demand coming into our services.  

Minister, according to Public Health Wales, drug-related deaths in Wales are at their highest levels. They report that the number of people dying from drug poisoning has increased by 78 per cent in just the last 10 years. They also say that there has been a rise in the number of young people dying from substances such as cocaine. Given that seeking early support can prevent the escalation of the problem and dependency, Minister, what action will you take to tackle the problem of drug dependency in Wales in the light of these disturbing findings? 

Again, that's why we're investing more in our front-line services not just at the treatment end, but in programmes together with other partners—the police are obvious partners in this area—on actually trying to intervene at an early point. There's no easy answer, though, because, of course, many of the reasons why people become drug and alcohol dependent are outside the health service. So, the challenge isn't just one for the health service in that earlier intervention and prevention, and it's certainly not just an education challenge; it is the broader stresses and strains that people are under, and it's how we actually address some of those. That includes, for example, the new substances that are appearing on a regular basis on the streets. 

So, there's a wide programme of work. It's about working with partners on the prevention message, as well as having a more effective response when people do need treatment. In that respect, our substance misuse programmes do show that you are more likely to receive specialist treatment and support in Wales than in England. In fact, King's College London in July of this year estimated that you're 2.5 more times likely to receive that specialist health and support and also receive it more quickly.  

Yes. Since the sore throat test-and-treat pilot started with 58 pharmacies in November last year, there have been 3,655 consultations recorded. Antibiotics were prescribed in only 752 cases, or 21 per cent. I'm delighted that the sore throat treat-and-test pilot won the innovation and technology category at the 2019 Antibiotic Guardian awards this year. This demonstrates Wales is at the forefront of innovation and investment in community pharmacy.

Thank you, Minister, for your response, and, just like my colleague Vikki Howells mentioned during business yesterday, I too have visited some excellent community pharmacies within my constituency of Alun and Deeside, and there's been some great work there taking place in taking forward and rolling out the innovative sore throat test-and-treat service.

Now, when I met staff recently, they highlighted two specific issues that I wish and, I think, appropriately today, you could address for us, Minister, given the fact that it is World Pharmacists Day. Firstly, on the issue of training, there is a concern that although this roll-out is going to be a vital part in dealing with the winter pressures, community pharmacists won't actually be trained until the new year. Minister, what is the Government doing to get them trained quicker so that people can experience the full benefits of the test?

Finally, Minister, on the roll-out in general, I'm really proud that Betsi has the highest level of roll-out, which is a great story for the health board but also for the people in north Wales. The tests have led to, as you mentioned, an 80 per cent reduction in the use of antibiotics, and has had roughly a 95 per cent positive patient response, including one of my constituents, Molly, who actually came up to me in the street and mentioned the test and recommended the test to me. So, it is a great way forward for Wales, but what's important is that it benefits everyone in Wales. So, Minister, what is the Government doing to get more consistency and less variability in the roll-out between health boards right across Wales?

Thank you for the question and the points made. I was aware that your neighbour in the Chamber had raised a similar issue in business questions yesterday. I will provide a written statement, setting out some more of the detail on what we're doing on rolling out this service, but it's worth addressing your point about training as well. I've invested £4.5 million in the future training of pharmacists to ensure we have a sustainable workforce, and that will carry on for the next few years and will nearly double the number of pharmacy training places in Wales.

We've already invested, in the last few years of the pharmacy contract, sums of money in investing in the workforce that we have in the here and now. Because the plan for the roll-out of the sore throat see-and-treat test is that we expect 50 per cent of community pharmacies across Wales to be able to provide that through the winter. And it's not just a winter pressures initiative; it is actually a part of the standard range of services we expect to see provided in community pharmacy locations. These are convenient locations, well-founded within communities, with trusted professionals who have relationships with people, so you will see more investment in the future of community pharmacies. This is just but one example. I'll happily provide the written statement that the Trefnydd had committed me to, and I'll be able to provide the details I think you and your fellow Members will be looking for.

I'm genuinely pleased on those occasions when even opposition Members should commend an action of the Welsh Government, and I do think this is a good scheme. I notice in the August edition of 'Clinical Pharmacist' the scheme is evaluated and praised and it does bring genuine innovation and relief. For many years, we've been trying to get people with minor ailments to seek the advice of a pharmacist—lower back pain, insomnia. There are a whole range of things where your first point of contact is often a pharmacist. So, I do hope that we will be seeing that continue. But it is a very promising scheme, so I do commend it.

Well, thank you, and I should just reiterate—I know I've said in this Chamber on a number of occasions, both when I was a Deputy Minister and, indeed, in my current role now—this is built on the back of the investment in the Choose Pharmacy platform. That's now available in 98 per cent of pharmacies. It allows us to invest in different and additional services within the community pharmacy sector. So, I am optimistic about our ability not just to roll forward this particular example, but that, in the future, we'll see more of those services being provided by healthcare professionals within the community.

Thank you for the question. Any drug-related death is a tragedy, and we have increased our investment to tackle substance misuse. Mortality rates for misuse of drugs in Anglesey is 6.4 per 100,000, slightly below the Wales average at 7.2. Whilst there is a variation in those percentage points, this actually reflects an additional two drug-related deaths, or the misuse of drug deaths, on the island of Anglesey in the most recent figures.

I have become aware of what appears to be a concerning pattern of deaths on Anglesey in this latest period. I say that I’ve become aware of this, because, as far as I know, there’s no publicity on this. What I’ve had is people in our communities talking with me to share their concerns, and they see a pattern. I think I’m right to say that five deaths have occurred in the Llangefni area in a very short period of time recently. The concern, really, is that those who misuse drugs have been combining benzodiazepine with other substances with tragic consequences.

Now, having made enquiries to the coroner and police, it appears that data isn’t kept on that specific drug as a cause of death because it’s considered a contributory factor. May I ask the Government to look into these deaths to investigate into the possibility that there is a pattern here? May I ask what work is being undertaken to recognise how much of a problem taking a combination of drugs is? And can I appeal for additional support that is really required urgently in order to be able to offer help to those people who are misusing drugs, a number of them for a number of years, so that we can prevent more deaths?

I'd be grateful, so that I don't misunderstand the exact points that the Member is raising from local intelligence and concern, if he would write to me so that I can make sure that, whether it's the Government—or, indeed, asking the area planning board to look at this with their own local intelligence as well. The figures that I quoted earlier relate to the published figures of 2018, so it is possible that the Member is referring to misuse of drug deaths that have taken place after that. So, I'd be very grateful if he would write to me. I will look at that and I will then write back to him to explain how either we will look at it within the Government, or, indeed, how the information and intelligence is being shared and a response sought from the area planning board.

Since the Welsh Government published its 10-year substance misuse strategy in 2008 to tackle and reduce the harms associated with substance misuse in Wales, drug misuse deaths across Wales have risen from 569 to 858: in Anglesey, actually—up to the figures published in August by the Office for National Statistics—slightly better, down from 10 to eight, but, across north Wales, up from 81 to 98. And the ONS figures in August revealed that Wales had the second highest figures amongst the 10 areas—nine in England plus Wales—the second biggest increase in its rate over the last 10 years at 84 per cent, and the second highest age-standardised mortality rate for deaths related to drugs misuse by country and region. It is not a good picture.

Why is the Welsh Government still failing to address the recommendations made in a series of reports it commissioned during the second and third Assemblies on substance misuse treatment in Wales, particularly detox and rehab, to address the problems identified by Healthcare Inspectorate Wales and their review last July 2018—10 years after the strategy—that people found it difficult to get the treatment they needed from substitute prescribing and detox, rehab and counselling services because of long waiting times and a lack of capacity in services? The solutions were identified—why are we still waiting?

Actually, the data on waiting times shows that, in the last 10 years of the substance misuse strategy, we have seen a significant improvement in waiting times—91.5 per cent of people start treatment and are seen within 20 working days of referral, compared to 73 per cent 10 years ago. And our challenge is what our service is able to do, compared to the demand and the need coming into it and the broader challenges outside the health service that end up needing a health service response. So, I don't think it's as simple as Mark Isherwood paints the picture, that this is simply a case of the health service not doing its job. It is how we are able to deliver on seeing and treating people in a timely manner. It is also what we're able to do as a whole-society effort on the challenge of drug and alcohol misuse, and I do recognise that there are too many deaths from drug and alcohol misuse. It's part of why we have a recommitment to a future substance misuse strategy and it's also, for example, on the alcohol front, why we've committed to taking measures on the price of alcohol as a significant measure to reduce mortality as well.

Yes, and I'd like to thank the Member for his work within Government on taking forward the work across Government on a potential social care levy. I now chair the ministerial board, and, over the last six months, we've considered potential methods to raise and distribute potential additional funding. Our current focus is on the principles of priority areas for any funding, and I look forward to being in a position to write to the health and social care committee with outline proposals, which we will broadly consult upon.

That's really welcome news, Minister, and I'm glad that the work is progressing in a considered way, steadily, because we can't rush at this. But he'll understand that, with the social care Green Paper in the UK Westminster Government still disappearing over the horizon like some sort of mirage, it is vitally important that we do do the work here in Wales, because I suspect at some point we will need to create our own solutions. There has also, of course, been talk within Welsh Government about a national care service as well, which would provide a valued career path for people who work within care, similar to what there is within the health service as well, rather than, as so often has been remarked, an alternative to stacking shelves or whatever—I think that denigrates the workforce, actually, but we know what that phrase means. So, could he tell us how he will take this work forward as it progresses, as he sees some of the outcomes of the work streams going on, in a cross-party way? Because what we do know is that far too often before, at a UK level particularly, this has crashed and burned against short-term politics and electoral cycles. In order to take this forward in Wales, if it comes to that, we will have to have cross-party agreement here in this Senedd to do that.

Yes, I recognise the point the Member makes, and, in fact, ahead of looking to consult on some outline suggestions about how we might raise and then make use of funding—and, of course, the rate at which staff are paid is part of that—I'll want to be able to have a conversation with the Chairs of our subject committees here. My office will be in touch to try and arrange a conversation, and we'll also be offering a technical briefing for the health and social care committee to look at some of those models so that we're open about what we're talking about, and to do that in a way that really does give us an opportunity to take this forward in a way that doesn't descend into a partisan contest. Because, whatever we think of the current UK Government—and there are many views available—it's not likely that we're going to have a social care Green Paper any time in the near future, so we need to know what we can do in Wales with the powers that we have.

On this point, on a cross-party basis, backbenchers in Westminster have come together and agreed that they should raise additional money to put into the social care system. That was a unanimous view from two select committees that came together, including members of the Conservative Party, Labour and others as well, who all agreed that you needed to raise money. So, there's a willingness to look at a UK level for that, but I think in Wales we'll need to look at that before we get to that point. We can then take account, if progress is made at any point in the future, of UK funding streams and what that might mean. But, yes, I'm happy to indicate now, and I'll be following that up with conversations between my office and the committee, and, indeed, I hope that party spokespeople would be open to a conversation about that when we have those outline proposals, because nothing is determined and decided at this point.

Finally, Angela Burns.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. Minister, we already have people who are leaving Wales to live in other parts of the home nations in order to be able to access drugs that they cannot access here. So, given Jeremy Corbyn's giveaway speech at conference, when he talked about having social care free at the point of delivery, could you confirm whether or not that is one of the work streams that this cross-party group is currently working on? If so, are they also looking at the costings, really to prevent a mass exodus from Wales?

I don't think anything from yesterday should lead to a mass exodus from Wales, and I don't recognise what the Member said about a mass exodus from Wales on the basis of the availability of medication. We have a very good record on the availability of new and effective medication, as our successful new treatment fund demonstrates. But, on your point about social care, when we share outline consultation proposals, those will have an idea about the sort of funds that that would be required to deliver. So, we'll be open with each other about what different options might mean in terms of how we use funding, as well as how you could raise that funding as well. So, yes, if you want to have the maximalist approach to having the maximum available social care, then we will be able to set out what that would require, and we'll be looking to consult on a wide basis. I'll certainly be wanting to make use of the citizen panels that exist around each regional partnership board, together with the mix of parties that lead local authorities. They'll all have a stake in this and in fact the WLGA are part of the work that we're doing in the programme board. So, it's being genuinely taken forward on a cross-sector basis—and indeed a cross-party basis, I'm sure the Member will be delighted to hear.

Thank you, Minister.

Thank you, Minister. The next item is topical questions. I have selected one question to be asked to the Minister for Economy and Transport, and the question is from Bethan Sayed.

Llywydd, can I say that the collapse of Thomas Cook is extremely disappointing? My thoughts are of course with all of those affected by the announcement. I issued a written statement yesterday outlining the range of actions I've initiated and my officials are of course maintaining very close contact with Cardiff Airport, UK Government and various other agencies.

Thank you very much for that written statement. To start on a positive, I'd like to ask you if you'd join with me in praising Elaine Kerslake from Gilfach Goch, who arranged a whip-round on a flight that she was coming back from on Thomas Cook because she realised that the staff were not being paid. Therefore, would you want to praise her for doing that? But also would you join with me, therefore, in asking those managers and CEOs of Thomas Cook, who reportedly earned £35 million in 12 years in bonuses despite the financial problems that they had—would you ask for them to pay back—join with me in asking for them to pay back those bonuses in the face of this particular sensitive situation, where we're finding that Thomas Cook staff are not being paid when those CEOs have benefited from the downfall of that particular company?

My other question to you would be—in my area at least, there are many Thomas Cook shops and staff will be adversely affected. I know that you mention in your written statement how you will be supporting staff, which I'm thankful for, but could you expand on that, and also how you would potentially be supporting the infrastructure around those shops on our high streets that will need to be facilitated in the future—can they be taken over by other travel agents or other such companies that may aid the high street in that regard—and also tell us a bit more about how staff in general in Wales will be supported?

Now, we all know that travellers have been affected, and many of them have come to me, but one case in particular did make me feel concerned—a constituent of mine couldn't get home on the Cardiff flight that was allocated to them because of disabilities that they had and therefore had to pay for their own flight. Can you assure us that you're looking into these types of situations so that travellers are able to travel back in the comfort that they need and with the support that they need if they do have those disabilities? We can't forget those people who are vulnerable when they are seeking to travel home. But I would like to share—with everybody else, I'm sure, in this Chamber—how sad we are that this has happened and how we can potentially as a nation support those staff and those affected.

Can I thank Bethan Jenkins for her questions and the concerns that she's expressed, not just for those affected who've been travelling with Thomas Cook, but also for employees at the company? I'd like to put on record my thanks to the kind woman from Gilfach who helped to raise money for people who are facing unemployment. I thought that was a selfless act, and the response from other passengers on board, I think, was quite incredible.

Can I also put on record my thanks to the Civil Aviation Authority and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office? When Operation Matterhorn commenced, a Herculean effort began to bring 150,000 people back to the United Kingdom and UK Government Ministers and I were clear that this would not be an easy task, but the way in particular that the Civil Aviation Authority have conducted themselves and have managed this situation is incredible, and I'm sure that many people who have been brought home as a result of their efforts will join me in thanking them—likewise the FCO, who are on the ground in so many countries doing an incredible job in providing support to British citizens.

I'm going to take up a unique case that Bethan Jenkins has identified, but one that does concern me, and that is the decision by a passenger with a disability to pay for their own flight home. Something that the Secretary of State for Transport and I were concerned to check on before Operation Matterhorn commenced was that there would be provision available for people who are disabled, and that would be prioritised: not just provision to get to a plane—an alternative service and onto that plane—but also onward transport when they returned home. We were given assurance that transport for disabled people would be provided as a priority. If the Member can provide me with information about the particular constituent, I will, of course, take up that matter with UK Government and with the Civil Aviation Authority.

I’m afraid to say that a significant number of people will be affected by the demise of Thomas Cook. We estimate that 179.5 full-time equivalents will be affected in Wales alone through the shops closing, and an additional 45 members of staff at Cardiff Airport. The Working Wales programme will be available to them as part of that. ReAct, a tried-and-tested intervention, will be available to them. We have regional response teams across Wales ready to assist anybody who is affected by the collapse of Thomas Cook, and I would urge any Members who are approached by businesses that are affected as well by the collapse of the company to direct them to the Business Wales hotline for assistance.

I think Bethan Jenkins makes a very important point that in many of our communities—and I was looking through the list of where some of the Thomas Cooks are located—many of them will be severely impacted by the closure of those shops. In many of the high streets that I can identify before me, there are very few such services, and to have another shop close in some of those places will, of course, be pretty devastating, which is why I and the Deputy Minister for Housing and Local Government are keen to progress a 'town centre first' initiative that would see the public sector, and indeed the private sector, prioritise investment within town centres to stimulate a greater degree the economic resilience within them. This won’t be an easy task, but it is one that we must embark on.

And just one final point as well, and that regards the action of the CEOs. I’m pleased to note that the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy has initiated an inquiry into corporate actions, and I think it would only be right and proper to await the outcome of that before commenting on it.

Can I also align my views to the other Members who have spoken in regard to the sympathy for those staff who are affected and, of course, the many other people that have been affected and are still being affected as well? I am pleased, Minister, in regard to the hotline that’s been set up that you referred to in regard to Working Wales—I think that’s the right approach. I wonder what support that you consider the Welsh Government may need to provide to Cardiff Airport. There is a challenge here in that the airport has lost a major airline that carries 100,000 passengers every year. So, I was somewhat surprised, but maybe you can elaborate on this, to read in your statement yesterday that you think that there will be a limited impact on the airport. It may be very difficult for the airport to find a new airline partner to replace Thomas Cook in advance of next year’s busy summer season, and of course you'll be aware that the airport has lost £23 million since 2014. So, do you feel that Cardiff Airport needs some support and could you outline what support you think it may need? And also, what initial analysis have you done in regard to the impact of Thomas Cook’s collapse on the financial stability of Cardiff Airport?

Can I thank Russell George for his questions and for joining other Members in this Chamber in thanking organisations and bodies such as the CAA for their work and efforts in recent days? I’m going to focus specifically on the issue of Cardiff international airport, which was the primary focus of Russell George’s questions.

In terms of the financial sustainability of the airport post collapse of Thomas Cook, it is indeed true that it will not have a major impact on the airport, and that is because, as part of the due diligence of the application process for the loan that we provided to Cardiff international airport, we modelled a number of scenarios. One of those scenarios included the impact that the collapse of an airline would have on the airport. The model that we took was a larger airline, and, therefore, the viability of the airport is very much intact, in spite of the collapse of Thomas Cook.

However, I think the Member raises an important point concerning the long-term ownership and sustainability of the airport, and that is something that I'll be bringing back to this Chamber in the autumn. It's quite incredible; we tend to think in the UK that airports as a default should be privately owned, but this is not the case globally. I think in total there are around 4,300 airports that have service scheduled flights, but only 14 per cent of those are not in public ownership. Even airports like JFK are owned by the public. So, it's actually the model globally for airports to be owned by the public, and that should be the same for Cardiff Airport, in my view. The airport is speaking on a very regular basis with alternative airlines, other airlines that it's trying to attract into the facility, and I am very confident, based on the very recent discussions that have taken place, that new airlines will be attracted and will be providing new routes from and to Cardiff Airport.

But if I could just say, there are two major challenges that airlines are facing right now, airlines that operate from a UK base. One concerns the spending power of UK citizens, which has reduced overseas because of the fall in the value of the pound, and therefore the difficulty in attracting UK citizens to go abroad. And then the second challenge that is facing us as a consequence of uncertainties around Brexit is the fall in the pound and the fact that fuel is priced in dollars, and therefore the cost of operating airlines that are based in the UK has risen. Therefore, the sector itself is clearly in a very fragile and precarious position. 

May I also add my sympathies to the staff, as outlined by Bethan and by Russell—those staff working in the shops in Wales, but also to the staff in the whole operation of the airline? Would the First Minister not agree with me that, even if it were desirable to bail out Thomas Cook—and given the apparent appalling management structure, it probably wouldn't be—the UK Government could well fall foul of the European state aid rules if they were to try to bail out the company? And there is one point with regard to the return of passengers from abroad. Apparently, once a company or an airline goes into liquidation, all the aircraft owned by that company are grounded. It's apparent that, back when Monarch collapsed, the UK Government said that they would change the rules. So, could the Welsh Government consider making representations to the UK Government to have the rules changed with regard to it, so those aircraft could be freed up to bring passengers home at times like this?

Absolutely. I'll consider doing that without a shadow of a doubt. I must say that the ability of the Civil Aviation Authority, though, to have identified 45 aircraft to bring passengers back was astonishing. It's a real credit to them that they were able to do that in such a small window of opportunity. I think it's a matter for UK Government to consider whether or not it should have bailed out Thomas Cook. I'm not privy, and I doubt I will ever be privy, to the due diligence it's undertaken. Therefore, I accept the word of Ministers within the UK Government when they say that it wouldn't have been a sustainable and affordable option. I know that people have raised the question of whether it should have been brought into public ownership. That's probably a matter for Members in the House of Commons to raise. But, as I say, I have not been in receipt of any intelligence that has been provided through the due diligence process.

Thank you, Minister. 

The next item is the 90-second statement. Angela Burns.

Today is World Pharmacists Day, a time to recognise the contribution that pharmacists and their teams make to world heath. Co-ordinated by the international pharmaceutical federation, World Pharmacists Day brings to the fore the varied work pharmacists undertake in various countries. For example, in Africa, pharmacists provide health education seminars and manage clinics for chronic diseases such as mental health disorders, HIV, diabetes and hypertension.

Specifically for us in Wales, pharmacists play a key role in the provision of NHS services, ranging from flu jabs and health checks to advice on all manner of illnesses and minor injuries, such as the innovative sore throat test and treat. And I know, as a mother, I was constantly, when my children were young, in the pharmacy asking for help. Wonderful people. 

So, with the emphasis on encouraging people to choose well and to seek help from the appropriate service level depending on their need, this year's World Pharmacists Day theme of safe and effective medicines for all promotes the crucial role that pharmacists play in safeguarding patient safety by improving the use of medicines and reducing medication errors. 

The discharge medicines review service in Wales is a great example of where medicine errors are being minimised through the use of data, but there's more to do and best practice to be disseminated. So, Members, I would ask that you all recognise the role that pharmacists play in delivering safe and effective healthcare, and to pharmacists throughout Wales, I say, probably on behalf of all of us, a very heartfelt 'thank you'. 
 
 

The next item, item 5, is the debate on the Equality, Local Government and communities Committee report on voting rights for prisoners. I call on the Chair of the committee to move the motion—John Griffiths.

Diolch yn fawr. I'm pleased to open today's debate on the Equality, Local Government and Communities Committee's report on voting rights for prisoners.

I would like to start by thanking all those who contributed to our inquiry, either by giving written or oral evidence; the members of the public who contributed to our online discussion forum, and the respectful manner in which differences of opinion were discussed and debated, especially as these are matters of some controversy; and the prison staff and prisoners we spoke to during our visits to Her Majesty's Prison Parc and to Her Majesty's Prison Eastwood Park. Both gave us a real insight into the practicalities of introducing any change, but also enabled us to explore the broader points of principle with those most affected by any change, prisoners themselves. They were interesting and informative discussions. 

Having taken evidence, and after very careful consideration and weighing up of the ethical, practical and legal arguments, the majority of the committee recommended giving more prisoners the vote. As I said earlier, this is, of course, a controversial issue, and we were very conscious of the impact any change might have on victims of crime and explored this with all our witnesses. 

Part of the background to these matters is the ruling that the UK Government was in breach of the European convention on human rights by having a blanket ban on prisoner voting. Limited changes were then introduced, allowing prisoners on remand and on temporary licence, for example, to vote. The European Court of Human Rights has been clear that the right to vote is not a privilege. It has said that the presumption should be for including as many people as possible in democracy. Prisoners retain other rights when they enter prison. They may lose their liberty, but they do not lose their basic rights. I believe voting is such a right. 

One of the most compelling arguments we heard was that prisoners remain citizens of society. This was something that came across very strongly during our discussions at the prisons. We heard that many strive to stay an active part of their families' lives, despite the physical barriers. Llywydd, I would say that criminal justice policy in the UK results in overcrowded prisons, a lack of rehabilitation and high reoffending rates and that more effective reintegration into society means less crime and fewer victims of crime. It benefits our communities in general as well as ex-offenders and their families. Voting may be a small but significant signal towards a more enlightened and productive approach.

Removing the right to vote is also part of a process that treats prisoners as outsiders: they are not like the rest of us and should be treated differently. This is not good for them and not good for wider society. It hinders the process of reform and does not help with reducing reoffending or social cohesion. Many stakeholders told us they believe enfranchisement would help. Lady Hale, now President of the UK Supreme Court, as we've heard quite a lot about recently, said that retaining the vote would encourage civic responsibility and reintegration. It is also an important symbol. While there is not extensive empirical evidence to support this view, we were persuaded by the stakeholders who said that greater inclusion when in prison would help rehabilitation upon release. There are also a number of other arguments that informed our final views, such as international precedent, and the disproportionate effect the ban has on certain groups of people.

Llywydd, we then needed to consider what the franchise would look like. We ruled out basing it on the type of offence or release date, and settled on sentence length. I, along with some of the members of the committee, supported full enfranchisement. However, after careful discussion, we decided to recommend including prisoners serving sentences of less than four years. We felt that this was a suitable compromise that balanced the need for a simple electoral franchise; is easy to understand, which was a very strong theme throughout our evidence; is mindful of acknowledging the view of public opinion, which is against all prisoners having the right to vote; and ensures compliance with the European court judgment. It also recognises the significance the criminal justice system accords to four-year sentences, which are subject to less favourable terms for early release.

Llywydd, I'm very pleased that the Welsh Government has accepted our key recommendation and will be seeking to legislate to make changes for both Assembly and local government elections. I believe this shows real political leadership, and indicates that Wales remains at the forefront of respecting human rights. I would, however, like to seek some further clarity. The Llywydd and the Minister confirmed in correspondence that changes to the Assembly franchise will be taken forward by the Welsh Government. In her letter, the Minister said she would be seeking an appropriate legislative vehicle. But while she committed to changing the franchise for local government in this Assembly term, there is not the same commitment for the Assembly. So, Minister, I would be grateful if you could provide some clarity on your thinking on this, and whether the change will be in place for the next Assembly elections in 2021. The current provisions in the Government of Wales Act 2006 clearly link the Assembly and local government electoral franchises. If, Minister, you are not making the changes to both at the same time, can you outline if you are seeking to decouple them on a temporary basis? It is worth noting the evidence we received from the Electoral Commission that they should be consistent.

While I have focused then on the broader issues of whether prisoners should have the vote, our report also looked at the practicalities around method of voting, information and campaigning. I would ask the Minister to give an update on how discussions with the UK Government on the issues raised by the committee in recommendations 5, 6 and 10 are progressing. These specifically relate to designating an election co-ordinator within the prison staff, ensuring that all eligible prisoners are registered to vote and are supported to take part in relevant elections, and providing access to Welsh media for those prisons with a sizeable Welsh population.

Llywydd, I now look forward to hearing other Members' views on these important matters. I'm sure it will be an interesting debate because this has been a very interesting piece of work for the committee, and, I'm sure, for Assembly Members in general.

Prison is the sharp end of our justice system, and an important and integral part of the criminal justice system in every country. Depriving someone of their liberty for a period of time is one of the most significant powers available to the state. Prison plays a crucial role in upholding the rule of law, by helping to ensure that alleged offenders are brought to justice, and by providing a sanction for serious wrongdoing. Its core purpose is threefold: protection of the public; punishment, depriving offenders of freedoms enjoyed by the rest of society and acting as a deterrent; and rehabilitation, providing offenders with the opportunity to reflect on and take responsibility for their crimes, and prepare them for a law-abiding life when they're released.

As we heard in Parc prison, few prisoners would either use a right to vote or see it as an incentive to rehabilitate. The committee admits in the report that the empirical evidence to support the theory that voting aids rehabilitation is 'limited'. The report also notes that when Cardiff prison took steps to encourage prisoners on remand to register to vote at the last election, not one took up the opportunity. Our focus should instead be on giving offenders opportunities to build positive lives. Rights go with responsibilities, and not voting is just one of the facts of life arising from being in prison, reflecting a decision by the community that the person concerned is not suitable to participate in the decision-making process of a community.

Following the European Court judgment referred to, some 17 per cent of prisoners are already eligible to vote. Prisoners in the community, on a temporary licence, can now vote, and both unconvicted prisoners being held on remand and civil prisoners jailed for offences such as contempt of court also already have the right to vote, although very few do. The UK Government has also said that it should be made more clear to people given prison sentences that they will not have the right to vote while in prison.

This report quotes a Welsh Government consultation, in which 50 per cent agreed that prisoners should be allowed to register to vote, and an Assembly Commission consultation, in which 49 per cent agreed that prisoners should be able to vote in Assembly elections if they were due for release during the period for which Members were being elected to serve. However, both these consultation responses were self-selective, rather than weighted representative samples. In contrast, only 9 per cent of people in Wales said that all prisoners should be allowed to vote in a 2017 YouGov survey.

It is not having boundaries that contributes to offending, but a lack of them. It is concerning that some committee members believed in the principle of votes for all prisoners. But despite that, the committee, as we've heard, only recommended that the Welsh Government and National Assembly legislate to give Welsh prisoners serving custodial sentences of less than four years the right to vote in devolved elections. For the reasons already outlined, Mohammad Asghar and I could not agree with that recommendation.

Responding to this report, the Welsh Government stated that it will work to introduce legislation in this Assembly to enable prisoners from Wales serving a custodial sentence of less than four years to vote in devolved local government elections. Responding on behalf of the Assembly Commission, the Llywydd stated that it does not consider that amendments should be introduced to the Senedd and Elections (Wales) Bill to address this issue. In a letter to the committee Chair last week, the Welsh Government added that it is committed to the principle of prisoner voting in all local elections, and it will seek an appropriate legislative vehicle at the earliest opportunity to enable prisoners from Wales to vote in Assembly elections on the same terms as will apply for local government elections.

To be clear, according to the Law Pages, giving the vote to prisoners serving a custodial sentence of less than four years will include those convicted of having a blade or sharp point in a public place, racially aggravated common assault, racially aggravated criminal damage, procurement of a woman by threats, attempted incest by a man with a girl over 13, abduction of an unmarried girl, causing prostitution of women, soliciting by men, ill-treatment of patients, assault with intent to resist arrest, and procuring others to commit homosexual acts, and many more. It is this that Labour and Plaid Cymru are supporting, further evidencing, dare I say, the growing gap between the expressed will of the people of Wales and their elected so-called representatives here.

I'm pleased that we're having this debate, and I'm just really disappointed at the Conservatives' contribution, not just today, but in the inquiry as well. I must admit that when our committee embarked on this inquiry I was sceptical. As a former probation officer, who keeps a keen interest in the justice system even though it isn't devolved, I thought it would be odd for us, as a committee, to rock up to various prisons to talk to prisoners about something that was in our interest. We're well aware of the range of problems that prisoners face, from homelessness to drug and alcohol problems, mental health, family breakdown, abuse, domestic violence, yet we were not going to the prisons to talk to people about those issues, we were asking prisoners and staff instead about their views on voting, presumably for us. I have to say that I felt a bit uncomfortable about it all. But how wrong could I be?

It soon became clear, on our visits, to HMP Parc and HMP Eastwood Park that some of these prisoners could see a way through our inquiry of putting their concerns on the agenda by having the vote. At present, who is listening to them? Do they have a voice at all? No, they don't. Prisoners have been forgotten and marginalised by policy makers, politicians and wider society, and here we have an opportunity to do something to change that.

There are disagreements as to the purpose of prison. Is prison solely about punishment? Should we make life in prison so awful for people that they would see it as a deterrent and be absolutely determined never to go back? If that's how we see it, then conditions and rights don't matter. Yet people then end up wondering why people who go through the prison system come out more damaged and more criminally inclined. Prison without a rehabilitation element is little more than a crime factory.

My view is that prison should not only be a punishment, but it should also be a tool to protect the public and to try and rehabilitate the person so that they don't commit further offences on release. A rehabilitative approach results in lower crime and a safer society, as any honest comparison between Scandinavian countries and the UK would reveal. We should be aiming to reduce the prison population by rehabilitating more people and treating people like the citizens that they are and that we want them to be. It is for these reasons that I support extending the franchise to prisoners and I endorse the recommendations of this committee report.

Being given the opportunity to vote is a reminder to prisoners that they are still a citizen despite being punished for a crime. It's a reminder that they are going to be released one day and that there are expectations on them as a citizen. Being allowed to put that cross in that box can help to reintegrate and include prisoners in wider society.

For me, although I was initially sceptical as to the usefulness of this inquiry to the prison population, I became more and more convinced that it was the right thing to do. It is nothing short of a scandal that if you are a woman sentenced to prison that you have to be incarcerated in another country with no access to your family, to the Welsh news, to your rehabilitation network and that alone should be a good enough reason to devolve the criminal justice system, so that we can do something just about that.

Voting is not a privilege and it shouldn't be seen as such. Voting is something that we should want all of our citizens to be doing. For me, this is a question where Wales could signal that we could things differently, more humanely with more compassion. This report gives the Government such an opportunity and I very much hope it takes it up.

I'm delighted to speak in support of the recommendations that came out of this committee, and to welcome as well the way in which John stewarded this committee. We heard an immense amount of evidence—those people who came in front of us, the visits that we made as well, where we spoke with prison governors, prison staff, front-line staff and also with people who are incarcerated themselves. I want to thank all those people who gave evidence, but particularly the way in which Members dealt with hearing that evidence as well. There were differences of opinion on this committee—they've come out in the report in terms of the main recommendation that we've come to—but we have done it in, I think, a temperate way. We've recognised those differences. I would simply say to Mark: I'm not a so-called representative. I am a representative in this institution, as everybody else is. Don't denigrate the role of myself or others by calling me a so-called representative.

However, if I can turn to the substance there, the report is balanced, because it does actually look at the arguments for and against as well. It makes clear that, as the European Convention on Human Rights has said, voting rights are not absolute rights—universal rights. That is exactly why this committee was looking at it. To what extent do we reflect public opinion? To what extent do we want to show leadership as well? But there is clearly, also, by international evidence, but also the pressure that's been put on the UK Government over successive years and years, a mood that we should actually look at this and see how much further we could go, very much because of the arguments that Leanne and the report put, which are that, whilst it might not be a universal, absolute right, we should be looking to individuals who are in prison not as—. Some will be lifelong prisoners, and some, including women we met, who said, 'Well, I've got children outside of this prison. I'm in here for a very short time. My children are in school. My children will be receiving care while I'm away from here. I have no say whatsoever in—'. Yet, still, those people who are in prison—all of them—will pay tax on earnings, tax on savings et cetera whilst they're in. So, it's a curious anomaly.

The report is balanced. It recognises—Mark, you're absolutely right—that the public does not support voting rights for prisoners. It does also reflect that the public mood is changing, and has changed on this as well. Sometimes, there's a need for us, as elected representatives, to actually signal a course—a direction of travel. I won't embarrass the Minister, but when she came in front of us in committee, I said, 'Minister, what is your mood toward all of this?', because I was slightly sceptical. I thought the Government might park this and kick this into the long grass: 'What an interesting committee report this is. We'll come back to this in five years or 10 years' time.' And I said to her, 'Do you see yourself, possibly, being the Roy Jenkins here of the Welsh Government Ministers on this issue?'—not that you should go above and beyond, and not that you should try and be cavalier in the way—. But look at the evidence and decide what is the right, progressive policy that balances those interests of people like the victims' commissioner, who came in front of us and spoke quite passionately about her concerns about the victims' side, but also very much that issue of rehabilitation—the fact that these people remain citizens, because they are paying tax, they have children outside in schools et cetera. So, I think it's quite balanced.

Now, the compromise we came to is a compromise. There were different views on the committee. There were those of us who supported, for simplicity but also on basic principles, the actual universal extension of that suffrage within there. Many of the witnesses who appeared in front of us actually supported that as well, for the very same reasons. But we recognised that, on the committee, because there were such differences of opinion, we should look at something that was practical, that was simple, that was deliverable and that wasn't overcomplex. We looked at many different possibilities within that, and the one we've settled on, of sentences of four years or less, gives that, I think, simplicity and clarity, and it gives that clear message that Wales, even if the UK Government won't move, could actually move forward and show a clear signal that we believe in the principles of rehabilitation—in the principles that these people, many of whom will be passing through prison, will be back living with us, alongside us and reintegrated in society, and bringing their children up and working in careers and so on and so forth. I think that's an important principle.

So, I welcome this and I welcome the response of the Government as well. My only query would be to echo what the Chair has said: what are we talking here about timescales of taking this forward? I think there is an opportunity here for the Welsh Government to show some leadership on this and, perhaps, who knows, the UK Government will follow suit in due course.

I thank the Equality, Local Government and Communities Committee for their report on voting rights for prisoners. I was not a member of the committee during their inquiry, but had I been, I would have joined Mark Isherwood and Mohammad Asghar in opposing the recommendations. It must be noted that prisoners on remand do have the right to vote, and I do not agree with the premise that prisoners should be allowed to vote.

The right to vote, a right that people died to secure and a right that people have died to protect, is linked to our citizenship. Citizens of good standing, those who abide by the rules and laws of our society, gain the right to decide who makes the laws.

Caroline, I wonder if you'd give way just on that point.

Go on, Huw. 

It's simply to make the point: would you recognise that there is a significant proportion of the prison population that are actually ex-servicepeople? They're veterans who actually served our country on the front line, and they have got into the situation where they are in prison for a time. For us to write them off when we want them to be back and reintegrated into society is an unusual message.

Nobody has written anyone off, Huw, but what I am saying is that when people are rehabilitated, then they have the right to come back in and have that vote.

It’s been a long-established practice in our country that those who break the laws of our nation lose the right to have any say in the making of those laws, and we should not abandon that practice. By breaking our laws, prisoners have demonstrated their disregard for our society and its citizens, along with the victims of their crimes, and in every crime there is a victim. They should not have a say in how our country is run. I wholeheartedly reject any move to give prisoners the vote.

I also question the decision to set the cut-off at sentences of four years or less. This practically means that all prisoners serving time in Welsh prisons will be entitled to vote, as Wales does not have any category A prisons. Even Scotland has not gone this far—they set the cut-off date at 12 months. So, I do not support the committee’s recommendations and, in what must be a first for me, I am calling on the Welsh Government to consider the implications and reject those recommendations, because not only does this go against the wishes of the wider public, those pushing for this change accept it is broadly unacceptable to ordinary voters. So, once again, politicians are stating that they know what is best, and disregard public opinion. We are put here to serve our constituents, and we simply can’t simply ignore their wishes, whatever our own personal opinions may be. So, if Welsh Government press ahead with this policy, they will be—

Will you take an intervention?

Not another one, sorry.

They will be demonstrating how out of touch they really are with public opinion. By giving the vote to those who reject our society’s rules, you are in danger of disillusioning ordinary voters—voters who won’t turn out at future elections because they refuse to vote for an out-of-touch political elite. And for what? A handful of votes from people convicted of a criminal offence. Having worked in the prison service, I can tell you that the turnout, in somewhere like HMP Parc, will be nowhere near the 33 per cent who voted at the last Assembly election.

And for the reasons I have stated, I urge Members to reject these proposals.

This report by the Equality, Local Government and Communities Committee, of which I was previously a member, makes 11 recommendations. The main recommendation is that Welsh prisoners who are serving custodial sentences of less than four years should have the right to vote in devolved Welsh elections. My colleague Mark Isherwood and I disagreed with this recommendation. I do so again today.

I object to this proposal in principle, and for practical reasons also. We as a society produce a framework of laws setting out standards of responsibility and commitment that we expect our citizens to maintain. People who have committed crimes against their fellow citizens do not meet those standards. So, if these people are not willing to follow the law, why should they have a role in making the law for everyone else?

The First Minister himself said in this Chamber yesterday, Presiding Officer, and the quote is:

'people who decide to be law makers give up the right to be law breakers.'

I believe the opposite is also true. There has been much talk of prisoners' civil liberty, but imprisonment, by definition, involves the suspension of the right to liberty. Civil liberties in a democracy combine the right to vote with the right to stand for election, freedom for association, assembly and movement. Offenders serving prison sentences are deprived of these civil liberties as a consequence of their actions. I strongly believe in the rehabilitation of offenders. The restoration of the right to vote demonstrates that an individual has paid their debt to society. It should be seen as an incentive to integrate offenders back into civic society. So, in principle, I object this proposal.

But there are also practical arguments against. The fact is, these proposals create a bureaucratic nightmare for staff employed in our already hard-pressed prison services. This report proposes that all prisons, wherever they are, have Welsh prisoners appointed an election co-ordinator within the prison staff. This represents an additional burden on prison staff. Wales does not have any women prisons, so Welsh women—

Will you take an intervention?

Yes, go on.

Given that the Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, was found guilty of breaking the law this week, do you think he should now not have the right to vote?

Listen—[Interruption.] Look, the thing is—

Should we lock him up? Lock him up, maybe?

Look, he did not harm the country. You're the one harming the country.

He's already harmed the country.

You are not listening to—. Presiding Officer, I had opinions in my own office in Newport: in a month, while I was a member of this committee, more than a 100 constituents—I asked them, and not a single one said, 'Yes, I would like to have the right to vote for the prisoner.' That is in South Wales East. Please do it in your constituencies and come back and report. [Interruption.] No, you've had enough, thanks.

Most people receive their news from the television in prison. This automatically puts Welsh prisoners in England at a disadvantage because there are no women prisons here in Wales—this was mentioned earlier. One of the strengths of our democracy is that electors have a chance to meet the candidate standing for election. It is totally impractical for candidates to travel to prison to meet potential voters in this case. Even this report recognises that the idea of holding practical hustings in prison is a non-starter because it poses significant security risk.

Presiding Officer, there is no support from the public or prisoners to have the right to vote. In 2017 a YouGov poll found that 60 per cent of people who responded did not support prisoner voting—that is YouGov.

Will you take an intervention?

Yes, go on. Go on.

Public opinion polls show time and time again that the general public is in favour of bringing back hanging. Do you therefore think we should bring back hanging in order to comply with public opinion?

But this is totally irrelevant to the prisoner—

It's not irrelevant, you're talking about public opinion.

Listen, I thought you're very intelligent lady, we are talking about—

Are you calling me stupid?

We are talking about voting not hanging.

Are you calling me stupid?

We are not—. I never said—. I thought you're very intelligent, but we are talking—

I think you need to be careful.

We are talking here—. No, I never said the word 'stupid' here. It is an indication of how out of touch this Welsh Labour Government is with public opinion. The Welsh Labour Government regards, as a priority, giving votes to villains, the franchise to felons, and ballots to burglars. Let Welsh Labour and Plaid seek the support of the Norman Stanley Fletchers of this world, if they wish. The Welsh Conservatives will always stand for the right of victims of crime and not for the right of the criminals. I urge this Assembly to reject this report. Thank you.

Wednesday afternoons don't get any better, do they? Do you know, I welcome the report from the committee. I also welcome the Government's response to that report, and I was very pleased to read the words of the Minister in her response.

I was very pleased when I made an oral statement on this matter in January of last year. All of us who have the privilege of serving the Government of our country will learn different things as a consequence of exercising our duties as part of that privilege, and, for me, understanding and coming into contact for the first time, really, with the criminal justice system, it left me with a very clear sense of a system that is broken and that is not serving the needs of this country, whether it be the victims or those who are held in custody in this country or elsewhere.

I became very convinced very quickly that we brutalise people in this system, that we brutalise our communities, and we do not either promote or deliver rehabilitation in any way at all. There is nobody here, in this place, despite some of the nonsense we've heard from some sides of this Chamber, who could take any pride at all in what happens—[Interruption.] I know my constituents, Oscar, they elect me; they don't know who you are. Let me tell you this—[Interruption.] Let me tell you this—[Interruption.] Let me you tell this: you should hang your head in shame, and so should all people on all sides of this Chamber who allow this situation to continue in our prisons.

I believe that it is right and proper that we extend the right to vote in certain elections to prisoners in this particular category. I think it is right and proper that we base a criminal justice system on our values and on our principles—our principles of social justice, our principles of what is right and proper, our principles that want to see real justice for victims of crime in this country, and that is a reduction in crime and a reduction in victims. I know of nowhere in the world where a more vindictive approach, a more brutal approach to criminal justice leads to more peace in a society. And, if people haven't learnt that yet, they need to perhaps do a little bit more learning before they read out somebody else's words.

Let me say this: we take seriously the removal of liberty from people. We take seriously the way in which we send people to prison and we place people in custodial institutions. But they lose their liberty in those places; they don't lose their human rights. They're still human beings—they're human beings who have rights in this community. They're also human beings who will return to our communities. In my community of Blaenau Gwent, there are, from Cardiff University research, about 50-odd people at the moment serving sentences in different institutions across Wales and England. It is right and proper that they are able to return to our community and that we provide them with the opportunity to learn, the opportunity to become the sorts of citizens we want them to be. It is right and proper that we treat them with the respect that they deserve as human beings—[Interruption.] It is right and proper—it is right and proper that we attempt to rehabilitate them into our society and our communities. That is how you create a better community and a better society. We don't need to debase this place with some of the language that we've heard this afternoon, and we don't need to debase our institutions by seeking the lowest common denominator on social media.

Let me say this: I've learnt a lot more than I thought I was going to learn in my time as a justice Minister in this place. It breaks my heart to think back to the conversations that I had with prisoners—the conversation I spoke to the Member for Rhondda about with one of her constituents, who assumed that he would be back in Cardiff Prison quite soon after his release, because the facilities to support him and to deal with his drug addiction simply weren't there and he had nowhere to live. We have to treat these people with more humanity, and we have to treat these people with more respect and we have to say to people, 'You have rights and the right to participate in shaping the community into which you will be released'. And I hope that this country, as we accrue additional powers and as this democracy matures, will mature into a democracy that treats the people of this country with far more respect than we've heard from some parts of this Chamber this afternoon. And let me say this: I will stand for election, as I already have—and many of the people making points in opposition, of course, have never won a mandate to this place, have never stood in their own name in a constituency and fought an election. [Interruption.] Let me say this: I have done so, I have been elected, I have had those conversations with my community and I will do so again. And I will stand up for the human rights of people when I do so, and that, I believe, is the duty of all of us.

I'm going to call the next speaker, Jenny Rathbone, but I think, before I do that, I would like some clarity from the previous speaker that he didn't intend to say, as I'm sure he didn't, that people who stand for election by whatever means and therefore become elected to this institution are less valuable than their colleagues. [Interruption.] I would just like for that to be explained, before I call the next speaker.

I'm making the point, acting Presiding Officer, that, when people talk to us about public opinion, I've tested public opinion in my constituency, and I won a mandate on the basis of it.

I think this is an important debate, and one that we are going to have to decide on when we legislate on the future franchise for Assembly and local government elections. So, this is not some airy-fairy matter; this is something that we are going to have to make decisions about.

Frankly, if prisoners had the right to vote, politicians might pay more attention to the disgraceful conditions in which many prisoners are still held. We heard from—. Yesterday's riots at Long Lartin exposed the fact that many prisoners still do not have a toilet in their cell and are having to slop out in the morning, which is so unpleasant for both the inmates and the officers who are looking after them. This is just disgraceful in the twenty-first century.

Across the UK, we spend billions of pounds on locking people up, and, in Wales, we have a higher proportion of prisoners than any other country in western Europe, so we need to be asking ourselves what is not working. Because our recidivism rates mean that, in many cases, we are simply having a revolving door and therefore we are sinking more billions into something that isn't working properly. We need to ensure that most of our prisoners are coming out convinced that they are going to live a better life and have learned from their mistakes. I pay credit to the excellent work of the prisons and the prisoners—the prison officers and other agencies who do achieve that, but far too many prisoners do not achieve that outcome.

I regard voting not just as a right, but a duty of all citizens, and that should include all prisoners. It was very interesting, talking to prisoners at Parc prison in Bridgend and at Eastwood Park in Gloucestershire, where all the women prisoners are themselves—they told us that, before going to prison, they believed all prisoners were bad people, but now they feel they were often just people who made bad decisions. I think it's particularly disappointing to hear from Caroline Jones, who has worked in the prison system and therefore knows how complex the situation is—every single person in prison will have a different story, and most of them have made bad decisions. Most of them haven't set out to commit a crime, they've just, on the spur of the moment, committed a crime—for which they need to be punished. But I think the complexity of the situation as well is illustrated by the play that's on at the Clink at the moment—called A Night in the Clink—which is attached to Cardiff prison. The work done by Sherman Theatre in collaboration with Papertrail is a really commendable piece of writing, of acting and a really powerful expression of just how difficult it is for somebody to reintegrate into society.

John Griffiths has already mentioned the venerable Lady Hale, that upholder of our democracy. In 2014, she said:

'Any restriction of fundamental rights has to be a proportionate means of pursuing a legitimate aim. Is it simply an additional punishment, a further mark of society's disapproval of the criminal offence? Or is it rather to encourage a sense of civic responsibility and respect for democratic institutions? If so, it could well be argued that this is more likely to be achieved by retaining the vote, as a badge of continuing citizenship, to encourage civic responsibility and reintegration in civil society'.

So, I think that view was well expressed by all the governors that we spoke to, because they understand the importance of ensuring that prisoners are focusing on the hopeful outcome. So, it is such a tragedy that penal policy is so dominated by the popular press, as expressed by some of the speakers today. The tragedy is particularly for children of prisoners, who are never considered when we send people to prison, and often they are no actual risk themselves to society. By enfranchising all those with sentences of less than four years we are excluding those guilty of the most serious crimes, and it's a pity that Caroline Jones didn't actually read the report, because it says clearly that less than half the prisoners serving from Wales are serving sentences of four years or more. So, in 2017, which is the last time those were available, 1,800 were serving less than four years, versus 1,600 serving sentences longer than four years.

We have to move with and—. We have to be the shaper of public opinion in this case, as we did with abolishing hanging, as we did with introducing the abortion Act, which most reasonable people now realise is absolutely what we need to be doing. So, my last point is to say that those who are already enfranchised to vote under the 1983 Act are not being allowed to exercise that responsibility. It isn't sufficient to say, 'Does anybody want to vote?'—

Can you wind up, please?

—and expect them to come forward, with all the other issues they have. Everybody needs to be registered to vote. That is the law, and it is not being upheld in our prisons, and it's something that I hope the Minister might speak about in terms of ensuring that the Prison Service and the electoral registration officers are working to ensure that every single person entering the prison, even if it's only for a week, is registered to vote as part of the process on entry.

Thanks to the committee chairman for bringing today's debate, and also thanks to all the people who took part, including the prisoners that we spoke to. Now, I'm not now a member of the committee, although I was at the outset of this inquiry. I did participate in the two prison visits and I was on the committee when we started to debate the contents of the report.

I think John Griffiths is right when he says that this is an emotive issue, and people's views are bound to differ, as has been demonstrated by this debate. To be fair to the Chair, he did allow us all to have our say on this when we began to discuss what would go into the report, but of course we were never all going to agree. Now, we may have political differences here as to whether or not there should be any extension of prisoner voting, but can I also point out that, even if we all agreed on the issue of extending it, which we don't, there would still be major logistical and practical problems in applying that extension? For instance, there is the problem that we have Welsh prisoners in prisons in Wales and also many Welsh prisoners in prisons in England, and we also have English prisoners in prison in Wales. This means that, if we have an election in Wales such as an Assembly election or local government elections, then some prisoners can vote—if this idea goes through, this extension, some prisoners will be able to vote and some will not, and there will be some difficulties in distinguishing between these different categories of prisoner. I'm not saying that—

Will you take an intervention?

Yes, of course.

I just want to point out that, already, those with more than four-year sentences are already categorised separately by the Prison Service. So, this is something they already do.

Yes, and I'm not disagreeing with that remark that you made, Jenny, and I'm not saying the difficulties are insuperable. But certainly I believe the legislation will add to the burden of prison staff, who probably have enough to do as it is, and we did hear some evidence to that effect when we had the inquiry.

There is also the issue of what happens if we have a situation similar to 2017, when we had Welsh local elections rapidly followed by a general election. If that situation were to be replicated in future, you would have some prisoners who were eligible to vote in the locals. Then a few weeks later we might have a general election, which they might be more interested in than they were in the locals, and guess what? They don't have a vote. Somebody is then going to have to explain to a group of prisoners why they don't have a vote that they thought they had—good luck with that one.

Now, there is also a logistical problem of setting a cut-off point as to which prisoners can vote, so we have the compromise, which the report proposes, of prisoners having a vote who are serving sentences of four years or less. This is better, I think, than giving the vote to all prisoners, which I think would send out a message to society that the wider public would find difficult to comprehend. However, we were told by some people in authority in the prison service during our visits that it would actually be far more difficult to operate this extension of prisoner voting if there were a cut-off point, because again, it creates different categories of prisoner, some of whom can vote, others who cannot. We would have prisoners on the same wing, many convicted for very similar offences, but having being given marginally different sentences, some of whom can vote, and others who cannot. In a closed environment like a prison, this could lead to problems. In fact, far from increasing the morale of prisoners, giving the vote to some of them, but not all of them, could actually lead to arguments and a decrease in the general morale of a prison wing during an election time.

In my view, the most practical solution would not be to extend the prisoner vote at all, but to accept the situation as it currently stands. Hardly anyone in the wider electorate supports prisoner voting at all. Most believe that prisoners have forfeited their right to vote when they forfeited a much more important right, which was the right to their own liberty. Prisoners have already been adjudged to be incapable of conforming to civil society. This was the decision taken when they were sentenced to imprisonment. It makes no sense at all in the eyes of most ordinary members of the public to give them the right to vote. There are some caveats in terms of prisoners on remand who haven’t been convicted of any offence, and in terms of those on temporary licences, but these are all covered by the existing legislation. So, why the need to extend prisoner voting at all? This report is the prelude to another bad piece of legislation in the making, I am afraid, and another that shows how out of touch the Welsh Assembly is with the general public of Wales. Thank you.

In its response to the report, Welsh Government said, and I quote, 

'The Welsh Government believes that enabling at least some prisoners to vote will send very strong and positive messages to prisoners that they still have a stake in society and, in turn, that they have responsibilities towards society as a whole.'

Such a claim ignores the fact that fewer than one in 12 prisoners are actually in prison for a first offence. It’s incredibly difficult to get into a prison these days. For example, fewer than one in eight incarcerated for drug offences have no previous convictions or cautions, and astoundingly, a prisoner is much more likely to have at least 46 previous convictions or cautions than to be a first-time offender. All of this offending while still being able to vote, still having a stake in society, and in turn, responsibilities towards society as a whole.

Each time a criminal has been through the judicial system, probation services and the judge or magistrates will have given the offender all the signals they need that they have a chance to reform—strong signals much more direct than any message this place might send. All offenders, and repeat offenders even more so, are warned that if they continue to offend, they will be risking their liberties, their conjugal rights and their daily freedoms. Magistrates, probation officers and judges make it abundantly clear what an offender risks should he or she reoffend, and so surely we can take the act of reoffending by the criminal as his or her consent to lose those freedoms and liberties.

This report is simply about numbers, but it shouldn't be just about numbers—there are some very serious principles here. Rather than sending non-stop criminals a message that they will still have responsibilities towards society, it does the opposite. It says that despite repeated warnings from judges and probation officers that if you keep offending you will lose your civil liberties, you can actually continue to offend with less negative circumstances for your own civil liberties than has thus far been the case. It sends a message to law-abiding members of society that our political class are even more out of touch than they thought, because they want to allow those who cannot stick to the law to have a hand in creating the law.

Surely a criminal, while in prison serving their sentence, is not a fit person to have an influence in deciding the rules the law-abiding public have to live by. Many paedophiles convicted of possessing indecent images of children are not jailed, yet even when they are, like Jonathan McNeill, they get sentences shorter than four years. This man didn't need to have any signal sent to him about having a stake in society; he'd only retired from being a police officer six months before his arrest and 15-month prison sentence. But Labour and others in this Chamber obviously think that he and paedophiles like him should still have a stake in society. Well, he shouldn't have, and people should be ashamed that they want to chase their votes.

Just a week after this place sent a message to parents that they should feel bad about how they discipline their children, the same politicians are telling those who want to see pictures of children being abused that they should feel better about themselves. It's disgusting. If you're going to continue to change the electorate, perhaps you should test the public opinion about the proposed changes properly before agreeing them in this place. I have had no correspondence from the electorate asking for prisoners to be allowed to vote. I do, however, hear from voters concerned about the failing NHS, the failing education system and the failing social care system. No wonder Labour want to change the electorate and allow those who have little or no concern for how fairly society functions to be able to vote for them. Thank you.

I call on the Llywydd to speak on behalf of the Assembly Commission—Elin Jones.

Thank you. I'm grateful for the opportunity to respond on behalf of the Assembly Commission to this detailed and informative report from the Equality, Local Government and Communities Committee. I want to outline why we're having this debate today. When the Commission and I were considering how to exercise the new powers provided under the Wales Act 2017 to make changes to the Assembly's electoral franchise, one of the issues that came to my attention early on was the rights of prisoners to vote.

The European Court of Human Rights has found in previous rulings that the United Kingdom is in breach of the European convention on human rights by banning prisoners generally from voting. As Llywydd, I feel it is my duty to ensure that the Assembly's electoral franchise is compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights. Therefore, the voting rights of prisoners became one of the top issues to consider in the context of changing the Assembly's electoral franchise.

Members will be aware that the UK Government has made administrative arrangements that will allow a limited number of prisoners to vote. The Council of Europe has endorsed the UK Government's approach, but it’s not yet known whether these arrangements are adequate in the view of the European court. For the Assembly, the main requirement of the European court ruling is that considered decisions are made about the rights of prisoners to vote in elections to legislatures.

The Assembly Commission sought the views of the public on this issue in 2018 as part of our consultation on 'Creating a Parliament for Wales'. Our consultation highlighted the legal, ethical and practical complexities of giving prisoners the vote, and we therefore agreed that the matter needed to be considered in detail on a cross-party basis, in order to enable the Assembly as a legislature to give its views on this sensitive policy area before submitting any legislative proposals.

Therefore, in September 2018, I wrote to the Equality, Local Government and Communities Committee and asked them to consider this issue further, and we can see the work that has been delivered and the report before us today. The Assembly Commission considered the committee's report and recommendations carefully and the main recommendation in the committee’s report was that the Welsh Government and the Assembly Commission should legislate to give the vote to prisoners serving sentences of less than four years.

I’m aware that the Counsel General has recently written to the committee outlining the Welsh Government's commitment to the principle of allowing prisoners the right to vote in every devolved election in Wales—

Will the Llywydd give way?

Yes.

You say that you felt a duty to push for prisoners to have the right to vote, but doesn't that actually understate it? Aren't you under a legal obligation to do so, speaking for the Commission, in the same way Jeremy Miles would for the Welsh Government? As public bodies, the law requires you to have regard to the judgments of the ECHR.

Yes, I agree, and I thought that that's what I'd said. If I was not clear in what I said, then certainly conforming to the convention is something that there is a duty on the National Assembly to ensure—that it does conform to the European convention on human rights, and that's driven all of this work thus far.

I'll return, therefore, to the committee recommendation. The Commission has considered whether the Senedd and elections Bill, which is currently being considered by the Assembly, would be a suitable legislative vehicle for any proposals by the Welsh Government, and has come to the conclusion that the Bill would not be a suitable legislative vehicle, in our view at present. The Commission strongly agrees with the view of the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee that granting voting rights to prisoners would amount to a significant change to the electoral franchise and any provisions to affect such a change should be included in a Bill when it’s introduced, rather than inserted through amendments. Although the inquiry into prisoners' voting rights undertaken by the committee has considered this policy issue in detail, the Commission agrees with the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee that this cannot be the equivalent of scrutiny of a Bill at Stage 1. As such, the Commission does not consider that amendments should be tabled to the Senedd and elections Bill to address this issue.

It’s also worthwhile clarifying the remit of the Assembly Commission in relation to electoral matters. The Assembly, of course, has given the Commission a mandate to introduce legislation to lower the voting age for Assembly elections. However, the Welsh Government retains responsibility for all devolved elections in Wales and a vote for prisoners is also a more complex issue than giving the right to 16 and 17-year-olds to vote, and for these reasons we believe that the development of any legislative proposals in relation to prisoners' voting rights for Assembly elections, and the responsibility for responding to most of the committee's recommendations, is a matter for the Welsh Ministers.

To close, therefore, I’d like to thank the committee for undertaking this detailed inquiry. Without a doubt, it’s a very important contribution on this fundamental question, which relates to constitutional issues and human rights issues that the Assembly and the Welsh Government will address in due course.

I call on the Minister for Housing and Local Government, Julie James.

Thank you, acting Presiding Officer. I also would like to add my thanks to the Chair and to the committee for their detailed examination of the many issues around the emotive and complex subject of voting rights for prisoners. Both the inquiry and the report were thorough and objective. The analysis and recommendations have certainly helped to inform our policy conclusions, which are set out in my already-published written response to the recommendations. We accept, or accept in principle, all the committee's recommendations that were addressed to the Welsh Government. Our reasoning is set out in my response, so I will not go through those again.

As highlighted in the committee's report, there are significant legal and administrative issues to tackle in implementing prisoner voting. The Welsh Government will need to engage in work with the UK Government and in particular with Her Majesty's Prison and Probation Service to deliver prisoner voting in a timely, coherent and effective manner. My officials have already started liaising with contacts across a range of UK Government institutions.

But that is only part of the preparation and engagement needed. The right to vote is a precious and powerful tool. Voters need to be informed about what they are voting for and who wants to represent them. Candidates and political parties need to be able to reach out to voters and communicate their policies to them. If extending the vote to prisoners and young people in custody is going to be meaningful, we also need to do a lot of work on the softer issues identified in the committee's report, such as voter awareness and education, accessibility to information and media and practical support to help prisoners and young people in custody to register their vote. 

I have always made clear that the Welsh Government believes strongly in the principle that at least some prisoners should be enfranchised in devolved Welsh elections. We will work to introduce legislation in this Assembly to enable prisoners and young people in custody from Wales who are serving a custodial sentence of less than four years to vote in local government elections. Our aim is that eligible prisoners and young people in custody will be able to vote at the next ordinary local government elections during 2022. 

However, sadly, we do not believe it will be possible to resolve all the issues mentioned in the committee report in time to include provision for Assembly elections in the Senedd and Elections (Wales) Bill currently being considered by Assembly Members. For all the reasons that the Llywydd just set out, and with which I entirely concur, we need to do a better exercise in figuring out what we need to do and think about that more particularly. I'll revert to that point a little later in my speech. 

So, this will be a very small group of new electors, but they have particular circumstances that cut across many of the long-established arrangements for registering to vote and casting votes. There simply isn't enough time to work through and test with the UK Government, the prison service and electoral registration officers all the new legal and administrative requirements that would need to be in place for an election that was held in 2021, as the Llywydd just pointed out. Bear in mind that, for any new category of voter to be able to vote at the Assembly election in May 2021, all the primary legislation, the secondary legislation and the guidance would need to be in place by July 2020, when the canvass starts to draw up the register that will apply at those elections.

We will also need to work closely with the likes of the Electoral Commission, prison governors and officers, political parties, education providers, media organisations and prisoners themselves to develop clear, accurate and practical guidance and procedures to inform and support prisoners about how to register and cast their vote. Accordingly, the Welsh Government will not table amendments to the Senedd and Elections (Wales) Bill; we will seek an appropriate legislative vehicle to introduce provision at the earliest opportunity to enable prisoners and young people in custody from Wales to vote in Assembly elections. The first general Assembly election at which prisoners and young people in custody would be able to vote, therefore, would be those in 2026. 

The number who gain the right to vote by these changes will be small—about 2,000 at the most—but this is an important step forward, both in practice and in principle. We need to make sure that this is not merely a gesture that has no practical effect beyond what's written on the statute book. That means we, and all the other agencies involved, will need to invest time and effort to make sure the necessary infrastructure is in place, is tested and is robust. I'm very happy to respond to John's request to keep the committee informed as to our progress with regard to each of the recommendations and how we implement them in practical detail, and I'll make sure that officials keep the committee informed as those matters progress.

We want this new group of voters to be able to exercise their rights and to do so in the knowledge that they are citizens, have a stake in society and have obligations to society too. I firmly believe that the return on such investment will be very worth while indeed. Diolch.

I now call on John Griffiths, as Chair of the committee, to reply to the debate.

Diolch yn fawr. Well, it's been an interesting debate with mixed views. There were, of course, mixed views on the committee, reflected in the report, but the majority support the recommendations of the committee and the report itself. I do believe that there are a number of practical issues that have to be addressed, as has been outlined by Members, but those are addressed by the report and the recommendations.

We did, of course, hear from prison staff that although there was recognition of those difficulties—some of the bureaucracy and system problems that might be involved—they were by no means insurmountable. Indeed, the prison governor and the staff were very supportive of the direction of travel that the report recommends, and we were very grateful for that degree of understanding.

Yes, there will have to be, as we recommend, a memorandum of understanding, which the Welsh Government and the Electoral Commission can pursue with the UK Government and the prison service. That will address issues around making sure prisoners are registered to vote, if they're eligible; that they're supported to take part; that there is access to meet with prisoners for political parties and campaigning purposes; and that there is an election co-ordinator in each prison with Welsh prisoners. All of those matters are very practical issues, Dirprwy Lywydd, and we recognise them and address them in our report in an equally practical way. They are not insurmountable, and, as I say, that was very much accepted by those who will be tasked with conducting the arrangements inside the prison.

There will have to be information provided to prisoners and an addressing of the lack of access to Welsh media in terms of prisons in England, which we heard very effectively from prisoners in Eastwood Park. So, yes, there are quite a lot of practical issues, but none of them insurmountable. Indeed, I think there was a clear sense of the necessary will within prisons and necessary partners to make sure that those difficulties are surmounted.

It has been very interesting and worthwhile work, and I think the committee did enjoy the work, knowing that it's something of practical import—it's something that we were asked to do. It's something that recognises the responsibilities of this institution in terms of the European convention on human rights, that there was a clear requirement for these matters to be addressed from that very important international body, and indeed, of course, that ruling by the European Court of Human Rights that a blanket ban is not defensible in terms of their requirements and our responsibilities. That has been recognised by the UK Government with the limited changes they've made, which I referred to earlier, and we also have to come to a view here as to how we deal with those requirements. I'm very pleased that the report has been able, I think, to do that effectively—that has been accepted by Welsh Government. I appreciate what the Llywydd said in terms of the work of the committee and the responsibility that we accepted, that we have undertaken and, I hope, properly discharged.

A lot of what we heard in terms of the debate, of course, Dirprwy Lywydd, wasn't about the more practical issues, but really address the wider matters of principle. I think that's absolutely fine; there are broad issues of principle. We recognise that in the report. I'd agree with some of the Members that spoke, such as Leanne Wood, Jenny Rathbone and Alun Davies, and I thank Alun Davies for the work that he did as Minister in taking these matters forward, and putting us in a position where we can make the progress that I hope we will make in due course.

I very much understand the description that those Members gave of the criminal justice system that we have. I think it is broken; I don't think there's any doubt about that. It's grossly overcrowded, which makes it very, very difficult to take forward proper training, proper rehabilitation. That really does matter, doesn't it? And it was recognised, indeed, by Rory Stewart, one of the recent Ministers at a UK level with responsibility. He actually, I think quite dramatically and very impressively, said that if he couldn't turn it around as a system within a defined period of time, then he would step down from that position. It was quite a dramatic way of addressing his responsibilities. Other matters intervened, as we all know, in a fairly dramatic way as well, but I think that was an impressive way of a Minister recognising responsibilities, recognising the current state of the criminal justice system and prison system, and wanting to do something effective about it.

So, there are grave problems, and what they actually do is result in more crime and more victims of crime, because if people aren't properly rehabilitated when they are released, as nearly all prisoners are, then obviously they are more likely to re-offend and damage our communities, themselves and their families further. 

Would the Chair give way? 

I will give way. 

He must have been taken, as I was, by the evidence given by the Prison Reform Trust when they said, 'Let's not forget that many of the people in prison come from those communities, disproportionately from black and ethnic minority communities, disproportionately from disadvantaged communities as well.' They're not a separate community; they are part of our community. And that's right, because if we fail to adequately put rehabilitation in place—and part of this debate is around that as well—then, actually, what we're saying is we are casting those people out, and heaven help us then for the implications of that when they are released back into our community, unless we treat them as citizens. 

I absolutely completely agree with that. As I said, what we're talking about I think is doing the right thing in terms of principle, but also doing the right thing in terms of the practical effect. And I'm not saying that giving prisoners the vote is going to greatly boost rehabilitation and reintegration, but I do believe it's an important signal, and I do believe that when we were taking evidence in prisons from prisoners and staff, and outside prison in our committee hearings, there was a recognition and a general support for that position. It might seem like quite a small thing in terms of overall rehabilitation, but actually it is significant. And that's certainly the way I view it, and I'm very pleased that the majority of the committee viewed it the same way.

The motion—. Wait a minute. The proposal is to note the committee's report. Does any Member object? The motion is therefore agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36. 

Right, we'll move on now to item 6, the Finance Committee debate on the Government's spending priorities, and I call on the Chair of the committee to move the motion. Llyr Gruffudd. 

Thank you very much, temporary Deputy Presiding Officer, and as Chair of the Finance Committee, I'm very pleased to be opening this debate today on the future spending priorities for the Welsh Government. The Finance Committee has expressed its concern that the Assembly does not have a formal opportunity to debate and, through that, to potentially influence the Welsh Government’s spending priorities prior to the draft budget being tabled.

During our scrutiny of the draft budget on 27 June, the committee agreed that Assembly Members should have the opportunity to debate future spending priorities at an earlier stage in the budget process. Indeed, our inquiry into the legislative budget process shows how other parliaments give much earlier opportunities to backbench Members to influence Government spending priorities in the early, formative period, long before the draft budget is tabled.

Now, while the committee strongly believes that an early debate is something that needs to be facilitated on a permanent basis in the future, it’s important, of course, that we have a debate on spending priorities this year, although a little later than we'd hoped, given the recent UK Government spending round and the proposed timings of the Welsh Government’s budget. Our scrutiny of the draft budget will follow the approach taken in previous years, focusing on the four principles of financial scrutiny, namely, first, affordability, also prioritisation, value for money and budget process.

The committee hosted an event in Aberystwyth on 27 June to gather the views of stakeholders on the spending priorities for the next financial year. Through discussion and following on from the recommendations in our continuous scrutiny of the Welsh Government’s budget, we identified a number of areas that we would like to focus on in this year’s scrutiny, and these include how the Welsh Government should use taxation and borrowing powers, particularly in relation to the Welsh rate of income tax, and how preventative spending is increasingly prioritised and how this is represented in resource allocation. We’re talking here about spending that focuses on preventing problems and eases future demand on services through early intervention, particularly in relation to funding local health boards, health services and social care. Another area we want to focus on is the sustainability of public services, and that includes innovation and service transformation to respond to changing demands and demographic change. Prioritising policies to promote economic growth, reduce poverty and gender inequality, and mitigate welfare reform, is also an important area. Also, the planning and preparedness work of the Welsh Government in relation to Brexit, of course, and how the future generations Act is influencing policy making. And in declaring a climate emergency, is it clear how the Welsh Government intends to respond to that challenge and ensure that appropriate resources are available, and that that is reflected clearly in the budget?

After the event in Aberystwyth, I wrote to the Chairs of the committees to share the views of the Finance Committee with them and to encourage the other committees to consider how they can contribute to scrutinising the Government’s spending plans in the most coherent and effective way. As in previous years, we are also undertaking a consultation on the priorities for the draft budget on behalf of all committees. Today is the closing date for that consultation, and the responses will be published in the coming weeks to assist the Assembly to scrutinise the draft budget.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer recently announced the UK Government’s spending plans for 2020-2021 as part of a one-year spending round. The announcement provided details of Wales's revenue budget for next year, which will increase by £593 million above the 2019-20 baseline. In real terms, this represents an increase of 2.3 per cent. The spending round also included an increase of £18 million to the capital budget for Wales, meaning that the budget was 2.4 per cent higher in real terms compared to 2019-20.

The Minister for Finance and Trefnydd responded to the spending round in a written statement on 4 September this year, stating, and I quote,

'The Welsh Government budget will be based on the needs of the people of Wales and we will aim to deliver the fairest possible settlement for Welsh public services.'

But what does this really mean? It’s a very broad-ranging statement, of course, but what will be the key drivers in how this additional funding will be spent in Wales? How should we balance the need to invest in preventative initiatives to reduce future demand with the need to support existing services that have, of course, suffered years of austerity? And how will we judge whether the Welsh Government has met its objectives? We need to ensure that the budget is used as effectively as possible in order to meet the needs of the population of Wales in the best way. Today’s debate is an opportunity for the Assembly to consider how the Welsh Government should be prioritising its spending in order to achieve this desired outcome.

There is little doubt that these are uncertain times, of course, with the likelihood of a 'no deal' Brexit still a possibility, and the possibility of another UK general election on the horizon, and all of this makes it increasingly difficult to predict the economic future for Wales. The fact that the UK spending round was only for one year is also frustrating for all of the devolved administrations, because it does not enable us to develop financial plans for the long term as we and the number of stakeholders that we’ve spoken to would wish to see.

However, this uncertainty makes it all the more important for us to have this debate today, in my opinion, and consider the priorities for next year’s budget carefully, to mitigate, as far as possible, any future impact resulting from Brexit and to protect the financial future of Wales and its citizens. I look forward very much to hearing the opinion, views and priorities of Members of all parts of the Assembly. Thank you.

I'm pleased to contribute to this afternoon's important debate on budget priorities, as we move into the all-important budget-setting phase of the Welsh Government and the budget-scrutinising phase of the Assembly's Finance Committee.

I was pleased to take part in the stakeholder event at the Marine hotel in Aberystwyth—a nice sunny day, as I seem to remember; it seems a world away now. We had a lot of discussion in the previous debate about the views of politicians and the views of Members in this Chamber and chambers like this vis-à-vis the views of the public, so I think those stakeholder events are all-important as a means of getting out there and finding out what people on the ground, in businesses and organisations in the third sector—what their priorities are, so that we, as a committee, can feed back to the Welsh Government and we can try and form a budget that is truly in the interests of all.

I think it became clear, through the course of the event in Aberystwyth, that there was universal agreement that prevention and early intervention are key words and concepts that should be at the heart of budget allocation. Yet, this core idea of prevention and planning ahead on the one hand—too often it was felt that that was being negated, or at least lessened, on the other hand, by the increased pressures on budgets, which public organisations and public bodies across Wales too often feel that they are sinking under—not to use too strong an expression. And those organisations find longer term planning really difficult.

We heard concerning evidence that many local authorities have reached saturation point—that was the word that they used—and cannot absorb any more additional costs. This is leading to cuts in non-statutory services, such as leisure, culture and transport, which can then have a knock-on negative impact on the well-being of the local population. I know that the Minister will have heard many of these concerns from local authorities for a long time; we've heard them on the committee for a considerable length of time. And it's too easy to think, 'Well, they would say that, wouldn't they, because they're at the coalface?' But, nonetheless, when these sorts of public services, local services, are cut, then there are knock-on effects and there are impacts on other budgets, because money has to come from other budgets to fund the non-statutory commitments. And, of course, when things like leisure centres see cuts and other cultural places see cuts, then local well-being can be affected and then the health service and social services have to pick up the consequences.

So, we can end up in a vicious circle, where there's greater pressure on the statutory services, which are at the centre of what the local authorities are providing. And, of course, these services are even more stretched in rural areas. Issues such as rural transport I'm constantly raising in this Chamber. Those issues apply even greater pressures in rural areas across Wales. It was very interesting that shareholders also questioned the affordability of some universal services, such as free prescriptions, which we don't discuss so much in this Chamber anymore, and it's probably become a little bit more a part of the accepted landscape. But when you talk to stakeholders out there, as we did, they are saying that universally provided things like that—yes, there might be a really positive thing that people want to have, but when budgets are stretched and local authorities and public services have to make important decisions, they feel that they have to look across the board at everything, otherwise you see important areas being cut.

The issue of cost neutrality came up time and time again. It's a key issue for the Finance Committee. We're often told by the Welsh Government that new legislation is cost neutral, and often by Members when legislation is coming through. Our stakeholders told us that it is rarely the case in practice, and often there are hidden costs, which we don't see at the time that we're looking at legislation, that are there and that have knock-on effects out there in communities. They wanted the Welsh Government to have a better way of assessing hidden costs that there can be behind legislation and budget decisions.

Brexit was, of course, raised during the session—impossible to avoid at the moment. By the way, for anyone who's read the Finance Committee report, I don't think there is such a thing as a 'new deal' Brexit, nice as that might be. I think stakeholders were actually talking about a 'no deal' Brexit. I think it was a merging of two different concepts there. Maybe it's, I don't know, a new term that's going to enter over the next couple of weeks. But with 'no deal' Brexit, they did feel there needed to be planning into that. No-one we spoke to wanted a 'no deal' Brexit, but they recognised that if that is looming on the horizon, there does have to be some work done to try and mitigate any potential consequences of that.

We know that the UK Government's spending round has resulted in an extra £600 million, or slightly less—I think it was £593 million or £594 million that the Chair said—coming into the Welsh budget, and £18 million extra capital. That's an over 2 per cent increase in real terms, and that is to be welcomed. The UK Government has said that we are turning a corner. I accept it's been a long time and pressures are still out there, but I think what's important to the stakeholders we spoke to and to people across Wales is that the Welsh Government does make sure that that money that's being spent on public services in Wales—the health service, education—does get passed on to the all-important public services, and the front line of public services in Wales, so that we can see the sort of improvements here that people really do want to see.

I think it's important that we start our conversations about the budgets right at the beginning of the process, rather than the legislature responding to the Government's proposals. The conversations that we've started to have, listening to people, in this case in Aberystwyth, were part of that attempt to ensure that we changed the way in which—we don't simply scrutinise budgets in the sense of scrutinising individual budget lines and individual spending decisions, but we look at the shape of a budget and we seek to influence the shape and priorities of a budget. I think, sometimes, as a Member, I've spent far too much time trying to catch out a Minister on a particular spending decision, rather than looking at the policy imperative and the policy ambition of that spending and then to look at how the Minister will then account for meeting or not meeting their priorities. So, I hope, as we move towards a legislative budget process over the coming years, we will be able to ensure that we hold more of these debates and we start the budget process with a debate of this sort, where Members here determine and inform the Government of their priorities, and then the Government, in publishing their budget, are able to respond to these debates and to the priorities that Members here and members of the public have actually identified.

Now, in doing so, and we had this conversation in Aberystwyth, the temptation, of course, is to list the whole range of governmental activities and, in different ways, to define all of those different activities as a priority. Some speeches we hear here on Wednesday afternoons certainly achieve that, and a good case, of course, can be made for much of Government spending at all times. So, I will resist the temptation to give our Minister this afternoon a list of a 1,000 different priorities, and try to limit myself to three priorities that I believe are important for us to consider over the coming weeks and months.

For me, the key priority is that of education. I spoke about this—and perhaps members of the Government will remember this—as a Minister last year. I was very, very clear that the public service I felt that we need to really focus upon in future years is that of education, and particularly schools. Schools have done great things over the last few years, and we've seen a fantastic improvement in standards and results. But we've also seen the pressures that schools and teachers, teaching assistants and others are under. The whole of the education community is achieving fantastic achievements, but we are, I believe, in a position whereby we need to ensure that schools are seem to be a priority.

I hope within this—and I will, acting Deputy Presiding Officer, ensure that my interest in this matter is on the record; my son receives additional learning needs education—I do believe that we need to ensure that, in implementing the additional learning needs statutory framework, we provide additional funding for additional learning needs education, which isn't done at the moment. I believe both the additional funding to education and the additional learning needs education should be provided by way of a direct grant into the education budget, or delivered through the pupil development grant to ensure that additional funding reaches schools with a higher population receiving free school meals. I believe it's important it's done through a direct grant through the education department, because I believe it's important that we ensure that this money is directed directly to the front line.

The second priority would be that of public transport. Members have already identified public transport as one of the key priorities that is quite often overlooked in some of these debates. Few weeks go by in my advice surgeries in Blaenau Gwent where people do not explain to me the difficulties that a lack of bus services, for example, mean for them in their daily lives—the impact it has on town centres, the impacts it has on people reaching public services, the impact it has on people being able to shop or socialise. If we are serious about cohesion and social justice in our communities, then access to an effective system of public transport has to be at the heart of that. It is clear to me that the bus services at the moment are simply collapsing in large parts of the country, and we need to identify that.

The third priority, in no direct order, is that of—[Interruption.] I think we're running out of time, sorry. But the final area that I wish to identify is that of preventative spending. We've seen some fantastic protests over the last week, fantastic activism from young people talking about the impact of climate change. I believe that we need to be able to fund action on climate change, decarbonisation of the economy and public service systems. We also discussed during health questions the impact of drug abuse on people, and young people particularly, and I believe that we do need to look at the services that are delivered specifically for young people. I don't believe that the Welsh Government does enough to learn from other countries and other territories where there are preventative services in place that are already delivering some significant advances and protections for young people, and providing greater opportunities for them. But climate change, of course, will be, I believe, the defining issue of our time. It'll be the defining political challenge that we face. It'll be one of those areas that people will look back on and look at Governments and look at legislators and ask the question, 'What did you do? You knew there was a crisis facing us. What did you do to face up to that crisis?' And I don't believe we can agree any budget in this place that does not include a significant investment in climate change and in addressing the causes of climate change.

We know that we’ve lived through a period of huge financial pressures, but what that means in reality is that, when it comes to setting priorities and trying to ensure that we are able to deliver on those priorities, to channel the funds in the right way to the right place in order to deliver against those priorities, it means that we will need to be more sophisticated in terms of how decisions are taken.

Back in July, the finance Minister noted eight priorities for the Welsh Government for 2020-1. Those included social care, tackling poverty, decarbonisation—I wouldn’t disagree with those priorities, but it’s one thing to identify a priority verbally, but it’s another thing to ensure that funds are channelled towards delivering the ambitions set.

Now, the Welsh fiscal analysis does show that there will be an increase in block grants for next year, and that will allow the Government to increase funding for more of its priorities, given that they take the right decisions. But, of course, we know from previous years that the ability of Government to respond to a range of its priorities will depend, to a great extent, on how much money the Government decides to allocate to the health service once again. It’s difficult to escape that fact. The fiscal analysis has outlined three scenarios that look at how much goes to health and how much that leaves for other devolved public services, and every time there is an announcement of additional funding from the Treasury for England, there’s always pressure from those who perhaps lack a little imagination in this place for any funding spent in England on health—for the equivalent to be spent on health in Wales, but it’s not that simple, of course, and this question of prevention has to be at the core of fiscal decisions made. The WHO, we were reminded this week, has said that 80 per cent of those things that keep us healthy are things that happen or are influenced by things outwith the NHS budget. So, we must ensure that the preventative side is maintained, and here I move immediately to local authority budgets. Now, local Government in Wales can’t face more cuts. They can’t take any more flat settlements because that will be a retrograde step.

Thanks, Rhun. Just before you move on to the local authorities, with regard to health, I hear what you’re saying and I said in my own speech that the preventative agenda is all important, but, nonetheless, if a significant amount of money is going into the health service in England, and, as a result of that, we get money through a consequential here, you would accept that you would want to see at least a proportion of that going on increasing the health service in real terms here, so we’re not just playing catch up.

No, I'm not agreeing with you—I think what we’ve seen in England is them falling into the trap of thinking they can put all the money into the health service, starve other services delivered by local authorities, leading to a knock-on in additional pressures on the NHS. What I’m saying is that money should be considered in the round. Money going into social care, social services, is preventative money that can save money for the NHS down the line. So, no, that is exactly the point I’m not making. We have to be more imaginative. Yes, absolutely, fund the NHS adequately, but not consider it in isolation.

Therefore, funding provided for local government for the care provided by them is funding that provides savings to the NHS at a later date, and the WLGA estimate that local government has had to make real-term cuts of 22 per cent over the past decade. Now, clearly, this is not sustainable for the future and the priority has to be clearly set out in the 2020-21 budget, or the NHS will suffer down the road.

One comment on a priority there is consensus about, and that’s the issue of decarbonisation: the future generations commissioner has estimated that not far off £1 billion will need to be allocated for decarbonisation schemes in Wales. Now, the concern for many is that we at this point in time haven’t seen any real signs from the Welsh Government—despite setting decarbonisation as a high-level priority, the Welsh Government haven’t shown that they are willing to make that commitment in financial terms.

So, those are two areas that have to be reflected in the budget for next year. Just one final point: it is, of course, of great concern that we are only seeing a one-year spending round from the UK Government, and I think it will be a priority to strengthen our reserves as we face the risks of more austerity in years to come.

I'm very pleased to take part in this discussion because I think we need to have more discussions in generalities about expected expenditure rather than talking about lines of expenditure and whether there should be an extra £10 to £15 million here or there, but actually talking about it as a general point.

I was also very pleased we had a finance meeting in Aberystwyth, meeting with members of the public. It was very helpful to me, because I met with people from the environment groups, from local government, and further and adult education, but I met with them outside what I would describe as my comfort zone of Swansea. It was interesting to have views from people in the same areas that I’ve taken an interest in and have a small amount of knowledge on, but who actually live in another area, and I certainly learnt a lot from that. I think the one thing that we should all remember all the time is it's the public's money we are spending. Far too often, we talk about Government money and we talk about Assembly money, but it's the public's money and we are responsible to them.

It was very interesting to talk to them. We talked about, basically, the effect of austerity and cutbacks on public services, that local government has borne the brunt of public sector cuts, whilst social care has the greatest pressures of any service—and I include health in that. Social care is under tremendous pressure. And it's so incredibly important. If you don't fund social care then people will end up in hospital. If you support them in their homes, give them that little bit of help they need, then they will not be falling, they will not reach that stage where they need to end up in hospital. So, you're actually helping health by keeping people in their homes.

The local government representative, coming from the Ceredigion/Powys area, was very keen to point out—and I wish Russell George was here, because he keeps on pointing it out as well—the cost of providing rural services, and they're absolutely right about the cost of providing rural services. I counted with him, and I count them in here regularly—they're the additional demand in areas where you have social deprivation. So, it's the difficulty of providing the services, and the demand. But, basically, we're not—. It's not a debate between Blaenau Gwent and Powys for the money; it's really a debate that we need additional money into the system.

Cutbacks have had a huge effect on education. Local authorities have generally tried to protect social services and education, but that's been at—. What's been affected? Library services, leisure services, leisure centres, sports facilities—all the things that are non-statutory services, they've been cut back. And some of the statutory services have been pared back. So, I think it really is important that we realise just how important these non-statutory services are in basically keeping people well and getting them out of the house.

The importance of school transport was highlighted—or, as the Conservatives have said in here fairly regularly, 'bureaucracy'; that money held by local authorities centrally that pays for school buses, they describe as money being held back for bureaucracy. I think that they need to give further thought to what money being held by local authorities centrally is actually being spent on.

Adult and further education—that again has borne more than its fair share of any cuts. Whilst we've given protection to schools and we've given protection within further education to 16 to 18-year-olds, those people who are going into—they want to stay on and retrain and reskill—. And we talk a lot, don't we, about giving people a second chance and people getting the opportunity to reskill in a changing world? Those courses have been cut dramatically, because the money going into further education is being cut dramatically, and what has gone in has been mainly aimed at 16 to 18-year-olds. That's been a conscious decision of the Government. In fact, they actually sent letters out saying that—that's not just of this Government now, it goes back to the 2007-2011 Government, who sent exactly those letters out.

On the environment, there was a call for more trees. I always call for more trees. I got into trouble with the Farmers Union of Wales when I said, 'We need more trees everywhere', but we need to protect the environment. The budget does not allocate anywhere near enough resources for environmental matters, and we also have the situation that Natural Resources Wales is massively underfunded. I don't think it was a good idea merging the three organisations together, and merging the three organisations together and then not funding them adequately has only led to problems.

I've got two things I would like to finish with. As we know, we've got real growth of 2.3 per cent in income next year. I would like to see the Welsh Government now say that no service will get an increase less than in line with inflation, and that includes every local authority. There is no reason why that can't be done, because you've still got the growth area to give to Government priorities, but let's protect everybody. 

We talk about preventive spend—and we always talk about preventive spend— can we put some money into public health? Because we lost the public health part of Communities First, which did a tremendous job on things like physical activity and promoting healthy eating, but we do need to get people better rather than waiting until they get ill and treating them.

The Finance Committee works hard to engage with stakeholders and the wider public as part of its budget scrutiny process. Nonetheless, during my intermittent membership of the Finance Committee, I have found a bit of a disconnect between the engagement that we have with stakeholders and others and the budget process. And I think it's a real challenge to engage people in a productive and useful way that feeds through to our scrutiny of a particular year's budget. 

I think a lot of that is because we have an Executive, Government, led budget process and we as a committee, as Assembly Members, to the extent that we meet stakeholders, who've come to perhaps push their particular priorities for spending, we engage with them and I think sometimes perhaps leave that meeting with the impression that the people invited expect more of us as a committee than we are likely to be able to deliver, because it's a Government-led process for the budget. 

I think there are also challenges in who you have to those meetings, how you can engage broadly. Do they favour organisations who employ people who have the time to go and join consultations and engage with Assembly Members in this way? How do we know we're giving fair priority to the different type of invitees and guests that we may wish to discuss their particular priorities? I think also, as we increasingly have devolved tax powers, another area comes into this. Whereas before we were largely block-grant funded—in fact, you'd lots of different people competing to tell you how important their area was for spending fed into a block grant-driven process where, largely, what we were about was dividing that spending cake. Now, we have increasing tax powers and, since April, 10 per cent of the income tax rate is set by us—what should we do to ensure that taxpayers are involved and consulted and part of that process and we consider that tax-spend trade-off rather more than we have when we've raised less of our own money?

The final area where I think there's a disconnect is the timescale. I think, when we look at the budget lines and go down to the main expenditure group level and perhaps below, what we hear from the stakeholders are very often their priorities about policy programmes or cross-cutting areas that don't necessarily fit neatly into one or even a combination of those different lines. Certainly, I find it challenging to take the lessons from stakeholders and then scrutinise the Minister in a line-by-line budget discussion for a particular year. And I think that plays into the other issue, which Rebecca Evans has spoken about here and elsewhere, about the difficulties she and the Government face with a one-year budget that they're putting forward because the UK Government has only put the block grant for one year ahead. I sympathise with much of what she says on that, but I would question whether it's a binary issue. I wonder if we could go a bit further in giving a little more certainty in at least some areas of spending. The UK Government itself doesn't know what its revenue is going to be in two or three years' time. It doesn't know when the money that we pay to the European Union is going to become available for other priorities. It has set some budgets for more than one year, and I think the Welsh Government could potentially, at least, set budgets for more than one year for some of its areas, or for particular priorities or areas where that certainty is particularly important.

I give way to Mike. 

Thank you. The advantage, of course, Westminster has is that they can borrow for revenue expenditure, can't they, so they have that certainty because they know, even if they don't have the money coming in, they can borrow it to meet the gap. 

Yes. And, clearly, we have our capital programmes and some ones where there is borrowing capacity, but there are greater hoops we must jump through than the UK Government to use those. But not quite such a dominant proportion of our income is coming from the block grant in the future and therefore that block grant only being set a year ahead isn't as defining a knock-down argument as it might have been as to why we can only budget a year ahead. And I just wonder if there are priority areas, or particular ones where certainty is needed, that the Minister could consider giving a firmer indication of likely plans. I think, last year, there was quite a good initiative in terms of communicating to local authorities potential year-ahead pressures to give them a bit more warning, and the Government at Westminster—they have budgets ahead, but sometimes they change. I remember, in 2010, the UK Government—new—came in and it made in-year cuts. That's not ideal, but it may still be better for some organisations to have at least an indication of what future budgets may be, even if they're subject to change.

I thank the Finance Committee for bringing forward this report. I'm not a member of the committee, but, obviously, I have an interest and remain concerned that there are a number of uncertainties that continue to surround the recent UK spending round—for example, the fact that a long-term solution to the funding of social care was, once again, not addressed by the UK Government. While we seek to find our own solutions to that challenge, it would help to know exactly what the long-term funding plans of the UK Government are in that respect. I think that is a major failing of the recent UK spending plan, and it casts a shadow over one of the key long-term challenges that we face here in Wales.

However, here in Wales I do welcome the indication given by the Minister in the Chamber only last week that, in addition to the priority that we're rightly giving to the Welsh NHS, we do intend to look carefully at the best possible settlement for local government. There are many discussions about the ways in which money is spent on local services, but it's apparent to all of us that, despite far more generous settlements in Wales compared to England, our councils are, nevertheless, under severe pressure, and we must take further steps to seek to sustain local services. Sadly, we know that a one-year UK spending plan is all about short-termism, ditching long-term strategy and ambition for a few short-term populist announcements. So, in spite of what stakeholders told the Finance Committee, from what I read we may still be facing some of the limitations on our actions due to that UK plan only covering the year 2020-21. 

Now, as others have already said, we know that focusing on prevention in health and care, and looking to longer-term planning in our public spending, is an established track record on which the Welsh Government can build. So, alongside the uncertainties that we face, perhaps this forthcoming Welsh budget can drive further shared priorities between the Welsh Government and local government. Because if both believe that spending for a clear long-term purpose is the right thing to do, then clearly a new bargain should be made in order for us to make that common purpose with local government, whether that lies in the debate around school and education or the demands for social care, including looked-after children, or the provision of vital leisure services that can deliver things like social prescribing, which, in the longer term, helps to alleviate some of the ever-growing pressures on the NHS. If there's a common purpose, then let it be a common bargain to deliver those priorities through local government.

Now, because of the short-term nature of the funding settlement that we're facing this year, now may not be the time to consider this, but I do wonder whether we should start thinking more about health and social care not just as an integrated portfolio for a Minister, but also in the reality of joint budgets to deliver a more agile, responsive solution in those vital health and care services. I think that was the point that Rhun was alluding to in his contribution, in terms of how we deliver those integrated services. As I say, this may be a longer-term consideration that we have to come back to, but today I think the overriding message for this budget round has to be to give local authorities the ability to not only function, but to start recovering and deliver those local services that have been so badly hit by the harsh years of austerity. We might only be able to start that process this year, but even the longest journey has to start with a single step. 

I'd like to support those Members who've mentioned education as a priority for Welsh Government expenditure, and I'd very much like to applaud the report by the Children, Young People and Education Committee on school funding. I know the Welsh Government has accepted all of the recommendations, but I think it does set out a very strong case for prioritisation for school funding to a greater extent than has happened up to now.

To me, if we are to be about preventative spend, we must put more money into education and our schools. I very much agree with what Mike Hedges said about further education as well, which I think has been rather overlooked in terms of adequate funding and should be better provided for. But the essential case, I think, is for schools funding because of the importance to so many of our young people, and, of course, early years educational funding and early years in general. Because if we are to be preventative, I do believe that education does just about everything for us. Education is a good in its own right. It's extremely important in terms of personal development. I think there are lots of studies worldwide that show that if you prioritise educational spending, then you will have a much stronger economy, and it's actually the most effective thing you can do. If you want to build your economy, put money into education.

Also, of course, it's very important for health. Better educated people enjoy better health throughout their lives and better well-being, and better general quality of life. They have more opportunities, better careers; it's just a win-win-win. It's also very important for culture and, indeed, the environment. So, I think if we look at things in the round and we look at prevention, we would be driven to put more money into education, and there's a very strong evidence base for that. That's why I very much agree with the committee's report.

I think part of that should be—and I've mentioned this many times in the past—more effective funding for community-focused schools, because it's an existing resource, isn't it, our schools, the buildings, the grounds, the facilities, and too often they're not well enough used in school holidays, at weekends, during evenings. That's an awful waste of existing resource, isn't it? There is some good practice, but not nearly enough, and I think we need to provide an effective funding mechanism that ensures community-focused schools are operating effectively right across Wales.

That brings more opportunities, because a lot of children do not get the mum's taxi or dad's taxi—or even grandma or grandad's taxi—experience when it comes to wider opportunities to develop their abilities and talents. They don't go to the activities and the clubs as they might. If it's provided on the school grounds as a part of an extension of the school day, very many more families, particularly families from deprived circumstances, will have those wider opportunities, and community-focused schools are essential to that.

One other thing I would mention—and again, I think it's very much on the preventative front—is youth services. Sadly, because of the pressure that local government and others are under, we've seen far too many cuts to youth clubs, youth activities and youth services generally, and that really is preventative. The police understand that. Local government understands that. The voluntary sector understands that. People, when you go around door-knocking, they understand that, but because of the pressures that 10 or more years of austerity have brought, we've seen far too many cuts to that incredibly valuable provision. I think Welsh Government really needs to look at how we can not just shore up the provision that remains, but get back and beyond the levels of provision that we had in years gone by. 

I call on the Minister for Finance and Trefnydd, Rebecca Evans. 

Thank you. I'm really grateful to have had the opportunity to listen to the debate today and to respond to it, and I thank all Members for their contributions. I really do welcome the work that the committee is doing in this area, and really value the input that the stakeholders who took part in the event in Aberystwyth in June have made. I really look forward to the committee's final report following the closure of their consultation.

In preparation for the budget, I also wanted to listen to the views of stakeholders about how Government funding is being invested across Wales, and the impact that it's having on people and their communities. So, over the summer, I visited a series of settings across Wales that reflect our eight cross-cutting priority areas of early years, social care, housing, skills and employability, better mental health, decarbonisation, poverty and biodiversity. These eight areas are at the heart of this Government's ambitions for a more equal Wales, a more prosperous Wales and a greener Wales. I wanted to understand the day-to-day challenges faced in these areas and to learn more about the difference that can be made by focusing on them. And it was also a great chance to explore the opportunities that exist for us to do more in these areas.

In north Wales, I saw first hand a community taking control of its own energy consumption through the Ynni Ogwen hydropower project in Bethesda. I also visited the I CAN mental health urgent care centre at Ysbyty Gwynedd in Bangor. The visit highlighted a preventative model where people experiencing low-level social and mental health difficulties are offered emotional support outside of the usual working hours. In mid Wales, I visited RSPB Lake Vyrnwy, which demonstrates how significant areas of the Welsh landscape can not only deliver positive biodiversity outcomes but also support sustainable farming enterprises. In Aberystwyth, I met with board members and staff of Tai Ceredigion, along with prospective residents of an exciting new affordable housing development at Maes Arthur. And in Penarth, I visited the holiday hunger play scheme at Ysgol y Deri that provides support to ensure healthy eating continues throughout the school holidays for some of our most deprived families.

These visits showcased the passion, talent and commitment of those who will drive the outcomes of our cross-cutting priorities. They represent real examples of how, despite austerity, we've continued to prioritise our limited investment in the face of challenging budgets and have worked with partners to deliver our priorities. And these priorities stand on the strength of a budget approach that protects and promotes what matters most. They are boosted by our commitment to prioritise health and social services and a genuine partnership with local government. And that stands in stark contrast to the experience in England, where cuts to councils have been twice as deep as in Wales, doing untold damage to local communities.

From early years to housing, our focus is enhanced by the building blocks that this Government has put in place by putting its money where its values are: a childcare offer with 48 weeks of provision that's delivering across Wales ahead of time, and the drive for 20,000 affordable homes this term—again, on course, ahead of time. I'm determined to maximise the impact that we can have on these priorities for Wales within our forthcoming budget, and I want to thank colleagues from across the Cabinet for the work that they have been doing to support this collective approach to the budget in recent months. Looking to the future, as a Government, we've been very clear that health will continue to be at the heart of our budget considerations, along with providing local government with the best possible settlement.

Before turning to some of the key messages that stakeholders have raised with me over the summer and I think have been echoed in the Chamber today, it's really worth setting the debate in the wider context. As we've heard from the Chair of the Finance Committee, the UK Government published its one-year fast track spending round on 4 September, and behind the headlines, this spending round doesn't turn the page on austerity, as the Chancellor claimed, as our budget in 2020-21 will still be 2 per cent lower, or £30 million less in real terms, than in 2010-11, and we will face some tough choices over the coming weeks. And we'll also continue to face—[Interruption.]

You must have expected me to rise with that comment. As I said to you previously in questions, I accept what you're saying about comparing the figures with 2010-2011—there's still a long way to go—but even you, when you're being optimistic, Minister, must accept that, compared with last year, this is over a 2 per cent real terms increase—that's real terms. So, this really will improve the Welsh budget next year.

Well, based on the discussions that we've previously had in the Chamber, I was going to go on to say that. I wasn't going to labour the point this afternoon, especially after what I think has been a constructive and useful debate. But we will continue, it is fair to say, to face some major risks and some uncertainties whilst we are making our preparations. For example, the timing and the content of the UK's autumn budget remains unclear, as are the implications of Brexit and the potential of a 'no deal' on our spending proposals. So, we do need expectations to be cautious within that wider context.

But during my summer visits, stakeholders have raised with me many important issues and, as we've heard again this afternoon, the ability to plan for the long term with stability of budgets for future years is often raised as an issue. And it's always our ambition to provide longer-term clarity over budgets whenever possible, however this does have to be balanced with realistic and sensible planning assumptions, which we don't have beyond next year. However, to provide as much certainty as possible to our partners and stakeholders, I have brought forward our plans to publish the Welsh Government budget, and I can confirm that, with the agreement of the finance and business committees, for which I am very grateful, I will be bringing forward the publication of our draft budget to 19 November and the final budget to 4 February.

During my visits and my wider meetings and engagement, there's been much support for that preventative approach to investment, which we've heard about this afternoon, and it's been very much the theme of recent budgets. We fully recognise the importance of funding preventative activity and its potential to have a transformative impact on public services and to make a real difference to people's lives. Preventative approaches such as the I CAN project at Ysbyty Gwynedd, remain an important consideration in the allocation of Welsh Government budgets. And, of course, Brexit is never far from my considerations. I've visited many communities that have benefited from EU funding in the past and there are concerns, obviously, with regard to post-Brexit funding. Across all of my visits and meetings, there was a real understanding of the challenges facing all of us across public services in Wales, but despite this, I was really heartened to hear how services across the board are looking at new ways of working to respond to the challenge. So, invigorated by these conversations, I'm more determined than ever to look positively to the future and support our public services in Wales as best we can.

All of these conversations are informing our preparations for the draft budget that we'll publish in November. The budget will be focused on the priority areas where we can have the greatest impact over the long term to meet the current and future needs of Wales, and deliver the services and outcomes that the people of Wales deserve. Diolch.

I call on Llyr Gruffydd, the committee Chair, to reply to the debate.

Could I thank everybody who has contributed to the debate? I think the debate that we've had in the last hour has shown how valuable having this kind of discussion is, and indeed how having an even broader discussion in terms of timing and the number of contributions would enrich and help the Minister and others in developing the Government’s budget, but that it’s important to do that at the early, formative stage, rather than as we now find ourselves, unfortunately this time, having it later in the process than we would wish.

I'll pick up on a couple of points. I think Nick Ramsay started by reminding us of the importance of engaging with the public more broadly, and evidently that’s something that the Finance Committee is trying to do. It’s something that every committee in this Assembly should be doing. Indeed, every Member should be embracing each and every opportunity to engage with constituents. I think that Mike Hedges's point was about that geographical broadening as well, in terms of who we speak to. And, of course, the consultation by the committee, which finishes today, as I mentioned earlier, is an opportunity to throw that net out wider.

It was interesting and encouraging to hear many Members referring to rural factors as one of the areas that is seeing a great deal of pressure at present. And I want to thank Alun Davies particularly for just asking the question, 'Well, what are we scrutinising?' Because we do get sucked into scrutinising line by line, where, very often, we don't take that step back to look at the shape of the budget as a whole and how that links with the ambitions or policy objectives of the Government. I think that is a central factor of our work as a committee, and other committees. When he mentioned that he had three priorities, I was afraid that he was going to say, 'Blaenau Gwent, Blaenau Gwent and Blaenau Gwent', but he didn't, to be fair to him. 'Education, public transport and climate change' is what he said. And, of course, that's the point. Every Member will have their three priorities, I'm sure, as we've heard from others today, and that’s the exact intent of this debate, to give a platform and a voice to those priorities as the Government forms its budget.

Rhun, Dawn Bowden and others talked about the tension between funding health services and other services, as did Mike Hedges in the context of the preventative value of investing in social services or social care services particularly. We've heard in the context of local government—. Nick Ramsay used the term 'saturation point' and I've heard 'tipping point' and 'we're on the edge'. These lines are often repeated to us, but I do think that the time has come for the Government to front up to this and we need to do something now about the situation.

Mark Reckless raised an important point, I think, in terms of the disconnect between engaging with stakeholders and our scrutiny of the budget. It is inevitable, as he said, because it is an executive-led process and maybe the perception of the public is one that suggests that they think that we have more influence than we would like, certainly. But that’s not only true in the context of finance. I think that’s true of other contexts very often: the lack of differentiation between the Welsh Government and the role of the National Assembly for Wales. But it does underline the need to strengthen the voice of backbench Members and the Members of the Assembly as part of that discussion.

I do share the frustration about the one-year spending round by the UK Government. Of course, if I'm right, that hasn't stopped the Scottish Government from offering more long-term assurance to their public bodies, but I do understand, of course, that it’s not easy to do that. But doing that does allow them to use that funding more effectively, and in the climate that we face now, we need every pound to work as hard as possible.

I thank John Griffiths for reminding us about education and the need to fund schools, again in this preventative context. And what we're looking for in general is this shift, this decisive shift to preventative investment, and youth services are a very important part of that.

And just to respond quickly to some of the comments made by the Minister, who did give us a list of projects: Ynni Ogwen, I CAN in Bangor, the RSPB at Lake Vyrnwy, Tai Ceredigion and so forth. I do feel that that is the danger, isn’t it? That is, you can point at individual projects to highlight something, but it doesn't necessarily represent a systemic change in the way that the Government proceeds to create its budget. And that comes back to the point made by Alun Davies: how can we strengthen that link between the budget lines and the policy ambition and the policy outcomes of the Government? That is, the difference between outputs and outcomes, and I do think that if we manage as a committee, as an Assembly and as a Government to resolve that conundrum and to create that clear link, rather than listing projects, then I think we will reach the point where I would like us to reach.

So, with those comments, could I thank all the Members for contributing? I do feel that we have had a flavour of the kind of discussion that we should be having around the budget priorities of the Welsh Government, but to do that in the years to come much earlier in the process. Thank you.

The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? No. The motion is therefore agreed.

The next item is the Brexit Party debate on the UK in the EU, and I call on Mark Reckless to move the motion. Mark Reckless.

Diolch, Llywydd. I move the motion in the name of Caroline Jones.

The first bullet point supports Wales's membership of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and its indefinite continuance. Now, I would have thought that this wasn't something that needed to be asserted. I know Plaid Cymru take a different view, of course, but I had, before my election to this place, taken at face value the manifestos and policy positions of other parties. I also knew several Members of Parliament from Wales who were in the Labour Party and all, that I was aware of, were staunch unionists. My impression here, though, has been that, within at least the Government, the Labour ranks here, there is a greater range of views about autonomy, if not independence, versus unionism and what the trajectory of devolution should be. I believe that at least some Members on the Government benches sail under the Labour manifesto and the Labour policy positions, but the differences between them and many of the members of Plaid Cymru are less than I would previously have expected. So, we assert that in our motion today.

We also, in our second point, note again—I don't want to labour the EU points in this debate—that Wales, like the United Kingdom as a whole, voted to leave the European Union. It's understandable in a Scottish context, where Scotland voted by a pretty significant margin to remain, and where you have a Scottish National Party Government that supports the independence of Scotland, it's understandable how the two issues become conflated and the SNP Government uses one to seek to move on the other. I've been surprised by the extent to which this has also happened in Wales. I recognise that many Members were shocked, disappointed, upset by the referendum result, but I've been more surprised by the extent to which some Members moved to question Wales's place in the United Kingdom on the basis that their side lost the referendum when Wales voted to leave the European Union. We've seen some polls and we've seen some marches, and often it's Plaid Cymru behind the questions and some of the organisation of those, and there's been quite a lot of media comment around the indy-curious, and there's a suggestion that there's some sort of upsurge in support for independence. I'm sceptical of that, and I wonder whether Members, particularly on the Labour benches, are going too far, at least for their own electoral interests, in the way that they perhaps question our continued membership, or at least the nature of that union and how it should develop because of what happened with the referendum.

I give way.

You've talked about the referendum, the reality of the discussion around independence has become because of the shambles of the UK Government and Westminster Parliament and the way it's behaved since that referendum. So it wasn't a referendum issue; it's actually looking at how Westminster behaves and the failure of Westminster to address the needs of the different nations across the UK that has been leading this agenda.

And to me, the issue is that of the failure of too many remainers, including and particularly perhaps at Westminster, to accept the result of the referendum. They've spent three years plus growing increasingly confident and going further and further against what they said in the past to try and block the result of that referendum, and I think it's that refusal to implement the result and the refusal of a remain-leaning elite, establishment perhaps, to implement the decision of their voters that has led to the difficulties that we now face.

However, I'd like to focus on devolution and the trajectory of it. I had hoped, with what became the 2017 Wales Act, that we would reach a stable settlement. It strikes me that in many countries around the world where there is devolved and in some cases federal government the system is relatively stable. It strikes me that the UK is an exception in there being such constitutional flux that has continued for so long and seems to have no end in sight. I had thought with the reserved-powers models that would work better, and I think some criticism perhaps to the UK Government in terms of a lack of flexibility in engaging with devolved institutions to find a settlement that would perhaps be more stable. And now even I and my party colleagues see areas where it would make sense to have more devolution, and we ourselves question whether that stable system is realistic, given the settlement that we reached in 2017.

I'll just highlight two examples here where I've largely been persuaded by speeches made by Government Ministers and by others in this Chamber that there is a strong case for further devolution. One of those is air passenger duty. I was also impacted, I think, on that by the Welsh Affairs Select Committee report from Westminster and David T.C. Davies's leadership of that, and the unanimous, I think, report that they had that this was something that should be devolved from their oversight to our oversight, and that's something we're happy to support.

Rail is also an area where I've been persuaded of the case for further devolution, partly on account of the Minister, Ken Skates, who I think makes a very, very good case for the need for further investment in Wales. But it's not just a question of money. It's a question of organisation, and frankly I don't feel that the structure of the railways in the United Kingdom has worked especially well. In particular, I'd be critical of Network Rail in terms of its management, its inflexibility, its bureaucracy, its one-size-fits-all model, and most of all its cost. It just seems so incredibly expensive to deliver rail solutions. I was also struck by Transport for London and its relative success in terms of integration, similarly with Mersey Rail, looking at that more recently. It just strikes me that, given what we've seen from Network Rail and how the system's worked, but also, I think, how well the Welsh Government did in terms of negotiating and agreeing that Wales and borders franchise, I think the case has been made for the devolution of rail. I think we have seen problems since Transport for Wales have taken over, and I think they’re running out of time to be blaming them on the previous system and responsibility needs to be taken, but, overall, I think the record is one we would want to support, and we think further devolution in that area would be to the benefit of Wales.

I’ll move now to point 4 of our motion where we note the position of the A55 and, I think more recently, the M4 as trans-European networks under articles 154 to 156 of the Treaty of Rome, and we’ve accepted a measure of European Union oversight over those roads because of the impact they have on Ireland and the extent to which they go beyond the borders of the UK. For the same, and I think stronger, reasons, we would see a case for a measure of UK involvement to the extent that what happens with those routes is very important not just to Wales, but to the wider UK.

He’s not in his seat now, but I was actually quite impressed by a point that Alun Davies made earlier looking at the M4. He looked at the economic case and the costs and benefits, and he made the point about how relatively small the benefits were calculated to be for his constituents in Blaenau Gwent, and he contrasted that with the very significant benefits for people living in Bristol and some places quite significantly beyond that in England. And he went, perhaps fairly, ‘Why should he care about benefits for them? Why should we be spending Welsh taxpayers money on that?’ And since he's now got this role looking at the structures of the UK that Welsh Government have given him in making proposals, I would say, ‘Yes, he is right on that’, but if we have a system where the costs are all taken into account, because we bear all the costs in Wales, but there are really significant benefits to other people, for instance in England, that we don’t take any notice of because they’re not our mandate, doesn’t that suggest that we may underinvest? And if actually there is this big benefit for people over the border into England, isn’t there a role for UK Government to support those roads and potentially to pay for it?

The Counsel General was asked on Sunday night by the chairman of the Welsh select committee that if his good officers and others worked to ensure UK Government came forward and put in the money to pay for this relief road, would he deliver it. I hope he will consider that, because we don’t want to constrict the Welsh economy and cut ourselves off from England, and particularly the more prosperous areas. We need to get that road running, and I do think there’s a proper role also for the UK Government in this as we seek to take a balanced approach to devolution. It's more justified in some areas, but there are areas where we could benefit from UK Government support.

I have selected the five amendments to the motion. If amendment 4 is agreed, amendment 5 will be deselected. I call on the Counsel General and Brexit Minister to formally move amendments 1, 2, 3 and 4, tabled in the name of Rebecca Evans.

Formally.

Formally. I call on Darren Millar to move amendment 5 tabled in his name. Darren Millar.

Diolch, Llywydd. I move the amendment, which has been tabled in my name.

I was expecting this to be more of a ding-dong debate, to be honest, as we are usually accustomed to on a Wednesday afternoon when the Brexit Party tables opposition debates. But, actually, I’ve been quite impressed by the thoughtful contributions that have been made by the leader of the Brexit Party in respect of the future of the United Kingdom and the devolution settlement, because I think there is a need for us as a Senedd to discuss the future of devolution in this country, and I for one certainly agree with you that we need a more settled and stable settlement. At the moment we don’t have that, and we have an imbalance within the United Kingdom in terms of the devolution settlement in Wales compared to Scotland, and in Scotland compared to London, and of course the mayoralties, and then Northern Ireland. So, we’ve got a peculiar arrangement that has, it seems to me, developed without proper consideration of what might be appropriate levels of responsibility for each of the nations. And I certainly, for one, think that that needs to be more carefully considered in the future in order that we can arrive at something more sensible for the long term that keeps the United Kingdom together rather than divides us.

I make no apologies for being a passionate unionist—I think Wales is far better off being part of the United Kingdom than being outside of the United Kingdom, and that’s why it’s pretty extraordinary that we have a nationalist party that criticises the fact the UK Government is determined to try to fulfil the will of the people in taking us out of the EU because it claims there are significant economic benefits that Wales derives from that, and yet seeks to divide us through independence from the rest of the United Kingdom, which, of course, is even more strategically important to Wales in terms of our economy. I'll happily take the intervention.

Thank you for taking the intervention. There's a very straightforward difference in the two scenarios: Wales is not an independent country within Britain; Britain is an independent country within Europe, by any measure.

Yes, I understand that, but I don't think you responded to the assertion that I made to you that it seems very extraordinary to many people that you make an economic argument to stay in the EU, whilst not making the same economic argument more powerfully because of the importance of our economic links across the UK.

Now, in terms of the Welsh Conservatives' position, we've already put on record that we support the devolution of rail and more responsibility for the rail system here in Wales, and I would concur very much with some of the comments that you made particularly about the lack of responsiveness of Network Rail to want to make sure that there's sufficient investment and maintenance here of our railways across the country. I've found them very difficult to deal with at a constituency level, and I've no doubt that that is a view that is shared in common across this Chamber. We also, of course, support—in a different way and take a different position than our party in terms of the UK position—air passenger duty being devolved to Wales, because we think that there are economic opportunities that we can wrest from the devolution of air passenger duty. I think there's also potentially a case to devolve some telecoms matters to Wales, for example, as well. We know that the Welsh Government has been responsible for the roll-out of the superfast broadband scheme, and that has been relatively successful in many ways, whilst still having some shortcomings in rural parts of my own constituency. But, again, I think there's a good case to be made that more responsibilities could come to Wales in respect of telecoms. We already have planning responsibilities for things like the height of masts et cetera, for mobile telephony, and it makes absolute sense to me to make sure that those things are put together in some sort of way, I think, in terms of the situation going forward.

We also recognise the strategic importance of the M4 and the A55 and other roads in Wales to the UK network, and I think you can make arguments both ways in terms of who might be responsible for those, but we certainly want to see more investment in our roads, because improved transport connections do help to drive prosperity. We can't ignore the fact that when you're better connected with areas that are prosperous, you tend to do better economically yourself. There's very strong evidence that that is the case, and that's why we believe that roads like the A55, the A40, the M4 and those strategic north-south routes in Wales are incredibly important in terms of the need to get that better connectivity across the country.

So, we're happy to acknowledge those things in this debate, and I do think that if we can have a good-natured debate, then there may be some consensus to be able to take some of these things forward in the future.

I want to concentrate on particular benefits that come from our union with England and the two other nations that make up the United Kingdom, and therefore I'll give you an example of how we can benefit from that union.

The trans-European network, TEN, was created with the stated goals of the creation of an international market and the reinforcement of economic and social cohesion. It made little sense to talk of a big EU market, with freedom of movement within it for goods and services unless the various regions and national networks making up that market were properly linked by a modern and efficient infrastructure. The construction of a trans-European network was also seen as an important element for economic growth and the creation of employment. The treaty establishing the European community first provided a legal basis for the TENs under the terms, which was mentioned by Mark Reckless earlier, contained in the treaty, and articles 156. The European Union must aim to promote the development of trans-European networks as a key element for the creation of the internal market and the reinforcement of economic and social cohesion. This development includes the interconnection and the interoperability of national networks as well as access to such networks.

The economy in north Wales has suffered a lot in recent years, and one of the reasons for this is the ability of the A55 trunk road to handle the high volumes of traffic that pass along it, particularly in peak holiday periods. The A55 is part of the trans-European route, linking the port of Holyhead to Europe, and yet the European Union has not put sufficient funds into the development of that route, and it's been virtually left to the Wales Government and the UK Government to make sure that that is suitable for purpose. And this road has a major impact on the economic viability of the north Wales region, both with regard to business and tourism—

Will you take an intervention, David?

Yes.

Thank you for taking the intervention. I'm sure you're aware that the European Union was more than happy for Welsh routes, both road and rail, to be given core status within the TEN-T networks. It was UK Government that didn't put those routes forward to be connected within TEN-T. Brussels was perfectly happy.

Well, you can argue that, but, of course, the funds were not available. That's what I'm saying, and coming from the European Union, they weren't available. And I'm just going to point out how they can be available within the United Kingdom scenario.

The M4 in south Wales has the same effect on business and leisure as the A55, and when announcing the decision to scrap the improvement scheme at the Brynglas tunnels, the reason given by the First Minister was, first, its escalating cost, and, secondly, environmental concerns. In order to alleviate the first of these obstacles, cost, we believe the Welsh Government should put forward a strong case for the UK Government to use the shared prosperity fund to subsidise Welsh Government funds, both in north and south Wales. Given that it is generally acknowledged that improvements to the Welsh part of the M4 will also have beneficial effects on the economy of the Bristol region and the trans-European nature of the A55, we in Brexit believe a case for the extra funds could be robustly made.

It is the Government's responsibility to put in place infrastructure to maximise the economic prospects of a region. To expedite this, we urge the Welsh Labour Government to deliver the modernisation of the A55 and resurrect the M4 relief road by seeking the financial support from the UK Government in the manner outlined above. This would not be available if we stay within the European Union. Thank you.

This motion expresses support for

'Wales’s membership of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and its indefinite continuance.'

I'm afraid that we on these Plaid Cymru benches can't sign up to that. Why? Firstly, I think we're more than likely discussing a hypothetical. It would be foolish in the extreme, I believe, to fully commit ourselves in perpetuity to a state that is perhaps unlikely to exist in its current form for very long. Scottish independence seems to me to be pretty inevitable in the coming years, and the rapidly moving picture regarding Irish unity is one that is likely, I think, to do nothing other than gather pace in coming months and years. So, not only are we talking about a hypothetical, we're also being asked to vote on something that could well be beyond our control. We could, of course, choose to commit ourselves to being a servile annex to England in a post-Scottish independence, post-Irish unity world, but the recent upsurge in interest in the independence question here in Wales suggests that's becoming a less and less attractive proposition to an awakening Welsh public.

So, by all means, let's—[Interruption.] Of course.

I find it very difficult to understand why Plaid Cymru would prefer to be a region in a huge conglomeration of regions that stretches from the Baltic to the Aegean, rather than be a nation in a unity of nations we call the United Kingdom. You have been told quite categorically that you will not be recognised as a nation in Europe.

As an independent nation we would certainly be recognised as a nation throughout the whole world. My wish is for that Welsh nation to develop those international networks that your party seems determined to break—building walls rather than building bridges.

But, by all means, let's talk about our transport infrastructure, as I'm always eager to, on how to improve connectivity to strengthen our economy, but let's do it in the spirit of real ambition for our country as an equal partner alongside England, Scotland, our friends across the Irish sea and indeed our friends across the English channel. Just a reminder of the legacy of transport within a United Kingdom context: it's taken till now to have a single mile of electrified railway here in Wales, and even then, when it gets switched on it will only be as far as Cardiff because the UK Government decided that's how far it should go. All our multilane highways run east-west; those routes are very, very important, of course, but where are the north-south routes that could, in the same way, have helped create an integrated Welsh economy? There's no rail connection down the west coast of Wales at all. I reckon I could cycle quicker from Blaenau Ffestiniog to Carmarthen than to go on the train, taking about eight hours. On rail spending, we get 1 per cent of the money that's available to improve and expand rail networks, when we have 11 per cent of the rail network. HS2—I'm sure you all know that, as HS2 spending goes up, rail spending in Wales goes down because it's considered to be a Wales-and-England project, even though every study shows that the Welsh economy will be harmed by HS2. That's the legacy of the UK, and it's the UK Government, as I pointed out earlier, that decided that Wales did not deserve to have a single mile of core status rail or road within the TEN-T networks. Take turns—Mark Isherwood first.

As a Member representing a north Wales constituency, will you acknowledge those same studies said that north Wales would benefit?

Only if they get some decisions on Crewe, correct, is there a chance that parts of north Wales in the north-east may not be harmed, but the Welsh economy as a whole, on which we will be basing our tax base in years to come, will be harmed. Every study shows that. Mark Reckless.

I agree with what the Member says, and it's one reason why we're keen to cancel HS2, but it's also, as David T.C. Davies, the Chair of the Welsh Affairs Select Committee said on Sunday night to the Brexit Minister, because of HS2, because of that unfairness, he was wanting to push to get UK Government to pay for the M4 relief road.

It's very interesting—consensus can build between politicians here in Wales and politicians in Westminster. It's happened over air passenger duty, for example. But still, because the cards are held by UK Government, it is up to them, not us as a nation what we get to decide on the future of our transport network. So, there's a catalogue of examples that I could give of why the UK is not a positive legacy for Wales when you look at transport. If you want to make the case for the UK, I'd suggest transport was a pretty poor choice of topic, and in fact I think it's getting more and more difficult for you to choose a topic that says that the UK is our best bet.

It was believed that the British empire would never see the sun set on it—that the empire was set for, and I quote the Brexit Party, 'indefinite continuance'. But the sun did set on it. Now we look to a new dawn, so rub your eyes and join us on the journey.

When I was first elected to this place, I was actually quite devo-friendly. I saw opportunities for Wales in devolution if we used the powers the Assembly had to liberalise the economy and be a more attractive location for investment, and so on and so forth. But I'm afraid to say that three years' experience here has turned me to the other direction. I've seen how the one-party state works. When we started out, of course, we prevented, in coalition with Plaid Cymru and the Conservatives, the Welsh Government being re-appointed, and that would have been a seismic shock to the system if we could have continued that. But there was of course—[Interruption.] Let me finish my sentence first. Sadly, Plaid Cymru always prop up a Labour Government, and that means that we can never see anything other than a left-wing government as things are at the moment. So, I can't see any reason why anybody who is even moderately right-of-centre could think that devolution could be a success.

Unless I'm much mistaken, I recall the Member speaking in July about a desire for more devolution, and I don't think he'd been back to this place before I heard reports of him speaking in Newport saying that he now wanted to abolish the Assembly. Why the change over the summer recess? 

I don't know what the former member of UKIP and the former member of the Conservative group, and much else besides, has been doing over the summer, but I've been doing a bit of thinking. I now realise that devolution by any measure has been a failure, and that is something with which a very large proportion of people in Wales agree with. There was an S4C poll that was done earlier this year, and people were asked whether they thought that the Assembly had changed how Wales is governed for the better, and only 34 per cent answered that question in the affirmative. When they were asked whether they thought it had been better for the health service, only 23 per cent said 'yes'. So, it certainly hasn't been the case that the Welsh people have been convinced that the efforts of this place and the Welsh Government have benefited them.

Therefore, we think that, after 20 years, it's right that the people should be asked again to give their opinion on whether they want to continue this experiment or not. I know that the Labour Party now is very keen, in Wales at any rate, to have another referendum, to have a people's vote, and Plaid Cymru, of course, have always been keen to have a people's vote on independence, and so we could combine the two with a series of questions. I think the Welsh people should be able to decide whether this devolution experiment has been a success or not, and whether there isn't another way forward that would be better, and perhaps go on beyond devolution and devolve powers further.

Why don't we democratise the health service in Wales, for example, considering that the health service has been so disastrously mismanaged from Cardiff, and continues to be disastrously mismanaged from Cardiff? We could take devolution even further down to the people than here in Cardiff. We could have further devolution in the education system as well, and put the education Minister out of a job. We could give more powers to local authority to take an independent view of the way they want to manage their own schools within their own areas. I think that could be very healthy for democracy as well. So, that could be another way of re-engaging with the people who actually still, to a very large extent, have no idea what are the powers of this place. It's still the case that a very large proportion of the Welsh people don't know that the health service has been devolved. Surely, that is a failure if ever there was one, considering that it takes half of the Welsh Government's budget.

Now, when devolution was first mooted, a case was made for it on the basis that it would help to keep the union together—the union of the United Kingdom, that is. And now we see that the United Kingdom is being rent apart, actually, despite devolution, most particularly, obviously, in Scotland. Certainly, the existence of the Scottish Parliament has done nothing to assuage the demand for political independence in Scotland, something which Plaid Cymru would be very much in favour of, but I as a unionist, of course, am very alarmed by that. And the existence of the Scottish Government has made it more likely that we will see the United Kingdom break up, rather than less. There are other reasons for that, of course, not least, as was pointed out earlier on, the confusion that's been created by the way that Westminster has mismanaged Brexit, where we have a 'remain' Parliament and a 'leave' people, and the confusion that that has caused has enabled Scotland, of course, to make it more difficult for us to deliver on the referendum result.

And we also see in the Labour Party that some of its members have been flirting with a move towards further independence as well, and the First Minister said in July that Wales's support for the union in the United Kingdom is not unconditional. So, I say that what we need after 20 years of experience of devolution is to put the case to the people yet again. Therefore, we need to go beyond devolution and we need to reconnect with the people of Wales, and get a better deal after 20 years of total failure.           

The Brexit Minister, Jeremy Miles. 

Thank you, Llywydd. The motion tabled by the Brexit Party is slightly strange. The Welsh Government can agree with some of it, but disagrees with much else. Let me start with the issues I can agree on, before highlighting the deficiencies of the motion. It supports Wales's membership of the United Kingdom of Great Britain. It calls for further devolution, which is a  development to be welcomed given the iffy history of Brexit Party and former UKIP politicians and their attitude towards devolution. The Welsh Government has called on a number of occasions for APD to be devolved to Wales, as has happened in Northern Ireland and in Scotland, and this motion supports that demand. The Tory Government, of course, has put a veto on this time and time again, despite the unanimous recommendation made by the Welsh Affairs Committee in the House of Commons.

Most strange, the motion recognises the significant investment in our infrastructure through the European Union over the past 20 years. Yet, the 'leave' side in the 2016 referendum was very unwilling to discuss the fact that Wales benefited from European funding, not only in terms of infrastructure but also skills programmes such as apprenticeships and workforce development within businesses, for business finance through the Welsh development bank—which was a huge success—and in terms of innovation, research and development.

Finally, it calls on the UK Government to increase its investment in infrastructure. This is certainly something that we have called for ourselves. Time and again, Conservative Governments over the past decade have disappointed Wales within those policy areas they have responsibility for. The electrification of the rail line to Swansea was cancelled.

Will the Member give way?

Yes, indeed.

He says that our motion refers to funding from the European Union. It doesn't; it refers to the powers the European Union took over the trans-European network, and isn't the issue. In some of those, they regulate them and they require certain standards, and then require, in this case, Wales to pay for them.

Actually, the TEN-T road routes in Wales have benefited enormously from European funding through ERDF, and, for the road network, we are confident we'll meet the TEN-T standards. But worryingly, if we leave the European Union, the loss of TEN-T would result, we fear, in a substantial decommitment to electrifying the Welsh rail network in the north to Holyhead and in the south to Milford Haven. That's, of course, investment we expect the UK Government to honour.

But I was listing the number of ways in which the UK Government has failed to meet its obligations to us in Wales: the failure of the Swansea bay tidal lagoon, failure to support the steel industry. And the Member, in his speech, mentioned the M4 and his apparent support now for the black route, though he campaigned on, and I believe wrote the manifesto in 2016 that said the M4 black route was too expensive and would blow, as he put it, the majority of the Welsh capital budget, and criticised in particular the adverse environmental impact of it, which were exactly the reasons the First Minister gave in not proceeding with it. So, I think it is well to have some degree of consistency in relation to that. [Interruption.] Yes.

We think it should be built. We campaigned for an M4 relief road. The colour of it or the exact route is a subsidiary issue to Wales needing it to be built.

Well, the record will show that you just asked for the black route to be built. So, we can perhaps check the record after this debate. 

Now to the elements of the motion that we can't accept. Firstly, it is inconsistent about devolution. I fail to see how it's possible to call for further devolution and yet support the UK Government's hollow concept of the shared prosperity fund as a way of replacing funds that Wales has been managing for decades to invest in matters within our devolved competence. It's hollow because, for more than two years, they have failed to spell out any concrete ideas about how it would work or what it would do. What is clear, however, is that it would mean the UK Government hijacking the funding that formerly came unmediated to Wales from the European Union and hobbling this National Assembly and Welsh Government from using it to realise a coherent development strategy. It's clearly an attack on the powers of the Assembly, and I think a party committed genuinely to devolution couldn't support that proposition. We've been clear that if and when the UK transitions out of the EU structural funds, not a penny should be lost and not a power stolen. 

Next, the union. As a Government, we want the union to flourish. But, unlike the motion, we recognise that that can only happen if there is radical reform of the constitution, including inter-governmental relations—reform that the current Government is, at best, neglectful of and, at worst, uninterested in. Llywydd, at no time has the union been under greater strain. Devolution is or should be an embedded element of our constitution, not something which is seen as a gift from Westminster and Whitehall, and the debate about devolution is not just about the separate relations between the UK and each of the devolved nations—it needs to address how the UK as a whole should be governed. And we need to recognise that power ultimately flows bottom up, not, as the outdated doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty and the royal prerogative, top down, and that the future of the union relies on the consent of the peoples and electorates of Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and England.

A key principle for the devolution of powers, used by independent bodies that have recommended the devolution of air passenger duty, rail infrastructure, policing and justice to Wales, is subsidiarity. We support strongly the devolution of further powers in those areas, and for the powers of the devolved institutions to be founded on a coherent set of responsibilities allocated in accordance with the subsidiarity principle. What the First Minister has called the 'grace and favour' model of devolution has most dramatically failed in the case of Brexit, where the UK Government has repeatedly failed to live up to its commitments to work with the devolved Governments and institutions to agree an approach to the negotiations, and the fact that the current Government sees no reason—as a Minister told the External Affairs and Additional Legislation Committee on Monday—to share papers shared with the EU negotiators not merely in advance, but at all, with us is both telling and very disturbing. And it’s Brexit that, of course, most obviously threatens the future of the union, with a ‘no deal’ Brexit recklessly taking a wrecking ball to the UK constitution, making it likely that Scotland will vote when it’s allowed to for independence, and also boosting the case for what would almost certainly be a divisive border poll in Ireland.

So, in ending, let me turn to Brexit. We do indeed note that Wales, like the UK as a whole, voted to leave in 2016, and, as we have made clear here many times, as a Welsh Government, we tried to honour that result. But it’s about time that those who campaigned to leave started to honour the promises they made. [Interruption.] Many of the claims made by the leave campaign have been left in tatters, which is why the Member barracks me a sedentary position. 'The easiest free-trade agreement in history', it was said. The German car manufacturers begging the EU to sacrifice their political values, having our cake and eating it, more money for the NHS, an abrupt end to immigration—where are those claims now as we face the potential of a 'no deal' Brexit that threatens deep and lasting damage to our country and our people? Tomorrow we will publish a full, evidence-based case for our decision to call, after three years, three wasted years, of mismanaged, disastrous negotiations and with jobs and investment leaching from our economy, for a second referendum and to pledge to campaign to remain in the EU. The objective case is unanswerable, and our amendments, unlike the original motion, emphasise reform, democracy and the well-being of the people of Wales, and I urge Members to support those principles in amending the motion.

I call on Caroline Jones to reply to the debate.

Diolch, Llywydd. Before I come on to individual contributions, I’d just like to put the view forward that the union of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is one of the greatest and long-lasting unions in history, and for well over 300 years this union has endured. And, despite calls for independence— and initially, when devolution when devolution was given to Wales, the Blair Government handled the devolution settlement not very well, which took over a decade to sort out, but, still, the union endures. And, just over five years ago, Scotland voted overwhelmingly to remain a part of the union, and the latest polls show that the vast majority of Scottish voters wish to remain part of the UK. Wales also remains opposed to leaving the United Kingdom. And the motion before you today underlines the principle that we are stronger together, and that each part of the union is important as a whole. The investment in Wales benefits the entirety of the UK, so we cannot therefore exclude involvement, can we, from the UK Government? And devolution isn’t a once done and then forgotten event. So, we have to ensure any settlement as well, post Brexit, is fair and benefits all parts of the UK. But, obviously, I'm concerned about Wales; I'm part of the Welsh Parliament and I want to represent the people of Wales as fully as I can. [Interruption.] We will—. Oh, here he goes again about an election. Do you want to—? I'll tell you what, you and I have a discussion outside, all right, if you don't mind. 

No, no; discussions are held in here on the record. Carry on, Caroline Jones. 

Would he like to stand up for an intervention, Llywydd, please?

I don't think he is. Carry on. 

Okay. We will—[Interruption.] We will therefore be voting against all of the Welsh Government's amendments. We believe, as do the majority of the Welsh public, that we are better off outside of the EU and we firmly believe that, by Welsh Government seeking to ignore the results of the 2016 referendum, they are abandoning democracy. We will be supporting the Welsh Conservatives' amendment.

But, as I said, I would like to thank everyone who took part in the debate, and Mark has spoken strongly to be in—[Interruption.] Yes, certainly, David.

I thank the Member for taking the intervention. You've just said you'll be supporting the Welsh Conservatives' amendment, which is an amendment to point 5, which talks about the shared prosperity fund and how you intend to use that to fund infrastructure projects. Do you actually understand what makes that the shared prosperity fund and why it's there? It's the European Social Fund, the European Regional Development Fund—it's that money that we're entitled to for other projects. It's not about the infrastructures you want to cover; it's about the projects and social needs of our communities. 

It hasn't been decided upon yet, David. 

You don't even know what it means.

Of course I do. It hasn't been decided yet. So—

Oh, so you're not going to have that money come to us.

So, we had Mark—. The first contribution was obviously from Mark Reckless, who highlighted that we would like for rail to be devolved to Wales. We want more devolution. And he spoke of the importance of infrastructure and highlighted the importance of connectivity, as did David Rowlands. 

I am interested in Rhun's contribution, because he has stated about infrastructure as well and how it must be improved. He highlighted the electrification issue, which we all know is very important to various parts of Wales. He also said, on the west coast, there was no rail connection. 

Darren also highlighted that he was in favour of devolution and of working all together—all parties, cross-party groups working together to make devolution work.

Because—. Neil Hamilton's contribution obviously came as a surprise because I thought, when you worked initially, that you were in favour of devolution, so it has come as a bit of a surprise that you've now decided that you want a referendum on the Assembly. Obviously, I don't share your views. 

You did when you were in our party. 

No, I never did. I always—. No, no, no. I always wanted devolution, and I was always in favour—. I was always in favour of it. So, there we are. So, he—[Interruption.] So, he's got it wrong there, but he never really did know the people that he was supposed to be leading anyway. So, we'll leave that—[Interruption.] So, we'll leave that there.

So, I would just like to—[Interruption.] So, I would just like to say thank you, everyone, for your contributions. I think it's been a good debate. Thank you so much. 

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

We've now reached voting time, unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung. 

The only vote is the vote on the Brexit Party debate on the UK and the EU. I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Caroline Jones. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 4, no abstentions, 42 against. Therefore the motion is not agreed.

A vote on the amendment, now, and I call for a vote on amendment 1. Open the vote. Amendment 1, tabled in the name of Rebecca Evans. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 26, eight abstentions, 13 against. Therefore amendment 1 is agreed. 

Amendment 2. I call for a vote on amendment 2, tabled in the name of Rebecca Evans. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 32, no abstentions, 15 against. Therefore amendment 2 is agreed. 

The next vote is on amendment 3, tabled in the name of Rebecca Evans. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 26, six abstentions, 15 against. Therefore amendment 3 is agreed. 

Amendment 4 is the next amendment, and, if amendment 4 is agreed, amendment 5 will be deselected. So, a vote on amendment 4, tabled in the name of Rebecca Evans. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 31, no abstentions, 15 against. Therefore amendment 4 is agreed; amendment 5 is deselected. 

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

Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 25, no abstentions, 22 against. Therefore the motion as amended is agreed. 

Therefore, we now reach the last item on the agenda today. That item is the short debate. I ask Members to leave the Chamber quickly and quietly, and I call on Jayne Bryant to speak on the short debate. Jayne Bryant. 

Diolch, Llywydd. I've agreed to give a minute in this debate to Mark Isherwood, Jack Sargeant, Hefin David and John Griffiths. The emotional and mental well-being of young people is a challenge, and that has come to the forefront in recent times. It has been recognised by politicians, parents, teachers and by young people themselves. It was telling that so many of the young people who stood for the Youth Parliament made this their priority. Young people today have more information at their fingertips than any other previous generation, but face greater challenges on the social, emotional side of growing up. It's our responsibility to listen and act. Adverse childhood experiences can have a significant detrimental impact on the life chances and attainment of young people. In 2015, research by Public Health Wales found that 47 per cent of the Welsh population had experienced at least one ACE before the age of 18, and 14 per cent four or more. Attitudes, beliefs and behaviours learnt during these very early years are often carried into adulthood, and it's imperative that we do all we can to support and nurture children. If we get things right early on, there is an ever-growing mountain of evidence to show that this will have a positive impact on not only the individual, but on society as a whole. 

A mentally healthy school sees positive mental health and well-being as fundamental to its values. Emotional health and well-being cannot be confined to just lessons. It must be part of the very ethos of the whole-school approach. I'm proud to say that there's been some really positive progress on this subject through the Assembly and through the determination of my colleague Lynne Neagle. Lynne has been a passionate advocate of improving the mental and emotional well-being of our children and young people, and has been a strong advocate for a whole-school approach. I'd like to take this opportunity to pay tribute to Lynne's work and the Children, Young People and Education Committee. The CYPE committee produced a clear, evidence-based report, 'Mind over Matter', which sets challenges to Welsh Government. 'Mind over Matter' found broad consensus that school settings are key to promoting emotional well-being and good mental health, that the preventative approach needs to be embedded within the ethos of a school, not just the lessons taught, and that teachers are not solely responsible, but it requires joint working between professionals from across sectors—health, education, social care, third sector and youth work are key.

I'm very pleased to say that, in my constituency of Newport West, you do not have to look too far to find examples of schools that are trying to embrace these very principles—schools that are doing excellent work on nurturing our children and young people, and trying innovative ways to put student well-being at the heart of everything they do. Millbrook Primary School in Bettws is a school that has embraced the whole-school approach, and is doing it well. To give some background, Bettws is a community of 8,000 people. It's an area with high levels of deprivation, with six lower super output areas on the estate.

The leadership team at Millbrook primary have been researching approaches to improve the life chances and attainment of children for many years. They've looked for good practice locally, nationally, and internationally. Their motto is 'Learning about caring, caring about learning', and their mission is to make a positive difference to the lives of the young people that they work with. To be the most effective, they aim to engage with children and their families from a very early age. The philosophy at Millbrook is that happy children learn. They feel passionately that it takes a whole village to raise a child, and believe that, by nurturing families, and the community, it provides young people with the very best opportunity to achieve. The school ethos is to be outward-looking. They encourage children and families to share cultures, and to broaden horizons. The school has an onsite Confucius classroom, and they teach Mandarin.

Working closely with Newport City Council, and other key partners, they've developed a multi-agency approach, piloting the Welsh Government's Children First initiative, a place-based approach to reduce inequalities and to mitigate the impact of adverse childhood experiences. Earlier this year, I had the privilege of visiting the school, alongside the Deputy Minister for Health and Social Services, Julie Morgan, and we saw first-hand the way that this worked, and you really couldn't fail to be impressed. Since this has been established, they've seen a significant reduction in the numbers of children on the child protection register. The most influential factor for this is the way in which agencies work together. Every relationship formed is based on the difference that it could make to the community, and to the young person's life. It has meant that these partnerships are no longer random acts of support, but carefully thought out and planned.

Millbrook's inspirational headteacher, Lindsey Watkins, says that the hope is that, when someone comes to the school, they feel welcomed, and that permeates throughout the building, so that all agencies are seen as one seamless team. One of the assets in Millbrook is a dedicated family room. It allows the school to provide a well-being cafe and mindfulness courses for families. The room also allows family access to other agencies on an informal basis, which helps build relationships and trust between agencies and families. For example, some families have self-referred into the prevention team. In addition, the school offers a range of family learning programmes and family activities that support well-being.

Millbrook prides itself on providing a bespoke package of well-being support for children and families across the school. This includes emotional literacy support and a range of nurture and welfare programmes. These are used to provide early intervention, especially when a child has faced trauma in their life. One young person who experienced trauma gave their experience—and I quote: 'While we all have bumps in the road at some time, I had a bump in the road when my parents split up and my mum was very ill. I was so upset, I used to come to school and cry. But it was okay, because I was able to talk to Miss. Every morning, when I came in upset, she would make me a drink, we would sit and have a chat, and I felt better. I'm okay now, but I know, if I ever needed her, then she would be there for me.'

Millbrook's partnership work has also seen bonds form with another Children First pioneer school in Newport West, Pillgwenlly Primary School. The programme focuses on two schools, in two communities, with one approach. Both schools involved have researched ways of building resilience in the two communities, and the children have been at the heart of that work. Working with organisations like Barnardo's Cymru and Save the Children Cymru, groups of pupils from Millbrook and from Pillgwenlly have worked together to learn how to conduct their own community consultation plans. Children are being empowered and they are learning about the rights of a child, democracy and citizenship, working with the community to effect positive change.

Pillgwenlly primary has also become a sector-leading primary school in nurture provision, and I was pleased to join the education Minister visiting Pillgwenlly primary to see this in practice. Nurture supports the most disadvantaged pupils and is specifically recommended by Estyn as a support approach for looked-after children. The charity nurtureuk are celebrating their fiftieth anniversary in 2019, and I'm glad to see that they're supporting 40 schools in Wales with their nurturing programme. Pillgwenlly opened its first nurture room in 2004. This provides a place where children can learn in a nurture setting and their parents can join them for part of the week. All pupils have a base class, but attend the family nurture room for over half of their week. They learn alongside their parents for 10 per cent to 20 per cent of their time, and Pilgwenlly's stated priority is

'to enable our children to form attachments with others, to make the right choices and to understand why they make these choices—to be resilient and reflective.'

Another school that's just started doing this is Malpas Court Primary School. They have been on the national nurturing schools programme for one year and the school opened a new nurture room in September for the pupils in need of the most support. Within three weeks, the school said that they've already seen the impact that the nurture room has had to support children and make them feel safe. Pillgwenlly and Malpas Court's experience of the benefits of this approach are similar to that of Millbrook. They say that this works most effectively when the school as a whole community is committed to maximising the social and educational engagement of all, and when nurture groups are positively contributing and effecting whole-school culture and practices, facilitating a more nurturing environment throughout the school.

I've been incredibly impressed and heartened by the work of these schools in my constituency and I would encourage all Assembly Members, if they haven't already, to go and see a school that has adopted a whole-school approach in their area. A whole-school approach cannot be led by the schools alone. The 'Mind over matter' report concludes that

'it is crucial to develop a whole-school approach, embedding well-being into the entire school ethos, the curriculum, and staff training and professional development. A substantial step change is needed to realise this ambition.'

We have a great opportunity and we must lead on this. I know that, following the committee's report, a joint ministerial task and finish group was established to accelerate this work. I thank the Minister for her work on this and hope that progress is being made at pace. Millbrook, Malpas Court and Pillgwenlly primaries are shining examples. I look forward to a time when all Welsh children are able to benefit from the whole-school approach.

With regard to that approach to nurture, I wanted to share an example in my constituency of exactly the same whole-school approach to nurture. Nant-y-Parc primary in the Aber valley involves daily efforts to understand the emotional needs of pupils by teachers, emotional literacy groups and support for staff well-being. The school runs emotional literacy groups throughout the year groups of the school and they also help with difficulties like, for example, bereavement. One staff member—and I want to quote that staff member—told me: 'Placing a high emphasis on well-being allows staff and pupils to feel valued. It's allowed me to form positive working relationships and I feel motivated to give to pupils as I feel appreciated.'

Can I thank Jayne Bryant for offering me some time in this very important debate, and give a personal thank you to Jayne as well? As a sufferer of poor mental health, which I've said many times, I recognise the support that you give to others and look after their well-being as well. So, thank you, Jayne.

Acting Presiding Officer, I'd like to put on record a school in my constituency as well, Ysgol Tŷ Ffynnon, which has taken on this approach and actually, earlier this year, became the first school in Wales to complete the national nurturing schools programme—a two-year programme, which I fully endorse to other schools to take part in around Wales. As part of this, the whole school has embraced the six principles of nurture, and the nurture group sessions, as Hefin says, allow their pupils to take part in activities that develop self-awareness, build self-esteem, perseverance and positive thinking. But that also helps the teachers and the families as well; it's all about looking after each other, being kind to each other and giving each other respect throughout the day. So, I'm very proud of the school in my constituency, Ysgol Tŷ Ffynnon, and I know they're honoured to be the first school known in Wales as a nurture school, but not just that, a nurture school for the whole community, as well. So, thank you, Jayne; thank you, Presiding Officer.

May I congratulate Jayne as well for bringing this very important and progressive set of matters to the Assembly today? It's so important that children get the best start in life, isn't it? None of us know what life may throw at us, so developing that emotional resilience is so important for the whole of our life course. I'd like to, as have others, highlight a school in my constituency, Somerton primary, which has been recognised by Estyn as showing a very good example in terms of the nurture approach. They've been running nurtureuk's national nurturing schools programme, and staff there believe it's made a real, positive difference to the pupils in that school. If I, as Hefin did, could just quote one of the staff members, who said that, 'It has really helped a significant change for the better, with growing confidence and self-esteem, sharing and co-operating, and producing better strategies to cope in different social situations. Behaviour and attitudes to learning have all improved.'

Well, we heard that 40 schools in Wales are currently on nurtureuk's national nurturing schools programme, building a whole-school nurturing approach, but also, according to nurtureuk research, in 2015, there were 144 schools in Wales with some form of nurture provision, an increase on 101 from 2007. On the work of schools in north Wales, in particular we heard reference from Jack to Ysgol Tŷ Ffynnon in Shotton, but also Ysgol Maesincla in Caernarfon—both excellent examples of settings taking a whole-school approach to nurture. I've often given attention to school exclusions, and particularly how these disproportionately impact pupils with additional learning needs. Ysgol Maesincla has seen a reduction in exclusions since it's opened its nurture groups and adopted a whole-school approach. Similarly, in Shotton, Ysgol Tŷ Ffynnon has said that during its nurture group sessions, its pupils take part in activities to develop self-awareness, build self-esteem, perseverance and positive thinking, which support their well-being, behaviour and, therefore, their learning. 

I call on the Minister for Education to reply—Kirsty Williams.

Thank you very much, acting Presiding Officer. I'd like to start by thanking Jayne for bringing forward this debate today and for describing the fantastic practice of her local schools. It always gives me a huge amount of pleasure to hear from Assembly Members of the fantastic work that our teachers and support staff are doing every day in communities the length and breadth of Wales.

As has already been said, this is a hugely important issue, and one that I believe we are making good progress upon, particularly since the publication of the Children, Young People and Education Committee's 'Mind over matter' report last April. Like Jayne, I'd like to thank all Members of that committee for their work in this area, and in particular to acknowledge Lynne Neagle's contribution in pushing this agenda forward. We all have a role and responsibility to promote mental well-being and build young people's resilience. Schools are very much on the front line of this issue, and that's why school staff need the skills, the knowledge and the understanding to support our children. Now, that does not mean school staff becoming experts in psychology or psychiatry, but what it does mean is that they're able to see when a child is struggling emotionally, they recognise the signs of distress, and, crucially, have access to the support they need to enable a young person to continue to engage in their education.

Our national mission action plan sets out how we intend to improve the school system by developing a transformational curriculum and assessment arrangements that will place well-being at the heart of our education system. Our new curriculum for Wales is the anchor for our commitment to emotional well-being, supporting young people to become healthy, confident individuals, building their mental and emotional well-being by developing their self-esteem, their resilience and empathy.

But, actually, what does that mean in practice and what is a whole-school approach? Teachers tell us that they are concerned about their students' mental health. They feel that they're being asked to deal with mental health issues outside their competencies as teachers, and they often feel unsupported by specialist services. There is a clear need for teachers to have help and support in responding to children experiencing difficulties such as anxiety, low mood and compulsive self-harm or conduct disorders.

But, it's also important, I think, that we must not medicalise the process of growing up. This is what young people themselves told us in the 2016 'Making Sense' report, compiled by and representing the views of young people. Almost 40 per cent in that survey cite that their teacher is a person whom they would prefer to seek support from. This theme was further developed in 'Mind over matter', which highlighted the important role of education in addressing the emotional and mental health needs of young people. And in particular, the needs of the so-called 'missing middle', young people with real emotional problems but who aren't necessarily mentally ill and who often find themselves with little support.

And that's why, as Jayne referred to, the Minister for Health and Social Services and I convened the joint ministerial task and finish group in September 2017. Experts from across the field of education and health have been gathered together to advise us on the work that we need to do to deliver a whole-school approach to emotional and mental well-being. Ensuring not just teachers but everyone who works in our schools are able to contribute positively to young people's well-being.

When I gave evidence to the committee in June, I indicated that I am committed to producing a framework that will support schools in developing and implementing consistent whole-school approaches, and it will provide guidance to schools on assessing their own well-being needs and strengths, and support them in developing a plan of action to address issues identified following assessment, backed by robust monitoring and evaluation arrangements. We will support schools in this work with a range of resources to help them promote mental well-being. 

I'm pleased to say that we're not starting with a blank sheet of paper. We have already, as we've heard from Members around this room, really good foundations on which we can build. For instance, as Jayne said, I know from my visit to Pill Primary School in Newport last year, more schools—more and more—are recognising nurture groups as a proven means to help young people at both primary and secondary phases. It helps them to develop trust and communication skills and improves their self-esteem. And they can be really effective when young people have experienced sudden severe trauma, when they are on the verge of becoming school refusers, and also as a support to parents and carers to build bridges with schools and education and to help engage them in their children's learning, when often they themselves have not necessarily had a positive experience of education when they were small.

Our schools' counselling services support over 11,500 young people annually, but I recognise there is still too much variation in waiting times for those services, and that's why the Minister for health and I have recently agreed additional funding to address some of the variation in provision, addressing long waiting lists and promoting collaborative arrangements across local authorities and health boards to improve provision. This funding forms part of a wider investment of £2.5 million this year to improve not just counselling provision, but also to train our school staff in their own and their students' emotional well-being, and to provide and to test both universal and targeted interventions in school.

On World Suicide Prevention Day, I was also very pleased to launch our new suicide and self-harm guidance, developed specifically to support teachers and professionals who regularly come into contact with young people. That guidance focuses on early intervention and the safe management of self-harm and suicidal thoughts when they arise. It provides a quick and accessible source of advice and good practice for practitioners. If Members have not yet had a chance to read those resources, I really would urge you to do so. I'm grateful for the professionals that have helped produce them. 

Our CAMHS school in-reach pilots are also showing real benefits since their launch, and I'm very pleased to announce that we have agreed extra funding to extend the pilots until December 2020 to coincide with the final evaluation report of that programme, and this has been backed by additional funding. The pilots demonstrate that developing those crucial relationships—and Jayne spoke about this a lot—across organisational boundaries is the key to delivering success. School staff report benefits in having a contact with whom they can discuss issues directly, and crucially in a timely fashion. This benefits not only young people but also teachers who feel better supported to address their children and young people's needs.

But I know—I very much know—that we can do so much more. I want to build on this momentum by further developing activity to support teachers so that they have a greater understanding of child development, especially during those crucial adolescent years, which can be really difficult for everybody, and the knowledge to learn and engage with emerging issues around emotional and mental well-being for learners. And, working with our universities, we will develop learning resources for student teachers and ensure that similar support is available to existing teachers.

It's also crucial to me that we continue to consult with young people themselves about what further support we should be providing to them. And that's why we have convened a youth stakeholder group, drawn from diverse geographical and social backgrounds, including mental health service users themselves. I have to say, I have been hugely impressed with their commitment to this process, their knowledge and their boundless enthusiasm. Together with the Welsh Youth Parliament, which has, as we've heard, agreed that emotional and mental health support should be one of their main issues, I'm sure that they, alongside Lynne Neagle, will continue to hold Welsh Government to account for our work in this area.

Like everyone here left in this Chamber this evening, I want every young person in Wales to flourish. I want them to learn and I want them to succeed, particularly in terms of the development of a whole-school approach to support those with emotional health and well-being issues. It's not an either/or, acting Presiding Officer, it's of equal importance, intrinsically linked to their ability to succeed in education. And I want, once again, to thank Jayne and colleagues for their contributions this evening. Diolch yn fawr.

That brings today's proceedings to a close.