National Assembly for Wales

I call Members to order.

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

Llywydd, thank you. The commission's report is an important landmark, which deserves serious and careful consideration. I will be making an oral statement on the report later this afternoon. 

Thank you for that answer. The report concluded that the Tory cuts to legal aid have hit Wales disproportionately hard—their words, not mine. Since the budget was slashed in 2013, the number of firms providing legal aid in Wales has fallen by nearly a third, creating what the report calls 'advice deserts' in many parts of the country. So, in response to the commission's report, how will your Government promote equitable access to justice as a distinctly Welsh legal system emerges in the coming years?

Well, Llywydd, I thank Joyce Watson for that important question. She's quite right, of course—the report highlights that whereas legal aid cuts in England have been a staggering 28 per cent in real terms, in Wales the cut has been 37 per cent and that that has left so many vulnerable people without access to the advice that they need when relying on the justice system. And just as there have been cuts in legal aid, so other cuts in the system. Court closures in Wales—50 courts in 2010, 28 courts left today, and people expected to travel 20, 30 miles to attend a court hearing. I see in the report, Llywydd, that the Ministry of Justice believe that it is reasonable, if you are a litigant or a witness, that you would leave your home by 7 o'clock in the morning and wouldn't return to it until 7.30 at night and that that is a reasonable expectation of somebody who may be doing that two or three days in a row to attend a hearing. We don't regard that as acceptable here in Wales and neither did Lord Justice Thomas in his report. 

Llywydd, the report sets out the way in which the Welsh Government has had to deploy our budget to make good on the deficits that have been created by cuts imposed upon us by the UK Government—a single advice fund with over £8 million in grant funding made available to information and advice services for 2020. This is plugging gaps that should not be there, and it's money that would otherwise be allocated to services for which this Assembly is responsible. But we do it because of the scale of challenge that there is there—a scale of challenge that this report exposes. 

The benefits of devolving the criminal justice system have been clear for a long time to Plaid Cymru. It was the basis of a policy paper that I wrote back in 2008, called 'Safer Communities'. So, it was heartening to see the findings of the commission on justice back this position up when the report was published. The evidence provided by this independent commission was forensic and indisputable. I agree with you when you say that the current situation is unacceptable. With that in mind, will the devolution of the criminal justice system, and specifically the recommendations of the Thomas report, form part of UK Labour's manifesto?

Well, Llywydd, there are a number of us in the Chamber who have long histories of arguing for devolution of aspects of the criminal justice system. I first gave evidence on this topic in 1985, when I gave evidence to a Labour Party commission, where I argued that the probation service should be amongst the first items to be part of devolution that the Labour Party was then planning. The justice commission's report is not yet two weeks old and deserves careful consideration. It will get that from my party, certainly, and I look forward to having a Labour Government at the other end of the M4, where we can have those mature conversations.  

I thank Lynne Neagle for that question, Llywydd. Regular discussions take place between myself and the Minister on a wide range of health and social services matters. These discussions have included support for those bereaved by suicide in Wales. 

Thank you, First Minister. We recently held the first substantive meeting of the new cross-party group on suicide prevention, focusing on suicide bereavement. We had a very powerful presentation from the inspirational Angela Samata, about how, working with those bereaved by suicide, a range of innovative projects have been developed in England, both to support those bereaved by suicide and to prevent further suicides. The Welsh Government committed in its response to the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee's 'Everybody's Business' report to urgently review the postvention pathway now in place in England, in order to adapt it for Wales. Given that we know that bereavement by suicide is a major risk factor for dying by suicide, and that postvention is therefore prevention, when can we expect such a pathway to be in place in Wales, and will you ensure that lived experience is fully taken into account in its development?

Can I thank Lynne Neagle for that supplementary question, and to welcome the formation of the cross-party group on this really important subject? She is right to say that we are committed to developing a national postvention bereavement pathway here in Wales. And this is to be a key priority for the new national lead on suicide prevention, and the three regional workers who will sit alongside the national lead, to make sure that we are able to develop a system in which the help that is already there for people who find themselves bereaved by suicide is not passively available to them and that does not rely on them going out to find the help that is there, but that the help that is available is organised in a way that makes that help actively available to people who find themselves in this position, and finds its way to them not once, but repeatedly over the period in which bereavement will be taking place. Because we know that people who are in that terrible position of suffering a bereavement through suicide are often simply not in a position themselves to go making the first move to get the help that they need. And even sometimes when help comes to them, it may be the wrong moment—it may not be the moment where they are able to take advantage of the help that is offered. So, we need a postvention pathway that is active in taking that help to those individuals and making sure that they are aware of what's available to them, and taking that help is made as easy as possible. And that is absolutely illustrated in the final point that Lynne Neagle made—that that way of doing things is drawn directly from the lived experience of people who have found themselves in this awful position. And we're lucky that they have been willing to contribute that experience to us in Wales, to help with the development of the postvention bereavement pathway.

A fortnight ago, as Chair of the cross-party group on funerals and bereavement, I met Rhian Mannings, who is the founder and chief executive of the all-Wales charity 2 Wish Upon a Star, to discuss their work providing essential bereavement support for families who have suddenly and traumatically lost a child or young adult aged 25 years and under, which may be from suicide, or may be through accident or illness. As she said, sudden death is the forgotten death in Wales. And although they've become a statutory service, effectively, in Wales, working with every health board, every police force, they're receiving no statutory support whatsoever, having to raise every penny themselves. She said they're reducing pressure on mental health teams, helping tackle that unforeseeable trauma of unpredictable death and loss. How, therefore, do you respond to their statement that their services therefore need to be widely known, with a multi-agency approach undertaken, to ensure that this support can be delivered Wales wide and that the severe long-term consequences for the survivors can be reduced?

Well, I respond first of all by saying how fortunate we are in Wales, Llywydd, to have groups like 2 Wish Upon a Star, organisations like Sands, and Bliss, all of whom draw on the enormous efforts of volunteers to provide help to families who find themselves in those deeply distressing situations. It's only a matter of a few weeks ago, Llywydd, that Baby Loss Awareness Week took place, and we had the annual event that I've had the privilege of sponsoring over a number of years now, where a number of Assembly Members, from across the Chamber, attended over at the Pierhead, where we were able to meet directly with people from those services, but also people who had lost a child very early on in that child's life, with a hurt that never goes away, and the need for the opportunity to talk with other people who have experienced the same thing themselves, to have the expert help that 2 Wish Upon a Star and other organisations can provide, was vividly part of the event that was held in the Pierhead. So, I absolutely commend the work that they do. I know that the health service in Wales wants to work carefully alongside them, but never to substitute for the extra ingredient that comes with people who have had that experience themselves, looking to make that available to others and to help them through an experience that they themselves have had to travel sometimes alone. 

Questions now from party leaders. The Plaid Cymru leader, Adam Price. 

Diolch, Llywydd. First Minister, can you say if achieving a score of 500 in each domain of the PISA global education rankings, in reading, mathematics and science, is still the policy of your Government? And can you confirm that the figures for Wales will be published alongside all the other international figures on 3 December, unencumbered by the rules around pre-election period announcements? 

Well, Llywydd, our ambition for PISA is set out in our national mission for education. I've received no advice that suggests to me that those figures will not be published, but we will look to see what other administrations across the United Kingdom do, and we will take advice, as the Member would expect, from those who are responsible for policing any rules there are about publication of such data during a general election period.  

First Minister, I believe it's normal practice for the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development to give advance notice to Governments, summarising the scores before the official announcement. Have you already received such advance notice, and can you say if you expect significant progress to have been made to achieving your target? 

Llywydd, no advanced information has been communicated to the Welsh Government, and, of course, Adam Price makes an important point that these are the OECD's figures, and publication of them will, to an extent, be in their hands, not ours. But we've had no advance notice of the results of the latest round that will be published later this month—

December. 

In December, I beg your pardon. And, of course, we are hopeful that those results will reflect the real efforts that our young people in our schools make in those PISA tests. 

First Minister, your education Minister said in 2017 that we need to make progress in the next set of PISA results if we're to hit the next target. If the news for Wales on 3 December isn't positive at all, or isn't positive enough, what will the response of the Government be in that situation? Will you accept that the strategy isn't working? We've had a PISA target since 2006 after all. Will it be a catalyst for a much needed boost in funding for the education system in Wales? Or will you be tempted to do what you often do under these circumstances, which is to drop the target? 

Well, Llywydd, I don't recognise what the Member has said, and I'm certainly not going to speculate this afternoon on what I might say in a set of hypothetical circumstances that I've no idea what it would mean. It just seems a wholly meaningless question, and I'm not going to be able to provide it with a meaningful answer. 

The leader of the opposition, Paul Davies. 

Diolch, Llywydd. First Minister, I'm sure you'll want to acknowledge this is the second anniversary of our colleague and friend Carl Sargeant's tragic death, and I'm sure you will want to join me in sending our thoughts and prayers to his family, his loved ones and all those affected at this time. 

First Minister, is it acceptable to pay an NHS manager almost £2,000 a day and allow him to work from his home in Spain? 

Well, Llywydd, let me begin by echoing what Paul Davies said. This is a week when many people in this Chamber will be thinking about our colleague and the hurt that is still there following his untimely death only two years ago. So, I'm very pleased indeed to put on record the commitment that this side of the Chamber has to remembering that and to thinking of those most closely associated with him.

Llywydd, the Member refers to a director in the Betsi Cadwaladr trust who has been appointed following the advice of the Public Accounts Committee, which said that the health board should take immediate and urgent action to appoint a director to assist the health board to carry out the necessary reforms. So, the health board has followed the advice of the committee, chaired by his colleague, and I'm sure he'll be glad that the health board has listened so attentively to that advice.

Oh, come on, First Minister. The Public Accounts Committee didn't tell the health board that he should be paid nearly £2,000 a day and actually operate from his home in Spain. They did not say that. And let's look at the facts, shall we? It's understood that under the deal agreed with the health board, management consultant, Phillip Burns, will earn more than £360,000 for a nine-month contract—£360,000 that could be used to recruit actual doctors and nurses, given that north Wales has the second-worst ratio of patients per senior doctor in the United Kingdom, £360,000 that could be spent tackling the high number of patients waiting more than 12 hours in accident and emergency departments, or £360,000 that could be used to help prepare the health board for the winter months. First Minister, do you accept that your Government has failed patients across north Wales, given that this money could have been used to deliver front-line services? And can you tell us what you're doing to rectify this very embarrassing situation?

Well, let me make two or three points in relation to the Member's questions. First of all, I see how fast he runs away from the advice of an Assembly committee when it doesn't suit him.

Dear, dear, dear. That's a pathetic excuse.

The Member thinks it is pathetic. Let me take him on, because he was the Chair of this committee once, and very keen indeed that its advice was followed. The committee makes advice. It said that this health board should urgently appoint somebody of this nature for this purpose. The health board goes and does it. It doesn't suit him then, so he wants to turn it into a question here. The reason that this person has to be paid what he is paid is because of the market that his Government has created in the NHS across our border. [Interruption.] Llywydd, these are exactly the sums of money that his colleagues in England are having to pay every day, and because there is a market created by people of that ilk who think that the NHS ought to be run in a market way, we end up having to pay sums of money of this sort. This is exactly in line with what organisations across our border run under the Government of his party are having to pay every day, and we are caught up in the backwash of the system that his party has created.

First Minister, that is simply not good enough. You are in charge of this health board. You are in charge of running this health board in north Wales, and let me tell you, under your stewardship, Betsi Cadwaladr health board is simply not fit for purpose, and the people of north Wales deserve better. It's unacceptable that whilst you're allowing managers to actually sun themselves up in Spain, people are desperately waiting for treatments and for services. Earlier this year, the Assembly's Public Accounts Committee actually reported that Welsh Government support has been insufficient, and that actions had little practical impact on changing the health board's performance. That's what the Public Accounts Committee reported earlier this year. So, when will your Government step up and show some real leadership on this issue, and what specific targets have you set to take Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board out of special measures?

So, when the advice of the committee suits him, Llywydd, he wants to parade it here. When it doesn't suit him, he wants to dismiss it. It's simply not an acceptable way of trying to conduct public business. Shall I just for a moment defend somebody who is being attacked on the floor of the Assembly, but isn't here, of course, to defend himself, because the individual that he has criticised this afternoon is actually working four days a week in the health board in north Wales, despite the things that he has said on the floor here this afternoon?

Llywydd, what we see is the old Tory trick. We see it every time there is an election. They think—as English providers said yesterday to his Government—that they can weaponise the NHS, that they can make it part of their campaign. Let me tell him now: he's tried it before, it didn't work then, and it's not going to work now either.

Leader of the Brexit Party, Mark Reckless. 

First Minister, 10 Welsh Labour MPs refused to support having an election. One of your AMs in my region has said it is a mistake of historic proportions. Another has said that it's unsafe to have any election until the electoral system is reformed and abuse of politicians is dealt with. Since that Labour AM, notwithstanding our own policies, told a female member of my group to 'eff off' just two weeks ago, and the real—. Do you not agree that is rank hypocrisy and that the real reason Labour resisted having an election is that you fear you will lose and you prefer to block Brexit in this House of Commons?

Well, Llywydd, if the Member has allegations to make about the conduct of any Member of this Assembly, then there are very well-understood ways in which that can be properly raised and investigated and making an allegation of that sort to me in First Minister's questions is certainly not the way for that to be resolved.

I am delighted there is an election. I'm looking forward to everything that I will do in it to persuade the people of Wales to go on doing what they have done for so many years: to support Labour candidates for a Labour Government that will make the real difference that they want to see in their lives.

First Minister, you are in charge of discipline within your group, and I note you look to wash your hands of such matters. Over the coming weeks, First Minister, you, your AMs and your MPs are going to find out exactly how voters feel about the way that you have treated them. You told them that you backed the referendum. You told them that you would respect the result. Yet, since, you've sought to block Brexit and deny their democratic vote. Now you will have your reckoning, will we see the same desperate displacement activity from you as we see from Plaid Cymru? Their ex-leader, Leanne Wood, is so keen on Government from Westminster that she said:

'This election is also about Wales' health service, education, and public services'.

Can we also again look forward to Welsh Labour MPs campaigning on the failings of our NHS?

Well, Llywydd, let me say again to the Member that if he has allegations he wants to make, then there are well-understood ways in which they can and should be made, and his conduct this afternoon is not in keeping with the responsibilities that he ought to exercise as the leader of his latest party.

Of course the election is more than about Brexit. It is about the future of our country, about the sort of country we want to have, about a Government that will invest in our public services, that will put an end to the age of austerity, that will offer people hope that a better future can be prepared for them in the future. That is why the Labour Party is so pleased to be fighting this election. That is the message we will be putting on the doorstep. But the choice in this election is between a backward-looking Conservative Party that has offered 10 years of nothing but cuts and devastation in our public services, and a Labour Government, committed to the future of the many people in this country, not simply the privileged few, and that will set out a prospectus that offers us all a future in which Wales can prosper inside a prosperous United Kingdom, and, as I hope, inside a prosperous European Union.

I thank John Griffiths for that question, Llywydd. Our strategy for the Welsh economy focuses on inclusive growth and fair work. Public investment in people and places supports these strategic purposes.

First Minister, Newport is very well placed to help Welsh Government realise its ambitions in terms of sustainable development. It could play a much bigger part, I believe, in economic growth, job creation, together with the sort of environmental protections that we want to see in our country—sustainable development in the round. It's geographic location between our capital city and Bristol I believe gives it great advantages, and it has very good transport and communication links, together with resourceful people and strong communities.

So, would you, then, First Minister, join me in welcoming the proposed approach in the national development framework to put Newport at the forefront of that sort of development in south-east Wales and help it realise its potential, and in doing so, the potential of Wales as a whole?

Llywydd, can I thank John Griffiths for drawing attention to the national development framework? It is still out for consultation. Members have until 15 November in order to provide comments on it, and I look forward to reading the many comments that have already been sent in on the framework. It does, as John Griffiths says, identify Newport as somewhere that has an increased strategic role in the region in the future. There are many good reasons why that should be the case, as John Griffiths, as you would expect, has identified.

Newport, already a city where the employment rate is above the Welsh average, somewhere where the unemployment rate has fallen faster than in other parts of Wales, where there are now 11,475 active enterprises—the highest since records ever began—that is why the national development framework identifies the city as somewhere where sustainable development in housing, in essential services, in digital infrastructure, can be developed in the future. And we look forward to working with the city council and other important players in the locality to achieve the ambition that the national development framework sets out for the city of Newport.

First Minister, you'll no doubt agree with me that having a thriving Cardiff Airport is essential for the south Wales economy. Now, the loans given to the airport has now increased to more than £50 million, nearly as much as it cost to buy the airport back in 2013, and the losses made to the airport continue to grow. Your predecessor said, First Minister, that it was always the Welsh Government's intention to return the airport to the private sector. You recently confirmed that this isn't your position. If I've got that wrong, then my question is to ask for clarification. Is it now the intention of the Welsh Government to run the airport for the long term, or are you still actively exploring the business models to get the airport into a position to turn it into the private sector? And if you have taken a different position to your predecessor, can you explain why that is the case?

Llywydd, I welcome the Member's conversion to support Cardiff Airport and welcome the things that he has said about the way in which the airport is now thriving under public ownership—very far from the case when it was under its—. I think the Member referred to the 'thriving' nature—I wrote it down—to the 'thriving' nature of Cardiff Airport, an airport that, as he well knows, is under public ownership. So, I welcome his conversion to both of those causes.

There will be a long-term public interest in this airport because Wales needs an airport as a long-term investment in the future of our economy. As the airport goes on thriving and goes on growing, of course we will want to make sure that the way in which it is run and the way in which it is organised reflects its new success.

The First Minister probably knows that Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs have calculated that Wales contributes approximately £5,800 per head in tax, and Her Majesty's Treasury calculates that public expenditure, at all levels in Wales, amounts to about £10,300 per head. And so that, in effect, is a massive subsidy, largely by the taxpayers of London and the south-east. Therefore, the future of the British economy is vitally important to economic prosperity in Wales. But there has been no desire on the part of either Labour or Conservative Governments in the last 20 years to adjust the Barnett formula, which produces significant injustice for people in Wales, because it's not based on actual needs. And in view of this, does he think that the devolution process has actually produced this unintended consequence that Wales is now largely forgotten by parties at Westminster because the powers that this Assembly has can be exercised here, but they have to be paid for, to a great extent, by taxpayers in England? So, it's a case of out of sight, out of mind, and therefore perhaps the devolution process has not been quite so beneficial to Wales as we might have thought.

What a contorted line of argument, Llywydd. Let me start: the Member was correct in what he said at the beginning—that those HMRC figures show that £12 billion more is spent on public services in Wales than is raised in Wales. That's £4,000 for every family in Wales. Where I don't think he is right is in saying that these things are not thought about or considered.

Let me, for a moment, pay tribute to David Gauke, then the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, now the discarded Conservative member, who negotiated the fiscal framework with the Welsh Government that provides a 105 per cent multiplier for any expenditure that comes through for English purposes until such time as the floor that Gerry Holtham talked about in his report has been achieved. So, I think a lot of work went on early in this Assembly term to look at those financial arrangements. We said at the time—we say it again now—that, while that was welcome progress, what is really needed is a fundamental reform of the way that financial arrangements happen around the UK so that there is a needs basis to it, and Barnett has no basis in need at all.

I thank David Rees for that, Llywydd. We continue to increase our investment to improve mental health services for young people. This investment is part of the Welsh Government's broader programme of work with a range of partners to respond to the changing mental health needs of children and young people.

Can I thank the First Minister for his answer? Obviously, as a former health Minister, he's fully aware of the challenges that child and adolescent mental health services face over these difficult times. But can I also ask a question about the assessments that are required? I'm sure he, like myself, receives many constituents coming to him expressing deep concern, frustration and desperation at the challenges that their children face in actually being assessed. Sometimes, those assessments don't require CAMHS services, but require other mental health services that stop them going into the CAMHS. Can you tell us what actions you're taking to ensure that those children are able to get access to those assessments and get access to those services and therapies that will avoid them having a need for CAMHS later in life?

Well, I thank David Rees for that and I completely agree that the system has needed reorientation so that it focuses on lower intensity services that prevent the escalation of young people to the specialist service that CAMHS represents. Indeed, Llywydd, I remember many times on the floor of the Assembly as the health Minister explaining that sending a young person straight to a specialist mental health service when what they really needed was a different sort of lower intensity service where they could talk to an adult about the difficult business of growing up—that that was a better investment in the future of those young people. And, as research by Hafal, the mental health charity here in Wales has demonstrated, that's what young people themselves tell us that they want.

That's why, since that period, we have invested in those services—the whole-school approach that has flown from the work done by the committee led by Lynne Neagle, where we're investing £2.5 million in bringing that about. The school counselling service that we have in schools: 11,365 young people benefited from that service last year, Llywydd; 87 per cent of them needed no onward referral, and only 3.5 per cent of them needed a referral to CAMHS. Now, that is exactly the point I think that David Rees is making, that, where you have suitable services there that can respond rapidly to a young person's needs, then it will very often mean that that young person doesn't need to have a more intensive and more specialist service. Where those things aren't available and aren't put in place in a timely way, the risk is that that young person's condition worsens and they're accelerated into the more intense end of the spectrum. That's what we would want to avoid. We'd want to make sure that the local primary mental health support service, for example—a great success story, I think, of this Assembly, brought about as a result of the Mental Health (Wales) Measure 2010—. There are now 2,384 more referrals every month to that primary care service than there were when it began in 2014. It's turned out to be immensely popular amongst patients, and it does what David Rees said: it gets alongside a young person—because it deals with people under the age of 18 as well as adults—it gets alongside them early, and tries to make sure that difficulties can be resolved without those problems becoming ones that require the intensity and the specialist knowledge that CAMHS itself provides. 

The latest data shows, First Minister, that 335 individuals waited over 56 days from referral to a local primary mental health support services assessment. Now, this is the highest number on record since the start of the fifth Assembly in May 2016. Now, sadly, around a third of the people waiting over 56 days for assessment fall within Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board, and I can tell you here today that a number of these actually fall within my own constituency. I have, on regular occasions, young people, and, actually, people of all ages, coming to me in absolute desperation because they cannot access any service or support for mental health issues, and some reporting suicidal thoughts.

Now, in a recent freedom of information request, the Welsh Government has spent around £82 million on intervention and improvement support to this particular health board. Now, this doesn't include the £2,000 a day that my colleague Paul Davies mentioned—this is £83 million just on the technicalities and the processes around intervention and improvement. Now, First Minister, I would be the first here to commend you if I thought that there were those real improvements going on in the Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board, but I'm sorry to have to tell you today: you need to get a grip of this. Your Minister has been asked to resign on numerous occasions, and I can tell you now, as we approach this general election, when you come to north Wales, the people will tell you exactly how you are failing my patients, my constituents, in Aberconwy and the greater people across north Wales. It is an absolute disgrace that you can stand there and defend £2,000—

Ask your question, Janet Finch-Saunders.

—a day on one person's pay. So, with waiting times for assessments that are now deteriorating, despite immense investment—

Just ask your question. I've asked you once.

Okay. What measures are you taking to scrutinise the actual money that your Minister has allowed to be spent on these improvement interventions? What scrutiny are you undertaking as the First Minister to ensure that you are not literally just pouring this money down the drain? We are not seeing the improvements, and I want you, as First Minister—

I think the question—. The question has been asked. Thank you.

—to take some responsibility.

Llywydd, I can tell you that, when I go to north Wales, what people tell me is that they wish they had an Assembly Member who would speak up for the health service in north Wales, that they wish that they had Assembly Members, particularly from the Conservative Party, who would occasionally, just occasionally, find one good word to say for the health service that they depend upon.

And I must say, Llywydd, it's absolute nonsense for the Member to refer to £83 million being spent on technicalities. The technicalities she is referring to is the money that we have provided to make sure that staff at Betsi Cadwaladr go on being paid and that patients in Betsi Cadwaladr go on being treated. I will defend every penny of the money that we have spent because your constituents, as a result, are getting the treatment that the health service provides. The fact that you criticise—that you criticise—a Welsh Government prepared to find extra money for patients in north Wales shows me just what a distorted view of priorities the Conservative Party in north Wales has.

Llywydd, I thank the Member for the question. Health boards in Wales continue to take a range of actions to improve access to all healthcare services that are safe, sustainable and as close to people's homes as possible.

Thank you, First Minister. Of course, while there has been some progress in improving access, there is one area in which we are still performing badly, and that is the emergency response times. Over recess, I was contacted by a constituent whose elderly parent suffered a stroke. But, after waiting over an hour and a half for an ambulance, they gave up and drove to A&E themselves. Now, this isn't the first time that this has happened, and a few months ago another of my constituents also waited hours for an emergency response following a stroke. So, First Minister, why are stroke patients facing these potentially life-threatening delays, and what is the Welsh Government doing to improve emergency response times?

I thank the Member for the supplementary question and for her recognition of the progress that has been made in aspects of the health service. She will know that reforms to the ambulance service mean that red responses have now been met above the target that we set for them for 47 months consecutively. Amber response times—the next category down—have been subject to an amber review, and we recognise that there are things that we need to do to refine that category, and stroke patients are a particular concern within that category. And I know that the health Minister is alert to that, he's working with officials on that. It's a matter we take very seriously, and we'll continue to see what can be done to improve it within the system that we have.

Well, it's not just ambulance waiting times, it's ambulance discharge times as well.

Your Government recently passed its climate emergency statement, yet we have patients and visitors driving round and round in circles in parking spaces at Morriston, Singleton and Princess of Wales hospitals, contributing unnecessarily to local pollution. It's also literally preventing access to healthcare through missed appointments for some, but at least compromising the well-being of others whose visitors just give up. This can't just be a question for active travel and public transport and technology. Can you please tell us what health boards are doing to try and resolve this particular problem?

Well, Llywydd, I'm not sure what the Member is suggesting—whether she's suggesting that the answer is to make it easier for cars to be able to park at hospitals. Our efforts and health boards' efforts are focused on sustainable travel plans, making sure that public transport is aligned with hospitals so that people can travel easily in that way to hospitals, and in staggering some of the times that appointments are made and visiting hours are held, so that you don't have large numbers of people converging on a site at a particular moment. We have to have sustainable travel plans, and simply relying on more and more cars being able to make their way to hospitals will not provide that, and certainly will not provide any answer to a climate emergency.

Llywydd, this fund was a Conservative Party manifesto commitment in 2017, at an election in which that party failed to secure a majority. In our discussions since then, including through the Joint Ministerial Committee on Europe, the UK Government’s plans have been repeatedly delayed and repeatedly held in secret.

Thank you, First Minister. I was more than a little concerned to read briefings from the last Queen's Speech that suggested that the shared prosperity fund, which will replace EU structural funding, will be approached within the context of English devolution. Hopefully, an election will bring about a change of approach in Westminster, but, in light of the importance of any successor scheme to Wales, do you agree with me that decisions regarding the operation of the fund should be made in Wales to ensure maximum benefit to people in constituencies like Cynon Valley?

Llywydd, I thank Vikki Howells for that. She's right to say that there were references in the background papers to the Queen's Speech to the UK prosperity fund. They appeared on page 91 and 92 of the background papers—you can see just how important it was to the UK Government to make a lot of that. Now, we have said time and time again that when we ever see details of the shared prosperity fund then there must be not a penny lost and not a power stolen from this National Assembly. The fact that those references late in the document are entirely cast in the context of English devolution seems to me to be a further very bad sign of what we can expect if and when such plans ever did emerge. And can I say, Llywydd, that the urgency of resolving this matter is moving from being just a theoretical issue to a real practical issue too? We have no replacement funding for the current EU programmes after 1 January 2020, and the UK Government's budget for 2020-21 has nothing in the final quarter of that financial year to make good the money that Wales will lose, money that Members in this Chamber assured people in Wales that there was an absolute guarantee we would not be losing. And, if there is such an absolute guarantee, why does that money not appear anywhere in the budget published by the UK Government for the financial year 2020-21, when that money will be required on 1 January that year? We've had months and years now of dither and delay. It's time it was over and Wales needs to have the promises made to it actually delivered.

I thank the Member for that. Amongst the actions taken by the Welsh Government is the new £7 million investment in Mid and West Wales to support Welsh-medium early years provision, including six projects in each of Carmarthenshire, Ceredigion and Powys.

I'm grateful to the First Minister for his answer. I'd like to draw his attention to the situation faced by pupils and staff at Ysgol Gymraeg Dewi Sant in Llanelli, which as the First Minister will know is Wales's oldest Welsh-medium school, where publicly funded Welsh-medium education began. He may also recall that the situation faced by pupils and staff in the school is serious. Whole classes are being taught in corridors and the physical state of the building is extremely poor. Staff and pupils and parents were very grateful to receive funding through the twenty-first century schools programme, but the scheme has been called in by another part of Welsh Government due to issues in relation to the planning system and some concerns about flooding potential.

I would not suggest for a moment, Llywydd, that I'd ask the First Minister to interfere in any way in the due process that needs to be gone through around the planning issue, but it is my understanding that the initial deadline for that decision to be made has passed, and I would like to ask the First Minister today to speak to the relevant Ministers—the Minister for Education, the Minister with responsibility for planning—so that the pupils and families and teachers in that school can be told when this process will be over, and with a view to ensuring that the Welsh Government's proposed investment is not lost because of the delay in the planning system.

I thank Helen Mary Jones for that supplementary question and for drawing attention to the history of Dewi Sant school and the place it holds in the history of Welsh-medium education here in Wales. I'll certainly make inquiries, as the Member says, not to interfere in any way in the process, but to make sure that information about it is properly known to those who have a direct interest in it. 

Question 8 [OAQ54627] was withdrawn, so finally, question 9, Darren Millar. 

I thank the Member for that. We provide guidance on public sector pay in Wales through various mechanisms, such as remit letters to Welsh Government sponsored bodies and pay review bodies, and are about to consult on a set of common principles to underpin our approach to public sector pay across Wales. 

Reference has already been made in this Chamber, First Minister, to the outrage that is taking place across north Wales as a result of this £2,000 per day that is being paid to the recovery director at the Betsi Cadwaladr health board. You will know that the Public Accounts Committee has previously reported on senior management pay in the public sector and made clear recommendations about guidance for the appointment of consultants, and indeed senior managers, in the public sector to ensure that there's transparency and accountability.

One thing that I think is absolutely astonishing is that health board members, independent members of this health board, do not appear to have had any role or knowledge about this particular appointment of this particular individual, and indeed other individuals who are also being paid what appear to be eye-watering amounts. Can you tell us whether new guidance will be issued as a result of this situation in north Wales, whether the Welsh Government will intervene to make sure that money is being spent appropriately, and whether the Welsh Government has confidence in the health board's own executive team given that there seems to be so much external capacity that is required in order to support this particular health board? We've got people at that health board, the chief executive, who's paid in excess of £200,000. If he's not competent to do the job, why on earth is he still there?

Well, Llywydd, the external assistance that the board has acquired is, as I've said many times this afternoon, the result of advice provided to the Welsh Government by the Public Accounts Committee, which said that such assistance was urgently needed, and has now been afforded. I don't follow the point that the Member made about, somehow, this not being known. I've got in front of me a freedom of information request, therefore entirely in the public domain. It sets out the job titles, it sets out their appointment dates, it sets out the length of contracts, it tells you the supplier in the market that his party has created, where people have to be sourced from, and it tells you how long the people are going to be in work for. The idea that, somehow, this was not known to people just simply doesn't stand up to examination. And I am sure that all these appointments were done in line with the guidance that the Welsh Government has already provided, informed by the advice that we get from Assembly committees. 

Thank you, First Minister. 

The next item is the business statement and announcement, and I call on the Trefnydd to make the statement. Rebecca Evans.

There's one change to this week's business: tomorrow's vote on the debate under Standing Order 25.15 on the Government of Wales Act 2006 (Amendment) Order 2019 will take place immediately after the debate, rather than at voting time. Draft business for the next three sitting weeks is set out on the business statement and announcement, which can be found amongst the meeting papers available to Members electronically.

Can I call for two statements, one from you in your capacity, Trefnydd, as the Minister for finance, in relation to support for the armed forces community? The Army Families Federation has raised concerns about what appears to be a trend of some local authorities not giving the appropriate discount for armed forces families in terms of their council tax. You will be aware that this is something that the Welsh Government has promoted in the past, and I would be very keen to see you reinforce the promotion of that discount for those armed forces families that are eligible.

In addition, concerns have also been raised about the application of non-domestic rates to army cadet halls. Now, you'll be familiar with cadet forces, probably, in your own constituency. Traditionally, their facilities have not been subject to non-domestic rates. They've been exempted on the basis of the opportunities and services that they provide to young people in their communities, and I do think that it's a retrograde step if some local authorities are choosing now to impose charges on them that are undermining their viability.

And thirdly, can I call for an update from the Minister for Health and Social Services in relation to the Betsi Cadwaladr health board and the whole of the special measures process? Clearly, we've had some concerning information regarding the appointment of turnaround directors and additional capacity in that health board. Now, we accept that that health board is clearly struggling. The interventions so far from the Welsh Government have not worked to support significant improvements in that health board and many people are very, very concerned that this is a health board with a significant overspend expected by the end of the financial year of tens of millions of pounds, that is making changes to nurse staffing rotas that are unpopular and providing a disincentive for nurses to go and work in that health board, and that, at the same time, is spending millions of pounds on people who are contracted as consultants to the health board doing jobs that, frankly, the executive team ought to have the capacity to do. [Interruption.] So I think we do need a statement on this from the Minister for Health and Social Services, who is barracking at the moment while I'm trying to ask for this statement. If he's got something to say, let's hear it in a formal statement, instead of the barracking that he's giving me from the front row, along with other colleagues on that front row, right now.

Well, on the issue relating to council tax discounts and non-domestic rates for army cadet halls, I'll certainly look into both of those issues and provide you with a letter, but Deputy Minister Hannah Blythyn will be making a statement marking Remembrance Day and supporting our armed forces community in Plenary next week.

On the second issue that you raised, regarding Betsi Cadwaladr, I think there are multiple opportunities to raise that with the Minister this week, including a debate to which the Minister will be responding tomorrow, which will no doubt address those issues you've described.

I want to express my horror at the recent ITV News interview given by a doctor who, prior to surgery, was asked by a patient if they could have a white person performing the operation instead. This hurt caused to a medical professional, who has given decades of hard toil, compassion and expertise within the NHS, was clear to see. What compounded matters was that he did not know how to respond to this blatant act of racism, as he was not clear how he would be supported by his employers. We know that racism doesn't exist in a vacuum. The Welsh Government must send out a clear and unequivocal message that all people of colour working in our NHS must have employer backing in such a situation, and that racism will not be accommodated or tolerated.

I'm sure you will share my disgust at the revelations that Ross England, a staff member for Tory Secretary of State Alun Cairns, deliberately collapsed a rape trial in the eyes of a senior judge. There are many questions that need to be answered on this, and hiding behind the lie that there are legal proceedings ongoing, as the Prime Minister erroneously and shamefully said, does not cut it. A story has emerged within the last hour that states an e-mail was sent to Alun Cairns by a special adviser in August of last year about the collapsing of that rape trial. This runs contrary to claims that the rape case collapse was news to Tory party figures, including Cairns, when the story first emerged last week. If this is true, it's incredible that instead of beginning disciplinary proceedings as a result of this courtroom outrage and the consequences that flowed from it, chiefly that a vulnerable victim was put through the ordeal of a second trial, England was named as a candidate in a key Tory target seat just a few months later. This is remarkable; remarkable for the indifference that the Tories have shown to the victim of such a serious crime, and remarkable for such a serious error of judgment from senior Tory figures who must resign if they knew about this disgusting behaviour.

I'm also concerned that a message has been sent out that politics are not just indifferent to the scandalously low rape conviction rates, which are at their lowest in a decade in England and Wales, but that politics are actively involved in perpetuating this horrific statistic and platforming those who sabotage rape trials. Can this Senedd please send out a clear and unequivocal message that not all politicians are the same, that some of us have no truck with people who wreck rape trials? Will this Welsh Government also redouble efforts to devolve the criminal justice system so that we can tackle the inequality of low rape prosecution rates in this country? Will you join me in condemning any politicians who knew about this and did nothing? And if it's proven that they knew, do you agree with me that they should resign?  

I thank Leanne Wood for bringing both of these extremely important issues to the floor of the Assembly this afternoon. In regard to the ITV interview, it was absolutely heartbreaking to see a doctor describe the racism that he had experienced, but then also to describe the fact that he didn't know how to respond to that individual, and that he didn't know that he would have the full support of his employers and the NHS. Of course, in Wales, there is absolutely no place for racism in any of our public services or society more widely, and if more work needs to be done to give people of ethnic minorities the confidence that the NHS or their public service employer is there to support them in any circumstance when they find themselves experiencing racism, then we certainly will look to provide that confidence and do more work in that area.

On the issue of the disgusting behaviour of the deliberate collapse of a rape trial, I absolutely agree with what Leanne Wood has said here today. I associate myself with the comments you've made and agree with you that there are absolutely questions to be answered. I would suggest that I'm not the person to be answering those questions, but they do remain to be answered, and I think that sending a strong clear message that not all politicians are the same is a really important thing to do.  

I wanted to raise the important issue of cervical cancer screening. Last week, the latest figures showed that one in four women do not get tested for cervical cancer screening by getting a simple smear test. And, given that this is the biggest killer of young women, it is particularly concerning that, amongst young people in their 20s, the numbers are down to one in three not getting tested. This simple test is what can save people's lives. Also last week, it was reported at a science conference that a new urine test could replace the smear test, which would obviously be a lot less invasive. Women don't have to go to a medical centre to have it done. They just simply take a urine test and send it off from home. So, there's both positives and negatives arising out of this. No. 1, it would be great if we could have a statement from the health Minister as to when he thinks this urine test is likely to have completed the research test that will satisfy us that this can be used as an alternative to smear tests. Apparently, it's already proving to be more accurate. No. 2, could we also have a statement on how we are going to endeavour to get more women, particularly younger women, to come and get smear tests in the meanwhile?

Thank you very much to Jenny Rathbone for raising this particularly important issue this afternoon. I think that we do have a good story to tell here in Wales in terms of the work that we've been doing thus far, because, of course, Wales is the only UK nation to have implemented HPV testing for participants in the cervical screening programme, and the programme now tests for 14 high-risk HPV types, and those are the ones that cause 99.8 per cent of cervical cancers. And this is a much more sensitive test and will prevent more cancers, and it's hoped that the new test will improve uptake over time. 

But the health Minister issued a written statement earlier this year saying that self-testing won't be rolled out across Wales or the rest of the UK until the pilot in England has been shown to be safe and effective and has been recommended by the UK National Screening Committee. But, obviously, we're really keen to watch the progress of that and to understand the evaluation of that pilot. I'll explore what the timescales are for that pilot with the health Minister and ensure that you have an update as to what kind of timescale we might be looking at for the completion of the programme and the evaluation.FootnoteLink

Organiser, can I seek a statement from the health secretary in relation to the story that broke last week on waiting times in the Cwm Taf area? I think it is fair to say, and, in fairness, the report pointed out, that this wasn't a deliberate omission of people off the waiting lists, and I think that's a critical point to bear in mind. But it did point to a lack of governance and a culture that maybe was a bit sloppy, to say the least, around the edges that allowed for nearly 3,000 people to be missed off a series of waiting lists, which is roughly 5 per cent of the total. And we know full well that it was a lack of governance that led to the tragedy in the maternity services in Cwm Taf, and we don't want to see the same thing happening here.

There's still work ongoing to try and understand the overall impact, and, as I understand, there's still another 750 individuals being looked at to see whether they too were missed off the waiting lists. But I do believe that this warrants an oral statement from the Minister of health, so that we—in my particular instance, as a Member for South Wales Central, but I'm sure other Members—can seek answers and reassurance from the Minister as to what action the Welsh Government is taking to make sure that governance is reintroduced and, ultimately, this type of problem does not exist again.

I'd like to also put on the record my thanks to the chairman of the health board, who did meet me over this particular matter to discuss it, but meeting the chairman and getting an oral statement off the Minister for health, who ultimately is responsible for the health service here in Wales, is not the same thing. So, I hope that you'll be able to facilitate such a statement coming forward, given the difficulties that the Cwm Taf health board has faced in recent times on maternity services. None of us want to see that going into other areas of delivery for this particular health board. 

Thank you. I'm very pleased that the chair of the health board was able to meet with you to discuss your concerns in this regard. And, of course, I'll make sure that the Minister for health is aware of the request that you've just made for a statement, and I'll know that he'll give due consideration to the best way to keep Members informed about this issue. 

Could I ask for a statement on measures to tackle empty former commercial premises, including long unused petrol stations like that at the entrance to Ogmore vale, or the empty and dilapidated factory shell at the entrance to Evanstown in my constituency, which, just like empty and abandoned homes, can blight communities terribly. Yet, business owners and absentee landlords can sit on these properties with business rate reductions or exemptions for years and years, and even decades, and, despite the best efforts of local authorities to work with those owners and landlords, and agents, they remain crumbling eyesores. Now, yes, local authorities have measures they can take on matters like environmental health and safety and security, but this merely maintains the buildings in a state of near dereliction—they are zombie commercial premises and they bring a community down. So, could we have a statement on how Welsh Government can explore new streamlined measures for local authorities to tackle these empty commercial zombie properties, and an update on what powers and incentives currently exist as well?

And, secondly, could I call for a statement or a debate on the subject of the Men's Sheds movement, calling attention to the growth of this fantastic movement, which does so much for men's mental health and well-being, from its start in Wales, in the Squirrel's Nest in Tondu, in my constituency, to now a nationwide network of sheds, involving, yes, mature men, but also women's sheds and youth sheds, too. And I'll also be drawing attention in the coming weeks to this celebration of Men's Sheds here in the Senedd, as I'll be hosting here a launch event in the Senedd on Tuesday 19 November, with the help of sheds from all over Wales, and inviting all colleagues to join with me, and it would be great to have a debate that coincided with that.

Thank you to Huw Irranca-Davies. The local authorities do have a number of powers available to them to help bring those redundant commercial properties back into use, as they do for residential properties. Those powers include the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, the Building Act 1984, and also those compulsory purchasing powers. However, I think what Government is really keen to ensure is that each local authority has the skills and knowledge and the confidence to use those powers to the best use for their communities. The Minister and Deputy Minister for Housing and Local Government have agreed to bring on board an industry expert in this field into Welsh Government, to make sure that all local authorities in Wales do have the skills that they need in order to address this particular issue. And the Welsh Government has been dealing with empty properties through regeneration activities—the targeted regeneration programme, which I know you're very familiar with. But the housing Minister has suggested that you write to her, perhaps, for some further information with regard to the specific cases that you've described.

And, yes, I share your enthusiasm for Men's Sheds. They are absolutely amazing in terms of supporting mental health, but also helping to tackle loneliness and isolation in communities. And I think that seeing them roll out on a very regular basis is really exciting, and I look forward very much to the celebration that you'll be hosting here in the Assembly on 19 November.

Minister, in a previous Plenary session, I brought to the Government's attention the parlous situation of the citizens of Pontypool, who find themselves marooned after 7 p.m., when all local bus services cease. The lack of transport has grave consequences for the licenced trade in the town centre, and these difficulties are being further exacerbated by the closure of the last community club covering Trevethin, St Cadocs and Penygarn. The people of that community now have nowhere to socialise, as access to the town centre is not an option with there being no possibility of a public transport return after 7 p.m. Would the Minister please make a statement on how the Government intends to take measures to alleviate these transport failures, which not only affect the communities mentioned, but many more throughout the south Wales Valleys, including, particularly, difficulties being experienced in Ebbw Vale?

Well, the deregulation of the bus industry under the Conservative Government back in the 1980s was clearly devastating for many communities, and I think that the example that you've given there very much highlights the kinds of issues that have come about as a result of that. That is why I'm so pleased that the Welsh Government is looking to bring in legislation that will help deal with some of these particular issues. And I know that Ken Skates will be bringing forward a statement in due course, as he seeks to introduce that piece of legislation to the Assembly, which I hope will have a very beneficial impact across Wales.

I wonder if I could invite Members to join with me in congratulating Bad Wolf on the first episode of their excellent production of His Dark Materials, which was aired on Sunday. Having said that though, I think there is still space, now that they're in occupation of Pinewood studios, for Welsh Government to bring forward a statement to explain what has actually happened now with Pinewood, why the arrangement with them has come to an end, and to tell us the full cost of that arrangement now that it has come to an end. I think we can also expect in a statement a little bit of detail perhaps about the arrangement with Bad Wolf studio, bearing in mind the interest of this place both in that company and in Pinewood over recent times. Perhaps we could be reassured that the company has gone in on full commercial terms, for example, even though we may not be entitled to know the specific figures. Generally, I'm asking for some transparency on an issue that has been of interest to Members in recent years. I'm sure it's good news and I think it would help the Government to let us see and hear that. Thank you. 

I absolutely join you in passing on congratulations to Bad Wolf for the production of His Dark Materials. I know it's been extremely well received and has caused a great stir, and again it's something that serves to put Wales on the map not only in terms of the fabulous country that we have to offer, but actually the incredible skills that we have here in our creative industries. And it's really exciting that the creative industries is one of the key areas, which the Minister for International Relations and the Welsh Language has prioritised within her international strategy. 

In terms of Pinewood particularly, we've worked closely with them throughout their time here in Wales, and utilised the company's industry knowledge to get the best economic outcomes for Wales and make it a thriving and established location for film makers. Pinewood leaves Wales to concentrate on its own growth plans at Shepperton, at a time when all three studios in south-east Wales, including Wentloog, are operating at full capacity with productions such as His Dark Materials and Brave New World. We're really proud of our association with Pinewood over the last five years, and our vibrant creative industry has seen some fantastic results. Pinewood and Bad Wolf have spent in excess of £100 million here in Wales, creating good jobs and benefiting the local supply chains and hundreds of businesses across Wales. But if there are specific questions that you have, I'd invite you to write to the Deputy Minister for Culture, Sport and Tourism, or the Minister, I should say, for Economy and Transport, and he'll be able to provide the detail that you're seeking.  

Trefnydd, I'd like to ask for an oral statement from the Minister for Health and Social Services. I very much appreciate his written statements over recent weeks regarding Orkambi and Symkevi, and we are now in a position where we are trying to get a deal with Vertex on the access to those drugs, and I also read from Simon Stevens' letter that, in fact, the English NHS agreement was based upon Wales and Northern Ireland having similar agreements in place. Now, the Minister put out a tweet this morning—very interesting, but it has questions we want to ask of him, and, therefore, an oral statement as to where we are—. Maybe by next time we might actually be in a position where we have a deal, but it opens us up to questions that we need answers to, which don't come always from a written statement. So, if we can have an oral statement from him, that would be very helpful. 

And following on from Jenny Rathbone's points on screening, I would also like to ask for a statement on bowel screening, particularly as to a report on how successful the new test is. I do not want to wait 12 months to see how the 12-month period is, because I think that's way down the line, but we should have at least a three-month position now as to how that test is working. Whether there would be an assessment as to the sensitivity of the test and whether that can be improved, because we are working on the sensitivity, which limits where we are, basically standing still on the test levels—. We can get better, but that depends upon also the resource of the diagnostics agenda, and the endoscopy in particular. So, can we have a statement from him in relation to how he sees bowel screening working? Is the new test more effective? Are we getting a better response rate as a consequence of the test? And what resource has been put in place to ensure that we can improve the sensitivity, which allows us to actually catch earlier cancers so that we can get better results and outcomes? 

I'll certainly make the health Minister aware of both of those requests for a statement, and I know that he'd be keen to update Members particularly on the issue of bowel screening, as and when information becomes available, in terms of the analysis that is being done of the impact that the FIT rate has and what the options are in terms of increasing the sensitivity of that, but also in terms of the work that we're doing to try and ensure that particular groups who have been slower to come forward to undertake that screening are fully engaged with. 

And on the issue of Orkambi, of course, the health Minister has been very, very clear today that he would agree today the same pro rata deal as the deal that's been offered for England, if that were to come forward, and we look forward to a positive response from the suppliers as soon as possible. 

Minister, could I have a statement from the Minister for health on the termination of the contract with Microtest Health to deliver the new computer software for handling prescription and medical records of patients in Wales? NHS officials in Wales are reported as saying the company could not meet the required timescale to deliver this vital project. Minister, may we have a statement from the health Minister on the implications of this action for general practitioners and patients in Wales, and whether the process of modernising our outdated NHS computer system will be delayed as a result of this?

The decision to end the contract wasn't arrived at lightly, with several factors contributing, including the impact that the delays were having on practices in planning for their migration to the new system. So, GPs will continue with their current clinical information technology systems, pending a review of GP clinical systems in Wales, which is anticipated to be completed early next year. While the outcome is disappointing, the cost to the NHS has been low, and I know that if you write to the health Minister, he would provide you with more information if you require it. But the other successful system supplier, Vision, is compliant with the contract and, to date, over 100 practices are benefiting from provision of additional services, such as mobile Vision Anywhere cluster functionality, INR, and pharmacy software, free of charge.

Trefnydd, I know many Members in the Chamber are supporting the valuable work of Tŷ Hafan and the hospice movement in general across Wales, and I think we all recognise on a cross-party basis the value of the support they provide to individuals and families, both in the hospice premises themselves but also out in the community. I'm also sure that many Members will have seen the publicity over the weekend about the ambitious proposed refurbishment work at Tŷ Hafan, the 'fit for future' project. The coverage surrounding this campaign raises the issue of Government support available to hospices and paediatric palliative care. So, can I ask if the Government could bring forward a statement on support for the children's hospice movement in Wales? And will the Trefnydd join me in wishing Tŷ Hafan the best of luck in their refurbishment fundraising campaign?

Thank you very much. I completely share your admiration for Tŷ Hafan and the incredible work that they undertake. I had the pleasure of visiting, some time back now, and I was incredibly impressed by the warmth, and the atmosphere that is created there I thought was really, really welcoming. I will certainly speak again to the health Minister with regard to your request for an update on support for hospices and palliative care for children and ask him to write to you with the latest position there.

Thank you, Trefnydd.

The next item is a statement by the First Minister on the report of the Commission on Justice in Wales. I call on the First Minister to make the statement—Mark Drakeford.

Thank you, Llywydd. The publication of the independent Commission on Justice in Wales's report on 24 October was a watershed moment. I will start, therefore, by paying tribute to my predecessor as First Minister, who was responsible for the establishment of the commission in the first place. I also wish to thank Lord Thomas and all of the members of the commission.

We knew from the start that we were appointing a highly regarded, diverse and independent-minded panel. What we did not know was the scale of the task that they would take on. Put simply, this is the most comprehensive exercise ever undertaken in examining Wales's justice system. It deserves careful and detailed consideration from all Assembly Members.

Llywydd, this is indeed a landmark report. It gives us not just 78 specific recommendations, but a real treasure trove of testimony and advice, reflecting an enormous drawing together of evidence from more than 200 people and institutions orally, and similar numbers in writing. It shines a light into every aspect of our justice system.

Now, a report of this scale deserves far fuller consideration than it can be given today. But let me begin by identifying what seems to me to be the most striking conclusion of the report and then to say something about our approach to responding to it.

The most striking finding, it seems to me, there, in the very first paragraph of the report, is that the people of Wales are being let down by their justice system. That is the commission's unambiguous conclusion. And I think that we should not underestimate the significance of that finding. A fair, effective and accessible justice system is a cornerstone of freedom and of democracy. It is, or it should be, non-negotiable. We should not allow ourselves to become accustomed to, still less to accept, embedded failures to meet those standards.

Llywydd, let me pick out some specifics from the report. Proper access to justice, it says, is not available. In many areas of Wales, as the question from Joyce Watson suggested earlier this afternoon, people face long and difficult journeys to their nearest court. There is a serious risk, the report says, to the sustainability of legal practice, especially in traditional high-street legal services. And all this at a time when, as the report says, Wales has one of the highest prison populations per head in western Europe, even though the evidence is that robust community sentences achieve better outcomes in so many cases. Meanwhile, the number of prosecutions is falling. We lack facilities for women offenders and there are too many gaps in Welsh language provision. Llywydd, it is the cumulative nature of the conclusions that makes them so additionally compelling.

Now, the challenge they pose will not be overcome without a change in the respective roles of Westminster and the devolved institutions, as well as in professional practice in the very many different facets of the justice system. In a key finding, the commission tells us:

'We do not see how it is possible to carry out the changes that are needed in a way that provides a practical long-term solution and makes a real difference to the people of Wales',

without substantial devolution of justice functions. Justice, as the report says, is not an island, and the decisions about how the system should operate need to be aligned with other social and economic priorities. And, as the authors say, there needs to be clear and democratic accountability for the way in which the system operates in Wales. This central finding is consistent with the long-standing position of the Welsh Government, reaffirmed most recently in our paper, 'Reforming the Union', published only last month.

Now, in the past, Llywydd, we have often argued this from a constitutional standpoint—that a nation that makes and executes its own laws ought also to police them, in the broadest sense of that word. But what this report tells us is that there are real practical challenges that flow from the division of responsibilities between Westminster and Wales. How, then, are the recommendations of the report and its many other proposals to be taken forward? Well, as Members will know, within less than a week of the report's publication, a general election has been called. This means that there is an unavoidable hiatus in our ability to open a dialogue with the UK Government, but that discussion will need to begin as soon as we have a Government again in office.

In the meantime, that does not prevent us, of course, from focusing on those aspects of the report that fall to many justice actors here in Wales. To provide just one example, Llywydd: the report challenges Wales's excellent law schools to work more effectively together to recognise the place of Welsh law in legal education and to ensure teaching materials are available in both languages. And the report, of course, also reflects on the history of the Welsh Government involvement during the whole of the devolution era in criminal justice matters and makes proposals for the future.

Indeed, one thing that I think many readers will find a surprise is the estimate that 38 per cent of the total justice expenditure in Wales already comes from the Welsh Government and Welsh local authorities, and this despite our very limited role in formulating policy and ensuring that those funds are spent beneficially and in a way that is consistent with our priorities.

So, the commission is clear that there is much more that needs to be done, and where the recommendations in the report fall to the Welsh Government to deliver, we will now look to take them forward. And this afternoon, I wanted to give just three brief examples of how we will go about that important work.

The commission calls on the Welsh Government to provide fully funded legal apprenticeships as a new pathway into the profession, a pathway that may particularly help people who might choose to practice in parts of the country where there are now too few practitioners to be found. We will now work with the professions to explore how best to do this, building on the higher apprenticeship options we already have in probate and conveyancing here in Wales.

Secondly, the commission also calls for the creation of a law council of Wales to promote the interests of legal education and the awareness of Welsh law. That is not something that the Welsh Government can do alone, but we will take the initiative to support its establishment and to get that council started on its important work.

And as an immediate response to the commission’s call for investment in technological development, Members may have seen that funding of £4 million has been put towards a new legal innovation lab to be housed at Swansea University.

Finally, Llywydd, in response to the commission’s call for a strengthening of leadership within the Welsh Government on justice matters, I have decided to establish a new justice committee of the Cabinet, and that is a Cabinet committee that I will chair. This committee will be responsible for taking forward these recommendations, the ones that fall to the Welsh Government, and to oversee discussions with the new Government at UK level.

Llywydd, as I said in opening, the report will need fuller discussion and broader discussion than we are able to give it this afternoon. But the Assembly will rightly want to know of progress that is being made, so I can provide an assurance this afternoon that, as a first step, the Government will bring forward a debate on the report in the new year. In the meantime, let me once again thank the commission for all their work and for the product of that work, this landmark report, which I want to welcome here this afternoon.

Can I thank the First Minister for his statement this afternoon? I'd also like to add my thanks to the commissioners and Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd, who made himself available to Assembly Members during the course of producing this report.

Whilst there are some very admirable arguments about the devolution of justice to Wales, we on this side of the Chamber still remain unconvinced that its devolution is the right way forward. However, that's not to say that there isn't a great deal of merit in some of the findings in the commission's report. Chapter 10 of the report considers knowledge, skills and innovation, and calls for an action plan to be created to support and promote public legal education, particularly for children and young people, and that's something that I very much welcome.

Now, today's statement rightly recognises that as the Welsh Government considers the devolution of justice for the future, a much wider focus is given to the legal sector in Wales and the country's knowledge base is expanded. Therefore, perhaps the First Minister can tell us what work the Welsh Government is currently doing in this particular area to help better promote awareness and develop skills within the Welsh legal industry.

I warmly welcome the news that £4 million of funding has been made available to Swansea University for its legal innovation lab, however, as today's statement notes, Wales's law schools are challenged more to work effectively together. So, can the First Minister tell us if the Welsh Government will be developing and implementing a specific strategy at a higher education level to develop Wales's legal studies programmes in all parts of the country?

Of course, I acknowledge that in some areas there are complexities between the work done by both the Welsh Government and the UK Government, and the commission's report makes it clear that family justice is an area that struggles between the responsibilities of both Governments. The report rightly acknowledges the importance of preventative action, and this is something that the Welsh Government could and should be doing more work on, and so perhaps in his response the First Minister could tell us a bit more about the work that the Welsh Government has done around family justice.

Now, in responding to the commission's consultation, the Law Society's evidence stated that, and I quote:

'We have a world-renowned legal system with judges of the highest calibre. These benefits have developed over hundreds of years and will continue for years to come regardless of our departure from the European Union.'

Unquote. And so it begs the question that these benefits could be lost in a separate jurisdiction. So, what assurances can the Welsh Government offer to those who share that particular view?

The Law Society also raised the issue of rural practice and the need for infrastructure issues to be addressed, and, as today's statement recognises, it will be absolutely crucial that these major infrastructure issues are dealt with to ensure that those needing legal services have access to them. With high street services diminishing, waves of broadband notspots, and public transport being often unreliable and expensive, this could have an impact on access to justice and the long-term sustainability of legal services in rural areas. Therefore, given Wales's geography, how confident is the First Minister that these infrastructure barriers could be managed so that those needing access to legal services will have them in the future?

Of course, Wales's geography means that devolving criminal justice isn't entirely straightforward, and there are some understandable concerns regarding the impact that devolving criminal justice could have on the Wales-England border. Calls for the devolution of criminal justice to Wales fail to recognise that criminal activity does not recognise national or regional boundaries and that around 48 per cent of the public live within 25 miles of the border with England and—[Interruption.] And 90 per cent of people—[Interruption.] And 90 per cent of people—[Interruption.] And 90 per cent of people live within 50 miles of the border. This, of course, contrasts sharply with the fact that only 5 per cent of the combined population of Scotland lives within 50 miles of the border. Therefore, perhaps the—.

Fifty American states.

Allow the leader of the opposition to carry on with his questioning of the First Minister.

Therefore, perhaps the First Minister could tell us a bit about the impact that devolving criminal justice could have on the border between Wales and England and tell us what discussions are already taking place on this specific issue.

Now, the First Minister will also be aware of some of the valid concerns over the capacity needed to deliver an effective criminal justice system. Currently, prisons in Wales do not offer integrated drug treatment systems, and we know from only last month the Welsh Government's advisory panel on substance misuse has failed to meet in the last year. Indeed, nearly half of people referred for substance misuse rehabilitation in Wales are treated in England, and, despite the Welsh Government ring-fencing £50 million for health boards, excellent centres around Wales are closing. As well as positive centres for rehabilitation, Wales is clearly lacking in suitable facilities for our prisoners, as today's news reports confirm. Therefore, what preparatory work has the Welsh Government already done to ensure that Wales has the resources and capacity to deliver a criminal justice system that can actually operate effectively?

Llywydd, as the public conversation surrounding devolving criminal justice continues to grow, it's more important than ever that Wales has an effective relationship with the UK Ministry of Justice, and so it falls on the Welsh Government to proactively encourage greater engagement to ensure that decisions that affect Wales reflect our country's circumstances. Perhaps the First Minister could update us on how the Welsh Government is ensuring that that is the case.

Therefore, in closing, can I thank the First Minister for his statement? Whilst there are certainly some very interesting points and recommendations made by the commission, the First Minister won't be surprised that we remain unconvinced that a full-scale devolution of justice is the right way forward for Wales, but I look forward to seeing further announcements by the Welsh Government, going forward.

Llywydd, can I thank Paul Davies for that contribution? He began by pointing to the way in which Lord Thomas had made himself available to Assembly Members during the preparation of the report, and I didn't have a chance in my statement to say that and to draw attention to the way in which the commission has gone about its work in speaking to so many different groups, so many different interests in Wales, making itself directly available in that way. And you see the product of that in the report itself.

Paul Davies says that he's unconvinced of the case for devolution of the criminal justice system. I'm left wondering what could ever convince him if this report does not, because you will never find a more compelling case set out than the one assembled in the report. I think it is less a matter, Llywydd, that the Conservative Party in unconvinced, than the Conservative Party will never allow itself to be convinced of this case, because it simply doesn't reflect the way in which they think about devolution.

Now, let me say that, having said that, there were a number of points that Paul Davies made that I think were a positive attempt to draw out those aspects of the report with which he does have agreement. I look forward to being able to continue to discuss those with him as implementation of the report proceeds.

He's right, of course—the report says a great deal about legal education and a great deal about the state of the legal profession. It's why my colleague the Counsel General instituted a rapid review of the position here in Wales during the time that Lord Thomas was sitting, in order to inform the report. That's well evidenced in its pages, and we've drawn on what the profession has told us. And one of the things that I think the report says—. And I think maybe I didn't quite agree with what Paul Davies said. The report is clear that the profession and the higher education institutions in Wales cannot continuously look to the Welsh Government to take the lead. Law schools in Wales are staffed by very senior, very well-regarded people with excellent reputations and they don't need us to do things for them. The things that are in this report that fall to them, the report says they must show the lead. The profession must show a lead in dealing with the issues that the report identifies as being important to them. We will want to be there with them, supporting them in that work, but the report never says, 'Every time there is a problem, it's the Welsh Government that has to find the solution.' It has to be much wider than that.

I want to thank Paul Davies for drawing attention to the chapter in the report, chapter 7, on family justice. It's a very substantial report. It's a compellingly argued report. I don't want to rehearse again some of the discussion that I had on the floor of the Assembly a fortnight ago about the approach that the Welsh Government is taking to dealing with issues of looked-after children, but you will see in this report what it refers to as the compelling evidence of the need for reform in the way that that service is delivered here in Wales; the way in which the costs in the current system for funds could be spent far, far better, the report says, in avoiding the need for children to be taken into local authority care; the testimony that it gives from young people themselves taken into care, who said to Lord Thomas that, if a fraction of the money spent on looking after them in care had been spent on their families to help their families to go on looking after them what a better outcome that would have been for them and for those families. It's a report any Assembly Member who maybe doesn't regard this as central to their interests here—if there was a single chapter in this report that I would ask them to read, that chapter on family justice would be the one that I think would merit anybody's consideration.

Paul Davies pointed to the issue of a separate jurisdiction. The report doesn't actually recommend, using those words, 'a separate legal jurisdiction', but it does recommend a separation of the judiciary—that there should be a formal creation of Welsh courts and a Welsh judiciary, and I think it sets out, very persuasively, why that would not run into some of the difficulties that Paul Davies set out in his statement. Of course, the devolution of something as huge as the justice system is not entirely straightforward, but nor is it unachievable. Some of the issues that Paul Davies raised really are old canards that we've heard time and time again in this debate. There are 50 states in America where people are able to move between one and another, and the justice system is not frustrated by that, just as it is not frustrated by the fact that there is a separate system in Scotland and in England.

Of course we want an effective relationship with the Ministry of Justice, and, during that brief period when we had a Secretary of State in David Gauke and a Minister in Rory Stewart, we were able to agree blueprints for women offenders, blueprints for young offenders—to have an approach to imprisonment that we would have been prepared to work with here in Wales. The problem we face, Llywydd, is that no sooner have you struck up a relationship with a team of Ministers than the merry-go-round at Westminster moves them on to somewhere else and we're back to square one again. We will go on making those efforts, but it does sometimes feel that it's very much uphill and against the grain of the way in which Whitehall operates in these matters.

May I thank the First Minister for his statement, and thank Lord Thomas and the members of the commission for their staggeringly thorough work in getting to the point where this report was brought forward to us as an Assembly? This is the beginning of a journey, if truth be told. I am pleased that we've had a statement today and an opportunity to make some comments. I'm also pleased that time will be allocated early in the new year to having a more comprehensive debate so that we can air these points in a little more detail. But we will then need to work across political parties, and across Parliaments too, in order to take these recommendations forward.

I do welcome the fact that the Conservatives, who don't at present see value in delivering these recommendations, are asking questions about how all of this can be moved forward. It's a matter of concern to me that the kinds of questions posed by the leader of the Conservatives today are at such a fundamental and basic level, and he is perhaps causing me to doubt just how much attention the Conservative Party has given to these recommendations and the thorough work done by Lord Thomas and his team. But I'm willing to accept that we must ask questions at every level so that we can make progress.

There are so many reasons why we, as a legislature, should be embracing these recommendations placed before us. On a point of principle, as lawmakers here in Wales, it's important for many of us here in Wales that we do become a Parliament that is a legislative body that deals with the justice system as a matter of principle. There are practicalities in terms of the difficulties that we face at the moment in delivering co-ordination between justice and the kinds of policies that will influence the justice system.

In Scotland and in England, they can form policy in a different context. But the main reason—and the main reason outlined very clearly in the report by Lord Thomas—for proceeding to implement these recommendations is that the deficiencies that have been highlighted do impact upon real people's lives here in Wales and the way in which the justice system deals with them, be that in how we deal with women within the justice system, how we treat people from ethnic minorities within our justice system, or how we operate legislation within family courts in a way that is sensitive to the needs of our young people and children here in Wales, as the First Minister mentioned.

Many of you, like myself, will have read—or will have started reading—The Secret Barrister, which looks at the deficiencies of the legal system in Britain or in England and Wales at the moment. We have an opportunity here in Wales now to address those weaknesses, which are so well known to many people working within the justice system, and to work in a way that, for the very first time, allows us to formulate a system that is sensitive to the needs of the people of Wales specifically. So, we will work together on these issues.

I do have a few questions. I welcome the fact that there will be a Cabinet sub-committee chaired by the First Minister. What about the role of the civil service in all of this? There are a few things that raise some doubts in my mind as to the attitude of the civil service. The Welsh civil service said that they would need 200 more policy officials, at a cost of around £14 million, in order to implement this kind of change. The suggestion by Lord Thomas was that 10 people would be needed, and that we could create a new model of working, drawing on the expertise of our universities and reflecting the benefits of being a small nation like Wales, in terms of efficiency. So, we don't want to copy what is done at an England and Wales level, but create something that is inherently Welsh. So, I would welcome some comments from the First Minister as to the confidence that he has as to whether the civil service can become an important partner in delivering all of this.

Finally, in terms of the role for the politicians at a UK level to deliver these changes, we heard the First Minister stating earlier that he had been campaigning since 1985, calling for these kinds of changes. Well, I do have to raise some questions as to the influence that you've managed to have on your fellow Labour members in Westminster. We know, don't we, that Labour MPs, for a long, long time after 1985 have been blocking the devolution of elements of the justice system. So, in that context, how confident are you that you can persuade your own party at the UK level, (1) to place these recommendations in a manifesto for an election, and to do so now? The recommendations before us are so clear and so unambiguous that there is no reason why any party couldn't promise to implement these. So, show us that you have the influence within your own party, because I make a pledge to you that the implementation of the Lord Thomas recommendations will be very strongly reflected in our manifesto as we enter this election.

Llywydd, I thank Rhun ap Iorwerth very much for those questions. I agree with what he said at the start of his contribution. We are at the beginning of a journey here, and it will take time to travel the whole path, and in order to do that it is important to have cross-party working. I welcome many of the things that Paul Davies said—the constructive things that he said—about a number of things in the report. He is interested in seeing how these recommendations may be implemented, and we must also work not just internally within the Assembly, but with people outwith the Assembly in Wales, and also with people in Westminster.

I also agree with what Rhun ap Iorwerth said about the practical recommendations in the report. For a number of people here, it is a matter of principle to have the justice system in the hands of the people here in the Assembly. But, in the report, they just make a more pragmatic case. It just shows the impact that the current system has on people's everyday lives here in Wales.

To turn to the questions as regards the civil service, well, we said 200 people because there are 300 people in the Scottish Executive working on those things that the report wishes to transfer to us in Wales. Well, Lord Thomas says 10 staff members—10 people to do everything contained within this report. I agree with him and with Rhun as well that we don't just have to emulate others or do things in the way that we've always done them, and we have to work with universities and draw more people in to co-operate with us, and I am totally open to doing it in that fashion, but if we are going to run the whole system—the courts, the probation service, youth justice, the profession, everything that's contained within this report—then it's difficult for me at present to see how 10 additional people could cope with that. But it's something for us to discuss on the journey, as Rhun mentioned.

Llywydd, I have attempted to do many things for a long time and failed. I'm sure that he has campaigned for independence for a long time, and he's failed to persuade people of that as yet. He's continuing to try to persuade people, as am I, and the report is a great help for us just as an evidence base from a group of totally independent people who have brought these conclusions forward.

Can I thank the First Minister for bringing this statement today, and still more if I may thank Lord Thomas and all his fellow commissioners for bringing forth this very impressive report? I'd also like to congratulate the previous First Minister for what is a very impressive report that he set up for us. 

I would like to actually follow what the First Minister said that this report deserves far fuller consideration than it can be given today. I had previously planned perhaps to give a more definitive response to it, but I think it is right to hold back to absorb it further and to consult more widely. I think that what he said about his approach to responding to it is sensible, and I really look forward to having that full debate and contributing more fully on some of the issues there.

What I might just say in terms of one point of principle is that the commission refers to the 'jagged saw', which although more prosaic in this context was described in the statement by the First Minister as the 

'practical challenges which flow from the division of responsibilities between Westminster and Wales.'

And I noted that when the leader of opposition was giving his response, there was quite a lot of heckling of him that he was anti-devolution. I just think that some of us, inevitably, whatever the division of devolved and non-devolved, there will always be something of a jagged saw; there will always be some difficulty at that level where the two different polities are meeting. But it just takes it as a given, this report, that wherever that's the case—for example, in justice—the solution must always be devolving to Wales, and some of us have just become concerned that if devolution is always that one-way street of continued and further devolution always and everywhere of greater and greater powers, that that may not be what the people of Wales want to see, and also that it will put at risk the very substantial flow of financial resources that Wales receives from England in a circumstance where we have a £13.7 billion fiscal gap. I just think that point needs to be kept in mind.

Also, if I may, take up Rhun's point, which I thought was a very good one. He quoted a book called The Secret Barrister, which I've also read, and I found really quite shocking in terms of the state of the courts system in England and Wales. When I was a Member of Parliament in England I saw some of this, but, frankly, it has got a lot worse since then, and the reduction in spending on the justice system has been almost higher than any other area of Government activity, and the implications are absolutely horrendous. I think what this report does, it doesn't just tell us about Wales; it tells us about the justice system in England and Wales, and, frankly, it's not just useful for us but it should be useful for the UK Government and the UK Parliament. If the Conservatives are not convinced of the overall thrust of it, I hope they will use this report to show what is happening to an area of England and Wales that has had this extraordinary effort and talented minds and work pointing out what the problems are. I hope this will be read more widely than Wales, and a lot of these problems are down to the UK Government at an England and Wales level, and they do need to be tackled.

Could I welcome some of the specifics that the First Minister has given today, specifically the schemes for apprenticeships in the legal profession and Welsh Government support for that? I think that is a good idea; I welcome that. I think initially perhaps we should concentrate on a pilot of the scheme for that, and I would just draw the First Minister's attention to chartered legal executives and the background and the positive impact they have on the law. Perhaps given how their qualification and support system works, it could be a good area for initial engagement and thinking how Welsh Government can help that go further.

In terms of some of the other areas, the law council of Wales, the legal innovation lab at Swansea University, the justice committee in the Cabinet, if I may borrow a phrase from Welsh Government, I think those are things that we would support in principle.

One substantive point I just want to make—and I will be interested in the First Minister's response—about the report on a more technical level is in the area of appointment to the Supreme Court. I'm just disappointed by the approach and the evidence base in the report on this because it is something that we discussed a few weeks ago in the Chamber and I agree with the substantive recommendation that the report makes that the Supreme Court must have a judge with knowledge and experience of practice in Welsh law, but also of the scheme of devolution for Wales and Wales as a distinct part of the United Kingdom. I think that's right and I think it should be implemented regardless of what happens in respect of other recommendations, but the report says that they recommend putting Wales

'in a similar position to Scotland and Northern Ireland in the Supreme Court as regards the appointment of judges to the Supreme Court.'

Unfortunately, what they propose is insufficient to do that, and the reason, I fear, is that the justice commission has misdescribed how judges are currently appointed to the Supreme Court. In paragraph 2.90, they say,

'Appointments to the Court of Appeal and to the Supreme Court are made on the recommendation of Commissions on which Commissioners from the Judicial Appointments Commission form the majority.'

Now, that is correct in terms of the Court of Appeal, but it is not correct for the Supreme Court and the reference to 'the Judicial Appointments Commission' is unhelpful given the focus on devolution and the nature of the Supreme Court. To look at the Supreme Court's own statement on its website about the procedure for appointing a justice of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, it refers to a panel of five, the President of the Supreme Court, and then she nominates a senior judge from anywhere in the United Kingdom but that judge cannot be a justice at the Supreme Court, and then, in addition, there is a member of each of the judicial appointments commission for England and Wales, the judicial appointments board in Scotland, and the judicial appointments commissioner in Northern Ireland. At least one of those representatives has to be a layperson. Nominations are made by the chairman of the relevant commission or board.

So, we do have in the report a recognition that a separate judiciary will require an independent method of judicial appointment and a later reference to an appointments system, but I think we need to understand, particularly if we're to have parity in the Supreme Court appointments, the implication of having our own separate judicial appointments commission, or something at least that the Supreme Court would recognise as equivalent to allow us to have that equivalent role of the other jurisdictions. And I think that also goes to the issue of, 'Is it really realistic to have just 10 extra people?' I know the previous Lord Chief Justice had a review of justice and managed to do that with 10, but I agree with the First Minister, that's not realistic for Government. And I just wonder if some consideration could be given to this because we really deserve better treatment at the Supreme Court than just Scotland having one of five, Northern Ireland having one of five, and then there's another one of the five that's England and Wales. If we were to go down the route of this separation, that would become a judicial appointments commission for England, and there's nothing in the report that would ensure that we're treated equally and fairly in terms of the appointments process for the Supreme Court. So, I'd just like to put that there and ask Welsh Government, at least, to respond, given that misconception.

Llywydd, I thank the Member for his very engaged response to the report. He started by pointing to 'the jagged edge' that the report points to between responsibilities that we already exercise here in Wales and on which effective operation of the justice system depends. While there will always be, wherever you draw the line, some jagged edges, I think the report does a very convincing job of showing how that current system has those jagged edges embedded into the middle of the way that it operates, and how you can redesign that so they become peripheral to the way that the system operates rather than constant barriers right in the midst of it. I entirely agree with him that the report is of significance far beyond Wales. The cuts to legal aid, the cuts to the court service, the way the probation service was privatised and lost the confidence of the courts in the process, all of those are things that are true not just for Wales but for England as well.

I thank Mark Reckless for what he suggested in relation to apprenticeships, and how they might be designed. We'll look carefully at that. Every now and then, Llywydd, in reading the report, which took up quite a bit of my half-term, I found myself at the edge of my own technical grasp of some of the issues with which it deals. As far as the Supreme Court is concerned, as I understood it, the court report suggests that there should be a Welsh judge formally appointed to the Supreme Court, and Mark Reckless's points—and I was trying to make sure I was following them—were not to dissent from that outcome, but to ask us to look carefully at what the report says about the method by which that might be brought about. And the Counsel General was sitting here listening carefully to that, and we'll make sure that we explore those points in the detail that they deserve.

First Minister, this is not only an impressive report, but an incredibly impressive panel of expertise, of really world-class standing, and as one would expect from a former Lord Chief Justice, the report is almost in the form of a very incisive judgment into the state of law within Wales. And the report, I think, is of such high competence and expertise—several hundred pages—that it took the Ministry of Justice approximately 15 minutes to tweet out that they rejected its findings but they would give them further consideration, whatever that meant. And I think that probably says more about the state of justice in the UK than anything else.

I'm very much grateful for the fact that there is going to be, at the appropriate time, a full and detailed report so we can debate these things properly. So, I only want to comment, really, on the one area, and it's an area I've raised time and time again, I think, ever since I've been in the Assembly, and in all my years, really—33 years—working as a practising lawyer, working for trade unions, working for working people. And that is this: we have lost, along the way, the understanding of not only the importance of justice and the rule of law, but the importance of access to it. And this was an understanding that we had in the post-1945 Labour Government, when the 1949 Act was introduced, when Viscount Simon, when he was introducing the Act, said that what we were creating was a national health service for law, because what was understood and recognised as fundamental in any society was that the law means nothing unless ordinary people have access to it, and are empowered to access that law. So, an environment where, effectively, in the past 10 years, there has been almost a 27 per cent cut in real terms in the funding of justice-related matters, indicates how far we have lost our understanding of the importance of justice to the people. And being a legislature now means we have the opportunity to actually put those fundamental principles back at the core of the Welsh legislature and the Welsh justice system that is actually developing.

It was well understood, the consequences of this—Lord Neuberger expressed this numerous times when he was president of the Supreme Court, when he said:

'My worry is the removal of legal aid for people to get advice'.

That not only undermines the whole legal system, it leads to people effectively beginning to have disregard to the law and taking the law into their own hands. And more recently, I think the head of the Bar commission basically just referred yet again, and consistently, to the huge threat to access to justice in the country, and the impact of the cuts, particularly on the poorest and most vulnerable within our society.

The part I would like to refer to and I would like to ask you about is really the part in chapter 3, where the recommendation is made that the funding for legal aid, and for the third sector—providing advice and assistance—should be brought together in Wales in a single fund. This is something we have debated over a number of years, and I know there's work that has gone on around this, and the fact that enormous amounts of Welsh money goes into various aspects in making up these shortfalls in the justice system, to ensure that some of the most vulnerable do get support, whether it be through Citizens Advice, whether it be through Women's Aid, whether it be through the various third sector bodies. And I wonder if you would agree with me that there is an opportunity now to start the process of the creation of a Welsh legal aid system, restoring that to the core, perhaps in two parts, because, of course, the devolution of funding and responsibilities are important, and certain things can't be done until that happens. But much of the administration and bureaucracy of that system already exists, and could well be brought within the ambit of Welsh Government if the funding followed it. And, clearly, the funding in respect of legal aid functions is something that would not take great minds in order to actually transfer, but it would be the creation of perhaps a two-stage process, getting ready for that to happen now, but starting the halfway house—perhaps the quasi legal aid system now—while we pull that together. And we also recognise the important contributions that bodies like the trade unions make to the provision of legal advice and legal support—for many years, the funders of much of the legal system for ordinary working people. And what was their reward by Tory Governments in the past? The reward was basically consistent legislation that made it more and more difficult for trade unions to operate and, in fact, to recruit members. So they clearly have a part to play within this, as many other bodies do. But I think we should commit ourselves, or we should start discussing committing ourselves, to the creation of a new route to legal advice and assistance, a composite Welsh route that would be the pride of a Welsh legal justice system.

Llywydd, can I thank Mick Antoniw for that? He began by pointing to the impressive nature of the panel. And when I had the privilege of helping to introduce the report on the day that it was launched, I remember saying that I thought that one of the key jobs that Ministers—and, in this case, the former First Minister—had to carry out, in getting this sort of work going, is to choose the right people to do it. And those are difficult decisions very often. But if you look at the panel who made up this commission, those decisions were very wise indeed, and have led to the report that we have today.

Mick Antoniw made a very important point, and it's here in the report, that, in the 1945 welfare state settlement, access to justice was a fundamental strand in the way those who were creating new rights for people—new social rights, in the Marshall sense, but new rights to justice as well—this was an integral part of the way that they thought citizenship rights in the United Kingdom would be discharged in the future. And the cuts that we have seen in the last decade, those cuts to legal aid and other access to justice aspects, are laid bare in this report. If you wanted to read no other paragraphs in it, read what this report says about litigants in person—people who are forced to represent themselves in court, because they have no access to advice, nobody else to speak up for them, the terrible burden that that places on them, and the way it slows down the whole court system, because they have to be helped from the bench repeatedly to understand what is going on and to make the points that they are entitled to make. It's such a false economy, isn't it, because it just throws costs into other parts of the system?

I was struck during the discussion, Llywydd, at how much more some Members here know about aspects of the justice system than I do. Mick Antoniw's idea of a Welsh legal aid system of course is one that we will want to look at as we take this forward. The report says, in that chapter 3, on access to justice, that the Welsh Government has had to divert money

'to address functions that were not devolved instead of using the resources for functions that had been devolved'.

And it then says that this

'was the right thing to do.'

But it wasn't—it shouldn't have been the necessary thing to do. But we will now be able to use some of that experience, and the funding that we have provided to third sector organisations, in that new system that Mick Antoniw has outlined this afternoon.

I will extend the time available for this statement a little, because of the importance of the statement, but may I ask the remaining speakers to be concise in their questions? Alun Davies.

Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. [Laughter.] You do have a happy habit of making those statements before I rise to speak. [Laughter.] I'm always very grateful to be called, of course.

First Minister, I'm grateful to you for making this statement this afternoon. I think, like other Members here, we are all very grateful to Lord Thomas and his team. Giving evidence last year to Lord Thomas, and to the commissioners, was a pretty terrifying experience, I have to say, and the level of scrutiny and the level of focus on the issues that were under discussion was something that was hugely impressive at that time, and I think it's demonstrated in the report that has been produced. For me, this is certainly a report about the justice system, but it is also a report about people. It's about fairness, it's about social justice and it's about the stability of the constitution of this country.

I was reading the report of Peter Clarke—the chief inspector of prisons—into Cardiff prison this morning, and what he says there is absolutely striking: something like half or all people released, all men released, from Cardiff prison are homeless upon release; 65 per cent have issues with mental health; 38 per cent have drug and alcohol addictions upon arrival at Cardiff prison. And these figures are seen to be quite good, quite reasonable figures. That's the burden of his report, and that this is an improvement on where we've been. But what that really tells you—what that really tells you is that we are used to a system that is so dramatically failing the people of Wales that we are used to a system that works for virtually nobody. And that is unacceptable—it's unacceptable. And it's not acceptable either to simply say, 'This is a very good report, we're going to file it away', and 'This is a very good report, we're going to have a seminar perhaps or take our instructions from elsewhere.' This is a report that demands action, and it demands action from this place.

I'm really very, very pleased that the First Minister has responded with the urgency that this report requires this afternoon. I very much welcome what the First Minister has said about a sub-committee of Cabinet to take these matters forward. I hope also that we will be able to ensure that we are able to move towards the creation of a justice department within the Welsh Government. The First Minister is absolutely right, in answer to an earlier question, about the weight of numbers and the resources available to achieve that. But there is already a job of work to be done, even without the devolution of these matters, to better co-ordinate and to manage the systems and the interfaces of services within this country. The report stands as a rebuke to people who have governed this country in the past, a rebuke to the constitution of this country, and a rebuke to all those people who say, 'It's simply too difficult, so I'm going to wash my hands of this.' Wash their hands, not only of the difficulty that we are confronted with, but wash their hands of the human consequences of it as well.

And so, First Minister, I welcome very much what you said this afternoon, both in answer to questions and in your statement. I hope that we will able to have a reasoned debate in the new year, as you have suggested. But, First Minister, I hope you will also be able to reassure all of us here that, in moving forward, you will do so with the urgency and the tempo that you've set this afternoon, with the understanding of the human issues that you've established this afternoon, but also with a clear understanding of how this will impact Wales and Wales's relationship with the rest of the United Kingdom.

One of the questions that Lord Thomas asked me during my evidence was whether there was a requirement for a symmetrical nature of devolution. We were talking about Great Britain, rather then the whole of the United Kingdom. And I believe, with my experience in Government, that we do require that symmetrical system of devolution. An asymmetrical system was acceptable in 1999, when we were establishing devolved government in Wales, but it does not provide the stability of governance and the stability of a settlement that will deliver the services we require and the sort of constitutional stability that we will require in the future.

So, First Minister, like others this afternoon, I'm very grateful to you for this statement, and I hope that you can reassure us that the Welsh Government will continue to pursue this, and to pursue this with urgency.

Llywydd, I thank Alun Davies for that. Let me respond to three or four points very quickly. He's absolutely right to point to the human consequences of the failures that the report outlines, and the human consequences are there right through the report. They stand out to you when you read them. The point I made earlier this afternoon about the apparent acceptability of saying to a witness, 'You've got to leave your house at 7 o'clock in the morning, maybe don't get back there till 7.30 p.m. at night'—that's fine as far as the Ministry of Justice is concerned. I don't think that's something that you would expect a vulnerable person, faced with the ordeal of a court case in front of them, to be able to just undertake without any consequences. So, the human part of this report—I thank Alun Davies for drawing attention to that.

We haven't talked about resources this afternoon, Llywydd, but Alun reminded me, and I should have said earlier, that funding will have to follow function if this report is ever to do what we want it to do. No Government can take on the responsibilities that are outlined in this report without being given the money that is necessary to discharge them properly.

I'm interested, of course, in the point Alun Davies made towards the end about symmetrical devolution. What I certainly think the report aims for is stable devolution. It aims for a coherent way of going about these responsibilities, putting them together in a package that will provide coherence and stability. There is an urgent need to get on with it. We will do that in terms of the recommendations that fall directly to us. And then we will inevitably be dependent on the willingness of others to move down that path with the same sense of determination.

First Minister, as we've heard, the criminal justice system in England and Wales is in need of much improvement. There's a body of evidence that establishes that, and I think this authoritative report significantly adds to it. We know that far too many people are sent to prison, as you mentioned in your opening statement, compared to our our western European neighbours, for example, and that creates overcrowding, which makes rehabilitation very, very difficult indeed.

We know that many of the people there have mental health issues, alcohol and drug issues, which are not properly or adequately addressed. And we know that there's much overlap between the services that Welsh Government is responsible for in terms of those problems and the non-devolved criminal justice aspects. We know that it all needs to be joined up much more effectively, and devolution would make that joining up so much easier. It would also enable, of course, joined-up scrutiny from the Assembly and outside bodies.

So, I just think that what we have at the moment is failing morally and failing very much in practical terms. What we have as a consequence is more victims of crime in Wales, in our communities, so our communities in general suffer from a higher level of crime than would otherwise be the case. And, of course, the families of offenders suffer, as well as the offenders themselves. It's a very bleak and, I must say, depressing picture that has persisted for far too long.

So, I really do believe that this report now, this authoritative report, is an opportunity to make progress on these matters with medium and longer term devolution, but also with the shorter term steps that are pointed to. And I hope very much, First Minister, that, in due course, Welsh Government will be able to set out its response in those terms—the short-term measures that can be taken as well as the medium and longer term improvements in terms of devolution. And I would hope, and I know many here today would hope, that Welsh Government will be able to set that out as quickly as possible in the most practical terms.

I thank John Griffiths for that, Llywydd. It is an authoritative report, absolutely, and I completely agree with him. Far too many people get sent to prison in Wales. We've seen the figures from the Wales Governance Centre, and that is a failure of having a coherent system, but it's also a failure of purpose in the system as well.

I was told recently, from someone who had visited a women's prison, where there were tens of women from Wales in that prison, that more than half of them were there because they had failed to attend to the conditions that their probation officer had placed on them. They hadn't, as far as I could tell, committed a further offence; they'd simply not kept to the conditions of their supervision. Now, if I had managed to succeed all those years ago in getting the probation service into the hands of this National Assembly, I cannot imagine for a moment that we would have contemplated an outcome in which women were taken away from their families, with all the damage we know that had done, for not committing an offence, but for simply not observing the rules that the probation service is currently obliged to operate under.

So, yes, we would have a more joined-up system in a practical sense, but we would have a different sense of purpose for the system as well, and we'd be able to make that part of the purpose of the system right through it so that every aspect of the system was operating in the direction that we would want to see it operate, and the report gives us that opportunity.

Finally, Mark Isherwood.

Diolch, Llywydd. The report refers to a number of matters. We heard reference to substance misuse, homelessness, perhaps education and health as well, which relate to devolved services. You've also made reference to a number of non-devolved matters, such as probation services, but we know that they're being reintegrated with the prison system, and the proposals of the UK Government recognise the devolution factor in the design of new systems. We already know that the UK Government has agreed with the Welsh Government that we don't need more women's prisons, we need community centres. Of course, we all support at least one of those being in Wales. We already know that the UK Government is moving to longer minimum sentences, recognising that short sentences damage rehabilitation and often criminalise people who might otherwise find a way to a more independent and happy life.

My concern, therefore, is that the report seems to focus to a large extent, or to a significant extent, on policies of Governments here and there, which come and go—Governments go, policies come and go—rather than focusing on whether, for all time, in perpetuity, the constitutional principle of the devolution of criminal justice would create a fairer, more just system for everybody, despite the fact that Governments and policies will change over time. It's a different and more political aspect. I wonder if you'd comment on, therefore, the need to focus on that constitutional issue in perpetuity, rather than our views of current or future Government policies or parties in Government.

Perhaps the elephant in the room, again, for me is the cross-border nature of crime and justice in Wales. It's always been thus. It's nothing new—it's no threat to nationhood, good or bad, it's a reality that most crime in Wales travels on a west-east axis and that crime measurement, support and intervention has always been therefore developed on that basis. How, therefore, do you respond to the fact that I can only find one reference in the report to any cross-border criminality, in the context of county lines, along the M4 corridor and north Wales? And the solution it proposes is joint working across the four Welsh forces in collaboration with other agencies, but no reference to partners across the board. How, therefore, again, do you respond to the reality that North Wales Police report increased collaboration with Merseyside and Cheshire forces on fire arms, intelligence, custody, property, forensics, and that they even share their regional organised crime unit with neighbouring forces, which is located in Warrington? So, how do we reconcile that reality, which has nothing to do with nationality or national identity, but simply demographics, geography and history, that we have that east-west movement?

And my final question is in response to something you mentioned earlier regarding the US system, and, if it works there effectively, why couldn't it work here. Of course, the US has an integrated network of criminal justice systems at federal and state level. The federal Government in Washington and the individual state Governments oversee various aspects of criminal justice and, in that context, if we are going to evolve into a more effective system that recognises the more federalised and federalising nature of the UK, do we not also need to look to more of a networked system, recognising tiered interventions, rather than simply trying to draw lines between systems according to where national borders lie?

Dirprwy Lywydd, can I welcome what Mark Isherwood said at the beginning about his party's support for the approach to women's imprisonment that this Government has adopted and worked with some of his colleagues in London on as well? We welcomed David Gauke's, when he was the Secretary of State at the Ministry for Justice, policy of abolishing short sentences of imprisonment. I fear, Dirprwy Lywydd, that, in the way that Mark Isherwood said policies come and go, this policy may have come and may already be going under the next occupant of the Ministry of Justice.

Mark Isherwood asked me about the constitutional argument, and I think, for me, it's always been relatively simple, really: decisions that affect only people in Wales should be made only by people in Wales. Given that these are decisions we're talking about that affect people who are in Wales, then the devolution of those services to be made by people elected to this National Assembly seems to me entirely consistent with that basic constitutional principle.

I don't myself believe that the cross-border issue is quite the showstopper that some Members here are trying to suggest. Even in a service as wholly devolved as the health service, we have a burns unit in Singleton hospital that is a regional resource that serves the south-west of England as well. It is perfectly possible, even when matters are devolved, to have proper collaboration and to work with others in pursuit of common ambitions, and I'm sure that we would be able to do that. The report actually deals with cross-border issues far more extensively, I think, than simply its county lines observation. It deals with the whole business of appointments of justices, how solicitors are qualified on an England-and-Wales basis; it regularly attends to cross-border issues.

But, in the constructive spirit that this discussion has been conducted, I'll end by thanking Mark Isherwood for the points he made at the end about the way in which different constitutional formats inside the United Kingdom would require us to look differently at how some of these cross-border matters would be resolved, and look forward to going on working with Members in all parts of the Chamber in order to make the most we can of this landmark report.

Thank you very much, First Minister.

Item 4 on the agenda is a statement by the Minister for Housing and Local Government, on supporting local housing authorities to secure long-term housing options in the private rented sector, and I call on the Minister for Housing and Local Government, Julie James.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. This statement provides details of the trial of a new scheme aimed at increasing the housing stock available to local authorities in discharging their housing duties, and, more particularly, their Part 2 Housing (Wales) Act 2014 duties. Local authorities' discharge of these duties has done much to prevent individuals and families from becoming homeless. However, there are still far too many whose homelessness is not prevented. This trial proposes using the private rented sector to increase the stock available to local authorities when discharging their Part 2 duties by offering tenants access to good-quality housing at affordable rents with an appropriate level of support. We are trialling the scheme in a small number of local authorities to prove the concept and provide the necessary evidence base for a model to be developed to roll out across Wales.  

'Prosperity for All' emphasises the role good-quality homes play in all aspects of an individual’s life and the importance of secure, affordable housing as a basis for improved health and life outcomes. Insecurity of tenure or poor-quality housing can, of course, cause or exacerbate anxiousness and ill health, and limit the ability of renters to engage with their local community or for their children to settle in education.

Preventing and resolving homelessness in all its forms is a key priority for this Government. The numbers of households presenting as at risk, or already homeless, in Wales has been aggravated by benefits cuts and austerity. This Government is committed to building social homes at scale and pace, but we also accept that homes are not built in a day. We are looking at additional, innovative approaches to increasing the stock of housing, and a model such as this could make a significant and important difference for Wales.

Increasingly, local authorities are looking to the private rented sector to find homes for families and the individuals they support. However, the private rented sector is increasingly a tenure of choice for a far broader range of households than in the past. Long gone are the days when renting was something for students and young professionals before they 'settle down'. Today, in some areas, the market for rental properties is very competitive. Landlords can pick and choose to whom they rent and, as a result, have pushed some of our more vulnerable households out of that market.

Many local authorities work hard to identify landlords willing to take households on benefits and to accept the low rents afforded by benefits. This hard work is admirable, but frequently only results in a short-term solution. With only six months' security and little support, we know that often these tenancies break down and the household goes back through the 'revolving door'.  

For those struggling financially, the disparity between local housing allowance rates and market rents limits access to the PRS. This problem is intensified by some of the anecdotal evidence suggesting private landlords are less likely to rent to those in receipt of benefits. Investing in and evaluating a trial focused on increasing access, quality and security for such groups is a worthy and worthwhile enterprise.

Working collaboratively with existing stakeholders we have developed a model that we believe will give local authorities a significant extra resource in helping to prevent and relieve homelessness. Finding an offer that also works for landlords has been an important part of developing this model. This is a win-win deal, it offers a good deal for those seeking a stable, good-quality home, and a good deal for landlords who want a long-term rental income stability without the day-to-day responsibility of being a landlord.

In exchange for a commitment from private sector landlords to lease their properties to a local authority for a period of up to five years, those property owners will receive guaranteed rent, every month, for the period of the lease, and an undertaking that, subject to fair wear and tear at the end of the five years, they will receive their property back in the same condition as they leased it. Additionally, property owners will be eligible for a grant and an interest-free loan to bring their properties up to a required standard, should their property not meet the minimum requirements for the trial. Interested private sector landlords will receive rent at the relevant local housing allowance rates—that turns out to be quite difficult to say—less a sum equivalent to a competitive management fee.

The minimum standard of properties accepted onto the trial will be linked to WHQS standards and, as I have said, there will be an element of grant and loan to ensure that any property participating in this trial is of a high standard. The households we are seeking to house here deserve high-quality homes and choice as much as any other household, but the incentives we will provide will also help improve the standards of the private rented sector more generally in Wales.

Tenants who live in these properties will be assured, subject to their observation of the terms of their contract, of up to five years of accommodation in the private rented sector at local housing allowance rates. Importantly, for both tenant and landlord, the households moving in will receive the support they need to help them thrive in their new homes.

As I have said, this is a win-win deal; it works for landlords and local authorities as much as it works for tenants. Tenants will have access to good-quality, affordable private sector housing with the kind of support that they would normally only have access to in social housing. Landlords can be confident that while receiving regular rent every month their property is being looked after and they need not worry about many of the day-to-day responsibilities that go with being a landlord as they will be carried out by the local authority as the managing agent. Local authorities will have the benefit of an extra resource to help meet their objectives for preventing and reducing homelessness.

We are all aware that supported, happy, settled, long-term tenants help to build more integrated communities. Tenants housed through this trial will be able to access a high level of support, should they require it, and an essential part of the trial will be promoting independence and the skills for life necessary to reduce the burden on the supply of social housing.

Local authorities are ideally placed to lead this initiative. Their private rented sector teams already have contact with a number of private sector landlords who might be interested in leasing their properties through such a model and they already know and work with the families that need these homes.

We will now be inviting local authorities to submit expressions of interest in running the trial. We will appoint three local authorities to operate the trial scheme, and these will be selected on the basis of a series of qualitative and quantitative measures. I will provide more detail on the successful areas in due course.

The goal is for this trial to provide a scaleable model that leads to a national scheme that provides significantly more affordable housing, of increased quality, with greater security of accommodation across Wales. Diolch.

I'm pleased to give a broad welcome to this trial scheme in Wales, and I look forward to receiving the continual reports on its uptake from the sector. I obviously have some questions regarding how it will operate, and I have been in discussions with the sector.

I note that the Residential Landlords Association have some reservations, particularly around the flexibility that landlords will be left with if the scheme runs, say, for five years. Are you thinking a minimum of two up to five, or what sort of range? And also, should there be some form of reasonable break in that contract for exceptional circumstances or if a landlord has to sell a property? So, I think we need to be quite clear on the nature of the obligation. Obviously, tying people into the local authority level spend is important. And for that stability, they then get three, four, five years of guaranteed rent. So, it's a real factor. But also, this is coming in at probably under the market rate in many cases. So, I think we need to be aware of the balance of the contract, but I do accept that it's an appropriate bargain to strike, and can work, as you say, for both sides and be a win-win.

I think similar schemes have been trialled in local authorities in England, so I suspect you could look to some best practice there, but obviously these sorts of schemes have been tested to some extent anyway, and whilst I accept trialling three local authority areas is a way forward, I do hope that the pilot will be a fairly brisk one, so that we can prove the concept and then deepen the partnership between the private residential sector and local government. That collaborative working, I think, needs to go deeper and we've urged you on several occasions to remember the resources that we have in the private sector. It's a much larger sector and, as you indicated, it now appeals to quite a broad range of people. So, I think rather than seeing it as a competitor we need to tap into those resources and see where they can be used.

I also think that local authorities need to be encouraged to do this, and ensure that they're having the sort of policy conversations on things like homelessness and empty housing, for instance, and the role that the private rented sector could offer, and then to remind them that vulnerable groups like ex-offenders, care leavers, and low-income households can be very stable tenants, with—which I thought was vital in what you said—the support mechanisms that are going to go into these schemes. Then, there's a real offer there. I had noted that, for instance, in Bristol, they have a bond scheme to reassure landlords—and landladies, I suppose—and that's linked to inspection and that properties are in a proper state, but that does give some reassurance as well, I'm sure, to landlords and landladies.

But overall, I do hope this is the start of a really good, active, innovative and enterprising partnership between the Residential Landlords Association and Welsh Government and local authorities, because these social problems are the concern of all of us, and I think the private sector has got its part to play where appropriate, and where bound in to reasonable conditions and due rigour. So, broadly, I welcome this and look forward to the reports on the three schemes and I hope that they progress quickly.

Thank you. As usual, David, we agree about much more than we disagree about. So, I completely agree with you that we need to have a better relationship with the private rented sector. Part of that will be of course bringing into force our new Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016, which does give people longer security of tenure anyway, just in the normal private rented sector. But this is an entirely different scheme that allows the local authorities to discharge their housing duties under Part 3 of the housing Act in a more effective way using the private rented sector, so that's the first thing to just make really clear. 

If a landlord wants to exit the scheme, they will obviously be able to, it's their property after all, but there are several options available there. First of all, if there has been any grant or loan arrangement in order to bring the property up to standard, that will be repayable at that point, proportionally to the amount of time that they've had their house in the scheme. Also of course it will be up to the local authority to buy the house should the landlord be selling it, and I hope in that way we would actually just convert the housing into social rent, effectively. So, we want to have the three trial areas to see what kind of churn in the system there might be. 

I'm also really interested in other innovative schemes, which I'm not announcing today, but which we're very interested in doing: pursuing, for example, investors who might want to actually build for this sector—specifically build for this sector. And although they wouldn't be a registered social landlord, they would be able to give over their property for a long period of time to this kind of housing management arrangement. So, I'm very keen that we look at that.

With my colleague Lee Waters we have been looking at empty properties throughout Wales and what we can do to incentivise owners to bring those empty properties back into beneficial use, and this is another scheme to do just that. So, if you are in possession of a property in Wales and you don't have the wherewithal to do it up so that it can be habitable, this will be a route to doing that, and in return you let the local authority have it for five years, rented out, and it will be returned to you in a much better condition than you probably—usually—inherited it in.

It does mean that we can give guarantees to the landlord that will help them to understand the reliability of more vulnerable groups, because there are a lot of myths out there about the unreliability of people on benefits, and so on. And what this does, in a similar sort of way, weirdly, to what the Jobs Growth Wales scheme did for young people, is it will demonstrate to people that what they believe is not true and that, actually, people are very reliable. Lots of people are on benefits when they're in full-time employment, and so on. So I do think it will prove that concept as well.

It won't need a bond scheme because, actually, of course, the local authority will be the managing agents, and so the landlord is protected via the local authority. We do run bond schemes, actually, to allow people to get into the private rented sector where they wouldn't otherwise have the cash, but that's not part of this scheme, because the house is taken over. I'd be very happy to come back with updates regularly. I really hope that we can do this trial period really quickly. My understanding is that we will have both landlords and local authorities queuing out the door to get on to it. 

It's always been the case that the private sector is more expensive to the taxpayer than social housing, even after benefit cuts, and it remains the case that, in the long run, we need more social housing and this will be cheaper. However, your statement acknowledges that social security payments themselves limit the choice that people have within the private rented sector so, to me, it's unclear whether this scheme will introduce greater subsidy to bridge that gap, or whether you as Minister are hoping that landlords will accept lower rent in exchange for a five-year guaranteed payment. So can you clarify whether additional subsidy is being put forward here to help enable people on benefits to access more expensive private rented properties than would otherwise be the case?

The second question I have is: one of the other problems in the private rented sector is the insecurity of tenure, and this scheme sensibly tries to avoid this through the provision of five-year leases. Can you confirm that landlords won't be able to exit this scheme for a quick sale once they have leased?

And then, finally, in the long run, will you also consider allowing local authorities to buy the properties that they might acquire through this scheme, because, in the long run, more housing stock is needed? We've lost a lot of housing stock as a result of the right to buy programme, and we need to avoid schemes like this becoming yet another way for the private rented sector to be publicly subsidised. Thanks.

Yes, again, I largely agree with the premise of your questions. So, just to be really clear, what we're asking them to do is accept the local housing allowance as rent in return for a guarantee of that rent without voids or any other detriment across a five-year period. We know from conversations with the Residential Landlords Association and other landlords through Rent Smart Wales that that's an offer that many of them will want to take up. So, just to be clear, we are not subsidising a higher rent; what we are doing is guaranteeing it over a five-year period. As I said, we are hoping that it will also increase the standard in the private rented sector, because people will have to bring their property up to the required standard in order to be able to rent it in this way and, in return, again, they get the five-year guarantee.

The security of tenure is an issue. So, tenants will be given security of tenure. The local authority will have to rehouse them should, for whatever reason, they have to exit it. So they would be expected to put a plan in place to do that. But I would expect, if the exit was because of sale, that the local authority would seriously consider purchasing the property and bringing it into the social rented sector. There may be other reasons, like the landlord requiring it for themselves, for example, in which case the homelessness duties would kick in and all the notice provisions would kick in and that family would have to be rehoused within the secure tenure estate.

So, I think it's a win-win, really, to be honest. It brings empty properties back into beneficial use; it allows owners who wouldn't otherwise have the cash to bring those properties up to standard; it gives us a much-needed extra area in which local authorities can discharge their Part 3 duty to families; it gives the families security of tenure; it does, as I said to David Melding, encourage people to understand that, just because somebody's on benefits, it doesn't mean that they're a bad tenant. It ticks lots and lots of boxes, it seems to me, and I do hope that, in the way that Jobs Growth Wales showed employers that young people were worth employing, this will show landlords that people on benefits are worth having as tenants. 

I very much welcome this statement. Far too many children move home between once and twice a year. It's obviously disruptive to education that they move from school to school. High-quality housing, secure and affordable, will improve the health and life outcomes for very many of my constituents. There are two separate private rented markets: there's the high-quality and expensive market that is providing very good quality homes to very many people, all of whom are incredibly happy with the housing provided; there's also the lower cost, but not low cost, rented sector. I welcome the requirement to meet the Welsh housing quality standard to be part of the scheme—I know people living in houses that do not meet the wind and waterproof conditions, never mind anything else. And offering five-year assured tenancies would actually mean a child moving in at the age of 11 would still be in the same house going to the same school when they took their GCSEs five years later. What a tremendous advantage to those children, rather than perhaps going from two or three different comprehensive schools, having to make new friends, having to settle in, and having discovered that the school has done things in a different order, so they do some things twice and some things not at all. I think these are really important. As you know, I believe very strongly in council housing, and I hope you will join me in condemning remarks made by Jacob Rees-Mogg regarding the Grenfell Tower disaster.

I've got three questions for you. How much interest do you expect from landlords in areas such as Cardiff and Swansea, where there is substantial, often unmet, housing demand? I can see, in other areas where demand and supply aren't far off equilibrium, or even parts of some areas where demand isn't far off equilibrium, where you may well get landlords saying, 'This is guaranteed income.' Isn't it the long-term solution just building or buying sufficient council houses, where we actually have control over the quality of houses people are moving into? It will also release a lot of these properties for first-time buyers. The people who lose out most, because of the private landlords buying up housing, are potential first-time buyers who don't, in those immortal words, get their foot on the first rung of the ladder because they've already been bought up for private renting. The third question is: how does the offer of this new scheme to helping to renovate houses differ or is an improvement on the scheme that currently exists for bringing houses back into use that are currently empty?

Thank you for that series of questions, Mike, and, again, I'd broadly agree with the thrust of your questions. So, just to do that last one first, the scheme that Lee Waters is promoting to bring houses back into beneficial use means that you have to live in it yourself for five years in order not to lose the grant. What this is doing is allowing you to rent it out through this scheme, so it's just another way of bringing it back into beneficial use. We have a number of other schemes that we're looking at at the moment for people who are currently living in a house that's not up to standard. I went to visit one in the top end of Rhondda Cynon Taf only the other day, with Andrew Morgan, the council leader, where a lady was actually living in her house despite it being below standard. We were able, through a mixture of grants available from that council and care and repair, to bring it back up to standard whilst she was—well, she had to move out to live with her daughter for a couple of weeks, but while she was broadly resident in it, and that was good as well. So, this is just another way of bringing empty residential properties back into use on that one.

In terms of the Swansea, Cardiff or any heating housing market, we do think there is a demand for this, because although there's a big demand for private rented sector houses in both those places that you mentioned, and in a number of other places in Wales, what this does is it means that the landlord doesn't have to worry about voids, turnover, damage—all of the sorts of things they have to deal with. And, actually, we know from our consultation that many landlords would much prefer the steady income that they know will happen over five years than the fluctuations that they get in a volatile market. So, I think it will have a place right across Wales.

You mentioned the remarks that Jacob Rees-Mogg made about Grenfell Tower, and I'd just like to say that I join you in thinking that those remarks were deeply insensitive and very hurtful to the survivors of Grenfell and the families of those who died. I believe he has subsequently apologised, but it is remarkable that somebody could make such remarks at this time and in the face of the reports just coming out on Grenfell that we've seen. Just to be clear, the 'stay put' policy is to ensure that people trying to get out of a building are not greeted by incoming firefighters trying to come with their equipment up the same set of stairs. We know that it didn't work in Grenfell, with tragic consequences, but that was not because the people in the tower were not being sensible, or, in fact, following the instructions of the fire service, as we know from the report. So, I think that was a really shocking intervention by Jacob Rees-Mogg, but, as I say, I understand he's now apologised.

Going back to the statement in front of us, we're very keen that the Welsh quality housing standard should be the standard that houses are brought up to in order to take advantage of this scheme, and, of course, Mike, you're absolutely right about the security of tenure, and the particular need for families with children to be able to keep their children in the same school. And to give them the social support that they need in order to be able to do that is one of the prime reasons that we want to bring this scheme forward.

Can I thank the Minister for her statement? By way of background, the private rented sector currently constitutes 11 per cent of the Welsh housing stock, with 71 per cent being owner-owned and 18 per cent rented from housing associations and local authorities. We all acknowledge there's a growing demand for rented accommodation, not only from those historical groups, such as students, but also from migrant workers, both foreign and indigenous, and increasingly from households unable to afford owner-occupation. The situation, of course, is exacerbated by the restrictive availability of social housing, given years of neglect in house building in this sector.

I must say, Minister, it's difficult to criticise the contents of this statement, as it outlines a very innovative, and, we believe, very effective way of increasing private housing stock available to rent. We also agree with the concept of local councils being the best vehicle to administer these innovations. The long-term guaranteed return to private landlords should be a very real incentive to them, as well as a release from the day-to-day running duties. And a loan facility to improve the property again must prove to be a great incentive to private landlords.

Just one word of caution is that it is imperative that the price at which the rentals are set must represent a good return on the private landlord's capital investment. I do believe, as others have said in this Assembly, that the stability that this may give to families to be able to know that they're in accommodation for some five years will have huge social impacts, not just for the family themselves but for society as a whole, because we know that if families are being moved from one area to another, as Mike Hedges has pointed out, it doesn't help with their education and many other things, and, of course, the health of those families as well. So, it impacts on that side of the argument as well.

So, at the beginning, I congratulated the Government and the Minister on initiating what promises to be a sound proposition to entice private landlords to let properties to those families who may not have previously been considered.

Well, thank you for that, David Rowlands. You made two points that I think require an answer—one of which was made by Mike Hedges and I neglected to mention it, which is the issue about the supply of social housing across Wales. You will know that since the removal of the cap on the housing revenue accounts in local government, not quite a year ago now, we've worked very hard with local government right across Wales to get their prudential borrowing into a position where they can build houses at pace and scale, and I'm very pleased to say that most authorities around Wales are stepping up to that ask from us with some alacrity, so we are now seeing quite an exponential increase, really, in the number of starts in social housing, and I expect to see that grow next year as well.

You also mentioned the rental income—about it being a competitive rate. Well, just to be clear, this is at the local housing allowance rate. So, that local housing allowance is set by the UK Government. Previously, in a debate in this Senedd, I did say that Members should be aware that that was frozen in 2016 and hasn't been increased since. We do understand that the Government, before it called the election, was saying that they would review that situation next year, and I really hope that any Government that comes into power after the next election will do so, because, obviously, that's at a depressed level at the moment. But the offer is at the local housing allowance level. Just to be clear, Deputy Presiding Officer, we are not looking to subsidise rents in the private rented sector at this time.

Thank you very much, Minister.

Item 5 on the agenda is a statement by the Minister for Finance and Trefnydd on the annual update on reforming local government finance. I call on the Minister for Finance and Trefnydd, Rebecca Evans.

I'm pleased to publish the third in a series of annual updates on our programme of work to reform local government finance in Wales. It sets out the reforms the Welsh Government is undertaking to improve local taxes and the wider local government finance framework to ensure it responds to the future needs of local services in challenging times.

Local services are vital in giving children the best start in life, helping to lift households out of poverty, helping us to live greener and more responsible lives, and ensuring that older and vulnerable people are cared for. These services, plus many more, could not exist without a stable and effective local government funding system—one which meets our policy aspirations and strives for fairness.

Our phased programme of short, medium and long-term reform is wide-ranging, and it's been in place since early 2017. It's delivered, and is contributing to delivering, several of the commitments and aims in 'Taking Wales Forward' and in our national strategy, 'Prosperity for All'. In 'Taking Wales Forward, the Welsh Government made a series of commitments to make council tax fairer, to support small businesses with their non-domestic rates bills and to deliver city and growth deals for regions across Wales.

The update I've published today outlines the progress we've made over the past year in working towards our aims. I'd like to take this opportunity to thank local government colleagues for their continued assistance in delivering significant improvements. Local authority officers and elected members across Wales have taken an active part in this work and have co-produced many of the improvements we see today. I'd also like to thank Citizens Advice Cymru, Money Saving Expert and other advisory services for providing much-needed practical input on the ground.

This year's report sets out the steps we have taken to make council tax fairer. On 1 April this year, we removed the threat of imprisonment for the non-payment of council tax in Wales, marking a step change in our approach to the treatment of local taxpayers. For the first time, all local authorities in Wales have adopted a common council tax protocol that captures new standards for how vulnerable and struggling households will be treated.

We continue to work with local authorities to deliver improvements to council tax collection and debt management, and to reduce bailiff action. The level of arrears has stabilised in Wales over the period since before council tax support was localised in 2013-14, whereas the total amount outstanding in England has increased by 36 per cent.

In partnership with others, we have also delivered a national campaign to raise awareness of council tax support, and I'm pleased to relaunch this campaign today. The next phase will be targeted at low-income households and households on universal credit to ensure that we highlight the full range of support that could be available to people in meeting their council tax obligations. Our campaign so far has seen over 60,000 people benefit from access to the information on our website.

Through our council tax reduction scheme, we've continued to maintain entitlements to reductions for vulnerable and low-income households across Wales. We'll shortly be bringing forward the regulations to update the scheme for next year, and we will be again investing £244 million into the scheme.

One in five households in Wales receives help with their council tax bills through this scheme, and around 220,000 households pay no council tax at all. This scheme operates in addition to the range of other discounts and exemptions available. Together, they mean that well over 0.5 million households in Wales receive some form of reduction to their council tax bill. Our awareness campaign is helping ensure that everyone understands their entitlements.

We've focused on making council tax fairer for vulnerable groups. In April, we delivered new exemptions for care leavers. Working with local government, we've also launched a standardised application process for discounts and exemptions for people with a severe mental impairment. Both of these groups can now expect to be treated consistently throughout Wales, no matter where they live.

In 'Taking Wales Forward', we committed to supporting small businesses with their non-domestic rates bills. We legislated in 2017 to make our temporary small business rate relief scheme permanent. In 2018 we delivered an improved scheme that provides enhanced rate relief for childcare providers, demonstrating how we're using all of our policy levers in a joined-up way to create the most generous childcare offer anywhere in the UK.

We're responding to the struggles of our high streets and town centres through continued investment in targeted regeneration. We have supported this by extending our high street and retail rates relief scheme into a third year and making it more generous. We want to help businesses sustain the facilities people want and need, to drive prosperity, tackle poverty and reduce inequality. In total, we are providing over £230 million of relief this year to support businesses with their rates.

A key part of our programme is an ambition to explore more fundamental reforms for the next term and beyond. I'm pleased to have joined forces with expert institutions, including Bangor University and the Institute for Fiscal Studies, to delve deeper into ideas such as local taxes based on land value, more progressive council tax, or local taxes based on income. I intend to explore these openly, and in an applied and practical way for Wales. I'll ensure that all research reports are made available to Assembly Members as they are published. Much of the report I've published today highlights changes we have made to the local taxes—council tax and non-domestic rates—which fall within my portfolio. These changes are set within a broader context, though, of local government reform.

The Minister for Housing and Local Government will shortly introduce the Local Government and Elections (Wales) Bill to this Assembly. It will provide a new framework for collaboration between authorities, recognising the regional arrangements that already exist for some local services in some parts of Wales, and reflecting other emerging developments, such as city and growth deals. The Welsh Government has always strived to give local government the best financial settlement it can, through more than a decade of UK Government austerity. We have also worked to provide local government with the tools it needs to tackle the challenges of rising and more complex demands.

I know that many colleagues in this Chamber have their own views and ideas on how local services should be funded in the future. Each of the challenges in the programme has been, or will be, consulted upon in detail. I welcome all contributions to the thinking on this important matter, from anyone at any time. In relation to alternative approaches, it remains the aim of this Government to publish our evidence in autumn 2020 to inform the debate ahead of the next Assembly term.

Local government must be enabled to deliver better public services for everyone. This programme of work makes a contribution to the strategic aims of this Government, and we are using every lever we have to make Wales a more equal, prosperous and greener society.

Can I thank the Minister for her statement this afternoon and for the annual update—the latest, as you say, in a sequence of updates? As you said, local services are vital in giving children the best start in life, helping give us a greener, more responsible environment and lead more responsible lives—I think we could all agree with that phrase that you use. And, yes, I would agree with you that we do need a stable and effective local government funding system. Some of us think that we are still some way off that today. I appreciate that, over recent years, funding has been tighter than in the past, but the Minister will be aware of my repeated calls for a review of the local government funding formula—well-worn calls now. I know that Mike Hedges has some different views on this, but I would like to hear from the Minister on whether there is any intention to look again at the current formula or current formulas that make it up—I know it's complex—particularly factoring in issues such as sparsity and rurality and the costs of delivering services over larger rural areas, such as we have in my part of Wales and particularly up towards mid Wales. So, I'd be interested to hear an update on that.

You moved on to discuss council tax and business rates, and we know that council tax has increased by around 6.6 per cent in 2019-20, or £99 for an average band 2 property. So, I would ask you, Minister, is it really fair and progressive or is council tax actually being used as a tool to make local people in local authority areas actually shoulder more of the burden over time, thereby freeing up money centrally? If that is what the Welsh Government aims to do, then that's a policy objective that you should be clear about, because it was only in your statement last year that you said you wanted to explore the balance between locally raised and centrally provided funding. So, are you still looking at that, because it does seem to be that, over time, the burden is shifting from central Government to local government, which I don't think the Labour Party of the past would have supported?

In terms of council tax arrears, which you mentioned, you say that the level of arrears has stabilised over the period since before council tax was localised in 2013-14. This may well be the case, but I would also remind the Minister that the Wales Centre for Public Policy has criticised the Welsh Government approach to handling council tax arrears. In fact, it says that, despite Welsh Government producing guidance on this, the extent to which Welsh Government is achieving its aim is being questioned, and there is a potential postcode lottery in place when it comes to people in debt. So, could you update us on the work of the working group that you established to look at this? I'm sure you'd agree that it's vitally important that some of the most vulnerable people in society, some of those at risk of the most severe debt, are being treated equitably and having access to that support that they so desperately need.

Moving on to non-domestic rates, I'm pleased that you recognise the struggles of our high streets and town centres. Those are well documented, and we welcome additional support for our high streets, because they are really suffering at the moment. The retail rates relief scheme needs to be more generous, because businesses need as much support as they possibly can get at this time. Will you look again at targeting support to those businesses in those areas that have been worst hit—in some cases, pockets of areas within otherwise more successful areas in terms of our high streets? I know that, when this was looked at a few years ago by the Enterprise and Business Committee, we exposed some of the issues affecting our high streets. Since then, of course, we have the issues with the rate revaluation, and pockets in my constituency, like Chepstow, were particularly affected.

We look forward to the introduction of the local government and elections Bill that you mentioned. I hope that it does provide a better framework for supporting collaboration between local authorities and also underpinning the city region model, such as that that is operating in south-east Wales. I think there are opportunities here to provide better support in the future.

Finally, Dirprwy Lywydd, on the council tax reduction scheme, you mentioned uptake. Current uptake is between 55 per cent and 66 per cent, I believe, so I welcome your relaunching of the campaign today to try to raise the profile of that reduction scheme. I think that certainly has to happen. I'd be interested to know more the reasons why you think that uptake is below what it has been in the past and some of the policies that you propose bringing forward to make sure that people who do need that support, who deserve that support and are most in need of that support, are going to be able to know it exists and access it when they need it.

Thank you very much to Nick Ramsay for the series of questions. The first related to the issue of the funding formula for local government, and the Minister for local government and I have been very clear with local authorities throughout that, should they want to come forward with ideas as to how the funding formula should be amended, then, obviously, we are open to those discussions. I think the distribution sub-group that we have with those bodies is a perfect opportunity to have discussions in that regard. There's not that appetite in local government at the moment for a review of the funding formula, but, as I say, the door is open for discussions if there are ideas as to how the funding formula could be changed in future.

There were a series of questions relating to council tax, and particularly in relation to the council tax reduction scheme. That's been a tremendously successful and important scheme. Of course, we make a contribution to local authorities of £244 million through our annual settlement to fund that scheme.

It is true to say that the number of households receiving council tax reduction help has fallen in all local authority areas, actually, since 2013-14, but we have undertaken—or commissioned, I should say—some research from Policy in Practice, which will allow us to understand how we can help to improve the case load and where changes might need to be made in future to ensure that it remains fair for all households. Because one of the reasons, I think, that we've seen the fall in numbers of households benefiting from the support that is available is the roll-out of the UK Government's welfare reforms. It impacts on a family's or an individual's ability to navigate the full range of support that's available for them, and one of the reasons is that eligibility for the council tax reduction scheme is directly linked to the UK benefits system. So, as a number of benefits, including housing benefit, are gradually being replaced by universal credit, it's important that we understand the impact that that is having on the uptake of the council tax reduction scheme.

That's one of reasons why, in January, we commissioned the research to shed some light on that issue. It’s a year-long study, and it will involve a significant amount of data analysis to track the circumstances of Welsh households as they are migrated from those legacy benefits on to universal credit. But, as I committed in my statement, when we are in a place where we can share information on those reports, I'm absolutely committed to do so, because I know that there's interest on all parts of the Assembly, really, to get this right.

The Institute for Fiscal Studies, I have to say, estimates that 3.6 million working-age households in England, who would have been eligible for support under the old council tax benefits system, are now entitled to an average of £196 a year less, so I think that our system is definitely more progressive in Wales. But I think that we can do more to make it more progressive in the longer term. So, one of the areas we're considering is the impact of revaluation. Properties liable for council tax are placed, currently, into one of nine council tax bands, based on the property values assessed by the Valuation Office Agency. They're based on property values at 1 April 2003. That's, obviously, much more recent than the situation in England and Scotland, which have values from 1991. But we are considering what difference a revaluation would make in Wales, because it is a huge undertaking. So, again, we've asked the Institute for Fiscal Studies and the University of Sheffield to provide us with some insights into that to inform our consideration on the way forward, and alongside that we're looking at things such as local land value taxes or local taxes based on income to try and ensure that we do have a more progressive system in the long term.

In terms of arrears, debt management and enforcement are absolutely crucial. It's something that I've particularly taken an interest in in my time within this portfolio. Over the course of this year we've introduced the legislation that means that the threat of imprisonment for the non-payment of council tax has now been removed. I think that's really progressive—getting into debt isn't a crime. Imprisonment is a really outdated and disproportionate response to dealing with civil debt, and there are other much more appropriate ways in which we can be dealing with that.

But we've also, crucially, introduced a new council tax protocol for Wales, and that was developed in collaboration with local government and has been endorsed by the Welsh Local Government Association, and it has been implemented in every local authority in Wales. And that's about good-practice support for families who are struggling, families who have been finding it difficult to make their council tax payments, and it's about trying to get in there at the earliest possible stage to provide those individuals and those families with the support that they might need in order to be able to pay their council tax in the future.

There were a series of questions as well on non-domestic rates, and, of course, we're really pleased to have introduced our permanent small business rates relief scheme. It's providing over £120 million of relief this year, fully funded by the Welsh Government, which, of course, isn't the case over the border, where you see some businesses, their contributions, being used to support other businesses. More than 70,000 ratepayers across Wales now receive some kind of relief, so that's half of all businesses in Wales paying no rates at all, compared to around a third of businesses under the scheme in England. So, again, I think that we've been able to offer a generous approach to small business rates relief here in Wales.

The issue of revaluation for non-domestic rates—well, it's something that we clearly were working towards, bringing forward the next revaluation for non-domestic rates in 2021 rather than 2022. And bringing that date forward means that, obviously, we can produce bills that are based on more up-to-date market conditions, and, obviously, it enables those ratepayers to plan ahead. However, the suspension of Parliament in September means the necessary legislation fell at that point, and the decision then to reintroduce it will be a matter for the new Government. So, we're working very closely with UK Government officials to try and ensure that a legislative opportunity does present itself to legislate to undertake that revaluation as soon as possible.

I thank the Minister for today's statement. We are discussing how to bring funds into the coffers of local authorities, and we can't ignore the pressures that there are on how that money is then spent. And we can't look at local government finance in isolation in that sense. The Government, in everything it does, in health expenditure, in housing expenditure, does have to behave in a far more preventative way in order to take some pressure off the budgets of local authorities, which have to step in very often at a time when it's very late in the day and where problems could have been resolved far sooner.

But, in turning to the system that we have in place at the moment, we in Plaid Cymru have felt for many years that council tax is a regressive tax. We don't believe that this is the best way of bringing funds in. We don't think it's fair that the pressures lie within society, and where the greatest demands are on people. Likewise, we do look forward very much to being in Government, using the capacity that the civil service has in order to look at how we can introduce a truly transformative system for business rates. We have supported and have pushed for business rate relief for many years, but the fact that that relief has to be provided at such a major scale does suggest clearly to me that there is something wrong with the business rates system itself.

I welcome the fact that a step was taken earlier this year to remove the threat of imprisonment for non-payment of council tax. That was certainly the right thing to do. It's also important that the work to raise awareness of council tax does happen, particularly in those communities where there are a high number of low-income households, which very often are very uncertain as to where to turn for support and assistance. It's also to be welcomed that the Government has delivered exceptions and exemptions for young people leaving care, but there are always ways, while we await that broader change to the system, of bringing in funding for local government. It's always important to look for new ways of understanding specific problems faced by certain groups.

I will conclude my comments by drawing one particular concern to your attention. A constituent contacted one of my fellow Members about council tax reductions. The partner of this constituent is disabled, and she is the main carer. The individual got in touch, saying that she didn't qualify for any sort of council tax reduction because the rules don't allow for such a reduction to be given where the main carer is caring for a spouse—a husband or wife. Now, is the Minister aware of that and, if so, can the Welsh Government, or will the Welsh Government, consider some steps to address that particular concern?

Thank you to Rhun for raising those issues. I think the point that he started off with is really important, in the sense that we can't just look at local government in isolation from the other parts of the public sector and beyond, because of course the issue of prevention was very much recognised. I think that we're doing really hard work across Government to ensure that we're focusing our efforts on prevention. So, within the budget context, of course, I'm particularly keen that we look at preventative spend. I know that the future generations commissioner has a close eye on this particular issue as well. So, it's important to recognise that this sits in a wider context, as Rhun ap Iorwerth certainly did. 

Yes, I agree, council tax is a regressive tax, and that's why we're looking so closely at what we can do to make it more progressive in future. One of those things would be about looking at the impact of revaluation of what the opportunities are there. So, potentially creating new bands or creating a new system entirely. So, without the revaluation of the 1.4 million domestic properties we have in Wales, we're constrained, I think, in making very fundamental changes with particular regard to that system, and we obviously wouldn't want to commit to a revaluation without some understanding of the impact, and that's why it's so important that we've commissioned those two pieces of research that are described in the report in front of Members today, from the Institute for Fiscal Studies and the University of Sheffield, to help us to inform our thinking as we take that forward.

But that's not the only way in which we could potentially make taxes more progressive, of course. I know there's lots of interest in a local land value tax and, to that end, we've commissioned Bangor University to explore whether local taxes in Wales could be based on the value of land, rather than the current position, which is an amalgamation of both land and property value. The objective of Welsh Government in exploring land value tax as a replacement for one or both local taxes is primarily to raise stable revenue for local services in the fairest way. But, obviously, I think there are potentially other advantageous outcomes that could be considered. Bangor University expects to publish that detailed report towards the end of the year and, obviously, I will share it with colleagues. And we continue to monitor the debate in terms of local land value taxes elsewhere. So, we've got ongoing links with Scotland. The Scottish Land Commission has particularly taken an interest in local land value tax, so we're very much considering the work that is there.

Another way in which we're considering a potentially more progressive system in future would be local taxes based on income. We're currently at the start of that piece of work, so we're seeking to commission external expertise to undertake some independent research. So that would be similar to the other pieces of work that I've described. But we're very clear that, were we to consider local income tax, it has to be explored very much as a local regime. So, administered locally, used to fund local services and local authority expenditure, supporting local decision making and raising similar revenues to the current system. So, again, we've got some work that was undertaken by the Wales Centre for Public Policy, and that explored this issue. But, again, this is part of the work that we're hoping to pull together as we consider the way forward.

Now, I've just described three potential ways of making the system more progressive, and each of those is a huge undertaking and would probably take at least one Assembly term to get through that potentially major change. So, as Rhun ap Iorwerth said, it's important that, in the short term and in the time that we have immediately, we do look to do things that make tax more progressive. So, the other things that we've talked about in terms of care leavers, the work that we're doing to ensure that people who are eligible for council tax reductions are aware of that and do claim that, I think, is really important. But, in terms of the specific circumstance that was described, I'll certainly take a look at that. If you could perhaps send me an e-mail with the details of the particular case, I'll explore what might be possible there. 

I often think that, if finding an alternative funding mechanism for local government was easy, it would have been done a very long time ago. And I think that that's something that we perhaps need to give great thought to. I remember when the aggregate external finance replaced the rate support grant following the centralisation of business rates to balance up income in those authorities that had the least ability to raise local tax.

The distribution of properties in each band varies enormously and, whilst some authorities have over half their properties in the lowest two bands others, notably Monmouth, have over half their properties in band D and above. We would thus expect the councils to get the largest Welsh Government support per capita to be Blaenau Gwent, Merthyr and Rhondda Cynon Taf and the three lowest per capita to be Cardiff, Vale of Glamorgan and Monmouth, and that's what we effectively get. 

We know that council tax hits the poorest households particularly hard, with low earners paying an average of 7 per cent of their income in council tax, whilst the wealthiest households pay only 1.5 per cent. On council tax, I have the following suggestions: I would suggest a band J at £1 million, a band K at £5 million and a band L at £10 million. This would mean that those in very expensive properties would pay substantially more. An alternative reform would be a mansion tax surcharge of, say, 1 per cent on the value of properties worth over £1 million or £2 million, 2 per cent on £2 million and 3 per cent on those properties worth over £3 million. Will the Minister consider these suggestions?

On local income tax, while appearing to be a fairer system, income tax, like corporation tax, is easily avoided, and often is. Non-domiciled people owning mansions in Wales could end up paying nothing. It would shift the balance of payment on to those on lower and middle incomes. I would urge the Minister to rule out a local income tax because it will be the middle-income people who'll be paying for those who are capable of avoiding paying tax on huge sums of income.

Something we talk about regularly, and I thought Siân Gwenllian would have raised it today, is: can we remove small business rate relief from flats and houses, to remove the incentive to move them from being holiday homes into being businesses? My view is that there's no good reason to keep on giving them rate relief.

Our land value tax has a lot of benefits but if you use that to replace council tax, you'd have no social housing in some of the most expensive land areas. People would not be able to afford to pay the council tax on those properties in the areas where we've got very high land values; I know you've got those in your own constituency, Minister. So, I think that what you'd end up with, by default because of a decision, is that in those more affluent areas and very affluent areas where land values are well in excess of £1 million an acre, you would have no social housing whatsoever.

So, I think that a lot of these things need investigating, but I think sometimes the downside of some of these needs to be looked at, or why we are where we are now. 

I thank Mike Hedges for his contribution there, and he began by talking about the variation in council tax levels. That's certainly something that we're very mindful of. The average for a band D property ranges from £1,092 in Pembrokeshire to £1,648 in Blaenau Gwent, and I think that that is partly as a result of the 1996 reorganisation that created a very mixed landscape in terms of the size and characteristics of those 22 unitary authorities, including some very small authorities with high relative need for local services and a small tax base. So, that's something, obviously, we're mindful of, but it also reflects the flexibility that has been given to local authorities in terms of setting council tax in their own areas. Of course, they're political decisions and the setting of council tax is very much political in nature in many cases.

Mike Hedges's contribution demonstrated really clearly the complexity of this issue, and the fact that all of these issues and all of these potential ways forward need to be explored fully to understand all of the potential implications, both positive and negative. And it's really important to do so in a way that looks at the different types of households, and the way in which different types of individuals might be affected by any particular change. But I'm really clear that we just don't seek to make change for the sake of it, but we seek to make change to ensure that the system is a better one than the one we have at the moment.

On the issue of small business rate relief for second homes particularly, I know that this is an issue that we debated with some vigour in the Assembly in a debate sponsored by Plaid Cymru very recently. It is the case that when we looked at this previously, I know that some consideration was given to removing rate relief from certain types of properties, but what the Welsh Government has tried to do is strike a balance between supporting the local tourism industry locally, but then also understanding the pressure that local authorities have in terms of ensuring that there is adequate housing within their areas.

In terms of the tourism sector, obviously, the significant benefits are recognised in our economic action plan, and the availability of good-quality, readily available self-catering accommodation is a really important part of the tourism offer that we have here in Wales. The latest official statistics indicate that self-catering accommodation accounted for almost £370 million of tourism spend here in Wales in 2017. But that said, we're very aware of the challenges that high percentages of second homes can cause in some communities that aren't reliant on tourism. So, we've discussed at length that Welsh Government is considering the way forward in this regard, and ensuring that those people who are claiming rate relief actually are doing so genuinely. I think the main concern that people have is the suspicion that there are people who are claiming rate relief for properties that do not genuinely meet the criteria. That was, I have to say, agreed by this whole Assembly in terms of trying to strike that balance between the local housing need and the importance that tourism plays for various communities across Wales. 

Mike Hedges provided some additional ideas as to how to take things forward. I said in my statement, and it's clear in the report today, that I welcome any ideas from any Member or any interested stakeholder at any time, and I'm really keen to have those discussions as to how we can improve the system and make it fairer, more progressive, and ensure that our non-domestic rates system and our council tax system contributes to our wider Welsh Government goals as well.

One of those additional suggestions was having a new council tax band for properties worth more than £10 million. Could I suggest, before bringing that in, we check to see whether there are any such properties in Wales?

I share the Minister's discomfort about imprisoning people for not paying their council tax. She said we shouldn't imprison people for getting into debt, with which, I think, people would generally agree, but traditionally a distinction was drawn in terms of whether people could be imprisoned for not paying their taxes, and I just wonder, as the Minister looks at the level of arrears, what would happen in a scenario when someone just refuses, doesn't want to pay their council tax, doesn't respond to anything, they get fined, they don't pay the fine, if they get community service and they don't turn up to that. What ultimately can make people pay, particularly those who are recalcitrant rather than those for whom we may have more sympathy?

You referred that the level of arrears have stabilised in Wales over the period since before council tax support was localised in 2013-14. Wasn't that an issue of localising it in England down to the local council level and didn't we instead in Wales bring in a national council tax reduction scheme? So, I'm a bit perplexed about the reference to localising this in respect of Wales. I wonder, when looking at these increases in arrears in England by 36 per cent, whether the Minister has any access to evidence of what types of schemes have worked well or not in different places in England and how those compare to her own council tax reduction scheme here.

You say that's going to be £244 million again next year. Will the Minister confirm that that will represent a real-terms cut? In terms of the distribution of this money, clearly, representing south-east Wales, I welcome people in poorer council areas getting substantial support from Welsh Government. I just note, though, that some of those councils have the highest levels of council tax in Wales. Could there be any connection between those? If substantial numbers of people aren't having to pay council tax, does that reduce the democratic resistance to higher levels of council tax? And particularly in an area like, say, Blaenau Gwent, with very large proportions of council tax B band terraced housing, a lot of people in those houses, really struggling but perhaps are just above the level, are paying a lot higher council tax. Could there be any interrelationship between those two points?

You referred to the standardised application processes for discounts and exemptions for people with a severe mental impairment. I infer from that that there isn't a standardised approach for others. If we have one national scheme for Wales, if the Minister has decided that there are not advantages to allowing councils to have their own scheme to reflect local circumstances, is there any advantage in having lots of different ways of applying for reductions for everyone else except those who have a mental impairment?

The research reports made available to Members as they're published, I think those are regarding the different taxes that fall within your portfolio and these changes you want to set within the broader context of local government reform. Shouldn't we also set them in the broader context of tax devolution, and in particular the land transaction tax and the interrelationship, potentially, with that and council tax, when you're looking at these things in future? And can you clarify whether those references are different from the one later on, where you're talking about local services and how they should be funded for the future? And there, we're going to get the research reports all in autumn 2020—is that a separate thing? And is that relating just to the council tax formula, potentially, or are you looking at wider issues of what the split should be between council tax, business rates and Government grant in terms of the financing of local authorities?

Thank you to Mark Reckless for raising a number of very interesting issues there. Of course, he began by welcoming, really, I think, the fact that Welsh Government had removed the sanction of imprisonment for the non-payment of council tax.

But I think it's important to recognise that the council tax system and the system that we have of enforcement of debt, particularly, is intended to ensure that there is payment secured from those people with the means to pay. And we do have evidence from committal proceedings that indicated that, in many places, the process previously was being applied inappropriately to people who just simply didn't have the means to pay. And, of course, that, then, is an additional burden on the public purse in terms of imprisoning individuals. It does nothing to address the underlying issues as to why that individual finds themselves unable to pay the debt in the first place. And, of course, in many cases, it just serves to make the situation worse.

In September this year, the Money Advice Trust published a new report called 'Stop The Knock', and many of those recommendations were focused in England, but actually there were several in Wales, which were addressed to the Welsh Government and we've already started to take those things forward. Part of that work is the council tax protocol for Wales, which I mentioned in terms of setting out the way in which local authorities should now deal with those individuals who find themselves unable to pay council tax. And it is about being unable, not unwilling, to pay council tax. And we're working really closely with local government now to ensure that that protocol is very much embedded in the way local authorities work. The early identification of those individuals whose financial circumstances mean that they might struggle to pay council tax is really important in that agenda as well.

Local authorities do have discretionary powers to reduce or exempt individuals from paying their council tax. We had an example earlier of a particular individual who found themselves in a circumstance where they were struggling to pay council tax, so their local authorities are able to offer individuals that benefit, should they decide to do that.

Council tax arrears haven't risen to the extent that's been reported in England, and that's partly due to the fact that our reduction scheme is so successful and that we have managed to retain that support for low-income households. I think it's important to recognise, as well, that council tax collection in Wales, the rates are actually very, very high indeed, and certainly higher than in England and Scotland. Of course, we can't compare to Northern Ireland because they have a different system of tax there. So, I think that, in terms of collection, our rates are very high.

The standardisation of the SMI application form was really important because previous to that, particularly with regard to serious mental impairment, local authorities—the staff themselves—weren't often aware of this particular benefit that was available to people. When they were, they weren't necessarily dealing with those people in a systematic and clear way across Wales. So, that's the reason why we've introduced that particular standardised form, and that was with the support of Money Saving Expert, which recognised, I think, that for these particular individuals, who often are some of the most vulnerable people, there wasn't the level of understanding and that they weren't being treated consistently across Wales.

Now, I think the protocol provides a framework to ensure that other people are treated consistently across Wales with other reasons as to why they should have help with their council tax. And again, the point was made that local taxation has to be seen in the wider contact. So, in terms of local taxes sitting alongside our Welsh taxes and the Welsh rates of income tax, those things together, I think, provide us with a suite of measures. And, of course, we've set out our plans in terms of the additional taxes that we might look to introduce in the future, were we able to get those powers devolved to Wales. So, absolutely, the whole tax picture has to fit as a jigsaw, given the spending commitments that we have and the pressures that we have as a Government.

In terms of the research, by the autumn of 2020, we will have, I think, all of the research reports I've described together, so we'll be able to look at them as a suite and hopefully set out, potentially, the direction as to where we would like to take things next. So, it could be about ruling out some of the ideas for some of the reasons that Mike Hedges highlighted earlier, or it could be a case of having to pinpoint particular areas where we feel that more work may need to be done, and hopefully those reports will help all political parites in their thinking as we head towards the next Assembly elections.

Thank you very much.

Item 6 on the agenda is a debate on the Welsh Language Commissioner's annual report of 2018-19. I call on the Minister for International Relations and the Welsh Language to move the motion—Eluned Morgan.

Thank you very much. The annual report in front of us this afternoon reports on the last year of Meri Hughes's seven-year term as the Welsh Language Commissioner. I'd like to take this opportunity to thank Meri for all of her work over her period as Welsh Language Commissioner. She, of course, was the first commissioner, and she has set firm foundations in place. We are indebted to Meri for the vital contribution that she has made, especially in introducing the Welsh language standards regime.

We've heard over the past year that support has developed across Wales for the standards regime and that the standards have raised the profile of the Welsh language within organisations and have given rights to Welsh speakers. The commissioner's annual report points to the work done to continue to implement the standards, which includes inquiries into complaints over the reporting period.

The report also outlines the activities completed to promote the Welsh language. One example of this work is the report published jointly with the Alzheimer's Society in Wales about the experiences of Welsh speakers of dementia services. This collaboration with bodies such as this is vital to mainstreaming the Welsh language across policy areas, which is a priority for us as a Government. The report also points to the role of the commissioner in ensuring that Welsh language services are provided across Government, and that external challenge is vital within Government to ensure a central place for the Welsh language.

But I don't want to spend this afternoon looking back. We have a new commissioner now, Aled Roberts, who has been in post since 1 April this year. Now, Aled's term of office corresponds with an exciting new period for the Welsh language. The months since I announced that we would not be introducing a Bill have given an us an opportunity as a Government, along with the commissioner, to plan how best to move forward in collaboration to achieve the Welsh 2050 target: a million Welsh speakers by 2050 and doubling the daily use of the Welsh language.

Some changes have already been made since April. In terms of the work of simplifying the standards regime, the commissioner has decided to operate in a different way in inquiring into suspected breaches of standards. Following an internal review, based on lessons from implementing the complaints regime, the commissioner has decided to use greater discretion about when to conduct an inquiry. This step means that it's possible to close simple cases in a more timely manner to give answers to the public more quickly, for example, if the bodies themselves have solved the issues quickly. These minor changes also save resources for the commissioner and for other organisations.

Now, as we heard in the Senedd some weeks ago, the evidence for the inquiry conducted by the Culture, Welsh Language and Communication Committee to support and promote the Welsh language shows concerns that the work to promote the Welsh language has been lost over the past few years and that we need clarity in terms of which body is leading on the work of different work streams. This was the basis of the White Paper, and I am still of the belief that this analysis is correct. It's worth restating the steps that I have taken in response to these points. I have announced my intention to establish the project 2050 board, a multidisciplinary unit within the Welsh Government that will be responsible for driving the Cymraeg 2050 strategy forward.

Developing a new working partnership with the Welsh Language Commissioner has been a priority for me over the first months of Aled's time in post. And I was very pleased to have agreed a new memorandum of understanding in August of this year. The intention of the memorandum is to give clarity to the Government and to the commissioner about how we will be working together, and to provide clarity for you, as Members, and to other stakeholders and the public about which body is leading on what, from the point of view of encouraging increase in the use of the Welsh language.

We have agreed that the commissioner will be leading on implementing the functions of the Welsh Language (Wales) Measure 2011, including imposing, monitoring and enforcing standards, and providing advice to organisations on how to comply with the standards. And may I emphasise that the regulatory work will have to be entirely independent?

The commissioner will also be working with banks, supermarkets and major businesses to increase provision of Welsh language services. At the heart of that will be getting more people to use the Welsh language, especially Welsh language services.

It is the Government that's responsible for ensuring that the principles of linguistic planning are followed in implementing policy, in accordance with the Cymraeg 2050 work programme. The Welsh language is the responsibility of the entire Government, and our desire, through the leadership offered by Cymraeg 2050, is to mainstream the Welsh language in all aspects of our work, so that we can reach the Cymraeg 2050 objectives.

But to turn to promoting the Welsh language, the Government and the commissioner have, certainly, a contribution to make, but the work belongs to all of us, and to all of our major partners. Effective collaboration with those who work on the ground is a vital element, therefore, of this promotional work. Every partner has a vital role to play in this work to ensure that we succeed in reaching our aim. It's important that we respond to the concerns that some aspects of the promotional work have been lost over the previous period. So, I have asked my officials to organise a further meeting of the major partners to discuss this issue. A great deal has happened in this field, but, of course, there is always room for improvement, particularly with regard to how we raise awareness and share information about the work that is being done.

I'm strongly of the belief that, together, with one voice, we can implement the objectives of Cymraeg 2050 to reach that million Welsh speakers and to double the use of the Welsh language, and collaboration with the commissioner will be at the heart of this. And may I thank publicly the commissioner for his first report?

May I also start by expressing my personal thanks to Meri Huws? She prepared the ground, after all, and that wasn't always easy: the overreaction of the previous Minister to the establishment of the standards, the erosion of her budget and her freedom in delivering her responsibilities in promoting the Welsh language weren't easy things for her to deal with. And for me, coming to this portfolio without any background in it and restricted language skills, her encouragement and her support was something that I continue to appreciate. So, thank you, Meri.

Certainly, we agreed that we needed to change the system of inquiring into complaints. There isn't much contained on this within the report, probably because of the failure of the proposals for new legislation. However, these issues were raised again in the report of the culture committee published recently, and I do hope that Aled Roberts will continue to press for reform of this system. We need to conduct thorough inquiries into complaints, but in a way that is proportionate, with some discretion about the professional views, as the Minister has already said, in terms of the best possible way of resolving any complaint.

So, I'm pleased to see two specific things in this report: an understanding that certain rights can be more valuable than others—and I'll return to that point in a few moments' time—and how the commissioner's enforcement powers have been used. I note the diversity of complaints, but it appears that the emphasis in most of them has been on positive performance for the future rather than penalties for failure, and if standards are to succeed, then it’s far better that we see rights being delivered more and more, and a greater understanding as to why that is a positive thing, rather than penalising and causing ill feeling.

And that's why I was particularly pleased to see the work on dementia. This is a case where a right to Welsh language services isn't a matter of choice, it's a matter of real need. In terms of priorities, some rights are more valuable than others. But the report was published on this work a year ago, and it’s not acceptable to wait so long for a response from Government on this. This will be a significant response—it will help us to understand the Welsh Government’s response to other areas where rights are a requirement, rather than just being desirable: speech and language therapy, for example; dealing with those with additional learning needs; and ensuring that we have clinicians who are able to work through the medium of Welsh is an ongoing issue.

I'm also looking forward to having a better understanding of the role of the commissioner in terms of legislation on the new curriculum, implementing the continuum and creating fair examination systems. And the report refers to the commissioner’s work on Welsh-medium education. Now, I would have liked to have seen specific references to other teaching locations, not just Welsh medium, because Welsh language rights, as safeguarded by standards, are relevant to everybody, but we haven't yet reached a position where we can be sure that learners appreciate those rights and are eager to exercise them.

Now, I don't know why the Welsh Government is taking so long to approve the good-practice guidance, but that's only half the story, in any case. As the commissioner has now reacquired the powers to promote the Welsh language, I hope that he will promote Welsh language rights for future speakers as well as current speakers.

Everybody working in this wider area—the councils, schools, the Coleg Cymraeg Cenedlaethol, the National Centre for Learning Welsh, the mentrau—all of them should be judged according to their impact, not their activities. And the same should be true of the commissioner. He isn't only a language policeman, of course—he is a midwife for a bilingual Wales.

And, finally, the budget. If the commissioner is going to continue to share responsibility for promotion, then, therefore, the funding must also be shared, and the pot must be enhanced. We will see how this memorandum of understanding between the commissioner and Government will work. I hope that it does.

But I have some other concerns about budgets, specifically the seeming failure to plan for salary increases and justification on the figure for unexpected events. I think those could have been explained a little more fully in the report, but the main story is the pressure to use reserves. The culture committee has heard about that, but if there is any way that the Government and the commissioner could collaborate appropriately on this, I would be very pleased to see that happening. Thank you.

I, too, give thanks for this report by the commissioner on the work that has been completed between 2018 and 2019—a period, as we’ve already mentioned, that is a transition period between two commissioners, namely Meri Huws, who has finished, and now Aled Roberts, who will be in post until 2026. And I would like to thank both of them very much for being so willing to meet regularly and to give me constant updates about the work of the commissioner’s office, across all of its many responsibilities.

It is true to say that the period in this report has been a period of uncertainty in terms of the commissioners work. Over the summer of 2017, the Government announced proposals that would have eradicated the post of the Welsh Language Commissioner. It's hard to believe that now, because, thank goodness, 18 months after those proposals were published, there was a u-turn and the plans to introduce a Welsh language Bill were dropped, in the face of opposition from various bodies and organisations, campaigners and experts, and also, of course, in the face of firm and robust evidence that was put forward by almost every witness who appeared before the culture and welsh language committee. And we in Plaid Cymru were also opposed to that intention, because it would have led to a significant weakening of the rights of Welsh speakers.

The report does refer to this u-turn that took place and says that now, and I quote, there is certainty for them to continue with their work. We need that assurance. One concern that I have is that there has been a significant decrease in staffing levels in the commissioner’s office over the past few years, despite the important function of the commissioner as an independent regulator, responsible for ensuring the rights of Welsh speakers and the general welfare of the language.

Funding the commissioner’s office directly from the Assembly would be an important step that could be considered, and an important step forward, I believe, from the point of view of giving that financial security, but also to strengthen the independence of the commissioner. The report does say this about the Government u-turn and the decision to continue with the post:

'It also means that the Government is able to proceed with introducing more standards regulations that will enable us to impose standards on other organisations in due course.'

The report also says:

'We have already achieved the first stage of the introduction of standards, namely undertaking a standards investigation into the water, energy, transport and social housing sectors…the process…has been at a standstill.'

I have raised this a number of times and I don't apologise for doing so again today. Unfortunately it's clear that the Government doesn't have much of an intention or the will to move this important work forward, despite what is in the legislation. I have mentioned several times that the Government needs to announce and implement a timetable to enable the commissioner to impose standards on all of the remaining sectors in the Welsh Language (Wales) Measure 2011, in order to strengthen the rights of Welsh speakers, in order to create Welsh-medium workplaces, and in order to ensure consistency in the legislative framework that organisations adhere to in terms of using the Welsh language. And all this would maintain the momentum of the standards regime at a time when we are all craving the achievement of that aim of a million Welsh speakers.

So, I'll ask the Minister again to announce that timetable, but I'm not confident that I'll have a positive response. And I have to say that the failure of the Welsh Government to announce and implement a timetable for expanding linguistic rights, in the age of Brexit and all the threats facing the Welsh language, is a cause of great disappointment.

One area that is very weak in terms of providing basic Welsh-medium services is the rail services in Wales. I wonder whether we can have clarity this afternoon about the duties of KeolisAmey and Transport for Wales with regard to the language and what discussions are taking place with those bodies.

Finally, I turn to an area that is part of the commissioner’s responsibilities. We've talked about it already, namely holding statutory investigations into complaints. Now, I note that there's been a significant decline in inquiries and investigations and you've explained a little why that is, but this Assembly hasn't agreed to any changes to the legislation with regard to the complaints regime. And I've just received a copy of a letter that was sent by the Minister to the Welsh Language Commissioner, on 4 September this year, congratulating him for succeeding in decreasing the number of investigations undertaken. Now, I very much hope that that doesn't mean that there is a connection made between the decrease and the number of investigations and the changes to the budget for the commissioner. Could you also explain how is it appropriate for a Government to make a specific effort to influence an independent regulator in this way? Thank you.

The Minister for the Welsh language to reply to the debate.

Briefly, thank you very much to Suzy and to Siân for their contributions to this debate. I do think it’s important that we recognise that a change in the complaints investigation process is something that is independent of Government; the commissioner decides. The commissioner decides on that regime. But I think that we would all welcome the fact that the system is now working more swiftly and more smoothly, and I think that that helps everyone.

Everyone needs to know where they stand, but also that it's important that we have a system in place where the commissioner can assist, as Suzy said, in terms of seeing where standards need to develop for the future. It's not a matter of always looking back, but of looking forward to how we can improve services within these organisations for the future. I do think that that monitoring work and sharing good practice is exceptionally important in terms of the commissioner's activities.

I also think that prioritising Alzheimer's is something that has been extremely constructive on the part of the commissioner. You will be aware, from the Welsh Government's perspective, that we have funded technology to assist people to live with dementia. There are a number of apps currently being developed to assist people in this arena.

In terms of rights, Suzy is quite right: our interest doesn't only lie with current Welsh speakers, but also with Welsh speakers in the future. If we want to attain that target of 1 million Welsh speakers, we do have to recognise that we have to provide much more assistance to Welsh learners, and help them to have opportunities to use the Welsh language in their workplaces or in social environments too.

Additional funding was provided last year in order to help with pensions within the commissioner's office. But, of course, Suzy, we are eager to work very closely with the commissioner wherever possible, and I do hope that we are all on the same page in that regard. I'm pleased that Siân Gwenllian acknowledged that the Government had listened. Of course, we are interested in developing the new standards. You will be aware that we have already stated that we will introduce new standards for water and certain areas of health next year. I do think that providing a concrete timetable—. You said that Brexit shouldn't get in the way, but Brexit gets in the way of everything. So, locking down the exact dates is something that's extremely difficult.

Will you take an intervention?

Yes.

What I was saying about Brexit, of course, was that Brexit is a threat to the existence of the Welsh language, because it threatens the existence of communities where the Welsh language is the language of everyday life. So, that was why I referred to Brexit.

I don't like this language of threats and that this is going to be entirely negative. I do think that we have to ensure that we work in a positive manner in relation to the Welsh language. That's why we have recently been ensuring that we are doing more to have a full understanding of the link between the Welsh language and the economy. We've been doing far more work in that area recently, because we are concerned about the situation surrounding Brexit. And that is, of course, something that we have to recognise. But then, of course, that does have an impact on the timetable in terms of introducing standards. But we have said clearly, as I've already said, that these new standards for the water industry will be introduced next year.

But, in terms of the new regime, that is a matter for the commissioner. We have not intervened. Of course, we want to see things moving more swiftly, and we want something that is simplified, because that was the evidence that was received by the committee of which you were a member. Simplification of the system was something that came through very, very clearly in those inquiries. So, of course, it's a matter for the commissioner; we won't intervene in anything in relation to regulation when it comes to the commissioner's responsibility. But may I just say that we do welcome this report from Aled Roberts? I do think that he's made an exceptionally good start, and we do hope that that collaboration will continue for the future. Thank you. 

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

And that brings today's proceedings to a close. Thank you.