National Assembly for Wales

I call the Assembly Members to order.

The first item on our agenda this afternoon is the questions to the Cabinet Secretary for Environment and Rural Affairs, and the first question comes from Joyce Watson.

Thank you. I want to see a more resilient, profitable and sustainable agriculture sector in Wales. I am supporting our farmers to achieve this through innovative use of funding available, including the sustainable production grant, the farm business grant, the strategic initiative for agriculture, as well as through Farming Connect.

Thank you very much for that answer, Cabinet Secretary. I was very pleased over the summer to hear of the £4.2 million investment, £3 million of which was from the European regional development fund for a cutting-edge veterinary hub at Aberystwyth University. It’s a much welcome investment for mid Wales, and it will, I’m sure, help to put that on the map. The important research carried out in that new development will be beneficial not just for the farmers, but for other industries too. Cabinet Secretary, do you have any indication of when the new veterinary hub is likely to be fully functional?

I thank Joyce Watson for that supplementary question. There’s no doubt that EU funds have been an absolutely crucial source of investment for research and development, not just in west Wales, but, obviously, right across Wales. Three million pounds of European social fund funding, through the Welsh Government, will be used to develop the new vet hub facility at Aberystwyth, and it will provide modern, fully equipped, state-of-the-art laboratories and office spaces. It will be used also not just for promoting animal health and welfare, but also human health. And I was really pleased to be able to launch the vet hub in the summer at the Royal Welsh Show.

As to the timeline for it, my understanding is that it will be next year, in 2018, but I don’t have a specific month, for instance, but I certainly can let the Member know.

Cabinet Secretary, there are still issues that exist for cross-border farmers, owing to the lack of sometimes constructive engagement between the English and Welsh payment agencies. At a meeting of the cross-party group on cross-border issues, which I chaired earlier this year, the chief executives of the Rural Payments Agency and Rural Payments Wales committed to holding joint meetings with the farming unions on a regular basis to discuss any outstanding issues and promote better working together. Are you aware if this has occurred, and what preparations can be made to ensure that there is no delay in making payments to cross-border farmers this year?

You raise a very important point, because I think the majority of late payments last year were due to this issue around cross-border and the lack of engagement, shall we say, from RP England. I’m not aware if specific meetings have been held with RPW and RP England and the farming unions—that’s a matter for the farming unions—but, certainly, I know my officials have been having meetings to ensure that, this year, we’re able to pay as many payments as quickly as possible in relation to those cross-border payments.

What plans is the Cabinet Secretary putting in place to make sure that the right to fish off the west coastline is prioritised for Welsh fishermen and not just boats registered in Wales post Brexit?

The Member will be aware of the extensive engagement that’s currently being undertaken. You’ll be aware of my ministerial round table, which, obviously, the fishing industry sits on. This clearly is going to be a matter as we bring forward a fisheries Bill. I’ve made very clear we will have a Welsh fisheries Bill, so those conversations are taking place at the current time, and that engagement. But that level of detail hasn’t been worked up as yet.

Thank you. I have set ambitious renewable energy targets and called for the public sector to be carbon neutral by 2030. Local authorities have an important leadership role in supporting the decarbonisation of energy in their communities through area planning and delivering projects that retain income and wider benefits locally.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary for that response. There’s been a growth in recent years in the role of local councils in supplying energy as well, ranging from energy service companies, or ESCOs, to those with fuller supply arrangements, like Robin Hood Energy, of course, in Nottingham, which claims reduced bills, increased energy efficiency and lower carbon emissions. There have also been developments in Bristol, in Leicester and the Liverpool Energy Community Company in Liverpool. Most of the growth in this seems to have been over the border. What is her analysis of why this has not taken off in Wales and, in light of her recent statement about increasing local involvement in renewable projects, does she feel that this is something she’d like to see growing in Wales?

I think you’re right. We do need to see more work and progress being taken in those areas. I’m aware that a number of public organisations in both England and Scotland have announced energy companies. My officials have met with these organisations as part of the work that we did when we looked at whether we should have an energy supply company in Wales, and you’ll be aware of the statement I made as to why we’re not pursuing that at the moment. I’m aware that Scotland have just recently announced, but they’re not doing it until 2021. But I will be having discussions with my counterparts to see how they’re going to develop their proposals. It’s not something I’ve shut the door on completely. I think we also need to work with local authorities. We need to help them look at the opportunities that could be available and how then they would plan to take those forward.

Cabinet Secretary, one of the challenges faced by the Ynni’r Fro community energy scheme was the difficulty in obtaining planning permission and consents when wishing to create such community energy projects. How have you addressed this after the report on the Ynni’r Fro community scheme, and would that not be one of the key reasons why, in fact, so many of these community energy projects are not able to go ahead, because of the involvement and engagement with local councils?

I think it’s certainly a barrier and I’ve asked my officials to work to have a look at—. I’ve made a statement about how I want to see local ownership, for instance, in relation to our energy targets, and there’s going to have to be a great deal of movement if we are going to achieve those targets by 2030. So, I have asked officials to start looking at the barriers and why there are these difficulties with planning.

We now turn to questions from the party spokespeople. The Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Simon Thomas.

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. Cabinet Secretary, can you tell us why you consulted on 56 different proposals on the management of natural resources over the summer?

I brought forward the consultation on the sustainable management of our natural resources because I think it’s particularly important, in light of Brexit, that we have the views of stakeholders as to what legislation and regulations we will need to look at particularly over the next year ahead of our EU transition.

But it wasn’t quite the Heinz variety but you almost got there. [Laughter.] One other and you would have made it. Many people suggested this looked like clearing the desks before Brexit. Can I suggest to you that surely it would be better to deliver on previous consultations before opening up new ones? For example, last autumn, you consulted on nitrate vulnerable zones; ten months later, you still haven’t made a decision. How can we take it seriously when it takes a year for a consultation to come to any conclusion?

In relation to the NVZs, I’ve said many times we had a significant number of responses and I think many of the ideas that were brought forward in relation to NVZs are worthy of very detailed consideration. I have committed to bringing forward a decision on NVZs by the end of this year. I’ve actually got a meeting with officials later today regarding NVZs.

As to why we had another consultation, I think I set that out in my original answer to you, and I know there was a lot of noise around this consultation. I’ve listened to what stakeholders were saying. I did extend the consultation to the end of September. We’ve had 15,000 responses, of which, I would say, about 1,000 are independent and 14,000 are probably campaigners et cetera. Again, those responses will be have to be looked at very carefully. We need to be in a position to announce legislation very quickly maybe. That’s the problem, and I think it was really important to hear stakeholders’ views. I have to say, the stakeholders have engaged in the consultation very well.

I think they have engaged because they were concerned, to be honest, that you were suggesting so many changes in such a short time frame. This is not to criticise some of the individual ideas in some of these consultations; it’s the way that your Government is now approaching consultation—a constant stream of new initiatives and no sign of actually delivering on previous ones. So, let’s look at one that you have now just published last week. You finally published the new technical advice note 20, which is planning and the Welsh language. That took a year and a half. So, I do wonder how long 56 consultations with 15,000 responses is going to take. But we did get the TAN 20 last week. In the TAN 20, you say that you want a local-development-plan-led system, and TAN 20 in turn says that the best way of assessing the potential cumulative effects of development on the Welsh language across the local development plan area is to consider the use of the Welsh language during the preparation of the LDP itself. So, you want an LDP-led system and you say that the best way to consider the Welsh language and the effect on the Welsh language is during the preparation of the LDP. In which case, why is it that consideration of the Welsh language is not a mandatory part of preparing and reviewing the whole LDP and simply just one of the different assessments?

I think it’s disappointing that we’re criticised for consulting. Certainly that’s not what stakeholders say. I appreciate that it was a great deal of work for them over the summer and that’s why I did extend the consultation period, but I think it really is important that we consult. I think we’d be criticised if we didn’t, so I’m afraid that, on the basis that you can’t please all of the people all of the time, I’m very happy to consult. I’m also a Cabinet Secretary who insists as much as possible that we have the full time for consultation; I think 12 weeks is really important.

In relation to TAN 20, you are correct. I published the updated TAN 20 last week to provide local planning authorities, developers and communities with clarity on how the Welsh language can be supported and protected by the planning system. It is a legal duty to consider the language as part of the sustainability appraisal of LDPs, and I think that TAN 20 will help them with that task.

Conservatives’ spokesperson, David Melding.

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. Cabinet Secretary, yesterday, you spoke about, and indeed your party voted in favour of, a tax on non-reusable and non-recyclable plastics in Wales. I wonder if you can now provide us with some clarification on the details and practicalities of this intention and how you might take it forward, or was it just a vague reassurance to Plaid Cymru that they have some continuing relevance in Welsh Government decision making?

I would never take that stance with Plaid Cymru, David Melding. In relation to the plastic tax, we had a very good debate yesterday on the circular economy. There are several points that I mentioned about the extended producer responsibility feasibility study that I’m undertaking. Several Members spoke in relation to a deposit-return scheme, and, obviously, the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government announced, I think on 3 October, the possibility, from four of the taxes, of a plastic tax being one of them. I will be having those detailed discussions both with officials and with the Cabinet Secretary.

I am reassured that you will have a full assessment, because in the past you’ve said that a deposit-return scheme needs to assess the implications that that would have on everyday household bills, and can you assure us that, in any new tax that you might be considering, again, the effect that that would have on household bills would be fully considered?

Yes, absolutely. I mentioned yesterday that I was a child of the 1960s and I remember DRSs, but I think that things have moved a great deal since then, and, in Wales, we recycle 75 per cent of our plastic bottles. We have excellent kerbside recycling, so you must make sure that there are no unintended consequences or outcomes in relation to having a DRS. But absolutely, the cost to the household has to be part of the analysis as to whether we take this forward.

I echo that, and it’s very, very important, but as is how any tax would be applied. As I’ve already stated, polystyrene food containers are technically reusable. I think we need to be very precise in the actions that we are trying to take to achieve the outcome in reducing pollution from plastics. I just wonder whether you might be open to a more radical proposal, and one that these Tory benches would be pleased to support, if you can find a feasible way of advancing it, and that’s just banning some of these materials. That’s what they’re doing in the United States now. So, if they can do it and some find that it’s a horrifying attack on the free market, then perhaps we should be doing it too. It’s much simpler for the public to understand as well.

I’m all for radical policies, so I’m very happy to look at anything that will help us reduce, particularly, plastic litter. There’s been a campaign recently about plastic litter in our oceans, and I think it’s absolutely appalling, so anything that we can do to help—. So, I’m very happy to look at any radical policy, and if the Member would like to meet with me to discuss it further, I’d certainly be happy to do that.

UKIP spokesperson, Neil Hamilton.

The Cabinet Secretary will be attending NFU Cymru’s conference in two weeks’ time, and I’m sure she’ll have seen the advance press release from John Mercer, the director of NFU Cymru, in which he says that

‘The Union firmly believes that we can make a success of Brexit if our collective focus is centred on supporting our industry to meet the challenge of feeding a growing world population with safe, quality, affordable food’.

I’m sure the Cabinet Secretary will agree with me that it’s vitally important that farmers in Wales should have a firm idea of what the legislative framework for agriculture will be after we leave the European Union and, therefore, it’s vitally important that the Welsh Government should make its framework decisions, at any rate, as soon as possible and make them public. This is a great opportunity for Welsh farmers, as John Mercer says. Could the Cabinet Secretary give us some firm idea of the time it will take her to develop at least a framework agricultural policy that she can make public?

I thank Neil Hamilton for his question. Yes, I certainly am attending the NFU conference. I think it’s early November or late November—

It’s 2 November.

That’s right. So, I’m looking forward to that very much. I’m not sure I’ve actually seen the press release that you refer to, but, certainly, I engage frequently with the NFU and I’m very aware of their views around opportunities as well as the challenges that we’re facing. There is a huge amount of work going on by my officials in relation to frameworks, possible legislation and also discussions with their counterparts. So, I know all the senior officials met last Wednesday here in Cardiff from the four nations. You’ll be aware of the ministerial engagement that I have. We now have another date for our monthly meetings—unfortunately, in October, we haven’t had one—with the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Secretary of State, but we are meeting again, unfortunately again in London, on 6 November. But it’s really important those discussions are ongoing.

In relation to a timescale, I would imagine that we’ll be starting to be able to make that public maybe early next year, but, again, there’s a huge amount of detailed work being undertaken for a time.

I fully understand that. No-one underestimates the vast scale of this project, but it is vitally important to us and the UK Government in the context of the current negotiations going on in Brussels also, because, if we are to get the best possible deal that is available out of the EU, they need to know that we are fully prepared for no deal. And the more, therefore, that we can make public in advance will help us, I think, to get a reasonable deal out of the EU if they are rational about it.

The fundamental basis of the current regime is the basic payment scheme, and UKIP’s policy is to continue a variation of that but to cap payments at £120,000, so that we end the discrimination in favour of larger farmers and agribusinesses and give more support to smaller enterprises. We also believe there should be a 25 per cent uplift for organic farms. Given the nature of agriculture in Wales being very different from England—we don’t have the vast prairie lands of Lincolnshire and so on—it should not be difficult for the Welsh Government to come to broadly similar conclusions. So, I wonder if she can give us any indication on at least the basis of a future agricultural policy.

I think you raised a very important point at the beginning of your contribution then about having that best possible information. I think it’s really important that we share information also and, certainly, I’m very happy to share information with my ministerial counterparts. I think we are starting to see more of that.

In relation to being fully prepared for a ‘no deal’, well, I don’t know how you can be fully prepared for a ‘no deal’. I don’t actually understand how you can have a ‘no deal’, because leaving the EU, to me, is like a divorce. Now, you can’t have a ‘no deal’ with a divorce. You have to have a deal of whatever description; you have to have a deal. So, all this talk about no deal—I just am completely perplexed as to how you can have ‘no deal’. I think it should be absolutely the UK Government’s top priority that they get the best deal possible, and that’s what we are pushing for for the people of Wales.

In relation to your proposals, again, I’d be very happy to look at what UKIP’s proposals are for future farming post Brexit.

Well, obviously, we all want a deal if one is available, but it takes two to tango and, if the EU is not prepared to do a deal, and is not prepared to carry on talking, until we pay the ransom demand, then that’s what a ‘no deal’ looks like. That wasn’t the purpose behind my question today. It’s to look at the future of Welsh farming and fishing.

Further to Michelle Brown’s question earlier on, what UKIP would like to see to restore life to our fishing and coastal communities is an exclusive economic zone all around the United Kingdom and, obviously, in our Welsh waters, under the control of the Welsh Government, halting equal access to these waters by European fishermen, to have no-take zones to aid spawning and replenishing fish stocks—yes, we might have foreign trawlers able to access our waters, but with permits—and to ensure that all fish caught within UK waters, including those taken by foreign vessels operating under licence, are landed and sold in the UK to help finance and attract investment in the newly developing fishing industry.

So, I hope the Cabinet Secretary sees that we can make a positive contribution towards this debate in a non-partisan way. I think that there is scope for doing that with all parties in this Assembly.

Yes, absolutely. I’ve just mentioned to David Melding that I’m very happy to look at anybody’s ideas, of course, and certainly, I want to have a very positive fishing and fisheries policy. I think, talking to the fishing industry—and we are just starting, now, to get our negotiations ready ahead of the fisheries council in December—they do feel very badly done down by the EU. There are no two ways about it, certainly from talking to the Welsh fishing industry. So, it’s absolutely right that we get that Welsh fisheries policy correct. So, yes, I’m very happy to look at any ideas you want to bring forward.

The Wales marine advisory and action group has been engaged in the development of a national marine plan for Wales. There is a statutory function that we must perform, and we will engage stakeholders taking this forward. We will seek the views of this group regarding the MPA management plan.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary for that response. Back in August, as she will know, the Climate Change, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee published its catchily entitled report ‘Turning the tide?’, which stressed the pride we should have in our Welsh marine and coastal environment, and the potential for marine protected areas to help support healthy seas, sustainable fisheries and much more.

Recommendation 1 spoke of the urgency of developing that MPA strategy. Recommendation 3 spoke of the need for Welsh Government to operate in a transparent and efficient way, ensuring that stakeholders are fully engaged in the development of that MPA strategy. The Cabinet Secretary responded positively to the recommendations, though, rather than committing to the development of an MPA strategy, as recommended by the committee, she committed instead to finalising the MPA management priority action plan and thereby agreeing a strategic direction by working with the marine protected area management steering group. But unfortunately, marine stakeholders working in the private sector and also non-governmental organisations are not part of the MPA steering group, which is limited to MPA management authorities such as Natural Resources Wales and local authorities. So, could I, in a very constructive way, ask the Cabinet Secretary to look at this again—I know she’ll want to draw on the fullest expertise of the marine sector in the development of that action plan and marine strategy—and, with the help of her officials, examine ways to have a platform of full engagement with all stakeholders before April next year?

Yes, I’m very happy to do that. My department is working with NRW and the MPA management steering group to finalise the marine protected area management priority action plan. Once that’s established, we will, of course, engage with a diverse range of marine stakeholders through the marine advisory action group.

Cabinet Secretary, shouldn’t that engagement, though, come before the plan is finalised? You have limited resources in your department; you face having to make more savings. There are extraordinary challenges about these marine protected areas; we know very little about what goes on at the bottom of the sea, and it’s very expensive to find information. Why do you not bring the stakeholders in at an earlier stage so that you can use both their resources and their expertise to help develop this plan?

When we began marine planning, we did publish a statement of public participation and that set out how stakeholders could input into the plan right from the beginning, and then as it developed. So, there is that consultation and that agreement with stakeholders; it’s not a matter that they were excluded—we did have that. We’ve also got the marine planning stakeholder reference group. That has a huge range of NGOs, industry and coastal fora on it. The Crown Estate is on it, NRW is obviously on it, and the Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science. They’ve been inputting throughout the whole process. So, I think it’s wrong to say they were excluded; they were there from the beginning.

In addition to considering activity tourism and recreation participation reports and strategies, the Welsh Government has undertaken significant public engagement. The recent consultation on sustainable management of our natural resources received around 15,000 responses. All show the value and potential of water recreation activities such as angling and boating and why a resolution to current disagreements is necessary.

Thank you. The September 2017 update on the report ‘The value to the Welsh economy of angling on inland fisheries in Wales’, collated by the Sustainable Access Campaign Cymru, found that under the current arrangement for access to Welsh rivers, around 1,500 Welsh jobs and £45 million in household income is supported by angling on inland fisheries each year. There are 1.7 million days fished on inland fisheries in Wales by licence holders, generating £104 million annually, and that the contribution to the Welsh economy of angling on inland fisheries in Wales must exceed over £125 million annually in Wales. In that context, how do you respond to the concern expressed by Salmon and Trout Conservation Cymru that it would not be in the interest of the ecological integrity of such habitats to move to unfettered access under the proposed extensions of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 and that environmental protection is paramount when consideration is given to increased access to the natural resources of Wales, and especially the fragile ecosystems in and around rivers and lakes?

I think your question lends me to say that it’s really important that you get the balance right, and that’s absolutely why we’ve consulted on such an important issue. You’re quite right, fishing tourism, in both domestic and day-trip visits to Wales, is very important. I think it was about £38 million in 2015. You referred to a report in 2017, but I know in 2015 it was about £38 million per year. I think it also highlights the importance of developing a framework so that we can facilitate responsible access opportunities, going forward.

Cabinet Secretary, I have received many representations from constituents regarding this matter in particular, and I think, as you’ve pointed out, there is resolution that needs to come together between the two groups. Now, you’ve just mentioned fishing tourism, but many of our citizens actually enjoy fishing as a pastime, and therefore enjoy the activities they undertake, not as tourist activities, but as part of their spare time. Do you agree with me that, actually, a way of resolving these by coming together and getting an agreement that is voluntary between the organisations is the best solution, not having something imposed upon them?

Yes, I do, but I think—. You know, when I was a backbencher, this was a very hot topic, and I think the consultation showed it can be incredibly divisive and incredibly polarised, so it is about getting that resolution. We want to see that because it is vital for our tourism. So, I’m hoping that, following the analysis of the consultations and when we come forward with resolutions, we’re able to engage with all the stakeholders to make sure we have the absolute best way forward.

Cabinet Secretary, following on from the comments earlier, I’m sure you’re aware of the potential for conflict that free access to Wales’s waterways may bring between those who use them in differing ways, in particular anglers and canoeists. I would say that David Rees is quite right in that if we can get some consultation between these two groups, that’s the best way forward. Unfortunately, the feedback to me from the angling societies is that there doesn’t seem to be that desire for talking coming from the canoeists.

I’ve been contacted by a number of angling societies, and have had meetings with Isca and Hay-on-Wye, one situated on the river Usk and the other on the river Wye. Both showed considerable concern with regard to canoe activity on the rivers, which, at this moment, is not regulated. One important factor pointed out is that canoes do not carry any form of identification, so any canoeist committing offences or simple nuisance cannot be identified. Does the Cabinet Secretary intend to bring in regulations to make registration and, hence, identification a mandatory requirement? Are there any plans to get canoeists to pay a fee for access to our waterways, as, of course, anglers have to, by way of fishing licences and/or society fees?

I mentioned in my answer to David Rees that it’s an incredibly divisive issue, and it’s a divisive issue that’s been around for a long time. However, I think this is our opportunity now to get it right. I would certainly want to bring all the groups together. I don’t want to take sides with any group, but if we can facilitate groups coming together, then I’d be very happy to do that. In relation to your specific policy questions around identification and fees, again, that is something that we would have to look at, coming out of the consultation.

Thank you. The recent review has provided an opportunity to reaffirm the importance to Wales of our designated landscapes. I will make a statement on the way forward when I have considered the wide range of comments in response to the recent consultation on ‘Taking forward Wales’ sustainable management of natural resources’.

Cabinet Secretary, I’m really interested in your thoughts on the Alliance for Welsh Designated Landscapes’s response to the review. The alliance has called for the report to be rewritten to provide traceability from the Marsden report, from the recommendations of which, of course—I’m looking at Dafydd; sorry, Dafydd—it was commissioned.

He didn’t say anything, you can carry on. [Laughter.] Not yet, not yet. [Laughter.]

They have also—this is what they said now. They have also called for a clear reaffirmation of the Sandford principle. Will you commit to both of these proposals today?

I certainly won’t be having any report rewritten. It was a group that took a decision, brought a report forward that I’ve accepted. I was very grateful to Lord Dafydd Elis-Thomas—who only has to look, clearly—for doing the work that he did with the group. In relation to the Sandford principle, I’m very happy to say, once again: I will not bring forward any proposals for reform that would put the natural beauty and special qualities of areas of national beauty and national parks at risk. I think there was a lot of mischief making that went on, and I’m very happy to confirm that again in the Chamber.

John Griffiths—question 6, Mike Hedges.

Thank you. Invasive non-native species continue to have a significant environmental, social and economic impact in Wales. We are working to reduce these through implementation of the EU invasive alien species regulation and collaboration with our partners to promote awareness, share best practice and data, and act to control or eradicate these species.

Thank you for that answer, Cabinet Secretary. Of all the non-native species that we have in Swansea, the one that’s causing us our biggest problem is Japanese knotweed, which is highly invasive, very difficult to get rid of and causes houses not to be able to be sold, causes drains to be damaged and can cause houses to have their foundations undermined. Can the Cabinet Secretary provide an update on both the use of the natural predator tests and on improved chemical treatment in getting rid of this highly dangerous, invasive species?

Thank you. We had an improved delivery method, and that has resulted in better survival in the insect psyllids, which is a key development in tackling Japanese knotweed. We had further releases earlier this year. Swansea University are currently analysing the results from the separate chemical control trials, which you’ll be aware we supported—a two-year trial by Swansea University. I very much look forward to reading their report.

Actually, I wanted to ask you a little bit more about the chemical control of Japanese knotweed myself, but I hear your answer there. Have there been any preliminary findings that Swansea University might be able to release, or any additional trials that might have taken place on interim findings? As you know, our local development plan means that there’s going to be quite a lot of land disturbed as a result of new buildings, and I think it would be quite useful if developers could have an early sight of anything that might help them, or not help them, maybe—it depends what it’s going to be—to decide whether they’re going to develop a particular piece of land.

I’m not aware of any interim findings. I know the data is currently being analysed. So, I’m not aware of any interim findings, or any small report that they’ve done, but I’ll certainly find out. If that is the case, I’ll be very happy to write to the Member. But you’ll know that the trial examined various combinations of herbicide treatments and mechanical actions. It was a very thorough trial, and I’m hoping that we will be able to find the most effective control method.

Yes, Japanese knotweed is a real headache for householders. We also have invasive species from the animal kingdom, which can be a real menace, such as the killer shrimp. This was discovered in waters off Cardiff Bay and in Eglwys Nunydd reservoir in Port Talbot in 2010. Now, the biosecurity sector has been monitoring the situation since then. I wondered if you had any updates on the current level of menace posed by the killer shrimps.

I’m afraid I don’t, and I will have to write to the Member.

Thank you. Support is available through Welsh Government Warm Homes, which includes our Nest and Arbed schemes. Nest offers free impartial advice and support to help people reduce household energy bills and provides eligible households with free home energy efficiency measures to help them keep warm at a more affordable cost.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, and I was pleased to see in the Nest annual report that the installation of a Government-funded home energy efficiency improvement package will see, on average, an energy bill saving of £410 per household each year. These figures demonstrate clearly that the scheme is performing above expectations and is making a real difference to fuel-poor households. I just wanted to ask, though, about residential retrofit, because ensuring that existing homes in Wales are energy efficient has a key part to play in tackling fuel poverty. So, could I ask what plans you have to increase the Welsh Government’s activity in terms of residential retrofit??

Thank you. I am working very closely with my colleague Carl Sargeant, the Cabinet Secretary for Communities and Children, in relation to retrofitting. I’ve also established a ministerial decarbonisation task and finish group with two others of my Cabinet Secretary colleagues, so that will really drive cross-Government action. I wanted to help bring forward proposals to meet our challenging carbon commitments also. So, whilst we will continue to look at the scale of our own energy efficiency programmes, we do need to look at our decarbonisation ambitions. They can’t be achieved through Government funding alone, so we are going to have to have a much more joined-up approach across Government and across all sectors, really, to help us deliver on this agenda.

Cabinet Secretary, I’m sure you’ll welcome the energy price cap announced last week, and also the continuing roll-out of smart meters. I think smart meters have a huge role to play in giving home owners more control over how much energy they use, and encouraging them also to switch between providers. However, there has been some reluctance amongst some home owners to have smart meters installed and I wonder what role the Welsh Government is playing to encourage the roll-out of smart meters to all households in Wales.

I think you’re right, there have been a few issues around smart meters, I think. Talking to a group of consumers as to why they wouldn’t want a smart meter, they put it down to, you know, their neighbours had had issues with it et cetera. So, I think we need to make sure that we work across all sectors to encourage people to have smart meters installed, and it is something that we work with the utility companies, for instance, to do.

When settling on a replacement for the Nest scheme, can you tell us whether you’d be prepared to look at eligibility rules around applying for some home energy efficiency improvements? I’m thinking Scotland’s corresponding energy assistance package has less stringent criteria, being available for those who are on a low income and pregnant, for example, or to some homes with children. In Wales, current rules exclude a lot of people in fuel poverty, particularly young people, so I’m wondering if, with the new scheme that will potentially, I hope, come into place after this current one comes to an end, you would consider changing that criteria.

Yes, certainly, that’s something we can look at. I think we are just about to go out to procurement, so clearly this is something we can look at as we do bring in the new scheme next year.

Thank you. The Welsh Government is supporting the farming industry in Pembrokeshire and west Wales, as in all parts of Wales, to become more profitable, sustainable, resilient and business-focused. Over 1,400 people in Pembrokeshire are signed up to Farming Connect, to learn more about improving the profitability, competitiveness, and environmental performance of their businesses.

Cabinet Secretary, one of the major issues facing the agricultural industry in west Wales is the Welsh Government’s proposed designations for nitrate vulnerable zones. Now, earlier on in this session, in an answer to Simon Thomas, you committed to making a decision on NVZs by the end of the year and that, later on today, you will be discussing this matter with your officials. Given the huge impact that the introduction of NVZs could have on farmers in my constituency, will you commit to consider looking at voluntary measures before imposing NVZs, and can you confirm whether you’re prepared to discuss voluntary measures with your officials later on this afternoon?

I have been having ongoing discussions with officials over the past few months—well, probably over the past year—in relation to this, and, as I say, I have another meeting this afternoon. I am not ruling out anything; we had a significant number of responses, and I did say in my answer to Simon Thomas earlier that there are some very good proposals and suggestions in those responses. That’s why it’s taking longer than expected, I think, to analyse them and look at the level of detail contained within the returns. But I do commit, and I have committed all along, to coming forward with an announcement at the end of the year.

I’m also very keen to work with farmers and with their stakeholders and the farming unions, so that we can develop solutions.

Diolch. This Government supports young entrants to agriculture through several important measures. Six million pounds has been made available over the next two years in the recent budget settlement for a young entrants scheme, which we are in the process of developing and which complements our wider package of support. And, of course, we are meeting this afternoon to discuss it further.

Thank you very much, Cabinet Secretary, and I look forward to discussing the details of the agreement between us to establish a young entrants scheme of about £6 million. The last time the Welsh Government had a similar scheme, there was £7 million in that scheme and it supported 520 young people into the agriculture industry. Perhaps somebody present would actually remember that scheme, Llywydd.

In taking this scheme forward, I think that it’s important that we send a strong message to young farmers that we want them to be part of steering the scheme and that they can learn from each other as well. So, will the Cabinet Secretary consider how young farmers’ clubs can play a role in advertising and marketing such a scheme, in sharing and learning, and, of course, in giving direct support and mentoring to young farmers?

Yes, absolutely; I’m sure the Llywydd does remember the scheme very well. I think, looking back at previous games, I really want to ensure that we get new entrants from this; not people who are in succession, for instance. It is really important that we engage with—you mentioned young farmers’ clubs. I’m certainly happy to do that, because we want to get these young people before they go into farming as a business. Certainly, my early thinking is around FE colleges and HE. I think it’s really important that we talk to the students and get their views. But, as I say, I’m sure that when we meet, we can discuss this further.

I was delighted just then to hear you say ‘new entrants’ to the farming schemes, because I think that the young entrants scheme is a very welcome step and we are very supportive of it. However, I find in my constituency I have a number of people who don’t fit into those criteria. Families have changed, people are working longer, and family dynamics are very different. You have people who have gone away and then they come back and take over a family farm—maybe a small one, but nonetheless they are still there, still trying to add vibrancy to our rural heritage.

They find it very difficult to get support, because they are supposed to know it all, because they just fit outside the ‘young’ bracket. I wondered whether you might consider, when you’re looking at this, making it more of a ‘new entrants’, or keeping an eye on the ‘new entrants’, that you might consider putting in place some kind of mentoring scheme. You know, I have pointed people to organisations such as Farming Connect, but it’s just not the same as having somebody who really can help you and walk you through those first vital couple of years while you really get to grips with, not just how you are running the business, but, actually, it’s the paperwork, the various schemes that you can belong to—those are the things that people are finding very difficult to navigate.

Yes, I think you raise a very relevant point, and I’ve been looking, over the past few months, prior to the budget agreement with Plaid Cymru I’ve been looking at how we can encourage more people, and particularly young people and particularly new entrants, because I think, looking back at the YES scheme, only about 10 per cent were new entrants. I think the rest were part of that succession into existing businesses. So, I think it is important that we look at how we can bring new entrants in. I mentioned that I was thinking about FE colleges and working with students and HE colleges. I think mentoring is really important, so if you think about another scheme that we have, the Venture scheme, where we’re looking at young people again with people who are maybe wanting to retire, I think that’s been very successful on a different level, but it’s about picking all these best pieces out and bringing it all together to form a new scheme.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary.

The next item is questions to the Cabinet Secretary for Communities and Children, and the first question comes from Hannah Blythyn.

I thank the Member for her question. The Communities First transition team was established to support Communities First lead delivery bodies in planning and advising staff. There have been ongoing conversations with local authority staff, third sector staff and unions. Lead delivery bodies have transition plans in place to inform the delivery of the programme during 2017-18.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. I raise this both as an Assembly Member who serves employees of the Communities First programme and as a trade unionist—with both hats. I’m sure you’ll understand that the workforce should get the support and consideration that they are deserving of. You said that it is currently going through a transition period, and that is obviously happening in Flintshire, as elsewhere in the country. Many of the staff in Flintshire have worked on these Communities First projects since they were established in 2002, serving across our communities on a number and variety of projects that enable people to be work ready, and to support them into work. Having met with the Communities First team in Flintshire, I know that they continue to work hard, as you will do, Cabinet Secretary, and under a lot of pressure to provide a smooth transition for all employees. I think they are now keen to focus on moving forward. So, I hope that the Communities for Work projects supported by the legacy fund will provide new opportunities for existing employees to move into, and during this transition period that the well-being of the committed workforce and their families will be given priority. So, Cabinet Secretary, do you agree with me that supporting our Communities First employees and providing certainty on their future should be a priority through this transition period, and what message of reassurance you can send to them today?

I’m grateful to the Member for raising this, and many other Members have also done that. Thank you for that. I agree that one of the priorities is ensuring Communities First staff are supported through this transition period, and it’s an important one. I am aware that my officials have been working with lead delivery bodies to ensure correct procedures are being followed, including liaison with union representatives as necessary. I know many of the Communities First staff in Flintshire and across Wales will want to continue to work to support our communities in other important programmes, and I wish them luck in doing that too.

Cabinet Secretary, such is the confusion now over the winding up of Communities First in our communities that a number of permanent vacancies are still being advertised online. What steps are you taking to ensure that taxpayers’ money is not being wasted on further recruitment processes for a scheme that you are technically winding down?

Well, the only person that’s confused here, it appears, is you. The lead delivery bodies are in regular contact and are encouraged to talk to my officials. If there are any questions or queries around the transition period or associated staffing issues, they’re more than happy to talk to my team in that process, but the Member has been misled in terms of her views today.

I’m grateful for the Member’s question and deeply concerned by the devastating impact that the UK Government’s welfare reforms are having on low-income families, particularly those with children. Average annual losses are estimated to be around £600 per household in the sub-region the Member represents, compared with £300 per household in the least affected sub-regions of Wales.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. Earlier this year, research commissioned by Cardiff Metropolitan University found the average rent arrears for tenants claiming universal credit was £449.97. The six-week waiting period for the first payments will mean that the first payment of universal credit for those in Newport will be 27 December. Will the Cabinet Secretary once again urge the UK Government to reconsider the six-week waiting period for this flawed policy, which will plunge yet more people into poverty and debt, and also support the housing sector’s calls to immediately roll out the much needed landlord portal and trusted partner status, so that housing associations in Wales will be treated the same as those in England?

I’m really grateful to the Member for raising that with me today. I have written to the UK Government to ask them to put a halt on the universal credit roll-out. The principle of the universal credit programme wasn’t wrong, but it’s not working right and people are being affected and traumatised in the way that they are living their lives. In fact, a six-week wait—. I read an article today about a very young person on the Wirral in Merseyside having to wait six weeks and who was suicidal and living on water for that period of time. It is not right, it needs stopping and it needs reassessing now.

The unemployment rate in south-east Wales has fallen to 3.5 per cent this year; the employment rate in the year to June is up from 70.2 per cent to 72.5 per cent. Given that the Government in Westminster’s welfare reforms are designed at least in part to help people into work, and the Cabinet Secretary himself says he supports the principle of universal credit, shouldn’t he be welcoming these and working with the Government to implement them?

I certainly don’t welcome the universal credit roll-out as it is, and I’ve expressed that in a strong letter to the Minister in Westminster. This is having a devastating effect on families and children right across Wales. It needs stopping now and reassessing as to how that should be delivered for the future.

The Member for Newport West touched on a point of the levels of personal debt and that being a real impact of the hideous welfare reforms being thrust upon us by the British state. Research earlier this year showed that personal debt levels in the NP postcode area were the highest in Wales and, across the United Kingdom, they are now reaching pre-recession levels. I wonder what action the Cabinet Secretary is considering in light of this new research to target ethical financial support in those areas with the highest level of personal debt, and also the areas that are losing financial services from the traditional banks, because the last thing we want is these people who are already under siege from the state to also be under siege from rogue lenders.

Yes, the Member is right to raise this point, and I’ve worked with Bethan Jenkins in terms of financial literacy; it’s a really important point. But, for many of these people who are undergoing universal credit roll-out, the problem is they don’t have any money. The problem is that to have savings or otherwise is a luxury. This programme is flawed. I’m grateful for the Member’s support in this space, but actually we have to, collectively, think about making sure the UK Government recognises the damaging effect the universal credit roll-out is having on communities. And while we had two trial areas in Wales, there was lots of evidence behind that saying about the devastating impact it’s having on those families there. We are only just starting the roll-out of this programme, but it’s flawed and needs stopping.

We now turn to spokespeople’s questions. The Conservative spokesperson, Mark Isherwood.

Diolch, Llywydd. As you’ll be aware, the Prime Minister announced at the beginning of the month that there would be an extra £10 billion for the Help to Buy scheme, both to stimulate new home building and to get 135,000 more people onto the housing ladder, with full plans to be detailed in the UK budget on 22 November. Given that the Welsh Government previously launched its own version of this programme some 18 months after the UK made a similar announcement, with recyclable loan finance, how do you understand Wales might be impacted or benefit from this, and what engagement have you had or will you be having with the UK Government accordingly?

We’ve had no indication of any additional funding coming to Wales on that particular point.

Well, I am disappointed, obviously, but I hope you’ll be pursuing that, given this isn’t normal block money, it’s recyclable loan finance—if it’s going to be funded on the same basis; of course, we don’t know yet.

Moving on from housing to housing-related support, of course, at the end of last month, the Welsh Government announced that £10 million annually, for two years, was being restored onto the Supporting People programme. Of course, it was well received, and £4 million of that will go through your own departmental budget. The sector responded warmly, but called for an assurance that this money would be ring-fenced for housing associations and third sector providers. Will it be so, or what assurance can you provide, working with them, that this money will go where it needs to go?

The Member could have been a little bit more generous in his observations. This wasn’t money put back into the system; this was additional money. This Labour Government here in Wales has put in an additional £10 million for two years to tackle homelessness—£6 million of that into the revenue support grant and £4 million into my budget line. I can’t guarantee what that will look like, because it’s about working with the sector and organisations to get the best value to tackle issues around homelessness, and I’m in discussions with agencies already about how that will look in terms of delivery for the future.

Of course, it was a restoration of money that had been taken out of the budget since 2013, and that was welcomed, but we do need to know if it will be ring-fenced because it’s about working with people, for example, through the Big Lottery-funded People and Places programme, which must be funding projects to be people-led, strength-based and supporting people and communities to build on the knowledge, skills and experience that they already have. Again, how will you ensure therefore that this fits those sorts of programmes, and enables people themselves to directly participate in the improvements in their own lives?

The Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 places a duty on Government and public sector bodies. We are working with organisations external to the public sector in the third sector. Llamau, the Wallich and other organisations are very keen to understand how best placed we should use this money. I’m not an expert in this field, but they are, and I want to work with them to make sure we direct our limited finances to the right places to help people in need across our communities.

UKIP spokesperson, Gareth Bennett.

Diolch, Llywydd. I wanted to raise today the problem of drug abuse and particularly drug abuse carried out in public places. We’ve had several recent media reports relating to drug users fairly openly injecting heroin in the Butetown area of Cardiff. This also raises the related problem of discarded needles, which can be a real danger to children, which has also been highlighted by the media. This is a problem not only confined to Cardiff; it is also a recurring issue in many of our Valleys towns. So, my first question is: do you recognise this as a major problem, and what steps can the Welsh Government take in helping the relevant authorities to tackle it?

Drug use and substance misuse is on the increase, but we are seeing an effect of welfare reform having an impact on individuals moving into that space. But let’s not forget that people who are suffering from drug and alcohol or substance misuse are human beings too. We have to think carefully about how we are able to support them in making sure that we can act appropriately to take them off the effects of drugs and alcohol, and put them back onto a pathway of success. It pains me when I see people in our communities taking drugs and the other paraphernalia used to expose themselves to risk. It’s our duty to make sure that we can help everybody in our communities, irrespective of their position in life or where they are.

Yes, and I agree with your sentiments. These are human beings—nobody is denying that— and we need to help these people as far as we can to come off their habits. But, in terms of how to deal with it as an issue of public order perhaps, what do you think about the issue of stop and search and how effective it is in helping to provide a safe urban environment?

The issues around stop and search are a matter for the UK Government and policing but, actually, I don’t think stop and search in itself is helpful in delivering services for people who need to be supported. Our Supporting People programme, along with our substance misuse policy, is designed to help people back into what would be considered a normal way of life, whatever that actually means. But, actually, taking them away from the risk that they pose to themselves and others is something that we should work at carefully.

Yes, and Supporting People, of course, we await what the funding for that will be in the upcoming budget, so I’m glad you mentioned Supporting People. But on a related issue on the drug theme, do you have any update on Welsh Government investigations into so-called safe injection zones, where drug users can inject in a medically supervised environment, and do you have any thoughts of your own on this issue whereby it is a possible way of taking needles away from the streets?

There have been some discussions with authorities, but this is a matter for a different Minister. I will ask the Minister appropriate to write to the Member.

Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Bethan Jenkins.

Cabinet Secretary, can you confirm the following questions? Did the Welsh Government offer the Baglan Moors site for the prison, when, at the time it was offered in May 2016, the site was categorised as a C2 flood risk zone and went against your own technical advice note 15 planning guidance? Can you also clarify whether or not the covenant on the land meant that it could only be used for economic purposes in keeping with an industrial park?

I can’t do just a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answer there, because there were lots of questions, but if the Member bears with me—. The land that the Member mentions was part of a long list of land that is available to any developer, whether that be from the Ministry of Justice or any other commercial operation, and it is not abnormal for us to do that. Is there a covenant on the land? I believe there is a covenant on the land.

Okay. I don’t think you answered the first question, but I can come back to it again. I just want to try and probe further on that in particular. Why was the flood-risk category only updated via Natural Resources Wales in March 2017? This was the same month that news about the site became—. The preferred option for a new prison, during this time, became public. It’s my understanding from a communication via our councillor, Nigel Hunt, that NRW only informed Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council of a change to the flood-risk category in February, a few weeks before the site was publicly chosen. Why was this? Can you confirm when NRW informed you, or anybody else in the Welsh Government, that the flood-risk category of the land would change, therefore making it viable for a large development such as the prison? Assuming it would have taken some time to compile a list of suitable sites for a prison of this size, it was before the flood-risk category was changed.

I don’t have the detail on exactly when the correspondence was with NRW or otherwise. But I will ensure that the Member is communicated with in terms of that detail. But the Member should be also aware that, because this land is designed with a flood risk, there are opportunities for developers to mitigate against that. So, the Member is alluding to a state of fact, in terms of that land may have had a flood risk imposed on it, but, actually, mitigation by any businesses can be considered in a normal planning process.

The point is, though, that it was changed, and it made it more viable, therefore, for this prison to be able to be built. In the past, it wasn’t as viable for industries to go and seek out that land, and I’m trying to understand why that was and when that decision was made, and I’m not hearing that from you here today. With regard to the covenant, and it’s my understanding, as is yours, as we’ve heard, that there is a covenant in place, I’ve received legal advice, which states, and I quote, ‘Assuming the covenant is legally valid, it means that the site is affected by an obligation in favour of a third party limiting its use to an industrial park only. In those circumstances, building a prison on the site could be a breach of the covenant.’

How do you plan to get around this, assuming you are still going to co-operate with the UK Government and continue to offer this land for the prison? The bottom line, of course, is that we understand that, potentially, things will change in relation to the flooding and the categorisation, and the covenant now ensures it should be for industrial usage. Will you, therefore, go back to the MOJ and say, ‘Well, actually, now we are not co-operating with this piece of land, and we will not therefore be providing Baglan Moors for a prison site’?

I’m really disappointed in the tone of the question from the Member. I’ve been in discussions with her, and many other Members, including Dai Rees, the local Member—[Interruption.] If the Members would like to listen, I’d be more than happy to answer the question. The fact of the matter is that this is a matter for the Ministry of Justice. We, as always, and with our land process, offer land that is appropriate for development. If they wish to look at the covenant, or other arrangements of that land, this is a matter for the Ministry of Justice, not for Welsh Government.

I thank the Member for her question. All social landlords are on track to meet the standard by 2020. Latest annual statistics show that, at 31 March 2017, 192,302—86 per cent—of existing social housing now meet the standard, compared with 79 per cent for a year earlier. Over 15,000 households now live in better quality homes than in the previous year.

Diolch, Cabinet Secretary. The figures released, as you said, earlier this month, show that 86 per cent of all social housing dwellings met the Welsh housing quality standard by 31 March, which was a rise of seven percentage points, unlike in England where there has been disinvestment. This significant investment by Welsh Government is having a significant and far-reaching impact and indeed transforming lives. Will the Cabinet Secretary outline how we can ensure that this progress is maintained and advanced across Wales?

Llywydd, this is a good news story for us as the quality of homes is so important to people’s well-being. It’s also vital for us in achieving many of our other goals as a Government, including improving the nation’s health and well-being. Investment in improving and building homes also has a huge potential to create jobs and training opportunities in areas like Rhianon Passmore’s constituency, and we look forward to continuing that support for organisations to develop housing quality standards.

Cabinet Secretary, I recently visited the Solcer house in Bridgend as part of the Climate Change, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee’s work, and was very enthusiastic to see the prospect of building homes now that actually produce more energy than they consume. Now, that house costs roughly twice as much as a normal build house but is not yet done to scale, and I understand that social housing does offer an opportunity to develop these products at scale, and they’re aesthetically pleasing and very efficient and offer huge benefits to people, especially those who may be in fuel poverty also.

I agree with the Member—it’s rather unusual, but, in terms of this point, he’s absolutely right in making sure that—. Actually, this is a clever investment for the future. It may cost a little bit more but it’s an investment for lower energy bills or decarbonisation; it ticks all of those boxes. I will be making an announcement shortly on the innovative housing schemes and it’s a case of watch this space.

I do support the objective of upgrading social housing, I really do, Cabinet Secretary. But I would like to ask what analysis have you made of the cost to the social landlords of upgrading the houses and the likelihood of that cost being passed on to future tenants via rent rises?

This is all measured within the business plans for associations and local authorities. We provide additional funding to ensure that they are no worse off. But it’s about making sure that housing is fit for the future and many households across all our constituencies are benefiting from this investment from Government and from the sector itself.

Despite the rehabilitation of offenders in Wales being a matter for the UK Government, we work closely with Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service, for example, through our support for the women’s pathfinder diversion programme.

Thank you. Well, given that response and, of course, your responsibilities at the devolved level for crime and justice policy, including youth justice, how are you engaging or will you be engaging with the UK Secretary of State for Justice after the announcement at the beginning of this month of a £64 million investment in youth custody to boost staffing and education for young offenders and a national taskforce—i.e. a UK, presumably, national taskforce—to help ex-offenders into employment, which will target employers to sell the benefits of employing ex-offenders, as well as advising governors on training to give former prisoners to maximise their chances of employment?

I think what we mustn’t forget is, in a lot of these institutions, there are Welsh prisoners and we must think about their integration back into our society as well. A lot of the services around prisons are devolved services. So, health, education, et cetera, are devolved services and we have regular discussions about what the involvement is of Government in terms of their ability to help structure a new approach to probation services and rehabilitation in our communities.

Cabinet Secretary, in order to effectively rehabilitate those leaving prison it’s very important that they have a roof over their heads. The Housing (Wales) Act 2014 meant that prison leavers were no longer automatically categorised as being in priority need for housing. There was a 2017 post-implementation evaluation of that legislation, which stated that amongst those groups not having their housing needs met were prison leavers. Given those facts, will you now give further consideration to the protection and the categorisation of prison leavers in terms of homelessness and housing need?

I think the Member is right to raise the issue, but I did create a working group that looked at prison leavers in terms of housing solutions. I will write to the Member with the details of that group and what the outcomes of that were.

Cabinet Secretary, rehabilitation and the reduction of reoffending is something we all want to try and achieve. I will give you one hint now: stopping superprisons might actually do it a little bit, and therefore stopping the one in Baglan might help you a little bit. But, in the sense of how we help them to be rehabilitated, support services are critical and those support services are going to be huge resource draw on our services. What discussions are you having with the Ministry of Justice to ensure that they fund those resource services so, when we do rehabilitation and when we reduce reoffending, it’s because they’re actually helping us and we’re not doing it off their back?

As with all prison estate across Wales, there is an agreement between the UK Government and Welsh Government in terms of a cost-needs assessment on additional services required. I can assure the Member, irrespective of if and when a prison does appear anywhere in Wales, there is a discussion with the UK Government to ensure that we have the right amount of services and finances to deal with the issues surrounding any prison.

Thank you. Our priority is to ensure that we provide effective services that meet the needs in areas such as health, housing and employment. Examples of these are the housing pathway and the work Veterans NHS Wales are undertaking in the delivery of research trials to alleviate mental health issues such as post-traumatic stress disorder.

I thank you for that answer, Cabinet Secretary. I’m sure that you’ll agree with me that we in Wales are proud of our armed forces and the work they do on our behalf. We must remember it is the politicians who sent them into conflict, therefore it’s incumbent upon politicians to ensure they’re looked after when they leave the service. Even given all the interventions that I know the Welsh Government has done, and they are to be applauded for that, we still find that there are those who slip through the net and are still sleeping rough on our streets. Do you have any updates on how the Welsh Government are going to deal with those people?

What we’re trying to establish here is a national solution to the problems, as well as here in Wales. What we’re trying to do is identify service leavers who want to be supported and therefore give them a pathway to change. I think it’s incumbent on the UK Government, in terms of how they deal with ex-service personnel—and I’ve raised this with Ministers on several occasions about their moral responsibilities for, when people go to conflict, how do they deal with and support them post conflict. It’s something I will continue to do and work with the armed forces expert group on that.

Cabinet Secretary, will you agree with me that one low-level support service is the Veterans Shed movement, which, of course, was established in north Wales in terms of the first one, is now being a model that is being copied in other parts of the country, not just in Wales, but across the UK as well, and that that is something that the Welsh Government would do well to support? I know that your colleague Lesley Griffiths, when she held the armed forces portfolio, made a visit to the Veterans Shed in Colwyn Bay and was hugely impressed by what they’re achieving. But what resource might the Welsh Government be able to make available to support the Welsh Veterans Shed network so that it can enhance the lives of other veterans in other parts of Wales that it’s not currently in?

I’m grateful to the Member and thank him for the work that he does on the cross-party group on armed forces also. I can’t commit to a financial reward for this group. I do recognise the work that they do in our communities. I think what we are looking at as a Government body is looking at the very high-level interventions that we can support—the more lower, but meaningful intervention the Member talks about is an important one. We have to see what pathway to finance they can access, but I’m not quite sure it’s at a Government level.

Cabinet Secretary, former service personnel can often have difficulty in accessing new employment opportunities, despite the wealth of transferrable skills that they possess, and I’m sure you’re aware of recent media coverage about this issue. You alluded, in your answer to David Rowlands, to help that the Welsh Government provide in this area. I wonder if you could expand on that for us, please.

I’m grateful for the Member’s question, an important one about how we move from a service position to the public and private sector, which can, for some, be a very difficult transition. We’re working with the Career Transition Partnership on discharge. I indeed also met with an ex-service user in Dawn Bowden’s constituency, who had moved from ex-service personnel to an excellent member of staff for a local contracting company. There are things that we can learn there about the support mechanisms that some people might need in addition to actual work and training skills and about how we learn from experience. It’s something my team and the expert group on service personnel is looking at and gives me advice on regularly.

Question 6 [OAQ51199] was withdrawn. Therefore, question 7, Lynne Neagle.

I’m grateful for the Member for Torfaen’s question. Positive parenting is fundamental to our cross-cutting priority of early years within ‘Prosperity for All’. We support every local authority in Wales to provide a range of parenting support encompassing universally available information and advice. Parenting groups and targeted and intensive early intervention through Flying Start and Families First continue.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. Yesterday, the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children launched their new Take 5 positive parenting campaign, which looks at encouraging parents to stop and react calmly when faced with a challenging parenting situation. The campaign was developed with parents in Wales and provides easy-to-remember advice to help them keep their cool. It urges people to take five—to stop, breathe and react calmly when dealing with tantrums, difficult behaviour or other challenging parenting situations, such as mealtimes and getting dressed—and is designed to complement the positive parenting advice and programmes that are already operating. Cabinet Secretary, will you join me in welcoming the NSPCC’s campaign, which looks to provide parents with confidence to make better-informed decisions that allow them to build positive, healthy relationships with their child?

Yes, I do. Indeed, I met with the NSPCC and had a briefing on that particular campaign that they’ve launched. And, you’re right, it does complement the TalkParenting campaign that we’ve launched as Welsh Government. We must continue to work together proactively in supporting parents across our communities, and I’m grateful the Member raised that with me today.

Cabinet Secretary, I know you will agree with me that resolving attachment issues is absolutely crucial for ensuring that young people or young children can grow up to be well-rounded individuals. In the last Assembly, the children and young people committee did a very hard-hitting report on adoption and post-adoption support. A lot of children who are adopted or who are about to be adopted suffer from attachment issues, and yet still today we are being told by adopters and would-be adopters that they are finding it very difficult to access training to help them learn how to parent children who have severe attachment disorder. If we want these children to go into stable, loving forever-homes, we have to help those who want to reach out to those kids. When will your Government—. Or what can your Government do to help these parents and to give them the training that they need to make sure that not only can they adopt those children but that, when they do adopt them, those adoptions are robust and do not breakdown, as I have seen too often with constituents in my own constituency?

I share the Member’s concern around this, and we are doing work with David Melding, who chairs an advisory group for us looking at the intense vulnerability of young people put in either fostering or adoption care, and we are seeking advice on what more we can do to help with this. This is not always about cash, by the way. This is often about support mechanisms—sometimes third sector or public sector bodies—actually doing what they say on the tin, making sure that we recognise that these young people are highly vulnerable and following up on that process as well. It’s not just a case of placement; it’s about placement and support, and it’s something I’m very conscious of.

We do not collect specific data on section 21 notices. However, we have introduced new requirements regarding their use, and landlords must be registered with Rent Smart Wales. In addition, the Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016 will provide additional protection to contract holders on the use of landlords’ notices.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. As you’ll be aware, the use of section 21 notices—the so-called no-fault eviction notices—can be served at any time on a tenant who is not protected by a fixed-term contract. The notice can be served without any grounds being given or proven and can bring an abrupt end to tenancies and total disruption to the lives of tenants. Not surprisingly, the increase in the use of section 21 notices is causing concern to Shelter and other housing and homelessness organisations. Whilst this is a pre-devolution piece of legislation that is still applied in Wales, can I ask the Cabinet Secretary if he would give consideration to reviewing the operation of section 21 of the Housing Act 1988, and, if necessary, more to disapply its provision in Wales so as to remove the unfairness and to provide greater security for such tenants?

This was a long discussion piece of the Housing (Wales) Act 2014 as we took it through the Assembly in the previous term. Can I say to the Member that the Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016, whilst retaining the ability for a landlord to serve a two-month notice, will offer greater protection for contract holders through the Act’s retaliatory eviction process? So, there is a part of the Act that does give protection to tenants as well. But I’ve heard the Member and I’ve heard her strong views, and I will give that some further consideration with my team.

Cabinet Secretary, I agree with the Member who has just raised this question that tenant protection does need to be looked at carefully. In England, as a result of the Deregulation Act 2015, section 21 notices cannot be served by landlords to residents if the housing is of a poor standard and doesn’t meet legislative standards. This does seem to be perhaps an appropriate way to now regulate this area in Wales also.

That’s where we are placed at the moment, with the consultation on the fit-and-proper person and fit-and-proper accommodation consultation that we are undertaking.

Diolch. Our child poverty strategy sets out our objectives for tackling child poverty. We are committed to a whole-Government approach to tackling child poverty and we are taking action to ensure that every child has the best start in life.

The use of food banks has increased over 500 per cent with a third of users being children, 31 per cent of children live in poverty, and there are 10 times as many people receiving sanctions at present, with evidence that the increase in the use of food banks is directly linked to sanctions and matters with regard to universal credit. Do you believe and agree that we need to transfer administrative control for benefits from England to Wales? Administrative control—not the ability to vary the level or kinds of benefits, but the ability to bring the culture of cruel sanctions to an end and the ability to create a regime that’s kinder here in Wales and more humane.

I don’t disagree wholeheartedly with the Member in terms of bringing the administration to Wales. However, what does concern me is the UK Government’s inability to service that with the appropriate funding behind it. I think I’d be very interested to have further discussions. The First Minister’s been very clear about powers coming to the Assembly without finances to support them. I think it’s a really important point that the Member raises and she’s right to say that I believe universal credit is one of the points that is driving people into poverty in our communities.

All our local authority councillors, of course, should consider social justice in all their decision making, but I wonder if it’s likely you will welcome the specific appointment of a social justice champion in Monmouthshire County Council. This is an individual who has been tasked to make sure that the whole concept is cross-cutting through all decision making. Myself, I’d be more than delighted if she took it on board to make sure that the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child articles were part of her work. I’m just wondering if you think the time really has come now to make sure that article 12 in particular, but all aspects of the UNCRC, are obligatory for our public services, including local authorities.

Well, that’s, again, another long-standing discussion point of this Assembly. I would be quite keen to further debate that with the Member and others to make sure that this is the right thing to do. What concerns me about champions in organisations is that, often, it’s a badge or a title. Actually, what I’m really keen on is making sure that those champions turn their duty into action. We are seeing that in several aspects, and I am encouraged by the Member’s point about the particular council that she raises, with a social justice champion within that organisation. I wish her well.

I’m deeply concerned about the devastating impact of universal credit on those who are left waiting for six weeks or more for their first payments. I’ve written to the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions calling for the roll-out of universal credit full service to be paused.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary for his answer, and it follows on from an answer he’s given to the Member for Arfon this afternoon. I know he will agree that universal credit’s more than just a political shambles; it’s cruel and it’s causing real hardship. The cost of calling helplines has been raised regularly, as too has the crucial issue of the frequency of payments. Now, I don’t doubt the Cabinet Secretary’s sincerity in his opposition to welfare reform more generally. I know that he genuinely opposes the cruel sanctions regime as well, but I am at a loss to understand why, therefore, he won’t at least take a further step forward and look at the feasibility of establishing a social solidarity fund in Wales that could begin funding mitigation steps, and then, at the same time, look to a devolved welfare administration model—because let’s remember, we’re the only country in these islands without the devolution of the administration of welfare—so that we can make it work for Wales, and rather than having to protest at that lot up in London to change their ways, we can do something more humane for our citizens here.

I’m grateful for the Member’s question. I genuinely—. When I get questions, the Member raises this on a regular basis, and that’s encouraging in terms of his commitment too. The fact of the matter is that we do do many things that mitigate the issues and effects that happen as a result of Westminster decisions, but, as I said earlier, making sure that we have the finances to support the administration of this process is an important one. We have to make sure that taking responsibility is credible, in the fact that we are able to act positively to support these individuals who are being affected by this. At the moment, the responsibility lies with the UK Government, and we are very clear in saying that the universal credit process is not working for people and is dangerous in the way that it’s being enacted.

I thank the Member for her question. Today is Anti-slavery Day, and anti-slavery events and activities are happening across Wales to raise awareness of this. It is by raising awareness and improving reporting that perpetrators can be brought to justice and, importantly, victims can be offered support.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. The Welsh Government’s code of practice and commitment to ensuring ethical employment opportunities among businesses in receipt of public funding offer clear objectives for how the private sector can help end modern-day slavery. Now, businesses like the Co-operative Group are leading the fight by offering paid work placements to victims of modern slavery through their Bright Future programme and ensuring no place for trafficked labour in their supply chains. What progress has the Welsh Government made more generally in ensuring the code is followed by businesses receiving public funding, and what work is being done to encourage the Westminster Government to follow our lead?

Well, the Member’s right: the code is a first for Wales, along with many other things, and a first for the UK. Along with the supporting guidance, it provides a practical means for tackling unfair, unethical and illegal practices, including modern-day slavery. However, the lead Member for this is my colleague the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government. I will ask him to write to you with specific details around the code and implementation of that.

Concern has been raised with me that human trafficking through Holyhead port is getting worse, but that not enough of the victims desperate to be found are being found, and that, despite this, it’s so far been impossible to get the six north Wales county representatives around the table. How, therefore, do you respond to the findings of the North Wales Police serious and organised crime local profile modern-day slavery report that there’s evidence of organised crime groups operating in north Wales by trafficking victims through Holyhead port to Ireland or employing victims in nail bars or pop-up brothels, and of groups based in north Wales, tied by familial bonds, who target vulnerable males for manual labour and canvassing?

Oh, believe me, human trafficking is alive in the UK, and we are the only part of the country that has an anti-human trafficking co-ordinator. My team work incredibly hard with the police and other agencies to ensure that we are trying to keep on top of this issue, but we are part of a larger island. I would encourage the Member and other Members to speak with other parts of the administrations of the UK to come together to create anti-human trafficking co-ordinators across the whole of the UK in order to ensure that we can tackle the issues that the Member rightly raises about the trafficking of human beings.

Yesterday, we had a round-table meeting, and the room was full of experts in the field of ending human trafficking or slavery in Wales. One of the issues that came up time and time again was the 45 days in which victims have to prove their case and get through the national referral mechanism—NRM—and the wish to make that a much longer period, a minimum of 60 days. I know that those powers rest with the UK Government, Cabinet Secretary, but there is a clear request from all the experts in Wales for you to ask the UK Government to consider expanding that, because it isn’t until individuals get through the national referral mechanism that they’re offered any help or support whatsoever. It’s left to the non-government organisations to offer any shelter, any help, any support whatsoever after those 45 days.

I’m grateful to the Member for raising that with me. I will ask my anti-human trafficking co-ordinator to meet with the Member in order for her to explain that to him, and I will act accordingly on his advice.

Finally, question 12—Huw Irranca-Davies.

I thank the Member for Ogmore for his questions. I launched the national pathway for ex-service personnel in November 2016. We continue to champion the approach through the recent publication of supporting leaflets, posters and advice cards, so that anyone needing accommodation can get access to the support that they need.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary for that response. In launching this pathway, which is a great innovation, much stress was laid by the Cabinet Secretary on the need for effective collaboration with housing consortia, with the local authorities, regional collaborative committees, local health boards and other provider agencies. So, this far into the pathway, could he give us an update on how effective that collaboration is and whether he sees a good uniformity in the collaboration right across Wales, and not some variability on a postcode basis?

I think what we are seeing is that we’re learning from experience. I said to Vikki Howells early on about dealing with ex-service personnel—it’s a variable process because people’s needs are all different. We have to understand that better. What we are really pleased with about the housing pathway is that local authorities and housing associations are picking up the gauntlet here, and are working very well to help ex-service personnel and veterans with regard to their needs, but also the needs of families, as well, who accompany service personnel. So, I’m seeing a great, positive outcome right across Wales. I have visited some of the organisations delivering the services to personnel, too.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary.

The next item on our agenda is the topical questions, and the first question comes from Angela Burns.

Will the Cabinet Secretary make a statement on the Welsh Government’s progress in bringing forward a long-term solution to the high cost of medical insurance facing Welsh GPs? (TAQ0053)

I thank the Member for the question. We continue to have a constructive conversation with both the British Medical Association and the Royal College of General Practitioners in Wales about the high cost of indemnity insurance. We have agreed with them to review how the market currently operates in Wales to help inform our options for progress. This Government remains committed to finding an answer that works for GPs in Wales.

Cabinet Secretary, I do not doubt your commitment to finding an answer. The trouble is that you’ve been looking for that answer for over two years, if not longer. You offer no timeline, no end date and no commitment to a state-backed solution and no answers. The issue at hand is that GPs have to pay for two elements of insurance. There’s a relatively stable set rate for professional advice and support and a variable, separate rate for clinical medical negligence cover. Changes to the clinical negligence cover model have made this insurance extremely expensive and precludes many contracted GPs from upping their hours in times of need such as winter pressures or stepping in to help another practice where a GP may have resigned or died or retired. The Welsh risk pool offsets cover for managed practices, locums and out-of-hours GP services. Cabinet Secretary, whilst this is a welcome move, by only doing half the job by tackling half the workforce, you risk destabilising general practice. I accept it is an unintended consequence, but I think this highlights why you need to act swiftly, because it makes becoming a GP in a practice far less attractive.

The recent—and welcomed—announcement by the Secretary of State for Health in England that English GPs will be covered by a state-backed solution could further attract GPs away from Wales. Given the disparity in earnings between GPs in Wales and GPs in England, this could be the final straw. So, we have a situation in Wales where you’ve been looking for a solution; you’ve been looking for an awfully long time. Cabinet Secretary, can you please tell us when you’re going to come forward with some kind of proposal, so that we can try to ensure that we do not lose those hard-won GPs that we have? We need to ensure that they will stay with us. We need to get rid of the disparity between being a GP in a practice and a GP that works for a health board, is a locum or does out-of-hours services, and we need to make sure they do not drift across that border. I think that this could undo an awful lot of the good work I know you’ve tried to do in recruiting and retaining GPs to this country.

There are a number of points to respond to there. It’s worth reminding ourselves that indemnity insurance is a general issue across the UK, and it’s been an issue for some time. The need to do something about it has been accelerated by the announcement made by the then Lord Chancellor on the personal injury discount rate. There is a difference between those people that are working directly for health boards and the role of the Welsh risk pool, and those that are working as independent contractors, and we need to recognise that. So, this isn’t something where there’s an easy answer and demanding progress in the here and now will deliver the answer. In committing to a timeline for where we are, we are actually undertaking some proper market analysis. We’ve agreed on the appointment of someone to do that for us. I expect a report to come back into Government by the end of this calendar year, and that will then allow us to have a more detailed conversation about options, moving forward.

I know you made the point about not committing to a state-backed solution. That’s because I’m not in a position to do that. The announcement that Jeremy Hunt made on a state-backed solution is one that isn’t fully worked out. The announcement’s been made with 12 to 18 months to work out what that means, and we don’t know what that means for us in Wales or in Scotland or in Northern Ireland, because we haven’t been given the facility to understand what that means in terms of ‘state-backed’; we don’t have the power to do that here. If it’s going to be a state-backed solution that provides resource with the state standing behind GPs in England, we need to make sure that those facilities are available in every devolved nation. And of course, since the initial announcement it’s also been clear that GPs may need to top up their own premiums in any event. So, there isn’t a certain position that exists in England but an uncertain one uniquely here in Wales. I expect us, over the time that we’re working to, to have an answer for what options exist in Wales over the exact same timescale that people will move within England, and it’s important that GPs understand that message. That’s why I’m pleased to reiterate we have been and are continuing to work constructively with both the BMA and the royal college of GPs. I wrote to them at the time of the announcement and I will, of course, come back to inform Members when there is real progress to report. But this is an issue I take seriously, and I recognise the timescales to act.

The announcement last Thursday by the Secretary of State for Health concerning indemnity arrangements for GPs in England presents a potential challenge for Wales. The Secretary of State for Health plans to introduce a state-backed indemnity scheme for general practice in England, and he has also stated that the indemnity arrangements are a devolved matter. Therefore, the Secretary of State for Health has opened up the possibility of there being significantly different indemnity arrangements for GPs in England when compared with Wales. So, in light of the current shortage of GPs, this is concerning news, really.

If future GP indemnity arrangements are more attractive in England than in Wales, then GP provision in Wales could face several challenges. One challenge would be that existing GPs practising in Wales may move to practise in England. Would graduates also find practice in England a more attractive proposition? In his statement last Thursday, he stated that his department would continue to liaise with the devolved administrations about GP indemnity provision. So, Cabinet Secretary, will you ensure that this promise is kept, and will you point out the specific challenges that we face in Wales? Furthermore, Cabinet Secretary, will you commit to holding discussions with GP representatives, including both the British Medical Association and the Royal College of General Practitioners, about the specific challenges we face concerning GP indemnity schemes in Wales, the recruitment issue, the retention issue, and in light of the proposed state-backed scheme in England, which I think will exacerbate the issues that we have in Wales? Thank you.

I’m happy to reiterate that of course we’re engaging with the BMA, through their general practitioners committee in Wales, and the Royal College of GPs as well. We have been engaged with them in a meaningful discussion in advance of this announcement. And, of course, there will continue to be conversations with the UK Government. But, with all due respect to the comments that have been made about GPs in England being potentially in a more advantageous position, or the previous questions and comments about there being clarity in England, there isn’t. There absolutely isn’t. This is an announcement about a direction of travel and saying there can be a state-backed scheme. The detail of what it really means has not been worked out and is not clear to GP representatives in England or in any of the devolved nations.

And this challenge about what exactly is a state-backed scheme, it really isn’t clear. If the state, the UK, is going to stand behind a scheme in England, but not in the devolved nations, that would be a very big problem, and I don’t believe for one single second that the BMA would sign up to a scheme that uniquely advantaged practitioners in England but not their members in Northern Ireland, Scotland or Wales. There’s a need to have a grown-up conversation about what this means, what our options are here in Wales, how whatever answer we have fits the needs of our practitioners here in Wales and the public they serve, but equally to make sure that the state is not used to particularly advantage one part of the United Kingdom over others. And I would have thought that people in all parties would recognise that that’s the position for us to adopt and expect to hold the UK Government to account—that it is certainly where GPs themselves are in every nation across the UK.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary. The next question comes from Simon Thomas

Will the Cabinet Secretary make a statement on the Care and Social Services Inspectorate Wales’s recent report on safeguarding children in Powys? (TAQ0054)

Safeguarding children must be the highest priority for public bodies. The CSSIW report raised serious concerns, and I have issued a warning notice to Powys County Council. This was laid before the Assembly yesterday, and I have also published a written statement. I expect rapid improvement, or more direct intervention action will be taken.

I thank the Minister for that response and for the opportunity to be able to discuss these issues with her yesterday. Since the statement of yesterday and my questions to the First Minister, a couple of questions have arisen in Powys’s response to this situation. May I firstly ask, specifically, what steps the Welsh Government is taking or will ensure will be taken to ensure that services will be safe over the ensuing 20 days? I know that you expect to see an action plan within 20 days, but what is being done at the moment, given that the report states that children are at risk in Powys? Therefore, what is going to be done over the next 20 days?

The second point, if I may just ask: last night, in the media, Powys County Council responded to the situation by saying that the figures that they had as regards the management of the services had possibly been faked and that they’d discussed this with the police. Have you any information or knowledge that you could share with the Assembly to say whether these figures and the data are correct and that they’re based on the services? And what other questions does this raise about other services in Powys? If there’s an allegation that the children’s social services data is being manipulated, what does that say about adult and elderly services? In that context, what steps are you taking as a Minister to ensure the security of the wider social services in Powys?

Finally, Powys also publicly declared that addressing this problem would cost them £4 million. Are you happy in your mind that they have adequate resources and funding to do that?

Thank you very much for those questions, and also for the opportunity to bring this issue to the floor of the Assembly today. As you say, safeguarding of vulnerable children has to be the No. 1 priority, and that was certainly my priority when I first was made aware of the situation, and that was through the submission, actually, of a confidential note from the chief inspector of CSSIW, and that really does reflect the seriousness of the inspection report. It’s very unusual, certainly unprecedented in my time in this post, for such an action to be undertaken. So it was certainly a priority then to satisfy myself, even before the report became formally accepted by Powys, that children in Powys were safe, and I required some immediate action to be undertaken. For example, Powys has responded by auditing cases and records and a risk-based assurance programme regarding safeguarding, and they’ve brought in an external company to do that piece of work.

They’ve also increased their staff resources and put in place a leadership and behaviours programme, and all cabinet members are now on the corporate parenting committee. So, they have taken some early steps, but at every step I have sought out reassurances from the chief executive and the leader of the council that, in their view, children in Powys are safe, and they have given me those assurances most recently when I met with them on Friday of last week to give them advance notice of the action we would be taking in terms of the warning notice.

You mentioned the issue that Powys have referred a matter of potential performance management manipulation to the police. I have to tell you that neither I nor CSSIW have had any previous notice of this matter from Powys County Council, so I was disappointed and surprised to have to learn about that from the media. This is a matter for Powys County Council to consider, and, of course, now it is a matter for the police, so it wouldn’t be appropriate for me to comment any further on that at this time, but I will say, of course, that we are considering the implications for our published statistics and those that we are due to publish following the announcement yesterday that the police are investigating those potential data manipulation issues in Powys.

In terms of services more widely, I understand that Estyn does have some concerns about education and that Powys is subject to the case conference process that it has. In view of the concerns that I have about children’s services in Powys, I have asked CSSIW to bring forward its inspection of adult social services. It was due for spring of next year, but I’ve asked them to bring it forward, and Powys will receive six weeks’ notice as to when that will take place.

I also understand that Powys County Council have suggested that improvements to children’s services will cost in the region of £4 million, and I do understand that moneys that had previously been taken from the children’s services budget will be restored from the council’s reserves to meet that money.

I would agree with you, Minister, that the CSSIW report on children’s services in Powys is incredibly serious. It’s a damning report and makes uncomfortable reading, and highlights a number of historical failings that have meant that children’s safety and well-being have been jeopardised.

The report raises a number of very serious concerns about Powys County Council’s children’s services department, which the report says has placed children at risk of harm. I note you’ve said today that you’ve had assurances from the chief executive and the leadership of the county council yourself that children are now safe, but can I ask: are you yourself satisfied that children are safe at the present time?

If families who have experienced dealings with the council’s children’s services department have concerns to raise following the report’s publication yesterday, what course of action would you suggest they take? Should they raise this directly with CSSIW, or with Welsh Government directly, or via Assembly Members, or indeed via Powys County Council? If there is a mechanism to report any issues via Powys County Council, would you agree with me that it wouldn’t be appropriate for them to raise concerns via the children’s service itself? The report doesn’t suggest any funding issues or cuts within the service area as a result of its failings, but I do see the report also today in regard to an extra £4 million of funds that have been made available. Can I ask: is there any commitment that the Welsh Government could make in terms of supporting that particular service financially from Welsh Government?

I was also disappointed to hear that the council hadn’t raised with you any discussions it has had with the police. As we’ve seen in reports today, I note that the information reported says that Powys County Council have talked to the police. It doesn’t say that the police are investigating any issue. Can I ask you, Minister, if you would formally make representations to the county council—I shall certainly do it myself as a local Assembly Member, but formally, yourself, as a Minister—to ask the county council what exactly they’re talking to the police about and find out if there is a formal investigation taking place or not? It’s certainly my view that the service should be built up from scratch, and leadership will be crucial in that. Have you any assessment of the experience of the new interim director who has been appointment? Are any arrangements in place to encourage staff who do have concerns to come forward without fear of there being any negative consequence to them? And finally, while the report was very highly critical of the departments of the council’s leadership, it should also be noted that the report has praised the commitment of staff who have shown resilience and professionalism in challenging circumstances—that’s what the report states. Often, comments, of course, are lost when the media report such concerning issues. So, what is your message to those particular staff?

I thank you very much for those questions, and you’re right, the report is very clear that inspectors did note that there was real commitment shown amongst the staff who actually showed some real resilience and professionalism during this period, but serious performance issues did arise and that was, in the view of the report, because of instability in management, poor and confused direction and weak governance. And certainly, when I’ve had discussions with the chief inspector myself, she has been very much at pains to press that point that it was deliberately very clear in the report that, actually, we should be recognising the commitment of the front-line staff who wanted to do a good job, but, however, the structures and the leadership and the governance and so on around them was preventing them from doing the better job that they could have done for the children in Powys.

With regard to the police issue, as I say, I found out about it through the media, just like everybody else, so I’ll certainly be pursuing that to get to the bottom of exactly what the issues are and what the police intend to do about it. Obviously, you wouldn’t expect me to comment any further, being in receipt of very little information on it myself. However, I certainly will be getting to the bottom of the issue.

The improvement board is going to be crucial in terms of driving forward improvement, as you can imagine, and Powys County Council have already convened that improvement board; that was one of the stipulations in the warning notice. I can tell you that the members of the board include Jack Straw, the former chief executive of Swansea, who retired from the council in the local authority in 2016; Phil Hodgson, the former director of social care at Blaenau Gwent; and Geoff Burrows, who, up until May 2017, was a Conservative member of Monmouthshire County Council. And those, alongside Phil Evans, who is the former director of social services at the Vale of Glamorgan, who is now taking over as the interim director of social services for Powys, will be working as a strong team in order to drive forward improvement. And they’ll be reporting back to Welsh Government on a monthly basis as we go through this period, but, as you can imagine, since the concerns were first raised, Welsh Government and the Welsh Local Government Authority have been in very close and constant contact with Powys on these issues.

I understand that those members of that board have already been holding discussions together with CSSIW about the work of the board and what they’ll need to do in terms of moving forward. It really is for Powys County Council to make sure that they provide significant funding to address these issues. As I say, funding had previously been moved out of children’s services, and I understand that money will be found from reserves to reinvest in children’s services to seek to address some of the issues that have been found in the inspection report. Some of these issues don’t require funding, of course. Some of the key issues were a lack of strategic direction and planning and lack of permanence in some of those senior and middle-management roles, a blame culture—. You know, some of these things are about the culture of the workplace and lack of leadership as opposed to necessarily investment and capacity and so on.

I’ve been reading with interest this morning about some of the allegations that have been surrounding the delivery—or the non-delivery, to be exact—of children’s services within Powys. I find it somewhat disconcerting to hear that you, equally, Minister, have found out for the first time by reading things online or listening to the news, in whichever form that arrives. And it seems very clear to me that what has been missing is leadership, management, focus and finance. And unless you have those four constituent elements working together, then nothing is actually going to improve.

But there’s one thing that really, really worries me, and that is that you are talking about identified potential vulnerable children in every single case that we are talking about, and you’re talking about case reviews where those children will have been identified, ranging from low, to medium, to high risk. And we are being informed via the newsreels today that there is a possibility that some of those cases, or some of the information, possibly, surrounding those cases, has been misrepresented—in other words, tampered with. Now, I find that the most concerning thing of all. So, my question, clearly, is: they’re in a mess, there seems to be no doubt about that, that they are absolutely in a mess and you’ve got staff there who have been trying really, really hard, to do their best; it seems clear that there wasn’t a transparent or open or trusted whistleblowing process in place, because those staff would have been telling somebody, somewhere about their concerns, and it was either suppressed or they were too afraid to state it—and I’ve seen this elsewhere in another authority where I used to be a county councillor. And if you’ve got a culture that doesn’t allow things to come out in the open, then that culture needs close examination. So, my question to you is this: they’ve got 20 days to put their bits of paper together, but it won’t be 20 days that will change the culture, so I ask you, Minister, if you will look at the culture so that it isn’t a culture that’s inward-looking, with, maybe, infighting, and that’s of a secretive nature that actually puts these children at risk.

I thank you very much for those points that you’ve made, and certainly the implementation board will be looking very closely at the culture within the organisation and taking on board all of the many comments that have been raised in the inspection report as well. I think it’s important that Powys County Council now looks to seek out peer support and looks for good practice amongst other local authorities that have a good and strong record on children’s services, and also I know that the regional safeguarding board for children in the area is also really keen to offer their advice and support, and the chair, Jake Morgan, director of social services in Carmarthen, has already spoken to the chief executive of Powys to offer his support. So, I would expect the local authority to be looking for, and accepting, strong support from those areas that do have a stronger experience of children’s services.

In terms of the whistleblowing question you raised, I think that is an extremely important one and it’s one that I will commit to looking to see exactly what happened in Powys and I’ll respond to you by letter with some further observations on that.

I thank the Minister.

The next item is the 90-second statements, and the first comes from Hefin David.

Diolch, Llywydd. On Friday last week, I attended the annual service at the Welsh national mining memorial in Senghennydd, which is in the Aber Valley ward of my constituency, and I had the honour of laying a wreath at the memorial. The service is held every year on or near the anniversary of the Universal Colliery disaster of 1913—a tragic incident that claimed the lives of 440 men and boys. It was, in terms of the sheer numbers lost—and remains—the worst disaster in Welsh and British history. The Welsh national mining memorial, which stands at the site, was officially opened on the centenary of the disaster, in October 2013. Indeed, the First Minister himself attended that event to unveil the bronze sculpture of a rescue worker coming to the aid of a miner.

The idea of a Welsh national mining memorial was realised thanks, in no small part, to the tremendous efforts of the Aber Valley Heritage Group, a small band of volunteers who gave up their own time to go about collecting donations to bring this idea to fruition. The fundraising appeal received welcome match funding from the Welsh Government, as well as contributions from other sources, including the Coalfields Regeneration Trust and the Heritage Lottery Fund. The patron of the Aber Valley Heritage Group is well-known Welsh broadcaster Roy Noble. Roy did a lot of good work during the fundraising appeal himself, and as always he was present and spoke at the annual service last Friday. Many local schoolchildren from the Aber valley were also present at Friday’s service, and it struck me how important it is that our younger generation learn about the industrial heritage of their area, and the ultimate price paid by those who ventured out one day just to do their job.

October 1917 was a month which left its mark on the world. Here in the UK, it is a 100 years since the co-operative movement first decided to give expression to its values through the parliamentary route at Westminster, by forming the Co-operative Party. That decision was taken at its congress in Swansea—fitting, given the role Wales had played in the history of the co-operative movement. Since then, devolution has given the Co-operative Party other parliaments through which to campaign for its vision of a co-operative world. Indeed, the very idea of devolution echoes so many of the values of co-operativism—of democracy, of active participation, and of community. This last weekend at our centenary conference, the First Minister spoke of the ways in which this institution, and Wales more generally, supports and nurtures the co-operative ideal.

As we celebrate our centenary we have co-operators in all parliaments of the UK, and we have a thriving Co-operative Party group at the National Assembly, of which I am proud to be chair. This fifth Assembly includes the largest number of co-op party members since devolution. Indeed, 25 per cent of Assembly Members now belong to the Co-operative Party. Through 100 years of change, the Co-operative Party has been a champion for democracy, active citizenship, mutual support, equity, community and sustainability—the principles of co-operation. And as we face the next 100 years, those principles remain as relevant as they were when the party was founded, 100 years ago.

I’d like to make a statement marking tomorrow as International Credit Union Day. ‘Not for credit, not for charity, but for service’ is a credit union motto. We often forget that the purpose of banking is not only one of business, but of social need. As we have witnessed the closure and acquisition of thousands of small retail and local banks in the last 30 to 40 years, and when we consider that the banks we do have are now fast disappearing from high streets and smaller towns, now more than ever, an alternative is needed. Along with greater education surrounding financial inclusion, which I have been privileged to work on, more needs to be done to promote credit unions as part of better financial education and tackling inequality and poverty.

In the UK, sadly, Wales does not stack up favourably to Scotland and Northern Ireland when it comes to credit union membership. This despite Wales being one of the areas of the UK facing the biggest challenges in accessing credit and people managing their money. In the first quarter of this year, Scotland counted a 0.33 million adult members, Northern Ireland counted over 0.5 million, and Wales only 66,000 members of credit unions. This needs to change.

On Friday, I was pleased to help open Celtic Credit Union’s new branch in Swansea city centre. This is the sort of development of the sector we should welcome, and I would urge all members here to get in touch with their local credit unions, support them and help to promote a more secure, financially inclusive and socially responsible alternative for the people of Wales.

Yr eitem nesaf ar yr agenda yw’r cynigion i ethol Aelodau i bwyllgorau. Yn unol â Rheol Sefydlog 12.24, rwy’n cynnig bod y cynigion i ethol Aelodau i bwyllgorau’n cael eu grwpio ar gyfer eu trafod, ond â phleidleisiau ar wahân.

I call on a member of the Business Committee to move the motions formally. Rhun ap Iorwerth.

Formally.

And to speak, Paul Davies.

Diolch, Llywydd. Can I, from the outset, make it absolutely clear that we on this side of the Chamber have no issue with Plaid Cymru filling the vacancies on the Public Accounts Committee and the Petitions Committee? We also have no issue with Neil McEvoy taking a place on the Petitions Committee as an additional Member. Indeed, we think that he should take that place. However, we believe that these changes should not take place without also changing the allocation of committee Chairs.

Given that the political balance of the Assembly has changed once again, it’s even clearer that the Welsh Conservative group is the largest opposition group. Therefore, I want to once again put on record this afternoon my extreme disappointment that that the current allocation of committee Chairs continues to not accurately reflect the relative sizes of each of the party groups. As the Welsh Conservative group continues to be the second largest group in this place, it’s only right that that is reflected amongst the allocation of committee Chairs. Indeed, the Presiding Officer has also concluded that business managers must have regard to the need to ensure that the allocation of committee Chairs is politically balanced. As the Business Committee’s report notes, and I quote:

‘Whilst the Llywydd is satisfied that Business Managers have been aware of that requirement during their discussions, she does not agree with the majority view on the Committee that the current allocation is acceptable in fulfilling that requirement.’

Therefore, it’s my view that the Assembly should honour and respect the Presiding Officer’s determination because anything else, in my view, is disrespecting the Chair. The Presiding Officer makes it absolutely clear that a situation where the Plaid Cymru group has more Chairs than the Conservative group is clearly anomalous, and so the Business Committee should abide by that. Of course, the current number of Members now stands at 12 for the Welsh Conservatives and 10 for Plaid Cymru, and yet Plaid Cymru has more committee Chairs and more committee places than the Welsh Conservatives. So, it won’t surprise Members to hear that my view has not changed since we last discussed this issue in this Chamber. I believe that this is unacceptable, deeply undemocratic and frankly worrying that the National Assembly for Wales continues to operate in this manner. As a result, we, on this side of the Chamber, will be objecting to these motions as a matter of principle, given that these particular changes have taken place without changing the committee Chairs, given the Assembly’s current political balance.

I’m disappointed that business managers from other parties are not convinced that a change needs to be made on the basis that committee Chairs should have security of tenure. The role of Business Committee is not to keep Chairs in their positions come-what-may, but to reflect the ever-changing political landscape of the Assembly. To chair a committee is a privilege, not a given, and if the political landscape changes, surely Members must all respect that and be mature enough to reflect any new political balance.

In the report, the Labour Party’s business manager has raised the question of the permanence of the current balance, given that Neil McEvoy is currently suspended rather than expelled from the Plaid Cymru group, and, of course, that’s ultimately a matter for Plaid Cymru to determine. Her view is that there is a possibility that the allocation of Chairs may therefore need to be revisited again by the Business Committee. Yes, that’s true, but why are we making other changes if the situation isn’t permanent? Surely, following that logic, we shouldn’t be making any changes at all? And in any case, the Presiding Officer has determined that Neil McEvoy is no longer a member of the Plaid Cymru group and this institution should respect that determination.

It is simply not right that an opposition party in this institution with fewer Members than another opposition party has more committee Chairs, and this could have serious implications in the future for this institution. In the year of the twentieth anniversary of devolution, is this really the message that the Assembly wants to send to the people of Wales? If this situation is allowed to continue, then it has become clear that the majority of this Assembly no longer supports a balanced Assembly that reflects the political balance of its Members. Therefore, Llywydd, I believe that this is yet another sad day for the National Assembly and its operations, and a sad day for our constitution.

Moving forward, I sincerely hope that this Assembly will eventually deliver an outcome that reflects the political balance of this institution when co-ordinating Assembly business, so that the people of Wales can have full confidence that the Assembly is working in a fully open, transparent and democratic manner.

Could I please ask someone to clarify Mark Reckless’s position within the Conservative Party? Thank you.

Well, I don’t think there are—. Yes, there is somebody who wants to clarify. Mark Reckless.

I’m very happy to clarify. The Presiding Officer wrote to Andrew R.T. Davies and to myself and confirmed that I should be considered a member of the Conservative group for all purposes of this Assembly, just as she has ruled that the committee Chairs should be moved in order to reflect the balance of the party groups. It ill behoves this institution, which wishes to be considered a Parliament, that it will not even follow its own Presiding Officer or follow its own Standing Orders in line with what any reasonable democratic institution should do. You should be ashamed of yourselves.

Thank you. There are no other speakers in this debate. All Members who have indicated that they wish to speak have spoken. Just for the record, my views on this matter—[Interruption.] I think I would suggest that you all are quiet, as I’m about to say something, and I don’t say it very often. My views on this matter are set out in the report that is tabled with this motion. I suggest that you all read it. It makes for a fascinating read in itself and the views of all business managers of all political parties are also outlined in that report. We have discussed this matter over a number of weeks and I am satisfied, and not disrespected, by the fact that the Business Committee has been through the process required by Standing Orders in considering this matter and that it has every right to make the decision it has. In a situation such as this, Standing Order 17.13 gives the Business Committee the option of revising the allocation of Chairs, but on this occasion the majority view was that it was not appropriate to do so. There is clearly a tension, on many fronts, between different provisions in the Standing Orders and an unprecedented series of events have led to the current anomalous situation. That’s why I’ll be asking the Business Committee to review the requirements regarding the allocation and election of Chairs.

Y cwestiwn yw: a ddylid derbyn y cynnig i ethol Neil McEvoy i’r Pwyllgor Deisebau? A oes unrhyw Aelod yn gwrthwynebu? [Gwrthwynebu.] Gohiriaf y bleidlais ar hynny, felly, tan y cyfnod pleidleisio.

Y cwestiwn yw: a ddylid derbyn y cynnig i ethol Rhun ap Iorwerth i’r Pwyllgor Deisebau? A oes unrhyw Aelod yn gwrthwynebu? [Gwrthwynebu.] Gohiriaf y bleidlais ar y cynnig yma tan y cyfnod pleidleisio.

Y cwestiwn yw: a ddylid derbyn y cynnig i ethol Adam Price i’r Pwyllgor Cyfrifon Cyhoeddus? A oes unrhyw Aelod yn gwrthwynebu? [Gwrthwynebu.] Gohiriaf y bleidlais eto ar y mater yma tan y cyfnod pleidleisio.

Yr eitem nesaf yw’r cynigion i ethol Aelodau i bwyllgorau ac yn unol â Rheolau Sefydlog 12.24 ac 12.40, rwy’n cynnig bod y cynigion i ethol Aelodau i bwyllgorau yn cael eu grwpio ar gyfer eu trafod a’u pleidleisio.

I call on a Member of the Business Committee to move the motions formally. Rhun ap Iorwerth.

Formally.

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

The next item is the motion to amend Standing Orders 26, 26A and 26B in relation to super-majorities for Assembly Bills. I call on a member of the Business Committee to move the motion formally. Rhun ap Iorwerth.

Formally.

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

The next item is the debate by individual Members under Standing Order 11.21(iv) and I call on Jenny Rathbone to move the motion. Jenny Rathbone.

Diolch, Llywydd. Chris Blake, who many of you will know as a non-executive member of Natural Resources Wales and a proponent in many guises of sustainable, renewable energy, has invested in an electric car, along with a wind turbine and solar panels on his house, to make sure that his vehicle is only powered by clean energy. But his frustration is that he cannot use this electric car to get to all parts of Wales. He, like other pioneers of electric cars, can get from Carmarthen to Nottingham or London and back in an electric car, but they cannot get to Gwynedd or Anglesey, simply because the electric charging points don’t exist.

Many of us will be familiar with this argument; Simon Thomas also tells us about his pain that he can’t use an electric car to get from Aberystwyth to get round his region of Mid and West Wales. So, I was delighted to hear that there is a proposal in the budget for this year to invest £2 million in developing more electric charging points so that we aren’t just making them available on the M4 and the eastern parts of the A55. I’ve no doubt that Simon Thomas had something to do with this, but I think that this commitment by the Welsh Labour Government is just the beginning of how we see this transformation through, because we cannot see this as a challenge to build yet another power station the size of Hinkley Point, as suggested by the National Grid, who said that that was sufficient to satisfy peak demand in the evenings if electric vehicles take off and become the norm. We have to see this as an opportunity to disperse our electricity generation and supply, and electric charging points are an ideal way of kick-starting that process.

So, how are we going to do this? The renewable that we have in abundance is wind; we are the windiest country in Europe. So, instead of getting the Brigands Inn on the A470 to install an electric charging point hooked up to the grid, they could be generating their own wind and solar energy, just like Chris Blake is already doing. Indeed, if they do install an electric charging point using conventional energy from the grid, I submit that they will quickly lose their market advantage before too long, as cheaper electric charging points fuelled by renewables come along. This could provide a major boost for community energy schemes who no longer have to run the gauntlet of expensive connection costs to the grid if they have a steady income from electric vehicles needing to charge up both for local transport and for long-distance journeys. This will also then generate an additional opportunity for people to be able to generate their own energy for warming their homes.

But electric vehicle charging points are but one cog in the revolution required to deliver our more sustainable future. Last week, the World Solar Challenge, which took place in Australia, was won by a Dutch car solely powered by the sun. Even though we have less sun than in Australia, vehicles that are at least partly solar-powered are something we will need to consider too. Electric vehicles are not new to Wales. The milk float was produced in Merthyr from the 1930s up until the 1980s, and the Eco Travel Network already operates across the Brecon Beacons National Park, offering electric vehicle hire of their fleet of Renault Twizys. They’ve developed an informal 13 amp charging network with tourist businesses so visitors get an interesting choice of attractions to visit, activities to try, and places to eat and drink.

But electric vehicles are not just for individual or leisure use. They are one of the key ways we can clean up our public transport system, and this we must do because of our climate change obligations. The debate is not whether or how we will switch away from dirty diesel to clean public—it’s not whether we, but how we’re going to do this in our switch away from dirty diesel to clean public transport systems. We’ve already seen that London, Milton Keynes and Nottingham have all commissioned electric vehicles, and many of them are already in operation. Other cities will have to follow. So, the question is: can Wales build the vehicles of the future that are going to be needed, particularly for mass public transport, not least, I have to say, to capture the expertise we already have centred around the Ford engine plant in Bridgend and the Toyota hybrid engine plant on Deeside, whose current activities will cease as a result of the UK Government decision to phase out petrol and diesel combustion engines by 2040, and probably a lot earlier as a result of that? Can we build an alternative vehicle industry focused on zero-carbon ambitions to make sure we don’t lose the expertise we currently have in Bridgend and in Deeside? How can we, for example, take advantage of the production of lightweight electric London taxis, which is now happening in Caerphilly, to, for example, green our own taxi fleet?

Now, the alternative to electric vehicles is hydrogen. The hydrogen fuel cell was invented by William Grove from Swansea in the 1840s. Twelve years ago—. But we haven’t developed it, to date, properly. Twelve years ago, WalesOnline ran a story headlined ‘Hydrogen Valley to put Wales on Green Map’. The Welsh Development Agency, at that point, was setting out to develop a micro-economy in south Wales based around hydro technology. The then Minister for Economic Development and Transport, Andrew Davies, described hydrogen valley as a unique opportunity to use existing hydrogen infrastructure to harness the expertise in the private and the public sector. Within 10 years, he envisaged there would be hydrogen fuelling stations, zero-emission integrated transport networks, hydrogen-powered water taxis and hubs where HGVs can transfer goods onto electric vehicles for delivery.

The results so far are modest. The University of South Wales hydrogen centre in Baglan has developed Wales’s first hydrogen fuelling station using renewably produced hydrogen, but hydrogen refuelling stations are limited to two University of South Wales sites, in Baglan and at Pontypridd. They are working with a small company in Llandudno who plan to build hydrogen cars for leasing starting next year. But this is obviously not on the grand scale that we will need to do in the future.

My final point that we need to think about is the systems that are already in place for wireless communications between vehicles and the congestion systems that we need to manage. That is, they are already in place; we already can see them in operation when we look up how we’re going to get from A to B on Google. But, in the future, they will be used as a vehicle for managing driverless cars, and it seems to me absolutely vital that we fight to resist the privatisation of the 5G network, which will be the platform from which this can happen. This needs to be a public service, not a privatised service for profit that only those with the money can operate. So, that is a major thought I leave you with for now.

It’s a pleasure to take part in this individual Members debate. Tim Peake the astronaut, gazing at planet Earth from outer space, marvelled at the spectacular appearance of our planet. And in a world where we talk in millions of miles, billions of kilometres and light years away, he noted the spectacular appearance of our atmosphere, which is only 16 km high—a thin, bright veneer that needs protecting, that’s so vitally important. And it hit him at that time the fragility, potentially, of our existence. It’s a 16 km depth, this atmosphere that we live and breathe, only, which is how we come to this very necessary discussion on phasing out the traditional combustion engine, for all the reasons that Jenny’s already alluded to, and introducing electric cars, hydrogen cars, driverless automated cars, vans, buses and all the rest.

Because there’s a lot of huge innovation going on. In terms of electric vehicles, which, obviously, are already on our roads, we are seeing significant strides, with some cars surpassing 300 miles in range and producing 0 to 60 mph times to rival supercars. This increase in the numbers of electric cars needs to be planned for, as well as the use of hybrid cars and those powered by hydrogen fuel cells that, again, Jenny alluded to, from William Grove’s start with hydrogen cells and photovoltaic cells invented in Swansea back in Victorian times, used by NASA before now. We need to be using them far more on the ground as well, because those don’t require mains electricity, the hybrid cars or the hydrogen fuel cars. But planning for increased electricity generation and supply needs to happen now with the predicted increase in the peak time demand for electricity of between 15 per cent and 40 per cent. We need to be developing Welsh solutions to this electricity generation challenge. And, obviously, with tidal lagoons being obvious examples, that should be supported now.

In addition, there needs to be a national network of charging points for electric cars. We need to know what Government is doing in conjunction with industry to expand this network to meet predicted demand.

Will the Member give way?

Simon.

Thank you to the Member. Just on the point about a national network, I think it’s important to bear in mind that today, for example, Shell have announced that they’re going to install fast electric charging points in some of their forecourts. But they’re concentrated in the south-east of England, and this is why it’s important to have a national infrastructure here in Wales, so that places in Wales are not left out.

Exactly right, because we need to have that national network of charging points. Turning to driverless cars, which are one of the biggest technological breakthroughs since the assembly line, companies such as Tesla, Audi, Nissan and Google are spending millions to get driverless cars on the road. You simply climb aboard, set your destination and the electronics do the rest—and this is only a few years away. One of the biggest benefits that driverless cars will offer is mobility to those who currently cannot drive, with clear social benefits in tackling loneliness and isolation as well.

But I return to the fact that we need to plan for all this—how we pay for self-drive cars, buses, delivery vans and the rest. Yes, they should be a public service, I would contend—I agree with Jenny there. And exactly what role the public sector plays in developing a truly integrated transport network—. And what about all those narrow, twisting country lanes in Wales? A special challenge, indeed, for driverless vehicles. Well, not just driverless vehicles, but particularly a challenge for driverless vehicles.

So, to end, there is much to ponder, but the direction of travel, as it were, is clear: in order to protect that fragile 16 km depth of atmosphere that we all depend upon, support the motion. Diolch yn fawr.

It’s a pleasure to support this motion and I’m glad that the individual Members debates continue to bring really interesting ideas to the Assembly, and ideas that generally have cross-party support.

I think we’re all very much aware of the close links between high levels of congestion and air pollution, and I think that electric vehicles will offer a way to alleviate this issue. But, as Jenny has already outlined, the lack of infrastructure at the moment is really quite frustrating, though, I would say that, in the last election, I think, for the first time, I saw several charging points built in, naturally, to the infrastructure of new houses. Rather than a long cable leading to the back somewhere or through the garage, there are now obviously properly designed charging points at the front of some houses.

So, the world is changing and we need to see this progress very quickly. I think the public sector can take the lead, especially in terms of public transport, and I’d include in that encouraging taxis to move to electric vehicles. Now, that, obviously, will require the availability of charging points around the city, and also perhaps some other incentives. Also, I think, as urban areas restrict the use of private vehicles, especially if there’s just single occupancy, then we can see much more of the inner urban travel being conducted on electric vehicles. So, I think that’s an important area as well. But, unless you get the infrastructure right, you simply won’t be able to see this transformation. They’ve tried very hard—it was interesting to note—in Hong Kong. They’ve been really trying to have a shift there, with their green transport fund, but they’ve concluded that high production costs, limited service life, long charging times and low-energy density of e-vehicle batteries are the key constraints for electric vehicles to take up commercial transportation duties. So, it is quite obvious that we’ve got to have a holistic approach to sorting out the infrastructure and then providing whatever incentives are needed on top of that to see this modal shift, or at least the shift in the manner of the running of these vehicles. I think, if you look at Cardiff, Swansea and Newport in particular, the air quality is often poor, and if we want clean air zones in these cities, and I’m sure that that is something we need to demand, then we’re going to have to see this sort of shift.

Can I just talk a little bit about the integration of transport modes? Because, again, I think this is very important. Now, usually we hear that you need to get off a train and onto a bus or vice versa, and that’s very important, but I think the facilities for people who are perhaps driving part of their journey, perhaps to a satellite car park at the edge of a city, and then transferring to a bus or to a train, indeed, but also, perhaps, walking or cycling, and to have these various networks then connected to these satellite points—I think that is very, very important, especially if you’re making a slightly longer journey, perhaps from the Heads of the Valleys, and are driving into the edge of Newport of Cardiff or, indeed, Swansea, if you take the western Valleys. I think this offers a lot of opportunity as well, and I think we need to look at our infrastructure that is currently there and think about how that can be used more effectively.

I notice that the mayor of London’s draft transport strategy earlier this year did suggest that Oxford Street could be closed to domestic vehicles and made into a cycling and walking street only, and that’s the type of thinking we need. There are a lot of routes there currently; we don’t necessarily need to build new ones. I think a focus on walking, cycling and public transport in a more integrated way has a lot to offer, and then the private use of cars in areas that are likely to get less congested, so the periphery of the town and such—but being in a partnership with motorists so that we don’t just beat them down with lots of restrictions.

Can I finally say that the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015, I think, is an ideal piece of legislation to try and co-ordinate these approaches? So, I think that will be a key test of the Act in the future. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer.

I’d like to congratulate the AMs in whose names this debate is tabled today. For my contribution, I’d like to address my comments to the second part of the motion, dealing with electric vehicles. The number of electric and hybrid vehicles on Welsh roads has increased dramatically in recent years, with nearly a twenty-fivefold increase in the four years between 2012 and 2016. This is obviously something that we should welcome. We know that emissions from motor vehicles contribute to global warming and are linked to tens of thousands of deaths each year. However, to ensure greater take-up of electric vehicles, we need to ensure that the correct infrastructure is in place so they can be used in everyday life, and this is something that my colleague Jenny Rathbone has already mentioned.

I noticed with great interest the commitment in the budget a few weeks ago for £2 million for electric vehicle charging points. I think this is a really sensible step in making sure Wales can develop the network of supply points it needs, but we need to ensure a network not just of charging points, but of rapid charging points. These are those charging units that can provide an 80 per cent charge in around 30 minutes, as compared to those units that take three to four hours to fully recharge a vehicle. With the average range of an electric car being around 80 miles, for many journeys, users will need to stop and charge their vehicle up again, and it’s simply not feasible for us to have charging units where people would have to stop for three to four hours. These are the kinds of things that put people off owning electric vehicles, so it’s really important that we use this investment in getting the rapid charging points, rather than the conventional ones.

Outside of a dozen or so rapid charging points, which are largely limited to the M4 or the A55 corridors, this really is something that requires further development, and I would hope that the Welsh Government will engage with the passionate and committed electric vehicle community at an early stage to make the best decisions on spending this money correctly and efficiently. It is a basic point, but we must make sure that these charging facilities are located in the right places and that they’re accessible 24 hours a day, too.

In doing my research for today, I found the report from the low-carbon vehicle expert group produced for the previous Minister for Economy, Science and Transport to be particularly useful. The report offers sensible suggestions for how the Welsh Government can promote a rapid charging network across the public sector estate and better develop an LCV fleet of vehicles. It also notes the importance of promoting alternative fuel sources amongst public transport vehicles. As the report notes, the strength of Wales’s automotive base places us in a good position to develop as a centre of excellence for low-carbon vehicles, and this, in turn, offers new opportunities for us to stimulate growth and capitalise on its economic benefits. I commend this motion today.

Thanks to the various Members for bringing forward today’s debate. We do broadly support the motion, although there are some observations that do need to be made regarding the development of driverless and electric vehicles. Now, I take on board that we are going to progress with this technology, so the problems we have now may not be the problems of a few years’ time, but I do want to follow Vikki Howells’s lead in pointing out some of the problems that we have currently.

Regarding driverless cars, I’m not really sure if they are going to be a positive development, because it seems to me that there is a very real risk that if driverless cars did become a commercially viable product, you could end up with more cars on the road. Will you need a traditional licence to drive them? If not, you could have people who are too old to drive getting back into a car, as well as people who are too young. Now, as Dai Lloyd said, this could bring social benefits. However, we could have a huge increase in vehicles on the road, and the roads could end up being even more congested than they are now. We have to remember that every major improvement to the road system that we have ever had from the inception of the motorways in the 1950s onwards has led to more traffic congestion—

Will you give way?

Of course.

Thanks for giving way, Gareth. You made some interesting points there. There is, of course, a flip side to that: that if you have driverless cars that are communicating with each other via computer, Wi-Fi or whatever it is, you can actually have shorter stopping distances, because you’re not relying on human reaction, so you can get far more capacity out of the existing road network.

Yes. I’m aware of the concept, but what bothers me with that concept is the transitional period, when you have both driverless cars on the road and you have passenger-driven cars on the road. How will they interact with each other? I’m interested in what the implications are for congestion and other road factors in that interaction, but it’s good that you raise that issue.

The other issues relating to driverless cars: if it makes it easier for people to get into private vehicles to make a journey, this could have a negative impact on the use of public transport, and it is public transport that we are trying to encourage. What about its impact on active travel? Driverless cars could make it even easier for kids to get to school in a private car, since that car might not even have to be driven by time-pressured parents. So, I think that these are things that we do have to bear in mind as we go forward with considering driverless cars.

Electric cars is the other thing that we’ve been discussing, and I don’t want to rehash all of the very valid, practical points that Vikki Howells has just made. She mentioned the same measurements that I’ve seen quoted. She made the distinction between the two different types of charging points, and we do need the rapid charging points, but even then, at the moment, we’re talking about half an hour to recharge to 80 per cent. What does that compare with in terms of filling up a tank of petrol? A few minutes. So, there is still a big difference, and it will render many journeys unviable in a certain time frame, which currently you can undertake.

There are other issues as well relating to electric cars. How are we going to dispose of all the batteries after we’ve used them and where do the parts come from to make them in the first place? Given that two of the parts that are used are lithium, some of which is sourced from Zimbabwe, and cobalt, some of which comes from the Democratic Republic of the Congo, this may raise issues of working conditions in the mines in those countries.

Another problem is that electric vehicles are also very quiet; you can’t hear them coming. So, one thing we could get, if we have more electric cars on the road, is more fatalities involving pedestrians, cyclists and motorcyclists. So, I think, although I agree with the broad thrust of your motion, and it’s something that we do need to investigate, I think we have to bear in mind we are entering unchartered waters and there could be pitfalls ahead. Thank you.

I’ll make a short contribution. I want to do that because I feel genuinely passionate about this particular issue. I like cars. I have always liked cars. I used to go to the motor shows when I was a young boy with my parents. I consider cars to be works of art. One can look at a car from any period and learn a lot about that period from the car in front of you. Yes, the cars on our roads in Wales in the future will be a sign of what the fashions and ways of life in Wales will be in future.

My interest in cars is in the way that they drive and the way that they’re driven, which has also followed fashion and trends globally. We know already that driving has changed over the years as the aspirations and expectations of people have changed. But people’s practices with regard to their choice of car can be changed as well, and there are a number of influences that can come to bear here: there are environmental concerns, and that is becoming clearer; the car’s performance; and also the cost.

In Wales now, we’re perhaps at the beginning of this next major change with regard to the way that cars are driven, which is the change to electric cars, but it’s a gradual change and I don’t see the genuine incentive there to accelerate that change. Point 1 in the motion notes the speed of the revolution, but the Government’s strategy and public policy don’t come anywhere near catching up with the technological revolution that there’s been.

I genuinely believe that there’s an opportunity here in Wales to make a name for ourselves in this area and by doing that to accelerate and drive change and the practices of users and consumers in Wales. So, why don’t we change planning rules for new homes to make it compulsory to set those charging points outside them? Where’s the strategy across the public sector to install those charging points? Do we have to have charging points in surgeries or twenty-first century schools? We need to take that action. Where are the regulations to make it compulsory for the fleet of public sector vehicles in councils and the NHS to be zero-carbon-emission vehicles or electric vehicles? One manager in the NHS in my constituency has been trying to ensure that district nurses and school nurses can have electric vehicles for their visits, but has failed because the contract that the NHS had was with a company that couldn’t provide electric vehicles. This is a change that could be made through policy change.

What about a commercial network that’s marketed with regard to its tourist potential, to ensure that when you’re coming to Wales your hotels and attractions will be places where you can charge your car? I don’t know if the tactic is to let things happen organically, leaving things to chance, but you only have to look at Tesla maps of charging points across Europe to see that Wales is being left behind here. I’m talking about swift charging points; they’re only available on the M4 and the A55. I genuinely want to have an electric car, but I can’t overcome the barriers yet in a way that makes sense economically at present.

Fel rhywun sy’n ddiedifar am fy hoffter o’r car modur am ei rinweddau artistig a mecanyddol a thechnolegol—a chyn i mi gael fy meirniadu, rwyf mor awyddus â neb i sicrhau bod cynifer o bobl â phosibl yn gadael eu ceir modur ar ôl ac yn defnyddio trafnidiaeth gyhoeddus. Ond fel rhywun sy’n hoff o geir, rwyf am i Gymru groesawu a chyflymu chwyldro’r cerbyd trydan, a normaleiddio cerbydau trydan. Felly, gadewch inni geisio datblygu enw da i Gymru fel gwlad sy’n croesawu cerbydau trydan. A chan wybod nad yw buddsoddiad a newid diwylliant yn digwydd dros nos, rwy’n meddwl y gallai hyd yn oed datganiad o fwriad go iawn, datganiad o uchelgais i ddatblygu’r enw da hwnnw, fod yn ffordd dda o gael pethau i symud ar hyn.

Yn olaf, roeddwn yn trafod yn ddiweddar gyda rhywun brwdfrydig ynglŷn â cherbydau trydan yn fy etholaeth sydd, fel y mae’n digwydd, wedi gosod gwefrydd foltedd uchel yn ei fusnes yn Llangefni oherwydd prinder pwyntiau gwefru mewn mannau eraill. Dywedais, ‘Rwyf am i Gymru wneud mwy na dilyn eraill ar hyn.’ Ei ymateb: ‘Ar hyn o bryd, nid ydym hyd yn oed yn dilyn; rydym yn edrych ar ein traed ac yn troi yn ein hunfan’, ac mae’n rhaid inni symud ymlaen o hynny.

Thank you very much for taking part in this debate.

Rwy’n falch o fod wedi cael y cyfle hwn. Rwy’n ddiolchgar i’r rhai sydd wedi cyflwyno’r cynnig hwn heddiw, a chan lawn fwriadu’r gair mwys, gadewch i ni ddefnyddio’r ddadl hon i danio’r Llywodraeth i gyflwyno gweledigaeth gadarnhaol ar gyfer cerbydau trydan i Gymru.

Thank you. I call on the Minister for Skills and Science, Julie James.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Can I, too, add my thanks to the Members who tabled this very important debate and for all the thoughtful contributions from all Members today in the Chamber? I, too, am a bit of a car fan. Everybody who knows me at all well knows that I restore old Minis by way of relaxation at weekends. And I also feel that Wales should be on the crest of the wave, whatever analogy you want, to take this forward.

I feel obliged, I’m afraid, to address some of Gareth Bennett’s somewhat downbeat contribution with a well-known anecdote from the introduction of motor vehicles in the first place, where many countries across Europe embraced the motor vehicle, but Britain put in place legislation to make a man with a red flag walk in front of them. Consequently, almost all of the large, successful automotive firms of the twentieth century were in Germany and France, whereas we lagged behind terribly. The lesson of the Luddites is clear: you cannot hold back the tide of technology; you can only embrace it and mould it to your own ambition. And that is very much what we want to do here in Wales as part of our Government’s strategy to embrace and involve ourselves in this very welcome, in my view, change as the technology advances.

We’ll do that by having a tripod structure to stand on. And that is by having policy that embraces the change and is fleet of foot, by having infrastructure policy to go with that overarching policy that allows us to mould our investment to make sure that the new requirements for that infrastructure are in place, and also that we have a skills policy that produces the people necessary to produce both the infrastructure and, indeed, the vehicles and so on that travel on that infrastructure into the future. And there’s absolutely no reason at all why Wales couldn’t be at the forefront of all of those things.

The need for action is extremely clear, not only because the technology is upon us whether we like it or not—indeed, I hope Members will see that I do like it very much—but also because, actually, it allows us to set a clear pathway for Wales in terms of decarbonisation and very seriously good renewable energy generation at the same time.

We have to be ahead of this game. We have to understand intelligent transport systems, the integration of information—

Will you give way?

Certainly.

Thanks for giving way, Julie. You’ve been extremely good and diligent at visiting broadband notspots across my constituency and across deepest, darkest Wales over the last few months. Are you really willing to take this on? You might get invited to all sorts of parts of Wales to check electric charging point notspots as well. [Laughter.]

I’m looking forward to it already. [Laughter.] Well, the reason I’ve been visiting all of those places is because I want to make sure that we are embracing the technology as it comes upon us.

As I was about to say, understanding intelligent transport systems, the integration of information and communication technology with transport infrastructure, vehicles and users is one of these important challenges. So, as we adopt these new technologies—low emission, connected autonomous vehicles and so on—we need to make sure both our companies in Wales and our infrastructure are in a position to take advantage of it. We’ve got a whole series of manufacturers already interested in coming to Wales or who are already in Wales and are interested in adapting their practice to embrace this, and that’s part of the reason why we’re going to invest £100 million to invest in the automotive park in Blaenau Gwent. That will—I won’t rehearse the metrics for that, because you’re all aware of them.

I recently attended a dinner after Digital 2017 with a series of automotive and digital entrepreneurs with a view to getting them together to talk about their ideas. That was a very instructive dinner, because it really does make you understand some of the integration pieces for this. So, we have to integrate our role in battery development and manufacturing, and electric charging points and their distribution across Wales—fast electric charging points; I completely take that point. We have to have low-volume, special purpose electric vehicle manufacturing, composite manufacturing, we need to have highly competitive, independent companies in Wales, but we have to have a good public infrastructure for them to be able to use it, both for the test beds of the next couple of years, and then for the cars of the future, as that rolls out.

I think it’s worth having a look for a minute at just a few of the things that we will need to discuss along this way. Members will know that we recently published a mobile action plan, which talks about readiness, amongst other things, for testing of fifth generation and other innovative solutions in Wales. I’d like Members to just apply their minds a little bit to how an autonomous vehicle might travel along a road. That road will be wired. It will have a fibre broadband tetrabyte pipe running along it, and it will have nodes every so often to talk to the vehicles above it. But the car won’t stick a spike into the road. It will have to have some kind of spectrum—Wi-Fi or radio spectrum—to talk to that road, and to the car in front of it. If the Government sells the 5G radio spectrum, which is a finite resource—bear in mind it’s not an infinite thing—in the way that it sold other spectrum, then what we will have, effectively, is equivalent to land banking. So, Members will be very aware that fourth generation is not available right across Wales, but 4G has been sold, and the companies that own it are simply not utilising it in areas that are not commercially viable. We call on the UK Government to seriously think about the way that it approaches the next spectrum sales, not as cash cows, but as ways of making sure that this infrastructure can be used productively to make this technology happen properly. So, for example, I personally would not want to be driving along in an autonomous vehicle in the middle of Powys only to find that my mobile connection cuts off because a private sector company has done a nefarious deal someplace else in the world and gone bankrupt. I’d quite like that to be public infrastructure, which I need to be reliable and resilient. So, I think these things really do need to be thought through as we move forward into the future. So, I thought it was worth pointing that out.

At the same time, we need to be embracing, for example, battery and technology change, so that the range gets bigger and better, and we address some of the issues that Gareth Bennett raised around the production of rare materials and so on. Recently, I had the real pleasure to attend a catalysis cutting-edge research centre at Cardiff University to look at some of the experimentation that’s going on there in developing different fuel cells and using different catalysts to produce different types of fuel technology. I confess that, although I understood what I was being told at the time, I’m not too sure I could reproduce it now in all of its chemical technicolour glory. But it was very impressive indeed, and of course the Government has put an enormous amount of resource into knowledge transfer partnerships and the commercialisation of such resource with appropriate private and public sector companies around that research, to make sure that the commercialisation for that kind of thing happens here in Wales. I’m going to run out of time—otherwise I’d read you a whole long list of companies that are very much part of that.

As Vikki Howells pointed out, we have provided £2 million in the budget to help secure a network of charging points, and in addition, we are putting 10 fast-charging points in Welsh Government offices, to serve employees and visitors as a network, as we roll it out. We’re liaising with the UK Office of Low Emission Vehicles, administering the UK funding on the potential for running roadshow-type events in Wales for the public and private sectors, and my innovation team has run several events in partnership with Innovate UK and the Knowledge Transfer Network on opportunities for funding integrated transport systems as part of our infrastructure, connected autonomous systems and accelerating innovation in rail systems.

Deputy Presiding Officer, I have another 12 or so pages about all of the things we could do in rail and electric—

No, I don’t think so. [Laughter.]

[Continues.]—that I won’t indulge myself in reading through. But I do think it’s worth—and you’ll forgive me for doing so—mentioning the need for advancing policy thinking at all levels of government in the UK. The issue about the generation of electricity in order to support these new technologies is a big one. So, I’m going to take this opportunity, unashamedly, to ask the UK Government to make the decision on the Swansea tidal lagoon in the way it should be made—as we know everybody in Wales wants it to be made, because I think it’s not really acceptable that they drag their feet on that—and to abhor the lack of electrification of the mainline railway down into Swansea, not least because we need the infrastructure for that to roll out some of the other programmes. There are many things that we can do. We’ve been clear from the outset that we want integrated transport systems in Wales to bring communities closer, to link our people with jobs, leisure and tourism opportunities, and to develop our economy. But more than anything else, we want to ride the crest of this wave, embrace it, and make it Wales’s contribution to the future as we go forward. Diolch yn fawr.

Thank you very much. I call on Eluned Morgan to reply to the debate.

Diolch yn fawr. Can I thank Jenny Rathbone and everybody else who sponsored this debate, because I think it’s really important that we start to look to the future? When we are developing a new economic strategy, this has got to be a fundamental part of it, and I’m really pleased that Julie James is the person replying to this as she has a real understanding of this technology and the need and the potential of this changing the way that we live. I don’t see it as something negative, I see it as really giving new opportunities in particular to people living in rural Wales. I know that General Motors this week announced that it would be test driving self-driving vehicles in New York city. So, the point is: this is happening now, this is not a revolution that’s going to happen in the future, this is not science fiction for our grandchildren—this is happening now and we need to catch up, and we need to create the infrastructure and to put that in place. In fact, Elon Musk, who’s the guru of this new technology, has said he wants to have a fully autonomous vehicle on the road by 2018: that’s next year. That’s a commercial vehicle. So, things are changing: I’ve just come back from Brussels yesterday, and you could see cars being charged on the street in Brussels. Other people are doing it, we need to catch up.

It’s predicted that, in time, this new technology will lead to a 90 per cent reduction in accidents, a 40 per cent reduction in congestion, an 80 per cent reduction in emissions, and 50 per cent reduction in parking space saved. And I think it’s absolutely right that we shouldn’t just restrict this, as Jenny said, to electric vehicles. Hydrogen vehicles also have an opportunity to contribute to this. I know that in my constituency, in Llandrindod Wells, the Riversimple car—they are just about to start a new pilot that is going to be happening from Abergavenny. So, this is happening—we are a part of this, but we do need to go further.

One of the most interesting things for me is that, actually, the potential for new car ownership is likely to change. Now, KPMG has suggested that 59 per cent of industry bosses believe that more than half of all car owners today will no longer want to own a car by 2025: that’s eight years from now. Well, I don’t know about you lot, but that means I’ve bought my last car. [Laughter.] So, I think it’s really important for us to understand that this circular economy, that the new way of owning cars is actually also going to change the way we have our relationship with the way we travel around. And, of course, there will be casualties. There will be casualties: taxi drivers are probably not very happy about this; the people who build combustion engines are probably not very excited about this. But that’s why we have to move with it and create the new jobs. I’m not one of the doom-mongers. I don’t think that we can stick the finger in the dyke. I think it’s really important that we embrace it and we run with it.

We have to take advantage of those economic opportunities. The Boston Consulting Group says that this market is going to be worth $77 billion by 2035. Now, even if we had a fraction of that in Wales that would be a great step. I really hope that the Minister and the Cabinet Secretary, when they’re developing this new economic strategy, will be thinking—as I’m sure they are—beyond the here and now. It’s given me great heart to listen to Julie, to know that, actually, they have got their eye on this, there is potential for it, but also to listen to, actually, the real problems that we have. You know, if we do have this 5G Wi-Fi going out to the commercial sector, not having any control on it, then that, potentially, could really freeze up the system in some areas. I think it’s important also—. We heard about planning—lots of people talked about planning—and I think Rhun was absolutely right to mention not just the infrastructure charging system that Vikki suggested is really important—that rapid charging system. There’s also the destination charging. You can drive to somewhere and leave it charging overnight. We need to make sure that can happen, and it is happening in some places in Wales already. But I think there is an opportunity for us to think. And I do hope that we’ll be building this into things when we’re assessing what the impact’s going to be if we do go ahead with changing the M4, and what the impact’s going to be when we are redesigning our towns and cities. All of these things need to be built in to that planning thinking now, as Rhun suggested.

I know that many people in this Chamber are committed to improving public transport in Wales, and I would ask that people give particular thought to how this technology could be really beneficial in parts of rural Wales, where we do need things to be a little bit more flexible, where we can’t have big buses and things in the same way as you do in cities. And the potential there, I think, in particular for helping an ageing population is really great and, again, we need to be thinking about that.

Dai Lloyd talked about the difficulty with narrow country lanes. Well, one of the things that I’ve learned from talking to Tesla is that you have to paint white stripes at the edge of roads, but in half of our rural areas there are no white stripes for these autonomous vehicles to read. So, again, what are local authorities doing? Are they actually writing that into their economic strategies?

So, we do need to think about how we’re going to do this, we do need to think about how we can adapt our grids—not just the large infrastructure grids, but could we have more local grids? Can we do more with renewable energy, which is absolutely crucial? We simply won’t be able to continue if we have this revolution to electric vehicles with the power infrastructure that we have now. So, let’s remember that this electric vehicle revolution is upon us. I think we need to move really fast to make sure we’re not left behind, and I do hope that we can lead with this technology and embrace this technology, because I think it’s a real opportunity for us in Wales to be an innovator and to lead.

Diolch yn fawr ichi am drafod.

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

Symudwn ymlaen yn awr at yr eitem nesaf ar yr agenda, sef dadl y Ceidwadwyr Cymreig ar docynnau teithio rhatach ar fysiau a threnau ar gyfer pobl ifanc, a galwaf ar Russell George i gynnig y cynnig.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I move the motion in the name of Paul Davies, which calls on the Assembly to extend the eligibility for free bus travel entitlements and railcard privileges to all 16 to 24-year-olds in Wales. I think our debate this afternoon is very relevant to follow on from the previous debate.

As Members may appreciate, we are unable to support the Welsh Government’s amendment, which seeks to delete our motion in its entirety. I must say, though, that I welcome the fact that the Welsh Government appears to be following in the footsteps in consulting on a new scheme to support young people in using public transport and reforming the mytravelpass scheme—a scheme that, despite sinking millions into it, has not really lived up to its initial potential and has been characterised as having disappointing take-up.

The aim of this motion, Deputy Presiding Officer, is to help relieve young people of the financial challenges that they face in today’s economic climate through the introduction of a scheme designed to make public transport more accessible and levelling the playing field for younger people. Young adults tend to have the lowest wages, the highest car insurance premiums, they suffer most from Wales’s housing crisis, and they’ve also suffered the uncertainty of not knowing whether their tuition fees will be rising yet again—and this, of course, has compounded the concerns of younger people regarding the costs of higher education. Therefore, our green card scheme that we have proposed could lift the barrier to accessing education and training for jobs for many people in Wales.

Indeed, this is an issue that faces many young people in my own constituency, where the cost of accessing public transport is a major hurdle for many young adults as they try to access further and higher education. As a result of the schools and colleges in some areas of mid Wales providing increasingly limited courses, the financial constraints and sheer difficulty of accessing further education elsewhere means that young people are either not pursuing their first choice of subject, or not pursuing further education at all. So, I’d suggest that we must act. I struggle to see how the Welsh Government’s ‘Prosperity for All’ strategy can become a reality without sufficient measures being put in place to reduce the cost of public transport for younger people.

The justification for this motion stems from the obstacles that younger people are facing in today’s Wales. Welsh workers now have the lowest weekly wages in the UK. Shockingly, in Scotland, a pay packet contains £43 more per week than that of a Welsh worker. As a result of this, younger people are facing a bleak outlook in terms of their earning potential. I believe that by providing a free bus service and a rail card, this will play a role in enabling younger people to pursue employment or further education, especially as 18 to 21-year-olds are more likely to use a bus than any other age group. Our young people depend heavily on the bus and rail network to access work and education opportunities, so we on these benches believe that they should be supported in that.

I would like to note that our proposal has been met with highly positive feedback from the Confederation of Passenger Transport, who were delighted by Welsh Conservatives’ efforts to support the use of buses by younger people. We proposed two fully costed initiatives that we believe would reduce the financial burden facing younger people in Wales. So, in order to help younger people reach their potential, I think the Welsh Government must make public transport more accessible to a struggling age group, and our free bus travel scheme will also have substantial environmental benefits that go beyond the immediate benefits to young people themselves, encouraging people to switch from private motoring to public transport. This is, of course, consistent with the Welsh Government’s aims to reduce vehicle emissions, and will also reinvigorate the bus industry.

As I said last week in a contribution, it’s clear that if young people are introduced to public transport early, they stick with it and continue to use public transport in later life. So, I do believe that our proposals for free unlimited transport for 16 to 24-year-olds is a crucial step to ensuring young people make the most of their potential, building ambition and encouraging learning, which the Welsh Government strategy, ‘Prosperity for All’, seeks to achieve. I therefore commend our motion this afternoon to the Assembly, and I look forward to hearing Members’ contributions to this debate this afternoon.

Thank you very much. I have selected the amendment to the motion, and I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Infrastructure to move formally amendment 1.

Amendment 1.

Thank you very much. Paul Davies.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and I’m pleased to take part in this debate this afternoon. As Russell George has said, good public transport is essential for younger people in Wales who rely on buses and trains to access educational classes, weekend jobs, after-school clubs and sports—the list goes on. Access to these opportunities and activities is integral to the development of the next generation, who continue to make it clear that they want to see better public transport. Members may remember that the UK Youth Parliament voted to make public transport cheaper, better and accessible their priority campaign for 2012. This UK campaign emerged from a nationwide poll of 65,000 young people, which identified the top-five issues of concern for young people, and clearly public transport was very much at the top of that agenda. Therefore, it’s important that Governments at all levels show that they are listening to the views of young people when it comes to providing transport services.

Of course, it’s also important that the bus and rail industry are also listening and engaging with young people too, as young people are an important market for public travel. Indeed, quite often young people will have no option but to use bus and rail services before they learn to drive. Therefore, public transport providers must ensure that young people have a positive experience of travelling publicly to encourage them to continue using buses and rail into adulthood, even if they learn to drive or buy a car.

We live in an age where it takes seconds to send a tweet or update a status on Facebook, and so it’s clear that young people can be a great influence, or a strong critic, of public transport and that’s something that perhaps the bus and rail industry haven’t taken that seriously in the past. Therefore, perhaps there’s an opportunity here for bus and rail service operators to engage more with younger people when developing services and even campaigns in the future, by using these digital platforms much more than they’ve done in the past to communicate with young people.

Therefore, given the importance of public transport to young people, this motion is today calling on the Welsh Government to support the introduction of a new green card scheme to provide all 16 to 24-year-olds in Wales with access to unlimited free bus travel and discounted rail travel. I think that this scheme sends a clear signal to young people across Wales that we recognise the concerns that they have surrounding public transport, and that we’re looking at ways that we can better support them.

This policy will also help strengthen and support the bus industry in Wales by encouraging more and more young people to use public transport, thereby protecting those bus services for the future, which is particularly important in rural areas and the constituency that I represent. A scheme like this will undoubtedly make some bus services, especially in rural areas, much more sustainable.

Of course, the use of public transport can be even more of a barrier to young people with learning difficulties who quite often find the public transport system complex and intimidating. One of the most effective ways that the Welsh Government can support young people with learning difficulties using the public transport network is by simply increasing understanding and tolerance of the challenges that face young people with learning difficulties. I’ve had many representations from groups such as Pembrokeshire People First, and I should declare an interest as their president. Groups like Pembrokeshire People First continue to advocate policies to make public transport more accessible to people with learning difficulties, and one of their calls has been for free entitlements to bus travel. Hopefully, this scheme will help in some way by encouraging more young people with learning difficulties to use public transport, thereby building up their confidence and encouraging them to live more independently and engage in the wider community.

The importance of providing good public transport is certainly felt in rural areas, where services are fewer and costs are higher. For young people living in rural areas like Pembrokeshire, the geography simply is not as interconnected as other parts of Wales. Therefore, I believe there’s a case here for making better use of the existing transport fleet in rural local authority areas by developing more of a partnership approach with those delivering transport services in local communities. This would mean bringing together a range of agencies and stakeholders, along with local authority departments, to centrally co-ordinate and schedule public transport, by taking into account capacity on the mainstream network and hopefully identifying gaps in transport provision where solutions can be met jointly. With funding tight for many local authorities in rural areas, alternative options are needed to support transport availability for young people, and perhaps a collaborative approach that can co-ordinate public transport is an effective way forward.

Therefore, in closing, Deputy Presiding Officer, at the very heart of this debate is the desire to deliver more support and independence to younger people. I believe that, to do this, the Welsh Government, public transport providers and young people themselves have to work together to make services more affordable, accessible and acceptable. Our proposals aim to give young people the independence to travel more freely around Wales by offering free bus travel and discounted rail travel to young people, and I urge Members to support our motion.

Today, when you speak to any young person about the sorts of things they want to see from politics, public transport, both its availability and its cost, are always pretty near the top of the list. Through the Neath area economic forum, we heard a story of a young man who’d lost confidence due to a failed job placement, which had broken down as a result of his having to depend on bus transport from the top of the Neath valley into Neath and onwards into Cardiff. The difficulty of making that journey work for him had led to him losing his job and set him back, really, on the road to sustainable employment. So, young people definitely need a new deal for bus users and one that gives them free or cheap travel, but that also improves travel times and experience. And that’s about bus prioritisation, planning issues and technology, as we’ve discussed several times before in this Chamber.

On the cost of travel, I welcome the Welsh Government’s consultation on extending the age of discounted travel to those aged 24, and I’d encourage young people across Wales to respond to that consultation with their views so we can hear what matters to them. I also think it’s right that the Welsh Government should keep alive the option, if needs be, of a mandatory scheme to build on the voluntary arrangements if that should prove to be necessary. But the debate today on the Welsh Conservatives’ motion is not about those things; the motion repeats the policy that the Conservatives have been pushing in the press in recent weeks, which has the virtue of consistency if little else.

They claim that offering free bus travel and a third off rail fares would cost £25 million. Let’s examine that. There are currently some 15,000 pass holders who will take approximately 1.5 million journeys on buses by March 2018. On the basis of those figures, you can assume that a completely free travel pass would be used by many more young people. Assuming an adult bus ticket price costs around £2 and some 350,000 people would be potentially eligible, the price tag for the Conservative proposal is not £25 million, it’s probably much nearer £70 million—and that’s just for the bus element, let alone the rail discount. Now, I’ve got a calculator if anybody wants to borrow it.

But they tell us that they want to scrap education maintenance allowance in order to pay for part of it, just like their Tory colleagues did in Westminster—the EMA, which, by the way, supports 26,000 students to stay in education. Now, if you’re one of those students—and we’ve heard a lot about educational opportunities from the bench opposite today—if you’re one of those students the Conservative plan would take away from you more than £1,500 a year. Russell George has said that transport costs are a huge barrier to education and I agree, but what on earth do you call a £1,500 hit? I call that a huge barrier too.

And, if the Tory bus policy isn’t puzzling enough, their policy of a third off rail travel is already national rail policy. So, I won’t be backing the Tory motion today, because it doesn’t help young people and it doesn’t add up. I urge young people to respond to the Welsh Government’s consultation and to tell us what they want from discounted bus travel so they can get policy that works for them.

It’s a pleasure to take part in this debate this afternoon. Plaid Cymru will be supporting the Conservatives’ motion today because, in principle, we are supportive of the notion of extending eligibility for free bus and rail travel to every person between 16 and 24 years of age in Wales. If you ask young people whether they want to pay to go on a bus or to go for free, well, going for free wins every time. But the budget has to be available in order to achieve this. Therefore, we would urge the Government to look at the Conservatives’ proposals on this, and not to disregard or criticise any policy proposals from opposition parties without even considering them first. Doing otherwise would certainly be immature on the part of the Government and excessively parochial without reason. In looking at the Government’s amendments, in addition to the Government’s consultation document, it looks as though the Government will be introducing something similar over the next few years anyway, so the response of the Government to this Conservative announcement was completely unnecessary.

But we have to remember why we are considering extending these benefits to more young people. Obviously, ensuring that more young people use public transport would bring a number of economic, social and environmental benefits, as we’ve already heard in this debate. But, in substantial areas of Wales where driving is more convenient, public transport is also scarce. We need to enhance the provision of bus services and, ultimately, we need to bring it back to being a public service.

But, in situations and locations where public transport provision is available, it is vital that we discover innovative means of changing behaviour in favour of using public transport. We need buses and trains that are reliable, that reach their destination on time every time, which are clean, which are integrated with other services, and that are linked up together, and that that happens regularly, so we don’t need to spend a large part of every day travelling.

The proposals that we’re debating today are worth considering as one obvious means of reaching this goal of changing behaviour in favour of using public transport, and making it easier for young people to get a job in the first place and to keep that job when they’ve got it. So, I look forward to receiving more information about these possibilities from the Government once the consultation period is completed. Thank you very much.

Encouraging the increased use of public transport must be near the top of any Government’s agenda. The benefits to the environment, economy, public health, are undeniable. Additionally, supporting our young people in accessing employment and education opportunities is essential to the growth and development of our future workforce. Our debate today—

Will you take an intervention?

I’ve only just started, sorry. Our debate today outlines a realistic, costed and positive policy. Indeed, one might realistically expect the Welsh Government to support this, given that it goes so far in meeting their objectives for young people, outlined in their ‘Prosperity for All’ document, and is a credible alternative to the current system.

Just 15,000 young people aged 16 to 18 have applied for a Welsh Government mytravelpass, out of a total of 113,000. Now, forgive me for thinking there is something wrong with that. That statistic alone says their message isn’t getting through. This is a take-up rate of just 13 per cent, yet the Welsh Government’s current consultation fails to even ask the question about how we can encourage more young people to sign up to the scheme. This is a real concern, because we know that 23 per cent of drivers that are involved in motorised vehicle accidents and 21 per cent of those involved in serious or fatal accidents are aged 24 or under. So, we need to be actively encouraging alternative and greener transport options where possible.

Our proposals to extend free bus travel entitlements to all 16 to 24-year-olds is the simplest, most open and accessible option. Universal eligibility should encourage take-up and, in those areas with our busiest roads, work to reduce congestion and accidents. Additionally, the relief of the burden of transport costs will more relieve the more broad economic challenges faced by our young people here in Wales today. Savings in petrol, insurance, initial car purchases: they actually mount up to a similar figure to a house deposit within a few years for some young people. The average cost of car insurance for a 17-year-old, for example, is now a staggering £2,272 a year. Coupled with this, Welsh workers have the lowest take-home pay of all the home nations, with weekly median wages for 18 to 21-year-olds just 40 per cent of those for 40 to 49-year-olds. Further, the employment rate for 16 to 24-year-olds is considerably lower here than in England and Scotland, and 57,400 people aged 16 to 24 are classed as NEETs—not in employment, education or training.

Now, given that almost 40 per cent of jobseekers say that their job search is limited because of the costs involved, it is clear that access via free bus travel really can make a hugely positive difference here. Eighteen years on from the establishment of this Assembly, Welsh Labour, with the occasional help from Plaid Cymru and the Lib Dems, have failed to address the needs of our young people, who face some of the worst employment opportunities in the UK. This policy is clear and immediately effective, and I do urge parties from across this Chamber to support our motion today. Diolch.

Imagine my surprise to see that this Tory debate before the Senedd offered supposed largesse—the same group of Members opposite who support this ideological, obsessive policy of austerity that the Tory UK Government is inflicting on victims with no mercy: the removal, for instance, of housing benefit for 16 and 17-year-olds, and, where they are in power, as in England, removing from those young people the education maintenance allowance that they are now proposing to remove from young people in Wales.

The life chances—16 to 24-year-olds are a generation suffering badly. From the ongoing austerity to zero-hours contracts in the private sector and to a Tory Government in England who are failing to provide more affordable housing, young people across the UK are continuing to pay the price for Tory neglect and failure. Imagine my surprise when I hear that you wish to help the younger generation reach their potential by taking away their education maintenance allowance. It is no wonder that a sighting of a young Tory voter is almost as difficult as finding a Welsh Conservative Assembly Member who believes that Theresa May will lead them into the next election.

But let’s give these proposals a closer inspection. What are they? Well, the economic professors opposite who lecture us on the evils of spending are claiming that they are offering free bus travel and a third off rail fares, as Jeremy Miles has already stated, for all 16 to 24-year-olds at a cost of £25 million. I’m sure that they think that this will make lovely, creative reading as a press release, but I would also say that we must look at the small print, because the devil is always in the detail. This intended funding, as I’ve stated, will be accounted for by scrapping the EMA—helping more than 26,000 students stay in full-time education in Wales and, don’t forget, a lifeline for our most vulnerable young people in danger of falling out of education entirely. That is extremely helping their life chances and its removal would have a devastating impact in Wales if it were allowed, as it is in England.

Indeed, have they actually engaged with students and young people? If I said to you, ‘Free jam tomorrow,’ I think we would want it, but if I said, ‘Free jam tomorrow, but you will lose your education access,’ there’s a different response. The Welsh Government have launched a consultation on potentially extending the age of discounted travel to those aged 24 last week. It is a wide-ranging consultation exercise, as has been stated, and it is aimed at engaging with young people, schools, colleges, organisations and bus companies in order to develop a scheme that is attractive. This consultation runs until 4 January 2018 and looks at a variety of aspects, including which categories of journeys, where there is the age of eligibility and size of discount, and alternative payment methods include fixed contributions per journey or a monthly/annual pass for free travel at the point of use. So, we do have a Welsh Labour Government with a purposeful consultation under way that is not to be completed until January, yet, for some reason, we are now presented with what can only be seen as a cynical attempt by the party opposite to pre-empt it or piggyback it.

So, let’s look at those figures: currently, 15,000 pass holders who will take approximately 1.5 million journeys on buses by March 2018. On the basis of these figures, it can be reasonably assumed that a completely free travel pass would be used by many more people. Assuming an adult bus ticket price is £2 and some 350,000 people would be potentially eligible, the Tory proposal could cost around £70 million for the reimbursement of bus journeys alone. That is almost three times the cost published by the Tories—three times £25 million. This figure only covers the free bus travel part of this scheme and does not factor in the significant additional cost of reimbursing rail operating companies for providing a discount of a third off rail travel costs for 16 to 24-year-olds in Wales.

So, how would the Welsh Tories bridge this huge funding gap between their published £25 million and the £70 million-plus that this scheme would cost in reality, particularly given the devastating effect that their party’s ongoing austerity is continuing to have on budgets? The Welsh Tories are advocating a plan with a damning economic incoherence that would cause ‘spreadsheet Phil’ to blush. Yet they continue to lecture the rest of us that they are masters of economic competence. Not even Alec Douglas-Home with his matchsticks could make these Welsh Tory figures up. So, as such, I will be supporting the amendments to the motion proposed by the Welsh Government, instead of the fantastic and fantasy economics of the Welsh Tories. Diolch.

Will you forgive me for beginning by saying ‘purposeful consultation’ is perhaps just a little bit late for a Government whose last scheme collapsed so spectacularly and which, of course, affected my constituency? The first thing I want to speak about is those constituents. My region pretty much follows the boundaries of the old West Glamorgan authority, which, back in the mists of time and evidence and documentation that is apparently far too expensive for the local authority to disclose these days, introduced a tertiary college education policy that remains influential to this day. Neath Port Talbot borough council is still following that policy. With two exceptions, based on language and religion, post-16 education is provided by a handful of further education colleges, and a merger with Powys FE not so very long ago means that some of that offer now extends well beyond the local authority boundary. That might mean that young people have perhaps a good choice of post-16 education, but it’s in a small number of centralised campuses, which extend into mid Wales and are separated by considerable distances. So, by definition, these aren’t local for most people, and in my experience, getting up early to travel considerable distances is a pretty unattractive proposal for some young people, if my house is anything to go by, and it’s even more unattractive if the cost of the bus to college is not the priority spend from the EMA if they have it, or indeed other money if they don’t have it. Colleges were telling us, not so very long ago, that their hardship funds were being swallowed up—and this is during the EMA period—by childcare and travel costs, leaving nothing left for meeting other demands, and if the direction that Wales is going in is to centralise provision for further education colleges, then our green card policy would mitigate those two connected pressures.

My second point is about Welsh language post-16 provision, and again I look at Neath Port Talbot: one Welsh language sixth form, situated right at the top of the Swansea valley, miles from the main areas of population. I think you’d have to be pretty dedicated to get there if you live in somewhere like Port Talbot, and support for travel is not particularly well guaranteed. The tertiary colleges are nowhere yet ready for providing an immersive Welsh language environment. I think our green card could help the Welsh Government meet its target of a million Welsh speakers by not choking off supply to that sixth form, by not making cost a reason for a young person to choose a college that may be nearer, and by not making it easier to leave your Welsh behind.

My third point is about the view that young people have of themselves, and I think this is pretty important. David Melding started to talk about it in the last debate, actually. I think it goes without saying that the population’s use of public transport, especially reduced diesel, will result in less air and noise pollution, as well as having less congestion on the roads. While many of our young people, especially those 16-year-olds that our green card would benefit—. Well, they don’t drive yet. So, encouraging them to use buses and trains more helps embed the idea that they don’t need to rely on expensive cars in the future. Congestion is just going to slow down their road journeys if they reach for the car keys anyway, so encouraging that public-transport-friendly population through the use of the green card works on two health levels, the first being about air quality with fewer cars, or fewer idling cars—it’s the same thing really.

But the second, and perhaps less obvious point is that in using public transport, you do end up walking and cycling more. Even if you have to walk to the end of your street to catch a bus, that’s further than walking to the car parked outside your house. In 2009, the World Health Organization found that one of the best ways of encouraging greater physical activity generally was through transport policy, and the Welsh Conservatives’ green card feeds into this in a really obvious way, because public transport journeys will require some footfall or cycling travel, at least one end of that journey. Countries where the population make a higher proportion of trips by walking, cycling or public transport—I’m sure we’ve heard this before—have lower rates of obesity. And also—although this may not actually be the strongest argument in Wales, I suspect—sunlight exposes us to vitamin D, which, in turn, leads to a lower risk of cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes and some cancers.

And then, just to finish, on the area of health, but more importantly wider well-being, it does matter how young people become confident and how they don’t limit their own horizons. Young people currently have to buy a railcard to get cheaper travel, or they perhaps get a deal when they go to university when they open a student bank account. I just did a quick ask around locally before this debate, last week, and found that Swansea students don’t just use their cards to go home. They take some chances to go places and make contacts, which lead to work opportunities, new networks, trips that some of them would not have considered without the discount. University College London also found that discounted travel cards were not always taken up because even a one-off payment can be unaffordable at that time. So, that’s one small barrier closing off all that opportunity for those already best placed to take it. I think all our people need that opportunity—not just students—and our free green card makes it just that bit easier to seize that opportunity.

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

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I’d like to thank all Members in the Chamber for their contributions today in what is becoming a very much transport-related set of debates. Before I respond to comments specifically about bus services, I’d like to add my name to the list of car enthusiasts and say that Wales is in a prime position to take advantage of emerging technologies, particularly in electric and hydrogen powertrains. In fact, I’m a classic car enthusiast, and I’m pleased to say that it’s now possible to convert your petrol-driven classic car to an electric powertrain, thanks to a service that actually exists here in Wales, Dragon Electric Vehicles, right at the forefront of developing electric engines for existing vehicles. We are right at the forefront of research and of development and of implementing new ways of powering vehicles.

Moving back to bus services, and particularly bus services for young people, I think it’s abundantly clear from this debate that we all wish to see more young people using local bus services. We want people to use them more regularly, not just for environmental benefits, but also, as Suzy Davies highlighted, for wider social and well-being benefits, for better connecting communities and, crucially, enabling people to better connect with other human beings. And so, it’s the objective of this Government, and it’s something that we are keen to encourage for the well-being of existing and, indeed, future generations.

Since April of this year, young people have made over 0.5 million trips using their mytravelpass and, today, there are more than 17,000 pass holders. I accept that that proportion, the uptake, is not as high as we would wish it to be, and so the challenge is to encourage even more young people to do the same, to enhance our discounted bus travel scheme for younger people, and to make it easier for an entire generation to travel by bus. Last week, I was delighted to make good on our promise to consult on how a new Welsh Government scheme to be introduced in April of next year can best encourage more young people on to our buses. And I’d like to emphasise the point that was raised by Jeremy Miles: that it’s absolutely vital that those who stand to gain the most from any discounted travel scheme are at the heart of any decision that we make. The consultation on discounted bus travel for younger people in Wales aims to capture the views of young people, of schools, of community groups, of colleges, and of bus companies on a scheme that is both attractive and affordable—one that can practically support people in their life, in their work and in their study.

The consultation document invites comments about maintaining the existing provision or extending the scope of the current scheme to include, potentially, an increase in the upper age limit, increasing the level of discount, replacing the current reimbursement arrangement with a charge per journey, which is something that we see in many parts of Europe, and also on introducing a monthly or annual fee so as to retain free journeys at the point of travel. The consultation also considers extending the scheme to apprentices, only some of whom are currently eligible under existing arrangements. It also looks at potentially extending the scheme to volunteers, to carers, to recipients of education maintenance allowance and to all young people in further education. And I do recognise the benefits of such a scheme to many other people who actively contribute to society or who need assistance when embarking on a new career but who currently fall outside the age of eligibility. That’s why I’m particularly keen to explore what appetite there is for extending the age of discounted travel up to 24-year-olds, potentially allowing us to help more young people to make the most of bus travel right across Wales. The scheme, to be introduced in April 2018, will be one that best reflects the needs and preferences of our young people and helps further boost bus travel as an option. That’s essential if we are to create a sustainable bus network for the future.

In the current financial year, we have set aside up to £1 million to support the one third discount scheme. Any enhancement of the scheme can be expected to result in increased costs for compensating bus operators under what would continue to be a voluntary arrangement. Operators, though, who wish to be eligible for bus services support grant funding must offer the discount. The existing legislation, of course, means that we cannot make a younger persons’ discounted bus travel scheme mandatory, other than for 16 to 18-year-olds in full-time education, and I am very much sympathetic to the point that my colleague Jeremy Miles made regarding this matter.

I also welcome Jeremy Miles’s offer of a calculator to those Members who possess a broken abacus. His and Rhiannon Passmore’s forensic analysis of the Conservatives’ proposals I think demonstrates that there is a titanic hole in the numbers. I’ll outline again the reasons why those figures don’t stack up. Based on a 50 per cent uptake across the 16 to 24-year-old cohort, the cost would more likely be £78 million or upwards. That’s based on 50 per cent uptake. Now, we know that the Conservatives support our view that there should be more young people on the buses, so assuming an uptake, perhaps, of 100 per cent, which I’m sure everybody would like to see, that figure would rise to more than £150 million. Yet their budget of £25 million would allow for an uptake of just 16 per cent of 16 to 24-year-olds. In turn, that would equate to approximately 17,700 16 to 18-year-olds; ironically, the very same uptake figure that the Conservatives were so critical of.

However, I do congratulate the Conservatives for entering this debate in a very co-operative manner. I think it’s very helpful that they have tabled this debate today to highlight just how much this Welsh Government has done and intends to do to support young people across all of our communities. To expect every young person, though, to forego the benefits of a car for all their journeys I think everybody in this Chamber would appreciate is probably unrealistic. But it is entirely realistic, Presiding Officer, for many young people to use the bus for more of their journeys, and I hope that many young people whose only experience of bus travel is the daily trip to and from school will take advantage of the new scheme to try the bus for other reasons, and having done so, they’ll see that today’s buses provide a really attractive offer.

Whilst reducing the cost of travel for young people is a priority to encourage use, I appreciate that it’s only part of the solution. Providing a bus product that is attractive and also efficient is equally essential, and anyone who has used a bus recently, I think, will recognise that the vast majority of vehicles on our roads offer a clean, comfortable and well-equipped environment. Yet unfortunately there remains an incorrect impression that buses are somehow a poorer relation to the private motor car. If this were ever the case, it is most certainly no longer true.

I’ve asked the Confederation of Passenger Transport, representing the bus industry, to develop proposals for a marketing campaign to publicise and promote today’s bus network, and subject to their proposals, I would hope to match-fund their financial contribution to any such campaign in order to drive up patronage. The new scheme I plan to introduce in April will be a better, more attractive means of encouraging younger people to use the bus for more of their journeys. The current scheme has made a good start, but we need to do more if we are to change attitudes.

Members will be aware of the bus summit that I held in January, and I’m pleased to say that a number of workshops are taking place this autumn to consider how best we can improve the passenger experience at bus stops by providing improved facilities and consistent passenger information; how we can also develop funding solutions that offer greater stability to the bus industry in Wales; and how we can deliver an integrated transport system that provides improved accessibility and ticketing solutions fit for the twenty-first century. This is our ambition, and it’s what we want to deliver. Thank you.

I call on Darren Millar to reply to the debate.

Diolch, Llywydd. Can I thank everybody who has taken part in what, for the best part, has been a very good and decent debate on all sides of the Chamber? We’re bringing these proposals forward today because we believe that they offer an exciting opportunity to do something different in Wales that’s not been done in any other part of the UK, and that is to offer our 16 to 24-year-olds the opportunity to travel on the public transport network free of charge, on our bus network. At the moment, of course, we extend those privileges to the over-60s and to other vulnerable and special groups like injured servicemen and women, and we know that that has been extremely successful. It has been something that has been supported by all political parties. I want to extend similar privileges to our young people, because I believe that they also deserve a fair deal. Our green card proposals are good for young people. As you’ve already heard from the speakers in this debate, they’re good for the environment, they’re good for public transport, particularly in rural areas, where we’ve seen bus routes scrapped because of a lack of commercial viability, they’re good for public health, and they’re good for people’s social well-being.

Will you take an intervention?

I will explain where I’m at with costings in a second, if you’ll sit down please, because I think it’s really important that the one significant objection that some Members seem to have is around the funding. So, let me go into a little bit of detail on our funding and how we’ve costed these proposals. First of all, can I just say that your suggestion, Rhianon Passmore, about the fact that if we scrap EMA it’s going to push up the number of people who are not in education, employment or training is wrong, because, actually, Wales has a higher rate of NEETs than England, which does not have EMA at all? You mentioned, Jeremy Miles, about the fact that 26,000 people currently benefit from EMA, and you’re absolutely right, but our proposals would benefit 360,000, not just 26,000, and as you will know from speaking to individuals in your own constituency, EMA awards can be extremely divisive amongst young people in educational establishments, and there’s a divide between those who get it and those who don’t.

So, let me just explain why I think this is an affordable policy. Your costings, Cabinet Secretary, have been based on the mytravelpass scheme that currently operates, which, frankly, is an extraordinarily expensive scheme. I cannot see how it is costing the Welsh taxpayer quite so much money. For the figures for the financial year to 2017, there were 15,000—. There were 9,000—just let me get the figures here—there were 9,250 beneficiaries of that scheme at a cost of £9.743 million. That means that the cost of mytravelpass per beneficiary is £1,053 a year. Now, in anybody’s mind, that’s extraordinarily expensive: £1,053 per year to get a third off your bus passes, when you can actually buy a bus pass for a whole year in my area for £490 a year at a commercial price. I think that’s an extraordinarily expensive scheme and I’m yet to see any explanation as to why it’s costing the Welsh taxpayer quite that much. [Interruption.] I’m very happy to take an intervention.

As the Member will be aware, it’s based on a no better, no worse-off scenario, and therefore the reimbursement is based on the amount of trips that a young person will make. Now, your scheme, as you’ve proposed, would supposedly cost just £25 million, and yet it would apply to 350,000 people. I mean, cost per person would be just £71 per year. I’m not sure how many journeys that would buy at a day’s adult rate, but I don’t think it’s many, and it’s certainly less than the 200 journeys that are expected to be made with the introduction of such a scheme.

I’m grateful for the Cabinet Secretary for clarifying why his scheme is so expensive, because what he will also know is that the other scheme that is operated by the Welsh Government, the concessionary fare scheme, is much less expensive—much, much less expensive indeed. In fact, it’s less than £100 per beneficiary for older people who get their free bus passes. And I understand the difficulty that the Welsh Government has in trying to justify spending £1,000 per beneficiary on a third off a bus ticket, when, actually, you can buy them over the counter for £490—and you’d be better off giving a grant directly to the individuals concerned, frankly, because it would cost you an awful lot less—but the reality is that if we’re able to afford this for older people, we can afford it for our younger people too. Surely they’re worth just as much to society as older people.

Now, we have based our figures on the costs of the existing concessionary fare scheme, and the existing spending within that scheme. The cost per head of beneficiaries, as I’ve already said, is well under £100 per year, and if we extend that scheme to 16 to 24-year-olds, then we know that not all of those 16 to 24-year-olds are going to take up the opportunity, as is the case with older people. So, at the moment, everybody who’s over 60 is eligible to be part of the concessionary fare scheme, but only 70-odd per cent of people actually take up the opportunity to participate in that scheme. We believe that younger people would choose: some people would want to take up the opportunity to get their free bus passes, others wouldn’t. And we actually expect around two thirds of the rate that older people have taken up, so just over half of the young people who would be eligible. So, that’s how we’ve arrived at our costs. We also know that you can buy commercially priced national railcards for young people, the young person’s railcard, for less than £15 on a regular basis: £14.99 I saw them advertised for—£15—last week. The usual price is £30, but they’re regularly discounted. Now, I would hope that the Welsh Government could use its buying power for 360,000 16 to 24-year-olds to get some sort of extra discount on that price in order to encourage young people to take up the opportunity to use the rail network at a discounted fare price. So, that’s where we’ve got our figures, and I’m happy to share them with you in the same way that I have now. We’ve even thrown a little bit in—on top of funding the bus passes and on top of funding the railcard discount, we’ve even thrown a bit in for promotion, because you haven’t done enough in terms of promoting your current scheme now, which is why we’ve got a paltry 15 per cent—15 per cent—of 16 to 18-year-olds actually receiving and taking part in the mytravelpass scheme.

Now, you’ve already heard that, for young people, this is a big issue. It’s one of the top priorities, as Paul Davies and Jeremy Miles acknowledged. The cost of transport is a barrier to people being able to get to their place of education, it’s a barrier to them getting a job interview, let alone getting to and from work. So, we need to do something about this. We’ve come up with a solution, we’ve presented that solution, we’re trying to do it in a non-partisan way, and it’s a shame that some people who have spoken in this debate have tried to make it a very partisan debate completely unnecessarily. So, we’ve got a realistic, fully costed solution to the travel woes of young people across Wales, and we want to encourage you, Cabinet Secretary, to seriously consider taking these plans forward, because I tell you what, it would make a huge difference to young people across Wales.

My daughter has just passed her driving test—I’m very proud of her. She’s just passed her driving test first time, unlike her dad, and the cost of her insurance is absolutely extortionate—over £1,600 a year. And let me tell you, she’s not driving a flash car; it’s a small, tiny, poky little car. So, when you consider the cost to young people of being able to be a motorist in the current time, you can see why our proposal would give them another alternative. It would encourage them to take up the opportunity to use public transport, would help those bus routes stay sustainable, would encourage them to get out and see their friends and to see some of what Wales has to offer, and would enable them to get backwards and forwards to their place of education or work.

Will you take an intervention?

I will take an intervention from you.

Thank you. In terms of, as has been stated, improving the life chances, well-being and potential of young people, how do you see factoring in the side of the coin whereby you are going to get rid of the education maintenance allowance to pay for this wonderful proposed policy?

Well, I thought I’d spelled that out, but just to repeat myself, because you clearly weren’t listening: the education maintenance allowance does not achieve its stated aims. The education maintenance allowance was scrapped in England and they have lower levels of those not in education, employment or training—in fact, record low levels of NEETs—in England, whereas Wales’s rate is much higher, proportionally, of 16 to 18-year-olds. As I said, I think using that money—it’s also very divisive. Using that money and giving 360,000 young people the opportunity to benefit, rather than 26,000, is a much better use of taxpayers’ money, and that’s why I hope, Cabinet Secretary, that you’ll take forward our proposals.

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

The next item is the Plaid Cymru debate on the north Wales economy, and I call on Llyr Gruffydd to move the motion.

Thank you very much, Llywydd. It’s a great pleasure to lead on this debate in the name of Plaid Cymru on the north Wales economy and, in fact, the broader need for Welsh Government to treat north Wales more equitably—something that a number of people feel that they haven’t been able to do at all for a number of years by now.

Now, the United Kingdom is acknowledged and recognised as an unequal state—one of the most unequal in Europe, where investment, of course, is focused on one small part of that state at the expense of the other parts. In fact, we live in the state in the European Union where we have the wealthiest area in Europe in addition to some of the poorest areas, and that is following the failures of consecutive Governments of every hue in the United Kingdom, and, of course, that is a topic of great disappointment and frustration to a number of us. But there is a risk too that Wales is falling into the same trap, and that we are going down a similar unfortunate route. When the referendum was won to establish this Assembly 20 years ago, and there’s been a great deal of looking back and commemorating that over the past few months, there was a great deal of hope throughout Wales that we as a nation could not only start making decisions for ourselves but, of course, that we could do things differently. But you only need look at the Government’s figures themselves on capital expenditure per capita per region in Wales to see the inequality in investment. Since 2013, residents in north Wales have received over £360 less per capita than those in the south-east of Wales, for example. And the residents of mid and west Wales are in a worse situation, where they have missed out on over £520 per capita in comparison.

Now, it must be emphasised—I’m sure that some people will try to portray the picture in this manner—that it’s not our intention today, or in any other place when we highlight the failures of the Government to spread the wealth more equally across Wales, to try to create divisions between regions and areas of Wales. I certainly do not rue having investment in Cardiff and south Wales, along the M4 corridor, or anywhere else, but there is frustration when I don’t see equivalent investment, or sometimes even relatively equivalent investment, in north Wales. Our intention in this debate is to underline the need to unite our nation by ensuring that we have a country that shares the advantages of devolution more equally. And I must say that the impression that I get is that this feeling in north Wales that everything goes to Cardiff has never been stronger, and that is certainly what I hear across the region that I represent. And I don’t think that this is unique to the national situation. There are microcosms of that existing in local authorities throughout the whole of the country. I live in Denbighshire and I hear people daily complaining and saying that everything goes to Rhyl and the rural side of the county is losing out. You have to be broad-minded enough to accept that there is an element of perception aligned to this phenomenon, but I also have to acknowledge that there is more than an element of reality existing on a national level in this context, and we need to change that. But in order for that to happen, of course, we must ensure that investment does reach every corner of Wales, in order to put the infrastructure in place so that the whole of Wales can prosper.

Since the industrial revolution, north Wales has been a successful economic powerhouse. We have a very able workforce in north Wales, a very productive one, with specialisms such as aerospace, engineering, food and the environment, and it all comes together and works extremely effectively with our excellent universities and colleges. The tourism sector is one that has changed significantly in north Wales over the years. We have to acknowledge that. By now, north Wales has overtaken other areas and countries such as the Lake District and Cornwall, and all of these are very exciting developments that show the innovation of north Wales, and the potential that exists in realising that. North Wales has excellent opportunities to grow its economy, and all the ingredients are present for a lively, vibrant economy, but in order for that to happen, of course, we must receive the support required to unlock that potential.

If you talk to any one of the region’s companies or any particular sector, you will hear a consistent theme in terms of the complaint that you hear, namely the fundamental weakness in the infrastructure of the north Wales region. The ability of our roads to cope is poor, and there were queues of six miles along the A55 this afternoon—the main route of north Wales and one of the major trans-European routes, of course, gridlocked for a period during the day. Public transport , from buses to the rail network, is weak, to say the least, and the quality of the 4G phone reception signal, let alone any other ‘G’, is extremely poor in some areas. Broadband is also painfully slow and weak in many parts of north Wales, and I can speak to that from personal experience.

The state of our roads means that it’s not easy for our producers to get their product to market, and we were talking earlier about tourism. In north Wales we have, of course, Zip World, Bounce Below, Surf Snowdonia, the best-quality mountain biking and white-water canoeing that are second to none, and all of them attract good money to their areas, but try to travel from one to the other on public transport and I’ll tell you that it’s almost impossible to do that.

Dyma ble y gall buddsoddiad gan Lywodraeth uchelgeisiol sy’n ceisio rhoi hwb i Gymru gyfan wneud gwahaniaeth allweddol wrth gwrs. Mae dull o lywodraethu sy’n canolbwyntio ar Gaerdydd wedi gweld sefydliadau newydd yn cael eu creu ar hyd coridor yr M4 ar draul rhannau eraill o Gymru. Roedd yr Awdurdod Cyllid Cymru newydd yn enghraifft dda, os gofynnwch i mi, o gyfle a gollwyd. Penderfynodd y Llywodraeth, wrth gwrs, y dylai gael ei leoli yn Nhrefforest ac roedd hynny, wyddoch chi, yn iawn i bobl Trefforest, ond roedd teimlad amlwg yn Wrecsam fod cyfle wedi ei golli. Rydym yn gwybod bod CThEM yn cau swyddfa’r dreth yn Wrecsam—mae dros 300 o weithwyr yn debygol o golli eu swyddi yno. Roedd ganddynt lawer o’r sgiliau perthnasol, a’r cwestiwn y mae’r bobl yno’n ei ofyn yw: ‘Wel, pam na ddaeth yma pan oedd y cyfle hwn yn cynnig ei hun?’

Will you give way, Llyr?

Yes, I will. I will, of course.

Thanks very much. I’m listening with great interest to your contribution. I was at the briefing this morning for the pre-launch of the Development Bank of Wales, and I was delighted, I have to say, as a south Wales Assembly Member, that they’ve chosen to headquarter in north Wales and to more proportionately represent their staffing around mid Wales and north Wales, as well as having the headquarters in north Wales. That is a good way forward, he’d have to agree, and probably we need to do more of it, but it’s not to criticise other regions in trying to get investment into their area too.

I agree, and thank you for that because you’re making my speech for me, effectively. [Laughter.] I can probably skip a page. [Laughter.]

Yes, but when you think that the Government is getting it right—. As you say, the new Development Bank of Wales is going to be headquartered at Wrexham, but then, of course, we hear that the chief executive won’t be based there, we hear that lead officers and board members will be based elsewhere, despite the Cabinet Secretary telling us that it wouldn’t just be a brass plate on the door. Well, you know, I accept that it is positive that it is going to be based there, but, you know, it does still leave a little bit of something hanging there about whether they genuinely will be headquartered there or whether, really, that isn’t the case.

Plaid Cymru has been consistent in insisting that we need parity of funding for all parts of the country as well as the real devolution of existing, and the establishment of new, national institutions, such as the Welsh Revenue Authority, and the development bank, and of course the national football museum as well, we hope, will, if it comes to fruition, be culturally important and be an important economic driver for north Wales as well. In our recent budget deal, we secured millions of pounds of extra investment for north Wales, including funds for, potentially, the national football museum I mentioned just now, investment in north-south links, medical training for the north, work on the third Menai crossing, et cetera, and that, of course, is positive.

But there is a concern in north Wales that the north Wales economy—. There’s a feeling that it’s becoming a bit of a—. Or there is a risk, certainly, that it’s becoming a bit of an afterthought. It’s an add-on or an appendix to the Northern Powerhouse. I’m hearing that from increasing numbers of people in the sector, and there’s a danger as well that it falls between the two stools of the Northern Powerhouse in England and the city regions in south Wales. We need to guard against that and we need to ensure that north Wales becomes an economic powerhouse in its own right, as part of a broader national Welsh economic strategy. Of course, an all-Wales economic vision, such as Plaid Cymru’s, is essential if we are to spread prosperity and opportunity throughout the country.

I’d flag up here as well the shared prosperity fund that the UK Government is proposing to replace some of the EU regional funds, which Wales is currently receiving, for the post-Brexit era. The EU regional funds are accessible, of course, to west Wales and the Valleys, if you look at certain aspects of that funding. If the shared prosperity fund is for all of Wales—and, you know, there’s a discussion to be had about how we use that money—then I’m already hearing people expressing concerns that it’s going to be channelled into areas that are already getting the lion’s share of investment. I’m not saying that’s going to happen, but we really need to be mindful that there is a risk there that some of those areas in north Wales, west Wales and the Valleys, potentially, will not be able to access as much money as they have previously been able to.

The North Wales Economic Ambition Board as well is critical to all of this, and one of the amendments before us is quite right to recognise their role, and their growth vision offers certainly a direction of travel for us, and their work recently on highlighting the skills needs in north Wales lays out a clear challenge to the Welsh Government and to the UK Government, and it’s a challenge that needs to be met head on.

Alongside all of this, of course, Plaid Cymru wants to introduce a regional renewal Bill that will enshrine, in law, a requirement on our Welsh Government to ensure that investment benefits all parts of our nation and drives up productivity in every part of Wales. It’ll transform how investment decisions are made in Wales, as well as how they are delivered. And, through legislation, we’d establish regional development agencies, as well as a national infrastructure commission with statutory powers, and in its remit letter will be a duty to spread investment across Wales. We need to prioritise the most deprived areas for investment in order to rebalance the economy, and the Government has a duty to ensure that no community and no part of Wales is left behind as it seeks to create the jobs, the growth and the opportunities that we all deserve.

I have selected the three amendments to the motion. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 will be de-selected. I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Infrastructure to move formally amendment 1, tabled in the name of Jane Hutt.

Formally.

I call on Mark Isherwood to move amendments 2 and 3, tabled in the name of Paul Davies. Mark Isherwood.

Diolch, Llywydd. As this motion states, we need to strengthen the performance of the north Wales economy and regret the historic underfunding of north Wales by the Labour Welsh Government. We also, though, regret Plaid Cymru’s role in this when in coalition with the Labour Welsh Government and in its historic budget deals with them.

The Welsh Government has now launched four economic strategies since 1999, yet Wales’s economic performance has continued to stagnate. In 1999, the value of goods and services produced per head of population, or GVA, in Wales was 72.4 per cent of the UK average; in 2015, it had shrunk to 71 per cent. The west Wales and Valleys sub-region, including four north Wales counties, was still bottom across the UK, at just 64 per cent of the UK average. Even Flintshire and Wrexham saw their GVA fall from almost 100 per cent of the UK level to just 84 per cent, whilst GVA in Anglesey had fallen to just 54 per cent—the lowest level in the UK. Yet, this Welsh Labour Government only gives Anglesey—the poorest part of the UK—the eleventh highest level of local government revenue funding per head of population out of 22 Welsh local authorities, with Conwy, fifteenth; Wrexham, eighteenth; and Flintshire, nineteenth.

The north Wales local health board is in special measures and overspent, because Labour Welsh Government dismissed our warnings on behalf of patients and staff over very many years. The Labour Welsh Government’s amendment claiming that it has played the cross-border leadership role in developing proposals with partners for a north Wales growth deal is laughable. In its March 2016 budget, the UK Government announced that it was opening the door to a growth deal for north Wales, and it would be looking for the next Welsh Government to devolve powers down and invest in the region as part of any future deal. At least the UK Government has the courtesy to say that officials from both itself and Welsh Government have been working with local partners to develop the vision and understand where a growth deal would sit within it.

The UK Government encouraged local partners to prioritise their proposals, which is precisely what the growth vision for the economy of north Wales did when it called for the devolution of powers by the Welsh Government over employment, taxes, skills and transport, saying that this would boost the economy, jobs and productivity, create at least 120,000 jobs and boost the value of the local economy from £12.8 billion to £20 billion by 2035. By ‘taxes’ here, this means project delivery via tax increment finance borrowing, funded by future growth in business rates receipts resulting from growth deal projects.

People in north Wales look south and conclude that different sets of rules are being applied to different parts of Wales. As the chair of the north Wales chamber of commerce stated, the Welsh Government is too Cardiff-centric, and north Wales could be better served if it could secure its own form of devolution deal with the Welsh Government, so that it can respond much more quickly and in a more informed manner to ongoing developments within the region and across the border.

Well, yes, Plaid Cymru has done a deal. It’s done a deal with the political devil in return for a few crumbs from the top table. And, to those isolationists who would undermine the growth deal, I say, ‘Do not betray the people of the borderlands, middle lands, or west lands of north Wales who stand to lose the most.’

I therefore move amendments 2 and 3, proposing that this Assembly notes that the North Wales Economic Ambition Board’s ‘A Growth Vision for the Economy of North Wales’ document concludes that north Wales is well placed to receive a range of new responsibilities and that we endorse its call for the devolution of powers by the Welsh Government.

April’s update on the development of the north Wales growth bid stated that ambitions for flexibilities and devolved powers to be granted to the region include transport functions, strategic land-use planning, business innovation and advisory functions, careers advice and taxation powers, and evidence submitted by the North Wales Economic Ambition Board to the Economy, Infrastructure and Skills Committee’s city deals and regional economies of Wales inquiry stated,

‘Wales as a polity needs to ensure that North Wales can both compete with the North West of England and participate effectively in the planning for growth in the North of England via the Northern Powerhouse.’

They also said,

‘Devolution of functions to North Wales that matches that of neighbouring English regions is a defensive necessity and a desirable enabler of growth.’

That is the economic and social reality within which those in the north-east live. It’s also the means to spread prosperity into those middle and western regions, which still languish at the bottom not just of the Welsh, but of the UK table after 18 years of devolution.

Thank you for being able to contribute to this debate. Can I set one caveat, as Llyr also did? It’s very common in north Wales to hear people saying that everything goes to the south, but I don’t have any interest in feeding divisions. I want to unify the nation, but—and this is very important—where there is evidence of a lack of action by the Government to spread prosperity fairly and to ensure that every region has the best possible opportunity to get the most sustainable public services, that investment, transport and economic development don’t appear to be equal across the country, it’s important to stand up for those regions wherever they are. Where there are ideas—. I’m very happy to give way to Alun Davies.

The Minister does not wish to contribute to the debate, although he’s making too many sedentary contributions, if I may say so. So, if the Minister could allow Members to speak and to contribute to the debate in full.

The Minister never wants to make contributions to debates, but is very happy to hear his voice here in the Chamber while he is sitting down. I will continue.

Where there are ideas or plans, as we have in Plaid Cymru, as we’ve outlined this afternoon, to strengthen the north, to encourage investment and to get rid of the lack of regional balance in many areas, we’re working on behalf of our constituents and holding the Government to account. I want to look at two areas that we gave attention to in our discussions to have a budget deal with the Government.

Transport, first. Dualling of the Britannia is something that I’ve called for consistently since I was elected. This is not just to respond to the delays at rush hour, even though they’re very frustrating for travellers and people who use the bridge for commercial reasons, rather, this is a step towards building resilience for the connections between the mainland and Anglesey. Only this week, the Britannia bridge was closed because of wind, with the Menai bridge the only link open—a bridge that will celebrate its two-hundredth anniversary within the next decade. It’s the most beautiful bridge that you’ll ever see, but taking the pressure off, not adding to the pressure, that’s what we should be doing in the future. There is an opportunity here to ensure a link that will ensure the traffic flow, give certainty to emergency services, which they’re pressing me for, an opportunity to give certainty to trade, and also an opportunity to look for National Grid investment in high-voltage cables across the Menai. Rather than spending £150 million on building a tunnel, they can make a contribution and have reserves to invest in undergrounding the cables across Ynys Môn. Every elected Member in Ynys Môn supports that, apart from the regional Member for UKIP. That’s why we were very pleased to see the budget deal setting aside funds to develop the crossing further.

While I’m in the area of transport, let me refer to the links between north Wales and other parts of Wales. Britain suffers from centralising—all railways and every road leading to London, and east-west are the main transport routes in Wales. It’s important that there are strong links between north Wales and London, and that there are strong cross-border links, but let’s also remember the need for investment in those transport connections that will bolster the indigenous Welsh economy, the kind of economy, as Llyr said, that can be a partner with the Northern Powerhouse and a partner with our partners also to the west in Ireland.

I have a minute left and I’ll use that to draw attention to another area, namely the lack or shortage of healthcare workers that we have in north Wales, specifically doctors. Plaid Cymru has made a proposal that could tackle this, namely to establish a medical training centre in Bangor. We know that here is a pattern of doctors tending to settle to work where they have been trained. Somehow, we need to provide more doctors who are rooted in rural Wales, who have developed specialisms, perhaps, in rural medicine, and who are committed to working in rural Wales and in the north Wales area specifically. There is an opportunity, I think, through this new education centre, to provide that in partnership, I hope, with Cardiff and Swansea. There is talk of moving more students from Swansea and Cardiff. We know that some trainees are going on rotations around Wales, but it is a barrier for people who don’t want to do that north-south travelling. It’s a barrier for them to come and study within the Welsh system. So, what about strengthening the medical education that we have in north Wales?

So, in medical education, in transport, and in economic development, we don’t just need fairness, we need to ensure equality of opportunity and the people of north Wales must be able to see that that is the reality.

I welcome the opportunity to have this debate today and to be able to contribute, as I’m proud to serve the community that shaped me and, since being elected just over a year ago, I’ve been clear that I’m not only here to be that strong voice and stand up for my constituents in Delyn, but also for north Wales and the north-east Wales area as a whole. Like many others from the area, I’m all too well aware of what I tend to call the devolution disconnect in the area that I come from, not least because, from my constituency, it’s actually quicker to get to Cardiff—quicker to get to London, sorry, by train, from Flint, than it is to get to Cardiff. There’s a whole range of things we can do to tackle that, and that’s one of the reasons I’m looking forward to the Senedd@ coming to Delyn next month and using that to actually engage more people with what the Assembly does and how it impacts on their lives.

But also it is about ensuring that we bring greater economic benefits from devolution to the region, and I’m pleased to see some such investment in the pipeline, including the development bank that was launched today, which will be based in Wrexham. I’m also supportive of the plans to have a national football museum in Wrexham, but I’d ask, perhaps, if there’s any clarity from Plaid Cymru on whether that will be part of the national museum or a stand-alone museum. From my own personal perspective too, I’d also be keen to know whether the museum would feature those Welsh greats, such as Neville Southall, the late Gary Speed, who also played for the No. 1 team for north Walians to support, Everton. I should point out this is the only time I ever support the team in blue.

Over the summer—

Can I make an intervention? It’s worth noting that Neville Southall outed himself as pro-independence over the last weeks.

Everybody seems to have a story about Neville Southall; I’ll leave it there. [Laughter.]

I spent a lot of the summer doing a survey of constituents, going out door-to-door, knocking on doors, and one of the main issues that came back was public transport, particularly in more rural areas. There are many issues around bus and train timetables and integration in the region, and, I think, issues that the planned north-east Wales metro needs to address. The £50 million from the Welsh Government to take forward the north-east Wales metro is a big proposal that could bring huge economic benefit, but, as work towards this metro gathers pace, I think we also need to consider the importance of people’s ability to access decent work closer to home and provide a driver for businesses to invest and expand. I think the proposals for new stations at Deeside industrial park and at Airbus Broughton to facilitate travel to Airbus and the new advanced manufacturing institute would better equip our region with transport connections to meet work demand. However, I think the ambition shouldn’t end there. I think we need to look at additional stations and, particularly from my own perspective in my own constituency, I think there is merit in looking at an additional station in the Greenfield, Holywell area, which not only would connect the advanced manufacturing sector in the north-east with the energy sector in the north-west and Greenfield and Mostyn docks, but also actually could link into some of the tourism and heritage of St Winefride’s Well and Basingwerk Abbey in the area.

We’ve already touched on how an integrated transport system is essential, not just to connect us east to west and north to south, but also across the border to north-west England. So, we know almost 23,000 people commute from north Wales daily into the north-west of England, and almost 31,000 travel in the opposite way into north Wales. This has had a long-standing pressure on our transport infrastructure, and one that needs addressing. We know the value of that M56-A55 corridor is £35 billion and over 2 million people live within a 30-minute commute of Deeside industrial park, making further investment in our infrastructure all the more significant, which is why improvements to the A55 and looking at the Menai crossings, additional routes, widening where we can, the resilience study to look at those pinch points to see how we can address those challenges, are all incredibly important, as it’s also the gateway to north Wales and all the amazing tourism and attractions that we have there. And so we need that infrastructure in place to better make the most of our visitor economy.

We’ve talked about—. I welcome the Welsh Government’s commitment—we’ve talked about a growth strategy and a growth deal for north Wales, and I’d ask where the UK Government is on this and hope to see something more than just warm words in the autumn statement, and actually some money to follow—money where their mouth is, literally—so we can take that forward. But we need the UK Government, Welsh Government, and all politicians across the region working in partnership with stakeholders like the North Wales Economic Ambition Board, the Mersey Dee Alliance, working together to achieve this growth deal for north Wales.

I think other people have acknowledged that, when we talk about the north Wales economy, we can’t ignore the fact that we are historically and physically and economically connected to our neighbours across in the north-west of England. And, although cross-border working, I think, brings a unique set of challenges, it also could bring significant opportunities, but we need to make sure those opportunities make the most for us in north Wales.

Finally, I’d like to welcome the Welsh Government’s amendment to this motion, which commits to continued support for the steel industry in Wales, including Shotton steelworks in north-east Wales. I won’t refrain from repeatedly making the case for Shotton steelworks when we talk about the steel industry in Wales. It is a shining light in the sector that produces profitable and unique products with a highly skilled and committed workforce, and it’s just one example of the advanced manufacturing sector, which is the cornerstone of our regional and wider wealth in north-east Wales. Indeed—

Are you winding up, please?

I am. Indeed, I believe there is great potential in the pipeline for north Wales—a potential that has been recognised right now by the Government here—but we cannot be complacent. We must build on this and ensure that the voices of the people of north Wales are heard loud and clear in developing our region, if we’re to successfully bridge the gap between north and south and get a fair share of the devolution dividends.

It’s a pleasure to participate in this vital debate today, and, as a gog or a northern person from the west, I will use my contribution to discuss north-west Wales specifically. One of my favourite practices as the Arfon Assembly Member is to chat to as many people as possible across the electoral area of my constituency. One of the things that is raised with me time after time, as with Llyr and Rhun, is this feeling that the Westminster Government, and increasingly the Welsh Government, is leaving our communities behind. But it’s more than a feeling; unfortunately, it’s also a reality. Llyr Gruffydd has alluded to the fact that residents in north Wales have received over £350 less per capita compared to the residents of the south-east of Wales since 2013. With the possibility of using all the borrowing powers of Government on funding the black route of the M4 soon, then it’s likely that the residents of north Wales will still be waiting for fair play, and that for many years to come, unless there’s a significant change of direction.

Forcing the Government to invest significantly in our corner of Wales very often feels like trying to get blood from a stone. As the plans for the bypass in Bontnewydd demonstrate, significant investments of this type only come because of the tireless campaigning by Plaid Cymru over a number of years.

We do need to invest in the north Wales infrastructure, but also to invest in jobs. And here, there is an opportunity for the Government to show its commitment to the distribution of wealth by ensuring that jobs in the public sector and national institutions are distributed throughout Wales. But even having published the location strategy, with the aim of creating and sustaining jobs outwith the M4 corridor, they’ve failed to actually meet that goal, particularly in the north-west.

In 2010, 127 jobs were located in Caernarfon town. By now, there are only 82 jobs in Caernarfon, and there is more uncertainty on the horizon for workers in the Welsh Government offices in the town. The Government is going to sell the current site in order to lease part of a smaller building in another part of town—lease, not acquire or purchase a new building, with the right to end that lease after five years. To me, this raises big questions about the security of those jobs in the long term.

I was very pleased when Welsh Government agreed to the Plaid Cymru demands to include £2 million in funding in order to promote collaboration amongst the four local authorities in the west as part of the budget agreement. We have an opportunity now across the west to share good practice, and an opportunity to work strategically and to begin attracting new investment to the west, because leaving the European Union without any kind of deal would be no less than a disaster for these poor, rural, westerly, Welsh-speaking regions. So, we must redouble our efforts on behalf of the area, and one clear step that these westerly counties have to take is to collaborate in order to attract investment in modern infrastructure and quality jobs in these deprived areas.

The concern of people in my constituency is that the growth deal won’t actually extend to the north-west, and so I look forward to seeing a powerful new region coming into play in the west in order to counterbalance the failures of Welsh Government and the United Kingdom Government to invest in a large part of our country. Perhaps then we can create a nation where every part of the nation has the opportunity to prosper.

I endorse the sentiments expressed in points 1, 2 and 4 of Plaid’s motion. It’s very true that the performance of the economy in north Wales needs to be strengthened. In particular, we need to build an economy in north Wales that allows its people to earn more while allowing them to keep more of their own money. I also regret the historic underfunding of north Wales, as do so many other people in north Wales. However, although Plaid are making the right noises, when it comes to action, they’re doing the opposite and supporting a Labour budget and a Labour Government that has let down north Wales in the past and will let down north Wales in the future. So much more could have been achieved for north Wales if Plaid had stayed true to their voters’ wishes and helped throw that budget out. But now they expect us to applaud them for successfully begging for the crumbs that are left after Cardiff and the rest of the south have once again taken the lion’s share from this south-centric Government.

The rest of the motion does seem agreeable, but, again, this does seem a little bit odd coming from Plaid, given their current track record. They mention the extra crumbs their betrayal of Plaid voters has secured for Visit Wales but somehow forget to mention the tourism tax, which they either support or have been powerless or unwilling to stop, which will make things even harder for those running tourist-related businesses in Wales. Since the advent of cheap holidays abroad, Welsh tourism businesses need every bit of help they can get, not moves that will push up costs and overheads, especially in comparison with their English counterparts. This is not just a tax on tourism businesses, but on all of the non-tourism businesses that are involved in the supply chain or that benefit from a healthy tourism sector and the employment it supports. Therefore, the proposal is in effect a levy on pretty much all local businesses in north Wales. But the tourism tax does have one useful function: it helps voters see what happens when you devolve tax powers to Labour and their supporters, Plaid—they raise them. They look to find anyone who is making a living and grab what they can while they can with no consideration for the long-term effects.

We can’t support point 3 of Plaid’s motion, by which Plaid seeks to give itself a massive pat on the back for negotiating concessions secured from the Welsh Government in return for propping up the Welsh Government again, whilst at the same time pretending to oppose that Government. Consequently—

Will you take an intervention?

Yes, go on.

You’ve seen the list that we’ve outlined in our motion. Which ones do you disagree with, then?

Point 3.

So, consequently, UKIP will be supporting amendment 2. As regards the other amendments to the motion, relating to amendment 1 by Labour, I note that Welsh Labour may now be spending some money in north Wales—at least they promised to, and we’ll see if those plans come to pass—but I don’t think that Welsh Labour have anything really to boast about, though. Yes, money is being promised to north Wales in some limited ways, but that’s a drop in a puddle compared with the moneys that are being invested by Welsh Government in south Wales. The benefits of the so-called improvement to the A55/A494 corridor to the local economy remain to be seen. I and many others believe that the decision to implement the red route will merely move the traffic problems currently in Queensferry further west, which will help no-one and certainly not the wider community. So, I will be reminding voters whose lives and livelihoods will be damaged by the decisions and the neglect of north Wales by Welsh Labour that they should not only blame Labour, but also the equally culpable Plaid.

Turning to the other amendments proposed by Labour, as regards an additional crossing over the Menai strait, when will these plans actually see the light of day, and when will construction actually start? How soon can people on Anglesey expect the third crossing? When will this advanced manufacturing research institute start showing dividends? No economic benefits can be felt until the plans come to fruition, so when will we actually see some improvements in the real world? I recognise that some of the powers called for by the North Wales Economic Ambition Board would need to be devolved by the UK Government first. However, the proposals of the North Wales Economic Ambition Board are very interesting ones that should be taken on board by Welsh Government, but I fear they won’t be. It would make sense for such decisions to be made by those most closely affected by them and by people who understand the area and put north Wales first.

Powers should be devolved to the lowest level of government feasible, and therefore we will be supporting amendment 3. Perhaps if investment decisions had historically been made by those most affected by them, we would not now be bemoaning the neglect of north Wales in comparison with other regions of Wales.

So, in summary, although I support the sentiments expressed in Plaid’s motion, I do find it a bit rich coming from a party that has propped up a Labour Government for years, that has treated north Wales as a poor and remote relation, and continues to do so. Thank you.

I have to say that, in debates like this, I find myself on very abstract ground, and sometimes I wonder where north Wales starts and ends. But this time I just followed the discussion, and I’m wondering which world an which Wales I live in, because that was unreal compared to the world that we live in, particularly in discussing a tax that doesn’t exist yet and hasn’t even been proposed formally, and where the Government in Westminster can say ‘no’ to that at any time.

But what is happening in north Wales of course is that tourism is very important to the coastal and rural areas, and it would make a world of difference there if VAT was cut to 5 per cent, as Plaid Cymru has campaigned for. The Conservatives, who have been so fluent on the subject of tourism over the last few weeks, have kept VAT at 17.5 per cent, and then increased it to 20 per cent on tourism businesses, after promising in an election that they wouldn’t do that to north Wales, and the rest of Wales. That’s the truth about that party.

But there is one thing that can be seen as a link that links north Wales, wherever you think it starts—some people feel that the language starts to change above Aberystwyth, and other people feel that you have to go past Dolgellau; I’m not really sure where exactly north Wales starts. But I do know that there is something common in that area, namely that it’s rural, with farming, agriculture and natural resources, particularly wind and rain. I just want to talk about the opportunities that we should try and take advantage of to establish a stronger economy using our natural resources in those areas to ensure a prosperous future for rural Wales.

Sian Gwenllian has touched on this, but I hope she will forgive me just saying a little bit more about the fact that we now have some very specialist reports about the different scenarios that could stem from Brexit, without a deal, or with a deal of a certain kind, or with a continuity of the customs union and the single market. Of all those scenarios, there’s no doubt that north Wales is going to suffer very badly unless we have some kind of agreement that keeps access or something very similar to the single market and the customs union. It’s very important to put it on record that the Farmers’ Union of Wales have said that we need to stay in the single market and the customs union, and the NFU haven’t mentioned this specifically, but have mentioned specifically about staying in the customs union, at least for now, to ensure that trade happens. One of the scenarios that are mentioned in the report by the Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board says very clearly that those areas that are less favoured, namely most agricultural areas in north Wales, are not only going to lose money, but are going to be in a negative position if that agreement does happen.

It is important, therefore, and we’re not going to apologise to anyone for putting in a Plaid Cymru motion some of the things that we’ve succeeded to secure from the Welsh Government. Among them is £6 million for new farmers and new entrants into the agricultural industry, and support, I hope, through discussion with the Welsh Government, that we’ll be able to see a prosperous scheme to ensure that we do send out the right message to people. As we leave the European Union, there are opportunities for new blood in the industry, there are opportunities for new people to enter the industry and, more than anything else, there are opportunities for new ideas to enter the agricultural industry. We need that revolution, of course, in order to deal with the challenges of the future.

Of course, we have had success in trying to mitigate some of the problems that have stemmed from changing business rates and the effect on hydro schemes. We’ve managed to get tax relief for community companies. There are justifications for tax relief for all kinds of hydro companies. We’ve pushed the Government as far as they can go in this budget deal and there are long-term implications from business rates. It’s obvious that the Government doesn’t want to see business rates killing prosperous businesses in the renewable energy sector—I’m sure they don’t want to see that—but those will be the implications that’ll stem from those business rate changes, and any report now needs to ensure that there is prosperity. I see, for example, that the Westminster Government is looking at stamp duty relief for residential properties that have renewable energy. Well, we could easily do the same thing here in Wales. In fact, Plaid Cymru did propose that in looking at the tax going through the committee, but the Government wasn’t willing to accept that at the time.

So, just to close on a note of hope, I think: there are great opportunities to grow the north Wales economy if we have our own resources and our own future, and that means more power for Wales as a whole.

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

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I’d like to thank Members for their respective contributions to today’s debate. I am incredibly proud of north Wales and the dynamic, forward-looking economy that it has: advanced manufacturing hubs in north Wales, a flourishing tourism sector, a booming food and drink sector, outstanding skills providers; they all contribute to a hugely prosperous part of Wales, one that we wish to see develop in the coming years, but one that is built on existing strength and capabilities.

Incidentally, I think I should draw attention to the fact that right now in the middle east, WorldSkills is taking place. There are approximately 30 competitors from the UK there and I’m pleased to say that two are from Wales: two are from Coleg Cambria in north Wales. Both represent occupations in the advanced manufacturing sector. One lives in Manchester, one lives in Wales and both work in north Wales, contributing to that sector and to the regional economy. I’m pleased to say as well that both economic output and household incomes in north Wales are higher than the average in Wales. This shows that the economy of the region is buoyant, is strong, but we do not wish to rest on our laurels and we will be investing heavily in the region in the years to come.

From Wylfa to Airbus, from Zip World to Chetwood Financial, we’ve some of the best skilled workers, we’ve some of the biggest attractions and brightest prospects in the UK. And I say all of this because I do think it’s too easy in debates such as this to focus on the negatives. We rightly focus on what we can do better, but rarely do we take a moment to actually reflect on what we’re doing very well. And so I’d like to start my contribution by talking about the positives, and I do think that the fundamentals of the north Wales economy are strong. Our task now is to look forward and to build on the strengths of the region, to promote north Wales and to strengthen its confidence, not to turn north Wales against other parts of our country.

I’m proud of what the Welsh Government has done to support the success of north Wales in recent years. Our programme for government investment portfolio in north Wales is hugely ambitious—far, far more ambitious than during the period in which a Plaid Cymru Member held the economy and infrastructure levers. Across the region, we have plans for investment in 78 schemes, totalling a capital investment of more than £1 billion for north Wales. That certainly is no small fry. We’re investing £0.25 billion in the Deeside corridor, or Flintshire corridor as my colleague Hannah Blythyn rightly calls it, to address the chronic congestion—chronic congestion that I’m afraid was only worsened when a previous Minister decided to cancel the project. We’re creating an advanced manufacturing and research institute to deliver game-changing support to key manufacturing companies, which will potentially grow the regional economy by £4 billion pounds. And we’re investing £50 million to take forward the first phase of the north-east Wales metro. We are creating, as Members are aware, M-SParc in the north-west, we are locating the headquarters of the Development Bank of Wales in the north-east, and the Welsh Government has led the way in pressing the UK Government to ensure that High Speed 2 has regular and accessible links into north Wales to support the economy, and I would ask opposition Members whether they have done as we have, which is to urge the UK Government to support scenario 3.

As I outlined in March, we are progressing with developing a third crossing of the Menai straits, and I do think, as Hannah Blythyn said, there is a need to take a mature view of the position of the north Wales economy and develop a strategic agenda for the region that develops the significant cross-border opportunities we have to ensure that the region plays a bigger role in the Midlands Engine and the Northern Powerhouse. It’s a fact that the GVA of the north Wales and Mersey-Dee region is more than half of the entire Welsh economy. Hannah Blythyn was right to state that it’s difficult to travel from Delyn to Cardiff in less time than it is to travel from Delyn to London, but the reality is that it takes less than an hour now to travel from Delyn to Liverpool, Delyn to Manchester, or Delyn to Chester, and so cross-border collaboration is a necessity, and it is surely desirable for our improved economic well-being. For that reason, the Welsh Government has played a leading role, with our partners in north Wales and on both sides of the border, to develop proposals for a north Wales growth deal. It gets added benefit from deals that are being formed across the border in the north-west and the midlands of England. And I’ve been very clear that any growth deal must be used to bring together the UK Government and the Welsh Government with a shared purpose to capitalise on the strategic potential of the region, with a relentless focus on improving productivity, raising skills and improving infrastructure, with Growth Track 360 asks at the very heart of any deal. As constructive as Mark Isherwood’s contribution today might have been, I do think that getting his political masters in London to address the shameful—shameful—underfunding of our railways would be far more beneficial to north Wales.

As great as north Wales is, though, there are challenges that we have faced in recent times. Last year, we intervened to support our steel industry, including the important site at Shotton, by making available over £60 million of support to Tata to keep steel jobs and steel production here in Wales. Our investment is helping the Shotton plant develop a sustainable future and, in turn, is helping that community to make a vital and vibrant contribution to the local economy.

But, of course, the most significant investment in north Wales—indeed, the whole of Wales—in the years to come will be the £14 billion Wylfa Newydd project. This is the largest private sector investment since the dawn of devolution, and we are absolutely committed to ensuring that this project—of course, subject to necessary consents—delivers a lasting legacy for Ynys Môn, and to ensure that this development is reflected fully and wholly in the growth deal.

Deputy Presiding Officer, you’ll be pleased to learn that last week appointments were made to our new regionally focused economic development units, with Gwenllian Roberts appointed as deputy director to the north Wales region. Our model of regionally focused economic development will build on the work that we have been undertaking with our partners in north Wales to develop new structures of co-operation. And so, to conclude, we are committed to doing everything possible to support jobs and growth across north Wales, from Cemaes Bay to Saltney Ferry, and indeed to all parts of Wales.

Thank you very much. I call on Llyr Gruffydd to reply to the debate.

May I thank, Deputy Presiding Officer, everybody who’s contributed to this debate? I believe that I spoke for too long at the outset to be able to respond to every point made.

Fe nodaf un neu ddau o’r cyfraniadau, a diolch i chi am wneud y cyfraniadau hynny. Soniodd yr Aelod dros Delyn, wrth gwrs, am bryderon ynghylch datgysylltiad datganoli a gofynnai am eglurder ynglŷn â’r amgueddfa bêl-droed genedlaethol arfaethedig. Fy nymuniad, yn sicr, yw y byddai’n rhan o’r rhwydwaith o amgueddfeydd cenedlaethol sydd gennym yng Nghymru. Yn sicr, pan edrychwch ar y map, mae bwlch mawr yng ngogledd-ddwyrain Cymru o ran cael amgueddfeydd cenedlaethol ym mhob rhan o’n gwlad. Cafwyd cyfeiriad at y diffyg sefydliadau cenedlaethol yng ngogledd-ddwyrain Cymru yn gyffredinol, ac rwy’n meddwl efallai dros y blynyddoedd fod hynny wedi bwydo ychydig mwy ar y datgysylltiad datganoli y mae rhai pobl yn ei deimlo. Felly, dyna fy ymateb i’ch pwynt yn hynny o beth.

Ac mae’n rhaid i mi ddweud, mae’r cyfraniad a gawsom gan yr Aelod UKIP dros ogledd Cymru—fe gadarnhaoch i mi nad ydych yn cefnogi trydydd pwynt ein cynnig heddiw. Mae hynny’n golygu nad ydych yn cefnogi cysylltiadau gwell rhwng gogledd a de Cymru, nid ydych yn cefnogi gwelliannau i groesfan y Fenai, nid ydych yn cefnogi cymorth ychwanegol i ffermwyr ifanc yn eich ardal, mwy o hyfforddiant meddygol yn eich rhanbarth, rhyddhad ardrethi busnes i gynlluniau hydro cymunedol yn eich rhanbarth, cyllid ychwanegol ar gyfer Croeso Cymru yn eich rhanbarth. Fe’i clywoch yma gyntaf, ac mae hynny’n dweud popeth sydd angen inni ei wybod am eich plaid, rwy’n credu.

Hoffwn ddiolch i Simon Thomas am ei gyfraniad hefyd. Yn sicr, mae llawer y gallwn adeiladu arno o ran yr economi wledig, ond hefyd y pwynt a wnaed am dwristiaeth. Yn amlwg, os yw pleidiau yn y Cynulliad hwn am wneud rhywbeth i gefnogi’r sector twristiaeth yng Nghymru, yna yn sicr gallant ddechrau gyda TAW a gall Canghellor Torïaidd y Trysorlys ddechrau fis nesaf yn ei gyllideb. Edrychaf ymlaen at weld Aelodau Seneddol Ceidwadol yn pleidleisio yn erbyn ei gyllideb os nad yw’n gwneud y peth iawn, neu gefnogi gwelliannau Plaid Cymru hyd yn oed, a hyderaf y bydd gwelliannau i’r perwyl hwnnw mewn perthynas â TAW. Yn y cyfamser, mae’r blaid hon yn bwrw ymlaen â bod yn wrthblaid effeithiol, gan sicrhau miliynau o bunnoedd o fuddsoddiad ychwanegol ar gyfer Croeso Cymru y llynedd, miliynau o bunnoedd o fuddsoddiad ychwanegol y flwyddyn nesaf, yn ogystal; dyna beth yw bod yn wrthblaid effeithiol.

I sôn am rai o’r gwelliannau, sef rhywbeth na wneuthum yn fy sylwadau agoriadol, gwelaf fod Llywodraeth Cymru wedi dewis defnyddio un o’i gwelliannau ‘dileu’r cyfan a rhoi yn ei le’ mewn ymgais i dynnu sylw at rai o’u llwyddiannau, ac rwy’n cefnogi llawer ohonynt, wrth gwrs. Ond tybed pa mor hir y byddai’r rhestr ar gyfer rhannau eraill o’r wlad pan edrychaf ar y rhestr honno. Ni fyddwn yn cefnogi’r ail welliant gan y Ceidwadwyr, sydd, unwaith eto, yn ceisio dileu cydnabyddiaeth o’r buddugoliaethau niferus a sicrhawyd gennym yn y gyllideb hon, ac yn wir, buddugoliaethau i rai o’r bobl yr ydych yn eu cynrychioli fel plaid hefyd. Rydym yn hapus i gefnogi’r trydydd gwelliant o blaid datganoli y tu hwnt i Gaerdydd. Gallech ddadlau, wrth gwrs, pe bai gennym Lywodraeth sy’n cynrychioli Cymru gyfan go iawn ac sy’n sicrhau buddsoddiad teg i bob rhan o’r wlad, efallai na fyddai angen y gwelliant hwnnw, ond rydym yn hapus i’w gefnogi.

Felly, gyda’r sylwadau hynny ac ar ôl cael gwybod bod gennyf dri munud a 25 eiliad i grynhoi, diolch i bawb ohonoch am gyfrannu.

Thank you very much. The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Right, thank you. We will now defer voting on this item until voting time.

Unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, I will proceed directly to voting time. Okay. So, we’re going to vote firstly on motions to elect Members to committees. Can I just inform you that the first three votes we take have to have a two-thirds majority to pass? So, I now call for a vote on the first motion to elect Neil McEvoy to the Petitions Committee. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 39, 10 abstentions. Therefore, that motion is carried.

The motion to elect Rhun ap Iorwerth to the Petitions Committee again requires a two-thirds majority to carry. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 39, 10 abstentions. Therefore, that motion is carried.

The motion to elect Adam Price to the Public Accounts Committee again requires a two-thirds vote to carry. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 40, 10 abstentions. Therefore, that motion is carried.

We now move on to the Welsh Conservative debate on concessionary bus and travel for young people, and I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Paul Davies. If the proposal is not agreed to, we will vote on the amendments tabled to that motion. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 24, no abstentions, against the motion 26. Therefore, that motion is not agreed—[Interruption.] Can we have some quiet while we are carrying out the votes? [Assembly Member: ‘Hear, hear.’] And the person saying ‘Hear, hear’ is probably the one who’s the noisiest in the Chamber. Thank you. So, that was for the motion 24, no abstentions, against the motion 26. Therefore, that is not agreed.

We’ll now turn to vote on amendment 1. I call for a vote on amendment 1 tabled in the name of Jane Hutt. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the amendment 26, eight abstentions, 16 votes against. Therefore, amendment 1 is agreed.

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

Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 49, one abstention. Therefore, the motion as amended is agreed.

We now move on to the Plaid Cymru debate on the north Wales economy, and I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. Again, if this proposal is not agreed, we vote on the amendments tabled to the motion. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion eight, no abstentions, 42 against. Therefore, that motion is not agreed.

We proceed to vote on the amendments. We now turn to amendment 1. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 will be deselected. So, I call for a vote on amendment 1 tabled in the name of Jane Hutt. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 26, no abstentions, 24 against. Therefore, amendment 1 is agreed and amendment 2 is deselected.

I now call for a vote on amendment 3 tabled in the name of Paul Davies. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the amendment 50, no abstentions, none against. Therefore amendment 3 is agreed.

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

Close the vote. For the motion 28, eight abstentions, 14 against. Therefore the motion as amended is agreed.

We now move to the short debate. If Members are leaving the Chamber, can you do so quietly and quickly, please?

We now move to the short debate, and I call on Bethan Jenkins—[Interruption.] If you’re leaving the Chamber, will you do so quickly and quietly, please? If not, please sit down. Thank you. Sorry, Bethan. I now call on Bethan Jenkins to speak on the subject that she has chosen. Bethan.

Thanks. I’ve given a minute to Angela Burns.

When approaching this debate, thinking about the issues it poses, including patient rights, how we support and trust victims of crimes or mistreatment in the NHS, how we safeguard against future incidents, and how the NHS handles problems and major incidents when they do arise, I felt it was important to use current events as a prism through which to look at these problems.

The Kris Wade case is of course one that people will know here I have taken a particular interest in, not just because Abertawe Bro Morgannwg University Local Health Board is in my region, but I’ve taken an interest because the case has demonstrated clearly, despite the review and the promises and assurances, Wales is still in a situation where a major health board has failed again to properly live up to the expectations people have of their NHS, and, more fundamentally, women have been failed—victims of sexual abuse—by having a sexual predator in an alleged safe environment.

I must put this case on the record, have a proper discussion about it, and assess what went wrong and the issues that have arisen as a result. The ‘Desktop Review Lessons Learned Report’, published by ABMU in August, was something of a contradiction in terms. I think we would agree that, in order for a proper review into a major incident to be thorough, and to demonstrate that lessons have in fact been learned, such a review would acknowledge the gravity of a situation such as the one under discussion before anything else. But, in fact, what we saw was something quite different. The report itself was inexplicably late. We were informed initially that the review would be ready in January. It was not published until August. No explanation has been given for this. The review being led by the former chief executive, Paul Roberts, did not materialise, and instead a desktop review was published with redacted authors—a far cry from the thorough and wide-ranging process that was expected and deserved. I have been told that repeated requests by a consultant and former clinical director to give evidence to the desktop review were repeatedly denied. The report came to conclusions for which there was absolutely no basis, such as the claim that there was no link between the failure to prosecute or dismiss Mr Wade and his murder of Christine James. This is something that, unfortunately, others, including the Welsh Government, have repeated. How can this claim conclusively be made when Mr Wade clearly committed a series of sexual assaults against vulnerable women, aggressive actions that are often recognised as precursor behaviours to more serious crimes? In the opinions of many, including some legal opinions, there is a causal link between declining to prosecute and the fact that Mr Wade faced no legal issues at the time he committed the murder of Christine James.

There was scant information over how Mr Wade came to be employed as a health support worker, working with vulnerable people, in the first place. Mr Wade started with the predecessor authority, Bro Morgannwg, as an information technology technician. He was also not subject to any advanced Criminal Records Bureau checks, which is a requirement for the role he was later employed in, and shockingly, ABMU have told my staff, and the staff of other AMs, that they still have outstanding CRB checks to do on current staff.

The report skirts around any potential conflicts of interest of nepotism within management of ABMU. It simply says the point is neither here nor there. It failed to draw conclusions one way or another. This did not strike me as good enough at the time, and it is an aspect of this that deserves greater attention. Kris Wade was, after all, employed as a health support worker in the learning disabilities service without the mandated checks, when his father, Steven Wade, had been the clinical director responsible for the service. One of the most critical parts of this case, and one which is barely reflected upon at all in the review, was why Mr Wade was not dismissed sooner than he was. Why were there so many delays and disciplinary hearings over his actions when there were allegations from three people? Responsibility for this does lie directly at the door of ABMU, and there is a clear responsibility to be taken and lessons understood in terms of safeguarding as we move forward.

Although it’s shocking, there is a recognised risk within the NHS of vulnerable people, particularly women, being abused. In fact, Rowan House stands on the site of Ely Hospital, at which the inquiry into failures of patient care for people with learning disabilities took place in 1969. The Kris Wade case occurred under the health board in which standards of care at Princess of Wales Hospital had been subject to the independent inquiry and subsequent Andrews report, ‘Trusted to care’, and similar incidents had occurred within its mental health services. ABMU has acknowledged its failures of care towards people with a learning disability in the tragic case of Paul Ridd. Even without the local examples, the failures and abuse witnessed in other health boards across the UK and in care facilities should have been a clear warning to the health board to take allegations of this nature seriously, that, in cases of this kind, employment has to be weighed against risk, and there was a clear risk and a pattern developing with this case.

Also omitted from the review were the problems with governance at ABMU. A former consultant from ABMU who I met told me, ‘I had personally raised concerns with the medical director in 2012 following the second allegations of abuse and its implications recognised. Concerns around the internal governance and leadership of the director were highlighted in internal reviews of governance and performance, but not acted upon. And a comprehensive range of concerns raised by myself and others about the failures of governance and actions of the clinical director were either ignored or, more actively, suppressed by the executive of the health board.’ There are clearly major accusations to make here, and those weren’t raised in the lessons learned report, in no small part because his requests to submit evidence were rejected. He goes on to say, ‘The culture within ABMU health board left the clinical director a free rein to run, without proper oversight, an isolated service which operated without accepted governance practices.’ This cannot be acceptable.

Clearly, despite it not being part of the desktop review, governance at the health board is a key issue here. There has been no clear accountability or responsibility from management over what happened and no formal apology. The victims of Kris Wade had to find out from the television that the desktop report had even been released. This is abysmal behaviour on behalf of ABMU. The British Medical Association recently said that the health board should not be allowed to review themselves, and I think Angela Burns has said something similar, and I quote,

‘The Francis Report starkly portrayed the catastrophic effects when concerns are not dealt with effectively, and post Francis, we believe it is unacceptable for a health board to investigate serious concerns about itself.’

It becomes crystal clear from this case, and from the desktop review, that there needs to be a better and more robust framework in place to oversee the management of health boards. If a doctor made a serious mistake or a number of them, then there are professional disciplinary bodies that would have the authority to deal with any of these cases, but no such body exists in the case of managerial breakdowns of responsibility. The boards can’t keep getting away with this. They must be held to account. While we can never say for certain that what happened in the Kris Wade case will never happen again, there are, sadly, likely to be allegations of abuse and crimes committed against patients in future. So, we must prepare health boards and the NHS to deal with incidents more effectively and more timely than what has become apparent in recent events.

The police, I believe, must bear some responsibility in terms of what happened in the Kris Wade case. This is not a matter for the Cabinet Secretary, but there should be in the upcoming Healthcare Inspectorate Wales assessment a thorough as possible investigation into why the police did not bring charges initially in relation to the first allegation, and why the CPS did not bring charges with regard to a later allegation. There’s also a question to answer as to why, in one of the allegations, the police recorded that a crime had been committed, yet no charges were brought in relation to it.

Alan Collins, a solicitor representing one of the victims in the Wade case, told me this: ‘Police inaction is a concern in itself. I do not necessarily criticise the police, because none of us actually know why Wade was not prosecuted for the three sexual assaults, and that is because the information is not in the public domain.’ Moreover, the review authors were in the dark too. The fact is that three vulnerable patients were sexually assaulted by a man who posed a serious risk to women. He went on and killed. The public are entitled to know why this man was not prosecuted for the three assaults. Clearly, on the face of it, the police thought that crimes had been committed. The victims and the public are entitled to know why this dangerous man—because that is what he was—was employed in public service and not prosecuted. We are also entitled to ask: are there lessons to be learned from what we do know? Would, for example, the police approach these cases differently if reported today?

I would hope that you would support me in calling for HIW to thoroughly investigate this police matter, and that they give their full co-operation. The HIW report will of course be pivotal, and it will stand as a test as to whether or not we can have faith in the review and the oversight processes we currently have. I have met with HIW, and I was reassured, to an extent, that the case will be looked at in its entirety. However, to what extent witnesses and evidence can be compelled from outside the health board, or from those no longer employed by the NHS, remains a grey area, and I would leave open the option of calling for a full independent inquiry, under the Inquiries Act 2005, in future if necessary.

More broadly, I would hope to see a proper and humble apology from health boards after these events. I would hope that HIW will fully investigate health board management structures and how they work across Wales, in particular, accountability and who takes responsibility when clearly there is an incident to be responsible for; how health boards cope with major incidents; and what happens if safeguarding procedures are not followed or have failed. There need to be inquiries made regarding how we have better oversight of NHS management structures, recognising that it isn’t only doctors who make decisions that have a real and lasting impact on a patient or NHS user.

For me, one of the bigger negatives, which has emerged as a result of this case, is that there is clearly a culture of secrecy in some parts of the NHS where a light needs to be shone. There is an unfortunate tendency in some sections of the NHS, where the reaction to a major incident, or a number of them, is to put up the barricades and hunker down, rather than to open doors and resolve to openly and transparently find out what went wrong. I would hope HIW and the Welsh Government work together diligently moving forward to solve these problems once and for all.

I’d like to end with a quote from a consultant from ABMU, who told me, and I quote: ‘The lessons to be learned are ones of relevance not just to ABMU, but all other health boards. In brief, lessons cannot be learned if the Welsh NHS refuses to take the class.’ I hope, moving forward, that this isn’t the case and that the victims and their families get the justice they deserve. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

I’d like to thank Bethan Jenkins for bringing forward this debate on safeguarding and patients’ rights in the Welsh NHS. And the reason why I wanted to make a contribution was that, in January 2012, I did a short debate that was entitled ‘Does the Welsh Government have a moral responsibility to seek to protect whistle blowers in all walks of life?’ Because one of the incidents—and you talked specifically about the Kris Wade case—is that there were people there who were trying to blow the whistle, and they couldn’t and didn’t. The question is: why?

When I raised this before, the Minister who responded to me at the time, who is the current leader of the house, assured us that there is written guidance issued by Welsh Government to NHS trusts requiring each to develop its own whistleblowing policy and that a structured assessment of NHS bodies had been undertaken by the Wales Audit Office, which sought high-level assurances that whistleblowing policies and guidance to staff were in place. The reason I feel so strongly about this is that, in this instance, whistleblowing didn’t work. In Powys, which we talked about earlier, people tried to whistleblow, and that didn’t work. And currently, I’m being ticked off by a major health board because somebody has tried to whistleblow, got slapped down by the health board, who then came to me, and I’ve raised those concerns. I’ve got a letter—which I will share, I won’t publicly shame them, but I’m happy to share it with you, Minister—that basically tells me that because they haven’t gone through the policy, the procedure, then tough luck. The reason people can’t whistleblow is because they are frightened. The reason they don’t whistleblow is they are scared they’re going to lose their jobs or their lives are going to be made an absolute misery. And, when good people walk on by and do nothing, it allows things like the Kris Wade incident to get away, to happen without having proper punishment.

We must start having a robust system in place that everybody in the NHS and other public service bodies absolutely cleave to in terms of being able to point out something that they feel is morally or factually incorrect, and have a manager who is outside of that system, looking at it and examining it, and above all somebody—and I know I’m just discounting all the malicious people, and there aren’t that many of them—

And you’re going to wind up now, because you’ve gone well over your minute.

Sorry.

No, no, it’s fine.

But, these people should have that right, because without them to act as a check and balance on our public services, we will have more of these awful, appalling instances in the future.

Thank you. I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Health, Well-being and Sport to reply to the debate. Vaughan Gething.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I’d like to thank both Members for their contributions in today’s debate, which is of course a significant and generally serious issue for all Members in all parties and all of the constituents that we are here to serve.

I think there is genuine cross-party support for ensuring that all patients using our services receive safe, high-quality care and are protected from harm. Much of what we discuss is where that doesn’t happen, in this place. It is of course the nature of our business that we’re less likely to talk about things when things go right, but actually to talk about the things that have gone wrong and to try to understand why.

For patients, that’s why we’ve put in place the Putting Things Right process, to integrate those, to try and ensure that those issues are investigated and addressed. We do want to see a single, integrated approach to make it easier for people to raise concerns and to provide a fair outcome for individuals and is consistent in the way that people are treated. In doing so, we expect to make the best use of our time and resources, and to make sure that people really do learn lessons from where things go wrong.

Concerns and complaints could and should be raised by patients, staff and members of the public, and all who raise them should receive support during the process. I recognise that, whatever the process we have in place, there is always an element of human error to fall within that. Within NHS Wales, staff should be treated with dignity and respect, in line with our established policies. All NHS organisations, as employers, must take action to address any concerns raised by staff in a prompt and timely manner. There is an all-Wales procedure for NHS staff to raise concerns, as agreed in partnership with the Welsh partnership forum, and that’s reviewed on a regular basis to ensure it is fit for purpose.

I shouldn’t respond directly to some of the points that Angela Burns has raised because in my previous life, when I was an employment lawyer, there’s the challenge of the rights that people have in theory and in law and actually the really difficult part of how you assert those rights in practice. Because even in an organisation like the NHS, and it’s a privilege to stand up and to be a Minister for the health service, but within the 76,000-odd staff, we reckon there is imperfection. There are times when people make mistakes and there are times when people don’t just make mistakes, but actually it’s a rather more deliberate approach. That isn’t to attack the service; it’s to recognise, in a human service, that will happen.

Our real challenge is how we support people in practice, because we ask people to raise their heads above the parapet, and that is not always easy. I’m always interested to understand when somebody raises a concern or complaint, it may not always be something where there is a full investigation, but they should not suffer a detriment from doing so. That is a challenge about the cultural part and the vision and the values. That’s why we did lots of work with the BMA on the vision and values for the service, and that’s still as relevant now as it was when we actually introduced and agreed that work.

For children and vulnerable adults, the NHS has been actively improving its approaches in recent years. The national safeguarding team works across NHS Wales with stakeholders and partners to help local delivery in health boards, as well of course as our regional safeguarding children and adults boards, where designated professionals provide a source of independent, expert health advice from an all-Wales perspective. In addition, there is an NHS Wales safeguarding network that connects organisations across NHS Wales to try and create that collaborative environment to recognise common issues, develop solutions, and achieve healthcare standards that better safeguard the welfare of children and adults at risk. At its heart is the evaluation of the efficiency and efficacy of child protection and adult safeguarding arrangements and interventions, as well as trying to reduce the variation in practice within the NHS. Examples of what the network has done already are the NHS Wales quality outcomes framework for safeguarding children, the child sexual exploitation prevention strategy and action plan for NHS Wales, and quality standards for medical advisers’ roles in adoption and fostering, and we also have the all-Wales female genital mutilation clinical pathway, thinking about the range of areas where people come forward into our service. And, of course, a key part of the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014, passed in the last term of the Assembly, was the establishment of a new national independent safeguarding board, which is now chaired by Dr Margaret Flynn. And their job as a board is to advise Welsh Ministers on the adequacy and effectiveness of safeguarding arrangements across Wales. We’ll never be in a position, I think, where we can say that everything is perfect. There will always be a need to review our procedures and our practices, to understand whether we have the best possible system in place, and, equally, whether we have people in place to do so.

I’ll come on to the points that Bethan Jenkins in particular mentioned about the individual case in point. And there’s not just a challenge about whistleblowing, but, in this particular case, with the three previous allegations, unfortunately it appears to be the case that those complainants were not seen as being reliable. And that’s a real problem for us in our system. It should not be the case that vulnerable people, whether children or adults, are seen as intrinsically unreliable. And that is a problem. The health board did, though, refer those allegations promptly to the criminal justice system. The police investigated. And, on each of those occasions, the criminal justice system decided not to proceed. That is a problem for us to understand. But, in the Healthcare Inspectorate Wales review, they don’t have the powers to go into and investigate what the criminal justice system did. What we do need to assure ourselves of, with our responsibilities, is that, the action that was taken, what lessons are there to learn, and look to the future about what more needs to be learned for others. There will be people in our service, sadly, who are in a position where they have not behaved as we would have wished them to around people in their care. That is something on which we do need to have the independence of the HIW review, but I, of course, expect them to have a conversation with the criminal justice system about what happened in this case, and there is definitely learning for the criminal justice system from the Kris Wade case as well.

But I depart company with Bethan Jenkins and a number of others on the very stark view that health boards should not investigate serious concerns. I think health boards have to investigate serious concerns where they have responsibility. There will always be a challenge about when is it appropriate, then, to have an independent review in addition, because we expect the health boards to look at serious concerns, and they already do. We regularly have ombudsmen’s reports, where they actually look at what the health board has done, and, in some of those, they don’t always get it right. They still need this process about understanding what they’ve done, and properly learning and improving. And, in this case, we’ve decided that there should be an independent review, which is why we’ve charged HIW to undertake that review.

Will you take an intervention?

I will take an intervention.