Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru

Prynhawn da. Before I call on First Minister's questions today, and on behalf of us all, I want to express our condolences with our colleague Carolyn Thomas, after the sudden and cruel loss of her son, Ben. Our thoughts and prayers are with you, Carolyn, and your family.

And, also, as we begin our proceedings today, I'm sure we are all horrified by the death and destruction we're witnessing in pictures from Turkey and Syria. Our thoughts as a Senedd are with the people of that region as they seek to rescue, to survive and to grieve. 

The Trefnydd now will be answering questions on behalf of the First Minister today, and the first question, cwestiwn 1, Rhun ap Iorwerth. 

Diolch. Welsh Government had no prior knowledge of the announcement of the 2 Sisters Food Group's consultation. We are committed to doing all we can to support the people affected and ensure all parties work together to deliver a sustainable future for the local economy. 

Thank you, Minister. It is now almost a fortnight since the announcement of the consultation—it was a short one anyway. And, although it was clear from the outset that the risk was that this was a decision that had already been made, it is crucial, of course, that the priority is to see whether there is anything that can be done to change the company's mind. But, we must simultaneously prepare for the worst. We are talking about a huge impact on the community—3 per cent of the whole workforce on Anglesey. 

In light of that, would the Minister agree with me that the response must be significant and swift, from the Welsh and UK Governments, given that so much of what has driven this, from Brexit to energy costs, is the responsibility of the UK Government, and, from significant investment in job creation to support with the cost of living, that Ministers in London and Cardiff need to make an early statement that we, the community, the council and the economic development plans can expect significant financial support?

Thank you. I think 2 Sisters Poultry Ltd are maintaining it's a meaningful consultation and no decision has been made. But, I think you are quite right—we do need, obviously, to prepare for the worst. As I say, we had no prior knowledge of that. I think it would have been helpful had we have had some prior knowledge. We worked very closely with that plant, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic; you'll remember it did have an outbreak, and we worked very closely with them. We have had a relationship with them, so I think it was disappointing that they didn't contact us ahead of the announcement. 

As you know—and you're absolutely a part of the discussions—we are all working in partnership together. On the day of the announcement, both I and the Minister for Economy met with the leader of Ynys Môn county council. Then there were further discussions. The First Minister himself met with the authority on the following morning, and, then, I know you met with the Minister for Economy last Tuesday, and, obviously, the taskforce has now been set up. It was held for the first time on 3 February, when all the partners that you referred to were there, along with the trade union and the Department for Work and Pensions. And I think it is absolutely right that—. This is another example, isn't it, of where Brexit, inflation and the energy crisis are having an absolute detrimental effect on all of our communities, creating that perfect storm that we really don't want to see. But, these are real people who are being affected by this, so we are, once again, urging the UK Government to act quickly to support Welsh businesses, and, as a Government, we will continue to do all we can. 

I'd first like to echo the comments made regarding the devastating impact of the proposed closure of the 2 Sisters Llangefni site, and the real importance for both the UK and Welsh Governments to work together to achieve as positive an outcome as possible. So, I certainly support the Member for Ynys Môn's calls for that. 

It has been positive, Minister, as I'm sure you'd agree, to see that there are companies on the island and beyond looking to offer further employment to those people who are affected. I'm pleased also that Virginia Crosbie, MP for Ynys Môn, has been working with employers to see what opportunities can be provided to those impacted as well. You mentioned, Minister, the taskforce that Welsh Government have set up, and it's certainly good to see that happen as quickly as possible. But, I wonder what further assurances you can give that this taskforce will ensure those impacted are supported through the 45-day consultation period, and what work they are doing to look at the long-term viability of the site. And, then, furthermore, what analysis will that taskforce be making of the impact on the wider community of Ynys Môn and beyond? Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Diolch. So, the taskforce does include Welsh Government, Ynys Môn council, UK Government, the Department for Work and Pensions, the company itself and Unite trade union. There are going to be two parts to it: there's going to be a leadership group, which will obviously have the ministerial input, and then there'll be an operational group, which will be at an official level. And that's to ensure that work progresses at pace. I think that it is really important that that taskforce looks at what we can do to support the affected employees and the communities. It is a really devastating announcement. I absolutely agree with you around that, and I'm aware that the taskforce, on Friday, did absolutely reaffirm its full support.

Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board is responsible for the condition of its own estate. Business cases can be submitted to Welsh Government for capital funding for the health board's assessed priorities, which have to be considered against the backdrop of significant capital pressures across NHS Wales.

Thank you, Trefnydd. Now, shockingly, some 74 per cent of the buildings owned by this board comply with statutory health and safety requirements, only 64 per cent comply with relevant statutory fire safety requirements, and only 62 per cent are operationally safe. And that's a very worrying concern for my constituents and also patients across north Wales. At Ysbyty Gwynedd, the design and layout actually present infection prevention and control risks. The hospital that you're directly supporting, Ysbyty Glan Clwyd, now has a maintenance backlog of £37 million. And Bryn y Neuadd, in Llanfairfechan, has a backlog of £27.7 million, and 70 per cent of its occupied floor area recorded as 'not functionally suitable'. And that particular hospital has some very, very vulnerable patients there. They deserve better.

Now, the health board's estate strategy states that,

'physical condition and statutory compliance of the estate has got worse since the 2019 Estate Strategy'.

Now, whilst I'd like clarity as to what financial assistance you will be providing, this is simply not a good state of affairs for a health board that swings from one crisis, or one scandal or story, week by week. Now, at some stage, when are you going to actually look at the management of this health board? And, actually, in something like this, if I was responsible for the maintenance and the upkeep of buildings in a managerial position, I would be expecting some kind of repercussion to come from such a poor report. So, what steps are you taking, Trefnydd, to make sure that my constituents, and other patients across north Wales—

I have been extremely generous, Janet Finch-Saunders, so just ask the question now.

Okay. So, what steps are you taking to ensure that my constituents, and patients across north Wales, can actually receive their medical treatment in safe facilities? Diolch.

Well, I know what steps you could take, and you could put some pressure on your Government in Westminster to increase our capital budgets. Our capital budgets have not been increased by the UK Government. However, we have committed more than £335 million towards important NHS and social care capital projects this financial year, and a further £375 million next year to support those organisations, because it's right across Wales. We know we have a lot of our buildings, across all hospitals and health boards in Wales—. Some of them are over 30 years old. So, we know that there has been an increase in backlog figures, for instance, and I know that the Minister for Health and Social Services has met with the chair of the health board and the interim chief executive of Betsi to discuss what prioritisation the health board has, because, as I said in my opening answer to you, it's up to them to identify the priorities that they have, and then put in the bids to the Welsh Government. But you must appreciate the pressures on our capital budget.

Questions now from party leaders. The leader of the Welsh Conservatives, Andrew R.T. Davies.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. Could I identify with the comments that you made earlier in this session, Presiding Officer? And could I ask you, Trefnydd, in light of the horrendous scenes that are coming from Turkey and Syria, and the size of the death total that's going up in the hundreds, if not the thousands, every hour, what assessment has the Welsh Government made of the assistance that we in Wales will be able to give? Very often, that involves search and rescue teams, it involves humanitarian aid and medical supplies generally. Obviously, the UK Government will be leading on this, but Wales has a proud tradition of helping out in situations like this, and speedy and timely intervention is critical. I assume you've made an assessment that the Welsh Government can make a key contribution. So, what will that contribution be and what dialogue have you had with the UK Government to make sure it happens in a timely manner?

I know the Minister for Social Justice has asked her officials to begin those discussions with the UK Government. She herself will be making a statement to the Senedd—probably a written statement, I would imagine. Those discussions have started and, as I say, further information will come forward. You're absolutely right, we do have a very proud tradition. I'm sure there are already people being identified to go and support the rescue operation. As you say, it's just devastating for the region. I do think the number of people killed is going to be significantly in the thousands, as you referred to.

I'm sure, as Members, we'd be greatly appreciative of an update as soon as possible, because not unreasonably, obviously, constituents and organisations that are able to help are getting in touch with us, and that would be most welcome. I can see the Minister indicating that will be forthcoming. 

Last week, we had from the auditor general the report on the purchase of Gilestone Farm. It made for interesting reading. The description by the risk assessment board of the Welsh Government was that the process that was used to buy Gilestone Farm was 'novel'. Some people think of Yes, Minister or Yes, Prime Minister in the civil service speak when you think of such language. But, when you look into some of the comments within that report, it identifies six meetings over the period when key decisions were being made with officials and the Green Man Festival. They were on 22 October, 26 January, 28 January, 11 February, 7 March and 23 March. Not one single note or minute was taken of those meetings. Not one single note or minute. You're a Minister of some considerable standing, leader of the house, and have been in Government some considerable time. Can you think of a situation where an interested party would be so heavily engaged in discussions where they could potentially be such a beneficiary of a considerable sum of public funds and not a single minute, note or record of six meetings was taken during that time?

I have to say, I am a Minister that does make a lot of notes. I've always done that, and I've always dated them. I think that's really important. But, I think what we need to look at in relation to the auditor general's letter—. I think it did make for interesting reading. There were a lot of positives in there, which I'm sure you won't welcome, but there were a lot of positives around the way that Welsh Government did use that funding. Sometimes we have to be a bit more innovative. Government, by its very nature, is risk averse, and that's absolutely right when you're dealing with public money. You have to be very careful. But I did think, for me, I took a lot of positives from that letter. The pressures on our budget have been very well documented, especially the real-terms decrease we face. Any decisions to make use of funding, regardless of time of year, must ensure the proposals present value for money, and they've got to be clearly aligned with our policy priorities and they need to follow due process. I didn't see anything in that letter that didn't say that we did that.

Minister, there are businesses the length and breadth of the country who apply to Welsh Government and the UK Government for support, sometimes for several hundred pounds, sometimes for thousands, sometimes for tens of thousands, if not millions. Here we have an intervention by the Welsh Government of £4.5 million where you cannot pinpoint a single note or minute of the interaction between the potential beneficiary of that intervention and the Government officials that were making decisions to advise the Minister at that time. In fact, the same Government officials commissioned the valuers and the legal firm to undertake the work without ministerial advice. Their advice was finished before the Minister actually said that they could spend the £60,000 on the procurement of that service.

My point is that many businesses the length and breadth of Wales—and you'll be familiar with this from your postbag as a constituency Member—bemoan the fact of all the level of information they have to provide to support grant application. We understand that there have to be the checks and balances, because it's public money. But why, in this case, was there not a single—not a single—note that could be drawn on to show the level of interaction and what was discussed, given the very quick intervention and turnaround time that the Government used in this particular aspect of purchasing the farm, which the auditor general highlights. There was no time pressure, because there wasn't another purchaser chasing the property. It's in his report. I can see the Minister turning round saying, 'That's not true.' It's in the auditor general's report. He could not find any other time constraint other than the self-imposed time constraint of Welsh Government. So, I ask you again: what examples in your ministerial career can you think of where such an interaction would not have had a minute, a note, a record so that that could be held in the accountability and transparency process and people can feel that they will get a fair crack of the whip when they apply for Government funding?

I think it's fair to say there had been discussions with Green Man about potential sites for some time. This wasn't just something that happened very quickly. Those discussions had been going on for some time, and the high-level outline business case that had been provided was enough to progress with the purchase. So, as I say, I think there were a lot of positives in that letter from the auditor general and we very much welcome that, and obviously we will look to learn lessons as always. There are always lessons to be learned.

Leader of Plaid Cymru, Adam Price. 

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. When Plaid Cymru suggested in November that you used a combination of the Wales reserve departmental underspends and unallocated funding to fund a better pay offer for NHS staff, the Minister for Health and Social Services told us there was no unallocated spending available, there were no underspends, and that you couldn't use the Wales reserve. 'Even if we did have underspends,' she said, 

'let's be clear that this could not be used to fund pay awards.... Reserves can't be used for everyday spending.'

She said, 

'They can only be used once, and they're held for emergencies.'

For months you refused to negotiate, for months you refused to admit more money could be found, and for months you refused to acknowledge that we were in an emergency. Now, you've effectively u-turned on all of that. What took you so long? 

Well, we're very pleased to announce that an enhanced pay offer was able to be made last week to the health trade unions, and that did call for several of the health unions to call off the strike action yesterday and today, and those discussions are obviously ongoing. We've had to prioritise money, we've had to look at reserves, we've had to look at underspends, and, obviously, as the year goes on, those underspends come to the fore, particularly this time of year. We're all, as Ministers, pressurising our officials to make sure what underspend there could be, and to make sure we use it to the very best of our ability. We've said all along we would have preferred a UK-wide conclusion, really, to this. We couldn't wait any longer for the UK Government to do this. We've managed to find a bit more money, and I think that money has been welcomed by the majority of people. 

The offer now of just 1.5 per cent extra as a pay rise on top of your, frankly, derisory original pay offer, has been described by Sharon Graham of Unite as 'a sticking plaster'. For many in the NHS this real-terms cut of more than 4 per cent in their pay will rub salt in the deep wounds caused by more than a decade of austerity. When you say now that this is your last and final offer, that this is, to quote the health Minister, 'the only deal in town', then why should anyone believe that statement when you've contradicted yourselves as a Government on so many occasions? You could, couldn't you, turn that one-off payment of 3 per cent into a permanent pay rise, again by using a combination of the Wales reserve next year and a reduction in agency spend? Instead of rejecting that now, only to accept it later, why don't you just do what is right right now? 

Well, we've already used the next two years' reserve, so we've already done that. What we've done in that 3 per cent additional offer is—1.5 per cent is consolidated, as you said, and the other 1.5 per cent isn't. I have to say that we're doing this at risk obviously. This has been the hardest budget I've ever dealt with as a Minister, and I'm sure everybody sitting around me on the frontbench would agree. We've done our very best, and I think the Minister and her team, who worked relentlessly to bring this deal forward, and also along with the Minister for Finance and Local Government, who has found that funding, they should be congratulated not criticised for a u-turn or whatever you want to call it. This has been welcomed by the majority of people. We would not, of course, have wanted to see industrial action in the way that we have, and we're very pleased that the majority of trade unions did postpone the action that they were going to take on the sixth and seventh. That will allow time for meaningful negotiations to carry on. The Minister's door is always open, and I think it's really good that we have been able to carry on those discussions. We've also got to ask the NHS to do things. So, I know, as part of the proposal, the Minister is asking them to look at agency working to see what money could be saved from agency staff as well. So, it's about everybody playing their part and working together. 

But you can go further than that, Minister, can't you, because you do have the ability to raise additional revenue through your tax-varying powers? Now, I understand the Government's position is that you don't want to touch the basic rate, but even if you simply matched the increases in the higher and additional rates that are being introduced in Scotland on 1 April—the 42p and the 47p—that would raise £76 million, enough to turn your one-off payment this year into a permanent pay raise. And if you were able to use alternative means of doing that, you could use that £76 million instead to raise care workers' wages to £12 an hour. Why don't you use the powers that you have at this time to do what is right by this group of workers? You describe yourself as a socialist Government; why don't you take this opportunity to act like one? 

We are a socialist Government, and I think just what we've done in this last week absolutely shows that; it shows the difference between us and the UK Government. But our position on tax is very clear; any analysis of the levers that are available to us as a Government via the Welsh rates of income tax demonstrates we simply cannot raise enough fairly enough to make good the holes that have been created by the economic crisis and ensure higher pay in our public services. So, I don't think it would be right in a cost-of-living crisis to ask anyone that pays the basic income rate to pay any extra money. And you refer to the higher rate, and we don't know if there would be any unintended consequences. I think you will have heard the Minister for Finance and Local Government saying in the same programme that you were interviewed on on Sunday that there could be unintended consequences. People who earn the levels of salary that they would have to earn to pay that higher rate of income tax, they're not like other people. They could just up and leave Wales and move to England, for instance. We don't know what would happen, and I think that is a piece of work that really needs looking at very carefully. I'm really not sure that your judgment on this is correct. 

Thank you. We continue to provide significant and sustained funding to support the provision of mental health services across the whole of Wales. In addition to its mental health ring-fenced allocation, Cwm Taf Morgannwg University Health Board has received an additional £3.3 million of recurrent mental health funding this year to continue to improve mental health support. 

Thank you, Trefnydd. Ensuring people can access mental health services in a timely manner is important for our NHS, vital for people in need, and can even save lives. That's why I'm really pleased at the roll out of the '111 press 2' telephone service to access urgent mental health support. With the intention that this will be introduced to all health board areas in Wales by the end of March, what plans does Welsh Government have to raise awareness of this crucial service?  

Thank you. I absolutely agree with you; I think this is an excellent initiative, and all health boards across Wales are at different phases of the implementation now, but we are looking towards having that 24/7 coverage right across Wales by the end of this financial year. I know officials are working with colleagues in 111 to develop marketing materials for preparation for the national launch. Health boards have been raising awareness locally; I know myself as a Member of the Senedd and I'm sure others have been raising it on our social media profiles too, and I think that's important also. There will be much more of a national awareness launch made when all health boards are in the same position by April.  

I think what's been really pleasing to see is that partners have welcomed this service, and I think what it does show is that the majority of callers to this number won't need referral to NHS mental health services following the intervention of a mental health practitioner to de-escalate their distress, for instance, they might need other types of support, and I think it's really important that it's the right access of support they're getting.

I'd like to thank the representative for Cynon Valley for raising this important issue. Over the last 40 years in Wales, the number of female suicides per 100,000 of the population has dropped almost 50 per cent, from nine to five. For males, unfortunately, the number has increased, from 19 per 100,000 to 21 per 100,000, and thus men are therefore over four times more likely to commit suicide than women. As the Minister will know, there are links between deprivation and suicide, where there are almost twice as many suicides for those living in the most deprived areas compared to the least deprived, and Cardiff and Rhondda Cynon Taf, both within the region I represent, have the two highest concentrations of deprived areas in Wales. Therefore, Minister, what specific action is the Welsh Government taking to provide targeted support for males suffering from mental health issues in the most deprived areas within Cardiff and Rhondda Cynon Taf? Thank you.

Thank you. Well, the Deputy Minister for Mental Health and Well-being has been working closely with all the health boards to make sure additional funding has been targeted to support the services to which you refer. We've also worked with the police and other emergency services to make sure that the real-time suicide surveillance system in Wales is available. It's provided much more rapid access to information about probable suicides, for instance, and that is really being used to strengthen our preventative work.

Our Transforming Towns programme is supporting the redevelopment of Rhyl's Queen's Buildings, bringing new vibrancy to the town centre. The market is expected to open this summer, following a £13.2 million investment, which builds on a broader programme of regeneration delivered in the town over recent years through strong local partnerships.

Thank you very much for that answer, Trefnydd, and I'm pleased to see the latest news that the ambition is for the Queen's Market Building to be opened, indeed, this summer, as you mentioned. And indeed, seeing the erection of the steel frame on the promenade in recent weeks has caused me much delight. However, there are many units to fill, and the opening in the summer of this year needs to be raring to go, with traders ready to do business in the local area to increase footfall in Rhyl, which has waned over the years with a struggling town centre and people choosing to go to Chester or Cheshire Oaks for their entertainment or to dine out and have a drink. What I want to ask is around the occupancy of the building, once established. So, what work is the Welsh Government doing to engage with local businesses, Denbighshire County Council and stakeholders to make sure that the building is a success when opened, and that local people can feel that they have a go-to place in their local town rather than it just being the latest in a long line of Welsh Government-funded projects that are socialist vanity projects? Thank you.

Well, it's a pity the UK Government failed to support the application for levelling-up funding to support Rhyl. Those vanity projects that you refer to I think have really transformed Rhyl. It's a town I've known a lot longer than you, having spent many days there as a child, and I think it's really, really benefited from the Welsh Government funding. As I say, it's just a shame the UK Government didn't come forward with some levelling-up funding. I know Jason McLellan, the leader of Denbighshire Council, and working in partnership, has got some really ambitious plans for Rhyl. I visited it myself last summer as part of my visit to look at specifically regeneration projects as north Wales Minister, and it was really good to see that focus on regeneration, and I know they're working very hard to make sure those units are fully utilised.

Working with the Welsh Government, Cwm Taf Morgannwg University Health Board and Bridgend County Borough Council have 48 step-down beds and community packages across Bridgend. This contributes towards the all-Wales total of 595 beds that have been created to support the discharge of people from hospital this winter.

Diolch. Thank you, Minister. Last month, the Royal College of Emergency Medicine hosted an event here in the Senedd on the future of emergency care in Wales. The event heard from clinicians on the ground who spoke about the need for a long-term sustainable strategy. Data shows that whilst attendance to A&E is similar year on year, capacity continues to be stretched. We know that there are a range of issues causing this, from patients having high complex needs to a reduction in community beds across Wales and the need to increase staffing levels of consultants. At the event, Bridgend was represented by our clinical director of emergency care for the Princess of Wales Hospital, and it was good, actually, to hear that the No. 1 issue, as it is in many other places, is not actually staff recruitment. However, it is the lack of community beds that is creating a slow hospital flow and thus impacting waiting times, because Princess of Wales has about 300 beds, and 160 of those are filled with medically fit patients, and 80 of those are simply waiting for a community or step-down bed. Bridgend is facing an exit block.

I appreciate the Welsh Government is working hard to combat these issues across Wales. The 595 community beds for Wales are welcome, but it is disappointing that just 15 of these beds reached Princess of Wales. How, then, Minister, is the access to more community beds determined, and what more can be done to ensure that those 80 patients in Bridgend, waiting in our hospital, can be discharged, improving the flow of patients through Princess of Wales as well as their care? Diolch.

Diolch. As the Member knows, the focus for health and social care in Wales is on strengthening our community-based services. We want people to live at home, as independently as possible and for as long as possible. Although it is extremely challenging, I think there is an emerging picture of improved patient flow and reduced length of stay for some of our oldest and frailest patients, and that's partially contributed to a stable performance position in the NHS, despite the significant challenges that have been faced this winter. 

Regarding the additional step-down beds and the community care packages created over the winter, as I described in my initial response, the total number now does stand at 595. And I know, in Bridgend, between 450 and 500 hours of extra reablement care have been commissioned and are being delivered locally.

Minister, the provision of step-down care is vital if we are to tackle the ever-growing waiting times experienced by patients in my region and across Wales. Of course, if a previous Welsh Government had not closed community hospitals and overseen the removal of over 10,000 beds from our NHS, we might not be in this predicament today. However, what is important now is that step-down care is provided in as safe a manner as possible. Minister, I have received a number of reports that patients have been transferred to step-down beds whilst not medically stable. In such cases, the step-down ward has to depend on the ambulance service for emergency medical care. What steps are your Government taking to ensure that there are no unsafe transfers to step-down care and that any step-down bed has adequate medical as well as domiciliary care?

Well, you used the very important word, and that was 'safe', and that is absolutely the priority. On 5 January, the Minister for Health and Social Services' officials held a national discharge summit with all regional partnership boards across Wales, to reiterate her expectations for every effort to be made to keep people at home and not admit them into hospital in the first place unless absolutely necessary, and, of course, the reverse, to enable those in hospital to leave hospital as soon as it was safe for them to do so, to help preserve our hospital capacity and prevent the risks associated with a prolonged hospital stay.

Diolch. Revisions to our statutory guidance for the Animal Welfare (Breeding of Dogs) (Wales) Regulations 2014 have been published. The introduction of new animal welfare regulations will be prioritised over the revision of existing regulations during the term of the plan. 

That's very helpful to know. In the last 15 months, two Caerphilly residents have been killed by dangerous dogs. One was a 10-year-old boy, the other was an 83-year-old woman. Both were in the community of Penyrheol, which has been hit by these two tragic, separate, incidents. My colleague Wayne David MP has raised the issue in the House of Commons and is putting pressure on the UK Government to update and amend the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991. A recent BBC Panorama documentary has highlighted the activities of unscrupulous dog breeders, who are breeding dogs and are combining breeds to get past loopholes in the law, and those dogs are then finding their way into communities like Penyrheol and others across Wales.

So, when updating the Animal Welfare (Breeding of Dogs) (Wales) Regulations 2014, which you have committed to, can this issue be considered, particularly cross-breeding? And I would be happy to sit down with the Minister to discuss the consequences of changing the law and how it can benefit those communities that have been affected in this tragic way.

Yes, absolutely, I'd be more than happy to meet with you. I had one in my own constituency as well—I had a fatal dog attack in my own constituency—and previous to Julie Morgan joining the Government, I remember having several meetings with her and a local Cardiff councillor around this. This is something that really needs to be got to grips with. As you say, the Dangerous Dogs Act is non-devolved, and I have raised this with colleagues in the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to see if the plan could be to amend the Act. Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be any movement by the UK Government to do that. The Act covers the ownership of specific breeds of dogs deemed to be dangerous, but we know, of course, that all breeds of dogs can show aggression sometimes. So, I think that's an important point to remember. For me, as a Welsh Government, I think it's really important to promote responsible ownership, particularly in relation to that particular point.

I'm certainly very happy to look at your suggestion. As you know, we updated the animal welfare licensing regulations, and we did close loopholes there relating to pet sales to try and improve enforcement by local authorities. We've had the enforcement project that Welsh Government has funded for three years. I think we need to make sure that the public are making informed decisions when they buy a pet, so that was part of those regulations as well. But there is absolutely more we can do. I've asked officials to actually start to look at dog licensing again. When I was young, people had to have a dog licence, and maybe now is the time to look at that. I have asked my interim chief veterinary officer to do that for me.

Shifting focus onto the welfare of non-domestic animals, I'm sure you'll be aware in your role as rural affairs Minister that otters and foxes have been designated as carriers of the highly pathogenic avian influenza H5N1. According to Animal and Plant Health Agency data, 66 mammals have been tested to date for the disease, with nine otters and foxes being found positive. It appears that these scavenging animals, who predate on infected birds, are at risk of contracting H5N1. So, given this, what steps is the Welsh Government taking to analyse this and ensure that this isn't spreading through the wild foxes and wild otters here in Wales?

Thank you. As you know, we've had a continual outbreak of avian influenza across the UK over the past 16 to 17 months now. You're quite right, it's something that officials are working very closely on in relation to the findings from APHA because I don't think it's something that we've seen—I certainly hadn't been aware of it probably five years ago. So, I think it is something that is evolving—that's not the right word. So, if there is more information to come forward, I'll certainly be happy to share, but I know, again, that the interim chief veterinary officer is very keen to see what we can learn from that data.

Good afternoon, Minister. You won't be surprised to know that one aspect that I've consistently raised here in the Siambr is that of banning greyhound racing. Obviously many of you know that I've raised the issue of our dog, Arthur. Sadly, we said goodbye to Arthur yesterday. Arthur was only 11, and he'd only been with us for three years. The period before, the eight years before, he'd been either in a dogs' home, or five years on a race track, which is where the dogs' home found him in absolutely squalid, terrible conditions. Arthur was a very anxious dog. His back legs went, and he had a very serious neck injury from racing. I don't want any more Arthurs; I don't want any more dogs that come out like Arthur. So, we have to ban greyhound racing. I would say to you: what is going to happen in relation to your officials not looking at whether greyhound racing should be regulated, but that we want greyhound racing banned here in Wales? Thank you. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Jane, I'm so sorry to hear about Arthur. He had a wonderful three years with you. I absolutely know that. And if we can do something in memory of Arthur, we will certainly do that. As you know, this is something that I've been looking at very closely. We've had the Petitions Committee report into banning greyhound racing, and, as you know, my officials have been looking at what can be done in relation to that. We need to build up evidence if that is the way that we think it should go. We cannot do anything without evidence and I very much look forward to continuing this debate. But I am truly sorry about Arthur.

Thank you. In conjunction with the Healthy Working Wales programme, a new in-work support service will commence in April 2023. This will provide occupational and therapeutical support for employees to remain in or return to employment who are absent from work or at risk of becoming absent due to their physical or mental ill health.

I thank you, Trefnydd, for your response there. And, of course, Trefnydd, you may be aware that there are hundreds of thousands of people who have left the workforce since 2019, and there are big efforts in terms of keeping older people in their jobs for longer to support the economy. An early reported conclusion of a review from the Department for Work and Pensions is that companies that provide employees with extensive occupational health support have a better retention rate because they lose fewer staff to ill health or related problems. And I'm aware, of course, we have over 50,000 people currently waiting for over two years for treatment on the Welsh NHS. I'm aware that organisations such as the Senedd Commission or the Welsh Government will offer good occupational health support to their employees. I'm aware also of the tens of thousands of small businesses across Wales that won't have that same ability to offer that occupational health support. So, can I ask, Minister, what specifically the Welsh Government is doing to help very small businesses—maybe just one or two staff employed in each business—how are they supporting those businesses to offer better occupational health support to their staff?

Thank you. I did note the Chancellor’s recent comments urging older people to return to the labour market. Some of us have never left. And I think there is a concern, a genuine concern, about the number of people over the age of 50 who have left the labour market relatively early. You make a very important point around occupational health provision and, certainly, the Welsh Government do support businesses in Wales to create healthier workplaces by making improvements to their well-being and health practices. We've also got a new in-work support service. That's completely funded by the Welsh Government, and that provides occupational and therapeutical support for employees. And there is also dedicated information and guidance on how businesses can extend their occupational health offering. That's available on the Business Wales website, so I'd encourage any businesses to have a look at that. There are also relevant links on Public Health Wales’s Twitter page.

We continue to support vulnerable people across Wales, including those in South Wales East, to help mitigate the cost-of-living crisis. Initiatives include our generous social wage, expanding our childcare offer, our universal primary free school meal offer, and reviewing the council tax reduction scheme to make it more equitable.

Diolch yn fawr and I welcome that answer. I recently met with the enforcement conduct board and we discussed the unfair charges that are applied to many people struggling to pay off a debt. I was given an example of a woman who lives in social housing in Newport and receives universal credit and personal independence payments. She was subject to a High Court enforcement case on behalf of a utilities creditor. She asked the debt collection company if she could arrange an instalment plan, but the company insisted on a visit to see if she had any assets. This meant that, in addition to the £75 charge that was added to her debt because of the telephone stage of enforcement, £190 was added to her debt for the visit. Had she not been at home on the first visit, a second visit would have led to the stage 2 High Court enforcement fee of £195 being added on. The system adopted by some debt collection companies appears to be nothing more than a racket that prays upon the most vulnerable in our communities. It has to stop.

Can the Government issue guidance to the public sector and utility companies, so that they only work with debt collection companies who work in tandem with the enforcement conduct board? I would be grateful if you could also explore any ways of curtailing the rogue operators in this sector in order to protect our citizens.

Thank you, you raise a very important point, and I know the Minister for Social Justice, next week, is meeting with enforcement companies to bring forward that very point that you make, and I'm sure the Minister will be very happy to issue a written statement following those meetings.

I thank the Trefnydd for responding to those questions on behalf of the First Minister.

The next item is the business statement and announcement, and once again it's the Trefnydd who will make this statement. I call on the Trefnydd to make the statement. Lesley Griffiths.

Diolch. There are no changes to this week's business. Draft business for the next three weeks is set out on the business statement and announcement, which can be found amongst the meeting papers available to Members electronically.

Trefnydd, can I call again for an oral statement on the investigation into the Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board concerning the events that gave rise to the qualification of accounts for 2021-22 and the subsequent £122 million counter-fraud investigation, which is now under way? There are lots of questions that people in north Wales have and want answers to, including whether this investigation extends beyond the health board, when it will be concluded, are any prosecutions likely, will there be significant financial implications for NHS services in north Wales to our local residents, will there be a further qualification of the accounts for the last financial year, and whether there are also Welsh Government officials that might be implicated in this. I think these are fair questions, which we do need some answers to, and it would be helpful if we could have an oral statement that we can ask questions to the Minister about. I can see the Minister is nodding, so it looks like we might get one.

The questions you ask are very fair and do need a thorough answer. I don't have the answers now. I think it's probably a little bit too early at the moment, but I think at the most appropriate time the Minister for Health and Social Services will do a statement.

Trefnydd, we have all rightfully been horrified by the testimony that has come forward relating to sexism, misogyny and racism within the Welsh Rugby Union. As Members will be aware, a Senedd scrutiny committee had the opportunity to question both the WRU and the Deputy Minister for arts and sport last week on the matter. During the scrutiny session with the Welsh Government, it was clear that the Welsh Government had been made aware of some serious allegations in May 2022, and that there had been discussions between the Deputy Minister and the WRU on these matters. I would like to request an oral statement from the Deputy Minister for arts and sport on this matter, clarifying what was known to Welsh Government and when, and outlining what steps were taken. Given the public interest in the matter and the significance of the allegations made, I would welcome the opportunity for the Senedd as a whole to be updated on the Welsh Government's discussions with the WRU during that time.

Thank you. Following the committee appearance by both the chair and acting chief executive of the WRU, and obviously the Deputy Minister for culture and arts and her officials, I think the next step, and that's the most appropriate step, is for the Minister to write to the committee.

His Majesty's Inspectorate of Prisons published a very troubling report on Friday about its unannounced inspection of Eastwood Park prison. That inspection took place in October, and the conditions described by the inspectorate make for very difficult reading: bloodstains on the wall, extreme mental distress, including spiralling incidents of self-harm, which well-meaning but poorly trained staff were not equipped to deal with. As this is the main prison where south Wales women are being incarcerated, I'd like to request a statement from the Minister for Social Justice to find out at what point was she informed of these conditions and what has been done in these last three months to improve the desperate situation for women who are acutely unwell and yet being incarcerated on very short sentences in really awful conditions.

Thank you. I know the report made for very harrowing reading. It identified substantive gaps in care and a real lack of support for some very distressed and vulnerable women. It's really important that women involved with the criminal justice system are held in safe and secure facilities that are absolutely fit for purpose. I know the Minister for Social Justice visited there recently with the Counsel General and will be making a written statement.

I call for two oral statements or debates in Welsh Government time on two important matters.

The first of these is on accessible communication and information for people with a sensory loss. Public services have legal duties under section 20 of the Equality Act 2010 to ensure that disabled people can access services on an equal basis to non-disabled people, known as the reasonable adjustments duty. This includes making sure that people who have an impairment or sensory loss are provided with information in a format that they can read and understand. However, following the health Minister's response to the joint letter from RNIB Cymru and the RNID in Wales seeking clarity around the all-Wales standards for accessible communication and information for people with a sensory loss, they replied outlining a number of continuing concerns they still have, which they also shared with me as chair of the cross-party groups on disability and on deaf issues.

They highlighted the lack of scrutiny, accountability and reporting around the implementation of the standards across NHS Wales, and that this is a patient safety issue. They called on the Welsh Government for clarity around why the Welsh Government has not allocated the resources necessary to appoint an accessibility lead, despite accepting this as a recommendation on two separate occasions, initially made by the Senedd's Equality, Local Government and Communities Committee and then again by the Health and Social Care Committee. They called for a clear commitment from the Welsh Government to ensuring the standards are embedded within health boards and are accompanied by a clear action plan, targets and timescales. They called for transparent and public reporting on the standards, setting out which targets are not being met by which health boards and trusts. So, I call for an oral statement or debate accordingly.

I also call for an oral statement or debate in Welsh Government time on support for deaf children in Wales. National Deaf Children's Society Cymru have warned of a looming educational crisis for deaf children in Wales. Their Consortium for Research into Deaf Education survey of local authorities shows that the numbers of teachers that are deaf in Wales has fallen by 20 per cent over the last decade. In addition, more than a third of teachers that are deaf across Wales are over the age of 50, meaning they're likely to retire in the next 10 to 15 years.

Mark, you need to conclude now.

They're calling on the Welsh Government to implement a Wales-wide workforce strategy to recruit specialist staff to meet the additional learning needs of deaf children, provide funding to ensure there is sufficient training provision to create a new generation of teachers who are deaf, and to work with local authorities to ensure all parents are aware of the support available through the additional learning needs reforms. This is the fact behind the rhetoric.

I call again for an urgent oral statement or debate in Welsh Government time on these two issues, perhaps combined or perhaps separately. Thank you.

Thank you. In relation to your second question, you're absolutely right; it is vital that the learning needs of a deaf child are absolutely met. I will ask the Minister for Education and Welsh Language to write to you on the issue.

With regard to your first request—they wouldn't be able to be done together, because it would be two different Ministers—I know the Minister for Social Justice's officials work very closely with the disability equality taskforce, and at the most appropriate time, I'm sure she will be able to write you with some further information.

I'd like to ask for a debate and a statement in Government time on the future of dentistry in Wales, because I do have to say that it's hard to see a future for NHS dentistry in Wales at the moment. A year ago, there were nine dentists providing NHS services on Anglesey. Now, there are only six. In Holyhead, the dentist there is the latest to inform patients they won't be treating on the NHS now. They've told patients they should seek another dentist, but there aren't any other dentist surgeries available, and the health board isn't confident that they will be able to find dentists to provide those services. Although we've lost those three dentist surgeries, with the level of morale as it currently stands, and the lack of confidence in the Government, we could lose more. The dental health of everyone is going to suffer—everyone across society—but of course, those least privileged will suffer most. They're going to suffer as individuals and we as a society are going to pay the price for that. We need to sort this out, or the hole that we're in will get deeper. We need the Government to introduce a plan for how we're going to move forward, and as a matter of urgency.

Thank you. You'll be aware that the majority of dentists are independent self-employed practitioners. They can choose how they spend their time. I don't think there's any shortage of dentists, but I think there is a shortage of dentists who are prepared to treat more NHS patients. As you know, we have a new dental contract, and the Minister already did a written statement in relation to that, so I don't think there's any need for a further statement at the moment.

Two written statements, please, Trefnydd, firstly with regard to Madrid, which is trying to encircle itself with a 75 km urban forest to mitigate the climate emergency and to improve biodiversity. There's a similar idea being put forward by campaigners here in Cardiff for the city to become a new park city, with large country parks on the outskirts of the city in areas such as St Fagans, Caerphilly mountain, the Rhymney river and St Mellons. Most of the Cardiff parks up to date were opened during the Victorian age, so there haven't been new parks in Cardiff for many decades. This would develop natural flood defences, improve air quality and absorb greenhouse emissions generated by the city. Could we have a written statement by the Government on this welcome initiative?

Secondly, could we have a written statement with regard to Cardiff's replacement local development plan? I had a very interesting meeting recently with the Radyr and Morganstown local development plan group on this issue. There are suggestions that large green spaces can be built inside the replacement local development plan in view of the lower-than-expected population growth in the last census and the environmental impact of excess run-off rainwater and flooding. So, could we please have a written statement on that also? Diolch.

With regard to your latter question, an LDP is a matter for the local authority, so I don't see any need for a Government statement. It was really good to hear about the first initiative you were discussing. As you know, one of our programme for government commitments is for a national forest right across Wales, and we're certainly doing all we can to make sure people are planting trees. You'll be aware of our Welsh Government initiatives, and I would encourage everybody to pick up a free tree from their nearest hub and either plant it in their garden or ensure that we can plant it for you if there is nowhere for you to do so. But it's always good to hear about new initiatives. As you know, one of our programme for government commitments is for a new national park. I know it's up in north-east Wales, but I think it is important that we identify areas where we can indeed have parks that, obviously, everybody can enjoy.

Minister, may I ask for a statement from the Minister for Climate Change regarding the historic dumping of toxic waste at Ty Llwyd quarry at Ynysddu? Caerphilly County Borough Council is now the owner of the site, having compulsorily purchased the quarry, but has refused to register Ty Llwyd as contaminated land in spite of local concern about leachate leaking out and polluting neighbourhood properties as well as the roads. Natural Resources Wales confirms it is solely the council's responsibility to register contaminated land, but Caerphilly CBC maintains that the leachate does not flow from its property. Will you join me in supporting the residents, Minister, and local councillors Jan Jones and Janine Reed, in calling for a public inquiry to be held into the potential threat to neighbouring land and the River Sirhowy from the leaking of harmful substances from Ty Llwyd quarry? Thank you.

Public Health Wales have been fully engaged with Caerphilly council and are content with the measures currently being employed to minimise any human health risks. I know NRW are also working with the local authority and their contractors to provide some technical assistance and advice regarding further works that may be required to minimise off-site impacts caused by site drainage during peak rainfall events.

Finally, Mabon ap Gwynfor.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I'd like to ask for two statements, please. Firstly, can I ask for an update from the Government regarding the uplift in funding for care workers, please? In December 2021, I think it was, the Government announced funding to ensure that care workers received the real living wage, which was due to be paid to the care workers from April 2022. My understanding is that the Government provided the funds for the local authorities, and in my constituency, at least, I know that Gwynedd county council in turn passed those funds on to the providers. However, there is one provider, Achieve Together, that has failed to pay its workers that uplift for the period between April to October 2022. This is money that is rightly the wages of its workforce. The company say that they can't pay out because not all authorities have passported the funds on, but it's not theirs to keep, so it begs the question what have they done with that money and when can their workers expect to see this pay that is rightfully theirs. I'd like the Deputy Minister to look into this and bring forward a statement if possible.

Finally and briefly, I've previously raised the issue of the T19 bus service from Blaenau Ffestiniog to Llandudno, which is due to stop at the end of this week. Neither I nor the residents of Blaenau Ffestiniog have received an update, nor heard anything, since I raised this. Can the Deputy Minister please give an urgent update on what plans are in place for that route so that my constituents can continue to attend school, get to work or get to their appointments on time? Diolch.

Thank you. I don't think the Deputy Minister for Social Services was aware of the specific issue that you raise, and I think it would be really good if you could write to her, and she will certainly look into what was, obviously, a very worrying situation that you outlined. 

In relation to bus services, you'll be aware that, across Wales, we've had some issues with being able to provide some certainty to our buses. I think the Deputy Minister for Climate Change will be making a statement around bus services probably a bit more generally, but it won't be in the very near future, but it will be, probably, in the next term. 

I thank the Trefnydd.

Item 3 is next, and it's a statement by the Deputy Minister for Social Partnership on the LGBTQ+ action plan. I call on the Deputy Minister, Hannah Blythyn. 

LGBT History Month offers an opportunity to reflect on how far we’ve come in the struggle for LGBTQ+ rights, and to celebrate the lives of LGBTQ+ people who, for too long and too often, have been hidden from history. But, we don’t just need to reflect on our past; we need to learn lessons from it. We will not forget the harm that discrimination, hate and exclusion have caused to so many LGBTQ+ people. Nor will we forget the progress and achievements that we've made over the past 40 years, thanks to the activists and allies that paved the way.

But we cannot be complacent. LGBTQ+ people can still face discrimination and harassment. We’re in an age when it can feel like we’re under attack and our rights at risk of being rolled back, with LGBTQ+ communities routinely weaponised in the name of so-called political and media debate. We remain absolute that the Welsh Government stands together with and within our LGBTQ+ communities in Wales. We want to create a Wales where everyone feels free, supported and safe to be and live their lives as their authentic selves. That’s why LGBTQ+ rights are embedded in our programme for government, are a key component of the co-operation agreement with Plaid Cymru, and why we have developed a bold and ambitious LGBTQ+ action plan.

I am proud to be able to announce the launch and publication today of our ambitious and wide-ranging LGBTQ+ action plan for Wales—the first of its kind. This plan strengthens protections for LGBTQ+ people, promotes equality for all, and helps co-ordinate actions across Government, communities and the country, in order to achieve our ambition of making Wales the most LGBTQ+ friendly nation in Europe. Whilst publishing this plan is a key step in this journey, our work to improve equality for LGBTQ+ people has already begun. Just last month, I set out our next steps in our work to ban conversion practices. Support services have been expanded across Wales, and a working group of experts has been formed. The group will provide us with the advice and expertise that we need to consign these abhorrent practices to history, and the first meeting has already taken place. Alongside this, our anti-hate crime communications campaign, Hate Hurts Wales, will have an increased LGBTQ+ focus this year, and will signpost to the Wales hate support centre, which offers confidential support to victims.

Progress has also been made in sexual health through the forthcoming HIV action plan for Wales, and we renew our commitments to tackle late diagnosis in Wales and HIV-related stigma, and improve the quality of life of people living with HIV. In the past year, we have provided funding to local Pride organisations around Wales. The grass-roots Pride fund supported north Wales Pride in Bangor, Pride in the Port in Newport, Swansea, Cowbridge, Barry Pride, and Glitter Pride, connecting communities across the country. We know the value of this and the difference it can make to the LGBTQ+ community, and this coming year, we will build on this success by expanding the grass-roots Pride fund. We hope to reach out further, embracing more rural areas and smaller towns, enabling Welsh language events and ensuring that there are opportunities for people to come together and be their true selves right across Wales.

Dirprwy Lywydd, I stated earlier how, sadly, all too often in the current climate, it feels like our rights are under attack, none more so than that of the trans community, from the toxicity of Twitter, to so-called populist politics and a media narrative designed to pitch people against one another. We recommit ourselves to supporting trans and non-binary people, and our starting point is that trans men are men, trans women are women, and non-binary identities are valid. The Welsh Government stands with all of our LGBTQ+ communities and, as politicians and public figures, we can and must be better.

That’s why we’re committed to doing all that we can to improve the lives of trans people in Wales, and to seeking any further power to do this, including our programme for government and co-operation agreement commitment to trigger a request to devolve the Gender Recognition Act 2004 and support our trans community, and preliminary work on this has already started. Work has also begun on developing guidance for local authorities and schools to support transgender children and young people, so that they can be confident and comfortable in supporting trans students in all aspects of school life.

Dirprwy Lywydd, I must acknowledge the support of so many in the making of this plan. A significant number of stakeholders, individuals and organisations have contributed to the plan’s development. People generously gave their time and many shared their experience of discrimination and hostility as citizens in Wales. They also shared their achievements as advocates, workers and leaders, as researchers, experts and professionals, and as communities. I want particularly to put on record my thanks to the LGBTQ+ expert panel, who provided help, advice and challenge, which allowed us to focus on what we could do to make a difference to people’s lives. I'd also like to thank the top team within the Welsh Government, whose hard work is behind me, being able to stand here and launch this plan today.

Indeed, it is a plan that reaches across Government, and I am grateful for the steadfast cross-Government support of my ministerial colleagues. This ongoing collective support will be vital in turning the plan from words on a page into practical actions that make a real difference. As they say, actions speak louder than words. It’s about changing lives not just changing legislation, it's about people, not policies alone. But words matter too; what we do and what we say has an impact. So let’s be clear, as we publish this LGBTQ+ action plan today, that, here in Wales, we stand for unity over division, inclusion rather than exclusion and hope not hate. Together in pride—making Wales the most LGBTQ+ friendly nation in Europe. Diolch.

Thank you for your statement, Deputy Minister. We broadly welcome the LGBTQ+ action plan for Wales, as well as its introduction during LGBTQ+ History Month. We have come a long way in ensuring equality for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer people. The mistakes of the past, such as section 11 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act 1885, which saw thousands of men prosecuted in the 1950s just for loving another man. By the end of 1954, there were 1,069 homosexual men in prison in England and Wales. A high-profile figure like Alan Turing had fallen foul of these insidious laws. Thankfully, these laws are consigned to the dustbin of history, and Alan Turing was awarded a posthumous pardon. They have been replaced by a slew of equalities legislation, including a legal right to same-sex marriage. We should be proud of how far we have come to promoting LGBT rights, but there's so much more that can be done.

Just this weekend, the Pope, together with the Archbishop of Canterbury, rightly condemned nations that pursued anti-gay legislation. But yet, the Catholic Church still opposes same-sex marriage. We are all equal in the eyes of God, regardless of our chosen gender, or whom we choose to fall in love with. Nobody should feel threatened or abused because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. This is why my party welcomes this action plan. However, Deputy Minister, I do have a few concerns; your decision to seek powers over gender recognition is chief among them. Why do you believe that this is the right approach, as opposed to working together with the Governments across the United Kingdom, to secure an approach to gender recognition that protects the rights of the transgender community whilst at the same time protecting the rights of all women? Deputy Minister, do you not agree that the approach pursued by the Scottish Government is fraught with pitfalls for all groups, as demonstrated by the embarrassing u-turn over the Isla Bryson debacle? The Scottish First Minister has invented a new gender of rapist to avoid calling Isla Bryson a woman. I'm sure that you'll agree that there are real concerns from both the trans community and from those seeking to protect women's rights that need to be addressed in such a way as to protect everyone's rights. Do you agree that the best way is to approach the issue on a UK-wide basis so as to avoid having multiple differing or even conflicting systems of gender recognition, and that we need to have a measured debate without the hyperbole of death threats?

My other concern is around the ability of parents and the medical professionals to help young people struggling with gender dysphoria. Whilst it is absolutely right that we ban the despicable practice of conversion therapy, we must take great care to ensure that any new legislation does not have unintended consequences. Deputy Minister, what steps will you take to ensure that any new legislation does not prevent parents and medical professionals discussing a young person's concern regarding their sexuality or gender identity?

Finally Deputy Minister, whilst I welcome the commitment to ensuring that our nation of sanctuary remains inclusive of LGBTQ+ people, I do question the development of LGBTQ+ only asylum properties in Wales. We can and we must ensure that Wales is a safe and welcoming place for those forced to flee their home nations because they are being prosecuted for who they love or who they are, but we should be guaranteeing housing for all asylum seekers with protected characteristics. We cannot provide enough housing for those fleeing the conflict in Ukraine, many of whom will be LGBTQ+. Deputy Minister, as my colleague Mark Isherwood highlighted a couple of weeks ago, the Irish Government are providing modular housing to home thousands of refugees. What discussions have you had with your Cabinet colleagues about replicating such a move here in Wales so that we can house those fleeing prosecution and murder because of their sexual orientation or gender identity?

Thank you once again for your statement, Deputy Minister, and please be assured that my party will work with you to make Wales the most LGBTQ+ friendly nation in Europe, as well as tackling divisions, exclusion and hate. Diolch yn fawr.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. As this is a 30-minute statement, I don't think I've got enough time to pick up every contradiction that Altaf Hussain made in his contribution then. I welcome the opening remarks and the profound words you said—that we're all equal in the eyes of God. Yes, I can celebrate my life in church by having a funeral there, but I'm yet to be able to celebrate my love in church by being able to get married there. Those were positive words, but then you went on to unravel everything that you'd said in your commitment to help us make Wales the most LGBTQ+ friendly nation in Europe. You said about working with the UK Government. Actually, as a Welsh Government, we have engaged previously in good faith, particularly around plans to ban LGBTQ+ inclusive conversion practices. They then did a u-turn on that, and a u-turn on the u-turn. I think you're very much replicating the u-turn on the u-turn in your contribution as well. So, we have to do what we need to do to defend and protect our LGBTQ+ community in Wales. We have a duty and a responsibility to do that. I'm willing to work cross party, cross Government, across the UK, to do the right thing. But, we have to remember, as I said in my statement that this isn't about politics, it's not about policies, it's about people and their lives and their right to live with dignity and respect and to feel safe and supported. 

Thank you for the statement, Deputy Minister.

The co-operation agreement between the Welsh Government and Plaid Cymru promises to make Wales the most LGBTQ+ friendly nation in Europe and support the publication of an LGBTQ+ action plan. Today is therefore a proud day for Plaid Cymru, as for Adam Price as the first LGBTQ+ party leader in the Senedd, with part of that commitment realised with the publication of the action plan, an action plan that shows so clearly our shared ambition with the Welsh Government for Wales to be the most LGBTQ+ friendly nation in Europe. It demonstrates also our shared values of fairness, tolerance and justice, of protecting and bestowing rights, not taking them away, and our shared determination to call out bigotry, hatred, inequality and discrimination in all corners of our nation. But this plan is just the start, because it addresses an urgent need to create a fairer Wales, because this is a Wales where hate crimes against LGBTQ+ people are increasing, and hate crimes against transgender people specifically are skyrocketing. Last year, Estyn found homophobic bullying was the most common kind of bullying in secondary schools. So, we agree with Stonewall Cymru that there is much work to do. 

In Plaid Cymru, we often refer to our country as a community of communities, and I'm glad to see how this plan demonstrates that it is one for the whole of Wales. The recognition of rurality in the LGBTQ+ experience is a welcome example of this approach, as well as the need for further research to address this. So, could the Deputy Minister tell us how she proposes this will be taken forward? And does she agree that building alliances across communities and organisations, working with the young farmers, for example, will be crucially important to achieve this vision? 

The intersectional approach of the plan is also very welcome, and, whilst not being a protected characteristic, I'm glad this plan acknowledges the Welsh language needs and identities of the LGBTQ+ community, and I'm particularly glad that the National Eisteddfod's Mas ar y Maes partnership with Stonewall Cymru and others is highlighted and there is an action to develop this further. 

The Deputy Minister highlighted the cross-governmental approach of this plan, and it's certainly encouraging to see meaningful detail underpinning the vision and transparency about which Welsh Government team and department will be accountable for bringing this vision to life. The actions to tackle discrimination in the workplace are a crucial and practical component of this plan. I would, however, like some more detail on the stated outcome of LGBTQ+ people understanding and being able to use pathways for reporting discrimination in Welsh workplaces. As you may recall, I've previously raised with the Government the BMA's 'Sexual orientation and gender identity in the medical profession' report, which highlights that LGBTQ+ doctors are regularly suffering abuse and discrimination, and the staff often report they feel unable to voice their concerns with management. Both Scotland and England have independent mechanisms in place across their hospitals for staff to voice concerns about this in a safe way, but there's nothing in place across Wales yet, despite a 'freedom to speak up' framework being worked on. I was assured that the cross-governmental approach of the action plan would address these concerns, so could you provide me with assurances this will be the case? 

I would like to specifically welcome the measurable nature of the actions and outcomes in the plan, for example, around the commitment to devolved powers in relation to gender recognition. We have seen in Scotland, even though they have greater autonomy to act than Wales in this area, the cross-party political consensus in the Scottish Parliament being undemocratically and outrageously frustrated by Westminster. So, while welcoming this action plan, I would ask you, Deputy Minister, to consider how we can really ultimately be the most LGBTQ+ friendly nation in Europe with one hand tied behind our backs by Westminster. In the immediate term, can you advise what strategies we can pursue to ensure these powers are rightly devolved and able to be implemented in relation to gender recognition? And, on the wider question of justice, do you, Deputy Minister, accept that the only sustainable way of creating an inclusive and safe criminal justice system for our LGBTQ+ community that works for Wales is by creating a system here in Wales, even if the Labour Party in Westminster continues to team up with the Tories to block it?

The theme for this year's LGBTQ+ history month is 'Behind the Lens'. This action plan undoubtedly sharpens our focus on the work that needs to be done to create the Wales we want to see by truly seeing all those who call Wales their home. That focus must be maintained, and the reality it captures must continuously inform how we achieve the vision of being the most LGBTQ+ friendly nation in Europe. 

Diolch, Sioned. Indeed, I share your sentiments that this is a proud day for us, not just in this Siambr, but in communities across Wales, and I've had lost of positive feedback already about, actually, how important to have the plan itself is. But, like you say, the proof is in the application of those actions and actually how we make people feel safe and supported in the future. And I'd like to also place on record my thanks to Siân Gwenllian for the work she's done with us on this action plan, and the passionate commitment that came from Siân and the team to actually making this work and the recognition that the majority of this Senedd Chamber is supportive of our LGBTQ+ inclusive work and ambitions for Wales. I said previously—and I'm not going apologise for saying this over and over again—that actions are important; actions are what make a difference. But what we say can have such an impact as well, and not always in a positive way. So, I do think that we all need to think about that before we open our mouths or tweet some of the time as well—and that's not just for politicians; it's for others as well.

I will try and touch as much as I can on the points that you raised, but I am sure that it is something that we will pick up in ongoing dialogue following this. It's about the opportunities that we have got in terms of workplace inclusion. It's so important that you can go to work and feel like you can be yourself, or feel like you can raise a concern if something sadly happens and that you have a safe space or a place to go to to report that. So, I'm certainly happy to give assurances that we will build on what is in the action plan, and use every lever that we do currently have in Wales around that, particularly in the public sector.

There is best practice happening in the private sector too. I am visiting somewhere at the end of the month. So, hopefully we can work on that and share it. I was particularly keen, as part of the action plan, that we included the work that some of our trade union colleagues are already doing, because why reinvent the wheel if there are good resources there and good support networks? I think that we can really learn and spread that out across workplaces across Wales too, to make sure that people can go to work and truly be themselves and feel that they are in a safe space. Unless you are a multimillionaire or you have won the lottery, work is such a significant part of each and every one of our lives.

I welcome support around the inclusion and support for the Welsh language. It's so important that not only can you live your life as your true self, but in your first language as well, and be supported to do that and being able to do that as well.

The final thing to touch on is around the 35 per cent increase in LGBTQ+ hate crime. We talk about how far we have come, and I think that, rightly, LGBT history month is the time to talk about that and celebrate that. I said before in this Chamber that, when I was growing up in Wales, I couldn't marry the person that I loved. I could get discriminated against in goods and services. I couldn't be talked about in school. So, we have come a long way, but I recognise that we have got a long way to go still, and this plan is just a step in doing that. The elements around hate crime in the action plan not only look at what we need to do with policing and justice and the devolution of that, but also in supporting the community to feel those relationships with policing as well, and that we understand what hate crime is. I have said before that people don't really understand what that is. It doesn't have to be a physical attack; it can be verbal. I am sad to say, actually, that I looked at the figures for the last year, 2021-22, and I think that there was a 35 per cent increase in LGBT hate crime. Sadly, I am a statistic as part of that increase. I have talked about that in the Chamber as well. I think that it's important that we talk about it and raise it, and I very much welcome your support and your party's support, and I look forward to working together in common cause.

I welcome the statement today and the Welsh Government's support for the LGBTQ+ community. I welcome the commitment to making Wales the most LGBTQ+ friendly nation in Europe. I fully support the vision to improves the lives and outcomes for LGBTQ+ people.

I remember section 28. When I was teaching in a college, a student told me that he could bully someone who was gay and, if I tried to stop him, he would report me and get me sacked. I explained that I would always do the right thing, no matter what. We have come a long way from those days. I am disappointed that the Conservatives were unable to apologise for section 28, because it was serious discrimination and it was a really bad piece of legislation.

But I’m going to move on to the positive now. I would like to highlight the excellent work done by Pride in Swansea, and the way that Pride has grown in Swansea from a march to a full day of events, supported by the local community and the Deputy Minister. There were previously concerns from Swansea Pride about the funding available in Swansea. Has this now been resolved?

Can I thank Mike Hedges for his contribution and also for his commitment as a committed ally for the LGBTQ+ community in Wales? I was proud to march alongside Mike at the most recent Swansea Pride—the first march post pandemic—and it was wonderful to see lots of young people there as well, with the younger community coming out. It's important that we pass the baton on. This is what it's about, actually—creating a different Wales for them to grow up in.

You raised that spectre of section 28, and well done, Mike, for standing your ground and doing the right thing, but I wouldn't expect anything else from you, Mike Hedges. That shadow of section 28 still hangs over us. It still hangs over many teachers and schools who are still nervous about wanting to do the right thing, but may feel nervous. That's why the education part of this action plan, and the work we're already doing with our inclusive curriculum, is so, so important, so that children and young people are not only supported in schools, but also—the issues Sioned Williams raised around homophobic bullying as well—that teachers have that support to be able to support the children and young people in turn.

I wouldn't expect anything less from Mike than to mention trying to put a pitch in for support for Swansea Pride, and while Mike will understand I can't actually directly commit to any specific Pride support at the moment, I can refer to the grass-roots Pride fund, which we will be carrying on for the next year. I would expect Swansea Pride to be contacting officials, probably before I've got out of this Chamber, to try and put their bid in for future support. But I hope Swansea Pride continues to go from strength to strength, as do other Prides across the country, and I hope to be able to continue to support it.

Of course, Deputy Minister, we all want the best for the LGBTQ+ community and we want to see a fairer Wales. But, as I read through this plan today, I read some of it with disbelief, and I find a lot of this plan genuinely concerning: pushing gender ideology in nurseries and schools, unfairness in sports, and, incredibly, seeing that you still want to push ahead for those powers to emulate the self-identification Bill in Scotland, despite the clear risks that it poses to women and children's safety. The UN expert on violence against women and girls warned on this move in Scotland, yet here is your plan. Your own Minister for Social Justice stood up in this Chamber time and time again talking about the importance of women-only refuges and spaces—it is so important, yet today you announce that you want to make it easier for biological males to enter those spaces. What about protecting women and girls? What about those Welsh mothers, daughters, sisters, aunts, when creating this plan? Will something bad have to happen before you wake up and realise the massive safeguarding issues that self-identification poses? Here we are today wasting half an hour of Senedd time on—

Can you ask your question, please?

—discussing a plan that you don't have many of the powers to change or implement. Wales having its own self-identification plan is a nonsense. It's clear from public opinion, Deputy Minister, that people see the importance of protecting women and children. When will you realise this?

Deputy Presiding Officer, it's hard to find the right words to respond to Laura Anne Jones's contribution. [Interruption.] Yes, 'shameful', and I don't think I have much to say in response to that. We have just talked in this Chamber earlier today, and we've got members of the community who are here watching—your words have a dangerous impact, Laura Anne Jones. They harm people, the words that you say, the discrimination that comes out of your mouth, and what I would say is I believe you're better than this. I think you're better than this. [Interruption.] I think you're better than this. 

Can I remind Members this is not a debate between two individual Members? This is a statement, and the Deputy Minister is answering the question put. 

I've nothing more to say to Laura Anne Jones, Deputy Presiding Officer. 

Deputy Minister, thank you for this statement today. In my constituency, and covering Ogmore constituency as well—Huw Irranca-Davies's seat—we are really fortunate to have YPOP, which is a branch of the Bridgend Youth Council. YPOP is an online safe space for young people who are LGBTQ+ or allies, and the group hosts chat and chill drop-in sessions, special events and delivers training workshops. Whilst being a space to make friends and socialise, YPOP is also a space to come and receive support from the Bridgend council participation team if young people need it. And young people who attend YPOP have raised the point that more needs to be done to ensure that their teachers, GPs and those within the authorities have training around LGBTQ+ discrimination, how to tackle homophobia or transphobia, as well as support young people with their needs. I want to thank you, and also our education Minister as well, because I know that you're meeting me with one of our Youth Parliament Members to talk exactly about this this week, so thank you.

But there is a consistent message coming through from young people and other people in the LGBTQ+ community: that we need to normalise calling out the hate when we see it, whether that's in schools and the workplace, amongst peers, or in this Chamber. So, Deputy Minister, my question therefore is: how much consideration have you taken to rolling out the action plan in places like schools and ensuring that schools have the provisions to tackle the hate crime against the LGBTQ+ community that continues?

I thank Sarah Murphy for her contribution, and can I thank YPOP for their work and the contributions that they've made? I'm looking forward to the meeting I have with Sarah and my colleague Jeremy Miles later with week with the Member of the Youth Parliament, but if you have young people's groups like that and you'd like to bring them to this place to engage further, then I'm sure I and many of my ministerial colleagues will be very happy to do that. Because it's absolutely right that they have a say and a stake in the issues that affect them, and that's why—. The action plan has 46 actions in it, and there is a real focus on not just schools but youth settings and young people as well to make sure, as I said before, that they get that support in place. But I think the point that you made was really, really important, about this is not just support for, perhaps, LGBTQ+ young people or questioning young people, it's about actually supporting their friends too to be better allies and to feel that they can speak out without them fearing what the impact would be for them. So, I think it's a really, really valid point that those young people have made, and I'm sure it's something that we can take away and work on with Jeremy Miles and my colleagues across Government to make sure that all young people, whether they are members of the LGBTQ+ community themselves or just want to be good allies to their friends in school, then there are ways in which we can do that.  

I thank the Deputy Minister. 

We move on to item 4 now, the debate on the draft budget for 2023-24. I call on the Minister for Finance and Local Government to move the motion. Rebecca Evans. 

Diolch. I'm pleased to open this afternoon's debate on the Welsh Government's draft budget for 2023-24. Since we first had the opportunity to debate the draft budget in the Senedd on 13 December, Senedd committees have been busy scrutinising our spending plans. I welcome the very constructive sessions that I have had with the Finance Committee and that my ministerial colleagues have had with their respective committees. Before I provide some early reflections on the themes arising from scrutiny, it's important to recognise again the challenging context in which this draft budget is prepared. This has been a year where we have seen the ongoing impacts of inflation, three Prime Ministers, three Chancellors, and the shocking mismanagement of public finances by the UK Government. We received an autumn statement by the latest Chancellor that fell far short of the interventions needed to meet the challenges that we face. But, despite this, and building on our three-year spending review, the draft budget balances our response to the immediate crisis alongside investing in longer term change. We have taken difficult decisions, but we did so in the spirit of collaboration and transparency and putting the people and communities of Wales first. 

Our main priorities for the 2023-24 budget are protecting front-line public services and our ambitions for the future, continuing to help those most affected by the cost-of-living crisis, and supporting our economy through recessionary times. Unlike what the Welsh Conservatives have set out in their amendment, we believe that those priorities—protecting public services, businesses and people—are the priorities of people in Wales. Building on the substantial increase in funding that I provided in our spending review, in this 2023-24 budget, I have allocated £165 million to the NHS, £70 million to deliver the real living wage for social care, and £227 million for local government. Core revenue funding for local government will increase by 7.9 per cent on a like-for-like basis, compared to the current year. No local authority will receive less than a 6.5 per cent increase. Alongside our support for public services, we will continue to support the economy and businesses with direct investment of £319 million for non-domestic rates relief. In response to the cost-of-living crisis, this budget targets support at those who need it most, including through investment in our basic income pilot and discretionary assistance fund. 

I'll now turn to the points raised in scrutiny. I was pleased to see the Finance Committee recognising the difficult context in which we are delivering this budget, and I will, of course, continue to call on the UK Government to recognise the growing impact of inflation and to uplift our budget accordingly at the upcoming spring statement. I will continue to call on them to provide us with the fiscal flexibilities that we need to make the best use of our resources in difficult times. I welcome the Finance Committee's support for this, and I will be raising it at the next Finance: Interministerial Standing Committee meeting, which will take place later this week. And alongside my ministerial colleagues, I will continue to call on the UK Government to deliver a range of interventions to support those who need help most. The joint review of inter-governmental relations includes a package of reforms as the basis for the conduct of inter-governmental relations. It's our hope that we can work pragmatically with the UK Government, through the new inter-governmental relations review arrangements, before needing to invoke the formal dispute resolution process. However, we will not hesitate to use that process when we deem it necessary. 

I'll now turn to the amendments put forward by Plaid Cymru on raising Welsh rates of income tax. We have been very clear that now is not the time to raise Welsh rates of income tax. Of course, we consider all of our tax levers as part of our budget preparations. However, the current tax burden is at its highest level for over 70 years. Rising inflation is affecting people across Wales, and we're in a cost-of-living crisis. We will not ask people to pay more at this time. Raising the higher and additional rates of income tax wouldn't raise enough money to make a significant difference to our spending plans. The largest contribution would have to come from the basic rate band taxpayers, and let's be clear that this would impact the lowest-paid workers in Wales. And these are the same workers who are seeking help from food banks, the same workers who are having to choose between heating their homes and feeding their families. The use of Welsh rates of income tax should be considered and strategic.

And turning to capital, there's no additional capital funding from the UK Government in the autumn statement, so there are no capital allocations within this budget. I'll be outlining further financial transactions capital allocations within our final budget, aligned to our priorities.

Turning to the information provided as part of the budget package this year, it's really important to remember that last year we delivered a multi-year budget up to 2025, alongside a zero-based review of capital allocations. This year was a single-year budget confirming changes to the budget settlement as part of the UK Government's autumn statement. These two budget packages—the multi-year and the single year—should clearly be considered together, and this will be the same for next year unless there are some fundamental changes to our budget settlement. The budget documentation this year focuses on the important changes that we've implemented for this budget round, rather than restating what's already been published, scrutinised and debated by this Senedd. I am, of course, open to further discussions to explore what additional information committees and stakeholders believe would aid scrutiny.

On the issue of pay, we recognise the strength of feeling that's been expressed by staff in these ballots for industrial action. We believe that all of our public sector workers should be fairly rewarded for the important work that they do. Unfortunately, our financial settlement falls far short of what is needed to meet the very significant challenges faced by our public services and workers across Wales. We cannot raise enough funding fairly enough through the limited powers we have to provide an inflation-matching pay rise to public sector workers. The autumn statement was a missed opportunity for the UK Government to give hard-working public sector workers a pay rise and prevent widespread disruptive industrial action across the UK.

But I am pleased that, in recent days, we have made progress in our discussions with trade union partners that have resulted in the current round of health strikes largely being paused while trade union members consider the latest offer that we have made to resolve the dispute. Hard choices have been required to find the money for the cost of this pay offer for this year. We've drawn down everything that we can from the Wales reserve and are seeking underspends from across Government to put this offer together. Using this money to increase pay now means that we face even more difficult choices in the future, but we are confident that it's the right thing to do.

In closing, I'd like to offer my thanks to all of those involved in shaping and scrutinising this draft budget. Scrutiny is a crucial part of the process, and, whilst I agree with the vast majority of the Finance Committee's recommendations, there are some that I will need to consider in the light of the limitations that I've set out today. I and my Cabinet colleagues will respond formally to the recommendations of all of the Senedd committee reports in advance of the vote on the final budget on 7 March.

To conclude, this is a budget for hard times and one where difficult choices have been made. However, in supporting public services, businesses and people, we have provided the certainty and clarity needed to navigate these difficult times. And I look forward to hearing from colleagues.

I call on the Chair of the Finance Committee, Peredur Owen Griffiths. 

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. It's a pleasure to contribute to this important debate on the Welsh Government’s draft budget for 2023-24. Before I turn to specific areas within the report, I would like to say that the committee fully recognises the difficulties faced by the Welsh Government in preparing its budgetary proposals. Inflationary pressures, rising energy costs and an increase in the costs of living are causing uncertainty and putting unprecedented pressures on already-stretched budgets. This has been exacerbated by poor communication between the Welsh Government and the UK Government, which is not reflective of an effective working relationship that is underpinned by smooth channels of communication based on mutual respect. That is why we support the Minister in pressing the UK Government to establish robust inter-governmental mechanisms, to ensure that it can effectively escalate disagreements and resolve funding disputes.

However, these challenges do not mean that we should let the Minister off the hook or that the Welsh Government's draft budget cannot be improved. In fact, as our report makes clear, we found that there are a number of areas where the draft budget disappoints and where improvements can be made.

First of all, the committee felt that there was a lack of clarity and candour regarding the Welsh Government's plans, particularly in terms of identifying where decisions have been made in the draft budget to halt, postpone or reduce funding. As a result, we have made a raft of recommendations calling for greater clarity in the information provided alongside the draft budget. This includes calling on the Minister to provide a full assessment of the impact that high inflation will have on its funding position and capital programme and for changes to be made to the way information is presented, so that the draft budget provides an assessment of the impact of spending decisions across portfolios.

Furthermore, I would like to note, on behalf of all committees, that, although we always welcome both oral and written evidence provided by the Welsh Government on the draft budget, we believe that more can be done to ensure that committees are provided with such evidence in good time. That is why I will shortly be consulting with Senedd committees on their experiences of scrutinising this year's draft budget and asking for practical ways in which improvements can be made to the next budget round.

Turning now to our views on the Welsh Government's use of fiscal levers, although we understand the Minister's decision not to raise taxes, the committee is surprised that the Welsh Government had not carried out detailed work on the behavioural impact of varying Welsh rates of income tax across all bands. This strongly suggests that the Minister has not given serious consideration to changing the rates during this budget round, which we found disappointing, and ask for this to be properly considered in the future. We heard evidence that the Welsh Government's fiscal tools need updating. In particular, we support the Minister's continued efforts in pressing the UK Government to increase the Welsh Government's overall and annual limits for borrowing and reserves at least in line with inflation. We also heard that the nature of our tax-raising powers is more limited than those enjoyed by our Scottish cousins. Although we acknowledge that doing so is far from straightforward, we would like the Minister to undertake foundational work into the benefits and risks of devolving powers to modify Welsh rates of income tax bands and thresholds.

A key aspect of this draft budget is the support provided to help with rising costs of living. On accessing benefits, the committee has long advocated a 'no wrong door' approach. As the demand for such support, sadly, increases, we believe more can be done to ensure that accessing such support is as easy and straightforward as possible. That is why we would like to see the Welsh Government fast-track the introduction of a unified benefits system, a Welsh benefits charter, to make it easier and simpler. We also believe that the current financial support schemes need tweaking, particularly in relation to eligibility thresholds, to ensure that they remain at suitable levels and are not excluding those at the margins of support. The committee has also made concrete recommendations to improve what is already on offer. This includes encouraging the expansion of the free childcare model, considering an increase in the value of the educational maintenance allowance, which has not been increased since the mid 2000s, and prioritising the development of a replacement Warm Homes programme as a matter of urgency to prevent fuel poverty.

Llywydd, all of us in this Chamber are fully aware of the pressures that public services are under. The additional funding provided by Welsh Government through this draft budget to support such services is a welcome move, and we are particularly interested in the innovative methods being explored to increase the money available, including the introduction of a social care levy to fund the rising cost of social care provision. However, the Senedd needs to know whether this funding allocated for next year is delivering tangible improvements. We therefore want the Welsh Government to explain the outcomes it expects to be delivered by NHS organisations and social care providers. In addition, although the Welsh Government has outlined priority areas for the NHS, it has been less forthcoming in outlining the areas it expects to deprioritise. As one stakeholder told us, 'If everything’s a priority, then nothing is a priority.' Such efforts to identify spending priorities are futile if the Minister cannot also explain which areas are less of a priority and will receive less funding as a result.

During our stakeholder event at Llanhilleth Miners Institute last June, representatives from the health and social care sectors told us that workforce planning is crucial to ensure that services remain resilient and fit for purpose—a theme echoed during our evidence sessions. Although we welcome the overdue publication last week of the Welsh Government’s national workforce implementation plan, we would like this to be extended across the Welsh public sector to provide long-term stability for services as well as support and direction. We cannot expect services to improve if we don’t look after those working so hard to keep them afloat.

Lastly, I would like to make a point about the time given to scrutinise the draft budget. Although we accept that the Welsh Government has no control over the timing of UK Government fiscal events, we are concerned that the timetable for scrutiny of this draft budget was truncated for the fourth consecutive year. This is not fair on Members of the Senedd, stakeholders, or the public at large, and we regret the impact that this has on our ability to engage and consider the draft budget proposals.

Having said that, I welcome the Welsh Government’s intention to look afresh at updating our budget processes, and I'm glad that the Minister is open to looking at ways to enhance scrutiny opportunities in the Senedd. This includes holding pre-budget scrutiny sessions, when the publication of the draft budget has been delayed. We found such an approach particularly helpful this year, as we sought to understand the factors behind the Welsh Government’s budget formulation process.

To close, Llywydd, I told Members during last year’s draft budget debate that I view engaging with people across Wales and listening to stakeholders as a priority. I would like to thank all of those who provided evidence and shared their views with us through our work. This year, the committee has established a clear arc between our engagement work, the priorities debate, and our findings in this report. Our aim is to build on this work for next year as we look forward to the 2024-25 budget round. Thank you very much.

I have selected the amendments to the motion, and I call on Peter Fox to move amendment 1, tabled in the name of Darren Millar. Peter Fox.

Diolch, Llywydd. I move the amendment in the name of Darren Millar. First of all, I would like to thank the Minister for her statement. I recognise the difficult financial backdrop that this year's budget has been drafted within. There are, hopefully, though, some positive signs that the current high levels of inflation will now start to ease over the course of this year. Thanks to the decisive action taken by the Prime Minister and the Chancellor, the Bank of England is now suggesting that any economic downturn will be shorter and shallower than first thought.

Some of the decisions that were taken were difficult, we know, but they were the medicine that we needed to improve the health of the UK's finances. We now need Ministers here, in this place, in Wales, to start dealing properly with the huge challenges this country is facing and stop looking for other people to blame. Because challenges can be overcome, and if we're going to create the Wales that we all want to see, then the Welsh Government needs to step up and sort things out here. 

Llywydd, we know what the immediate issues facing our communities are. We debate these here week after week in this Chamber. This budget has to deal with the immediate pressures facing society, so we have to prioritise our actions and make sure that we deliver on these. I know that the Minister understands this, and there are areas in the draft budget that I generally do welcome, such as the additional money for mental health services, the additional non-domestic rates relief for businesses in the retail, leisure and hospitality sectors, and also the increase in the local government settlement.

But, despite this, there are areas of the draft budget where the Welsh Government are letting so many people down, as we've just heard from the Chair of the Finance Committee, such as the real-terms cut in the education budget. Then there's the real-terms cut in the health and social care budgets. And let's not forget that the only Government in Britain to actually cut the NHS budget was a Labour Government here in Wales in 2012. And we know that even before the pandemic, the Labour Government were only spending around £1.05 of the £1.20 that they received from UK Government for every £1.00 spent in England, in both the education and the health services here. The people of Wales need to know where that additional money has been spent.

There are well-meaning announcements, such as the real living wage for social care workers and teachers' pay uplift, but we know that councils will be expected to fund the vast majority of these increases from the revenue support grant, rather than the Welsh Government stepping in and providing direct funding to enable these, meaning much-needed resources will be directed away from front-line services. Again, this an issue that has been raised by councils on numerous occasions and where they will be told, 'It's in your settlement', which just passes the buck onto local authorities.

And then there's the usual funding of pet projects, such as: the constitutional commission—a one-way talking shop; millions being spent on unnecessary tinkering around the elections policy and more politicians, which take money from public services and focus it here in Cardiff Bay; and not to mention things like universal basic income pilots and blanket 20 mph default speed restrictions. For the Government that has called this very budget 'A budget for hard times', it doesn't seem as if Ministers are solely focused on these hard times, does it?

To put it simply, Llywydd, we need a plan that focuses on the immediate problems faced by the people and businesses of Wales, and this is where the Welsh Conservatives believe that the draft budget can improve. We know, as a result of the autumn 2022 budget, the Welsh Government will receive an additional £1.2 billion over the next two years. Let's spend that money on delivering on people's priorities instead of what I've mentioned earlier.

In its draft budget, the Welsh Government is looking to reprioritise some nearly £90 million from within existing departmental plans to, and I quote, refocus

'limited resources towards the areas of greatest need.'

In a budget of almost £23 billion, we believe that this reprioritisation work could have gone further to enable existing funding streams to do more. As a group, we have identified further funding streams worth over £100 million over the next two years that could be refocused in the immediate term, together with adjustments to some existing budgets that would be cost neutral, but help significantly towards helping people with the cost-of-living challenges, supporting businesses to create jobs and prosperity, and clearing the backlogs in our health service. Reprioritising some current funding streams is needed until the pressures we face begin to ease and services are on a more stable footing once again.

However, it's difficult to find out where all of the money here is spent. I’ve certainly found it difficult to get under the bonnet of this budget. In my previous role within the council, I could understand every element of the budget, but it's only Ministers here who know where the pockets of potential additional funding lie. But let's be honest, how much of the £350 million in central administration funding allocated in the draft budget is spent on actually delivering on people's priorities? How does spending £6 million on elections policy, £2 million on a constitutional commission, or over £8 million on international relations—

Will you take an intervention?

Yes, okay, I will do.

I say to Peter Fox, I'm not trying to score a political point here. I just would like to ask—[Interruption.] No, I'm really not. What is the Conservative policy now on universal free school meals? What is your current view on that particular policy?

I'm not reflecting on that at the moment.

I'd like to know what it is. I'd like to know what it is, that's all. And it's not—.

My personal view is that there are many people in Wales who can well afford to pay for meals for their children. Would you expect free meals for your children? Would I? I don't think so. So, let's just be honest, and I'll go back again.

So, how much is that? Where does the spending of £6 million on election policy, where does £2 million on a constitutional commission and £8 million on international relations—outside, of course, of the Wales and Africa programme, which we support—deliver a more sustainable health service, more jobs and pay some bills?

And the Welsh Conservative action plan does not seek to whack up income tax on hard-working people whose budgets are already stretched, which Plaid intend to do, and I agree with the Minister on this. They can pretend that their plans would impact on the highest earners the most, but we all know that it's the basic income tax payers, who make up the bulk of Welsh taxpayers, who will foot the bill under Plaid's plans.

Llywydd, with the funding that we have identified as a group, we have looked at six key areas that could be funded to better deliver on people's priorities. We would take immediate action to clear the bedblocking, open up hospitals and end the disgrace of ambulances queuing outside A&Es by introducing care hotels. These were introduced elsewhere in the UK during the pandemic—indeed, in Devon, they're still in use—and are designed to protect acute hospital capacity, providing step-down facilities for people who require support but not hospital care.

Surgical hubs would also be established in each region, to provide additional relief to the Welsh health system—they've been talked about, but they're not being delivered—creating more operating theatres, meaning we can begin to tackle the unacceptably long waiting lists, with one in four people in Wales desperate for treatment, especially around orthopaedics, which we know the professional sector have made a lot of suggestions on.

To support the economy, a microbusiness support fund would enable businesses to get off the ground and expand by helping them with paying the national insurance contributions of two new additional staff members. A trial scheme would be established to subsidise the cost of solar panels for small businesses, helping them to reduce their energy bills and contribute to Wales's net-zero ambition.

We would expand upon the Government's empty homes scheme by turning it into a help-to-buy scheme for empty homes and those in need of renovation, so that we can help people onto the property ladder and unlock almost 20,000 homes sitting empty in Wales.

Finally, we would unlock some of the eye-watering £2.5 billion plus of useable reserves currently sitting in local authority bank accounts, so that we can freeze council tax in the immediate future, helping those further to deal with the cost-of-living crisis.

Will you take an intervention, Peter?

To do so—. I'll finish this point, Mike, if I may. To do so, a formula would be used by the Welsh Government to enable an adjustment in the RSG where councils hold usable reserves above a set threshold. The money adjusted from the RSG over the threshold would be redistributed to create a sector-wide funding floor to enable all councils to retain council tax levels at the current levels. We're seeing some authorities with useable reserves of £270 million. That is unacceptable. I'm happy to take the intervention now.

I was going to say it's based upon the standard spending assessment, the rates support grant, taking into account the ability of councils to raise money. Would you have to also change the standard spending assessment in order to change the rates support grant?

What I'm suggesting here is something not dissimilar to what we would do if we were leading councils and we found our schools accruing huge balances and not using those for the purpose they were created for, that resource to help educate our young children. This is purely suggesting that where a council holds significant reserves above a threshold, a small adjustment of £150,000 per £1 million over that threshold would be held back in the RSG and distributed out as a funding floor to allow all authorities to be able to save people from paying the excessive council tax that once again is being proposed.

In summary, Llywydd, I recognise that the Welsh Government, like all Governments, is facing substantial challenges in the immediate term, but today we have brought the Welsh Conservative action plan forward, which will help to address some of the immediate problems our people and businesses face, and to deliver more resilient communities and public services, using existing resources, because we need to double down on our efforts to tackle the most pressing issues that we are currently facing and deliver a better tomorrow for the people of today.

Amendment 2 now, to be moved by Adam Price.

Diolch, Llywydd. There can be no doubt that the Welsh Government lacks the money it needs to do what is necessary to build the kind of decent society that we want to see. That is more true now than it has ever been, I think. Ultimately, that lack of money stems from our lack of power. We lack the powers necessary to grow our economy in Wales, which is one absolutely critical way by which we can generate the revenue necessary to create that kind of society. We also lack the financial powers to control our own fiscal policy—the borrowing powers, the tax-varying powers—to enable us to raise the resources we need, and to do so fairly. Our debate tomorrow, for example, is about giving Wales the power to set the income tax bands and thresholds so we can have the flexibility that Scotland currently enjoys. Our solution to this dilemma, of course, ultimately, and as soon as we can, is to become an independent nation, so we have all of the tools and levers available to us to create that society we want to see. But that is not currently our position. 

Will you take an intervention?

Yes, certainly. 

Given the uncertainty around that last statement about independence, isn't that one of the greatest risks you could take with the economy?

We totally disagree. We urge you to read the report by Melin Drafod, which was drafted by members of the Labour Party, as well as members of Plaid Cymru and people of no party, and came to the conclusion that there is no fiscal impediment to Wales actually becoming an independent nation, and that there are huge advantages in terms of the kind of fair and prosperous society that we want to see. But that is not what we're debating today, Llywydd. 

Currently, our position is this: the choice we face is whether to use the powers that we do have, or simply accept the financial envelope essentially passed to us from Westminster. The problem with the latter course is that, to all intents and purposes, we face either the worst-case scenario—austerity mark 2 under the current Conservative administration—or, at best, with a change of Government, a flatlining of public expenditure. Coming after a decade and more of austerity, when our public services are crying out for investment, Sir Keir Starmer has said, hasn't he, recently, that, apart from the admittedly ambitious capital commitments in terms of investment in the green economy, there will be no new money—not my words, his words—and that people need to think of Labour's agenda as that of a decade, because there will be no substantial additional investment in the first five years. That's a more conservative pitch even than New Labour in 1997, which promised to stick to the Tory spending plans for the first two years. Essentially, it's five years of no additional substantial money.

Labour and the Conservatives at Westminster are closer than they admit on the main fiscal challenge that we face; they just involve different kinds of wishful thinking. The Tories pretend that it's possible to cut taxes while maintaining the 'quality' of public services—I'm putting that in inverted commas. Labour says it can improve public services without spending or taxing more. Neither party is prepared to tell the difficult truth that even with reform—necessary reform—and innovation in our public services, the health and care required by a rapidly ageing population requires investment. We've had a social care system chronically underfunded, and it's been in crisis for a generation. We've managed somehow with a gradually deteriorating healthcare system up until recently. The NHS was fragile and getting worse—winter crises becoming the norm, the rise in life expectancy stalling, avoidable deaths rising, health inequalities worsening. The NHS at its core, though struggling, still was largely able to take the strain, largely because of the heroic efforts of the workforce. But the combination of the pandemic and the cost-of-living crisis, plus 12 years of austerity, means that the entire health and care system now is buckling, and unless we do something radical, it is going to collapse. That's the stark truth.

That's the deep truth at the heart of the current pay dispute, which isn't just about pay, or even mostly about pay, if you speak to the people on the picket lines; it's about a healthcare system that is brittle and a workforce in health and care that is exhausted and is at breaking point. Twelve years of austerity have meant declining real wages for the workforce and rising illness for the patients, and now it's the NHS itself that is chronically sick. With that rapidly ageing and ailing population, with a decade of underinvestment in technology, and now ballooning waiting lists, and a workforce that feels desperately undervalued, we have created our own crisis. It was there to be seen, wasn't it? We all know this. It was there starkly in the pandemic in the lack of capacity in the NHS, the shortage of beds, the shortage of equipment, the shortage of workers that led us to scrambling to make up for these deficiencies, that surely contributed to the higher death rates that we saw here than many of our European neighbours.

Difficult as it is, we believe now is the time, Minister, to be honest with the people. Money alone, we know, is not the answer, but without it, there is no way out of this crisis. The people that will end up paying the highest price will be precisely those on the lowest incomes—it is they that are always most dependent on the quality of our public services. Look at all the evidence the Welsh Government actually produces in terms of health inequalities. Cuts in health and care affect those on lower incomes more than anyone else; they can't escape their dependency on public service, they can't go private. They will pay if we do not act now. They will pay not in money, but with shorter lives and with more painful lives. That is the stark reality, and we must invest for them. 

I'm struggling to understand your ideation around this, really, because last week I saw in the press that Plaid Cymru want to raise taxes across Wales. How will that help the lowest paid people in the country?

I've just precisely explained to you. It's actually those on the lower incomes that stand to suffer most from the cuts in public services right across the piece, and that's true in health as well. So, if we don't invest, it is those people on the lower incomes that will suffer falling life expectancy, shorter lives, more painful lives. That's why we have to do it.

That is why we are making this proposal that, yes, includes an increase in the basic rate as well. We wish we had the powers they have in Scotland, so that we could have a starter rate, which would be lower, we could have intermediate rates, and that's what we're focusing on tomorrow. But we have to work within the constraints that we're under. But even then, if the Government disagrees with us, then, as the Future Generations Commissioner for Wales said, at least use the additional or the higher rate, as I said earlier. Raising it to the level of Scotland would actually raise £72 million next year, £76 million the year after. That would at least allow you to raise care worker rates to £12 an hour, which would make a significant impact upon the crisis of vacancies in that sector. I hear this phrase, 'the highest tax rates for 70 years'. It's strange to hear the talking points of the TaxPayers' Alliance on the lips of Labour Ministers. But I think, actually, in the history books, and doing the maths, 70 years ago was the Clement Attlee Labour Government—was that a terrible time in terms of what we were able to do, coming out of the second world war and the huge burden that we were dealing with? Just as we were deciding in the pandemic would we—[Interruption.] No, I won't take an intervention; I've taken one from you already.

We decided, didn't we, out of the pandemic, that we were going to build a better society, we were going to build back better, and we seem to have forgotten all that. We've forgotten all the clapping that we did to recognise the key workers. And when we look across the world, we have a lower rate of tax than the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development average, and yet we keep on telling people that you can get Scandinavian-level quality of public services and expect to pay an American level of taxation. We have to be honest with the people, we have to do it now, and we have to do it urgently, because there are no cost-free options here, Minister, and if we continue along the path that we're on, then I fear, quite frankly, for the future of our nation.

I will be speaking in my capacity as Chair of the Local Government and Housing Committee. I would like to thank the Welsh Local Government Association, the Minister for Finance and Local Government and the Minister for Climate Change for attending the committee's evidence sessions.

As a committee, Llywydd, we acknowledged that setting a draft budget in the face of extreme economic pressures is a difficult challenge for the Welsh Government. We welcomed the increase in funding for all local authorities, and in particular that the overall increase is higher than the indicative figures provided last year. But despite this, of course, the increases are lower than the rate of inflation, and we are concerned that inflationary pressures mean local authorities will still be facing difficult decisions that could impact on service delivery. 

Local government told us of an overspend of £200 million across Welsh authorities in the current financial year, which will have to be recovered from reserves, and that's despite the increase in funding provided at the start of the year. Relying on reserves to cover overspend is not sustainable, of course, and local authorities told us they are already fearful of the resources available for future years. We believe it is crucial that the Welsh Government and local government prepare now for sustained pressures on local authority budgets in order to mitigate further cuts to already-stretched services. We have therefore recommended that the Welsh Government outlines how it is working with local government to prepare for sustained pressure in future years. 

We have a particular concern around the capital funding for local authorities. We welcome the increase in general capital funding, but are mindful again that inflationary pressures mean that authorities won't be able to do as much with that funding. Local authorities told us that, once more this year, highway maintenance is still a pressure for most councils. It is therefore disappointing that there is no specific highways capital funding in situ. Before finalising the budget for the next financial year, we would like the Welsh Government to look again at the overall allocations for the local transport fund and ensure there is sufficient capital funding for local authorities to adequately maintain the highway and roads network.

Another recurring concern relayed to us by local government was the continued challenge to recruit and retain staff to work in the social care sector. The chair of the Health and Social Care Committee will speak, I know, of their concerns on this issue. We support that committee's recommendation that the Welsh Government should commit to providing six-monthly updates on the work of the social care fair work forum. 

Llywydd, we were concerned that the funding allocated to the Gypsy and Traveller sites capital grant is lower than in previous years, particularly as during our inquiry into the provision of sites we heard and saw that some local authority sites are in urgent need of maintenance or refurbishment. But, as a committee, we were even more concerned to learn that there has been no spend from the capital grant during this financial year and none is forecast to occur before the end of March. We believe this is a stark illustration of why we decided to undertake our work on the provision of sites for Gypsies, Roma and Travellers in the first place and shines a light on the extent of the problems in delivering sufficient and suitable accommodation for these communities. It does seem to be too low a priority for the Welsh Government and local authorities, and this has to change. We have made a joint recommendation with the Equality and Social Justice Committee and recommended the Welsh Government should urgently set out the reasons for the lack of progress on the use of the Gypsy and Traveller site capital grant and how it plans to work with local authorities to ensure take up of this important fund. It should also clarify what will happen to the underspend from last year's budget.

Homelessness and related support services is another area of concern for us in this draft budget. There is an unprecedented number of people currently in temporary accommodation in Wales, and this, of course, puts severe resourcing pressure on support services. An additional revenue funding of £10 million has been allocated for homelessness prevention, but we are concerned that this is not enough to deal with current challenges. The housing support grant allocation remains at £166.8 million in cash terms. This is a real-terms reduction. Services funded by this grant are critical to the prevention and alleviation of homelessness. We are therefore worried about the impact that this cut will have on these services at a time when we are relying on them more than ever. It's also worrying that front-line staff, who are working incredibly hard, are struggling to make ends meet.

We appreciate the challenge facing the Minister for Climate Change in setting the draft budget, but we recommend that the Welsh Government must make it a priority to provide additional funding for the housing support grant ahead of the final budget. It's a key area of preventative spend. We are also concerned with the number of people in temporary accommodation and the 22,000 long-term empty properties in Wales, and we believe that they must again be given more priority. And, of course, the 20,000 additional homes, Llywydd, even though these will not be all new builds, we are very concerned that it is going to be difficult to reach this target, given the cost of materials and issues with the supply chain and workforce.

Decarbonisation is the final area of the committee's concern, Llywydd. But we are very supportive of the Minister's decision not to roll back on housing standards as a cost-saving measure. We are facing a climate crisis, and that is the right decision. Diolch yn fawr. 

You're lucky you're in the class of '99, John Griffiths [Laughter.] I was particularly generous there. Russell George. You're not—you're not. 

I'm in the class of 2011, Llywydd.

Thank you, Llywydd. I'm speaking in my capacity as the Chair of the Health and Social Care Committee. Now, last year, I opened my contribution to this debate by thanking everyone who worked in the health and social care sector, including volunteers and unpaid carers across Wales, for their dedication and their commitment. The winter months, as we know, are always challenging in the health and social care sector, and unfortunately, this winter is no exception at all—far from it. So, on behalf of the Health and Social Care Committee, I thank them very sincerely, once again, for all that they do.

Now, the draft budget includes more than £10 billion for health and social services, as well as, of course, the provision for social care within the local government settlement, and we, as a committee, have explored how the Welsh Government is planning to use these considerable financial levers to achieve its desired outcomes and ambitions for our health and social care. The financial context, of course, is challenging. That's got to be recognised, and constrained, of course, by high inflation and high energy costs, and the impact, of course, of the pandemic and the cost of living continues to affect staff and services. And our health and social care sectors, of course, are grappling with an increased demand, in terms of tackling the waiting times backlog and dealing with longstanding workforce issues. Inevitably, this affects the range of activities that can be delivered, and potentially the timescales of both activity and outcomes. 

We welcome, as a committee, the Minister’s six priorities for health boards. That's very welcome, and if progress can be made in these key areas, it should unlock capacity and free up resources to enable progress to be made in other areas in the longer term. However, if these are priorities, by definition, other areas are not priorities, and we have some concerns that health boards may not have been given clear guidance about which areas the Minister considers as politically acceptable for them to draw back from. So, the Minister said to us in committee that she will review the health boards' integrated medium-term plans once they have been submitted to see whether she is comfortable with the decisions that they have taken. But, we all know that decisions to reduce funding or focus may be challenging or unpopular as well as necessary, and potential opportunities to draw back in some areas at a local level may only be apparent if full consideration is given to regional or national options. So, our report therefore calls on the Welsh Government to update us on discussions with health boards, including any concerns that health boards have raised, and any further guidance that Ministers have given on how health boards are expected to mitigate any resulting impact on the areas that are not amongst the six priorities.

I referred to the pressures that we've seen in health and social care this winter, and we agree with the Minister that addressing these issues relating to patient flow and delayed transfers of care are vital to unlocking the gridlock we have seen in the system. Now, part of the solution has to be resolving the long-standing social care workforce issues that we're all aware of, and we support the Government's commitment to the real living wage for social care workers—I very much support that myself—but we agree also with the Deputy Minister that it will not be enough on its own to address increasingly acute shortages. So, I know that the Minister does understand the urgency of the issues, such as improving access to sick pay, embedding domiciliary care workers in multidisciplinary teams and addressing the discrepancies in pay and conditions for social care and health service workers. But we are not yet persuaded that the social care fair work forum work is being progressed at the pace that is needed, that voluntary measures for collective bargaining or pay structures are adequate, or that there is enough clarity about how the recommendations of the national care services expert group will be progressed to deliver the Welsh Government's longer term ambitions for social care. So, to help us monitor this area, we have asked the Minister to commit to providing us with regular six-monthly updates, through our ecommendation 9.

So, I thank my colleagues on the Health and Social Care Committee and also the clerking team and the wider integrated team as well for all their support in terms of drafting our report. And, Deputy Llywydd, as a good Member of the 2011 intake, you can see that I'm dead on five minutes. [Laughter.]

Okay. Delyth Jewell.

I’m very pleased to contribute on behalf of the Culture, Communications, Welsh Language, Sport, and International Relations Committee, and thank you to the clerking team and Members, and everyone who has given evidence and information to us who’s fed into our recommendations.

In our report on the draft budget, our main message is that it all comes down to money. Unfortunately, we are concerned that the current financial settlement will either limit, or worse, terminate several important services that a number of people in Wales are dependent on. Following our report on the impact of rising costs in November 2022, last year, it is clear to us as a committee that there is more that needs to be done. Additional support is needed by our culture and sports sectors to cope with the cost-of-living crisis. They continue to face the impacts of the pandemic in terms of participation and with regard to their financial viability, therefore they are not in a position to weather the storm that we are all currently facing.

The national library told us that the sustained reduction in capital funding would pose a lasting risk to our national treasures, whilst the arts council said that it would warmly welcome any additional funding that could be provided to the sector. At the same time, one of the most popular petitions on the Senedd’s website calls on the Welsh Government to support swimming pools by providing a package of hypothecated support beyond the final settlement for local government, to ensure that swimming pools can remain open.

The Welsh Government was deservedly praised for investing over £140 million in these sectors to ensure their survival during the pandemic. Unfortunately, we are of the view that the further support outlined for this year and the next financial year is insufficient, and unfortunately, our concerns don’t end with the culture and sports sectors. We are all aware of the fragile situation of the Welsh language following the publication of the disappointing census results before Christmas. We are concerned about the significant impact of inflation on providers of community activities through the medium of Welsh to continue with their current service levels. Bearing in mind the Welsh language’s fragile situation, and to aid recovery from the pandemic, we would wish to see the Welsh Government reviewing the level of funding needed to maintain and also improve opportunities for Welsh-medium activity in communities the length and breadth of Wales in the wake of a higher cost of living. The committee will return to the census results once more data have been published in due course.

So, as I said at the beginning of my speech, it all comes down to money. I would urge the Welsh Government to ensure that this isn’t the end of the story for these sectors by providing further support to boost these sectors and to ensure that the investment made during the pandemic is not wasted. Thank you.

I will be voting for this budget, despite having very serious concerns about it. If the Senedd was unable to set a budget, there's no shortage of members of the Westminster Government who would be only too happy to say, 'Devolution does not work. We can set the budget for them because they're incapable of doing it themselves.'

On raising income tax, as suggested by Plaid Cymru, while intellectually in favour of raising the rate of income tax on the top two bands, there are practical difficulties if we do it alone, including people registering as taxpayers in England. There are a lot of ways for high earners to avoid income tax, but the easiest and simplest is to be paid in dividends, as dividend income is taxed at a lower rate. This is, unfortunately, outside of the Senedd's control, but needs to be addressed by the next Westminster Government. Adding 1p to the basic rate would mean that basic rate taxpayers would pay an extra £5 for every £100 currently paid. This equates to, as my constituents would be able to tell you and I can tell you, a large loaf of bread, half a pound of butter and a large bottle of milk. At a time when people are facing a huge cost-of-living crisis, a tax increase that takes money out of the pockets of ordinary people is not a progressive move.

Where can the Welsh Government get extra money from? I have some suggestions. First, cap basic farm payments. This is supported by the farmers unions in Wales. This is a Brexit dividend, we are out of the common agricultural policy, so these payments are no longer needed to be paid. The average farm payment in Wales is £15,000, and I'm calling for that to be the level at which it is capped. I am unable to get a Welsh figure, but from published sources, over £100,000 is paid to many farmers in Britain, many in Britain who were not necessarily active farmers. How many farm businesses that involve current or former Senedd Members have received over £1 million since the Senedd was set up?

The second is not to give additional rate relief to large companies: fast food operators, coffee chains, hotel chains, pub chains and out-of-town shopping centres. Business rates are one of two taxes strongly disliked by businesses. You cannot avoid them, whilst corporation tax has become effectively a voluntary contribution by large businesses. Another way to save money would be to only introduce legislation that didn't cost the Welsh Government-funded public services money.

Finally, end enterprise zones. Central Cardiff and Deeside did not need the additional funding to attract investment, and the last figures I saw from the others showed very few jobs created and even fewer not from relocation. Having released this money, the priority should be poverty, housing and education. Education is the best economic development tool that we have. It is investing in our children and young people. Expenditure on schools and further and higher education brings more economic reward than any other expenditure on economic development. Why do those areas that have highly qualified individuals attract inward investment and start-up businesses? By providing skilled and highly paid employment without having to bribe companies to bring their branch factories, which are then fairly regularly closed after time runs out.

Gilestone Farm raises the further question: should the Welsh Government spend scarce resources on supporting events that do not benefit the Welsh economy, where the majority of contractors are not Welsh, or should the Welsh Government be using money at all to support tourist attractions? If people want a tourist attraction, they go to the bank, they borrow and they run it as a business. Far too often, the Welsh definition of capitalism is, 'How much money can we get out of the Welsh Government?'

Housing used to be under health in the immediate post-war period. Attlee and the 1945-51 Labour Government understood the importance of housing to health. Is it any surprise that people living in cold, damp conditions are more likely to suffer health problems? Building council housing, using transactions capital to support registered social landlords, will increase the quantity of good-quality housing for rent and improve the overall health of the people living here.

Finally, on poverty, a large number of people in Wales live in relative poverty and use food banks regularly, along with cutting back on heat and surviving on cold food. The Welsh Government has not got enough levers to deal with poverty, but there are things that can be done. As was said by Peredur Owen Griffiths earlier, increasing EMA in line with inflation would help children from the poorest families continue with education. Providing free school meals to all children whose parents are on benefits would help both health and education. And whilst not a budget matter, the Welsh Government need to continue to press for ending standing charges on days when no energy is used. This is something that even The Observer now has taken an interest in. Diolch. 

Today's debate is a crucial one. Having heard the initial headlines from the statement back in December, I thought that Welsh Government had finally had an epiphany and come to the realisation that it’s time to properly fund and support our education system after years of neglect. Alas, as it turns out, this isn’t the case, and, in fact, things are going to get worse for our schools, our educators and our pupils.

In November last year, we saw the UK Government’s autumn statement put young people at the forefront of their agenda, with an increase of funding for education. I called for this to be matched in Wales the week after the autumn statement was announced. So, initially, I was delighted to hear that, apparently, it would be matched in Wales. However, upon further reading, it became clear, Minister, that, if the £117 million figure in the budget is falling in with the £227 million for local government, the extra £117 million isn’t being ring-fenced specifically for education and therefore cannot be counted to go towards education—it can be spent elsewhere, and not necessarily go where it’s needed desperately, on the front line of education, at a time when school budgets are stretched to the max and there are a lot of extra pressures on education in Wales.

If this wasn’t bad enough, it turns out that the draft budget for 2023-24 for education and Welsh language means a real-terms cut of £6.5 million to the budget. When you go over the detail, it becomes even more concerning, with a 6.3 per cent decrease in support grants for students. According to UK-wide data from the Sutton Trust, 27.8 per cent of students have skipped meals to save on food costs, and 16.4 per cent of students have travelled to campus less to reduce costs, which is likely to significantly impact on their educational attainment. This is even more worrying when coupled with the 24 per cent of students who believe that they are slightly, or much, less likely to finish their degree due to the costs.

We also see a 6.5 per cent decrease in the pupil development grant. The Welsh Government is reducing the only targeted funding available for low-income families. The cut is coming as the additional £100 given this year is being scrapped, despite the world being in a cost-of-living crisis. This is certainly not a budget for hard times.

We see a 3.9 per cent decrease in teacher and development support, even though, in the latest Estyn annual report, there was significant mention that there needs to be an absolute priority on the recruitment and development of staff. The budget has outlined a 2.6 per cent increase in education infrastructure, yet there are valid concerns over the extent to which this will support schools, especially with the roll-out of free school meals. Many councils are due to overspend significantly on the delivery of these reforms—far more than the first instalment of allocated funding. For example, Flintshire’s council is predicted to spend £1.8 million this financial year—more than £500,000 more than their initial allocation—Gwynedd is expected to spend £1.6 million, putting them close to a £500,000 overspend, and Newport council is set to exceed its allocated £1.3 million to ensure their delivery.

All in all, Minister, you have presented us with a budget that doesn’t just neglect Welsh education, it actively harms it, in its having a real-terms cut. This should have been a budget to start repairing the damage that you have made over 23 years in power, which has led to Wales languishing at the bottom of Programme for International Student Assessment ratings in the UK. PISA has been bad news for this Government since we joined in 2006, and we have been the UK’s poor relation in every tranche since. Every Minister, since we have joined, has had a PISA target that they always miss. The budget does nothing to stop the rot and does nothing to ensure that we're attracting the brightest and best teachers to our education system.

Let’s not forget that, in 2011, we've seen almost a 10 per cent drop in teacher numbers as they leave the profession in droves. This budget fails on all metrics, and I urge you today, Minister, to go back to the drawing board and try again, as you've failed Welsh education far too many times now. Wales deserves better. Our learners deserve better. And as Mike Hedges said, we should be investing in our children.

I thank the Minister and her colleagues for putting this budget together.

I’d also thank her for taking the time last week to chat about the budgetary situation. And I’d also actually like to thank the Finance Committee as well for its scrutiny work, and I’m not just saying that because the Chair of Finance Committee is sitting next to me. Turning to that work, there was a very clear lack of detail in the evidence supplied by Welsh Government to the committee relating to budget reprioritisation where this might have led to the scaling back of spending plans or even the shelving of original plans. This, of course, can have consequences further down the line, so I would be grateful if the Government could publish that detail. I’ll give an example: the bus emergency scheme funding. It was introduced to support the continuation of bus services during the pandemic, and it’s something that, in particular, rural services rely on. Now, the evidence supplied by the Government to the Finance Committee initially stated that the £28 million allocated to the BES in 2022-23 would be carried over to 2023-24 without any adjustment in funding, but it has come to light from correspondence received by me from stakeholders that this commitment is now in doubt at this very late stage. So, I would appreciate some clarity on this. Buses are vitally important as a service to our communities.

Moving on to green jobs, TUC Cymru has suggested that 60,000 new green jobs could be created in Wales if we invest properly. Unfortunately, limited access to funding, skilled workers and capacity on power lines are slowing a shift towards renewable energy. Seventy per cent of UK employers in a Construction Industry Training Board survey said they have a good understanding of how they will need to change their business to decarbonise, 88 per cent were willing to diversify to decarbonise, and 90 per cent would be willing to retrain if necessary. However, more than 78 per cent of employers that responded to the CITB survey believe there is a shortage of skills in the specific occupation to decarbonise at the present moment.

Now, the Government has always been keen to talk about the creation of new apprenticeships, and their creation is welcome, but, as I’ve said before, retention of students is key to addressing the skills shortage. Let’s take the construction sector as an example—the CITB estimates that, year on year, 1,400 students study a construction-based course. Now, conversations I’ve had with the sector all follow the same pattern—if that number of students year on year were to complete their course, we wouldn’t have a skills shortage in construction. So, very clearly, there’s a drop-off of students. Data, however, isn’t collected by the Government on how many students leave education mid course. That, of course, needs to change, but what will help is the support provided to students. The increase to student maintenance support was very welcome. However, it doesn’t catch students in colleges, in sixth forms, nor on apprenticeships. Now, the Minister will be aware of my campaign to increase EMA payments and the threshold. That would certainly help, especially during this cost-of-living crisis, where students are really struggling to make that £30 a week go far. Transport on its own wipes out that £30. Couple it with food, resources for courses, and in some cases—cases that I've picked up during my campaign—paying for household bills, and education becomes very unsustainable very quickly for so many.

Now, we tell students—and Mike touched on this—especially students from low-income households, that education is an investment and that they should look at what advantage that will give them in the future. Well, for low-income students, the future, more often than not, is tomorrow. It’s whether or not they’ll be able to afford to eat, whether they’ll be able to afford to travel, whether they’ll be able to afford to live—not in five years’ time. This isn’t just for full-time students studying on campus, by the way. This applies equally to those on apprenticeships, and I would urge the Government to consider the apprenticeship minimum wage.

Now, there is a clear case for boosting investment in this area. The Finance Committee recommended the Government consider increasing EMA. We received evidence in the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee around support for students—so too have other committees. So, it is unfortunate that this is not adequately reflected in the draft budget. But I would hope that the Government looks to address this when they bring the budget back, and I’m more than ready to play my part in making it a reality.

I’m going to speak initially in my capacity as Chair of the Equality and Social Justice Committee, and then move on to some things that are burning issues in my constituency. We looked at the social justice budget, obviously through the lens of trying to identify how we are going to support the most vulnerable in our society. 

One of the things that majorly concerned us was that the one-off non-recurrent allocation of £117 million as a result of the UK Government's decision to give everybody a handout to subsidise the energy companies' horrendously raised charges has serious implications for how vulnerable families are going to survive next winter, because that £200 Wales fuel support scheme has been really important for a lot of people, and if that doesn't exist in the next financial year, then we really do have to do some very serious thinking about how we're going to enable families to survive in what could be an even more critical situation next year. So, we want to see some serious thinking on how we're going to do this, and we want to see that by this July, because it's no use producing a plan when you're already in the middle of winter. 

We think that the discretionary assistance fund has been an important mechanism for ensuring that those who are in desperate situations, which can be caused by either having to flee a domestic violence situation or simply by a washing machine breaking down—. These really simple things I think have been fantastically important for people, and the fact that it's administered by all the single advice fund agencies ensures that everybody can get access to it. But we have very little idea what the impact of this fund has been, and therefore we really feel we need to know who's benefited from it in which parts of Wales, which local authorities have been successful in promoting it. As budgets are so constrained in this year's budget and it's likely to be even more difficult in next year's one, we really do need to have some clarity over who exactly is going to benefit and whether the DAF is going to be sufficient.

I think one of the things that concerns us is that it is still very concerning that a lot of people do not know what they're entitled to. Only yesterday I was sitting with some families who were with children with special needs. They simply didn't know about the £200 fuel support scheme that the Welsh Government is operating, because their social worker simply hadn't bothered to ask them whether they'd got it, and that is an unacceptable situation, just as it's unacceptable for health visitors to say they haven't got time to help families to fill in the Healthy Start vouchers. On what basis are they not focusing on the ability of a family to be able to buy food that nourishes their families, rather than junk food that can kill them? So, we really do need to ensure that every front-line worker, whether it's the school administrator, the caretaker, or whether it's those busy health and social workers—it's absolutely essential.

I was astonished to hear Peter Fox say that the basic income pilot for care leavers was a waste of money. This is an invest-to-save measure. This is our collective responsibility. That's what being a corporate parent stands for. So, we support the invest to save in the Equality and Social Justice Committee, and I think the continuation and the increase in that money is very welcome.

I just now want to refer to matters that are absolutely crucial to the well-being of my own constituents in Cardiff Central, picking up on what Luke Fletcher was saying about the continuation of the bus emergency scheme, because Cardiff Council has informed me that ending the bus emergency scheme, rather than having that £20 million transition money, could lead to cuts of at least a third of all the routes, or, alternatively, less frequent buses on all of the routes. And it will also have an impact on its ability to deliver school transport to schools. So, this is a really serious issue. This was discussed in the Climate Change, Environment and Infrastructure Committee, and the Deputy Minister acknowledged that transport poverty was a really significant issue. You have to remember that, in parts of my constituency, over half of households do not have access to a car and at least 25 per cent of bus users have a disability or a long-term illness, so getting on a bike is probably not an option for them. So, I think that this is a very significant issue and something that we need to put much more of the focus on. We need to think 'yes' about eliminating food poverty, 'yes' to having long-term solutions to fuel poverty, particularly with the need to bring forward the next iteration of the Warm Homes programme, but we also have to look at transport poverty; it really does stop people getting to their job or their education.

Obviously, I'd like to actually address my budget concerns regarding the portfolio. If we just take Natural Resources Wales, for instance, Welsh Government have completely ignored many warnings that we've seen in committee reports and inquiries that Natural Resources Wales is underfunded, and yet, they've chosen to maintain its current level of funding. So, it's continued to be allocated £60.1 million in the draft budget, yet in contrast, this body received £69 million in 2021-22. Despite these concerns of underfunding, the Minister for Climate Change has said that the body's funding was 'sufficient for their statutory responsibilities', though she

'would prefer to give them a bigger budget',

during scrutiny of the 2022-23 budget. That's on record. So, with the need for environmental oversight more important than ever now, these words will certainly ring hollow for many.

In terms of the Welsh Government's environmental targets, clean energy funding is set to decrease by 6 per cent, despite the Welsh Government's own net-zero target. Welsh Government had planned to allocate £10.4 million to clean energy, though the budget now shows this has reduced to £9.8 million. The funding is used towards policy development, financial support for renewable energy, including the local energy grant scheme and the energy planning programme. So, whilst funding also goes towards pursuing devolving the management of the Crown Estate in Wales, I hope that the cut in funding is due now and that this ridiculous policy idea are being scrapped.

Members may know that marine planning is an issue that I, along with my colleague Joyce Watson, have constantly raised, issues about marine planning and our legislative proposals for a full marine spatial development plan for Wales. So, we're disappointed that the Welsh Government has reduced the anticipated capital spending on marine energy for 2023-24. The capital funding is set to be cut by 30 per cent, with £10 million originally planned in the indicative budget, though this has now been reduced to £7 million.

Will you take an intervention?

Yes.

With regard a complete lack of capital funding for Wales and the complete and utter lack of infrastructure funding over the last 10 years, how can you explain that?

Well, I disagree that there's a complete lack of this funding. At the end of the day, we've had devolution here in Wales for 25 years. We have just over 3 million of population. The billions that come into Wales—is it £18 billion? It's you that's out of order even asking a question like that.

So, the Welsh Government needs to explain how this has been reduced, despite the target to meet 100 per cent of its electricity needs from renewable sources by 2035. Funding going towards the tidal lagoon challenge, tidal lagoon project, ports infrastructure, wave and tidal stream, it is puzzling as to why the Welsh Government has now decided to reduce spending on this portfolio.

Now, let's turn to the issue of housing. Whilst the Welsh Government rightfully praises the support generated through the housing support grant, it fails to prioritise this as an area. The Welsh Government claims it is increasing its focus on the housing support grant. They say that in one breath and yet, in real terms, it's got a cut of 8 per cent. The funding is due to remain the same as last year, with £166.7 million allocated. This is particularly concerning, as the grant aims to help vulnerable people with issues they face, and we can see they exacerbate now the risk of homelessness. We can also see the risk of violence against women, domestic abuse and sexual violence.

Moving on to building safety funding: that's set to receive a 37 per cent reduction in resource from the indicative budget, despite the indicative budget setting aside £9.5 million for 2023-24. This draft budget now shows an allocation has dropped to £6 million. It makes an absolute mockery of the Welsh Government's claim that building safety is a top priority. If that's one of your top priorities, well, I wouldn't like to see anything else lower on that list. With 261 expressions of interest received for the Welsh building safety fund, and 163 of those requiring intensive surveys, the extent of fire risk in Wales is clear. Whilst the £135 million in capital for building safety is needed, the Welsh Government must match its words and treat building safety as one of your top priorities. It is only fair that our constituents have a safe place to live.

This, of course, the actions of the Welsh Government, now stands in direct contrast to the UK Government's tough new ultimatum on cladding, giving developers hard deadlines to pay up to fix unsafe buildings. The market housing national empty homes grant scheme will only bring 2,000 empty homes back into use. With 22,140 long-term empty properties in Wales, this is just—well, it's a non-realistic figure. There's no ambition, no aspiration to get those empty homes back into use by people who desperately need them.

Janet, you need to conclude now, please.

Yes. Twenty-five million pounds in capital funding towards the costs of remedial works to make a property habitable. The Welsh Government needs to outline how it seeks to promote empty homes. Too often, we're seeing the wrong priorities being afforded money.

Anyway, that's my take on it. I think this budget is very poor. I think it's not ambitious at all. We know that there are challenges, however, you really do need to be far more adventurous with your budget aims. Thank you.

In introducing the draft budget to the Senedd, the Minister mentioned that this was one of the most difficult budgets since devolution. This is because it is a time of austerity, a time of poverty, and a time of crisis, the likes of which we haven’t seen for decades.

In the Wales of the twenty-first century, nurses and teachers are amongst the thousands who are having to turn to foodbanks. More and more people are falling into debt, critical levels of debt. Citizens Advice Cymru say that they have never seen such a high proportion of people in deficit in terms of their household budgets—almost half of those who come to them for support. 

The number of those who are homeless or at risk of being homeless is another sign of a state of economic crisis. Citizens Advice helped more people with homelessness this year than in the past five years. Women, children, disabled people, people with health conditions, single parents, carers, people from black, Asian and minority ethnic communities suffer disproportionate levels of economic inequality.

Yes, it is difficult to ensure that the support is there for those who need it most, that the services providing this support have the resources that they need to achieve that, that the huge gaps that exist in the safety net, which has been torn to shreds by the merciless and unprincipled Conservatives in Westminster, are filled. Yes, it is difficult. But, taking the difficult decisions is the function of government, and the Welsh Government’s function is to serve the people of Wales, to consider their needs, to safeguard their health and dignity, and to ensure that they have equal access to every opportunity and service, including healthcare and social care.

It is through this lens that we will have to scrutinise the draft budget before us. That’s why our amendment calls for us to be given the resource to do more of what needs to be done. Those who are most dependent on the support that our health and care services provide and additional financial support are those in the greatest need, those who have no options, who have no reserves, who don’t have a second home, who don't have the means to keep their heads above the water that is so incredibly deep.

The Government has stated that this budget is one that prioritises those in greatest need. The way that every penny is spent is, therefore, of the utmost importance because people’s lives are now in danger. That's the conclusion of a Which? report on the impact of the cost-of-living crisis  in Wales, published yesterday and discussed by the cross-party group on consumer rights, which I chair. Seventy eight per cent of people in Wales are cutting back on heating, and 18 per cent are eating fewer hot meals.

During the same discussion, concerns were expressed that the increase in the level of the discretionary assistance fund, although welcome, is funding to help people in crisis, and that priority should also be given to preventative spending, for schemes such as the Wales fuel support scheme, which has been cut in its entirety. It was warned that although the scheme will come to an end, the need won’t come to an end, and the need indeed will be even greater next winter, according to Citizens Advice forecasts. The implications of this level of need, this depth of need, and the impacts on people’s health and well-being will be with us for generations. This budget does not contain a plan to prevent these impacts.

It's also disappointing to see the lack of investment in our most disadvantaged young people who wish to continue with their education. Our amendment would ensure that the education maintenance allowance, for example, could provide an appropriate level of support. And although the maintenance grant has seen an increase, students cannot access many of the other cost-of-living payments that are available. Talking about buses, if you're a student over the age of 21, you'll get no discount whatsoever on your bus ticket, and student rents, of course, continue to increase, leading to a cost-of-education crisis.

Our calls to expand and increase the EMA have been echoed by the scrutiny report published by the Children, Young People, and Education Committee, and speaking of the gap that exists in spending on cost-of-living support this year, namely £116 million, the Equality and Social Justice Committee's scrutiny report notes that there is

'a clear need to look at longer-term, sustainable solutions to the cost of living crisis',

as Jenny Rathbone mentioned, our Chair.

I've argued and, indeed, I've received this Senedd's support for the call for a co-ordinated Welsh benefits system. Now is the time to accelerate the work to ensure that every penny of support reaches the pockets of those who need it, without fail and without fuss.

In concluding, I would like to draw attention to the most damning and serious conclusions of the two committees of which I am a member, namely this one by the Children, Young People, and Education Committee, that there is a lack of clarity as to whether the budget supports children and young people who are particularly likely to be impacted by the cost-of-living crisis. And this in the nation where the levels of child poverty are the highest in the United Kingdom.

With Westminster denying Wales—

Sioned, you'll have to conclude.

With Westminster denying Wales the resources and the powers that we need, yes, there is a need for difficult decisions to be made. The Welsh Government makes those decisions even harder by failing to secure the resources it needs through fair, proportionate and just taxation to help us overcome the shameful hardship that scars our communities. I urge Members to support our amendment.

Can I remind Members, please, from all groups, that as you go beyond the time, you're taking time away from your colleagues who wish to speak? So, please keep to your time limits. Hefin David.

I'll try and keep it short, Dirprwy Lywydd. I might not succeed. This is a debate in two parts really, isn't it? It's a debate that comes from the committees' responses to the draft budget, and the committees making reasonable points, cross party, that are well made. Pered was the first to speak from his committee, and a very impressive contribution it was. I think that is where this debate should be.

I wasn't going to make a speech, actually, until the amendments came in. I think the amendments are the second half of the debate, which is entirely political, entirely point scoring, and entirely pointless. What I wanted to do was to specifically speak, because I think, sometimes, there's an amendment that you want to speak to, because you want to explain to people who may be watching why you are voting against it, and I am going to vote against Plaid Cymru's amendment 2. The reason for this, I think, has already been laid out very well today on the Today programme by the Minister, who made an excellent contribution this morning, but also it's been laid out by politicians in Caerphilly. I'd like to read to you this statement.

'There surely can be no justification in the current climate for increasing the tax burden on hard-pressed residents of Caerphilly.'

That comes from Lindsay Whittle, the leader of Plaid Cymru on Caerphilly County Borough Council. And the leader of Plaid Cymru was a little bit grumpy when I tried to intervene earlier, so I'm happy to take an intervention now if he wants to put Lindsay Whittle right. But Lindsay actually said that. Go for it.

He's referring to the most regressive tax of all, of course, the council tax, which is why the reform of that is in the co-operation agreement, and we need to get on with that as soon as possible.

I fully agree with the reform of council tax, but, on a band B property, the proposed rise in Caerphilly—the lowest council tax in the whole of Gwent, if not the whole of Wales—is £1.91 a week. The proposal that he's putting forward for basic rate of income tax from the same workers is around £2.50 a week. So, actually, the consequences of his tax rise will be higher for those people who Lindsay Whittle says are faced with

'higher food, energy and mortgage costs and many are now having to turn to foodbanks'. 

[Interruption.] As he said to me, I'm not taking another intervention. [Laughter.] If he'd taken an intervention from me a second time, he could have come in, we could had a lovely debate, but let's play by the rules that he set.

Plaid Cymru are making it very clear in Caerphilly that they are not accepting any council tax rise at all. In fact, what they've said—. You might want to speak to speak to your Plaid Cymru group. We know that they're mad as a box of frogs in Caerphilly. But they've said:

'We propose a zero council tax increase'

in Caerphilly, and that a council tax rise

'cannot be justified and bills should be frozen for residents.'

[Interruption.] Two seconds. I think what they are doing there is playing politics, and I think what is happening with Plaid Cymru here in the Senedd—[Interruption.] Heledd, I will come to you in a second. What they are doing here in the Senedd is proposing this council tax rise so that they can make as many uncosted proposals for the current budget as they want to, outside of the co-operation agreement, and then say, 'Yes, but we wanted to raise council tax to pay for it, so you should raise council tax.' This is where the co-operation agreement is falling down. It's power without responsibility. I think it should either be a coalition Government or it should be confidence and supply. What we've got from this deal is Plaid Cymru having the worst of both worlds and being able to make these points. Heledd, you can defend it if you want.

I think there's a point of order necessary here, because we're not debating the co-operation agreement; we're debating the draft budget. And if anybody is trying to score political points, I would say that it is our colleague Hefin David. I don't see the relevance of this in terms of the draft budget. I would like to know why you think our amendment is pointless. It is a proposal. It's about using the powers we have here in Wales to do something, to do something differently. Why do you call that suggestion pointless when it is a serious suggestion?

I'll tell you what I'll do; I'll withdraw the word 'pointless'. I wouldn't want to be the subject of a point of order later on today. I withdraw the word 'pointless' and I apologise for that. What I should have said was 'politically convenient', because what they are doing is using this proposed rise in council tax, which will hit the poorest people, in order to justify uncosted expenditure through the course of the rest of this Senedd term, and I think that is something that needs challenge.

Let's just look at some of the proposals that they've had through the debates that we've had so far: comprehensive free school meals, universal childcare, a rent freeze, education maintenance allowance, and that big black hole that we don't know anything about—independence. These are things that they are bringing to this Chamber, and in spite of being in the co-operation agreement, in which they've got spending commitments, they are making these demands as well, which is, I believe, politically unacceptable. You've got effects, then, on things like, as has already been mentioned, public transport, apprenticeships, town centre development, local authority capital funding, decarbonisation and Natural Resources Wales. These are all consequences that are having a direct result, as a result of some of the decisions that have been made.

And my last point, Dirprwy Lywydd, if you'll allow me, because of the interventions: I did ask Peter Fox that question earlier on, how he felt about universal free school meals. When that debate was held in the previous Senedd and in the beginning of this Senedd, it was not a healthy debate. It was a debate held by social media. We were attacked, those of us who voted against it. I believe in universal free school meals, but I am still sceptical about it as a priority at this time. If we had extra money, it should go towards universal Flying Start, and if we didn't have that money, it should go towards those things that we already protect. I think there is a real danger in pushing that policy harder and harder when there are other priorities that we have to meet, such as the bus emergency scheme, that are not being met as a result of this budget. There is a lot of—

I have now given you the extra time you asked for.

There's a lot of difficulty, I think, with Plaid Cymru's approach to this, and it's inconsistent with what they're saying locally.

I've had a request for a point of order from the Member for Carmarthen East and Dinefwr. If it's okay, I'll take it at the end of the debate, rather than now. But I will give you the point of order at the end.

Will you give a ruling as well?

Probably. Tom Giffard.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I'm not quite sure how to follow that, but what I will promise is a short contribution. I know Hefin promised it and didn't quite manage it, so I will try my best just to focus on a few key points, which I hope will give the Minister some pause for thought.

Last week, we debated the Culture, Communications, Welsh Language, Sport and International Relations Committee report, which Hefin and I both sit on, on rising costs. It was clear from the evidence that we heard that more support should be given to amenities such as leisure centres to help with the increase there in energy costs and prevent those key services that many people rely on from closing. Whilst, in responding to that debate, there were warm words, I thought, from the Deputy Minister, targeted additional support is lacking, I think. It's also worrying that as a nation Wales spends only £18 per head on sporting participation, compared to £51 per head in Norway.

I do believe it's really important that we get to disadvantaged areas so everyone can get that regular physical activity, but it's disappointing to see that by failing to increase support for this in the budget, the Welsh Government is not intending to change its approach. I know Ministers will say, 'Well, where does this funding come from?' But colleagues on these benches, as we heard from Peter Fox, have identified £100 million that can be diverted from other areas to areas that matter, to those areas that are priorities for the people of Wales. So, I hope you'll listen, Minister, to Peter Fox's suggestions, and take them very, very seriously indeed.

And finally, I'm also concerned about the potential for stealth taxes that could strangle our tourism industry. This is an often-made but very important argument, but we've got to the stage where recovery from COVID-19 in this sector is incredibly fragile. Proposing a tourism tax at this point alongside changes to self-catering accommodation rules won't help the recovery in that crucial part of our economy. We do, in the end, have to receive the returns to be able to reinvest in these services in future years. I hope you'll take those points on board, Minister, and thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd; that was less than two minutes.

It was indeed. Heledd Fychan.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I think, very clearly, listening to this debate, there are two things that strike me: first, that certainly the biggest risk to Wales and its citizens is remaining part of the UK and not having these levers under our control, and secondly that all the Brexit dividend promises were lies. We're not seeing that reflected in the reality here in Wales.

Last night, I attended a public meeting organised by those that are opposing the proposals by Cardiff Council to close the Museum of Cardiff, privatise St David's Hall and reduce public library services. We heard a number of powerful speeches, in particular by those whose lives have been transformed by these wonderful facilities, proving that cultural assets aren't just nice to have, but absolutely essential for the health and well-being of our communities. When I have previously raised concerns about the potential loss of both cultural assets and leisure facilities—including swimming pools—in the Senedd, I've been repeatedly told that it is a matter for local authorities and that their settlement is better than expected in the draft budget. But I'm afraid that detracts from the reality that we're currently seeing across Wales, with—as everybody knows—Andrew Morgan, the leader of the WLGA, recently stating that the economic outlook for councils looks bleak, and councils are having to make difficult decisions to meet spiralling budget gaps due to energy bills, inflation and pay costs.

One question that was asked at last night's public meeting—and I think it is relevant for today's debate—was why are so many politicians both in our Senedd and in our local authorities not doing more to stand up to the austerity agenda, and not on the streets to reject the Tory narrative that no money is available. [Interruption.] No. Time and time again here, we hear Ministers state that it's the UK Government's fault that these difficult decisions have to be made, but one thing I'd like to ask today is: what are you doing in practical terms, beyond writing letters or making public statements, to demand the funding we need and deserve? Unless something significantly changes, and quickly, Wales will be stripped of many of its vital public services and facilities, and I worry that sometimes, we forget here that these are a result of political choices made by the UK Government. The UK Government follows a policy agenda that rewards the rich or super-rich and punishes the majority.

It's time for us to unite with our communities and send a clear message to Westminster that enough is enough and that we are unwilling to continue to implement an austerity agenda on their behalf. We therefore have an opportunity in this budget to outline the kind of Wales that we want to see, and use all the powers available to us to prioritise. My colleague Adam Price has outlined our priorities in terms of the NHS, and our proposal does mean that additional money can be made available. My colleague Sioned Williams outlined the very real challenges and the risks associated with some of the cuts that we are seeing in the draft budget, especially impacting children and young people living in poverty here in Wales, and there are more children and young people in poverty with every month that goes by.

I would also like to ask two other questions. Firstly, how does this draft budget address the issue of teacher recruitment and retention? It's something that Laura Anne Jones picked up on. We've heard warnings from headteachers that unless additional funding is made available, we will lose teachers and teaching assistants and additional support services will be lost. So, what considerations have been given to this in the budget?

Secondly, if I could turn to the Welsh language, this is the first draft budget since the publication of the census results, as Delyth Jewell mentioned, and we know that significant investment is needed in a number of areas if we're reach the target of a million Welsh speakers by 2050. However, a real-terms cut of 2.4 per cent in expenditure on the Welsh language is contained within this budget. So, what assessment has been done on the impact of this on the target of a million Welsh speakers?

Further to that, although there's been success in investing in free access to the Urdd Eisteddfod last year and 15,000 free tickets to the National Eisteddfod, is there an intention to provide further support to enable this to happen in the future? These kinds of events are extremely important, and we've seen a warning from the National Eisteddfod just last week that they will have to look again at the price of entry. So, how are we going to ensure that culture isn't just for those that can afford it? We have the Well-Being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 here in Wales; we must ensure equal access to all the wealth of life, and that includes culture. So, I'd like to know how this budget will secure that.

I’m speaking this afternoon in my capacity as Chair of the Children, Young People and Education Committee. As a committee, we are all very much aware of the significant financial difficulties facing the Ministers setting this year’s budget. We know that children and other vulnerable groups of people are disproportionately impacted by the cost-of-living crisis. An estimated 31 per cent of children in Wales are living in relative poverty.

In a survey of 7,873 children and young people last November, the children’s commissioner found that 45 per cent of children aged seven to 11, and 26 per cent of young people aged 12 to 18, said they worry about having enough to eat. This is the stark reality of how poverty affects children, and the backdrop against which the Welsh Government sets its 2023-24 draft budget. It demonstrates why it’s so important for the Welsh Government to give children and young people their fair share of resources.

At the heart of the Children, Young People and Education Committee’s scrutiny of the Welsh Government’s draft budget is this key question: has the Welsh Government allocated enough resources to children and young people? Unfortunately, we do not know for sure. Once again, the Welsh Government did not publish a children’s rights impact assessment of its draft budget. Our committee is clear in our recommendation on this: the Welsh Government must comply with its duty to have due regard to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child when setting its draft budget.

We asked for a lot of information in preparation for our scrutiny, and we are grateful for the co-operation of Ministers and officials on this. Sadly, not all of the written evidence we receive to support our scrutiny was clear, and we look forward to the Finance Committee’s forthcoming consultation. Despite those challenges in seeing what’s spent on children, we have made a series of recommendations to the Welsh Government this year, some of which aim to mitigate the impact of the cost-of-living crisis on children and young people across Wales.

The school holidays free school meals programme, which is due to end after the February half term, should be extended. Children in Wales should not have to worry about having enough to eat. The school meals programme is an effective way to mitigate the impact of food poverty on our most vulnerable. We welcome the Welsh Government’s decision to extend the scheme thus far and urge it to do so again.

A number of Members have already mentioned the education maintenance allowance, and we believe that the time has come for the education maintenance allowance to be properly reviewed. In its response to our draft budget report last year, the Welsh Government told us that it hasn’t reviewed the EMA in part because a 2014 review suggested that it was

'an essential source of financial support for only the minority of students.'

That review is almost now a decade old. An awful lot has changed since then. Meanwhile, since neither the EMA eligibility threshold nor the support rate have been revised since 2011-12, the EMA is of less real-terms value to fewer students every year.

These recommendations, alongside others, feed into the final recommendation of our report. This year, we join the children’s commissioner, Audit Wales and many others in calling for the Welsh Government to produce a child poverty action plan with clear, costed, deliverable, measurable and time-bound actions. We understand that the main levers for alleviating child poverty lie with the UK Government. But that does not negate the need for the Welsh Government to set out clearly how it will use the levers that are in its gift, and the money that it does have, to reduce child poverty here in Wales. And I know that we are not the only ones who will be paying close attention to the Welsh Government’s response to that recommendation, in particular.

And finally, I would like to thank my fellow Senedd committee Chairs and committee members for their support and collaboration this year. It is so important for the Senedd to be as holistic as possible in its scrutiny of the Welsh Government’s draft budget. As well as drawing on the expertise and excellent engagement work of the Finance Committee, I know that some committee reports this year—including ours—have joint recommendations with other committees that have shared areas of interest. I hope very much that we continue to build on this collaborative approach to scrutiny in future years. Diolch yn fawr.

I'd like to preface my contribution to this debate by saying thank you so much to the Minister. I have said on many occasions that it’s a job that I would run a million miles from—to set a £19 billion budget. I would like to thank her for the discussions that we have had, and for the opportunity to look at particular areas in detail. Thank you. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

What is a Government’s budget, unless it’s there to support our poorest and our children? There is a song—I won't sing it—and I think it goes something like this: 

‘I believe that children are our future’.

Indeed, they are, aren’t they? I’m really pleased to see so much in this budget that actually focuses on children. I echo many of the statements from Jayne Bryant. We have free school meals. That is about feeding our children—all of our children, it doesn’t matter what their background is. It’s about making sure that our care-experienced children whom we are responsible for—we are their corporate parents—do not go without anything through the wonderful pilot universal basic income for care-experienced children.

In education—and I’m bound to say here that Kirsty Williams worked on this—the pupil development grant, which actually looks at targeting those children who are the most vulnerable and need our support on education. That’s what a budget should be about. It is so tempting, isn’t it, to list exactly what we want in addition, but that’s actually what I’m going to be doing in the next few minutes. I will come to something else at the end, but I do want to talk about some of the things that I would like to see and that are already in the budget as well.

Dentistry. Many of you know that I have raised this on several occasions. In Powys, we have 5,000 people on the dental waiting list, with 800 children still not able to find an NHS dentist. We need to look at funding—that’s not the only issue—and I’m grateful, in my discussions with the Minister, to look at innovations that we’ve had. But it needs to go further and faster, and I look forward to hearing more about that.

Social care. We know that that is a really big issue. I’m pleased to see that the Welsh Government has committed £70 million to the social care sector, which will fund that living wage commitment. But, as I’m sure everybody in the Siambr here today knows, it needs to go further; it’s only a step to helping to mitigate many of the issues in relation to social care.

The third area is around decarbonisation. The climate emergency is the most important thing that we face. I am interested to learn what plans the Welsh Government has for the new iteration of the Warm Homes programme. We have been waiting a little bit of time for that, but that is essential in order to make sure that people’s bills are lower, and that we address our climate emergency. You have heard Luke Fletcher talk about the bus emergency support scheme and concerns around that, and I do share those. But we want to see free public transport for all under-25-year-olds. That would help to tackle the climate emergency and to help our young people.

I would just like to finish by saying that we have all talked about—including me—what more we want to see being spent. But we need to look at income as well. We need to look at how we are going to fund what we need, particularly in the light of a disastrous Conservative Government and an absolutely shameful Liz Truss budget, which put so many people in a precarious position. We need to look in Wales at what we can do. And although I won’t be supporting the Plaid Cymru amendment, I do think that there is a discussion to be had. My concern is that I cannot support a proposal that seeks to add an additional tax burden to the lowest earners, particularly at this time of a cost-of-living crisis. But I do think that there’s a discussion to be had, and I hope the Minister’s open to that, to look at how we can actually tax the highest earners, because they are the people who can afford to support everybody in Wales. And, of course, I won’t be supporting the Conservative amendment. It’s clear to everyone that their Government is not delivering on the people of Wales’s priorities. Thank you very much. Diolch yn fawr.

Can I also thank the Welsh Government Minister for bringing forward today’s debate on the 2023-24 draft budget? Of course, it has a really important impact on our communities, on everyone in Wales, and it’s something that, I’m sure, everyone’s been eagerly anticipating. It’s clear from our side of the benches and throughout contributions so far, along with our amendment to today’s budget debate, that this Welsh Government budget does not go far enough in delivering for the priorities of the people of Wales. And one of these priorities is the services delivered by our fantastic councils and councillors up and down Wales. It’ll be no surprise to us here that I’ll be starting my contribution in this regard.

As has already been outlined, the local government settlement is proposing a 7.9 per cent increase, which is around £227 million being provided to local government, which, of course, those councils have welcomed cautiously. But it’s clearly not enough for them to deliver the services that are required. It’s really difficult to see how this increase in the settlement will actually lead to local communities receiving better services. We know that councils are currently having to grapple with budgets and difficult decisions just to survive and deliver business as usual, let alone see additional services delivered.

But we are living with and dealing with a bit of a paradox on this issue, because in light of this funding settlement of 7.9 per cent, many councils up and down Wales are planning huge council tax rises to deal with it, but this is despite them sitting on massive reserves, which my colleague Peter Fox pointed out. In my view, it’s simply not right that residents across Wales are likely to face significant council tax rises, especially during a time when their pockets are already being hit, when some councils are sitting on hundreds of millions of pounds’ worth of reserves. The moral position on this is difficult to justify, and I hope the Minister will consider the thoughts that Peter Fox presented in respect of this as well.

Secondly, other Members have mentioned this point, and it is in relation to the housing issues and challenges that our councils are facing. I’ve received significant correspondence on this, and I’m sure that other Members have as well, and it’s in relation to the housing support grant, which we know funds the vast majority of support for our homeless and housing support in Wales, with around 60,000 people every year being supported. Really important support was provided throughout the pandemic, but it’s currently under more pressure than ever. We know that, over the past decade, the housing support grant has reduced in real terms from where it was at £139 million around 10 years ago, which should equate to about £181 million today. But in actual fact, it is £167 million, so it’s about a £14 million real-terms cut to an area that has seen a significant increase in demand. And this real-terms cut is having a significant effect on the housing support grant workforce, and it’s clear that the absence of any increase to this budget means that service delivery is at risk, and ultimately it will cost the taxpayer more in the long run, because this preventative service is not being properly supported.

In addition to this, we’re seeing a huge challenge in recruiting and retaining staff in these services, and we’re told that 29 per cent of staff working in housing support will be getting paid less than the new real living wage. It can’t be right that the Welsh Government’s own budget for housing support services is not enabling them to pay the real living wage, despite the Welsh Government’s own commitment to pay the real living wage. There’s a real hypocrisy there in the budget setting for housing support services from the Welsh Government.

Will you give way?

Certainly.

Do you share my concern that cuts or freezes in the housing support grant have been offered almost as a sacrificial offering in almost every Welsh Government draft budget for at least the last decade, despite the consequences of increased pressure on the NHS, accident and emergency departments, and blue light services? And do you agree that the Welsh Government should not be pursuing these false economies, and instead should be removing the millions of added cost pressure on statutory services that they would cause?

Absolutely. Mark Isherwood raises an important point from his experience here in the Senedd, and I absolutely agree with every point that he's made there because there's a broader point here around preventative services not being properly supported, and the consequential effect on budgets elsewhere within the Welsh Government's control. 

Of course, it's fair to say that this budget has come at a challenging time. However, I believe that there are clear aspects of this that are letting many parts of Wales down, and need to be urgently addressed. I've highlighted just two here this afternoon. So, in closing, I'd like to thank the Minister again for bringing forward today's debate, along with her continued engagement with members of our committee—I sit on the Local Government and Housing Committee. I look forward to further contributions from across the Chamber and call on all Members to support our Welsh Conservative amendment 1. Diolch yn fawr iawn. 

Now, I understand that it's impossible to draft a budget that pleases everybody, especially in the current climate. A budget is a reflection of your politics, and politics, after all, is about priorities. And I'd like to speak to one of those priorities that is often espoused—that of tackling homelessness. Homelessness is a scourge and nobody in an advanced and fair country should be left homeless, but the sad truth is that people are homeless here in Wales. Only last week, my surgery was full of appointments of people who were presenting themselves as homeless, from young families to octogenarians. Tackling and preventing homelessness is not only a good thing in and of itself, but it's also a preventative measure that saves money, be it money in our local authorities or money in the health service and elsewhere. Research has demonstrated that the housing support grant services deliver a net saving—

Will the Member take an intervention? 

Yes, go for it, Janet. 

Thank you, Mabon. Thank you, Mabon, very much. There's some irony here, isn't there? The reasons that the homeless numbers are increasing are, in fact, as a result of many private landlords—and I declare an interest—actually now serving section 21s. You've supported all those extra regulatory burdens that have been placed on private landlords that are now forcing people out of comfortable homes and into hotel rooms; 19 hotel rooms in Conwy county now have many homeless living in temporary accommodation, but they're there for months. 

There's no evidence at all to suggest that the new regulations are contributing to section 21, but I'm here to talk about homeless people, not to defend the landlords. 

So, there's evidence to show that the housing support grant, the services delivered by the funding for the HSG, provides a net saving of £1.40 for every £1 invested by preventing homelessness. The housing support grant funds the vast majority of homelessness and housing support services, supporting over 60,000 people every year by providing tenancy support that prevents homelessness and keeps people in their homes; supported accommodation for a range of client groups, including refuge for survivors of violence against women, domestic abuse and sexual violence; housing first projects that support people with a history of repeated homelessness to access and maintain a tenancy. 

The homelessness sector is under more pressure than ever before, with around 9,000 people in temporary accommodation and nearly a third of them with dependent children. But the housing support grant, as things stand, will not see an uplift this year. This is a real-terms cut at a time when demand is increasing exponentially. Service delivery is now at risk. Local authorities and support providers are seriously concerned about the cost of running services and their ability to recruit and retain staff, and support providers are now actively considering walking away from existing contracts and may be unable to bid for contracts when they are re-tendered. So, will the finance Minister look again at the funding for the housing support grant and ensure that it sees an increase, so that the crucial services that it funds can continue and keep Wales on track to eradicate homelessness? 

Secondly, we all know of the serious challenges facing society on several fronts. Climate change means that we need to rapidly decarbonise and poor housing is threatening the health and well-being of many of our citizens. If we're to reach our targets and decarbonise our housing stock while ensuring that people have good-quality housing, then we should expect to see the Government fund this decarbonisation project to the tune of some £170 million a year. But, as things stand, this budget will only provide £184 million over two years at a time of significantly rising inflation in the sector and labour shortages. This needs to be looked at if we are to achieve modest targets, let alone ambitious ones. 

With the current cost-of-living crisis with large increases in in mortgage interest rates, it's expected that some 220,000 households in Wales will face difficulties in paying their mortgages this year. Wales led the way in introducing a mortgage rescue package back in 2008, and we need to see the introduction of a similar scheme again. There's no budget line for this as yet, so I'd like to ask the Government to consider this, moving forward.

Finally, there is no budget reference to the second iteration of the Wales quality housing standards, which, while welcomed, will certainly mean significant extra costs for social housing providers, while the private sector will have no such bar set as high. So, can the Minister provide clarification on this? Thank you.

We have now exceeded the time allocated to this item on the agenda, but the business of the budget is very important. I have three further speakers. I will call all three, and then the Minister to reply. Huw Irranca-Davies.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd, and I'm speaking in my capacity as Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, although, if I have time at the end, I have just one other point to add, taking that hat off.

Our committee laid our report on the draft budget yesterday afternoon, and I thank committee members and our clerk team for their rapid and diligent scrutiny. Our scrutiny of the Welsh Government's draft budget proposals focused mainly on spending on justice. However, we also closely considered whether the Welsh Government has the capacity to legislate within the current constitutional context, and we're very grateful to the Counsel General for attending our meeting on 16 January to consider these areas in detail.

In relative terms, compared with the Welsh Government's other responsibilities, spending on justice within the draft budget is relatively limited, and it reflects the Welsh Government's relatively limited powers. However, its impact is wide ranging and so we keep a close eye on the Government's proposed spending in this area. We noted small decreases to the allocations within the draft budget that support the Welsh Government's justice transformation programme, and also to the Welsh tribunals. We were grateful to receive assurances from the Counsel General that these decreases did not signal that these areas were falling in priority. In particular, in the case of the Welsh tribunals, we heard that the Welsh Government would be monitoring the impact of any increases in cases or face-to-face hearings on the resources that the tribunals require, and so we recommended that the Counsel General should provide us with timely updates on its monitoring of that. We also heard about the important work that's under way to reform the Welsh tribunals, following recommendations made by the Law Commission. We would like to see more detail about the extent of this work, and so we recommended that the Counsel General should provide us with detail on the likely resources that will be needed to develop these proposals.

It is very important for us, as well as the Senedd, to be able to measure the outcomes of the Welsh Government's spending. We heard, during our session with the Counsel General, that the Welsh Government's first annual report on its delivering justice in Wales programme should contain detail on the Welsh Government's expenditure on justice and evaluations of the outcomes of that expenditure. As the content of the annual report will likely touch on both our remit and that of the Equality and Social Justice Committee, we will explore opportunities for joint scrutiny of the annual report.

Now, Members will be aware of the concerns we have as a committee on the increase in the number of UK parliamentary Bills subject to legislative consent memoranda. The Counsel General told us in quite clear terms that the Welsh Government has indeed sufficient resources to deliver its legislative programme. However, in the context of this increasing volume of LCMs, it's unclear to us as a committee if the Welsh Government does have sufficient resources to deliver all the legislation that it may decide at any time to be necessary. As a result, we are concerned that the Welsh Government may indeed be using the UK Government's legislative programme to implement some of its policy objectives because it may require less of its own resources to be deployed, which has the added effect of legislation in devolved areas being subject to less-detailed scrutiny by the Senedd. Now, I note that the Local Government and Housing Committee has also raised concerns after hearing evidence that the biggest challenge in delivering the Welsh Government's legislative programme is, in quotes, the 'skilled resource that is needed'.

We're also particularly concerned about the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill. The impact of this Bill on the Welsh Government's resources if it is enacted as currently drafted is likely to be considerable. The Counsel General told us that the Welsh Government is continuing to identify which areas will need attention under the Bill's requirements. We do believe that it is imperative that the full picture of that assessment is shared with us and with the Senedd. If the retained EU law Bill becomes law, the Welsh Government should do exactly that. We've recommended in our report that the Counsel General should report within a month of the Bill’s passage, and monthly thereafter.

Finally, we considered the Welsh Government’s future spending on its programme to improve the accessibility of Welsh law. We were told that the costs to deliver this programme are met from across a number of portfolios, and that indicative additional staffing costs of that work were set out in the explanatory memorandum to the Legislation (Wales) Bill. Since it is now over three years since the Bill became an Act, we have asked the Counsel General for an analysis of whether those costs are proving to be accurate.

In the final 20 seconds I have, if I can take my hat off, I began with justice, and I want to end with social justice and echo the words that have come from a few colleagues, our concern about the support for bus transport in Wales. This is a matter of social justice. I am worried that the squeeze on this budget—and there is an undoubted squeeze on this budget—is going to mean that, when Liz Truss blew up the economy, she may have blown up parts of our policy agenda, including radical reforms on the buses—[Interruption.] No, I'm not speaking as Chair. I made that clear, quite clear, quite crystal clear. As a backbencher.

It's a pleasure to take part in this debate this afternoon, although I do feel a bit like a radio DJ on early breakfast now, as we're in the graveyard shift. This time of year, I usually get a little bit disappointed as well, because I always have this picture in my mind that we're going to be sat here like Charles Babbage with calculators, sort of going line by line through the figures, but I understand it's not like that and we have to be a bit more woolly and subjective about some of the things that we're talking about in a roundabout way. 

As this budget has shown, the Welsh Government is continuing to undervalue social care, and not have its priorities in order. The over-reliance on agency workers and worsening skills shortage is leaving the sector incapable of functioning properly. Instead of taking responsibility, the Welsh Government puts the blame on local authorities, forcing them to consider cuts that affect the most vulnerable. A recent case of that was my own council in Denbighshire. It was widely reported that they were discussing reducing the care home fee for our most vulnerable residents in the constituency behind closed doors, without public scrutiny. So, I don't agree with the leadership decision to do that, and I think it should be debated in a public setting, where all stakeholders can be involved. Even when the Government has taken some responsibility, it has been a shockingly poor response to the needs of social care, and only £400,000 has been allocated to apprenticeships, with no answer on how to plug the gaps. 

That brings me on to the training opportunities. I think, in social care, it's not always just about pay, although that is very important. It's also about the training and people feeling like they're valued in their roles, like they've got a career path and something to aspire to. I think that's a big thing in terms of the retention and recruitment of social care staff within various different settings. In my own constituency, I've done a programme of care home visits, and a lot of them are not operating to capacity. They might have, for example, an allocation of 50 beds, but they can only operate at maybe 25 to 30 because they just don't have the staff available, and then that's then backlogging onto the NHS system and contributing to some of the waiting times we're seeing and bedblocking, although I'm not too keen on that sort of wording, although I can't think of a better one at the moment.

Equally, even though the Welsh Government has recognised the role of unpaid carers, I'm deeply concerned that the Welsh Government does not see this, providing financial support to them, as a priority. This budget continues to undervalue, under-reward and underfund our carers, and all of this shows, whilst the UK Conservative Government levels up, the Welsh Labour Government is messing up.

Minister, managing public finances after Liz Truss crashed the economy is desperately difficult, and I'm sure you have the sympathy of many Members in the Senedd in this very difficult task.

Members have already raised a number of points that I intended to, so I just have two points that I'd like you to consider in your response today. First of all, is it the case that all funding that would have been spent on the north-south air link and which was promised for improvements in public transport in north Wales, will indeed be spent on public transport improvements in north Wales, including the Wrexham Gateway? And secondly, do you agree that, amongst the many priorities that Welsh Government rightly has, improving the mental health of young people must be a key concern of all Ministers when they set their budgets? Diolch.

I call on the Minister for Finance and Local Government to reply to the debate.

Diolch, and thank you to all colleagues for what I think has been a really helpful debate. We've heard so many different priorities coming forward: dentistry, building safety, the health Minister’s six priorities for health, the EMA, social care workforce, highways, renewable energy, support for care leavers, the Welsh language, bus services, homelessness provision, farm funding, mental health and swimming pools. And I know that many of these particular issues are subject to some specific recommendations from committees. So, perhaps I'll leave my colleagues to respond to those through their responses to the committees, which I know that we'll be aiming to get to committee Chairs at least in time for the debate on the final budget. And I thought I maybe would concentrate my remarks more along the process, the reprioritisation exercise that we undertook and, of course, some comments on tax as well.

So, I thought I'd begin in reference to the comments by the Chair of the Finance Committee that suggested the committee was surprised and worried at the lack of candour in the draft budget. I take that suggestion very seriously, because we've always adopted an open, transparent and collaborative approach to the preparation of both our draft and our final budgets. I'm really proud that, as a Government, we publish a huge and extensive suite of documentation alongside the budget, and that includes details of our spending plans across all of Government, the impacts of our decisions, the economic context within which we're making those decisions, as well as new tax products, such as the ready reckoner.

And this year's documentation, of course, builds on that which we provided for the 2022 multi-year spending review, and that also included a distributional analysis of our spend, and that was a really significant piece of work, which helps us not just as a Government, and helps the Senedd too, but also our partners in the public and the third sectors. We also, of course, provide a budget leaflet, and that provides a really easy and accessible way into our high-level allocations, and we've provided a children's budget leaflet and also a fantastic animation, which sets out where our money comes from and what it is spent on. And some of these products have been developed in collaboration with our partners and stakeholders, including children, and of course we've sought to take back feedback from colleagues within the Senedd over the years, including the Finance Committee.

So, throughout the production of this year's budget, I've welcomed the constructive engagement and collaboration that we've had with the Finance Committee and with the Chair in particular, and we've worked really closely with the committee to provide details of what our priorities are, to the keep the committee up to date in terms of the challenging circumstances that we face, and also to actively pursue some collaborative working practices, which is why I was concerned by the comments mentioning candour. I think that could be interpreted by the public as an attempt to obscure the scrutiny process, and I think that couldn't be further from the truth. I always have recognised the importance of the scrutiny process, especially at times when funding is so restricted, and I'm keen to continue that open and collaborative work, and of course I'm open to understanding what further information committees need to complete their scrutiny, and look forward to continuing that productive relationship.

One area I think the committee identified as one that we could provide some further information in future would be alongside the calculations relating to the block grant adjustment. So, certainly, we'll look at seeing what more we can provide. Even though the draft budget narrative contains some substantial detail on the block grant adjustment, I do recognise that it has become more complicated over time and there would be benefit, I think, to a more detailed presentation of that information. So, I look forward to working with the Finance Committee on that particular aspect as well.

So, thinking of the reprioritisation exercise, it's just worth re-emphasising, I think, that this budget, of course, builds on our already published plans as part of our three-year spending review. So, this budget only allocates £1.2 billion over two financial years. Of course, we scrutinised a three-year spending review last year. And, as part of that, of course, we allocated an additional £1.3 billion over that spending review period to health, and nearly £0.75 billion additional to local government, and I think that we need to remember that in the context of what we're scrutinising here as well.

Of course, our capital budget falls by 8 per cent in real terms in the next financial year, so hearing about additional ideas from the Conservative benches as to how we could be spending capital is difficult to swallow when there wasn't a single extra penny of capital coming in the autumn statement. Of course, the Chancellor has the opportunity to rectify that in the spring statement, and we look forward to continuing to press the Chancellor for additional funding in that respect.

Thinking, now, of the reprioritisation exercise, to help us protect our front-line public services and support people through the cost-of-living crisis, we did undertake that reprioritisation exercise to release £87.4 million from within those existing budgets, which I've referred to as being agreed as part of our spending review. I did give certain areas a degree of protection, so front-line health services, local government through the RSG, and part of the education budget were excused from that exercise to try and reprioritise across Government, but, I mean, I have to say it was such a difficult exercise. We've been asked why we couldn't reprioritise a greater amount, but actually once we got past that we really did get into the realms of talking about cutting some of the programmes that help the most vulnerable people, and you end up going completely against the kind of preventative agenda that we all want to embrace by cutting some of those proposals.

In deciding which areas to reprioritise, Ministers across Government were searching out areas that were perhaps demand led, where they could, at risk, put a small amount into those budgets to release some funding. Other options included looking at whether contracts could be terminated or redeveloped or reduced in scope. For example, I did that in my own MEG through the reprocurement of our e-procurement contract, and also some work took place in that space in relation to public appointments.

I know that portfolio Ministers did have some really good and thorough scrutiny in their own committees about the choices that they made, but I'll just give a few examples to put them on the record. So, in the rural affairs MEG, the budget repriorisation was limited to farm funding outside of the basic payment scheme. So, the Minister provided protection to the BPS, and we did see then, of course, though, a reduction to the rural economic and sustainability budget line. This MEG, though, did have an increase of £63 million through the multi-year settlement last year. That's now been reduced by just under £9 million to £54 million, and I know that the Minister is working through the difficult choices now that that makes for her in terms of some of the farming and land management activities. That's just one example of the difficult choices that we talk about.

In health, there were a number of areas where funding was refocused to ensure that resources could be focused on our front-line services as far as possible. Those, for example, include changes to the plans for the establishment of an NHS executive, so there will be a reduction now in scope and capacity over the short term, in order to refocus some of the funding towards the front-line services.

In other areas, we've had to revise the timeline of delivery, due to the inflationary pressures, but not the scale of ambition, and an example there would be that whilst obviously excellent progress has been made in terms of maintaining the sustainable communities for learning programme, our programme to improve and develop schools and colleges in Wales, the availability of construction materials and labour has seen costs rise by around 15 per cent, so inevitably we'll be delivering less with that programme even though the amount that we intend to spend will be the same.

And, of course, you'll have heard my colleague, the Minister for Climate Change, talking about the commitment in relation to 20,000 social homes. That now will include an element of homes beyond new builds compliant with development quality requirements, but it's clear that given the multiple sector challenges and the cost increases in the supply chain, and the inflation rates that we face, we may now see, out of necessity, some more homes being brought into the social sector though non-new-build routes. But I do think that gives us good opportunity to take further action in respect of empty homes.

As well as reprioritising, having more flexibility would of course assist us. A number of people have mentioned the fuel support payment. Well, that was something that we were able to do because we were carrying over money that had arrived very late in the financial year in 2021-22. We were able to carry that over outside of the Wales reserve. That was a pragmatic decision on the part of the UK Government, but if that kind of carry-over of very late consequential funding could just become part of our normal way of working, that would help us a great deal.

I don't have too much time left, but I do want to say a few words on tax, although I know we'll have much more opportunity to talk about this in a lot more detail tomorrow afternoon. But there is a recommendation from the Finance Committee that we talk more about the work that we've been doing to understand the potential use of various tax-raising powers. Of course, we did publish our income tax ready-reckoner alongside the draft budget, and that takes account of behavioural impacts of tax changes. It does use His Majesty's Revenue and Customs estimates for certain elements, but it also does include some additional estimates for the potential migration effect of varying income tax rates within the UK. Those were based on a Swiss academic study, because it's the most appropriate proxy for the situation in Wales, although it's not perfect, but we do build that into our ready-reckoner to understand what the impact would be if we were to raise those higher and additional rates of Welsh rates of income tax. We know that the recent changes to income tax rates and thresholds in Scotland provide us now with that first example of income tax varying policies within the UK, and as the relevant detail does now become available as to the impacts of that, hopefully that will provide us with some further information to help inform our policy in this area in future.

And then, just on the rates and bands, the devolution of powers to vary income tax thresholds would prove an additional policy tool, but I think that it would be very difficult to do so without the full devolution of all income tax on non-savings, non-dividend income, and that would be a step that the Welsh Government's devolved tax responsibilities would take, but it would lead to a very, very big change and much greater exposure to the relative tax-base growth risk within Wales and the rest of the UK. So, I think that this is something that we'll discuss in a lot more detail tomorrow, but again, whenever we're talking about the further devolution of tax powers, we have to do so in the context of balancing the risk and the reward, but I look forward to tomorrow's debate on that.

Finally, just thank you to everybody for their contributions this afternoon. I know all of my colleagues will be responding to those committee reports, but also giving some thought and reflection to the important points raised this afternoon.

Before I move on to the further business, I did indicate to the Member for Carmarthen East and Dinefwr that I would accept his point of order at the end of the debate. I understand that the point of order will now be raised by the Member for South Wales Central, Heledd Fychan.

Yes. Diolch yn fawr iawn, Dirprwy Lywydd. I just wanted to check, really, that I'd heard correctly earlier, and I'd like to ask for a ruling, Dirprwy Lywydd, as to whether the language used and one phrase in particular used by Hefin David in the course of the debate were acceptable. I won't repeat the words, but they were crass, insensitive, and in a workplace setting, arguably discriminatory. In fact, an employment tribunal judge in 2021 ruled the exact same comment as being inappropriate and unprofessional. It lowered the tone of the debate, in my view, that was otherwise characterised by respectful disagreement and is an affront to the dignity of the Senedd and the people we represent.

I have had a chance to review the transcript and I consider that the language used is wholly inappropriate by the Member, and no Member of this Parliament should be using such language, and I would therefore call on the Member to both retract his statement and apologise for making such a reference in his contribution today.

I sincerely withdraw and apologise for using that term. It was intended, in the heat of the debate, to make a political point. It was flippant and it was indeed inappropriate. In fact, given the fact that one of Plaid Cymru's councillors in Caerphilly had been pictured holding a gun, threatening to shoot English people, the word I should have used was 'appalling'.

I'm disappointed that the Member included the last reference. I accept his retraction of the statement, and I would encourage all Members not to use such language, but in doing so, please do not bring other issues such as that in. I think this was purely based upon the language used in this debate, and I do not believe such language is appropriate in any debate in this Chamber, and I would encourage all Members to make sure that their contributions do not include such language in future.

The proposal is to agree amendment 1. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection. I will defer voting under this item until voting time.

We'll move on now. In accordance with Standing Order 12.24, unless a Member objects, the two motions under items 5 and 6 will be grouped for debate, but with separate votes. I see that there are no objections.

So, I call on the Minister for Rural Affairs and North Wales.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I'm very pleased to open this debate on the general principles of the Agriculture (Wales) Bill and to move the motion and the financial resolution. The Bill represents an important first step in our plans for agricultural reform. It is the first of its kind for Wales, and is a made-in-Wales policy designed to support Welsh priorities.

Welsh farmers hold an important position in our society, not only recognised for their role in producing a supply of safe, high-quality food, but also for their opportunity to help tackle some of the most pressing challenges our country faces. We must respond to the climate and nature emergencies. The need for action at scale and to deliver outcomes at pace is essential if we are to ensure a sustainable and resilient agricultural sector for present and future generations.

The Welsh Government is committed to a just transition to a new low-carbon future, and our farmers and the communities in which they operate play a vital role in delivering that just transition and the move to net zero. The Bill establishes sustainable land management as the framework, demonstrating this commitment to support farmers to lower their carbon footprint and deliver for nature whilst, at the same time, continuing to produce food sustainably through resilient agriculture businesses. It also recognises the key role farmers play as stewards of our Welsh language, heritage and culture.

The concept of sustainable land management is referenced by four objectives and the associated sustainable land management duty. The objectives and duty legislate for a made-in-Wales agricultural policy that incorporates the wide-ranging and significant economic, environmental and social contribution of agriculture in Wales.

Presenting sustainable land management as a set of objectives is consistent with and complements the approach of other Welsh legislation, such as the Environment (Wales) Act 2016 and the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015. The sustainable land management objectives make clear what we're aiming to achieve, providing the legislative and policy platform for ongoing action in accordance with the SLM duty that best contributes to achieving this production of food and other goods in a sustainable manner, whilst tackling the climate and nature emergencies, sustaining and promoting the Welsh language, and conserving the Welsh countryside and our cultural resources. In doing so, the Bill recognises the complementary objectives of supporting farmers in the sustainable production of food, contributing to thriving rural communities and keeping farmers on the land.

I would like to thank the Chairs and members of the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee, including members of the Climate Change, Environment and Infrastructure Committee who also participated in the ETRA committee, the Finance Committee and the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee for their thorough scrutiny of this Bill during Stage 1. I appreciate the work that has gone into delivering their comprehensive and helpful reports within a very tight timescale. It is also important that I thank all the farmers, stakeholders and communities who've contributed, supported and worked with us to develop the proposals for this vital legislation. The combined expertise, challenge and perspective has been and continues to be invaluable to the development of this Bill and future schemes.

My written statement of 3 February 2023 highlighted the productive discussions held with Plaid Cymru as part of the co-operation agreement on amendments to the Bill. The intention is to bring forward those amendments at Stage 2, should Members agree the general principles of the Bill today. The amendments are: introduction of additional text in relation to the first sustainable land management objective, section 1 of the Bill. For the purposes of the first objective, factors relevant to whether food and other goods are produced in a sustainable manner include, amongst other things, the resilience of agricultural businesses within the communities in which they operate.

Three additional purposes to the power to provide support, section 8 of the Bill, have also been drafted to be inserted within subsection (2). These follow the first purpose of encouraging the production of food in an environmentally sustainable manner. The additional purposes are: (b) helping rural communities to thrive and strengthening links between agricultural businesses and their communities; (c) improving the resilience of agricultural businesses; and (d) sustaining the Welsh language and promoting and facilitating its use. The amendments support the resilience of agricultural business by enabling an effective, efficient, profitable and, therefore, sustainable production base and supply chain. This links directly to the farmer. Supporting farmers with their own well-being, engagement with their communities, sustaining and promoting the Welsh language and business diversification are all key aspects to keeping farmers on the land.

Turning to the recommendations from the committees, given the detailed nature of the committee reports and the number of recommendations made—84 in total—it is not possible to respond to each one of them individually in the time available today. I have already provided a written response to the Finance Committee report prior to today’s debate, and I will be writing to the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee and the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee following this debate.

Turning to the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee report, I acknowledge the full range of recommendations made, and I am pleased to read that recommendation 1 asks the Senedd to agree the general principles of the Bill. I am also pleased that a clear majority of the committee support the provisions to prohibit the use of snares. This is an important step forward for animal welfare here in Wales, and one reflected in our programme for government commitments. A number of important recommendations have been made by the committee, the majority of which, I am pleased to say, are expected to be accepted or accepted in principle.

I will also write to the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee to provide considered responses to its recommendations. The Finance Committee was broadly content with the financial implications of the Bill, and my response to the committee ahead of this debate, in line with the committee’s recommendation 1, recognises my acceptance of the majority of recommendations. In addition to the amendments agreed with Plaid Cymru, I am expecting to lay a small number of further Government amendments to the Bill at the amending stage.

In conclusion, Llywydd, this is an ambitious and transformational piece of legislation that reforms decades of EU farming support. There can be no mistaking the importance of this moment. This Bill will breathe new life into the agricultural sector here in Wales, as it is the first Welsh agricultural Bill, the first time that the Welsh Government has had the opportunity to bring agricultural legislation of this nature before the Senedd, and the first time that our farmers, our communities and our businesses have been able to decide their own futures. This agricultural Bill has given a voice to the Welsh countryside and all those who work within it. I urge Members to agree the general principles and the financial resolution of the Bill. Diolch.

I call now on the Chair of the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee—Paul Davies

Diolch, Llywydd. This Bill and this debate mark a very important moment for Welsh agriculture, the environment and, indeed, the Welsh economy. Following the UK’s exit from the European Union, it’s the first time that the Senedd is considering legislation for a wholly made-in-Wales agricultural policy. The policy framework set out in this Bill is intended to last for many years to come. Therefore, the stakes are very high, and it is vital to get it right. In my view, this piece of legislation is probably the most important piece of legislation since the start of devolution, and that’s why it’s important to get this right, as it will shape agriculture and our environment for decades to come.

The Bill, as the Minister said, signals a new policy approach for sustainable land management, and it will give Welsh Ministers new powers to support farmers under a scheme that is developed wholly in Wales, for Wales. The Minister has said that the overarching aim of the Bill is to keep Welsh farmers on the land. As our committee report sets out, the support that they receive under the powers in this Bill must balance a number of different needs: (1) the need to protect and promote sustainable food production and local supply chains; (2) the need to support strong and vibrant rural economies and help our Welsh-speaking rural communities to thrive; and (3) the need to protect our precious Welsh landscapes, natural environment and biodiversity in the face of climate and nature emergencies.

The Bill was referred to our committee for scrutiny as we hold the rural affairs remit. I want to take this opportunity to thank my colleagues on the committee and, indeed, the clerking team for their hard work and support during our work. But it is also important to note that our work was greatly assisted by the active participation of members of the Climate, Change, Environment and Infrastructure Committee. We are grateful for their invaluable input, which can be seen in the Record of Proceedings and, indeed ,in this report. We are also, as always, grateful to all the organisations and individuals who have engaged with the committee’s scrutiny work.

Some provisions of this framework Bill will replace clauses in the UK Agriculture Act 2020 that are due to expire under a sunset clause at the end of 2024. With some exceptions, these clauses mirror the powers that Welsh Ministers currently have under that UK Act. However, it should be noted that this Bill is particularly broad in scope, and it introduces some significant new elements. These new elements include prohibiting the use of snares and glue traps in Wales, and the new powers for Natural Resources Wales over forestry felling licences. And so, whilst these provisions could be argued to be agricultural in nature, they could also perhaps have been legislated for and scrutinised separately.

The Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee had 14 weeks to scrutinise the general principles of this Bill. We considered all aspects of the Bill to the best of our ability in the time available. I know that the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee has made some strong recommendations about the Welsh Government’s chosen approach to legislating in the field of agriculture, and so I will not pre-empt anything other Members may say about that, but I would like to highlight some of the policy-related matters that we identify in our report.

The Welsh Government has involved stakeholders in the development of this Bill in recent years, with a number of consultations and a co-design process. So it was initially surprising to us on the committee that there were some fundamental issues on which stakeholders still had quite divergent views. The very definition of 'sustainable land management' has proved to be a sticking point. To the lay reader there is no definition, neither bespoke nor borrowed, on the face of the Bill. The Minister’s view is that the sustainable land management objectives set out in section 1 of the Bill are the definition. And the committee’s report sets out some strong arguments for how those objectives in section 1, and the list of purposes for support in section 8, could be strengthened. There is also some disquiet about the proposal to allow the definition of ‘agriculture’ to be amended by subordinate legislation, and we have recommended that the Minister also reviews this aspect of the Bill and seeks to allay concerns.

There also appeared to be a lack of clarity and/or a lack of understanding by stakeholders about the Welsh Government’s intentions with some of the provisions in the Bill. In particular this is the case for support for ancillary activities, and how this might benefit the agri-food supply chain. Recommendation 16 of our report asks the Minister to provide more clarity on this. It was also widely expected by stakeholders that national minimum standards would be a feature of this legislation, and there was much disappointment that this was not the case. The committee would therefore like the Minister to clearly set out her intentions for the future regulatory baseline for the sector. We have also asked that the Minister gives further consideration to animal welfare and the role of the farm vet in the new legislative framework.

From our scrutiny work it was clear that further work is needed to address concerns of tenant farmers and those who farm on common land, ensuring that they can fully access the support available under the proposed sustainable farming scheme. The needs of new entrants into the sector must also be fully supported by the Bill. We have welcomed the Minister’s commitment to further work in these areas, as monitoring the effectiveness and impact of the sustainable farming scheme will be vital.

In light of the evidence that the committee received, our report has suggested amendments to the Bill’s reporting provisions, as well as the concerns that were raised with us about data collection provisions. The Bill grants Welsh Ministers powers over marketing standards, and our inquiry raised important questions about post-EU divergence and the role of the common frameworks. In our report we have also included a recommendation about assessing the impact of trade deals on the Welsh agricultural sector.

In closing, Llywydd, I stress again that this is a wide-ranging and highly significant piece of legislation. I therefore invite all Members to consider the range of evidence and recommendations in our report, along with the views of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee and the Finance Committee on the Bill as introduced. As our report notes, with regard to Part 5 of the Bill, a clear majority of the committee supported the provisions to prohibit the use of snares, although there was support from two Members for the Minister to give further consideration to a highly regulated licensing system.

As I said earlier, this legislation will shape the landscape of Welsh agriculture and the environment for decades to come, and so we have to ensure that this piece of legislation is absolutely right. In taking account of the range of evidence presented to us, and our 30 recommendations, we recommend that the Senedd agrees to the general principles of this Agriculture (Wales) Bill and that it now proceeds to the second, amending stage. Diolch, Llywydd.

I now call on the Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, Huw Irranca-Davies.

Diolch, Llywydd. I'd like to open my contribution this afternoon by thanking the committee members and our clerking team, but also by emphasising that one of the key questions my committee considers is whether a Bill is fit for purpose as a piece of law. As a general rule, we don't comment on the merits of the policy it contains.

The Minister told us that the Bill is a framework Bill, with the aim of being in place for several decades. As a result, the Minister emphasised the need for futureproofing and flexibility. But it is because the Bill is a framework or enabling Bill that our report contains so many recommendations—there are 44 in total. It's a reflection in part of our concern about the amount of power it provides to Welsh Ministers at the expense of this legislature. Our report demonstrates that it isn't just our committee that has concerns about the use of framework Bills—our predecessor committees and long-established committees in the House of Lords express the same concerns.

Of most importance when a legislature is asked to delegate powers to the executive is consideration as to how those powers could be used in the future, rather than how the current Minister intends to use them at the time they are taken. So, it's regardless of words on record and intent of this Minister. If passed, the Bill will delegate broad powers to any future Government in Wales. The powers could be used to develop significant policy on agriculture, with very limited democratic input and decision making by the Senedd as the legislature. That's what this Bill as currently written does; it can be amended. Future Welsh Ministers will be able to avoid detailed scrutiny by the Senedd of what could be substantive and significant policy decisions on agriculture, potentially for, and I repeat it, decades.

We believe that the Welsh Government has had the opportunity to draft a Bill that could have included more detail on its face. The detail would have included the relevant purposes, the principles and the criteria underpinning agricultural policy in Wales that will replace the provisions and powers being returned from the European Union, not least since the decision to leave the EU was taken by the electorate in 2016. In an attempt to improve the Bill, therefore, 11 of our recommendations require more information to be placed on its face, particularly on policy detail and matters relating to the exercise of regulation-making powers. In addition, a further 15 recommendations seek explanations for the approach adopted in the Bill. They genuinely are seeking to improve the Bill.

In the absence of any sunset provision—I draw particular reference to that—to ensure transition to a new system of agricultural support, changes could be made, as it's currently fashioned in this Bill, on an indefinite basis to the existing system, which gives certainty to no-one. We accept that it is this Minister’s stated intention to transition to the sustainable farming scheme and a new system of support. But, as currently drafted, the Bill places no obligation on this or any future Government to actually do so by any certain date. We have therefore recommended that it would be appropriate to include a sunset provision in the Bill to provide that certainty—an end date for transition away from the basic payment scheme and the common agricultural policy. If provision is included to allow an end date to be amended by regulations, such regulations then should be of course subject to the affirmative procedure.

We note that the Welsh Government has not replicated limitations on the exercise of some regulation-making powers—so, for example, under sections 15, 16 and 22 of the Bill—that were included in the UK Agriculture Act 2020. This means that, as it currently stands, the 2020 Act—legislation by the UK Government—provides more control for this Senedd over the exercise of Welsh Ministers' powers than the Bill before us today. So, nine of our recommendations were aimed at addressing this specific issue. We think that these are sensible.

Five of our recommendations relate to the procedures attached to the making of regulations, and a further four recommendations call for amendments to 12 sections in the Bill to include a duty on the Welsh Ministers to consult before making regulations, because this is such a framework Bill. This is important because, in a recent set of, for example, student loans regulations, the Welsh Government did not consult before making the regulations because there was no statutory requirement to do so. It may have been good or bad policy, but there was no duty to consult.

I would like to cover now two brief specific recommendations before closing. We recommended that the Bill should be amended to include a definition of 'sustainable land management'. In the committee's view, it is not appropriate to try and define a term adequately by a set of objectives, which may or may not be achieved and which can be balanced across and traded against each other. It does not provide the certainty needed in good law.

Section 50 of the Bill permits the Welsh Ministers to amend the definitions of agriculture and ancillary activities—definitions that go to the very heart of the Bill. This is an exceptionally broad power that could fundamentally change the nature and the reach of this Bill. So, as well as seeking clarity on why this power is being taken, we recommended that, if the Minister retains section 50, a superaffirmative procedure should apply to the regulation power.

So, just in conclusion, Llywydd, we concluded that the Bill, as currently framed, in this broad framework that it has, doesn't actually provide a sensible and constitutionally appropriate approach to legislation and has some significant shortcomings. But these can be improved in the passage of the Bill, so, in the interests of sound law making, we hope that the Minister, who's offered to write to us in detail on our recommendations, does listen to those concerns, which are sensible recommendations, and can address this positively as the Bill proceeds. Thank you very much. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Chair of the Finance Committee now, Peredur Owen Griffiths.

Thank you, Llywydd, and I'm pleased to contribute to this debate as Chair of the Finance Committee, and I'm delighted to thank the Minister for giving evidence and the clerking team and Members for their work. I'm sure that the Minister is pleased that we didn't make as many recommendations as some other committees; we made 10 recommendations in total. So, I thank the Minister for providing a response prior to this debate and for accepting nine of our recommendations.

Sadly, as with so many Bills that have been introduced to this Senedd, the lack of information contained in the regulatory impact assessment accompanying this Bill has made it difficult for the committee to assess its total costs.

In particular, we have a significant concern regarding the lack of available financial information relating to the future sustainable land management scheme that will be introduced by this Bill, which is not yet finalised. This is the most significant cost arising from the Bill and assumes that Welsh Government's annual payments to farmers will be £278 million, under the future SLM scheme. However, there seems to be a hole in the Welsh Government's finances on this point. The funding that farmers currently receive through the common agricultural policy is approximately £370 million per annum—almost £100 million more than the cost of the new scheme. The Minister told us that the 'missing' £100 million was the rural development plan funding, which has not been included, as it is not a direct payment to farmers. However, we are not clear what the RDP costs outlined in option 3 of the RIA relate to. We are therefore pleased that the Minister has agreed our recommendation 2 and will provide further details relating to this element when the revised RIA is laid following Stage 2.

We have concerns about the affordability of the new scheme, especially if there is a maximum take-up from all farm businesses. We recommend that the Minister undertakes modelling work to estimate the annual cost of the new scheme, dependent on the different levels of take-up in different farming types. The Minister has agreed in principle, but said that the timescales will not allow additional information to be included in the revised RIA. However, we note that the environmental and economic modelling work being undertaken will inform the design of the final proposed scheme, and we are pleased to hear the commitment to consult on the final scheme at the end of this year.

We are disappointed that the Minister is unable to accept recommendation 6. This recommendation asked for further work to be undertaken to assess the cost to the private sector related to forestry arising as a result of adding conditions to new licences. However, we are encouraged to hear the Minister's response that no additional costs to the private sector are envisaged over and above what they are already. There are also significant IT costs to develop a new system for online applications and contract management of £35.5 million. We are pleased that the Minister's preferred option is to enhance and build on the current system and that she has agreed recommendation 8 to provide further details of the IT development costs in the revised RIA.   

In addition, the cost for farmers completing an online application is estimated to be 50 per cent higher than maintaining the status quo, and this may impede farmers, especially on smaller farms, from applying for the scheme. We are grateful to the Minister for accepting recommendation 9 and her commitment that making the application process user friendly is an important design principle that will be adopted where possible. Approximately £2.8 million of additional costs will be borne by Natural Resources Wales. We are aware that NRW is facing a flat budget for the next financial year, which amounts to a real-terms cut. We asked for clarification on whether additional funding will be made available by the Welsh Government or whether NRW will be expected to absorb these costs into the existing budget. Whilst the Minister has accepted this recommendation, regrettably, the narrative that she provided fails to answer the question.

Llywydd, I am conscious of time, but I would like to raise an important issue relating to the consideration of financial resolution motions. Whilst acknowledging that the Minister has responded prior to today’s debate, this is not standard practice. Usually, responses are issued after the Stage 1 debate, with the financial resolution considered immediately after the Stage 1 motion has been agreed. This process does not allow Members of the Senedd to properly consider the financial implications fully before being asked to authorise spending arising from a Bill. We feel that this also undermines the committee’s efforts and increases the risk of the Senedd passing laws with uncertain financial outcomes.

I have been in correspondence with the First Minister and suggested that, when it is not possible for Ministers to respond prior to the Stage 1 debate, it would be appropriate to take the financial resolution motion at least a week later. I am awaiting a response from the Welsh Government, but I’m sure this Chamber would agree that, given the current pressures on public finances, it is more important than ever that the Welsh Government provides as much clarity as possible and as much assurance as possible before it asks the Senedd to commit resources. Thank you.

As always, I'm very grateful to have the opportunity to contribute in this afternoon's debate. We will be voting in favour of the general principles of this Bill.

As has already been mentioned, this is a landmark piece of legislation for Wales's agricultural community. For the first time ever, Wales is set to benefit from having its first Welsh-born, Welsh-bred agricultural legislation, tailored to the uniqueness of the industry in Wales and its importance to our culture and language. As a Welsh parliamentarian in this Senedd Cymru, this is certainly a principle that I'm incredibly proud of, and now, as Minister for rural affairs, you have more powers than you previously held.

With Putin's illegal invasion of Ukraine shining an important spotlight on the significance of food sovereignty, and the pressures being seen by both food consumers and producers, this Bill's passage through this place comes at an important time both domestically and globally. And, to steal a phrase from Bon Jovi, Llywydd, this agriculture Bill is halfway there, so, as we progress to Stage 2, let's get this Bill all the way there.

The need to focus on productivity is important. With sustainable land management the key objective, and the leading role the agricultural community plays in tackling climate change, we must continue to see the production of high-quality Welsh produce and the sustainable use of our land as two sides of the same coin. Through technology and improved farming practices, it's easily possible to be able to get more from less without exploiting the resources available to us. It's vital then that productivity is reflected in this legislation.

So, it's important that we get this legislation right. I welcome the fact that the Government hasn't rushed this agricultural policy; they've taken their time through consultation and discussions with the farming community to get the Bill to where it is today—a long way from where the 'Brexit and our land' consultation had us in 2018. But, with that, our agricultural community needs security. Our farmers need that important ability to be able to plan for the future. And, whilst this draft legislation does that to some degree, I still think it can go further. That ability to plan ahead is not just specific to farm businesses, but in the wider context of the sustainable land management objectives. Economic, social, cultural, environmental—they all need this ability. But, in addition to this, we ought to ensure that all four objectives are displayed and interpreted on one equal footing, removing the possibility of ambiguity or any prioritisation. By ensuring that this is done, we can make certain that all four objectives are given equal and intertwined priority in their implementation, so that no focus can be shifted from one to another.

One such point of contention surrounds the restriction of certain predatory controls. It remains questionable whether the Bill allows the Welsh Government to maintain and enhance the resilience of ecosystems effectively, whilst at the same time removing predatory control—a possibility that there is a contradiction between two parts of the Bill. And so, this is a matter of clarity that I look forward to seeking during Stage 2 of the Bill's progression.

This Bill is ambitious, but with such ambition, we must ensure that there are sufficient checks and balances in place. By obligating the Welsh Government to report back on their key ambitions, we can ensure that Ministers are kept on track and that all objectives within this legislation are being successfully achieved, because we cannot afford either of the four objectives to fall below the wayside.

Llywydd, this is an incredibly exciting time for Wales's agricultural community. Yes, there are challenges before us, but I am proud of the work that our farmers have done and continue to do in feeding a nation and protecting our environment. I hope that the final Agriculture (Wales) Bill will echo that pride in our farmers, welcoming the next generation of farmers onto the land. Diolch yn fawr.

The journey to bring us to this part of the journey has been long and, at times, rather tempestuous. From the second that the statement was made that the United Kingdom was to leave the European Union, it was clear that a significant challenge faced the agricultural sector. Now, the journey began with a misstep, as the Government published 'Brexit and our land'. But, from the ashes of that scheme, we learned important lessons about collaboration, listening and joint planning, and this party has been clear in amplifying the voice of the agricultural community in this regard, which has brought us to where we are today.

Now, let us not forget these important principles: everyone needs food, and this food has to be produced by someone, somewhere, in a sustainable way. That is the farmer's role. A farmer produces food so that we don't have to do so, so that we can sit or stand here debating and developing policy. So it was a surprise to see the first draft without any mention made whatsoever of the importance of food production. But now, in collaboration with Plaid Cymru and by listening to farmers' voices, food production is a key output of the Bill, which is to be welcomed.

Ensuring the economic and community benefit of our farmers is also vital. If a piece of legislation on agriculture does not create the framework to safeguard the rural economy, then it's legislation that fails our food producers and fails our rural communities. That's why the agricultural community and us in Plaid Cymru, through Cefin Campbell's laudable work here, have pushed for economic value to be included on the face of the Bill. This is the fruit of years of collaboration and listening to the agricultural community, and collaboration too with the Government to achieve a common aim.

I wish to take a moment to focus on other amendments that have been accepted by the Government as part of the co-operation partnership. The first objective, as well as mentioning food production, now emphasises the importance of resilient agricultural businesses in our communities. This will strengthen the Bill significantly, demonstrating the importance of the long-term viability of the Welsh family farm. In addition to this, three additional purposes have been drafted within section 8 of the Bill, which will help to support our rural communities, improve the resilience of agricultural businesses, and support the Welsh language and our culture. And, of course, we have to welcome and acknowledge the role of the party in ensuring the continuity of the basic payment during this transformative period to come.

But, some questions remain, and as we begin our scrutiny of the Bill, I'm eager for the Government to formulate positive answers or satisfactory solutions to some of the questions and challenges posed by the Bill before us. The sustainable farming scheme has raised a number of questions and we're yet to receive clear answers to them, and we need these answers during the scrutiny period to give confidence to everyone involved in farming and with an interest in nature. For example, 10 per cent of trees. Although the meaning is obvious at first glance, it is unclear as to what this means in practice—10 percent of what parcel of land, and what kinds of trees? By the same token, we need an explanation of the 10 per cent of wetlands.

Farmers have to plan their businesses years in advance, preparing land for cereals or in nurturing and fattening their animals, and they have to do so in the face of a market that is often unstable and can change overnight. Therefore, a three-year budget would offer that stability, while simultaneously securing our food supply. So, I wonder whether the Minister would be willing to give the agricultural sector a three-year settlement. 

We also need detailed scrutiny of the impact of this proposed legislation on tenant farmers, and those who farm common land. We've heard a few words moving us in the right direction in this regard, but we need clarity and further confirmation on this. 

Finally, farmers in Wales are acutely aware of their environmental duties. They see the change in our natural world with their own eyes and experience climate change on a daily basis. They are eager to play their part as we try to reverse the decline in the natural world and limit the increase in global temperatures to 1.5 degrees above pre-industrial levels. So, I look forward to working with the sector and other partners as we scrutinise and finesse this Bill, and we'll be voting in favour of the proposal to enable us to move to Stage 2. Thank you. 

I thank the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee for allowing members of the climate change committee to take part in this really important inquiry in scrutiny of Stage 1 of the Bill. I wanted to talk a little bit more about recommendation 9, which is the need for more clarity on the role of local procurement and local food supply chains, and how they're going to be supported by the Bill.

There's a decent amount of information in the explanatory memorandum about food security, which is a major concern for me. So, I approve of that level of detail, and, clearly, a lot of research has gone into what we mean by food security. So, food security is the ability of the people of Wales to access enough nutritious food to meet their dietary needs for a healthy life. It's not just affected by the availability of food, but also its affordability, quality and safety. Clearly, we have a major food security crisis in Wales, because so many of our population are unable to access healthy food, because they simply can't afford it. Not only that, in many cases, far too many people, regardless of their income, are simply not eating nutritious food because they simply don't understand that processed food is full of adulteration—things that are very, very bad for them. So, I think, highlighting the evidence from the Landworkers' Alliance, who argued that missing from the Bill were some references to how we're going to develop the food system to strengthen our food security, because this Bill is intended to be for the next 20 or 30 years, so, therefore, we really, really do need to get it right. 

Samuel Kurtz mentioned the war in Ukraine, which is one, at the moment, I would regard as quite a temporary upheaval in food security. I think much more significant are the whole issues of climate change and the wholesale movement of populations who are unable to live in areas of the world because they simply can't produce any food. And, so, this is a much more significant issue. Also mentioned in the explanatory memorandum is the role of antimicrobial resistance, which is both for people and animals, and that's a very significant issue too.

So, I think, I would like to see much more detail around how the Bill challenges us in our objectives around sustainable land management to really develop those local food networks that will enable people to have access to properly fresh food, produced in a way that does not undermine the quality of our soil, and ensures that we are not subject to what is going to be a very bumpy ride going forward as we transition away from the climate change emergency. So, I hope that the Minister can provide us with some assurance that, as we take forward the Bill to Stage 2, there will be a good deal more information about how we're going to do that.

Thank you, Minister, for all your work in this regard. We've heard from many how this is really a once-in-a-generation opportunity to reshape agricultural policy in Wales, following our departure from the European Union. The last-minute amendments to the Bill are also welcomed, namely adding some additional detail on ensuring the sustainability of farm businesses. I would just like to raise some areas of focus for me. One of them we've heard about is food production. In my conversations—and I know others have raised this as well—with farmers, their biggest concern is that they are concerned there is no mechanism for measuring food production as a public good. Although food production is highlighted in the Bill as a key public good, there isn't a means in the delivery mechanism, that being the sustainable farming scheme, for farmers being rewarded for that public good. So, what I'd like to ask is if food production has been identified as a public good, especially when our own food security has become of prime importance, which we've heard from others in the Siambr, particularly in relation to the emerging conflict in Ukraine. Could I ask that the Bill does create a mechanism for farmers to be rewarded for it? And food security has to be at the heart of the Bill. I'd be keen to hear more from the Minister about how she intends to ensure that farmers are rewarded.

Another issue I'd like to raise is that of the national minimum standards. It's my view that the sustainable farming scheme needs a robust regulatory baseline put in place before the start of the scheme, without which the scheme may fail to deliver upon its ambitions. So, I was wondering whether, Minister, you could provide us with an assurance in the Siambr today as to whether the national minimum standards will be ready in time for the start of the SFS.

Finally, and we've heard this from the Chair of the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs committee, is tenant farmers being able to access the scheme. There is great concern that tenant farmers, particularly new entrants, will be hampered by potentially not being able to make the necessary changes to lease the land in order to access the scheme, for example adhering to the 10 per cent tree cover. With that in mind, I was wondering whether you would be willing to work with me and others on what assessment has been made to ensure that tenant farmers, particularly new entrants, are afforded some leniency in order to be able to access the scheme. There are real opportunities to increase new entrants, which is what we need in relation to our rural economy, to ensure that we have long-term sustainability and futureproof our farming. I look forward to future work with the Minister and others in the Siambr as well. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

I welcome the opportunity to take part in this debate. It is one of the most important pieces of legislation, I think, that this Senedd will scrutinise. It not only shapes the future of Welsh farming, but our natural heritage, economy and culture, and particularly in mid and west Wales, so we need to get it right. I'm pleased to support the ETRA committee's recommendations and agree the general principles and to proceed to Stage 2, but—and there is a 'but'—I do have to make three points, and some of them have been made.

The Bill does establish sustainable land management as the framework, and that's been alluded to, but what does that really mean? If we look at, for example, the intensive poultry units that I've mentioned many, many times, and the real concerns of the Landworkers' Alliance Cymru and Sustainable Food Knighton, who will be here next week, what difference will this make to that proliferation of intensive poultry units, for example? There are 150 there already, housing an estimated 10 million chickens, and I think we ought to have a moratorium until we've looked at the damage that that has done. Jenny Rathbone did mention antimicrobial resistance, and when you're mass-producing things like chicken, then there is a real possibility that that will leach into the population, and we all know that there are worldwide issues with antibiotics for people and their effectiveness. The Wildlife Trusts Wales has warned that life in the River Wye is silently slipping away. So, what will this Bill do to address those environmental concerns, of which I've just given you some examples?

So, the second point is transitional plans for financial support. Given my first point, ironically, it's a bit like the chicken and the egg. Wales Environment Link and others argue that, without a deadline on basic payments, we cannot successfully transition to the sustainability scheme. The farming unions and others, on the other hand, argue that without the stability of the basic payment schemes, we cannot successfully transition to the sustainability scheme. So, which is it? I do appreciate that you'll be consulting on it, but can you reveal your thinking, Minister? Are you considering a gradual tapering, for example, as suggested by the RSPB?

And thirdly, I want to raise the issue of public access. The pandemic did bring to the fore the importance and also limitations of public access to green and blue, in the case of our waterways and spaces. So, I wholly support Wales Environment Link's proposal to strengthen these provisions in the Bill. 'This land is your land', the song goes, but, at the moment, too much of it is inaccessible or off-limits. In respect of the recent High Court judgment on wild camping on Dartmoor, the UK Labour Party said it would pass a right to roam Act. Is that something the Minister has reflected on in the context of developing this Bill to the next stages?

The Minister for rural affairs now to reply to the debate—Lesley Griffiths. 

Diolch, Llywydd. I very much welcome all of the comments that have been made by Members today and the spirit in which they've been made. I've set out today why I believe this Bill is an important step in agricultural reform here in Wales and I've listened really carefully to the views and the recommendations of the three committees and, of course, to other Members as well. 

The Bill does provide the framework on which all future agricultural support will be delivered, and we also have the proposed sustainable farming scheme, which will be the first future support scheme and the main source of future Government support for farmers across Wales. Access to the sustainable farming scheme needs to be available to all eligible farmers in Wales. Members, including Jane Dodds, referred to tenant farmers, and I've said all along that if it's not accessible to tenant farmers, then it won't work. It's really important this scheme works for every farmer on every type of farm across Wales. 

I've implemented a number of working groups with farmers to understand the opportunities that exist, but also to see what barriers are there. So, working groups in relation to tenants, working groups in relation to new entrants, which, again, Jane Dodds mentioned, and working groups on common land to make sure we do have that vibrant farming sector here in Wales. 

To reiterate my opening remarks, I don't have time to go through all the recommendations or to address every Member's questions, but I'll certainly do my best to address many of them. I'll start with Paul Davies, as Chair of the ETRA committee. He asked for further clarity on the scope of support for ancillary activities. I know that's one of your recommendations to me, and I will provide further clarity on the scope of support for ancillary activities within the explanatory memorandum. So, an amendment is not needed. The scope of ancillary activity is linked to agriculture and they are complementary to the activities that are captured under the definition of 'agriculture'. So, whilst 'ancillary activities' is fairly broad, I think it's fair to say, that is to enable Welsh Ministers to be able to respond to future developments in the sector and enable that support to be more inclusive of the supply chain.

Several Members, including Paul Davies, mentioned the national minimum standards. They already exist in law, and what I've asked officials to do is to explore whether new legislation—whether that be primary or secondary legislation—is required to stabilise the existing regulatory baseline, for example, and the regulations.

Huw Irranca-Davies—again, I will be responding to the LJC committee—you talked about the sunset clause that is in the UK Agriculture Act, which will obviously end in 2025. I've previously stated that we will not sunset BPS. I know you listened to—sorry, Paul Davies's committee, I know, listened to—quite a good evidence session, I thought, from stakeholders on transition plans and a sunset provision for the Bill. I think it's fair to say that the farming unions and environmental organisations agreed there shouldn't be a cliff edge in financial support, and I've always said that, but there were varying views on the need to legislate for a transition period or for a sunset period, so—. I notice that you don't advocate for sunset provision. I think further detail on how, the transition to the new system of agricultural support, will form, of course, part of the final sustainable farming scheme consultation.

Huw Irranca-Davies also talked about the definition of sustainable land management. That's already defined in the Bill by the four objectives and the sustainable land management duty. The SLM objectives and duty have been informed by the UN definition, developed in the specific legislative context in Wales, obviously, of the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 and the Environment (Wales) Act 2016. Because we've already got that legislation, it's been quite easy to hook in and to have that consistency. But also we've had extensive stakeholder consultation and engagement around that also—

Will the Minister give way on that? I don't want to push this point but, curiously, actually, it's quite reassuring to hear the words on record and to hear the words in front of committees, but that, you recognise, is not quite the same as having on the face of the Bill not that this is informed by, but this is that definition or a version of it. I just want to make that point, because there is a clear difference in law.

I note what you say and defining sustainable land management by reference to the objectives and the duty does provide certainty, I think, in shaping possible action to the specific context of land management within Wales.

Huw also mentioned around it being a broad, framework Bill, and, again, we can point to the affirmative procedure for the scrutiny of the Senedd when regulations are made in order to allay any fears about the breadth of the framework.

Peredur talked about funding, of course, and it's really difficult when you don't know what your funding is going to be, and the focus of the future support cost-benefit analysis within the RIA was on the costs and benefits of providing revenue support directly to farmers. And as you said, under the current system, the two largest contributors are the basic payment scheme and Glastir, and that amounts to the £278 million that you referred to per year. I do accept the recommendation to add further information relating to the RDP elements not included in the RIA for information, following Stage 2.

Around NRW, the costs that we've attributed to NRW are indicative estimates and not predictions. Officials are currently working with NRW to determine what, if any, future downstream costs may be realised as a result of the SLM schemes. And as we begin to transition, I will work to ensure that any downstream costs resulting from the implementation of this legislation are fully considered.

Samuel Kurtz, I was very pleased to hear you talking about and recognising the complementary objectives of supporting our farmers to produce food sustainably. And of course, they are absolutely in a position—they have so many opportunities—to help address the climate and nature emergencies. And like other Members—Jane Dodds, and obviously, Mabon ap Gwynfor and Cefin Campbell and yourself and obviously my own group—I look forward to challenge at Stage 2 and to continuing to work with you all to make this the very best piece of legislation.

Mabon ap Gwynfor queried about the 10 per cent on trees and what that means. That's being looked at as part of the co-design for the sustainable farming scheme. It will be going out to consultation again, and what we're trying to do is have that conversation with farmers and try to explore how they can plant trees so that they become an asset to food production—so, for instance, shelter belts or biosecurity barriers. I'm not quite sure the start was tempestuous; I'm not sure that was 'Brexit and our land' really or that it was a misstep. It was absolutely the first consultation and, yes, things have changed, but what's the point in having consultation if you don't listen and you don't make changes? And I do think that everybody has absolutely contributed along that very long journey that you pointed out.

I think it was you who asked about the hierarchy. Yes, it was. There is no hierarchy—it's always been the intention that the SLM objectives would be considered together. They're not expected—. There's no hierarchy because what they are expected to be is complementary, and we don't intend to alter section 2. I think the wording 'best achieves' is already present in the SLM duty in that context, and there's a strenuous duty on Welsh Ministers to maximise their contribution.

Jenny Rathbone talked about food security, and the biggest challenge to our food security is the climate emergency, so by investing in our soils and our habitats and our livestock—and of course in our farmers' skills—for me, that's an investment in protecting food production.

And Joyce Watson referred to AMR—I'm actually making an oral statement on AMR and the use of that, and I think that is a really important point.

So, I am committed to writing to committees, Llywydd, with a response on each of the recommendations and the issues raised by various Members today pertaining to the committee reports, so I do ask that Members approve the motion and agree the general principles and financial resolution of the Agriculture (Wales) Bill. Diolch.

The proposal therefore is to agree the motion under item 5. Does any Member object? There are no objections. And therefore the motion under item 5 is agreed.

The next question is that the financial resolution and the motion under item 6 be agreed. Does any Member object? No, there are no objections. And therefore that motion under item 6 is also agreed.

Which brings us to voting time, and, unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, I will proceed directly to voting. The votes this afternoon are on the debate on the draft budget for 2023-24. The first vote is on amendment 1, and I call for a vote on amendment 1, tabled in the name of Darren Millar. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 13, no abstentions and 38 against. And therefore amendment 1 is not agreed.

We'll move now to amendment 2. And I call for a vote on amendment 2, tabled in the name of Siân Gwenllian. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 11, no abstentions, 40 against. And therefore amendment 2 is not agreed.

We'll now vote on the unamended motion, tabled in the name of Lesley Griffiths. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 27, 11 abstentions, 13 against. And therefore the motion is agreed.

And that concludes voting time and brings our proceedings to a close. Thank you.