Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru

Good afternoon and welcome to this Plenary meeting. The first item on our agenda this afternoon will be questions to the First Minister, and the first question is from Jayne Bryant. 

Llywydd, I thank Jayne Bryant for the question. There are many examples of social prescribing services in south-east Wales, including the Ffrind i Mi project, which supports those who are lonely or isolated. Recent research demonstrates a clear year-on-year increase in referrals and use of social prescribing in all parts of Wales.

Diolch, Prif Weinidog. And it's good you've mentioned Ffrind i Mi—a great organisation. I fully welcome the Welsh Government's commitment to developing a national framework for social prescribing. At a time when A&E and GP surgeries are under pressure, it's vital that we grasp every opportunity at preventative care. One example of where this is happening is at the laundry garden at Tredegar House, which is run by the National Trust. Members of Growing Space, a mental health charity, help care for the garden, while members of Woodland Routes to Wellbeing use the garden to gain skills and improve people's mental and physical well-being. And I had the pleasure of inviting you, Prif Weinidog, to see Growing Space back in 2021, so I know you've seen first-hand the excellent work that they do. 

This project in my constituency is an excellent example of using our past and our heritage to improve the well-being of the present. As a country, we pride ourselves on our castles, estates and landscapes; it would be fantastic to see more of them utilised in this way. Prif Weinidog, how are the Welsh Government working with partners like Cadw, Museum Wales, National Resources Wales and the National Trust to promote social prescribing projects, and how are bodies such as these able to work with NHS boards to ensure that front-line staff are aware of the local opportunities so they're best able to refer residents?

Well, Llywydd, I thank Jayne Bryant for that. And I've been fortunate enough to have a number of opportunities to visit Newport and to see the sorts of projects to which Jayne Bryant referred. In fact, I was with John Griffiths only on Saturday at the Maindee Triangle, where the Ffrind i Mi project operates, and not only was I lucky enough to be at Tredegar House for the Growing Space project, but, of course, the Member for Newport West invited me to the Road to Nature project, another example of where social prescribing—those non-clinical, community-based projects—connects people with nature in a way that we know to be so good for their own physical and mental health. 

Llywydd, around 20 per cent of all GP consultations are with people who primarily have a social rather than a medical need for help. And what social prescribing does is it allows those people to be put in touch with that vast range of different services—befriending, book clubs, choirs, running clubs, community gardens, the national exercise and referral scheme. The list goes on and on of things that people can be put in touch with, and, if they're able to take up those opportunities, then it makes that long-term difference. What the Welsh Government seeks to do is to create a national framework where we have an agreed model, a common understanding, and a shared language that promotes social prescribing even further. There's been a consultation on all of that, and the plan is to publish the final framework, and an action plan to support it, later this summer. 

Firstly, I'd like to thank my colleague for asking this important question. Now, I wholeheartedly agree with the need for social prescribing, as the service will undoubtedly help individuals whilst also reducing the pressure on GPs. Recently, I had the pleasure of meeting with the Caerphilly-based company, Signum Health, which uses artificial intelligence and cloud-based technology to deliver remote healthcare and social prescribing within harder-to-reach communities. This Welsh company has already used its technology to cut waiting times in England, managing to clear a dermatology backlog in Swindon in just six months. Most importantly, patients, GPs, pharmacies and other alternative health services can connect directly and share information, meaning patients can connect with local community providers without a GP appointment. Given that we are looking to reduce waiting lists, First Minister, and reduce pressure on primary care services, as well as increase access to important services such as social prescribing, what conversations has the Welsh Government had with companies such as Signum Health to assist in this area, First Minister? Thank you. 

Well, I thank Natasha Asghar, Llywydd, because she makes an important point, and it's one that's been made a number of times on the floor of the Senedd, that the future of health services has to be based on increased use of those contemporary opportunities that developments in technology and artificial intelligence bring us. We learnt a great deal of this during the COVID pandemic, and, as you know, the Welsh Government has an ambition that, in future, many more consultations will take place remotely, allowing people to avoid difficult journeys, and to increase efficiency in the system. I think the practical examples, through a Welsh company, that the Member has raised this afternoon sound very consistent with that general approach. And I know that the Minister has a very direct interest in making sure that we maximise those opportunities, so that the health service is able to provide in a way that takes advantage of opportunities that weren't there in the past but definitely need to be part of the future here in Wales.

I thank Heledd Fychan for the question. Llywydd, the Welsh Government has been granted core participant status in modules 1, 2, 2B and module 3 of the public inquiry into COVID-19. Through our legal status as a material provider, the Welsh Government is supplying a significant volume of evidence to the inquiry to enable it to properly scrutinise action taken in Wales.

Diolch, Prif Weinidog. Following last week's visit to the Senedd by COVID-19 Bereaved Families for Justice Cymru, a number of constituents from South Wales Central who lost loved ones to COVID-19 have contacted me regarding the nosocomial investigation. I understand that the interim report is imminent, but many bereaved families are concerned, as they still haven't heard anything at all in relation to their loved ones, whilst others have received letters telling them that COVID wasn't the cause of death, despite it being on the death certificate. Their understanding is that only a coroner would be able to change the cause of death, yet families are being told this without being presented with any evidence to support the change. So, rather than receive answers about how their relative contracted COVID-19 in hospital, they are now having to fight, once more, for the cause of death to be acknowledged. Can you please confirm what the purpose of these investigations is: learn lessons and provide answers to families, or is it an exercise to try and reduce the official number of COVID deaths in Wales? Surely, this once again illustrates the need for a Wales-specific COVID inquiry.

Wel, Llywydd, the Member's allegation is both offensive and absurd. Of course the efforts that are being made are not some conspiratorial effort to change the number of people who died from COVID here in Wales. What an utterly, utterly absurd allegation to make here on the floor of the Senedd. The efforts that are being made are led by clinicians—are they part of your conspiracy as well? The purpose of the investment that the Welsh Government has made, the efforts that those clinicians are making, are to provide for family members an understanding of the way in which their family members were treated and what happened to them while they were in the care of the health service. By the end of February, 5,765 cases had been reviewed, with a further 2,301 in progress; there are still a further 10,320 cases to be investigated. Now, in line with everything that was said here on the floor of the Senedd, a national report of learning from this programme is due to be published by the end of this month, and that will lead in time to a comprehensive national learning report, to be published in 2024, at the end of the programme. Individual organisations will also publish their own reports, in line with the reporting requirements that the Minister set out for them when the additional funding to support them in this work was found. The Deputy Chief Medical Officer for Wales, Llywydd, meets with COVID-19 Bereaved Families for Justice; he met with them last on 16 March. Where there are concerns about the way the system is working, there are ways in which that can legitimately be raised, and those concerns, which are not founded on the sorts of allegations that the Member made, can be properly investigated, and if there are things that need to be improved, then, of course, we will want to see that happen. 

As the First Minister will be aware, COVID-19 Bereaved Families for Justice Cymru have submitted considerable concerns to the UK COVID-19 inquiry abut the capability of the Welsh NHS during the pandemic. The list is quite substantial, and one particular point I would like to pick up is their concern regarding the lack of long-term investment in IT infrastructure and digitisation of NHS Wales. We know that NHS Wales is lagging considerably behind its English counterpart on its IT infrastructure, and this ultimately has an impact in many different ways. For example, we have particular issues in interoperability of systems between primary and secondary care and between health systems and the police, which is vital in terms of helping to address mental health issues. With this in mind, First Minister, does this Government have any plans to now ring-fence resources for digital transformation to enable upgraded and new IT systems? And do you believe that we should have a national minimum standard for IT equipment in NHS Wales? Thank you.

Well, Llywydd, I certainly agree about the importance of digital investment in the health service, and, here in Wales, we have a national digital service, there for many years. I don't accept what the Member said in one of his throwaway remarks about Wales 'lagging behind'. In fact, we have shown the way in Wales as to how a genuinely national service can tackle some of the very real issues there are in other parts of the United Kingdom, where the service has been atomised, where there is no national approach and where there are real vulnerabilities as a result. I wish we had more money to invest in this area, Llywydd, of course I do, but, as Joel James will know, in the second year of the spring statement period, we have £1 million for every capital need that we have in Wales. We invest, I think, significantly and in a sustained way in making sure that those digital opportunities that Natasha Asghar mentioned are made available here in Wales. If we had more opportunities, through a proper capital settlement, then we would be able to do more in that field as in many others. 

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

Thank you, Presiding Officer. First Minister, last week, the former chairman of the Betsi Cadwaldr University Health Board wrote an opinion piece for the press. He's also written to you, to which he says he hasn't had a response; he might have, by the time I'm asking you this question, had that response. But some of the assertions within that opinion piece do deserve a public answer from you, as leader of the Welsh Government, notably the concerns that were raised by him and the board members with the health Minister and the director general of the NHS here in Wales back in September, when he raised long-standing concerns and issues that simply went unaddressed—his words, not mine. Why did the Welsh Government not respond to these concerns and support the board at the time? 

Well, Llywydd, I don't accept at all that those things went unnoticed, because the Minister and officials were in very regular dialogue with the Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board, including the board. The board has responsibilities. You don't discharge your responsibilities simply by telling somebody else that you've got a problem. You have an obligation, as a board, to address the issues that are within your legal area of responsibilities. So, while there was undoubtedly a dialogue, and while the Minister and officials here were always responding to concerns that were raised with the Welsh Government, to simply say, 'We told the Welsh Government about that', as though that is the full extent of your responsibility, I simply don't think that that is the way the system is ever intended to operate. 

I don't believe that was the point that the chairman was making in his opinion piece. Bear in mind, this was a chairman who was a former chief constable, had served the public for 30 years plus, and then chose to do another public service role by being chair of the health board that covers the whole of north Wales. And he made, in his column in the press last week, that clear categorisation that he was not getting the support from the Welsh Government. He raised this as chair with the Welsh Government, which is the sponsoring body of any health board, because they send the cash and they set the priorities for the health board. I take it that you say that the former chair is not speaking the truth when he says that his concerns and those of the board were not responded to back in September, because that is quite an assertion from you, First Minister, if you believe that the former chair is seeking to mislead public opinion by saying that the Welsh Government stood back and didn't support the board when those concerns and long-standing issues were raised with the Minister and the director general as well.

Well, Llywydd, I think the leader of the opposition must allow me to answer his questions, rather than to tell me in his question what I have said. It's my answers that lie on the record, rather than his interpretation of them. First of all, let me say that I do share what the leader of the opposition said about the many years of distinguished public service that the former chair of the board had rendered in north Wales, and I include in that the service that he gave as chair of the board.

The assessment of the Minister and the Welsh Government was that the reports that we had received from independent bodies of the dysfunctional nature of the board could not simply be allowed to lie there without action being taken. That is the culmination of a long dialogue between the board and the Welsh Government, a dialogue in which the Welsh Government took action time after time in order to support the board: significant additional investment above and beyond what its population share would have justified through the normal formula, intervention through national programmes, giving advice, attempting to support the board in the efforts it was making to improve services. Nothing in what the Minister decided should be read as indicating that the board and its chair were not making efforts to put things right. It is simply that the conclusion of independent oversight was that those efforts were not succeeding and that it would have been impossible to put the board as currently, or as then constituted, in a position where it could successfully address those challenges. That is why action was taken. It was necessary action and it will lead, I believe, to a better platform for improvement in the future. 

First Minister, my question was relatively straightforward: why didn't the Welsh Government offer the support when it was requested back last September? I've used two of my three questions and I don't feel that we've advanced any further forward in trying to find out why the Minister or the director general did not respond to that direct—and these are the words of the chairman—that direct escalation of matters to the Welsh Government. That stands on the record, those are his comments, not my comments. I've relayed them to you, and we don't seem to have made much progress towards finding an explanation for why Welsh Government did not respond to those comments. But, you've identified the audit report as being the flashpoint for intervention by the Welsh Government and making sure that the board changed and the chairman was removed. In the same article, the chairman highlighted that there were, in his words, clandestine moves to recruit replacement board members to form a new board at least four weeks prior to the publication of the audit report. So, if this clandestine recruitment was going on, can you today tell us when the recruitment process began to find new board members, even though the existing board was in place? And what would that do to give confidence that the Government was working with the then board to rectify matters in north Wales?

Well, Llywydd, let me return to the leader of the opposition's first questions, because he asked what support the Welsh Government provided to the board. So, let me put them on the record again. The Welsh Government supported the board through financial assistance—£82 million over and above what the board would otherwise have had available to it. Secondly, the Welsh Government corralled a set of professional advice, available to the board through our national programmes, to make sure that the efforts that were being made could draw on expertise from beyond the board itself.

Thirdly, there was a pattern of continuous monitoring of the board. That's the nature of the relationship between the Welsh Government and the board, and senior civil servants here were involved in that continuous dialogue.

Fourthly, the delivery unit—the arm of the Welsh Government that assists boards across Wales in addressing those difficult issues that boards face. The resources of the delivery unit were made available to the board as well. Any idea that the Welsh Government simply stood back and allowed the board to flounder would not be borne out by that continuous set of engagements [Interruption.] Well, I'm explaining to the leader of the opposition why I don't accept that the board was simply left to its own devices. It absolutely and clearly was not.

As to the responsible actions that the Minister took in assessing her options, given the advice that had come from those independent sources, when the Minister was considering whether or not to remove some members of the board, it would have been utterly irresponsible to have done that without giving some thought to what would follow. Imagine what the leader of the opposition would be saying to me today if the Minister had removed the board and had no plan at all for how those legal responsibilities were to be fulfilled. In planning ahead and assessing the options available to the Welsh Government, the Minister absolutely properly asked the question, 'If the current incumbents are not to be there, do we have credible other individuals able to fulfil those legal responsibilities?' It would have been a dereliction of her duty had she not done that.

Leader of Plaid Cymru, Adam Price.

Diolch, Llywydd. On Thursday, Ofwat is due to announce its draft decision on whether the plan to extract up to 180 million litres of water a day from Llyn Efyrnwy in Powys and transfer it to the south-east of England is to proceed to the next stage of its rapid investment programme. Do you think it's right, First Minister, that a water regulator answerable to the UK Secretary of State should be making decisions on what should happen to water in Wales? Do you think that Thames Water, which loses 635 million litres a day through leakages, should be able to make up for its own failings by accessing our own water resources? And do you think it's right that Thames Water should be planning to pay just over £5 million for the use of this precious resource when we in Wales pay among the highest water bills anywhere in the UK?

Well, Llywydd, I believe that the position may have moved ahead a little today. I am relying simply on a newspaper report of the end of this morning. The Guardian is reporting that the Environment Agency has turned down the Thames Water plan and instructed it to return to the drawing board and to come forward with a better plan, including the plan to extract water from Wales via the River Severn. The Guardian reports that the Environment Agency has told Thames Water that it is not convinced that this is a viable solution and that it will not be prepared to endorse the plan that Thames Water has advanced so far. And it's for the many reasons that the leader of Plaid Cymru set out in his question. Thames Water, instead of producing a plan that relied on remarkable ideas, it seemed to me, extracting water from the Thames itself and replacing it with sewage-polluted water, and taking water from Lake Vyrnwy, that it should do two things. First of all, it should focus on reducing demand for water. We have, in the United Kingdom, some of the highest daily usages of water per head of the population of anywhere. We use on average 141 litres per day. In Belgium, a country just across the channel, the average is 95 litres a day. So, the first thing that Thames Water should be doing is to come forward with credible plans to reduce the use of water, a precious resource that we don't regard preciously enough. And then, as the Environment Agency is being reported as saying, it needs to fix the leaks in its own system—leaks which, if they were to be fixed, would almost match entirely its plan for extracting water out of the Severn and backfilling that through drawing water out of Welsh resources. It looks as though some outbreak of sense may have occurred, and that would be very welcome.

As to what would have happened had the plan gone ahead, then, of course, there are rights for Welsh Ministers in all of this—rights to intervene, rights in relation to the approval of any plan, and Welsh Ministers here would have exercised those rights very much with the points that the leader of Plaid Cymru has made in mind.

I suppose, if you forgive me, First Minister, this is one leak, I think, that we would welcome, isn't it? But, of course, that's one of the three regulators that have been quoted. There is the Drinking Water Inspectorate, and it's Ofwat that will be publishing the formal response on Thursday. We await to see what those two other bodies—. But the point stands, of course, that we have three regulators here, which are answerable to the Secretary of State, making a decision, and hopefully they'll make the right decision, but it's not a decision made here in Wales. Now, Wales already exports 320 million litres a day of water to England from cwm Elan, and Welsh Water receives just £7 million from Severn Trent Water for that as part of an agreement they were obliged to accept in 1984. It's an agreement that will last for almost 100 years and possibly 100 years after that. The Welsh Government, the Minister has said, has no formal powers to change the terms of that agreement, but you are considering how trading agreements can be revised to better reflect current and future circumstances. What does that mean in practice, First Minister, to the price of water currently now being supplied from Wales to England?

Well, I don't think it probably does mean anything actually here today because there are existing commercial, contractual relationships in place that govern the price of water today. The leader of Plaid Cymru is right to say that the Welsh Government has a direct interest in how those contracts are shaped for the future. I do not, myself, sign up to a nationalist view of water; I don't object to English people drinking Welsh water. But what I do say is that the economic, environmental and wider benefits for Wales must be demonstrated in any relationship in which the natural resources of Wales are used to the benefit of other citizens in the United Kingdom, and in any renegotiation of those contractual arrangements, then the price that is paid for that precious natural resource must reflect the value of that resource to Wales as well as allowing its beneficial use for other UK citizens.

That's the point, isn't it? It's about fairness, isn't it? The current agreement doesn't reflect a fair price, particularly when Welsh Water customers face the second highest bills in the whole of England and Wales. Now, it's six years since the UK Government promised to transfer the power to Wales over all of our water resources and infrastructure, not just those controlled by the two Welsh water companies. But to date, the provisions in the Wales Act 2017, which would have given effect to this, have not been brought into force by the UK Secretary of State. Why is that? And is the practical effect of this that the Welsh Government cannot, at the moment, legislate for example to regulate the use of Welsh water by United Utilities, who own Llyn Efyrnwy? So the water could be transferred in the future, but the power is not.

And to the point that you earlier made, can you just say a little bit about the veto power that the Welsh Government would have under those circumstances, given that the transfer of power that was promised six years ago hasn't actually happened yet?

Well, Llywydd, it's a very good question indeed that the leader of Plaid Cymru raises, because the 2017 Act was a Conservative Government Act. It wasn't an Act made here, it wasn't an Act that reflected the policy preferences of the Welsh Government; it was an Act that a Conservative Secretary of State took through the House of Commons and put on the statute book. What happened, I believe, is the general election of 2019 and the arrival of a very different regime at Westminster. The history of devolution is that, from 1999 to 2019, under Governments of different political persuasion at Westminster, it was possible to have rational discussions about where powers best lay, and that's why the 2017 Act, the result of very significant negotiations over the water issue, allowed for the transfer of those responsibilities. Since 2019, we have faced a Government in Westminster that doesn't respond to issues on that rational basis; it responds to them on the entirely ideological basis that devolution was a mistake and that the work of the Westminster Government is to roll it back in the opposite direction wherever it can, and quite certainly never to transfer new powers to Scotland or Wales, even when it was a Conservative Government that had made the arrangements that would have allowed that to take place.

So, that's my answer to the leader of Plaid Cymru's question: that, when we were dealing with a reasonable and rational Government, albeit of a Conservative nature, we made the progress that the 2017 Act embodied; all of that has been at a standstill over the last four years.

As far as the rights of Welsh Ministers, water companies wholly or mainly in Wales must follow the Welsh Government's guiding principles, principles that we have published and set out, and then Welsh Ministers have a statutory role in the sign-off process for any plans. So, while the powers are not in our hands in the coherent way that we would have wished to see and that the 2017 Act would have assisted, we're not without powers in this area, and, if the reports from this morning don't turn out to be true and further regulators take a different view, then the Welsh Government will use the powers we have to defend Welsh interests in this area.

I thank Cefin Campbell, Llywydd. Contract reform, financial incentives, additional investment and diversification of the profession are among the actions being taken to improve access for the people of the Member's region.

Thank you. Llandeilo, Haverfordwest, Fishguard—examples of dental practices in my area where NHS provision has come to an end over recent months. The dental situation in rural Wales is critical at the moment, and the change to contracts recently has caused real concern, as was expressed to me in recent correspondence from the Dyfed Powys dental committee. Even dentists who succeed in meeting the requirements of the new contracts have noted that they're doing so at the expense of treating their current patients, and these changes are causing real stress, which means that many dentists are now considering their future as NHS partners. In Powys alone, over 4,500 are on the waiting list for NHS dentists—10 per cent of those are children—and more and more families are facing difficult decisions, with many travelling abroad for dental treatment.

First Minister, do you agree with the sentiment expressed in the recent Government statement on dental reform that private dentistry is an acceptable alternative, or will we see a real commitment from Welsh Government to work with the profession to ensure a dental service that works for everyone in Wales?

Well, Llywydd, 20 per cent of dental practices in Wales are private practices; that is simply a fact of life, and it has been a fact of life since the NHS was established. There is nothing new in that at all. I see regularly from dental interests this theme that contracts are being handed back across Wales. I spoke to the Chief Dental Officer for Wales myself last night about this. He tells me that 20 contracts out of 400 have actually been handed back. Many of them are small contracts, and health boards, and health boards in rural parts of Wales, are succeeding when they put those contracts out for retendering. So, in the Member's own area, a major contract in Ammanford—a £1 million contract—has been successfully retendered. In Powys, to which he referred, a contract that was handed back in Newtown has been successfully retendered. It will provide NHS treatment for between 2,000 and 2,500 patients in that part of Wales.

Last year, Llywydd, just under 1 million people in Wales received NHS dental treatment. There were well over 1 million treatments on the NHS, and that included 155,000 additional NHS patients because of contract reform, 20,000 of those shared between Hywel Dda and Powys health board. So, while there are undoubtedly challenges in the field of dentistry, and a lot more ground that we need to gain, actually, it's fewer and fewer, not more and more, Welsh citizens who are needing to find treatment elsewhere. And as we move forward with the contract, in consultation and negotiation with the dental profession, we will be able to do even more, and that will include, Llywydd, the £5,000 salary uplift that we are offering to future dental trainees who are willing to complete their foundation year in dental practices in rural Wales rather than taking up opportunities in the more popular urban areas. That combination of contract reform, further financial investment, liberalisation of the profession—there is a way to go, but there is a formula in Wales that we have started to put in practice and is beginning to succeed.

Diolch, Prif Weinidog. I've previously raised the serious concern amongst local dentists in Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire about the Welsh Government's current policy direction. And like Cefin, a senior member of Dyfed Powys's local dental committee shared his views that the large financial penalties that were being threatened on dentists if they failed to meet what were described as 'unevidenced and unachievable contract reform targets'—quote—'were driving NHS dentistry provision in Wales towards a cliff edge'—another quote. But a possible solution to this, put to me by a local dentist and orthodontist in my constituency, is to reward the dentist when treatment starts, incentivising practices to see patients. So, would the Welsh Government explore this suggestion, which could help keep dentists in the NHS and support patients across Wales? Diolch.

Well, Llywydd, we're always willing to look at ideas that come forward from practitioners. The fact of the matter is that dentistry, uniquely of primary care professions, is paid for the work before they do it, not after it. At the end of the year, there always has been, under the previous contract as well as the current contract, a reconciliation, when you look to see what a practice has actually been able to achieve. If it has not been able to fulfil the terms of its contract, nobody can expect public money to be offered to somebody for a service that hasn't been provided.

Now, we have always had a pragmatic approach to that end-of-year reconciliation, and I know, from my discussions with the chief dental officer last night, that that is exactly the way in which it is being approached this year as well, and particularly because, with a new contract, some of the metrics that are being used are inevitably being used for the first time and need to be tested in practice. The system is not designed at all to penalise practices where there is a reasonable accommodation that can be reached with them. If there are other and better ideas as to how that can be navigated, then of course the system and the people who work in it will be very willing to think those through.

Good afternoon, First Minister. Today the Welsh Liberal Democrats published a report looking at dentistry, particularly focusing on our concern around two-tier dentistry—and I do make no apology in using that term. We have a system at the moment that means that, if you can pay for dentistry, then you don't have to wait; if you can't, then you do have to wait. And that is the basic truth.

I want to just focus my question, if I may, on children and young people. I'm sure we'd all agree that they should be able to access NHS dentistry. In Powys, as Cefin has mentioned, over 800 children are waiting for an NHS dentist, and, to be fair to Powys, they are one of only two health boards who keep data on children waiting for NHS dentistry. I just wonder if you could provide an update, an outline of the plan the Government has in order to help children who are waiting for NHS dentistry across Wales. Thank you, diolch yn fawr iawn.

Thank you to Jane Dodds for the additional question.

The Minister set out in her oral statement here on the floor of the Senedd practical action that is being taken to increase the provision of NHS dentistry for children, including the pilot that the Minister set out in secondary schools—a pilot being carried out in north Wales in the first instance, and we hope, if it is successful, to be able to do more of that elsewhere. In Powys, to which Jane Dodds referred directly, I think I was able to say in answering a question last week that the health board has been successful in recruiting a paediatric specialist dentist who can carry out more of the specialist treatment that is necessary without children needing to leave the county, and an additional dental therapist focusing exclusively on children. I understand that the figure of 800 to which Jane Dodds referred has already been reduced by more than 100 as a result of that additional resource that the health board has, and, when I spoke with the chief executive of Powys health board before questions last week, she said to me that she felt that the health board had been really successful in recruiting new staff in the dental profession, of a variety of contributions that they could make, to come to be able to make sure that adults, but children as well, are able to receive the sort of service that we would wish to see in that part of Wales. 

Llywydd, phase 1 of our programme for government commitment to palliative care has been completed. Phase 2 reported at the end of January. The full programme will conclude by January of next year, as part of our continuing investment in a high-quality service across Wales.

Thank you, First Minister. Earlier this month I had the pleasure of visiting Sandville self-help centre, which is in Ton Kenfig in my constituency, and they have provided life-changing support for those diagnosed with cancer, Parkinson's disease, multiple sclerosis, dementia and other serious life-limiting and life-changing conditions for over 40 years. Sandville relies on the generosity of fundraisers, and they've recently done the most incredible refurbishment of the whole centre, and it includes, but is not limited to, a hydrotherapy pool, counselling rooms, a gym and mobility suite, and also, at the moment, they're working towards having a cabin that can be used for families when a child has cancer, so that the whole family can have respite together. 

Minister, I'm not alone, either, in recognising the work that Sandville does. Callum Hughes, service improvement adviser at Parkinson's UK, recently visited the site and said there is nothing like this in Wales or the rest of the UK, especially with their free, open-to-anyone, drop-in therapy sessions for people with Parkinson's each week. As you can tell, I'm incredibly proud of the Sandville centre, and I would like people from across Wales to be able to benefit from the incredible support, and also learn from their model of care, so that we can have this service across Wales for everybody who needs it.

So, First Minister, I'm just asking you today, really, to join me in congratulating the team and the trustees and the volunteers, as well as so many people from across Wales who have fundraised for Sandville. Diolch. 

Llywydd, I absolutely echo what Sarah Murphy has said in congratulating Sandville hospice. It is a fine example of the work that hospices do in every part of Wales. It has always been an outstanding example of voluntary and committed effort that people make in improving services in the way that the Member has set out, and the fact that Sandville hospice has been able to offer that service to the people of Bridgend and the surrounding areas for over 40 years is an incredible achievement, and something of which I know Sarah and many other people in that part of Wales are immensely proud. In the work that the Welsh Government is doing, of course, we look forward to continuing to work with the hospice and other hospices in Wales to ensure that anyone with life-changing or life-limiting illnesses has access to the best possible care.

Llywydd, the 'Welcome to Wales' strategy sets out our three key ambitions for the sector: to increase spend in the visitor economy, to spread benefits to all parts of Wales and to extend the tourism season, promoting Wales as a destination to be visited all year round.

Thank you, First Minister, and I am pleased that the strategy does include increased spend. But my concern is that there are huge concerns that remain with regard to the Welsh Government's changes requiring many holiday let businesses to be let for 182 days a year, and making them move from the business rates system to the council tax system, which would then increase their tax burden and make many of those businesses unviable.

Can I say, First Minister, of course, that many of these businesses as well are being encouraged to diversify—farming businesses are being encouraged to diversify into that holiday let sector? Many businesses tell me, and I believe it from the casework that I see, that they will simply fold if further exemptions are not brought forward. I'm afraid, so far, that I do believe that the Welsh Government has paid lip service to the concerns that have been raised. I do welcome very much the exemption that has come forward in regard to planning matters—very much welcome indeed—but when are we going to see further exemptions brought forward?

The specific examples that I would bring forward would be where holiday let properties are co-located, so in the same location as, perhaps, where the owner lives, or where holiday let properties share utilities. Those types of properties can't be used for any other purpose except for holiday lets, or it would certainly make it very, very difficult to change from that position. So, can I ask, First Minister: when are we going to see further exemptions that clarify these matters and make sure that these businesses don't fold?

Well, Llywydd, I think the Minister has shown her willingness to listen to cases made in the industry by the way in which—and I know that Russell George welcomed it—she has provided an exemption for properties that can only be occupied for certain times in the year. But let's be clear about what the changes are there to do. They are there to make sure that proper businesses are able to take advantage of small business rate relief, and when they are properties that are let out on an infrequent basis and are not businesses in that sense, then they pay council tax like anybody else.

If you're a business, then I do not think it is unreasonable to say that you should be making your property available to be let for 252 days and that you should actually let it for 182 days; then you are a business. If you're not operating as a business, it doesn't mean you have to fold; it just means that you pay the council tax like anybody else. I think that is a fair basis on which people can be treated. The Minister has shown her flexibility where a case can be made, but the basic principle that people who seek to be treated as businesses operate as businesses, and people who don't operate in a business way are treated like anybody else, that's the basic principle and I don't think we're going to move away from that.

Llywydd, I thank Carolyn Thomas for that question. The UK Government’s budget contained almost nothing for public services. Following a decade of Tory austerity, the latest budget continues to let down the people, communities and businesses across Wales who rely on the essential services local authorities provide.

Thank you for that answer, First Minister. Local authorities are dependent on the dedicated staff who manage and provide front-line services, day in, day out. But they are not immune to the cost-of-living crisis we all face. The Resolution Foundation has said that wage stagnation over the last 15 years means that an average household in the UK is now £11,000 worse off thanks to successive Conservative Governments. First Minister, do you agree with me that UK Government should be growing the economy by putting money into the pockets of our workforce, encouraging people into public sector jobs, and creating better working conditions with better hours? After all, the economy cannot grow without public services, planning, housing, transport and all the support services they deliver, which also take the pressure off our NHS. Thank you.

I thank Carolyn Thomas for that very important supplementary question, because she puts her finger exactly on the flaw at the heart of the current UK Government's prospectus. The Chancellor said that his was a budget for growth, but he failed to do the most basic things on which growth depends. It tells us why, since 2010 and the current run of Conservative Governments, growth in the United Kingdom economy has collapsed compared to anything that was achieved in the previous 60 years.

The two basic components of a genuine growth strategy, Llywydd, are investment in people and investment in the infrastructure that allows an economy to grow. Far, far from investing in people, as Carolyn Thomas says, families in every part of Wales are thousands of pounds worse off than they otherwise would have been had the failed and flawed policies of austerity not been followed. There was nothing for those people in the budget, the spring statement of 10 days ago.

As for investment in infrastructure, the derisory £1 million of capital investment that's been offered here in Wales means that those things that would create growth in the economy—investment in digital infrastructure, for example—all of that will be far more difficult. Carolyn Thomas has highlighted and exposed this afternoon, Llywydd, the flaws at the heart of the UK Government's strategy, and the fact that there is a prescription available for them were they to be serious about reversing the 13 years of Tory decline.

I thank the Member for that, Llywydd. Under the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014, the Welsh Government provides local authorities with guidance in the form of codes of practice and statutory guidance. Topics covered include autism services, prevention, assessment, eligibility and care planning, charging and financial assessment, children who are looked after, safeguarding and partnership working.

Thank you. The findings of the recent Equality and Human Rights Commission's report 'Challenging adult social care decisions in England and Wales' include: local authorities make daily decisions about people's access to social care and people have a right to challenge them, but people are not given crucial information about how to challenge decisions. They fear that if they challenge decisions, they will face negative consequences and lose access to care, and that, as a result, the system is failing those who need it. People are deterred from seeking help and feel ignored and disempowered. Some people are in crisis and desperate for help.

This is certainly reflected in my own constituent casework, particularly in certain counties. How will you therefore respond to the report's recommendation that the Welsh Government work with local authorities and others to improve the collection and analysis of equality data from social care users, including those who challenge decisions? They state this data should be

'used to identify and address poor outcomes'

where they're experienced by people who share particular protected characteristics.

I certainly agree that people who feel that decisions made in relation to their own care ought to have the right to challenge that decision, and that right of challenge ought to be available to them in a way that is real, that's accessible, and where they feel that their voice has been properly heard. So, in taking forward any recommendation, one of the ways in which we will want to make sure that here in Wales we improve the system is to make sure that the voice of the user is at the heart of any data collection or any improvement in that system in the future.

Under the terms of the guidance that the Welsh Government has provided, Part 10 of the social services and well-being Act—the advocacy section of the Act—means that a code of practice has been provided to local authorities, and the purpose of advocacy is to make sure that those people who feel that their own voice has not been heard fully in the way that services have been provided, that that voice can be supported and amplified, and the active offer of advocacy to children and young people is a particular feature of the way in which that service is provided here in Wales.

But I agree with the basic point that the Member made. People who feel they’ve not received the service to which they were entitled, they have a right to challenge those decisions and the way in which they do so ought to be properly reflected in data capture, and where improvements need to be made, the voice of the user ought to be influential in those decisions.

Finally, question 8, Darren Millar.

Well, Llywydd, I thank Darren Millar for that. The Welsh Government has adopted the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s definition of antisemitism in full and without qualification. Our 'Anti-racist Wales Action Plan' provides the framework through which we will take concerted action to tackle antisemitism, including our ongoing support for victims of hate crime.

I’m very grateful for that response, First Minister, and I applaud the leadership that the Welsh Government had shown back in 2017 when it did adopt the IHRA definition in full, but we are six years on, and there are still organisations across Wales that are in significant receipt of funds from the Welsh Government that are yet to adopt the IHRA definition; and indeed, some of them have outright rejected it.

This is particularly concerning, I think, in our higher education sector. We have eight universities in Wales; only one, Bangor University, has adopted the IHRA definition, and that compares extremely badly to the higher education system in other parts of the United Kingdom. Can I ask you, as a condition of funding being given to organisations like our universities, colleges, other places of learning, and indeed, the wider public sector, that you require those organisations to adopt this very important definition of antisemitism, which will help to put to bed some of the horrors that we’ve seen in our society in recent years?

Well, I share the Member’s view of the horror of antisemitism and there’s no doubt at all that there has been a rise in such incidents, and that we all have an obligation to play our part in resisting that. Universities, in the end, Llywydd, are autonomous bodies. The Welsh Government cannot instruct, but the Minister has made it clear in his dealings with universities that while he respects their autonomy, the Welsh Government is keen for them to adopt the IHRA definition of antisemitism.

We don’t intend to pursue this through the funding route to which Darren Millar referred, but this is how we intend to take that conversation further forward: higher education institutions in Wales have an obligation to carry out their functions in full recognition of their obligations under their public sector equality duty. We are to carry out a review of that duty here in Wales, and in that review, we will make sure that we engage with those organisations in Wales in receipt of Welsh Government funding—including the university sector—to make sure that the review of the equality and human rights duty in Wales includes consideration of relevant definitions such as the IHRA, so that that definition will be part of the review, universities are obliged under the public sector equality duty to have regard to their responsibilities, and we will be exploring that with them as part of that review.

I thank the First Minister.

The next item will be the business statement and announcement, and I call on the Trefnydd to make that statement. Lesley Griffiths.

Diolch, Llywydd. There are three changes to this week's business. Firstly, the Minister for Economy will make a statement on the free-port programme in Wales. To accommodate this, the statement on the taxi and private hire vehicle White Paper has been withdrawn. Finally, the legislative consent debate on the Procurement Bill will consist of two motions rather than one. Draft business for the next three sitting weeks is set out on the business statement and announcement, which can be found amongst the meeting papers available to Members electronically. 

Trefnydd, can I call for two statements this week? The first is from the Deputy Minister for Climate Change in relation to his transport responsibilities and seeking an update on the blue badge scheme in Wales. I've had a number of constituents who've been coming forward with concerns about the renewals process for the blue badge scheme. I appreciate that it's only right that these things are reviewed periodically, from time to time, but some of the evidence that they're having to provide seems a little bit ridiculous. I had one constituent who was asked to take a photograph of her walking aid in order to see whether she was eligible for a blue badge. Of course, she did point out to the person asking her for a photograph that she could take a photograph of anybody's walking aid and send that across, but, for whatever reason, that's what she had to do. Clearly, there needs to be some stricter guidance, with some common sense, to make sure that these obstacles can be overcome. 

The second statement that I'd like, please, is from the Deputy Minister for the armed forces on veteran welfare in Wales. I know that this is an issue that the Welsh Government takes very seriously. I met with the Royal British Legion last week, and was alarmed to hear that the number of veterans coming forward for support from their welfare officers has fallen quite significantly post the pandemic. There appears to be no explanation as to why that is the case. Of course, it may be that demand is just generally lower, but given the cost-of-living pressures that we're seeing across Wales at the moment, I really don't believe that that is the case, and I think it requires some further investigation. We know that the Royal British Legion has resources that it wants to make available, and SSAFA and other organisations have resources that they want to make available to support veterans, particularly in their old age. Therefore, I would be grateful if the Minister could commit to working with those organisations to try and do what they can to promote the opportunities that are there. 

Thank you. In relation to your second point, the Deputy Minister is in her seat and has heard your questions. I'm sure she is, and will continue to be, committed to working both with the third sector and any other service provider or organisation in supporting our veterans.

Regarding the blue badge scheme, I am aware that, obviously, the system was looked at holistically—it was probably about three years ago now—and it came forward with a new scheme. I do recognise some of the points that you made from my own constituency mailbag. I will certainly ask the Deputy Minister to update us if there is something further he is able to tell us. I do think there is a difference between local authorities and the criteria that they use, and it could be that it needs to be looked at to make sure there is a level playing field across Wales. 

I'd like to ask for a statement, please, setting out how the Government will urgently increase capacity in community hospitals. A few weeks ago, I raised concerns with the First Minister that ambulances were in effect being used as waiting rooms because of a lack of hospital beds. I've been contacted by a constituent this week whose story, I think, has highlighted another way in which that lack of beds is affecting patients, which is that a lack of capacity in community hospitals means people are being kept in hospitals further away from home for a longer period of time than is necessary. My constituent's wife, who has lung cancer, collapsed at home, and there were no ambulances, so he drove her to the Grange. After waiting for hours on a trolley, she was moved to another unit, but even after she was assessed and she was stable, she couldn't be released, because they were told that there were no beds available in Ystrad Mynach or in Ebbw Vale for her continued treatment and rehabilitation. My constituent said, 'It's real people's lives who are being blighted by this situation', and I agree with him. Could a statement please set out how the Government will get to grips with the serious lack of capacity in community hospitals that's delaying people getting to where they need to be?

Thank you. We know, not just in our community hospitals, but in our district general hospitals as well, that delayed transfers of care are causing a great deal of consternation with bed capacity. Obviously, this is something that the Minister for Health and Social Services is looking at across the piece. 

I would like to ask for a Government statement on the future of the Heart of Wales railway line. I'm told by constituents that trains are regularly cancelled, and that, during summer, they are overcrowded. Can the Government outline its plans for the Heart of Wales railway line?

I would also like a Government statement on how the Government decides on funding to support tourist businesses. Surely, if a tourism operator has a good commercial idea, they should be able to raise money from the financial markets. My concern is that Welsh Government money that could be better spent is supporting these businesses. In Swansea East, £4 million is being given to a zip wire company, at a cost of £40,000 per job.

The Deputy Minister for Climate Change recently issued a written statement on the Welsh Government's plans for improving rural transport. This confirmed that we would be submitting a proposal shortly to the UK Government's union connectivity fund to develop plans to increase capacity across the Cambrian and Heart of Wales rail lines, and, in doing so, increase cross-border connectivity. I know that the Deputy Minister recently met with Transport for Wales and the Heart of Wales Line Travellers' Association regarding the performance of the line and the importance of Transport for Wales making sure that they provide very clear information to passengers about any disruption to the services.

The methodology applied in deciding investments in relation to tourism is very comprehensive, and it follows a strict code of governance. The due diligence process involves a combination of both Welsh Government investment analysis and expert advice and support commissioned from an outside body.

Minister, can I ask for a statement about the terms and conditions of Welsh Government funding grants? The reason why I ask for this is because Blaenau Gwent council has missed out on nearly £250,000 of funding, which it was going to use for a bus infrastructure project. The project's contractor had been unable to deliver the project within the funding timescale, due to unforeseen circumstances, meaning the money now has to be sent back to the Welsh Government. It now leaves the council in a rather difficult situation, and the project, ultimately, in limbo. One of the things the Welsh Government could do to stop something similar happening again is perhaps having an 'exceptional circumstances' clause—just as an example. Please can we have a statement about what steps the Welsh Government can take to make the grant funding process for Welsh councils easier? Because it would be a shame to see great projects fail because of rigid processes that will only disadvantage the people of Wales in the long term.

The Welsh Government allocates a great deal of funding to local authorities, on a great number of schemes, so I'm not aware of the particular grant that you refer to. But I'm sure the Member would expect—and it is, indeed, the case—that there are very strict criteria, and it's not something that you can just leave to chance. I would think that it's probably best to write to the Minister directly about that specific grant you refer to.

The clocks have gone forward and spring is facing us. That's a cause of joy, and it raises the spirits of many of us. It's the start of the traditional tourism season, and of course that brings all sorts of opportunities and benefits to large parts of Wales. But there are some communities where this time of the year does mean the beginning of parking difficulties, littering, illegal camping, and great pressures on local infrastructure. Last week, I had a meeting with Capel Curig and Betws-y-coed community councils, as well as partners including Natural Resources Wales, Eryri national park, the National Trust and others, to discuss some of these challenges and concerns. Can I ask therefore for a statement from the Minister responsible for tourism on what the Welsh Government is doing to support these communities, perhaps by helping to improve infrastructure, ensuring that the relevant partners have the necessary resources to deal with problems, and also to help to protect the ecology of these areas? Because that is something that is damaged by some irresponsible visitors, who not only don't respect the rules but very often break the law.

Thank you. You raise a very important point. Obviously, while we want to see tourism absolutely boom here in Wales, unfortunately, as is often the case, the minority spoil it for the majority. I know the Deputy Minister has recently taken tourism into her portfolio and is looking at a variety of issues around tourism, and I'm sure she'll be very happy to update us via a written statement.

Good afternoon, Minister. It is reported that the chief executive of Dŵr Cymru is to receive a bonus payment of nearly £0.25 million. This is despite sewage being in our rivers and our seas, and our beaches being in a terrible condition. I wonder if I could ask for a statement, please, from the relevant Minister on the performance of Dŵr Cymru, as well as the payment of bonuses to senior staff in the public sector. Diolch yn fawr iawn. 

Thank you. Welsh Ministers do not have a formal role in determining executive pay for Wales's water companies, but the Welsh Government does monitor pay and performance, and we do expect relevant remuneration committees to reflect very carefully on performance and delivery against the breadth of current water sector and environmental challenges that need to be addressed—and you pointed one out immediately. I think we should also remember the way that Dŵr Cymru was set up. I think they should bear that in mind when setting these bonuses that you referred to. 

Could I ask for two statements, please? The first is on the support that's available for swimming pools to get us through the runaway costs that they are facing at the moment. Swimming pools tend to be something of a money pit to run at normal times; at the moment, they're under intense pressure. Some of the public pools in my area have contacted me to ask the question, which is a genuine question—. Apparently, there has been additional money—new money, according to the Chancellor—announced for distribution via Sport England to pools within England for the next 12 months. So, they're asking—I have to say they're quite sceptical about this—whether we can hear from the Welsh Government whether there are any consequentials that we'll be able to pass on to pools here. I don't expect you can answer now, Trefnydd, on that, but a statement on it would be really welcome. 

The second statement I'd like to ask for is one on the money that has now been clawed back to the UK Treasury—the £155.5 million. I know the committee has reported on this, but the precedent in previous years has been to be flexible in this. I understand that the finance Minister made suggestions to the Treasury to actually change this into capital from revenue spending. This was declined, and several options were declined. We have, in effect, lost £155.5 million. I would like to see a statement on that, how we can avoid this in future, and why it was clawed back from Wales, when, actually, the amount was significantly bigger in some UK Government departments. I'd like to see a statement on that. Thank you, Trefnydd. 

Thank you. In relation to the additional funding for swimming pools, as you say, the UK Government budget did announce further funding for that. As a Cabinet, we are looking at the additional funding that came forward from the spring budget, and obviously decisions will be made collectively.

In relation to the £155 million, obviously that was our money. As a Government, we had plans for how to spend that money, and the rules were changed. In relation to what you were saying about UK Government departments, you're quite right: departments in Whitehall returned about £25 billion to the Treasury. If you look at the Department of Health and Social Care in England alone, they returned £18.6 billion to the Treasury. If you think about what our Barnett consequential share would have been of that funding, we would have had an additional £1 billion. But we didn't return that £1 billion, because we spent more in Wales. Our offer to businesses during the COVID pandemic was much more generous, for example, and we also spent better, avoiding the scandals of those dodgy PPE contracts. 

Trefnydd, could I ask for statement this afternoon from the Government in response to the recent Daily Telegraph survey on the town of Rhyl, which claimed it was one of the least desirable seaside towns in Britain to visit, describing it as having 'no past, no arts or entertainment, no fun'? Even in the past, it's been described as 'Costa del Dole' and 'Blackpool after a neutron bomb', which is quite a nasty way to describe Rhyl, really. Being from the local area, I beg to differ with a lot of those statements, as there are a lot of attractive features in the town. I would encourage anybody to visit the town themselves to see what it's got on offer, including three miles of unspoilt beaches, a sea life centre, SC2, 1891, to just name a few. But generally, how are we ever going to turn round Rhyl's fortunes with this sort of attitude? I know it's had its problems over the years, but there has been a lot of work locally to try and turn things around. What is the Welsh Government's response to this article? Do you accept that such stories don't help Rhyl at all? What partnership working is the Welsh Government undertaking with the likes of Denbighshire County Council, local tourism boards and the public to attract people to visit the town? And what efforts are being made by Welsh Government to invest in seaside towns such as Rhyl to ensure a more buoyant economy and to create well-paid, sustainable jobs in the area to give local people opportunities? Thank you.

Well, I don't read The Daily Telegraph, and I'd advise the Member not to either. I think you make a serious point about Rhyl and, as somebody from north-east Wales, I know Rhyl very well. And you're quite right—some significant funding has gone into the regeneration of Rhyl, and certainly your predecessor, Ann Jones, always ensured that, for whatever money was around, Rhyl was absolutely at the top of every Minister's list when they had a look. I visited Denbighshire County Council last year. We did a day of visits, and I spent a significant part of that day in Rhyl, and it was very pleasing to see the investment that had gone into a number of significant investments—looking at the market, for instance, and the other plans that Denbighshire council has for it. And, alongside that, not just making it a pleasant place to visit, if you look at the funding that's gone into, for instance, flooding defence, because I think that's very important when we talk about seaside towns. 

Trefnydd, I'd like a written statement, please, on rail infrastructure funding. I'd like to know how much money has Wales lost over the years due to the delay in the electrification of the Great Western rail line, the fact that HS2 and probably the Northern Powerhouse rail are classified as England-and-Wales projects. Last week, I raised during First Minister's questions the upgrading of the Cardiff west junction in Canton to enable four trains an hour to run through all Cardiff stations. This is the responsibility of Network Rail and UK Government. Since then, it has been pointed out to my office that this originally was included in the Department for Transport Network Rail Cardiff area resignalling and renewal project 2012-15, but, for whatever reason, it didn't happen. They said they were going to do it between 2012 and 2015, but we're still waiting in 2023. Can we please have it set out how much we have missed out on and why we are missing out on this money? The answers we're receiving back from the UK Government are becoming more and more weak, and that is to put it mildly. Diolch yn fawr, Trefnydd.

Thank you. Well, as you know, the Welsh Government continues to press for the UK Government to call Northern Powerhouse rail exactly what it is, and that's an England-only project, and the same with HS2. I think it would be interesting for Members to see the significant funding that we haven't received in Wales, and I will certainly ask the Deputy Minister, if he has all that information to hand, to update Members in a written statement.  

I would like a statement from the Minister for rural affairs, please. Currently, as she is aware, we are in lambing season and we're still having far too many dog attacks on sheep. I know that, recently, Dan Jones from the Great Orme in Llandudno and other farmers have approached me about the horrific sights and scenes that you see. There needs to be more education, really, for dog owners. There needs to be more education. I know that, in the days when we had dog wardens, they would go in and liaise with pupils so that they could go home and say, 'We need to have our dogs on leads at all times.' I was just wondering—. The north Wales rural crime division are amazing, but they've only got so many resources and they can't be everywhere. What do you think in terms of more actions that we can do so that people realise you do not wander around sheep with your dogs running loose, and also if your dogs are missing and are not at home, that they're not potentially exhausting and chasing sheep until, ultimately, the sheep die, and sometimes, often, the lambs? Thank you.

Thank you. The Member raises a very important point and something that concerns me greatly, and we have done some significant work in relation to it. You mentioned the north Wales rural crime team, and I absolutely agree, along with the other two across the country, that they do some excellent work. And, of course, we've got Rob Taylor, our rural wildlife crime commissioner, who just yesterday—I don't know if Members will have picked it up on social media—was doing a significant piece of work on a farm in the Vale of Glamorgan, and he's very happy to go anywhere to help educate people in relation to responsible dog ownership, something that I obviously publicise as well. I'm continuing to have discussions with my UK Government counterparts to see what legislation they could perhaps bring up to date, because some of the dog legislation that we have is incredibly outdated and certainly, I think, the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991, but not all dogs that attack lambs, of course, are dangerous, so it is really important that we use every tool that we have in the box.

I thank the Trefnydd.

Item 3 this afternoon is a statement by the Minister for Economy on the free-port programme in Wales. I call on the Minister, Vaughan Gething.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. On 23 March, the Welsh Government and the UK Government jointly announced that the Celtic free port and the porthladd rhydd Ynys Môn Anglesey free port will proceed to the next stage of the Welsh free-ports programme process. This outcome was reached through a transparent and competitive application process, with selection being jointly undertaken by both the Welsh Government and the UK Government.

I am pleased that our negotiations secured the important conditions set out by the Welsh Government. We were clear that free ports in Wales must enjoy funding parity with successful bids in England, that the process must be advanced across a partnership of equals where devolution was respected, and that the prospectus provided protections on our priorities of fair work, sustainability and our net-zero future. Dirprwy Lywydd, we also worked to make the case for an additional free port, securing the opportunity for a strong bid to win designation beyond the initial offer from the UK Government of one site. And I believe it was right for Welsh Ministers to hold to those conditions to ensure fair funding for Welsh free ports, clarity on governance, as well as progress on social and environmental justice. I welcome the positive moves made in response to me by the UK Government to recognise the significance of these matters. I'm also grateful for the work undertaken by officials in both Governments that has allowed us to reach this positive outcome. 

The strength of the bids was aided by an agreement between both Governments that led to the joint prospectus and a clear path for businesses and communities to plan against. The First Minister has called again for the UK Government to learn from this positive and constructive process. It offered a level of clarity that is badly needed at a time of such economic uncertainty.

Dirprwy Lywydd, both the Celtic and the Ynys Môn bids are clearly aligned to our economic mission and have the potential to play a key role in creating a stronger, fairer, greener Welsh economy. The Welsh model that we have developed for free ports will ensure that Wales is not set at a disadvantage as compared to English and Scottish sites as they move ahead. At the same time, it should bolster our long-term investments across both sites. 

The Celtic free port will be based around the port of Port Talbot and the port of Milford Haven. I was in Port Talbot yesterday, in the Deputy Presiding Officer's constituency—I understand he won't be asking questions today from the chair—and the plans there focus on low-carbon technologies, such as floating offshore wind, hydrogen, carbon capture and utilisation, and storage, and biofuels to help support the accelerated reduction of carbon emissions. The Welsh Government has already intervened to support the proposed tax sites of Pembrokeshire Science and Technology Park and the Baglan Energy Park because we recognise the long-term role that these assets will play in supporting high-quality jobs.

The Anglesey free port will be based around the port of Holyhead, the Anglesey prosperity zone, Rhosgoch and M-Sparc. The free port will develop the energy island programme by focusing on marine energy technology testing on the seabed—that's both tidal and wind power. The bid focuses on Morlais and M-Sparc as innovation priorities, both of which, of course, have been backed by major investment from the Welsh Government in recent years.

Dirprwy Lywydd, these are not fly-by-night projects based on low-value rental income. The bids demonstrate how the model we have developed in Wales will add to, rather than take away from, the long-term plans we are building for a just transition that delivers the jobs dividend that Wales deserves.

I'm very pleased that both bids demonstrated sufficiently strong cases that allowed Ministers here in the Welsh Government and in Westminster to designate two free ports for Wales to proceed to the next stage. Both bids provided a compelling narrative of how they intend to boost the distinct strengths that both sites boast, harnessing the unique opportunities from offshore wind and marine energy to advanced manufacturing and innovation. With sites in north and south Wales, progressing two free ports is a real win for Wales and, indeed, the whole of UK, with the opportunities for regeneration, the embedding of fair work, the establishment of hubs for global trade, and fostering an innovative environment to be felt in both north and south of our country.

Each free port would be supported by up to £26 million of seed investment funding. That's confirmed parity with England free-port sites. Each site would be able to access a range of customs benefits and tax reliefs. The next phase is an important one, with the development of an outline business case that, again, must be agreed again by both Governments. A package of trade and innovation support will also be available to each free port. Through their outline business cases, the currently successful bids will now need to articulate their overarching strategic vision. This will involve significant development of the content of the original bid.

Dirprwy Lywydd, unfortunately, the Newport free-port bid was unsuccessful. I know this will be very disappointing news for all involved, and I do appreciate the huge amount of resource that went into the development of their bid. We are keen to build on that in any way that we can outside of the free-port process. I continue to recognise the pivotal role that the semiconductor industry plays in the area and how crucial that sector is to both the Welsh and UK economy, now and in the future. It was a particular focus of my time in California last week, and I will be remaking this case to the UK Government, who urgently need to bring forward a funded strategy for the semiconductor sector. This would deliver a major boost for Newport, a city that with global standing in this sector.

Dirprwy Lywydd, people and businesses across the UK remain under intense pressure from the cost-of-living crisis and subdued economic growth. This is all in addition to the ever present geographical inequality, which is why a place-based policy like free ports is an important lever for the Welsh Government to have as part of our economic tool kit. We worked extensively with the UK Government to ensure that the Welsh free-port programme was designed to help deliver our ambitions for fair work. This includes engaging the voice of workers and their trade unions in future governance arrangements, alongside driving a prosperous, green economic future for Wales. Free ports can act as drivers of growth and employment in their areas and, collectively, the bidders estimate that their proposals could create as many as 20,000 high-quality new jobs.

As well as maximising the growth potential of the local area, we also set out that proposals needed to embody the values in the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 and ensure dignity and fairness for people are at their core. Prioritising the social and environmental needs of Wales and building a more prosperous and resilient well-being economy were essential. That is why the Welsh Government's economic contract was included in the prospectus. This is another distinctive feature of the Welsh model, based on our values and priorities.

Dirprwy Lywydd, I would like to note again the constructive engagement and working relationship that has been developed between the UK Government and the Welsh Government on free ports. Through that engagement with the UK Government, we have been clear that any proposals for investment zones in Wales should follow the same principles and design as outlined for Welsh free ports. Investment zones too would need to align with our policies on fair work and net zero, as well as representing value for money for the people of Wales. I look forward to working with all partners as we move to the next phase of work and to exploring the opportunity to turn the current choice and the next phase of bidding into a catalyst for major investment in high-quality jobs and, of course, a just transition.

Can I thank you, Minister, for your statement today? It is indeed wonderful news that Wales is getting two free ports, not just one, and I'm delighted that there's been such close and effective working between both the Welsh and UK Governments in delivering this objective that all of us in this Chamber, I know, shared a passion to achieve. I have to say as well, my colleague Paul Davies, the Chair of the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee, isn't here today, but I know that he was leaping for joy as well with the announcement of the free-port bids being successful, particularly, of course, the one that affects his own constituency, the Celtic free-port bid, with Milford Haven being sited in his constituency.

They do have a huge opportunity to drive significant growth across Wales, make that huge impact as well on the UK economy as a whole, levering in billions of pounds worth of investment and creating at least 20,000 jobs overall. It was obviously a disappointment for Newport that their free-port bid was not successful, but I was very pleased to hear you refer to the need to look for other opportunities to support Newport, particularly that all-important semiconductor industry, and I think that you'll certainly have support on this side of the Chamber in order to achieve that end, because that is going to be important for delivering growth, particularly in south-east Wales.

I think what this whole thing shows us in terms of being able to secure two free-port bids is that, when the Welsh and UK Governments work constructively together and in a collaborative way, we really can achieve great things for our nation, and for me, it's music to my ears hearing a Government Minister, instead of criticizing the UK Government, cheering on the fact that there has been such a close working relationship. 

Now, as you would expect, I've got a few questions that I wanted to ask you about the next steps forward, because we do know, of course, that the Welsh Government has got its enterprise zone initiative and that there is already an enterprise zone in the Haven—Haven Waterway enterprise zone—and that Anglesey's got its own enterprise zone, alongside the energy island sort of focus. So, to me, it's really important now that these are strategically aligned with the free ports so that we can maximise the delivery of all of those programmes. So, can I ask you, what work are you going to do to make sure that they are properly aligned, so that they're not working against one another but that they're working in concert to deliver and squeeze out the maximum possible benefits from these opportunities now that we have these free ports here in Wales?

In addition to that, of course, we're going to need to have the right skills for the individuals who are going to work and hopefully glean the benefits of these incredible new jobs, which I hope will be well-paid jobs across the whole of Wales, as a result of the zones. And, therefore, there's going to need to be a very close working relationship with the higher education sector and the further education college sector as well. So, I wonder what action the Welsh Government is taking to make sure that there is a dialogue and an alignment with our education system so that we can make sure that it is reflecting the needs of these new free ports as they go forward.

You mentioned green technology; we do have ambitious plans to reach net zero by 2050, and obviously, the contribution that these free ports can make, particularly given their focus on green energy and renewables, is going to be huge. But given that you published your net-zero strategy before the free ports were announced, will you now review that strategy to make sure that it reflects perhaps a little more broadly the opportunities that the free ports can bring to contribute to achieving that 2050 goal?

Just finally, if I may, can I also ask what's next from the Welsh Government's perspective? You've hinted at the fact that there's further work to do, obviously, to develop the overarching strategy in each free-port area, but what is the Welsh Government going to do in collaboration with the UK Government to track progress, to make sure that these opportunities aren't missed, that we are holding people's feet to the fire to deliver against the promises that people are expecting to be delivered about growth, about investment, and about jobs? Thank you.

Thank you for the comments and the couple of questions in there as well. I should start by saying that I wish Paul Davies well. I look forward to him returning to the Chamber. I also suspect he'll have sent a map to the leader of the Welsh Conservatives. I saw the video in Cardiff Bay that suggested that the free port was in Carmarthen; I think Milford is still in Pembrokeshire.

But actually, I'm sure that there is lots to be positive about and, on that, it does show that, when we do work together, there are things that we can do, which is what I've set out to do in all of the conversations I've had with UK Ministers. We want to have a pragmatic conversation about what we can do, and what the UK Government can do, whether it's on steel, whether it's on semiconductors or here, on free ports. The challenge is that there are times when the UK Government works in this way and other times when there's a less collaborative approach taken. We talked about the shared prosperity fund and others, and I'm sure that we'll spend time talking about those on other occasions.

On free ports, I'm positive that the process now will take us into further alignment with the work we're already doing. It's part of what we expected in the prospectus, it's why it was designed in that way, and if you look at what each of the free port consortia have been suggesting they want to do, it is aligned with what we're doing and, indeed, with what growth deal areas are looking to do as well. It was one of the conditions that, for any bid, they had to secure the backing of the growth deal area in which they were based. The free-port prospectus that we have agreed and published, and the outlined business case with more detail in it, is in alignment with our economic mission. So, I recognise the points that you make and the question you've asked about what we will need to review again what we're doing to align with free ports; I think it's the other way around, actually. The free-ports process has been done in a way that successful bids should align with what we're already intending to do. And it will build on work that's already undertaken. For example, your question about skills; there is work already under way with the consortia of marine energy businesses and bidders, and they've always included the ports, who recognise that significant investment in port infrastructure is essential to unlocking not just the opportunities to generate low-carbon power, but the jobs that should come from that as well. So, we'll build on that work, and the work that we have already set out with further and higher education providers.

One of the things that businesses are already doing is looking at where they think there are gaps and opportunities and the skills base of where they are, as well as a number of people who could come into work there. So, some of that could be transitioned from workers in other sectors, some of that will be people already in the sector and reskilling them to do the sorts of jobs that will be required in the next three, five and 10 years, and some of that also will be with people who are yet to enter the world of work. So, there'll be a period of time where we'll be developing a network with the bidders, with the businesses, not just around the two free ports, understanding what the gaps are and then planning how we can meet those. So, again, I don't think the net-zero strategy is in conflict with where we are on free ports either; it adds to where we want to go.

The free ports themselves are about trying to incentivise more activity and more pace. They're not about trying to set out on an entirely different direction, not the way they've been designed in Wales. And our challenge will be at the next stage of development, which is your point about holding people's feet to the fire. We expect to see more detail in how the headline promises, the headline expectations, are actually going to be delivered in practice. When we're through that stage and when we've made a decision on the outline business case, I'll expect to provide a further statement to Members, following a joint decision between myself and the UK Government.

I thank the Minister for the statement, and I'd also like to place on record my thanks for the Minister's approach on this issue. We've come on quite a long journey, I think. When the UK Government announced its free port prospectus, it was clearly unacceptable that they proposed to offer £26 million for English free ports, only £8 million for one in Wales, and some may have been happy to roll over and say, 'Just take what you’re offered and be grateful for it'. Others of us could see that this lack of parity, this completely unjustified difference, had to be addressed, and I am grateful to Welsh Government for sharing that view, and also the view that we needed assurances around workers' rights and on environmental regulations.

The result, as the Minister said—we got that funding fair play. We'd have been short-changed by £18 million under those original Conservative Government plans. We also got those further assurances. So, when Plaid Cymru-led Anglesey council and Stena put together their plan—and I was only too happy to work with them and support them—they were working from a much stronger, I think, Welsh free-ports prospectus. We were in a much better place.

Now, the Minister also heard my numerous appeals for two free ports to be considered. Again, I congratulate the negotiators on both sides for making that happen. Why did I think two would be valuable? Because I think there were real synergies between the proposals to develop offshore energy proposals in particular, major decarbonising schemes in the north-west and the south-west, and I think the Welsh economy as a whole can benefit from that.

So, now we move forwards; we need to do so with purpose, but with care also. So, a number of questions. How does the Minister intend to work with the winning bids to ensure that jobs created are truly sustainable, because that has to happen, and also, that our social and economic values are respected and pushed forward, as those jobs are created? Also, what opportunities—? Or, how will he ensure, rather, that opportunities for the local workforce are maximised through the skills agenda and through effective upskilling? Because it’s got to be about employing our local workforce. And also, does the Minister agree that there needs to be honesty around the impact of this? This is a valuable economic tool, but there’s never one single lever, so we have to be driving forward with other opportunities too, and here, Government has to work across departmental boundaries.

I would invite the Minister to encourage looking again at how funding could work for strengthening the Menai crossing in response to the free-port designation. That should be another opportunity looked into. And also, we have to see pressing by Welsh Government for UK Government to look again at the issue of consequentials from English rail projects. The fact that we have HS2 and now Northern Powerhouse Rail being designated as English and Welsh projects when they’re clearly England-only projects, leading to the loss of many, many millions of pounds—hundreds of millions of pounds that could be spent on improving Welsh rail that could feed into this free-port project—I would suggest that we use this designation as a springboard to encouraging the UK Conservative Government to look again at that, rather than short-changing Wales.

Thank you for the comments and questions. Look, on your point around the approach we took, we were very clear that parity had to be delivered for Wales or we wouldn’t be prepared to sign up to a free-ports programme. I think we wasted the first year in a rather circular argument where one of the previous Secretaries of State for Wales said that there would be a free port whether the Welsh Government liked it or not, and that we'd have to take the money that was offered. I wasn’t prepared to do that, and I can certainly tell you that the finance Minister was giving me significant encouragement not to agree to anything less than exactly the same funding settlement that English free ports had received as well.

Having got there now, we do need to see that the detail in the delivery plan is to deliver sustainable employment, but actually, the money, the seed capital and the release are there to try to advance and expand the rate of growth in a sector that we think will need investment in any event. If you’re going to exploit tidal and wider marine power, including floating offshore wind, the jobs we’re talking about are not small or time-limited jobs. There’ll be jobs, of course, in the construction phase, but we’re actually talking, though, about a long-term deployment of manufacturing to go into the Celtic sea. So, these jobs aren’t going to be for two or three years if we get it right, and actually, both free-port bids looked to try to take advantage of the first-mover advantage that is still available in the developing and yet-to-mature sectors of floating offshore wind and tidal energy. Both north and south have something clear to offer on that, and that will help to deliver us a greater economic return, with more jobs being created there rather than things manufactured in other parts of Europe and then put together in Wales at a much later stage.

On skills, there is still a need to see—the construction sector is actually quite resilient, actually, there is still lots of opportunity, but think of the construction that will be required around both of the current free-port bids if they proceed to the final stage, and then, also, the skills for those jobs. I think I covered some of that in answer to Darren Millar as well, but it’s definitely a key focus for us to understand the skills need and be able to plan and to deliver those as well. A more coherent approach and the ability to work with different regions in Wales would help with that. So, there will be a need to try to knit together the way that some of the skills landscape has been pulled apart in the way that different funding streams are put in place. The shared prosperity fund does not allow for that sort of strategic joined-up approach in regions, let alone across the whole country, so there is definitely work to do to take proper advantage of that. We're already seeing that, in this area, a number of Ministers have an interest—so, not just the finance Minister—when it comes to the sort of tax reliefs and what's on offer from Wales as well as the UK. The climate change Minister has an obvious interest in this as well, as, indeed, does the Minister for north Wales. So, we do have a number of departments and we want to see how we can take proper advantage of the opportunity that's there. Regardless of free-port status, I want to see that investment made in the future of the economy and a low-carbon economy, and this, I think, helps us on the way.

Finally, I completely agree with you about HS2 and Northern Powerhouse consequentials. I don't think the Government here could have been any clearer: they're England-only projects, where there should be a consequential for Wales, and that would make a significant difference to our ability to invest in transport infrastructure. To be fair, I think there is a gathering of people who have recognised that and agree with it. Even the Welsh Affairs Select Committee have agreed that HS2 is plainly an England-only project, and that's a committee with a majority of Conservative members. I look forward to more Conservatives joining the cause in both Parliaments to make it clear to the UK Government that we want the rules to be respected and the consequentials that Wales is plainly entitled to to be delivered. 

Before I call the next speaker, I want to remind Members that most of the time allocated has already been used up. I have seven speakers who wish to speak. Make sure you ask your question within your time limit, otherwise, you may not be able to get to it. Mike Hedges.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I welcome the statement today. Anything that helps the economy of the Swansea bay city region I will support. Using the site of Port Talbot to build and then take out to sea offshore wind turbines will benefit our fight against global warming and create well-paid jobs. I agree with the Minister that, as well as maximising the growth potential of the local area, proposals need to embody the values of the well-being of future generations Act and ensure dignity and fairness for people. Levelling up must be about increasing average wages. How is the Welsh Government going to ensure that employment rights, environmental standards and health and safety rules are followed in the free port?

We've been very clear in the bidding process, and in going through all of these stages, that the bids have to be able to match that—we've been very clear. That's why the regard to the future generations and well-being Act is in the bidding process—you won't find that in England—it's why the points about fair work—you won't find those in England—you won't find the points about the economic contract in Scotland either—that's a unique phase here in Wales—and the workers' collective forum as well. So, we're very clear about the sort of free-port activity that we're prepared to support and not, which is why we're at this point and why we don't have the same outline of what might happen in England.

For example, DP World, which is the company that was behind the sacking of all of those people in P&O Ferries—the unlawful sacking—well, they're apparently going to run a free port in Wales. I don't think they could demonstrate they'd meet all the criteria that we have for a free-ports process here in Wales. We're also going to benchmark where we are with economic activity, so we can actually understand where there's genuine growth and not simply displacement of jobs and other opportunities.

I recognise and welcome this really positive statement, but I would like to remind Members that, of course, this doesn't replace the unfettered access we had to the world's largest single market prior to us leaving the EU. But this is a reset for some of our coastal communities that have really struggled. I wondered if I could focus just on one specific question to you, Minister. There are significant concerns about the opportunity and significant risks around money laundering and the trafficking of goods and people. May I ask you what discussions you are having with the UK Government and other agencies to minimise these risks? Thank you—diolch yn fawr iawn.

Well, there'll still be customs arrangements in place; these won't be customs-free places. Part of the challenge will be, like I said, reliefs and incentives, rather than saying that rules simply don't apply. I have the fortunate responsibility within the Welsh Government of having borders as part of my suite of responsibilities. So, I'm very much looking at arrangements with the island of Ireland, which I hope we'll be able to take a step forward with in the near future as well, and that's really important for the economic potential and the continued survivorship of a number of our ports as well. We have a particular interest in westward-facing ports here in Wales. So, that will form part of the discussions about what we'll look at when it comes to final bids and the process that should be in place.

I should make it clear that I have never advocated free ports as somehow replacing the way that we were able to trade with our nearest European partners. It's a matter of fact, not opinion, that Wales has more traders reporting overall trade with the European Union than other parts of UK, and, of course, there were free ports whilst we were members of the European Union. This is a new version, and I'm looking forward to seeing what we can do to deliver on the promises that we have been made and the criteria that Welsh Government have set out for what a successful free port should look like.

Sam Rowlands.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and thank you also, Minister, for your statement today, and I join you, certainly, in welcoming the news that the UK Government plans to establish the two free ports in Wales, and also join the Member for Ynys Môn in highlighting the free port in Anglesey, and also in paying credit to both the work of the local authority and to Stena Line, and also to applaud the efforts of my Conservative colleague Virginia Crosbie, the MP for Ynys Môn, in championing the Holyhead free-port bid in Westminster. Minister, you will be aware, of course, that good transport links will be vital to make sure that the new free ports achieve their potential, creating new jobs, attracting the new investment we want to see and spreading prosperity as well. So, in light of the announcement of the free ports, in particular for Anglesey, what assessment have you made of the roads review on the current and future transport links between Ynys Môn and the rest of Wales? Also, I'm not sure if you answered Rhun ap Iorwerth's question earlier on the third Menai crossing, so what assessment would you make, also, of the third Menai crossing as a result of the announcement last week?

We're not going to be able to make a formal announcement on the basis of the free-port bid moving forward to the next stage. Understanding the level of economic activity that the free port can deliver—we'll have greater clarity on that once the outline business case is returned. So, we're going to do exactly what we said we'd do, in understanding whether it moves through the next stage successfully, as I hope it will do, and the sort of economic activity that will get generated, the time frame for that, and we'll, of course, need to take infrastructure choices around that. We would be in a better position to make infrastructure choices, of course, if we had the consequentials from HS2 and Northern Powerhouse that were referred to earlier on. I look forward to Sam Rowlands joining and giving his voice to that call as well on the new free ports that are being jointly established by the Welsh Government and the UK Government, and I look forward to making decisions in the next stage of that process.

I'm sure the Minister won't be surprised to learn that my opinion hasn't changed when it comes to free ports. This is nothing more than an abdication of power to companies through creating deregulated zones—trickle-down economics in its purest form, extractive by design. Now, there are a number of questions that need answering in detail. I'm really interested to know how the Government will monitor the free ports going forward. For example, we've talked about safeguarding workers' rights and a living wage. How will the Government ensure that companies operating in a free port zone will meet the requirements in the first instance, but, equally, in the long term, once they're established, what are the mechanisms available to Government to enforce this?

I also think it's important for Government to further elaborate on the role of trade unions. In his statement, the Minister referred to engaging worker voice and trade unions in future governance arrangements. Will they have genuine power and ability—actual decision making—or will their role be merely consultative? Because, if it is the latter, we know how that story goes.

As I said, my view on the concept of free ports remains the same, but my challenge to the Minister, Welsh Government and other Members is to prove me wrong and prove communities wrong. Because time and time again, Welsh workers have been fed the promise of regeneration, and, time and time again, little has changed.

With respect, I think the Member is being consistent in his broad scepticism over free ports, but I think he's judging them on a model that has existed previously, and not the one we've been talking about, the one where we've got into the prospectus that everyone has to bid against and succeed against where fair work is not negotiable, it is part of the expectation that you have to deliver; where not regressing on our environmental standards is part of what has to be delivered. The economic contract that everyone will have to sign up to is part of what has to be agreed to. So, it's a very different type of economic development tool, and, in the next stage, we're going to have more on how we measure a baseline of activity and understand, from each of the bids, how they can demonstrate that they will grow, not displace, the economy. That was one of the concerns we had at the outline of this process, and it's a fair one, as well. But, of course, the seed capital and the devolved reliefs that are coming in have actually got to help deliver much more significant investment—not just sums of money spent, but what that will mean in terms of the number of jobs and the quality of jobs we want to see created.

Now, part of that will be in areas of devolved levers—so, non-domestic rates and our understanding in conversations with the free port bids around how that will be deployed, what that will look like, and what we expect in return. So, there is an active conversation to be had that we'll go through in the next few phases of the process.

And when it comes to trade unions, it was a specific area that we wanted inserted into the prospectus, so there's a workers' collective forum mentioned—that's a work council by any other name—and the challenge and the strength in the trade union voice is how successfully they recruit and they organise. We'll be really clear that the sort of union-busting activities, the sort of awful employment practices, that we saw with DP World when they sacked all of the P&O Ferries staff is exactly the sort of thing that we won't tolerate in Wales. The challenge is whether partners in the UK Government are prepared to follow through, because they appeared, in public, to be outraged when all those workers were unlawfully sacked. There's a challenge now on how they choose to behave, but I'll be very clear that all the devolved levers we have will be used to make sure that people bid against what was said in the prospectus, and we'll then be looking to see how we can hold people to those, including the way that devolved levers and incentives are used.

Thank you for clarifying for Conservative Members that it was the Welsh Labour Government who worked hard to ensure we received parity of seed funding with England of £26 million—not the £8 million previously offered—as well as protection for workers' rights and environmental protections. I say this because these made-in-Wales conditions are the reason I also finally agreed to support the Anglesey free-port bid. I am delighted that there will be a focus on green renewable energy. Coleg Llandrillo Menai are currently working with RWE on training apprentices on wind turbine energy and maintenance, and they are concerned that they will have enough apprentices, so could you help promote this sector? And I've also made suggestions that, should there be 106 or social value contributions arising out of planning, it could be used for protecting the Penrhos nature reserve at Holyhead. Would you also support that?

And finally, Minister, please could you ensure that all representatives in north Wales will be involved, and not just those electioneering, as I've had businesses, public sector and constituents making important representations to me? Thank you.

Yes. On your final point, I'll of course make sure that north Wales Members are engaged. It's been one of the features, actually, that a range of partners from more than one party have been interested in both of the bids, and I want to try to maintain that cross-party support and expectation that the bidders will deliver on what they've promised in terms of the jobs dividend and the quality of work, which goes back to your point—and it's been made by others—about the terms and conditions. It's not just important for Labour Members, but I have deliberately made sure that, in the prospectus, we're clear about the rights of workers and what fair work should look like.

On the possibility of section 106 agreements in the planning process, I'm not the planning Minister now, but I'm not sure that I should give a cast-iron support, but I recognise the point you're making on what can be delivered through the planning process, not just in consenting, but what it means in terms of return for nearby communities to both the north Wales and the Celtic bid as well. I'll certainly continue to promote the sector as an opportunity for apprentices, for new people to come into the workforce. And I'm pleased that we did hold out, as has been recognised. Initially, we were told there'd be £8 million and the Welsh Government would be expected to make up the difference. I was very clear there wouldn't be a free port delivered on the cheap. When we got through that, and we had direct decision maker to decision maker conversations in the UK Government and the Welsh Government, we were able to make progress, and that is what I want to see continue in a pragmatic, constructive way, and I look forward to seeing all Members across north Wales engaged in supporting the next stage in the process.

Can I join colleagues across the Chamber in congratulating the Welsh Government and the UK Government on delivering the two free ports planned for Anglesey and for the Celtic free port, which is situated partially in my region? And I don't need to regurgitate statistics, but it can be genuinely be transformational, not only for Port Talbot, but for the whole south-west Wales region. But, with that economic boost, one of the things I'm hopeful that we'll get to see is an increase in freight travelling across south Wales, and so my mind immediately went back to a visit that Altaf Hussain and I did last year for National Lorry Week with workers in the haulage industry, and they raised two big issues: first of all, they spoke about the lack of adequate truck rest stops along the Welsh portion of the M4 corridor. So, if we're going to see more freight, would the Welsh Government commit to looking at the potential of the improvement in that area?

And, secondly, the other problem they identified was, unfortunately, sitting in traffic in the Brynglas tunnels on the M4, sometimes knocking them over their allotted hours as a result. So, I know the Welsh Government has taken a decision on the relief road—I don't want to go back over that—but has the Welsh Government commissioned any study into the impact that the free port will have on the M4 and the traffic problems that it causes there? Thank you. 

Well, not only do we have a freight strategy that we're developing, but I'd remind the Member again that we need to get through the next stage in the process. We need to understand whether the headline claims made in the bids—and they are good bids that we've been happy to support through the next stage—to see the detail of that, to understand more about the detail before we make plans on assumptions.

So, regardless of the free-port status, I am confident we'll see more investment in developing and delivering marine energy across our long and windy coastline, which is a natural advantage in, not just power generation, but the economy of the future. And we will, of course, want to take account of what that economic development means for our broader infrastructure, and I'm sure that I, and the Deputy Minister for Climate Change, will be more than happy to take account of that in the future.

And finally, Samuel Kurtz. 

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. And, Minister, I was delighted to see on Thursday a very happy and smiling First Minister, and a very happy and smiling Prime Minister up in Holyhead, and yourself smiling alongside the Secretary of State for Wales at Port Talbot yesterday, in celebration of the Celtic free-port bid. And what has been really transformational about this—and I say that—is the cross-party work that's gone on in support of both the bids in north Wales, and the Celtic free port in south-west Wales as well. And although he's not allowed to speak, as he's in the Deputy Presiding Officer's chair, I have to pay testament to Dai Rees for his advocacy in that part of the world, including Stephen Kinnock, Simon Hart, Stephen Crabb, Tom Giffard, Paul Davies as well, who's not here. 

But one of the things in talking about the free-port bid is, now, your assessment of the next part of the process. Given the devolved responsibilities of the Welsh Government, how much of a relationship are you going to have with the two bids now going forward, so that, in delivery of the benefits that these bids have, you're involved with those discussions as to what you need to deliver on within Welsh Government devolved responsibility? Diolch.

Well, there is more of a practical conversation to take place now. So, I'm the lead Minister in this area, but, as I've said earlier, it does take in a range of other ministerial portfolios as well—the climate change Minister and the finance Minister being the most obvious ones, as well as the Minister for north Wales—because the devolved reliefs and powers that we'd be looking to exercise, we've got to understand the design of those around each of the bids. So, there will necessarily be a need for Ministers and our officials to be involved and engaged in that, as well as then planning for the potential outcome of those as well. If you think about the skills we talked about earlier, the questions about infrastructure, what we actually want to deliver is a real jobs dividend for Wales—a real jobs dividend in sustainable jobs that will help us on our path to a net-zero future. 

It should also mean, if we get this right, that there is greater confidence in the steel sector as well. It isn't just Tata in Port Talbot, but, actually, if we're going to find our ability to build some of the floating offshore platforms, I'd much rather it was British steel that goes into those, and if it's going to be British steel, then a significant chunk of British steel production takes place in Wales, and that's what I want to see as well. So, it's part of the reason I mentioned earlier the need to have conversations with the UK Government about a range of these things as well. Finalising an investment package for the future of the steel sector will give more confidence, and I hope that the fact that the free-port bids are going through the next stage will give greater impetus for that decision to be made.

Thank you, Minister.

Item 4 is a statement by the Minister for Health and Social Services: access to primary care services. And I call on the Minister, Eluned Morgan.

Diolch yn fawr, Dirprwy Lywydd. Today, I am pleased to provide an update on our programme for government commitment to delivering better access to doctors, nurses, dentists and other health professionals in primary care services.

At the outset, I think it is important to acknowledge that the demand for primary care services outstrips capacity, which undoubtedly provides a challenge in terms of delivering on our commitment to improving access to health professionals, particularly when our budgets are so stretched as a result of long-term austerity and inflationary pressures.

The backlog created by the COVID-19 pandemic continues to impact on waiting times. But, despite this, we all know that the numbers of people in Wales supported by our health and care professionals on a weekly basis is staggering. They are dedicated to providing the best quality of care to all who require it, prioritising on the basis of clinical need where necessary. But we know there's a need to do more.

Our primary care model for Wales is about people accessing the right care, from the right professional for their specific needs, as close to home as possible. Primary care services are integrating, bringing together GPs, nurses, pharmacists, allied health professionals, dentists, optometrists, and other local services, co-ordinating access and effectively using everyone’s expertise and time.

Whilst working together to deliver services, we also want front-line health professionals to collaborate through the primary care clusters to help plan services that better meet the specific needs of their communities. To strengthen their voices, professional collaboratives have been established over recent months for GPs, nurses, pharmacists, optometrists and allied health professionals, and dental professional collaboratives are next. This transformation is underpinned by a programme of contract reform, which provides the legislative platform to accelerate patient access to primary care health professionals. This aligns to 'A Healthier Wales', and is founded on the key principles of prudent healthcare.

In Wales, we promote a digital-first approach, and I am confident that we will be making significant strides in this area in the next few months and years. Patients can get a range of advice and information from the NHS 111 Wales website, including access to 76 symptom checkers. During January, there were 423,600 visits to the NHS 111 Wales website, with 18,600 completed symptom checkers. And I am particularly pleased that the 111 service is now being extended to mental health support, with the latest 111, press 2 service having been switched on in Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board last week.

Where patients need to contact their GP practice, there are initiatives in place to ensure consistency of access across Wales. But we know many people still find it difficult to make a timely appointment to see a GP. That is why our access commitment, introduced in April last year, requires practices to adopt a planned approach to meeting patient need, moving away from the release of all appointments at 8 a.m.. We want to see this way of working become a future contractual requirement for GPs, and I am pleased to say that our initial phase of access standards will be contractually mandated from next week.

With respect to dentistry, we want to reach a position where everyone in Wales who wants access to NHS dental care can get it, but this is not going to happen overnight. On the whole, dentists are independent providers. We are promoting a new way of working, and it takes time to train the relevant workforce. We are working with health boards, who have the responsibility for the provision of NHS dental services, to address gaps in service provision through their operational plans. The overwhelming majority of dental practices are now working under the principles of dental reform, focusing on prevention and needs-based treatment. This is creating capacity for more patients to access NHS dental provision. During this financial year, over 155,000 patients who have historically struggled to get an appointment have now received treatment. From 1 April last year, £2 million of additional recurrent funding was made available to improve access to NHS dentistry across Wales. Health boards are investing this funding in NHS dental services to address local needs.

As part of the reformed contract for our community pharmacies in Wales, since April last year, pharmacists have been able to prescribe and supply medicines for an extended range of conditions, providing increased access to services for the public, and relieving pressure on GP and other NHS services. Pharmacists can now provide treatment for common minor ailments, they can give access to repeat medicines in an emergency, they can provide annual flu vaccinations, emergency contraception, and some forms of regular contraception. And these services are available in 99 per cent of pharmacies across Wales, and they're all provided free at the point of need.

In optometry, we are already expanding clinically focused provision in primary care. That's being done by moving the delivery of some eye-care services from hospitals to the community, where there is a skilled workforce with the capacity to meet increasing demand. Before some aspects of the reform can come into force, some changes will need to be made to regulations, and, of course, we will be consulting on those proposals. In the meantime, the roll-out of services, utilising optometrists with higher qualifications, such as independent prescribing, glaucoma and medical retina, is under way, using existing legislative directions. We recognise that these service pathways will have the greatest impact in terms of supporting specialist hospital eye-care services.

We are also making good progress in terms of providing direct access for patients to audiology pathways without referral by a GP or another health or social care professional. To facilitate this change, we are engaging more with the third sector and community heath councils, establishing capacity in audiology services via robust workforce planning.

Access to allied health professionals in primary care is also a priority, and this continues to be progressed through the strategic programme for primary care. In January, I announced an additional £5 million to increase the number of allied health professionals and to improve access to community-based rehabilitation to help people remain active and independent.

The commitment in the programme for government to invest in a new generation of integrated health and social care hubs will play an important role in helping to build community capacity. Through our new capital investment fund, we are beginning to see proposals come to fruition, including the newly completed Rhiwbina well-being hub, which will provide people with easy and seamless access to a wider range of health, care and well-being services closer to their homes.

There has been further investment for community nursing, namely just under £3 million since 2021. This is to take forward the learning from the neighbourhood district nursing pilot schemes. Supporting this, the electronic scheduling system enables district nursing teams to ensure that their service can provide patients with access to the right nurse with the right skills every visit. 

Across all of these services, ensuring equity of access is vital. This Government recognises the need for a specific focus on access to services by vulnerable groups, including those who are classified as frail.

We have recently commissioned a piece of independent research to gain insight from the public in Wales around accessing primary care services and what good access means to them. The views of the public are extremely important as we work to progress policy that supports their primary care needs. 

Lastly, I would like to acknowledge my thanks to the professionals working in primary care. Without their dedication and flexibility, the services that I have highlighted could not be delivered and transformed for the well-being of people across Wales. Thank you.

Can I thank the Minister for the advance copy of the statement on what is a really important topic, because we see a lot of anecdotal evidence that shows the difficulty in accessing primary care services, and how that drives pressure, of course, on emergency care with lots of people then turning to A&E? Indeed, that was one of the reasons why I brought forward the Welsh Conservatives' GP access plan.

One of the components of that was to upgrade and modernise GP phone systems—that often, I would suggest, don't work for many patients—helping to alleviate long waits when contacting a surgery. I've lost count of the times when I've had correspondence from constituents with regard to the out-of-date methods of trying to make an appointment. We've got that well-known 8 a.m. rush, for example. So, how are you going to support surgeries into the modern world in that regard, Minister? One of these ways could be through an NHS Wales app, so that patients in Wales, like those in England already, could access health records, order prescriptions, contact health professionals and, yes, of course, manage appointments as well. Where are we with this, which I would suggest is vital technology? Perhaps you can give an update in that regard. 

Again, on the plan that I've previously brought forward myself, Minister, have you given any consideration to the suggestion around cutting red tape for GPs so that they can see more patients, by allowing a greater range of professionals to be able to provide medical evidence and certificates, such as fit notes and DVLA checks? If others could do that, it would really free up GPs' time. And what about the improvements in transparency and accountability by increasing the oversight of practices and making health boards collect information on patients? That could certainly be done in a non-burdensome way, using IT, I would suggest. And of course, it's really frustrating for politicians like me, whose job it is to scrutinise the Government, to find that information is just not being collected on matters that are really important to the Welsh people and helping us to make policy judgments. 

Before I move away from GPs, it would be good to know, Minister, if you are happy with the Chancellor's decision to abolish the tax-free lifetime pension allowance, because it addressed in my view one of the driving factors pushing GPs to retire early. This was welcomed, I noticed, by the British Medical Association, who reported the very next day that doctors were already cancelling their retirements to further contribute to the NHS. But I did notice a bit in The Times that reported a dash to retire before Labour reverses this, despite Wes Streeting actually calling for this back in September. So, it would be good to know the Minister's and the Welsh Government's position in this regard, especially in the context that Welsh communities have lost 20 per cent of their GP practices in the last 10 years. 

On e-prescribing, an update on that would be appreciated. Again, in England and Scotland, we've seen that happen there since 2005 and 2009 respectively. Can we have an update on progress in that regard?

I wonder if the Minister also shares my concern that one of the challenges we need to overcome in Wales is the lack of knowledge about different primary care services—an absence of knowledge about what pharmacies and minor injury units can do. And on that note, what is the guidance to A&E units about referring people who are clearly in need of one of these services rather than emergency care in a timely manner? Basically, what I'm saying is that, if somebody turns up, perhaps, at A&E in the Heath hospital with a sprained ankle, they shouldn't be left to go through the system, taking up time and resources; I would suggest they should be then sent away to the more appropriate department straight away. I was just wondering if the Minister shares that view. 

Dentists you've mentioned, Minister. I know in the recent update you provided in that regard you talked about a meeting with the British Dental Association in the next couple of weeks, at the time. Have you had that meeting? Can you update us on what followed that meeting, if it has taken place? 

And finally, you ended your statement by referring to commissioning independent research around accessing primary care services. That's very good, and I very much welcome that. You mentioned that the views of the public are really extremely important, and I agree with that as well. Can you give us any details on the timeline of that work and how can the public engage?

Diolch yn fawr. You'll know that, in relation to access to GPs, we've done a huge amount of work on that over the past few years. In fact, we had some access standards set out, and I'm pleased to say that 89 per cent of GP surgeries are already achieving the access standards that we set out. Those access standards include a commitment to make sure that what is offered by GP surgeries, for example, is a blended model of different ways of accessing. It may be that there'll be an opportunity for an urgent on-the-day booking, there'll be prebookable appointments, there'll be telephone consultations available, there'll be digital contact available. The whole point is that there's a broader way of accessing GP surgeries, and that face-to-face contact would depend on the clinical judgment of the GP. Up until now, that has been effectively a voluntary approach, but in three days' time that will become a requirement. I'm hoping that, for those laggards who have not got rid of the 8 a.m. bottleneck, for example, we will see some shift in those from 1 April.

When it comes to the NHS Wales app, it's been very carefully tested. It's live, but for a small group of people, already. What we didn't want to do is to see what they did in England, which was to launch the app and watch all of the GP surgeries just switch it off, so actually your ability to use it was quite restrained. We're taking it very, very carefully, but I'll have some news on that imminently.

In terms of improvements and transparency and making sure that the voice of the patient is heard, of course there is access now to the community health councils. That is the voice of the patient, and of course, that, from 1 April, will be turning to the new patient voice facility, Llais, so hopefully people will know that they can access that as a way of letting the NHS know if they're dissatisfied with the service.

When it comes to the abolition of pension allowance for doctors, we actually lobbied for this. I was very clear that we had to do something to try and stem the flow of doctors retiring early, so we're pleased to see that. Whether it needed to be extended to everybody in that particular tax bracket, I'm not sure about that, but certainly we've welcomed it in relation to the NHS.

We've got more GPs than ever. When it comes to e-prescribing, you will see some changes on that this summer, at the GP level. And of course there are different ways, as you say, of accessing primary care services. One of the things you will have seen, and you will have seen it because you'll have been living in a cave if you haven't seen it, is the 'Help Us to Help You' campaign, which tries to direct people to the right facility for them. And obviously there's also the 111 service that directs people. Very few of the people who phone 111 are directed to accident and emergency.

I did have a meeting with the British Dental Association. There are clearly a number of issues that we still need to iron out with them. We do need to make sure that we perhaps give a much clearer picture of what's coming their way and that we discuss that with them earlier in the process. I have asked the head of dentistry for Welsh Government to continue with that discussion and I've asked for a follow-up, just to see how far we get on that in the next week.

May I thank the Minister for her statement? Perhaps the most significant thing is the fact that a piece of research has been commissioned by the Minister recently to try and better understand what people's experiences are in accessing primary care services, and what does good access mean to them. It's very important, I think, that we should understand this, because so often the patient experience as it's reported to me and many of us, I'm sure, as Members of this Senedd, is very different to what we're told officially.

For example, constituents will often ask me, 'Why don't GPs see people face to face?' Well, of course, GPs do see patients face to face, and indeed GPs continued to see people face to face throughout the COVID period, but there is this perception that it's more difficult to access a face-to-face appointment now. Therefore, I'd like to hear from the Minister about the work that's being done in order to provide clarity to people on the kinds of services that they can expect face to face within their surgeries, so that they do have a realistic idea of what exactly the expected standards from Government are at the moment.

I agree entirely with what the Government is trying to do in terms of talking about primary care in its broadest definition. People still talk about 'going to see the doctor', but very often they are accessing a health service, and that's why it is so important that people understand all of the services available through pharmacies and so on. I'd like to hear from the Minister about the kind of investment that the Government is making or considering in order to tackle that educational challenge, which clearly needs to be overcome, because it's only if people understand the different ways that they can access health services will they start to take advantage of those services available in alternative ways and more sustainable ways.

One other concern that I have, in turning to the dentistry element of the Minister's statement, is that the Government, whilst admitting there are challenges, is trying to give the impression that services, generally speaking, are in a good place in dentistry at the moment. Having spoken to dentists and many dental patients, I don't feel that that is a realistic reflection. I truly believe that there is a crisis in dentistry in Wales at the moment. We've touched upon that here in the Senedd Chamber a number of times in recent weeks and indeed in recent years. I would ask for a change of tone from Government in discussing dentistry. The First Minister once again during First Minister's questions today emphasised the million people who've had access to dental services over the past year. Of course, there are positive statistics that can be referenced to, but unless we realise that we are in a period of crisis, then I fear that that urgency in the Government response won't be there.

And finally, following the Minister's reference to the community health councils in her response to the Conservative spokesperson, I have one specific question on the North Wales Community Health Council. We know that we are in a very challenging period in terms of health and care provision across north Wales. Betsi Cadwaladr health board has been put back in special measures. I would argue that it's more important than ever that we have a community health council that truly understands that community and can respond swiftly, for example making no-notice visits and so on. So, isn't there a strong argument for enabling the North Wales Community Health Council to continue for the time being whilst we are still facing these challenges in Betsi Cadwaladr?

Thank you very much. I think it's important for us to consider what access means to people and what their direct experiences are, so thanks for recognising that that research is ongoing. I think that perhaps we do need to help people to understand that what has happened historically in terms of having access to GPs isn't necessarily the way that things will work in the future, partly because it's not good use of our GPs. That's why we have to divert people to people who are going to treat them with more expertise in one area or another that is more appropriate for them. That is a change, and I do understand that is a difficult one for people to understand, but I do think that that's the change that we need to see.

What we hope to see is more co-ordination on a cluster level, so the GPs and so forth will work with the allied health professionals and others who work in that area, and with pharmacies and so forth, and they will start to collaborate much better than they have in the past. That is working well in some places, but evidently we have to go further.

Regarding access, I think it's interesting because, very often, we hear a lot of noise about people who don't get good treatment, but a lot of people come up to me and tell me how much they like the e-consult model, which is working very well for many people, particularly those who are in employment. They don't have time to go and see GP and they like having that access. So, things are working better for some people than others, and I think we have to acknowledge that.

We have spent millions on trying to get people to understand that there are other ways of obtaining access to treatment. That's why the 'Help Us to Help You' campaign is to be seen everywhere. It's been very visible. It's difficult to escape from it. I think that that has worked well, and it does provide information to people that pharmacies are available, that 111 is available, that urgent primary care centres are available and that there are lots of other places that you can go to instead of the GP. I think that that has started to work well, but we need to just keep on reminding people. Once people understand that for the first time, they will hopefully pursue those options in the future.

In terms of dentistry, I do acknowledge that there is room for improvement, but I do think that things are improving. So, we have a long way to go, but we are on the right track, and I think that that's important. But, what's clear is that we can't just turn things around overnight; these things take time in terms of training people. That's why I think it's difficult, particularly when we're trying to change systems. What we want to do is to use more people such as dental therapists, and that's why we're opening up a greater number of centres in places such as north Wales. 

In terms of the CHCs and the new group, Llais, I do think that it is important that the voice of NHS users is heard clearly. There's been a lot of preparation in terms of moving from the CHCs to Llais, so there is a lot of preparation to do. The majority of the people who worked for the CHCs, they will be TUPE-ed over, so they'll be the same people, but the system is going to be slightly different. So, I do acknowledge that it's important that people do understand that the system is going to change and that there will be a campaign that people do understand that this new system will be in place.

I very much welcome the statement today. The access commitment introduced in April last year, requiring a GP practice to adopt a planned approach to meeting patient need, moving away from the, 'Release all appointments at 8 a.m., and if you happen to be eighty-first, and they're only taking 80 appointments, then tough, no matter what was wrong with you'—. But how is this being implemented? What is the role of the health board in ensuring that it is implemented?

Last week, I raised a problem that a constituent had had in getting access to primary care. To quote, 'We have called Llansamlet doctors for an appointment for my grandfather every day, twice a day, since 27 February, for an appointment due to a chest infection as he has chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. On 10 March, he accessed a GP, and immediately was sent to hospital'. Does the Minister agree that, until we get primary care working well at all surgeries, hospital admissions will go up? Also, will the Minister join with me in congratulating GP surgeries such as Clydach in the Cwmtawe cluster in Swansea that provide excellent service to all their patients?

On dentistry, after Brexit, we lost in Swansea European Union dentists. Was that true for the rest of Wales?

Thanks very much, Mike. You're absolutely right; there are some GP practices that are performing much, much better than others when it comes to access. One of the things I've asked my officials to do now is to start getting a lot more granular in terms of where we are hearing the complaints over and over and over again. Because some are performing really well, and as I say, 89 per cent of them are honouring the access commitment now, but that means we've got to chase down the rest of them. But, from April, as I say, it won't be a voluntary approach; it will be a part of their contractual obligations. So, it will be much easier then to push people to deliver on what we're expecting of them.

You're quite right in terms of EU dentists. Certainly, we saw a lot of them returning after Brexit, and it's left a hole. It's left a hole; it's another legacy of Brexit. And, again, that doesn't help when it comes to trying to get people to fill up these spaces. They just don't exist; you can't switch on a dentist overnight, and the ones we had, a lot of them have gone home. I can't be responsible for that. I can be responsible for a lot of things, but that bit, I can't be responsible for it, and it's going to take a while to train up the next generation.

The performance of primary care is obviously a really complex issue, because if you're serving a deprived population, it is likely that the demand on your services is going to be much greater than in an area where people can afford to simply go to the pharmacist and buy whatever it is they need. So, I think—. I appreciate that the 8 o'clock in the morning call is incredibly stressful for very vulnerable people, particularly those who find it difficult to use their mobile phones. But I did see some really excellent practice in one of my health centres, where the senior receptionist committed to ring the patient at 8 o'clock in the morning, knowing that they needed to be prioritised for some of the limited available spaces. We cannot expect GPs to run on a treadmill even harder—that is the path to burnout. So, it definitely needs human beings to be involved to prioritise urgent need over the worried well. But I think excellent work is obviously being done, Minister, and the better use of pharmacists and optometrists on the high street. And the 111 service—wasn't it great that we didn't rush into trying to replicate what they were doing England?

Jenny, you need to ask your question now, please.

So, my two questions are really around community nursing. I see that you're committing about £3 million to it, and the electronic scheduling system is very powerful in saving senior team leaders' time. But do we not need multidisciplinary teams involved in community nursing, because we can't get all the district nurses we need, therefore we've got to do things differently? So, that is my main question. Thank you.

Thanks very much, and you're quite right, and I'm going to just pay tribute to the receptionists who very often have a really tough time from the public. And, actually, I do hope that the public will be respectful to receptionists who have a very difficult job, especially when you consider that, in December, there were 400,000 contacts in one week, I think it was, to GP practices. So, this is a huge, huge amount of contacts being made to GPs.

But just in relation to pharmacists, well, we're well ahead of what's happening elsewhere in the rest of the UK when it comes to pharmacies, and, of course, we've got that community pharmacy contract. And what's great is that now, we have 704 pharmacies providing treatment for common ailments, emergency contraception and other issues. The key thing for us to understand is that we're now taking that even further. So, we're trying to get them to prescribe on top. Because these people are highly, highly skilled, and it's now about using their skills to take some of that pressure off GPs. So, by the end of this year, we're expecting one in three pharmacies in Wales to be able to deliver that prescribing service, so I think that's pretty good news. The 111 service has been exceptionally successful and hopefully, now, people will understand that the 111 'press 2' service for mental health is also available.

Just in terms of community nursing—and thank you, again, for championing this, because I know you're a real champion when it comes to this—you're quite right, what we need is multidisciplinary teams, and the No. 1 priority I have given to health boards this year is to say, 'You've got to move more resources from secondary, effectively, into primary care, into our communities'. We have to be working together, with local authorities, building those multidisciplinary teams around the patient and making sure that they're working with allied health professionals. So, I think we're going to see quite an acceleration in that space in the next few months.

Finally, Vikki Howells.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd, and thank you, Minister, for your statement. It's so important that people can access primary healthcare in a timely fashion. So, I'd welcome a little more information about the access requirements for general practice as this transitions to a mandatory basis. From speaking to GPs in my constituency, I'm told that those early morning triage systems allow them to build in far more appointments in the space of a day than would otherwise be the case, but also, of course, I deal with many enquiries from constituents who are frustrated by the so-called 8 a.m. logjam and wish to be able to forward book many more services, such as routine check-ups and blood tests. So, what ratio—what sort of ratio of appointments—would you expect to be held back by GP practices? And how would you see this working in practice?

And finally, as I’ve mentioned previously in the Chamber, I’m really looking forward to the roll-out of 111 'press 2' across Wales, which could also relieve pressure on primary care. What lessons has Welsh Government taken so far from the initial introduction of the service?

Thanks very much. Well, just to note some of the access requirements, some of the things that we’re expecting them to do are to move away from that one approach that’s been there in the past, which is the face-to-face approach. So, we’re looking at blended models. We are looking to make sure that they are able to offer urgent, on-the-day appointments, and that they should also be giving pre-bookable appointments, so, things that, when you phone, you can book an appointment for the future. So, these are some of the things that we are expecting them to do, although not necessarily on the same day.

Telephone consultation is another approach that we’re obviously encouraging and expecting to happen. That is, obviously, something that happens a lot now. There’s not much use being made—although we spent quite a lot of resources on it during the pandemic—of the video consultation that is available to GPs; they seem to still be more comfortable with the telephone approach. But also, that digital contact, the e-consult, is not available everywhere at the moment. I would hope to see that being rolled out as well, including, also, perhaps three releases a day, so it’s not just all of the appointments being given at 8 o’clock in the morning, but actually you’ve got to stagger them throughout the day.

And then, just on 111 'press 2', it’s still very much early days on this. It has been successful, but the key thing for us—one of the key things for us—is to make sure that we can provide that service over 24 hours. Because what we want to do is to make sure that people understand that it’s available, and to take the pressure, again, off people turning up to accident and emergency services. So, intervention early when it comes to mental health is absolutely key, and not letting those issues mount up, which is why I’m hoping that that service will be successful. As I say, it has been rolled out in many places already.

Thank you, Minister. 

Item 5 is withdrawn.

So, we'll move on to item 6, a statement by the Minister for Education and Welsh Language on tackling the impact of poverty on attainment. I call on the Minister, Jeremy Miles. 

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. Twelve months ago, I set out a series of actions to set us on the path to address the impact of poverty on educational attainment. Attainment gaps between children and young people impacted by poverty and their peers in primary schools and at key stage 3 have reduced over time. The progress at GCSE level has been less consistent and the impact of the pandemic is likely to have worsened the gaps. But there are no silver bullets. We cannot address this issue with one initiative or a reform in one part of the system; it requires a whole-system approach.

Last week, I updated the Senedd on our new road map for education, 'High Standards and Aspirations for All', which sets out the collective action we are taking in education. Every action must be examined thoroughly through the lens of tackling the impact of poverty on educational outcomes. Today, I will update Members on the actions that I set out 12 months ago, which are now captured in our road map.

The most important factor in terms of tackling the impact of poverty on attainment in schools is ensuring high-quality teaching and learning. We have taken action across the system to ensure a focus on this issue, drawing on international evidence of what works. Understanding the impact of poverty already forms part of initial teacher training and we will strengthen this focus. From September, the national Masters in education qualification for serving teachers includes a module focused on reducing the impact of poverty, and new resources were recently provided to teachers and teaching assistants.

The National Academy for Educational Leadership Wales and Estyn have both been tasked to support this mission. Estyn has increased its focus on what providers are doing to reduce the impact of poverty and has published new supplementary inspection guidance. The national academy has a role in ensuring that leadership across Wales recognises and addresses the impacts of poverty.

In January, with the help of the national academy, I appointed seven exceptional headteachers to be attainment champions. They are working with partner schools across Wales to share their experience of successfully tackling the impact of poverty within schools. I have met with them twice, most recently on 9 March, to draw on their insights, which will inform our own policy development.

Dirprwy Lywydd, there is always more to learn. Over the last 12 months, we've looked across the UK and internationally to inform policy, drawing on the expertise of organisations like the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and the Education Endowment Foundation. As I set out last year, we know from research and inspection evidence that schools that couple effective learning and teaching with a focus on family engagement are most effective in overcoming the impact of poverty on educational attainment.

Earlier this month, I announced additional capital funding for community-focused schools to improve the accessibility and community use of schools. We will invest £40 million in the next two years, building on the £20 million made available in 2022-23. We'll continue to provide support for community-focused school managers. I've also announced an increase in funding for family engagement officers from £3.84 million to £6.5 million over the next financial year. By working with families, these roles are having an impact in helping address the barriers learners face, such as poor attendance, attainment or mental health and well-being issues. We've developed and updated our guidance on community-focused schools and we are working closely with our education partners to finalise revised attendance and engagement guidance.

I'm committed to the pupil development grant, which provides around £130 million a year of additional support to schools. We've prepared revised guidance, informed by the work of the Education Endowment Foundation and Estyn, to support schools to better target this funding on what works and improve monitoring and evaluation of impact. This will be published in the summer term.

I recognise the difficulties recruiting teachers into more challenging areas. The Education Policy Institute are undertaking a rapid review of the international evidence in this area and will report to me over the summer. I'm committed to maintaining the £13.6 million support for our school essentials grant. This will continue to ensure learners do not go without uniforms or school equipment and can participate fully in education.

The University of Wales Trinity Saint David will report over the summer on some initial scoping research to understand the use and impact of mixed-attainment teaching in Wales so we can ensure learners facing poverty are not held back in their progression and aspirations.

We've expanded our whole-school approaches, including a toolkit to support schools and settings to develop and embed their own whole-school approach to achieving high standards of oracy and reading. Our whole-school approach to emotional and mental well-being and access to free school meals in primary schools are particularly important for those facing the impacts of poverty.

I want to provide more opportunities for children and young people from lower socioeconomic backgrounds for wider enrichment. We continue to invest in support to access the national music service, language and science, technology, engineering and mathematics tutors, and the expressive arts. Our school holiday enrichment programme provides £4.85 million of investment for fun and educational activities over the summer holidays, targeted at areas most affected by poverty.

Equity must continue through to tertiary education. The core duties we've set out for the commission for tertiary education and research include promoting equality and widening participation for those from lower socioeconomic backgrounds.

Finally, Dirprwy Lywydd, I want to look ahead to the next 12 months and beyond. To build on the foundations we've now put in place, I want to highlight three priorities. Firstly, we must keep learning from others. We will build on our UK and international networks to identify and share best practice on what works from across the globe. We'll keep developing our relationships with the OECD and EEF, as well as forge new relationships, such as a memorandum of understanding with Flanders.

Secondly, we'll move from research to policy development in priority areas. This includes developing a policy for incentivising teachers into challenging areas, and better understanding of the impact of mixed-attainment teaching in Wales.

Thirdly, we'll need to be able to identify where additional support is needed and to target it effectively, tracking our progress throughout. I published detailed information on our next steps for an information ecosystem in January.

I will close by repeating my commitment of last year: every single child in Wales deserves high standards and aspirations. I set out a road map to achieve this last week, and, today, I have provided an update on some specific actions to tackle the impact of poverty. We will not make a choice between equity and excellence in our school—we must deliver both.

Thank you, Minister. As you know, the disadvantage gap in Wales is far worse than in England, with the worst disadvantage gap in England still ranking higher than much of Wales. So, the question has to be asked: why, after two decades, are you only just thinking of this now? What quick wins are you hoping to achieve with these champions, as well as a long-term plan to turn around these embarrassing gaps in attainment between the poor in Wales and the more affluent?

The Joseph Rowntree Foundation has highlighted over the years that the educational performance of children from poorer backgrounds compared to their peers from more prosperous backgrounds provides clear evidence of the impact of poverty on achievement. So, Minister, don't you actually think cutting the pupil development grant, aka support for the poorest students in Wales, flies in the face of the statement you've just read out today and that this will actually harm attainment?

Now, I understand the Welsh Government is commissioning research and pilot activities to address gaps in understanding and develop new approaches, and I know this includes the appointment of the seven attainment champions. However, we're already seeing schools up and down Wales struggle to share best practices on a whole array of issues. You may have set up a new website for sharing such best practice, but, in reality, teachers are saying it's cumbersome and that they're not using it. So, when the new advice from the attainment champions is fed back to schools, how are you going to ensure best practice is shared better than it currently is?

And as you know, ultimately, the best way the Welsh Government can alleviate the impact of poverty on educational attainment is to alleviate poverty in Wales full stop. We need proper investment in Welsh communities, especially rural areas, as well as a more pro-business approach that also incentivises skilled workers to live and remain in Wales. These are all necessary steps to lifting more people in Wales out of relative poverty. This is also a crucial way to cut the attainment gap and increase the life chances of our learners.

My final question: how is your department going to work cross-department to ensure this happens? What plans do you have in place to ensure that Wales has a multipronged approach to educational attainment? Diolch.

I thank the Member for her observations and the questions that she has asked. She makes an important point, I think, about the ability of schools on their own to address the full impact of poverty on educational attainment. Schools are in their communities, they're in their society, and there are things that schools can do, and there are things that schools can't do, in terms of addressing that broader range of challenges.

But what the statement I've described today does is—to answer the Member's question, I think—to set out a whole-system approach that starts at early years and extends through school, college, work-based learning, higher education, and, importantly, lifelong learning as well, to bring a whole-system focus on how we tackle the impact of poverty on attainment.

She made the point that PDG, pupil development grant, has been cut. That is factually incorrect; it’s been increased both in cash terms and in real terms, and that is for the very simple reason that it’s a very effective way of targeting funding at schools to reflect the cohort of pupils living in disadvantage.

She makes an important practical point about how best to spread best practice through the system. I don’t actually recognise the point she made—she mentioned a website; I’m not sure which website she was referring to, but I don’t recognise quite the point that she was making. Although, as it happens, in the discussions that I had most recently with the attainment champions that I’ve appointed, one of the issues we were exploring is how we can make sure that heads in schools right across Wales who want rapid access to good case studies of what has been effective in other schools—how we best make sure that is easily accessed and made quick use of. So, there is definitely work that we will want to do, together with our attainment champions and also the National Academy for Educational Leadership, in that space. But she asked me what measures we are going to take; I had taken, I think, about 10 minutes to spell out the wide range of measures that we are taking, so I think I can do no better than refer her to my statement.

Thank you, Minister, for this afternoon’s a statement. Clearly, this does follow a discussion that we had last week on this issue, where we were emphasising how crucial it is that we do look to ensure that there is equality of opportunity for everyone, wherever they are in Wales and whatever their background, and we know that that isn’t currently the case, and there are a number of steps here that can certainly be welcomed. We also know, of course, in terms of all of the evidence, that, in pupil absence, there is a clear link between poverty and absence, and one of the things I warmly welcome is the ongoing funding with the engagement officers to work with families. I would like to ask—. I see that there has been an increase in that regard—I just wanted to know how you will monitor the effectiveness and efficiency of those programmes. Certainly, the response from schools has been positive, in terms of those that I visited, where this has been enabled, and I think this will be warmly welcomed by them.

If I may just focus on the £40 million investment that you mentioned in terms of the community-focused schools to improve the accessibility and community use of schools, obviously, that investment is welcome, but I’m still not clear how exactly they are going to help in terms of attainment, especially when we look at the connection between school absences and attainment, because, obviously, if we can’t even get our children and young people to school, then, obviously, they’re not going to be able to take advantage of any additional facilities there, and this seems to be a fundamental point.

I don’t see, in terms of your announcement today, for instance, who exactly will benefit from that investment, because there’s no mention in terms of transport costs, something that we’ve discussed many a time now as being a barrier, something that came through with the children and young people committee's inquiry into school absences. I’m still not very clear, in terms of that capital investment, how that’s going to help tackle the problem that we have now, and I wonder if any of this funding or funding being made available to the family engagement officers will be towards transportation at all.

Another issue I’d just like to mention is that, obviously, we know poverty affects every aspect of a child’s life and, in school, it can lock children out of opportunities to participate, learn and thrive, and research shows that children and young people from less affluent homes are more likely to report higher levels of loneliness, lower life satisfaction and no enjoyment in going to school. So, we know that transport can be a barrier for some, but, for some, school is not a good place to be. Worryingly, the social exclusion felt by low-income learners is frequently heightened by other forms of inequality, with lower income children from Gypsy, Roma and Traveller and black groups more likely to say that they are lonely and unhappy at school compared to white Welsh or British children of a similar socioeconomic status. Will the Minister therefore provide an update on the Welsh Government's plan to target these groups who greatly feel social exclusion, and perhaps explain how this increase in funding or investment will support them?

Certainly, as I said at the beginning, we very much support any investment that helps to ensure that we lessen that attainment gap that exists presently. Of course, through the co-operation agreement, things like free school meals are absolutely essential, and we very much welcome them. But, in terms of secondary schools, obviously, that falls outside of the co-operation agreement, and therefore we would still ask, where there is opportunity, to look at the expansion of free school meal provision at the secondary age.

We need to work together. We need a system that will transform education. We see the concerning figures from the Bevan Foundation, too, in terms of the differences between boys and girls, and the differences in attainment there. So, can I ask what specific plans do you have to ensure that those kinds of differences are also tackled? We have to ensure equality of opportunity for all and, as I said at the outset, that's not the reality at present. This is to be welcomed, but I think there are still questions in terms of how we can secure the best for everyone. Thanks.

Well, the Member made an important point about what are the biggest challenges, and I think possibly the biggest challenge that schools face is making sure that young people are in school. There are obviously very high levels of absence, which many, many schools are reporting. And the Member asked an important question about what the investment into community-focused schools and the family engagement officers that I announced recently will do in relation to that. I should say, as I mentioned in my statement, on the question of absence and engagement more broadly, we are reviewing the guidance available to schools on some of the strategies that schools may adopt. And one of the key issues relates to the threshold for additional intervention—the 'persistent absence' definition. I think there's a very strong case for reviewing that to make sure that more support is more quickly available to families than is often currently the case. And the funding for family engagement officers and education welfare officers as well helps to provide additional capacity in the system.

She asked me whether I'm persuaded that that money is well spent, effectively. I don't think there'll be a Member in the Chamber who will not have visited a school with a family engagement capacity who doesn't immediately see the benefits of that. It's often a 24/7 job, actually, and often involves work on the weekends and certainly in the evenings, as well as the necessary work during the school day of connecting with the family and visiting the family, and so on. It's a very important role, I think, in schools that have a need for it. And I hope that the funding that we have made available will be able to contribute further to that. 

On the question about the funding and how that relates to absence and attendance, I can probably do no better than refer her to a report today on WalesOnline, which describes the £46 million that we've invested as part of an attendance strategy, and it records a discussion that I had yesterday at a school in Cardiff, which is doing extraordinary work in terms of partnership with other organisations, including the local council but also the university and sports teams and so on. What they were telling me at the school yesterday was that it helps the young people relate to school differently. So, many of the young people—who were interviewed for this piece, by the way, as well—were telling the journalist that they felt 100 per cent more committed to school by virtue of also being able to do these additional activities as part of being a community-focused school.

We were also hearing about parents coming in to help volunteer to support some of those activities who themselves were benefiting in terms of developing their skills. But, perhaps—I felt at least—more importantly, it was reshaping the relationship of parents to school and rebuilding that relationship of trust, which is really an important part of the challenge for getting young people back into school. So, I encourage her to look at that, because I think it's just a very live example of the sort of thing that we are hoping to achieve here.

There's more detail available in the guidance that we published. There are two iterations of guidance, which we published at the end of last year, which really spell out what the community-focused schools programme is all about, how it can help with attendance and attainment. What I would say, though, is that the key thing is it will be different for each school, and the whole point is: what is the relationship between this particular school and this particular community? And that will be very different in different places, obviously.

The whole-system approach, I agree, is a really important one when we're trying to tackle the impact of poverty on attainment. Hungry kids don't learn very well, and we know from Gordon Brown that 4 million children across the UK are going hungry. But there is also a cultural issue in that six in 10 people never cook from scratch, so this goes well beyond people who are struggling with the cost-of-living crisis.

I noticed that your nearly £5 million investment in the school holiday enrichment programme, and I wondered what consideration you've given to teaching young people and their families to cook during those summer holiday programmes, because there obviously isn't time during the school day, but that seems to me a really effective way of combatting the dominance of the processed food culture that is going to bankrupt the NHS.

Otherwise, I'm intrigued to hear what these exceptional headteachers you've designated as attainment champions—. What are their words of wisdom that they shared with you, most recently on 9 March, on how to tackle the really complex issues around poverty and attainment?

I think the Member is absolutely right to mention the importance of food as part of the summer food and fun programme—it's sometimes called 'food and fun', in some parts of Wales. I share with her her passion for making sure that schools teach young people about the whole range of purposes of food, so nutrition, obviously, but eating together. You could also teach large parts of the curriculum through food, and I most recently had an opportunity of visiting a school in the constituency of the Member for Wrexham, my friend Lesley Griffiths, and saw there young people being taught to cook things and taking recipes home, so that they could cook them again at home, and I just thought that was a very powerful example of the sort of thing that the Member is talking about. We are working—. Julie Morgan and I are working at the moment on aligning the various programmes that the Government funds over the summer holiday, to make sure that we obviously ensure as much coverage as possible, but also to look at making sure that the kinds of opportunities that the Member is referring to are more widely available. She will know that nutrition is already an important part of that summer holiday provision, and that often takes the form of cooking with young people, but what can we do to make sure that's a more universal experience?

On the second question, 'What are we hearing from attainment champions?', they have two roles. One is to work with particular schools. It's currently still a pilot programme, a six-month pilot programme, working with particular schools on particular approaches based on their own experiences. But the question she's asking is on the other part of their role, which is: how are they informing system-wide development and policy development? There are some pretty clear themes, I think, about the importance and strategies for developing pupil voice, which evidence suggests is particularly important in the context of re-engaging some young people who might find it more challenging. But also we heard about the importance of mixed-attainment teaching and good usage of the PDG. That's why increasing that, as I mentioned to Janet Finch-Saunders, is so important.

I mentioned, essentially, how at the very heart of this is high-quality teaching and learning, but what are the strategies that enable that to reach children and young people who might need a different kind of approach? Links with parents, links with carers, and also the importance of leadership at a school level in relation to this. I spoke to them and was teasing out what it is that distinguishes schools that have been successful in this and those that maybe have had a little bit more of a challenge. One of them said to me, 'Well, some heads who had really committed to this have lost the sense that they might be able to do anything meaningful about it,' if you like, because it's such a big challenge. There isn't an absence of commitment. There is not a single head in Wales who isn't completely committed to this, but sometimes it's a challenge to see how you can make that difference, and that's why this is so important, because we can share that best practice across the system and make sure that heads have ready access to things that are working well elsewhere, so all those strategies can be brought into play.

I very much welcome the new funding and focus on community-focused schools, Minister, which I know we've discussed before. I have some good examples, I think, in my area, including Maindee Primary School, which is multicultural and is doing some really good work, and tells me that they have to invest heavily in staff to support parents and families with wider issues, such as food, housing, medical issues, benefits and other wider non-education issues. So, it's great, I think, that a school like that will benefit from this new focus and funding.

The new Monmouthshire County Council administration is taking forward some interesting initiatives. They have a new service tackling the impact of disadvantage at its heart, and they've brought together a range of professionals, from educational psychology, pupil referral, family support, and created a new post within the team to provide leadership. And in addition to that, Minister, they've got some really good initiatives linking with the third sector, providing grants to support learning experiences for pupils, such as providing tents to enable schools to provide camping experiences, and are also looking to provide breakfast-club funding for secondary school pupils. So, with all that going on in my area, Minister, I very much welcome that new focus and that new funding.

I thank John Griffiths, and I know of his commitment to the principle of community-focused schools, not least because of the successes in his particular area of many schools in achieving that, and I think he just highlights two important themes in what he has just said. Firstly, that role of school staff connecting with families around a range of issues, which might not be directly around the education of their children, but cements that relationship of trust between the school and families. And the second theme, which is so important, is the linking up of different services, whether that's a physical co-location in the school or a network of connections, so that school, but also housing services, children's services, primary healthcare—all those services are part of a seamless offer. Some schools are doing that very well. Many schools want to do more of that, and I think there is much more we can do across the system to make that a more common experience for many of our schools.

Thank you, Minister. I've got two questions today. My first is about initial teacher training. I think it's really important that trainee teachers are allocated a mix of school placements, so that they're able to gain experience in working with pupils from more disadvantaged backgrounds. And this is to build their skills and their expertise, but also, crucially, to build a passion for what is probably one of the most rewarding aspects of teaching. What work are you doing with universities in Wales to ensure that they deliver placements on this basis?

Secondly, I note your comments around ensuring that we tackle the impact of poverty on attainment throughout the year and not just during the school term. From visiting projects in my own constituency, including, for example, in Penywaun, I know what good work the school holiday enrichment programme does, not just for children, but also their families and school staff. So, building on your answer to my colleague Jenny Rathbone, I'd like to say that I appreciate the pressure on budgets, but I'd like to ask if you've given any consideration to whether this provision could be extended, both geographically and in terms of the school year.

I thank Vikki Howells for those two questions. On the first question, one of the aspects of the job, which is a great pleasure actually, is being able to visit the initial teacher education partnerships across Wales, both remotely in the past, but now also in person, and talk to the cohort of students going through the postgraduate certificate in education about their experiences and answering questions from them. I always take the opportunity of those fantastic meetings to highlight just how important I think it is that every single child, whatever their background, is entitled to the full range of care and commitment from every single teacher, and that is a very widely shared principle and passion, I think, amongst teachers qualifying in Wales.

But the question she asks is important: what are we doing structurally to make sure that that is a strong feature of initial teacher education and placement? She will know perhaps from previous discussions that we are currently refreshing the criteria for accreditation of ITE programmes in preparation for the next round of reaccreditation, so this is a timely discussion in that sense, and we are strengthening the requirement for all student teachers to be aware of and have experience of tackling the impact of poverty on attainment and how they can address that through strategies. Obviously, questions around placement are important in that sense. Clearly, that's already an expectation from ITE, but we plan to beef that up in the next round of accreditation.

Secondly, yes, we are making sure we can satisfy ourselves that the funding available for the school holiday provision is being spent as effectively as possible. I fund some of that from my portfolio; Julie Morgan funds related interventions from her portfolio. For this summer coming, we're making sure that both programmes, if you like, speak to each other and can co-ordinate, but in the future we will be looking at whether we can do something more systematic to ensure that there's wider coverage, less duplication and a consistent offer in as much of Wales as we can manage.

Finally, Rhianon Passmore.

Diolch, Llywydd. I do welcome the responses of the Minister to the Chamber, so thank you for making the statement. One of the driving forces entering active politics was seeking to tackle the scourge and impacts of poverty, providing equality of opportunity for all, not based on parental wealth, in education and the arts. There's little doubt that education is one of the most profound tools that we can equip citizens with in order to best safeguard them against experiencing poverty. But it does not, however, negate the need for the wider state to provide adequate welfare safety nets, good-quality social housing policy, or sound economic growth. I welcome the £46 million programme to tackle inequality and absence in schools, and I know that it will be very warmly welcomed in communities across Islwyn. So, thank you very much. Diolch yn fawr ichi.

We all know, though, that one of the core ingredients of success for children during their school years is to be able to attend in the first place. Too many of our poorest students now are facing huge, unprecedented pressures that undoubtedly impact on that ability. The data shows that attendance rates for this academic year sit at 83.9 per cent for those eligible for free school meals, compared with 91.4 for those better-off pupils. It is about transport, poorer health, having no coat, no shoes, period poverty, uniform costs, sports, music, food costs, caring and mental health—all of those impact, as does the extra money needed for school trips, which I know the Welsh Government is attempting in many ways to influence and impact. Poverty is often generationally endemic, Minister, and the challenges faced by us all to ensure equality of opportunity is not an easy one.

If I go straight to my question, then. Minister, children themselves, as well as educators, have highlighted the importance of schools being seen at the heart of their communities—truly community-focused schools. So, what can the Welsh Government do, working with local authorities, to ensure that twenty-first century school facilities are practically available to the wider community so that children feel that sense of genuine belonging to their community and also to their school? Thank you, Llywydd.

The Member makes a series of very important points. She talked about the importance of children's own experience of schools, and I think that listening and the hearing of the voices of young people in this is very, very important. The £40 million capital that I announced recently is intended to enable schools to make the kinds of adaptations that schools sometimes do—to fence off areas, to make areas more easily accessible, to reconfigure land and so on—so that the range of facilities in all of our schools, not simply those that have been funded through the sustainable communities for learning programme, are available to the community. That looks different in different schools. I saw a very good example yesterday of how different parts of the school were being used in different ways to support the local community. The reason it's so important is because it helps young people have a different relationship with school, and for those who feel a bit disengaged, it's also an opportunity, as well as being in the class, to be doing the taekwondo or the rugby or whatever it is, the dance, the range of things that through their local clubs they can then enjoy in school. That just changes and cements that relationship with school, which is really fundamental to the point that she started on, the challenge of ensuring attendance.

I thank the Minister.

The next item will be a statement by the Minister for rural affairs on the refreshed TB eradication programme. I call on the Minister to make the statement—Lesley Griffiths. 

Diolch, Llywydd. I last provided Senedd Members with an update on the TB eradication programme in July 2022, setting out our direction of travel and progress after consulting on an enhanced approach in late 2021. I outlined my intent to commence action in several areas prior to launching a refreshed TB delivery plan, including new governance arrangements for the programme and preliminary work on a project to address endemic infection in Pembrokeshire. I committed to engaging with stakeholders on TB payments and informed purchasing, both of which attracted significant interest in the consultation. Further work is still required to get this right for both Government and industry. I'm also committed to working with the veterinary delivery partners to trial the use of lay TB testers in Wales, in efforts to increase veterinary capacity. This pilot began in October and is ongoing, and a full evaluation will take place to inform next steps.

The picture of bovine TB in Wales is ever changing, but the important long-term trends show good progress. Between 2009 and December 2022, new TB incidents fell by 49 per cent in Welsh herds while prevalence decreased by 32 per cent. Regionally, there is variation, mainly due to pockets of disease where we are developing or have already taken forward enhanced measures, for example a more rigorous contiguous testing regime for herds neighbouring a TB breakdown.

Today I am launching a refreshed delivery plan that sets out our approach to TB eradication over the next five years. The plan builds on the comprehensive armoury of measures under way and sets our course to make further progress towards a TB-free Wales by 2041. The theme at the heart of this refreshed delivery plan is partnership working. I've always said Government cannot eradicate TB alone. We need the support, engagement and ownership of the farming industry and veterinary profession. We must all play our part. This is borne out in the findings of the task and finish group on farmer engagement, which suggests a greater level of partnership working, through co-design and co-delivery, can build trust, dispel inaccurate information and empower keepers to take control of their TB situation and protect their business.

We will explore the benefits of this approach through a project in Pembrokeshire, where TB presents an ongoing challenge. The project will focus on identifying residual disease risk in clear testing cattle and mitigating cattle-to-cattle transmission risk. This will be achieved by enhancing collaborative working relationships at a local level, empowering vets and farmers to make informed decisions and show leadership in disease control. This will inform our approach to communication and engagement, including the disease report form, Cymorth TB and action plans in chronic breakdowns. In the medium term, we will explore the remaining recommendations of the task and finish group, taking account of practicality and cost of delivery.

We are making progress with establishing new governance arrangements for our programme. Adverts for the publicly appointed programme board and technical advisory group will be published by the summer. The technical advisory group will provide expertise on several key policy areas, which will also include review of the management of in-calf TB-affected cattle. We are building on our approach to addressing TB hotspot clusters, with severe interpretation of contiguous and post-breakdown tests in affected areas in the low and intermediate TB area north from April.

The Animal and Plant Health Agency epidemiology team continuously monitors disease levels and trends to identify areas of concern and potential new and emerging disease clusters and inform necessary action. One such emerging area of concern is Anglesey, where annual incidence reached an eight-year high in 2021. To prevent TB becoming established, several actions are being introduced and others are being considered. Firstly, I intend to bring forward legislation to reintroduce pre-movement testing for cattle movements within and from the low TB area. Most respondents to our consultation were in favour of this approach, and it will have the added benefit of protecting Wales as a whole.

No TB-positive badgers have been identified in Anglesey through the 'badger found dead' survey between 2014 and 2022. Although this is encouraging, we need to prevent TB spreading to the badger population. Therefore, a badger activity and farm biosecurity survey has been undertaken on Holy island, where most of the badgers submitted for examination were found. Subject to the outcomes of this work, our intention is to vaccinate badgers on Holy island before considering the approach across all of Anglesey. Keepers in Anglesey also received a letter earlier this month providing further information on action they can take to protect their herd from TB, including responsibly purchasing cattle and raising the standards of biosecurity on farm.

In addition to reintroducing pre-movement testing, I am also intending to make other legislative changes to further strengthen our approach in Wales, for example extending the requirement for post-movement testing in the intermediate TB areas and enabling the display of TB-free herd information on ibTB to support farmers to buy responsibly. These changes were again looked upon favourably by respondents to our consultation. These, along with further changes, will be explored through amending the Tuberculosis (Wales) Order 2010. Updates will be provided in due course.

Engagement on TB payments and informed purchasing will begin over the coming months to explore policy options with stakeholders and agree a way forward, making the necessary links with the sustainable farming scheme. Further legislative changes will be required to bring in new policies in these areas. We will also continue to work with both the UK and Scottish Governments on the development of a cattle vaccine, and the second phase of trials has now commenced. Cattle vaccination will be a powerful tool in our battle against this disease, and we will consider specific deployment options for Wales once a licensed product is available.

I will provide an annual progress update on the TB eradication programme and report against commitments in our delivery plan. I now call upon the farming industry and veterinary profession to unite with the Welsh Government and delivery partners to make further strides towards our shared mission, a TB-free Wales. Diolch.

Can I thank the Minister for advance sight of this afternoon's statement? I also refer Members to my register of interests. 

Firstly, I would like to begin by paying tribute to every farmer across Wales. Despite the physical, mental and economic burden that this disease inflicts, our farmers remain committed to the job in hand. The data that the Minister has described this afternoon is largely to be welcomed. For the first time in a long time, new herd incidents, slaughter rates and other data sets are beginning to show the start of a positive trend. However, despite nationwide decreases, there still remain a number of communities where the disease continues to be both persistent and prevalent. In areas such as Gwent, Gwynedd and mid Powys, new herd incidents are continuing to rise. In South Glamorgan, Pembrokeshire and south Powys, slaughter rates continue to increase year on year, and high herd recurrence rates consistently lead to repeated breakdowns in our communities. 

Despite the headline statistics, we still have a long, long way to go. But behind every statistic is a farmer, their family and a community under the immense pressure and anxiety that TB restrictions bring. That's why we cannot get complacent. I broadly welcome the Wales TB eradication programme delivery plan, March 2023 to March 2028, which accompanies today's statement. I'd also like to welcome the appointment of Dr Richard Irvine as Wales's new chief veterinary officer. As you emphasise in your statement, Minister, a UK-wide approach is pivotal to our success, and I'm hopeful that Dr Irvine's previous experience as the UK's deputy CVO and policy deputy director for global animal health at DEFRA will ensure that this is the case. 

In a recent Environment, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee session you stated that the delay in the publication of a refreshed TB strategy was, in part, to allow the new CVO to feed into this programme. I would certainly be interested in understanding what conversations you've had about improving TB policy in Wales with Dr Irvine, and what lessons can be learned from elsewhere to ensure that Wales's TB eradication policy is as effective as possible.

There are a number of points within the refreshed TB eradication programme delivery plan, namely the theme of partnership working and collaboration between industry and government, which are to be welcomed. As page 16 of the plan notes, improved communication is critical to successful delivery. The Welsh Government acknowledging this is positive, but please can we bring in mental health charities such as Tir Dewi or the DPJ Foundation to offer assistance on how letters from the Welsh Government or APHA are drafted, and the language used, to minimise any negative emotional effect?

I would also like to welcome the acceptance of the benefits of lay TB testers or approved tuberculin testers. This is certainly a policy that needs to be adopted on both a national and permanent basis, and I look forward to hearing your consideration of this matter. You mention as well the increased level of pre-movement testing, but I would urge caution on the reliability of the skinfold caliper test, and indeed the interpretation level of that test. I'd like to hear more from the Minister on that testing regime. 

Moving forward, I do wish to briefly touch upon the prospect of a cattle vaccine. Despite what feels like it being ten years away for the last 30 years, we are making significant strides in the right direction. Field trials have been rolled out across England, yet, Welsh involvement still remains, unfortunately, non-existent. In a recent written question, you noted that phase 1 and phase 2 cattle BCG trials have seen zero Welsh farms opt into the programme. Given this, what conversations have you had with DEFRA about ensuring that Wales can play a critical role in researching and deploying trial vaccines in our rural communities?

Minister, whilst on the subject of Welsh farm involvement, I do wish to touch upon the Pembrokeshire TB pilot. I note that this is mentioned in the delivery plan. However, my understanding is that it still remains stalled as a consequence of procurement rules. So, given the urgency of this project, any update on this matter would be gratefully and appreciatively received.

A final point, Minister, if I may, is the slaughter of in-calf cows and heifers. Today's statement showed, maybe, a little light in allowing a bit more flexibility in this policy, giving farmers a choice. Please, can we keep pressure on this point, as I know a small change here would be huge for the industry and its well-being?

To reiterate, Minister, we will only be successful in removing this disease from our herds by collaborating and working as one. Taking ownership, and recognising that we all have a part to play, is critical to our success. For too long, our industry had been left with little hope of ever seeing TB eradicated in Wales. We need the Government to work with the industry to give the industry that all-important hope, and all of us to work together. Diolch.

Thank you very much, Sam Kurtz, for your welcoming of the statement and the delivery plan, and, also, for your words of support, and I'm grateful for the work you did in Pembrokeshire on our behalf. Just to reassure Sam Kurtz and every other Member, and, indeed, every farmer in Wales, I would never be complacent. While you're quite right that the long-term disease statistics do show progress, which, of course, is to be welcomed, we still do, obviously, have a long way to go. I've always collaborated; since I've been in this portfolio, it has always been an area that I've worked towards improving, because, as I said, the Government cannot do this on its own. 

I welcome the appointment of Dr Richard Irvine, who's joined us in the public gallery today. As you say, he comes with a great deal of experience in the field of TB eradication, so I did think it was very important, while he's only been with us for a couple of weeks—we've had, obviously, meetings and a couple of conversations around it, and he's had significant input into the statement today. But, clearly, this is a piece of work that we'll be taking forward as we look at the delivery plan. Next time I update Members, I'm sure that there will be far more input from Richard, going forward.

It is really important that we learn lessons from elsewhere, and, as you say, Dr Irvine worked in DEFRA before. But, it's a very small field of CVOs—just the four of them—and they worked very closely together, so I know that we've already learnt lessons from DEFRA and working very closely together.

You talk about improved communication, and this was an area that clearly needed to be looked at significantly. In my oral statement, I referred to a letter that had gone out to farmers in Anglesey, and I think you can see from that, if you've been able to see one of those—it's much more simple than, perhaps, previously. But, just to reassure everyone, I meet with the mental health charities in Wales and they will have had an input into this, because whenever I meet them, and I meet them regularly, clearly a farm that is having TB testing has significant concerns. I do not underestimate how distressing and stressful it is for a farmer as they approach that time.

Certainly, lay testers is an area that I really want to improve, because we know that we're struggling with the capacity of vets for a variety of reasons, which are very well rehearsed. So, I think the more we can do in relation to that the better. 

Cattle vaccination—as I said in my opening statement, we're now in phase 2. I think it's incredibly disappointing that we haven't been able to have any farms in Wales participating. We are relying on English farms, and I think that is very disappointing. I've asked my officials to do some considerable engagement between phase 1 and phase 2 with our farmers to try to secure some farms here in Wales to be part of the trial, because I do think it would be beneficial. I understand that we do now have a number of possible candidates who have been shortlisted for participation who may be able to do this.

You referred to the Pembrokeshire project, and you're quite right, because of procurement issues, we haven't been able to get on with this as quickly as I certainly would have wanted to, and probably everybody else as well. Unfortunately, there are procurement rules that we have to abide by, and I know that you will appreciate that. We've got to follow that due process before we are able to take a project forward. We've got to have that open and fair competition.

Around on-farm slaughter, we have to look at this again. Back in 2019, I think it was, we piloted on-farm euthanasia for heavily pregnant cattle and, unfortunately, the uptake was quite low. There were quite difficult logistical difficulties in removing TB-affected animals within the 10 working days, and the pilot was ceased. So, I will have discussions with Dr Irvine to see if there's anything that we can do there. If you've got a TB breakdown, as I say, it's very distressing; it's devastating. If we want to avoid as much distress as possible, this is certainly an area we need to continue to work with. As I say, we did a significant piece of work with the industry probably four or five years ago, but it is something that I have asked Dr Irvine to look at again, because, clearly, it's something that is very distressing. I've received correspondence from farmers, so I think we do need to have a look at that again.

I thank the Minister for this statement today and the plan that's been submitted. I'm particularly pleased to see the collaborative element that's part of the statement, which is so important if we're going to tackle this challenge of eradicating TB. But I stand before you today to discuss the refreshed TB eradication programme with a heavy heart, because I'm painfully aware of dear friends who are going through a terrible mental ordeal today, because they have been told that there is TB either in their herd or on a nearby farm. In the face of this, they feel completely helpless, and fear the worst. 

The mental anguish is dreadful, leading some to consider the extreme act of taking their own lives. Families, friends, and communities are suffering as well because of this. This is the level of pain that our farmers have to endure when facing this terrible disease. The president of NFU Wales, Aled Jones, emphasised this message recently, imploring the Government to use all the levers at its disposal to eradicate this disease. So, this statement is to be welcomed today. 

But the official letters that are sent out are written in a cold and threatening manner, which has a detrimental impact on the mental health of the families who receive them. Therefore, I do warmly welcome recommendation 3 of the plan, which is about improving communication. But could we have an assurance from the Minister that the tone of the new letters will be more empathetic, and that any communication will consider the impact on the mental health of those families?

While we have seen the number of cases decrease in some areas, it is a huge concern to see infections spreading from the north-east to the north-west, and more clearly in areas of Wales that are traditionally considered as low risk, and continuing to be stubborn in parts of the south-west. What is the Government's assessment of the reason for this?  

Overstocking and intensive farming do contribute to the intensity of infections, as with any other virus, such as COVID, bTB is spread in intensive environments. One approach is to improve biosecurity measures on farms. This includes improving ventilation in barns and sheds, and ensuring that feed and water sources are kept clean and free of contamination. How much funding is being invested by the Government in these measures at present, and what increase in funding will come as a result of the introduction of this programme today? 

But when there is an infection in an area, the undeniable fact is that it is spread by badgers, as well as from cattle to cattle. Therefore, it's foolish to disregard the culling of badgers in areas where infection is present. Badger culling therefore has to be part of the solution. However one looks at the issue, animals are going to have to be culled, whether they be dozens of badgers or cattle in their hundreds. The plan says that the Government's intention is to invest in a vaccine at the expense of culling, but no timetable is provided for the development of a vaccine.

Following an announcement by the Animal and Plant Health Agency, field trials for a cattle vaccine and a new skin test for bovine tuberculosis have moved on to the next stage, following an announcement by the APHA. If the second phase is successful, we will be closer to being able to vaccinate cattle against this endemic disease. But we haven't seen any major actions to bring us closer to this area recently, so, until we see the vaccine, and in view of the scientific evidence that culling is an important tool in areas where infection exists, will the Minister allow a controlled culling programme in those areas? We need to work on a much larger scale and at a quicker speed than what's happening at the moment if we are seriously going to tackle infection. So, will the Minister tell us what the timetable is for the vaccine so that we can be assured that the Government and others are taking this seriously?

Finally, I do welcome the project in Pembrokeshire, but I'm concerned that it is very restricted. Farmers respect the knowledge of the local farrier, and the project will help to develop that relationship between the farrier and the farmer. So, what plans does the Government have to ensure that vets across Wales are supported in order to have the latest information out to farms as soon as possible? Thank you very much.

Diolch, Mabon, for those questions and points. I absolutely understand your opening remarks around the distress and stress caused, and I think you've just explained very clearly why we really all need to work together to ensure that we do realise our ambitions of having a TB-free Wales; at the very latest, 2041, but obviously, the earlier we can do it, the better it will be for us all.

I think the points you make around the letters being more empathetic is really important, because if you're stressed anyway and you receive a letter that you deem to be threatening or very unsympathetic, then that is only going to add to this distress. And at the workshop that we held last year at the Royal Welsh Show, I think that was one of the things that really came out, and I know we have been looking at that. As I said in my answer to Sam Kurtz, if you look at the letter that went to farmers in Anglesey, I think you can see an improvement there. But of course, we can always continue to improve, and you do have my commitment to looking at that. I think, by accepting the recommendations of the task and finish group on farmer engagement, what I wanted to do was really signal that Welsh Government is very committed to improving both face-to-face engagement, but also in correspondence in the way that you referred to, because I think that is the way to build up more trust, going forward, and to try and find that common ground, really.

As you said, unfortunately, we have seen a deteriorating situation on Anglesey after I identified that, and you will have heard me say in my initial statement that we had this survey undertaken on Holy Island to try and assess the levels of badger activity there. And then, we'll have a look at the findings from that and see what the next steps are. This is why informed purchasing is so important, and as you'll be aware from previous statements I've made, we gave significant funding to our markets to make sure that people did have that information that they needed to make those informed purchases. Biosecurity is very, very important as well, obviously.

You ask about badger culling, and it gives me the opportunity to say again that I have consistently ruled out an English-style widescale cull, and that now forms part of our programme for government—that commitment to not doing that. So, there will be no culling going forward, and badger vaccination has been part of our programme for many years, it predates me; I think it’s about 10 years now—sorry, the cattle vaccination. And when I spoke to academics last summer around the—. I think you referred, Sam Kurtz, to 10 years; it’s always been 10 years, 10 years, but I was told that, actually, this time, we definitely would have it within 10 years, and I hope it will be much sooner than that. That's why I was very disappointed that we didn't have any take-up of Welsh farmers to participate in the trial, because I think we can't just look to England to be doing this; we need to show that we're very keen to do it also.

You mentioned Pembrokeshire and the difficulties there. I do think it is important that our vets are very aware of everything, and again Dr Irvine will be continuing to work with our vets to make sure everybody has the information and the tools they need. And Pembrokeshire is something that we can look at as we procure the project. It's really important that we get it right. So, again, if there's anything that anyone thinks we need to look at, because we are tackling some really deep-seated levels of infection in parts of Pembrokeshire—everywhere else seemed to have an improving backdrop, but in Pembrokeshire it just seemed not to be improving, and in fact it was getting worse in many areas. So, that project to collaborate with industry, with our vets and with ourselves, is really important going forward. I do hope that we are able to learn from the project when it is up and running, and encourage other areas to look at what we're doing in Pembrokeshire and to have that similar engagement in other parts of Wales.

Minister, thank you for this update today on the TB eradication programme. As you will know, Minister, north Wales is such an important region for the agricultural industry and for farming families, who play such an important role, both in our local economy but more broadly in ensuring our language and culture are enhanced and prosper really well in north Wales. That's why it's so important that, as Welsh Government, you're able to create the right conditions for our farming businesses to thrive.

When I speak to farmers in my region, TB eradication is often the main point of conversation, as I'm sure, with you, Minister, it's very similar. Sadly, currently, they often feel they are unable to take all of the steps necessary to protect their livestock and their businesses from the spread of TB, and they are expected to live with the anxiety of having entire herds wiped out by this disease, and that's why I certainly support the comments made by the Member for Dwyfor Meirionnydd on the anxiety and the stress that many of our farmers experience.

So, in light of this, Minister, which part of the programme do you think gives farmers in north Wales the most reassurance that they may need to feel confident that the programme itself will protect their livestock, their family businesses and their communities?

Thank you. Well, I would hope that the whole of the programme will. I think it's really important. You can't just take one piece of the jigsaw, and it is indeed a jigsaw, and I go back to what I was saying about everyone having their part to play. So, obviously, we bring the policy forward. It's really important that the farmer looks at informed purchasing. It's really important that the farmer looks at their biosecurity; if they have any concerns, they speak to their own vet in the first instance, and then obviously we can also assist with that. I think that enhanced surveillance that we've had in north Wales, and I suppose I'm referring to north-east Wales in particular, but obviously now it's going over to north-west Wales, has been very good. It's been able to detect infection much more quickly, and it has slowed down the rate of new TB incidents over the long term. And that's what we want to do. We want to drive down the disease before it becomes established in high-TB areas. So, that's what we've been doing, and I hope that will continue to reassure north Walian farmers.

I thank the Minister.

The next item is item 8. This is the statement from the Minister for education on Adnodd—supporting the Curriculum for Wales. I call on the Minister to make the statement—Jeremy Miles.

Thank you, Llywydd. Gaining access to high-quality bilingual educational resources and supporting materials is central to our vision and mission for education in Wales. High-quality educational resources made in Wales for Wales will enhance the quality of learning and promote learner progression.

That is why, in March last year, I announced my intention to set up a company specifically to oversee the provision of purposeful, high-quality and timely teaching and learning materials. I'm pleased to say today that Adnodd has been established and will become operational from 1 April.

Adnodd will provide a platform for collaboration and co-construction, which will bring a more strategic approach to the provision and commissioning of educational resources. It will ensure parity and equity in provision in Welsh and English. It will guarantee high-quality resources, and make the most of the expertise available nationally.

Working with stakeholders from the education, creative and public sectors has been, and will continue to be, fundamental to the provision of educational resources and supporting materials that are made in Wales.

A national network conversation was held in 2021, with a focus on practitioners. That resulted in teachers in Wales co-constructing the resources guide that was published by us last July. That guide forms the starting point for Adnodd’s work. It sets out key principles for resource development. The development and availability of resources should reflect the needs of schools and settings as part of their work in designing and developing the curriculum. Therefore, engaging with practitioners from across Wales is an essential component in developing resources that are made in Wales. That engagement also extends to external stakeholder organisations and expert input. The process should also involve learners, to ensure the resources are appropriate and engaging.

It is also essential that Adnodd provides a platform to engage learners and practitioners in how to make best use of resources. Adnodd will provide that space for promotion and engagement, to ensure that the experience of using the resources is positive and productive for all.

Adnodd will be that go-to service that is easily recognisable and that facilitates co-construction between practitioners and other stakeholders to create resources of quality, which are consistent with the principles of the Curriculum for Wales and that have a clear learning rationale. I am clear that we must continue to ensure that the resulting resources are available through the Hwb platform, so that schools and settings have that clear and unique space to go to for resources that are appropriate, high quality and made in Wales.

I'm pleased to announce the appointment of Owain Gethin Davies as the interim chair of Adnodd's board. As headteacher of Ysgol Uwchradd Dyffryn Conwy, he is an experienced leader in the field of education, with a background in curriculum development, Welsh language strategic planning, inspection and leadership development. I'm confident that his experience and expertise will enable him to establish a national body that will understand and meet the needs of practitioners.

I have also appointed five non-executive members to the board—Huw Lloyd Jones, Nicola Wood, Sioned Wyn Roberts, Dr Lucy Thomas and Lesley Bush. These individuals bring a range of skills and experience to the table, including governance, legal, audit and risk, commissioning content and publishing, as well as educational and additional educational needs experience and expertise. We will be looking for two more board members in the next six months, specifically to ensure that we have representation from black, Asian and ethnic minority communities. The board will consult with representatives from these communities in the meantime, to ensure that full consideration of black, Asian and ethnic minority voices are embedded in its work from the outset. 

Work will be ongoing in the coming months to build the connections, systems and foundations necessary for the company to be able to operate efficiently. In its first year, I want Adnodd to engage with stakeholders to seek their views and get feedback on what resources are needed, the best and most inclusive method of commissioning resources, how to work together to develop resources, and what a quality-assurance process should look like.

There is a vast variety of resources out there, and practitioners need to know that the resources that they're investing their time in, and what we are investing finite public resources in, are materials that are evidence based, that are proven to work and that reflect the principles and rationale of the Curriculum for Wales. That is why I'll be asking Adnodd to develop a quality assurance framework.

In future, Adnodd will also develop and invest in skills and capacity to create, share and publish educational resources in Wales. Working with the national network, for example, there will be opportunities to share expertise and experience and to develop the capacity of schools and practitioners in creating resources that support their local curriculum.

Over £4 million is set aside annually for Welsh and bilingual educational resources and supporting materials. A transition plan will ensure a seamless transfer to Adnodd, ensuring that there are no gaps in commissioning, and providing space for Adnodd to develop a model that is truly made in Wales for Wales.

I'm committed to Adnodd's vision and I'm proud to be a key partner as it embarks on this exciting journey. I am confident that this approach will make a difference and that Adnodd will be an important component of the success of the Curriculum for Wales as it's rolled out. I will of course keep Members updated on developments as part of my annual report on curriculum reform. 

I look forward to working with Owain Gethin and the board members to realise this ambition to support the education system in Wales.

Diolch yn fawr, Minister, for your statement today. Of course, we all want to see the Welsh language properly supported, especially after what can only be considered disastrous census results. Whilst we in the Welsh Conservatives are supportive of Adnodd being set up, don't you think it could be considered short sighted to have the company that is set to take the reigns of the crucial learning materials for the new curriculm to be delivered so long after the roll-out of the curriculum itself has begun? Surely, we now have another cohort of students who have missed this opportunity with this delay.

Now, whilst your focus has been on establishing a company to manage learning materials, do you not recognise that you have failed to ensure that there are sufficient Welsh-speaking teachers, particularly Welsh-speaking teachers in core subjects, to actually utilise these materials? We have a staffing crisis in Wales, yet you are producing materials without the teachers to actually teach them. So, Minister, how will these materials be properly used without the sufficient number of Welsh-language teachers in Wales?

It's not just the lack of teachers to utilise the materials that concerns me. It's crucial that, with cuts to the education budget now announced by your Government, you ensure this company delivers on its stated mission and proves itself to be a good use of Welsh Government funding and efforts. We always hear of new boards being set up for various portfolios across this Welsh Government and, quite often, when you look into them, there's not much transparency, you never know how often they meet, where the minutes of these meetings go. So, what assurances can you give that this will be a transparent board and that they will be accountable? Can we be sure this approach is cost-effective? If so, what mechanisms have you put in place to ensure the taxpayer isn't footing an ever-growing bill?

The fall in the number of children and young people able to speak Welsh was a critical component in the extremely poor latest census results, indicating that the present strategy of Welsh education provision is demonstrably failing, and has done since the start of devolution. A question I have for you also: you know we have GwE in north Wales—how will this board function and work with those kinds of organisations, this organisation? I suppose, for me—. There won't be any duplication, I hope. So, what mechanisms do you have in place to ensure that these materials are properly utilised in schools and that learners can get the most from them? And is there going to be sufficient training for current teachers to deliver these materials and to get the best out of them? Diolch.

I thank the Member for that range of questions. I think some are more germane to the statement than others. I think it is important to avoid duplication. I think we achieve that principally by this company having an entirely different function from, for example, the consortia, which she mentioned in her question. But it's obviously a legitimate point for her to raise. I can assure her that the activity that this body will be undertaking isn't duplicative. Indeed, it's intended to take on functions that are currently discharged, I would suggest, less than strategically across the network of providers. So, the whole point of this is to bring together the range of commissioning activities, including, by the way, from the Welsh Government, because it is important, as she says, to make sure this is streamlined and focused. I think the opportunity that establishing Adnodd represents is for it to be a focal point for creators, practitioners and other bodies in the education system to look to this body in order to give direction and obviously also to commission resources. What teachers have said is that they want to work with an organisation where their voice can be heard and their experience can help shape the resources that are available, so she's right to make the point that the voice of teachers is important in this, and I can assure her that both in my initial letter to the board and in my discussion with the chair I've emphasised how important it is for the new body to be seen as the go-to body for practitioners when they're looking for resources.

One of the key advantages in how we've structured the roles and responsibilities of Adnodd is to make sure, which is implicit in her question, that we have that wide range of materials that are consistent with the curriculum, so that we don't have publishers who are looking to take advantage of a new opportunity in Wales, but perhaps don't actually understand the principles of the curriculum. We want to move away from that, and to make sure that resources are available in Welsh as well as in English.

Mabon—. No, it's not Mabon ap Gwynfor. Apologies if I shocked you there, Mabon. Heledd Fychan. Oh, he's not even there. [Laughter.]

Thank you, Llywydd, and thank you for this afternoon's statement, Minister. Clearly, this is to be warmly welcomed, and I think that the benefits that you've outlined will certainly be welcomed by teachers. One of the things that you will have heard, as have I, in speaking to teachers, is that they welcome the new curriculum but that the issue of resources and that we don't have the necessary materials, particularly in Welsh, is a concern for them. Certainly, from some of the visits that I've undertaken to Welsh schools in my region recently, I've seen teachers who are delighted by the new curriculum, but also are spending a great deal of time translating materials in the evenings and during holiday times, to ensure that there is new and appropriate material available, and that, of course, adds to their workload. So, I think that this is to be very warmly welcomed indeed.

I also welcome the announcement through the co-operation agreement on the issue of Welsh history. There's certainly a deficiency there. I remember when I was in school, many years ago now, but there was a problem then, and seeing that it's the same materials that are still used today in schools, and that's the reason why schools haven't been choosing to teach Welsh history, because of a lack of resources. That has had an impact on a number of subjects, including the sciences and so on, because of the unavailability of resources. As you've emphasised, having bilingual and high-quality resources is the issue that we're trying to solve.

Some practical questions from me—two specifically: first, on the timetable in ensuring when the resources will be available. I know that you're announcing the establishment today, and that there will be some consultation, but for those teachers who are implementing the new curriculum and are perhaps having to use other materials at the moment and having to translate for themselves, what kind of support will be available in the interim? Because it will take time to get the necessary resources in place, and I fully understand that.

Also, in terms of the availability of resources for those home teaching. Of course, Hwb does provide some materials, but is it intended that these materials will be available through Hwb for them too? Hopefully, there will be a positive response. I look forward to seeing how things develop. But just to understand between now and when the resources become available how we will ensure that that support is available.

I thank the Member for welcoming this development. What's important to remember is that this is not the start of the commissioning process; commissioning is already happening, but I would say, to be honest, that it's happening in a way that's non-strategic across the system. But we have a plan to ensure that we move over time from the commissioning that's happening, for example, within the Welsh Government, to the new body in a smooth way.

The first priority of the body will be to establish a staffing structure and so forth. So, the main priority is to ensure that a chief executive is employed. The hope is that that will happen by, perhaps, September, and then a staffing structure around that, including interim secondments, so that we have a body of experienced people available who can work on the strategy. It's right to say that one of the main concerns among stakeholders is the lack of Welsh materials for the new curriculum, and the experience of adequate resources during COVID-19 in digital terms has been a consideration in establishing this new body.

As I mentioned in the statement, we heard the voices of practitioners in the national network, but we've also had discussions with a stakeholder group to look at different options in order to understand how best to structure the new body, and I think this is the best way of doing that. It's an arm's-length body from the Government, but then it meets the needs of stakeholders in a more flexible way, I would say, than any Government can do. So, I hope that I will be able to make a statement on progress in this area, but just to give the Member some assurance that a plan already exists to continue to commission, but when the body is more operational, there will be more of an opportunity to do that in a strategic way and a more engaging way for publishers and designers and those who create the content across the sector.

Thank you, Minister.

The next item will be the Alcoholic Beverages (Amendment) (Wales) Regulations 2023. I call on the Minister for rural affairs to move the motion. Lesley Griffiths.

Diolch, Llywydd. I move the motion to approve the Alcoholic Beverages (Amendment) (Wales) Regulations 2023.

Welsh Government agreed to participate in a joint targeted exercise with the UK and Scottish Governments, which concluded on 23 November 2022, regarding three minor proposed changes to retained EU law on how wine is described and marketed as part of the UK free trade agreement with New Zealand. The legislative changes would come into force on 28 April 2023 and add flexibility with minimal impact on the alcoholic drinks industry. Businesses may continue to use their current labelling arrangements if they wish. These amendments will closely align with legislation being introduced by both the UK and Scottish Governments, limiting any divergences between how the laws apply in Wales and the rest of Great Britain. I'm grateful to the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee for its considerations of the regulations, and I ask Members to approve the regulations today. Diolch.

Thank you very much to the Minister for that statement. We have no reason to oppose, and we think it is a wise move in the current climate, so thank you very much.

Mabon was the only speaker. Does the Minister wish to reply? No. The proposal, therefore, is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? No. Therefore, the motion under item 9 is agreed.

Item 10 is next, the legislative consent motion on the Social Housing (Regulation) Bill. I call on the Minister for Climate Change to move the motion.

You're like a supermarket delivery, Julie James—you're just in time. Julie James, are you able to contribute? Can you wave? Wave if—

Apologies. Can you not hear me?

Yes, we can, but you're not saying anything. I'm calling you and you can now propose the LCM.

Apologies, Llywydd. Give me one second. I seem to be having an ICT problem. Give me one second. Apologies.

Okay. We'll take a pause.

There we go. Sorry. Apologies, Llywydd.

Okay. Much anticipated mover of the motion, then, Julie James.

Diolch, Llywydd. I do move the motion. This is a UK Bill intended to reform the regulation of social housing providers in England. I have called another debate today, because on 9 March, I laid a final supplementary LCM following additional amendments proposed by the UK Government shortly before our last debate.

Today's debate and vote is in relation to giving legislative consent for the final version of the Bill as a whole. Although the Bill impacts on a relatively small number of people who live in Wales—tenants of the approximately 500 units in Wales owned or managed by English social housing providers—the legislative consent of the Senedd is required where UK legislation makes provision for any purpose within the competence of the Senedd. Since housing is a devolved matter, the requirement for consent is triggered.

I have now laid six memoranda that identify and explain why I believe consent is required. This last one deals with amendments to the Bill that introduce new requirements for certain qualifications in some housing management roles of social housing organisations in England. Following these amendments, my recommendation that legislative consent is given remains the same. The changes proposed to the English regime aim to ensure that landlords are more accountable to their tenants for their performance, and I don't think that anyone here in Wales would argue that that's not a positive aim.

I'm very, very grateful to the committees who have considered the memorandum on this Bill, including the reports on the sixth memorandum, which were published yesterday. I understand their concerns in relation to the need to provide the Senedd with as timely information as possible about UK legislation within devolved competence, and the need to give as much opportunity for scrutiny as possible. I really have striven to meet Standing Order requirements, demonstrated by the improvements to the laying times for later LCMs produced in relation to this Bill. But, Llywydd, there have been circumstances beyond my control, which have seriously impacted on the smooth functioning of Senedd consideration of this legislative consent.

During the last debate, I gave an undertaking to write to Michael Gove to express my dissatisfaction that the laying of amendments at a late stage, with so little notice before the date of the consent debate, severely constrained the ability of the Senedd to fully consider the Bill in its final form, before deciding on whether to grant consent. In reply to my letter, Mr Gove advised me that he has delayed the final parliamentary stages of the Bill to ensure that this debate today could go ahead first.

Despite these procedural difficulties, Llywydd, I do remain of the view that consent is appropriate in this case, and I recommend Members support the legislative consent motion in respect of the Social Housing (Regulation) Bill today. Diolch.

Chair of the Local Government and Housing Committee, John Griffiths.

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. I hear what the Minister has said about the difficulties in timing, Llywydd, and these have plagued this particular Bill, I'm afraid. We were once again as a committee unable to give this latest LCM the sort of consideration we would have liked, and we do not believe we've really been able to sufficiently understand the impact of the provisions on the lives of people in Wales, although we do accept the relatively small number of social housing properties in Wales affected and the positive changes that Welsh Government has set out for Welsh tenants who will be impacted.

I'd just like to reiterate the committee's concerns, Llywydd, that we should have more time if we are to play a meaningful role in this legislative consent process. Despite the concerns, most members of the committee feel that they can recommend that the Senedd gives its consent to legislate on the devolved matters in this supplementary memorandum. One member of the committee, Mabon ap Gwynfor, disagrees with the majority view, and believes that consent should not be granted.

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

Thank you, Llywydd and Minister.

I'm going to keep my comments brief on this item this afternoon, and I think that some of my comments have actually been prefigured by the remarks of the Minister, and, indeed, my fellow Chair, John Griffiths.

When we spoke last month, during the first debate we had on a legislative consent motion for this Bill, I focused on the large number of memoranda laid by the Welsh Government—it's something that the Minister mentioned as well. We are, as the Minister says, up to number six on this Bill, and I just repeat that this demonstrates the extent to which the Bill introduced to the UK Parliament has changed since its introduction, and the extent to which such changes impact on devolved areas too. And I think that the Minister acknowledged that.

We have really welcomed the Minister’s action to lay memorandum No. 6 before the Senedd. Whilst we acknowledge it is, of course, a requirement of our Standing Orders, it also assists all of us in ensuring that greater transparency is given to a process of legislating that is, well, it's sub-optimal—it's filled with deficiencies from a devolved legislature point of view. However, the fact that the Senedd has already been asked to make a decision on whether to give consent to the Bill’s relevant provisions because, as the Minister said, of the point at which the Bill was in the UK Parliament’s scrutiny process, again highlights the inadequacies of enabling a different Parliament to legislate for Wales on matters within the Senedd’s legislative competence. I sound like a broken record, but it's for a purpose. And I wonder, Minister—. It was good to hear that you've written to Michael Gove on these matters, and I'm sure you'll have raised it with him, but it would be helpful to hear any other reflections you have on this and the way we go forward.

But, in closing, can I briefly highlight that the amendments that triggered the laying of memorandum No. 6 relate to professional qualifications, and, as we understand it, new professional qualifications standards in England may fall under the ambit of Part 3 of the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020? That's quite interesting. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

As a party, we're very happy to be supporting the consent motion for the sake of both tenants and the vast majority of responsible landlords. It's important that we have a framework that will crack down on poor standards, when needed. The Bill seeks to establish a new proactive approach to regulating social housing. Such issues include safety and tenant engagement, as well as creating new enforcement powers to tackle landlords that fail in their duty.

The UK Government identified the Bill has having three main objectives: to facilitate a new proactive consumer regulation regime; to refine the existing economic regulatory regime; and to strengthen the Regulator of Social Housing's powers to enforce the consumer and economic regimes. The UK Government announced that the objectives for the Regulator of Social Housing will include safety and transparency. The legislative barrier to regulator action—the serious detriment test—will be removed. Moreover, it will be mandatory for landlords to nominate a designated person for health and safety issues. 

This Bill will ensure that providers are well governed and financially viable to protect homes and supply investment. The UK Government seeks to encourage continued investment in the sector, as well as the development of new homes and the protection of tenants from the risk of provider insolvency. The UK Government's Bill will ensure the regulator can effectively intervene, when needed, through new enforcement powers, and the Bill will also ensure that the regulator has the appropriate tools to deal with non-compliance. 

Whilst the majority of provisions in the Bill relate to the regulation of social housing by English bodies, it will still have an impact on some tenants here in Wales. Provisions of the Bill extend to Wales insofar as English-registered providers who own and/or manage some social housing stock in Wales. There are approximately 530 properties in Wales that are owned and/or managed by an English RP, which will be subject to these changes described in the Bill. The Minister for Climate Change described it as appropriate for the provisions to be dealt with within the UK Parliament Bill, due to the small numbers of social housing stock in Wales owned or managed by an English-based RP. Of course, we agree, and we also hope that this means the Welsh Government recognises the need for strong England-and-Wales co-operation, so that we can ensure that these protections are as strong as possible.

The Minister has recommended the Senedd consents to the provisions, describing the clauses as positive for our tenants in Wales. We are very happy to agree with the Minister on this. Whilst it is welcome that the Senedd granted its consent in the legislative consent memorandum vote in February, it is, however, disappointing that Plaid Cymru voted against. I really struggle to see the reasoning behind this. The Bill, as acknowledged by the Welsh Government, strengthens tenants' rights, and, where applicable, will hold landlords to account when they fail in their role as a landlord. What part of this approach would Plaid Cymru be against?

There is one clause that has been tabled during the House of Commons Report Stage that does require Senedd consent. The provision, which was tabled by the UK Government, introduces a new section into the Housing and Regeneration Act 2008. The clause would enable the regulator to set standards to ensure those with management responsibilities have or are working towards appropriate qualifications, according to their role. This is very welcome, and I hope that the Welsh Governent and the UK Government will be able to engage constructively in order to strengthen tenant rights.

The Welsh Government continues to recommend the Senedd gives its consent to the Bill. We are very happy to be joining these calls, and will be voting this way. Thank you. Diolch.     

I will try to respond to some of Janet's questions in my response now. This supplementary legislative consent motion, like every other LCM, undermines the principles of devolution and fails to adequately address issues surrounding social housing here in Wales. I, therefore, oppose this LCM, and would urge my fellow Members to do so too.

This Bill is an infringement on the powers of the Welsh Government to regulate housing in our country. Housing is a devolved issue, and this Bill interferes with our ability to develop and implement policies that meet the specific needs of our communities. Instead, it seeks to impose a one-size-fits-all approach that may not work for us in Wales. This Bill has not been subject to adequate consultation with the people of Wales. We should be engaging with tenants, housing associations and other stakeholders to ensure that any changes made to the regulation of social housing are in the best interests of the people who rely on these services.

While this sixth LCM looks at very specific issues around the qualifications of managers within social housing in England, it is to do with England. We don’t know if it dovetails with Welsh law, nor if it is appropriate for tenants in Wales. There’s no way of knowing this because we’ve not seen any consultation, and scrutiny has been shockingly inadequate. The fact that there have been so many LCMs demonstrates how the proposed Bill has been changed and adjusted, and how the elected Members of Westminster, and indeed developments in housing in England, are able to influence the Bill—because it is their Bill. But we’ve had almost no voice here in Wales. It will affect the daily lives of tenants who live in Wales, the people who we represent, and yet neither we nor they have had any influence on it. The lack of time to scrutinise and understand the proposed legislation is entirely unacceptable.

The purpose of devolution, as weak as it is, is to give us the power to set policy in specific areas here in Wales, such as health, education, the environment and housing. Transferring those powers back to Westminster is contrary to the will of the people of Wales. It is entirely unacceptable. This Westminster legislation has been designed to meet the needs of England, but we face different challenges here, and Wales must respond to these challenges with our own policy framework. If we’re not able to solve the problems here with the limited powers that we have, then the solution is to demand more powers in order to tackle these challenges, not to surrender them to Westminster.

One of the concerns I’ve previously expressed regarding this LCM is the fact that there is social housing in Wales that comes under the control of housing associations in England, which will be accountable to Westminster legislation instead of being accountable to Welsh legislation. This currently affects around 500 properties, which is not insignificant. Thankfully, the requirements and standards in Wales are higher than in England, and congratulations must go to the Welsh Government for ensuring that. But we must ensure that everyone here in Wales can expect those same standards. Enabling this LCM today means that some social housing in Wales will continue to meet different, and lower, standards. That should not happen, and we must have consistency in terms of our expectations here in Wales.

In conclusion, I urge my colleagues to join me in opposing this LCM on the Social Housing (Regulation) Bill. We need to protect the powers of the Welsh Government to regulate housing in Wales and develop solutions that meet the needs of our communities. Diolch yn fawr iawn. 

The Minister for Climate Change to reply. Julie James.

Diolch, Llywydd. I very much want to thank Members who’ve contributed to the debate today, and indeed to reiterate my thanks to the Chairs for their scrutiny of the LCMs over the time. I know that John Griffiths was not able to do this last one, but I’m very grateful for the previous work that the committee has done. I would just like to say that I completely agree about the time limits that have been imposed by the UK Government, and I’m very happy to continue to engage with Michael Gove in this particular instance about the timings of this. I think it has been useful that the debate has been able to take place prior to the vote in Westminster, but nevertheless, the timescales are inadequate for proper scrutiny.

I just want to say a few things about the contributions of both Janet Finch-Saunders and Mabon ap Gwynfor, just for clarification, Llywydd. These regulations will affect English social landlords who happen to have or manage properties in Wales—that’s around 500 properties. Just to be really clear, there are Welsh registered social landlords who own or manage properties in England and those houses are subject to the Welsh regime, so this is reciprocal. So, this isn’t that, somehow, England is having an influence in Wales that isn’t reciprocal—it is because the border is extremely porous and some properties are managed by people from the other side of the border. So, just to be really clear, I want Members to be really fully understanding that, if you are a Welsh registered provider, then you would be regulated by the Welsh regime. As Mabon ap Gwynfor pointed out, this is very much the English Government catching up with us and not the other way round. I just want to assure Members of that point. Nevertheless, it means that we need to have a regime that is fit for purpose and that the tenants of those particular RSLs do have the maximum protection that can be afforded. Therefore, Llywydd, I do recommend that Members support giving consent to this LCM. Diolch. 

The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There are objections, and we will therefore defer voting under this item until voting time.

Items 11 and 12 are next. In accordance with Standing Order 12.24, unless a Member objects, the two motions under items 11 and 12 will be grouped for debate but with separate votes.

As there is no objection to that, I will call on the Minister for Finance and Local Government to move the motions. Rebecca Evans.

Thank you. I move the motions. Over £8 billion is spent on public procurement each year in Wales. Improving the way we procure can drive innovation and resilience and deliver benefits across Wales by supporting our local economy and saving the taxpayer money. Through this Bill, there's an opportunity to simplify the complex procurement landscape that currently exists for buyers and suppliers across Wales, and to develop a more transparent procurement regime.

All the matters of concern I raised in my legislative consent memoranda have how been resolved, aside from the international agreement matters, which I will address later. The resolving of these concerns is significant, and it's the result of good working between Welsh Government officials and officials in the UK Government. We have tabled two motions to ensure that the Senedd can explore the issues relating to the Bill and reach its decision on consent. 

Members will see in memorandum No. 5 that I am recommending consent to the core procurement elements of the Bill, but that consent is withheld for certain provisions of the Bill that concern international trade. As Members will see, there are good constitutional reasons for the recommendation to withhold consent.

I will firstly address the arguments for recommending consent for core procurement provisions of the Bill, which represent the majority of the Bill. Brexit, the pandemic and, now, the current economic crisis have left our Welsh businesses crying out for stability and certainty. There is an opportunity through the Bill to reform the existing rules and processes underpinning public procurement in Wales, and to ensure that they are streamlined and simplified for all users, whilst at the same time avoiding confusion, inconsistency and uncertainty for organisations that conduct business across the border. 

My officials have worked closely and constructively with officials in the UK Government to ensure Welsh objectives have been included in the Procurement Bill and ensure maximum alignment between the Procurement Bill and our Social Partnership and Public Procurement (Wales) Bill. Together, these Bills will establish an effective and efficient procurement regime in Wales, which maximises the opportunities to achieve greater value for money and deliver social, environmental, economic and cultural outcomes for Wales. 

One of the most significant benefits of the Procurement Bill is that it will embed greater transparency throughout the commercial life cycle. I'm sure that we can all agree that any measures to improve transparency are welcome, and will provide reassurance to the Welsh taxpayer that opportunities to achieve greater value for money are being maximised through our procurement activity. This increased transparency will provide the ability to collect more transparent, reliable and meaningful procurement data, which will support analysis of how Welsh public money is being spent. It will give us access to detailed information to monitor for signs of waste and inefficiency and to identify potential corruption.

It will also give contracting authorities the data that they need to collaborate better, drive value for money, and identify and monitor social value and community benefits in their procurements. This data will also help with making more robust evidence-based decisions for procurement policy in the future. Finally, and most importantly, we have secured stand-alone equivalent regulation-making powers in the Bill, which means that the Senedd will be able to fully scrutinise the detail of the secondary legislation as it's developed. It will allow for any future legislative changes to be made here in Wales.

I was grateful for the diligence and the support of the various Senedd committees in their scrutiny of the memoranda and the Bill. The committees highlighted important areas of concern, such as in relation to the commencement provisions contained in the Bill. In order to commence the provisions of the Bill regulating procurement by Welsh contracting authorities, the UK Government must obtain the consent of the Welsh Ministers, meaning that the Welsh Ministers have a say when the provisions of the Bill will commence in relation to Wales. If Welsh Ministers withhold consent, then the financial implications will be determined at that time.

A notable benefit of joining the Procurement Bill and commencing the provisions of the Bill at the same time as England and Northern Ireland is the certainty, consistency and continuity that this will realise for the Welsh contracting authorities, as well as ensuring our Welsh suppliers who conduct business across the borders can continue to do so without interruption or additional costs. Whilst I regret that the committees had some concerns with certain aspects of the legislative consent memoranda for the Bill, I was pleased that the committee reports on the memoranda largely concur with the benefits that this Bill will bring to Wales.

I'll now turn to addressing the arguments for recommending withholding consent to certain of the provisions of the Bill that relate to international agreements. The two outstanding matters of concern present a threat to fundamental constitutional principles and our devolution settlement. They relate to two clauses in the part of the Bill that deals with the implementation of procurement obligations in international trade agreements and concern the power to add international agreements to the list in Schedule 9 to the Bill, and the power to deal with procurement-related trade disputes relating to international agreements. The changes these powers would make are not controversial. However, both powers have been included as concurrent, meaning there is no requirement for UK Ministers to obtain the consent of the Welsh Ministers when they're exercising this power in relation to devolved areas.

This mirrors the position taken with the Trade (Australia and New Zealand) Bill, which the Senedd recently debated and refused consent to. The UK Government's continued approach to only including concurrent powers in legislation relating to trade deals is unacceptable, and, despite the exhaustive discussions at official and ministerial level, the UK Government is unwilling to make any amendments to these powers. Welsh Ministers have repeatedly committed to the timely implementation of international agreements.

It's important for Members to note that the clauses in the Bill containing these powers are about ensuring suppliers from countries the UK has trade agreements with can access the UK procurement market. They do not relate to the main purpose of the Bill, which is the reform of the procurement rules in the UK, rules that will apply to suppliers both within the UK and outside it. This is what I mean when I refer to the core procurement elements of the Bill. So, despite our outstanding concerns in relation to certain of the provisions on the implementation of international agreements, I hope Members will share my strong belief that the changes being introduced as a result of the Procurement Bill will make public procurement more accessible to businesses, including our SMEs, will drive greater value for money for Welsh taxpayers, and will maximise opportunities to deliver social, environmental, economic and cultural outcomes for Wales. Diolch.

The Chair of the Public Accounts and Public Administration Committe, Mark Isherwood.

Thank you, Llywydd, for the opportunity to contribute to this debate as Chair of the Public Accounts and Public Administration Committee, or PAPAC. The Business Committee agreed that the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, or LJC committee, and PAPAC should report on legislative consent memorandum, or LCM, No. 1 by 6 October 2022. On 11 July 2022, the Minister laid before the Senedd a supplementary LCM, No. 2, which was tabled on 27 June 2022. We reported on LCMs 1 and 2 on 22 November 2022. We worked closely with the LJC committee on scrutinising these LCMs, and wrote jointly to the Minister for Finance and Local Government. We invited members of the LJC committee to attend our evidence session, and wrote jointly to the Minister, as indicated, about our joint evidence session with the Minister in September 2022. We also undertook a consultation exercise and received valuable information from the Welsh Local Government Association, Caerphilly County Borough Council and Community Housing Cymru, and I thank them for submitting evidence. Since then, supplementary LCMs relating to this Bill were laid on 19 December 2022 and 7 February 2023. Each time a supplementary LCM was laid, our deadline for reporting was extended. Finally, the Business Committee agreed that the LJC committee and PAPAC should report on supplementary memorandums 3, 4 and 5 by 23 March 2023. Unfortunately, PAPAC had only one meeting scheduled within that time frame. We were disappointed by the short time frame provided to consider and report on the supplementary LCMs as this provided no opportunity for us to either raise concerns with the Minister prior to our reporting or to consider them in further detail.

We'd highlighted serious concerns in our report on LCMs 1 and 2 about the limited opportunities for detailed scrutiny and repeated these in our report on supplementary LCMs 4, 5 and 6. We concur with the LJC committee and disagree with the Minister's suggestion that the process is equal to that of the detailed legislative scrutiny of a Senedd Bill. We made six recommendations in our reports on supplementary LCMs 1 and 2 and LCMs 3, 4, and 5, and our report on supplementary LCMs 4, 5, and 6 raised several further issues.

We were concerned about whether an amendment to clause 123—commencement—achieves the Minister's policy intent. It is unclear whether an assessment of the potential financial implications of not giving consent to a Minister of the Crown to commence provisions in the Bill has been undertaken and what the financial implications would be for the Welsh Government or the wider public sector in Wales of not providing consent. The financial implications of a possible subsequent removal of provisions in relation to Welsh contracting authorities from the Bill are similarly unclear, as are any steps the Welsh Government may be required to take to introduce its own legislation to replace them.

We note that if Wales did not give consent to the UK Government to commence the Bill’s provisions in relation to Welsh contracting authorities, and Wales was carved out from the Act, the financial implications would be greater than currently provided for in the financial assessment, both in relation to the lost opportunity cost involved in developing the present Bill, and the additional cost of any alternate Welsh legislation. We recommended that the Minister gave further consideration to the potential financial implications of not giving consent to commence provisions in the Bill, given the insufficient detail in the financial section of memorandum No. 5. We were also concerned that the level of detail in memorandum No. 5 was lacking as to the effect of amendments made to the Bill. Our report on LCMs 1 and 2 noted that memorandum No. 2 included references that amendments are 'minor and provide greater clarity'. We believe this is a simplistic summary of the amendments, as some summaries within memorandum No. 5 do not set out how and why the new memorandum differs from the previous memorandum.

We support the conclusion of the LJC committee that emphasises to the Minister and all Welsh Ministers the importance of providing sufficient detail to Members of the Senedd within legislative consent memoranda, especially where timescales for Senedd scrutiny are compressed. Whilst the committee did not oppose these legislative consent memoranda, Mabon ap Gwynfor MS wished to record his view that he is opposed to the legislative consent memoranda in relation to the UK Procurement Bill. The committee will continue to pursue these issues with the Welsh Government.

The Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, Huw Irranca-Davies.

Thank you, Llywydd, and good afternoon, Minister.

We produced two reports covering the five consent memoranda that have been laid by the Minister on this Bill, and we laid the first report in October 2022, and our second report on 14 March this year. 

Minister, I think I'm right in saying that we still have not received a formal written response to the three recommendations we made in our second report to better inform this debate today. But I do thank you for the detailed opening remarks you've already made, which turned some of our remaining concerns and, indeed, I have to say, some of your outstanding concerns, as you just phrased them—. And I hope that you may be able to respond further to the points that I'll now put to you. 

As a committee, we've been closely following the Welsh Government's approach to legislating to reform procurement law as it applies in Wales, including this Bill, the Social Partnership and Public Procurement (Wales) Bill and, more recently, the Health Service Procurement (Wales) Bill. This Bill legislates extensively in devolved areas. The first memorandum covered 103 clauses, which I believe is the most number of clauses in a single UK Government-proposed Bill that makes provision in devolved areas by a good margin. 

Now, the Welsh Government accepted the UK Government's offer to include provisions for Wales in this Bill. However, from our perspective as the Legislation Justice and Constitution Committee, we believe that this decision has led to an approach to legislating on procurement law in Wales that is less than ideal. It's sub-optimal in terms of Senedd scrutiny and the ability to amend and shape legislation here in this Siambr. As we stated in our first report, there was a clear alternative available within the Welsh Government’s legislative programme, which has passed now, in the form of the Social Partnership and Public Procurement (Wales) Bill, whereby we could legislate in parallel with the UK Government on the processes underpinning procurement, whilst also including provisions on the outcomes of procurement. Now, taking such an approach would have ensured a far more accessible statute book in both English and Welsh, and more opportunities for detailed Senedd scrutiny of provisions on procurement processes. It would also have allowed the Welsh Government, I have to say, to fully reflect its values in legislation on procurement that applies in Wales.

Now, it would have also avoided this unsatisfactory position, where we find ourselves today, where Members of the Senedd are being asked to give consent to some of this Bill’s provisions whilst withholding consent to others. Now, Members will know that this has happened before. This does not provide the UK Parliament with an unequivocal decision of whether or not the Senedd has given its consent to legislate in devolved areas.

Now, we know that the Minister has expressed concerns with the drafting of powers that allow for the addition of international agreements to the list in Schedule 9 to the Bill, and for the making of regulations to deal with the procurement consequences of a trade dispute under an international agreement. The Minister indeed first raised concerns with the UK Government in respect of the power to allow for the addition of international agreements back in May 2022. However, it's our understanding that that provision continues to be included in the Bill. So, we've asked you on several occasions, Minister, at which point you would use the inter-governmental relations dispute avoidance and resolution process, which has now been set out, to resolve any of these concerns. You've told us it's not anticipated that would be necessary. But, Minister, in the circumstances, I would be really grateful, on behalf of the committee, if you could update us on whether these concerns have now been raised through that process, and, if not, your reasoning for not doing so.

Minister, for a while, you had also expressed concerns about the absence of commencement powers for the Welsh Ministers within the Bill. You've touched on this in your opening remarks. In memorandum No. 5, you said that you were now content with the position in respect of commencement powers, as UK Ministers' commencement of devolved Welsh aspects of the Bill will now be subject to the consent of Welsh Ministers. But we have to ask the question of why this position is satisfactory, as the Welsh Ministers continue to have no powers whatsoever to commence the Bill's provisions in Wales. So, again, Minister, I would be very grateful if you could just explain to us why you are now, therefore, content with this position.

Finally, Minister, you also say within memorandum No. 5 that if the Welsh Ministers refuse to provide consent to UK Ministers' commencement of the Bill's provisions in Wales, the UK Government would be able to amend the Act resulting from this Bill so that it no longer applies in respect of devolved Welsh procurement. Now, it seems to us to be highly unsatisfactory that a disagreement on when to commence powers might result in the UK Government disapplying the provisions in the Act as they apply to Wales. So, Minister, as we have highlighted and recommended in our report, it would be really helpful if you could set out in your response the Welsh Government’s assessment of the implications of a refusal to consent to the UK Government's commencement of the Bill's provisions in relation to Welsh contracting authorities, and also the Welsh Government's assessment of the implications of a subsequent decision by the UK Government to remove those provisions from the Bill. And I look forward to your response, Minister. Diolch yn fawr.

The Conservative group is pleased to be supporting both motions that have been laid relating to the LCM today, which will be introducing revised legislation for the processes and procedures of Government public procurement. This Bill will take advantage of the post-Brexit opportunities, allowing the United Kingdom to shape its own procurement rules while complying with our international obligations, including the World Trade Organization's agreement on Government procurement, giving businesses across the UK guaranteed access to £1.3 trillion-worth of public procurement overseas.

The Procurement Bill will also slash more than 350 complicated and bureaucratic rules that govern public spending in the EU. Removing these and creating more sensible rules will not only reduce costs for businesses and the public sector but also drive innovation by allowing buyers to tailor procurement to their exact needs. Not only will this Bill speed up and simplify public procurement processes, it will place value for money at the heart of procurement and create greater opportunities for small businesses and social enterprises to innovate public service delivery. 

The Procurement Bill will also make it easier for small businesses to win more of the £300 billion-worth of goods and services that are bought by Governments, across Wales—indeed, access to the £8 billion in Wales, as the Minister mentioned. It will also introduce new rules to help the UK Government procure, in emergency situations, such as during health pandemics, ensuring that contracting authorities can react quickly to tackle any emergencies, similar to those we experienced with COVID-19. And obviously, that benefits Wales. So, Llywydd, I ask all Members to join with us and the Welsh Government in supporting this LCM and its two motions. 

Can I begin by stating clearly Plaid Cymru's strong opposition to the use of LCMs as a matter of principle? Decisions affecting devolved matters in Wales should always be made in this place. The increasing and worrying use of LCMs by the UK Government symbolises their disrespect for devolved administrations and signals their intent to plough on with the increasing centralisation of UK politics. 

As someone who was closely involved with social partnership and procurement legislation over the past few months, it's disappointing that the Welsh Government did not use the opportunity provided by that Bill to make stronger provisions on public procurement procedures. On behalf of my party, I tried on many occasions to establish principles and benchmarks in public procurement through Senedd legislation, rather than relying on a UK Government-driven Bill. Unfortunately, the Labour Government was not for turning. As a consequence of this decision, a vast and far-reaching range of provisions affecting Wales will be implemented with little actual oversight by the Senedd. It cannot be repeated enough times that scrutiny within the legislative consent process is a vastly inferior substitute to that which is afforded by a Senedd Bill. Not only is this approach a poor reflection on the Welsh Government's management of its legislative agenda, it also undermines the Senedd's credibility as a law-making body. The Welsh Government should give greater consideration in future of the democratic deficit caused by the LCM process. 

Turning to the specifics of the LCMs in question, a particular area of concern is the fact that the Minister has seemingly rowed back on previous Welsh Government objectives for amending the Bill. As noted by the recent Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee report, an amendment to clause 123 of the Bill, which makes UK Ministers' commencement of devolved Welsh aspects of the Bill subject to the consent of Welsh Ministers, does not actually achieve the aim set out by the first memorandum to equip Welsh Ministers with the relevant commencement powers themselves. This means that Welsh Ministers continue to have no power to commence the Bill's provision in relation to Welsh contracting authorities. Could the Minister therefore explain why she is satisfied with the aforementioned amendment, despite achieving significantly less than the Welsh Government's initial ambition in this area?

The amendment in question also allows the UK Government to effectively carve out Wales-related provision from the Bill in the event that Welsh Ministers refuse consent, on the application of the aforementioned commencement powers. Could the Minister therefore confirm whether, under this scenario, the Welsh Government would need to introduce primary legislation to address the resulting gaps?

Finally, it's worth reflecting on the implications of the Bill in terms of reducing the accessibility of law, especially at a time when the Welsh Government is undertaking work to improve the accessibility of law in the areas of historic environment and planning. On this basis, will the Minister reverse her stance on undertaking an internal review of its approach to legislating on procurement law, in order to inform future practice, as recommended by the LJC's report on the first LCM? Diolch yn fawr.

In the absence of any controls on food imported into Britain, we will continue to attract criminals intent on presenting food that is not what it says on the label, whether it's imported meat, reared to lower animal welfare standards or avoidable carbon emissions, or whether it's honey adulterated with water or cheap sugar syrups. Exiting the EU has left us naked to fraud by criminals, and the question is whether or not this procurement Bill fills those gaps. I appreciate that there's a huge amount of value in enabling businesses to trade across Britain without having to have another layer of regulations. Transparency is essential, but unless there is enforcement of the regulations, then they're not worth the paper they're written on. So, for example, our success in obtaining PGI status for a range of Welsh produce, whether it's salt marsh lamb, Welsh leeks, cockles or honey, will come to nought unless we have simple, transparent enforcement of regulations.

I note the first bullet point in the legislative committee's report on the subject of international agreements being added to the list in schedule 9, which means that there would be no requirement to obtain consent of Welsh Ministers, either if the UK Government decided to change regulations overnight, which could have an immense impact on Welsh producers, or it could decide to do nothing in the face of significant change in international trading arrangements. We've all seen the impact of the war in Ukraine, which has caused havoc to food supplies from Ukraine to developing countries and starvation beckons for some countries. But the concern I have is that, for example, the international agreement that was signed with Australia and New Zealand by Liz Truss hasn't yet had much impact on Welsh farmers, because they are selling everything that they produce to China at the moment. But if international trade with China was interrupted on a massive scale, the result could be absolutely catastrophic for Welsh producers. And if Welsh Ministers don't have the powers to act and ensure that UK Ministers have to consult Welsh Ministers, then I don't see how Welsh Ministers are going to be able to take appropriate action, which has been provided within the agriculture Bill, to take action when there are food security risks to our country. I find the whole landscape here very fragmented.

We have the social partnership and public procurement Bill. We have this procurement Bill, and then we have the agriculture Bill. All of these things should really be meshed together, and I am not confident that they are. So, I understand and I have heard from what Rebecca Evans was saying about the importance of having clarity for producers to be able to sell to other countries, but I think we should be seriously concerned about the potential for other countries to dump stuff on us, or to adulterate things and try and sell us things that are actually not what they say on the tin. So, I look forward to hearing the remarks of the Counsel General on this important matter, because this seems to be quite serious.

The Minister for Finance and Local Government to reply. Rebecca Evans.

Thank you very much to colleagues for their contributions, and, again, thank you to committees for the work that they've done. We're absolutely committed to facilitating Senedd scrutiny, and, as I think has been recognsed, the scrutiny periods for the memorandum were originally shorter because of the anticipated timing of the conclusion of the Bill's committee stage in Westminster, but the reporting deadlines for memoranda 3, 4 and 5 were extended by several weeks when it did become clear that the timetable for the Bill had changed. So, at any opportunity, we have built in more time. And the various recommended extensions for each of these memoranda, and the rescheduling of the consent motion debate today, I think, have been a result of our attempts to ensure that the Senedd has as much scrutiny time as possible. 

But, I think, one of the most important things to recognise is that Welsh Ministers have secured standalone, equivalent regulation-making powers for the vast majority of the powers in the procurement Bill, so the Senedd will have the opportunity to fully scrutinise the detail of those regulations in due course. 

Turning to the issues around commencement, we are absolutely committed to commencing at the same time as the UK Government, to avoid the detrimental impact on cross-border suppliers and buyers of doing otherwise, and the UK Government is absolutely in the same space as us; we are intending fully to commence at the same time. However, if we were to withhold consent to the date of commencement of certain provisions in the Bill, there could be a potential delay in the commencement for Welsh contracting authorities. It wouldn't be the case that they were removed from the Bill entirely, and it's not possible to carry out a financial assessment at this time, as the financial impact would be dependent on the length of the delay. But, as I say, we're absolutely committed to not finding ourselves in that situation, and, to reassure colleagues, I have spoken to officials earlier on today, and they reassure me that we're very much in step in terms of the preparation of the regulations that we will need to put in place. So, work is very much in step either side of the border. 

So, on that question, really, about why there is more than one Bill, well, officials have worked really closely across this organisation to make sure that there is maximum alignment between the procurement Bill, our own Social Partnership and Public Procurement (Wales) Bill, and also, the work, of course, that my colleague, Eluned Morgan, is taking forward in respect of the Health Service Procurement (Wales) Bill. And I think that they do dovetail very well, and I'm confident that the approach taken does give certainty and clarity for buyers and suppliers across Wales, because I think it is again important to recognise that this is the preferred approach of suppliers and contracting authorities here in Wales. We consulted with them before deciding to legislate—or asking the UK Government to legislate on our behalf—and it was very much their preferred approach, because they recognise the benefits of doing this in this way. 

We have managed to protect Welsh interests, though, in terms of the legislation. The amendments that we've secured—I know they were areas that the committees were interested in—related to the definition of a Welsh authority. So, there was an amendment accepted and tabled in the House of Commons on 25 January, which provided clarity on that. We asked for an amendment in relation to the commencement powers contained within the Bill—I've described that, and that was tabled on 2 February—and an amendment to powers to make consequential provisions to reflect the Welsh Ministers in the areas of the Bill, and again, I've referred to those, and that was tabled in the House of Commons on 25 January. And, also, then, there was interest from committees in an amendment that has the effect of ensuring that a Welsh contracting authority's duty to have regard to the Wales public procurement policy statement will not be enforceable in civil proceedings; they should be enforceable through judicial review only. Again, that was an amendment that was accepted and tabled in the House of Lords. 

So, I think I would agree with what my Conservative colleague has said, actually—that this Bill does provide significant benefits for businesses in Wales, in the sense that there will be a duty on contracting authorities to have regard to the barriers that SMEs may be facing, and look at how they can be removed. There'll be increased transparency measures, meaning that suppliers will see all of the opportunities, including the pipelines of future opportunities and advertised below threshold procurements, all in one place, and the new competitive flexible procedure will provide more opportunity for innovative procurement. And I've already talked about the improvements in terms of transparency. 

And, then, just to finish, because I do realise I'm over time, the Bill does have opportunities for some suppliers through reserved contracts, which is obviously important to us in Wales. So, it's retained the current provisions allowing contracting authorities to reserve procurements for supported employment providers, for example. So, there is a range in which not-for-profit and mutuals will be able to benefit as well. So, I think that the legislation is an important new opportunity for contracting authorities and suppliers here in Wales. The kind of consistency across the border is important, but let's not forget how important the public procurement Bill, which my colleague Hannah Blythyn is leading on, is in terms of driving forward our own Welsh values through procurement as well.

The proposal is to agree the motion under item 11. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is objection. Therefore, voting on item 11 will be deferred.

The next proposal is to agree the motion under item 12. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is objection. We will therefore defer voting on that item.

Item 13 is next, the LCM on the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill, and I call on the Counsel General to move the motion—Mick Antoniw.

Thank you Presiding Officer. I move the motion.

This Bill has no legislative merit in a modern, responsible parliamentary democracy. Unlike the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill, which sought to ensure legislative continuity and consistency, this is an ideologically motivated discontinuity Bill. It serves no constructive purpose and sabotages years of parliamentary and legislative convention and democratic process. It will not improve the legislative framework or improve legislative understanding and accessibility, rather the contrary. If it continues in its current form it will create confusion and lead to as yet ill-understood and unforeseen consequences. It undermines the credibility and status of parliamentary democracy, placing immense power in the hands of Government Ministers to bypass parliamentary scrutiny and democratic accountability. It is a threat to and undermines devolution. In summary, it is a recipe for legislative chaos. Whatever a person's political perspective—left, right, centre—it makes no difference; this is just a bad, ill-thought-out, authoritarian Bill that discredits Parliament.

In the past months, Welsh Ministers have said time and time again to UK Ministers that this Bill needs to be prevented, or it needs to be significantly changed. But, to date, the UK Government haven't done either of those two things. The Welsh Government disagrees vehemently with the whole intention of the Bill. Generally speaking, we believe that retained EU law works well, as EU law worked well prior to that. Of course, gradual change over time, in the usual way, would make sense. But this Bill creates a rushed process of revocation or removal. It does this in an unacceptable way, without consultation and without real impact assessment, and without appropriate scrutiny of individual pieces of law. It means that pieces of retained EU law will lapse without any scrutiny unless steps are taken to prevent this. This is a waste of important Government and parliamentary time just to keep the crucial things that the Bill would otherwise remove automatically from law.

In the six months since it's appeared, the Bill has created great uncertainty and risk for everyone. UK Government Ministers still haven't clearly stated which pieces of law they want to retain and which they want to revoke. It's possible that UK Government Ministers will remove all pieces of retained EU law by the end of this year. That would have a terrible impact in the light of losing social and environmental measures that are crucial. Rather than that, we should see a more cautious process to review all pieces of retained EU law cautiously. The UK Government should work with other Governments as equal partners in order to ensure that things are consistent across the UK, but we still don't know exactly how this will evolve.

What I can say is that the Welsh Ministers have no desire to amend retained EU law in devolved areas to reduce standards using powers given to us by this Bill. We intend to maintain the protections derived from retained EU law. We will work with the Senedd and build on existing collaboration with stakeholders to address retained EU law as appropriate.

But let me take you through some of the main substantive concerns about the Bill's provisions, as we set out in our original legislative consent memorandum on 3 November 2022. There are a range of measures in the Bill that destabilise and jeopardise the devolution settlement. Firstly, we believe that any powers to amend retained EU law within devolved areas should reside in the first instance with the Welsh Ministers. Where powers under the Bill are exercisable by UK Government Ministers in devolved areas, then this should, as a minimum, be subject to an affirmative consent requirement of the Welsh Ministers in advance, and this should be on the face of the Bill. This is a fundamental point of constitutional integrity, which needs to be addressed as a priority. Any exercise of that power that could see the UK Government legislating in a devolved area without Welsh Ministers' consent would be unacceptable, both to the Welsh Government but also to the Senedd. We have pressed this with UK Ministers. They have declined to agree to this viewpoint, or even to express a view. We continue to pursue suitable amendments to the Bill.

Secondly, the arrangements for sunsetting retained EU law are unacceptable, because they would allow the UK Government to seek to sunset legislation made by the Senedd. Also, the deadline of 31 December 2023 is, of course, totally unreasonable and carries huge risks. Thirdly, if all this work cannot be completed by the sunsetting date, the Bill must give Welsh Ministers powers to extend the deadline in order to avoid undesirable and potentially calamitous gaps in the statute book, just as it does for UK Ministers. It is just constitutionally unacceptable for the Welsh Ministers to have to ask UK Ministers to exercise this power on their behalf.

Finally, as regards the devolution settlement, we cannot accept any scenario where changes in devolved areas could be restricted under the Bill's provisions. At present, there is an unfair and imprecise requirement that changes to retained EU law should not increase the regulatory burden. It is imperative that devolved Governments and legislatures are left to regulate in a way that they see fit, without interference from the UK Government in devolved matters. Any restrictions within the Bill itself or through its wider interaction with the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020 that would prevent devolved Governments from being able to change retained EU law to maintain or raise standards would be incompatible with devolution.

More generally, we have further concerns regarding the delivery of the Bill and its wider impacts. Firstly, the Bill is rushed and it creates a large and unwelcome administrative burden for Welsh Government, and creates additional scrutiny work in the Senedd. We are now only nine months away from a huge body of important law potentially being extinguished. It is very disturbing; there is no clear position from UK Ministers on how they intend to use the powers the Bill gives them to retain these provisions. We have such little time, not only to take actions to ensure that retained EU law we want to maintain in devolved areas is preserved, but also to consider the impact of UK Government decisions on our devolved responsibilities.

Secondly, as you know, business organisations, unions and many others have expressed concern about the UK Government's approach, especially the lack of clarity and the rushed timescale. We urge the UK Government to listen to the legitimate concerns of stakeholders who know the regulatory system well. They are keen to maintain its benefits to business, to citizens and to the natural environment, and we as Welsh Government are happy to do so with stakeholder groups in Wales as soon as the UK's position is clear and we know what we face.

Finally, we expect that, where policy is within the scope of devolved settlements and there is an appropriate common framework in place, the UK Government will live up to its commitments and that the inter-governmental mechanism will be fully engaged. I'm sure that the Senedd shares our fundamental concerns about this Bill. Diolch, Llywydd.

I'm very sorry to hear the tone of the Government's contribution on this very important matter, because it seems to me to be nothing more than an attempt to simply try to reopen old wounds—old wounds that were healing—over the issue of Brexit. And I know you want to keep refighting those old battles, but, frankly, you've already lost. The majority of people in Wales—and I know it's an inconvenient truth that you don't like to remember, but—the majority of people in Wales voted to leave the EU, and one of the things that people have expressed concern about was the unnecessary red tape that sometimes the EU foisted upon businesses, farmers and people across Wales. And frankly, it's time to change the narrative. I'm fed up of the scratched record that is the Welsh Government bleating on constantly about Brexit. We need to start being a bit more positive, and to frame it positively—let me be clear about this, because I want to dispel some of the myths that you have further propagated today and which no doubt will be echoed by others in this Chamber later on—the truth is that this Bill will not weaken one iota any of the environmental protections we already enjoy in this country.

In addition, the UK Government has been absolutely clear that it is committed to upholding the current position on workers' rights here in Wales and across the UK. And just to put this into some sort of perspective, let's not forget that we already have better rights than most people across the whole of the EU when it comes to maternity and paternity leave and pay, when it comes to a national living wage and a national minimum wage, and when it comes to the all-important issue of annual leave, which is longer here as a minimum requirement than specified in EU law. I'll happily take the intervention.

I'm pleased that you're happy to take an intervention. You're trying to assure us, or reassure us, that the UK Government take workers' rights seriously, and yet, when workers were demonstrating against poor pay and conditions, the very first thing they tried to do was remove the right to be part of a trade union and the right to express their feelings. So, if on that premise you think we're going to take that as read, I don't think it's much of a promise.

Look, I know we hear a lot of twaddle in this Chamber, but that was absolute tripe, frankly. The UK Government has not stopped anybody joining a trade union in any way, shape or form, and it's not stopped anybody being able to strike; what it has done is it's set out a very clear route to protecting minimum standards in our important public services that should be upheld from a public safety point of view.

The third thing that, of course, the UK Government has given a clear commitment to do is to take the necessary action in order to safeguard the substance of any important EU laws, so that the legal effects of those obligations under things like the EU withdrawal agreement, for example, can continue to be upheld. Now, the process of reform has already started and is already well under way. Eighteen per cent of EU law has already been reviewed and 18 per cent of EU law has already been retained, revoked or completely reformed. That's the information that's publicly available to everybody in this Chamber on the retained EU law dashboard, which is available from the UK Government for everybody to see. You can see all of the laws there that are being reviewed, the status of each and every single one of them. And I know the Welsh Government wants to just sit on its hands, do nothing and wait until the end of the year, so that it can manufacture a crisis over this. You need to pull your finger out, frankly, and start having a look at the laws that you want to be able to retain, so that you can have a dialogue with the UK Government and make it clear which parts of the EU law are important to you, so that they can make sure that they take those things into account.

We've already, of course, seen some of the benefits discussed in this Chamber of the revocation of some of the EU law in things like procurement. We've been debating procurement this afternoon. We've got huge opportunities as a result of the withdrawal of Wales and the rest of the United Kingdom from the EU as a result of that. So, I want to encourage you: stop being so negative, take a look at the dashboard, have a look, department by department, at the EU law that affects Wales that you want to see retained, make your views clear to the UK Government, and they can then be taken into account. But stop being alarmist, stop the tripe, stop the nonsense.

I forgot to call the Chair of the constitution committee—I must have a 7.45 p.m. kick-off on my mind. The Chair of the constitution committee, Huw Irranca-Davies.

Diolch, Llywydd. Our committee has produced one report on the first three memoranda for this Bill. We weren't able to report on memorandum No. 4 and produce something that could have meaningfully assisted Members during this afternoon’s debate. Whilst this is unfortunate, it is a direct consequence of amendments being made at a late stage to Bills in another Parliament that affect us here in Wales.

Llywydd, our main report clearly identifies where we have reached a whole-committee view, and where we have agreed a position as a majority. But as a whole committee, we have expressed deep concerns about the Bill and the implications for this Senedd, and I want to make clear to the Senedd that this is based on the evidence that we've taken and the legal and constitutional analysis that we've diligently applied. It's also fair to say that this analysis is not unique to us, but is echoed by other authoritative committees in Westminster and in Scotland.

This Bill is not like others. It is severely lacking in providing appropriate and constitutionally acceptable oversight by Parliaments of Government action, and we have concluded that it enables an unacceptable power imbalance between the Executive and the legislature. That should concern us. The Bill presents a real risk that the Senedd will be bypassed on decisions being made in devolved areas. I repeat that: could be bypassed on decisions in devolved areas. And more generally, we are greatly concerned that the Bill would enable Ministers, rather than Parliaments, to significantly alter the UK’s regulatory and legal landscape. And furthermore, we are being asked to sign a blank cheque, because neither the UK Government nor the Welsh Government can successfully and confidently identify what is retained EU law. Just let that sentence sit with you for a moment. So, laws might fall off the statute book without the Governments having even informed the Parliaments that this has happened. We, as the Senedd, would have no way of determining whether this was by accident or by design.

So, let me briefly address a number of recommendations in our report. Recommendation 3 relates to the second sunset date in the Bill, namely 23 June 2026. If this sunset date remains in the Bill, we said that the Welsh Government should, as a matter of urgency, raise with the UK Government the unique issue of the 2026 Senedd election and its conflict with this sunset date. This is a material concern. We welcome the Counsel General’s commitment to do this, and I'd welcome an update from the Counsel General on whether this has been discussed to date.

Recommendations 7 and 8 deal with the UK Government’s dashboard of retained EU law. We’ve said that the Welsh Government should share its own list of Welsh-made retained EU law with our committee and with the UK Government as soon as possible, and that it should request that its list is added to the dashboard. Again, I welcome the Counsel General’s agreement to these recommendations.

In recommendation 9, we have said that the Bill should be amended to require Ministers to lay before the legislatures of the UK by 30 September the details of the retained EU law that they intend will fall on 31 December. There is a key chronology here, I say to colleagues. Now, I welcome the Counsel General’s commitment to pursue this with the UK Government. Again, Counsel General, I would welcome any updates that you might have.

In recommendation 10, we have called on the Welsh Government to ensure that Wales remains compliant with international obligations, as required by the devolution settlement, and, indeed, by the Welsh Government’s ministerial code. And the Counsel General has committed to come back to my committee after further discussion on this with the UK Government.

In recommendation 11, we have asked the Welsh Government to clarify with the UK Government how it will take into consideration the views of the Senedd in respect of changes to reserved retained EU law. And again, I welcome the Counsel General’s agreement to this. In recommendation 15, we said the Welsh Government should assess the Bill’s impact on Wales as a matter of urgency.

And our final recommendation—recommendation 17—said the Welsh Government must set out a frank assessment about the resource and capacity implications for the Welsh Government of implementing the Bill, and identify what legislative activity will be displaced in order to ensure the delivery of the tasks it will need to complete this by the end of 2023. And the Counsel General has committed to provide these assessments.

Members, the Senedd could be confronted with an unprecedented workload this autumn. You will recall that, in September 2022, the Senedd was placed in a difficult situation when the Welsh Government asked Members to approve regulations with known defects because of the imminent switching off of a delegated power in the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018. So, with this recent experience fresh in our minds, we believe, as a committee, it's critical that the Senedd is prepared to schedule additional sitting weeks this autumn, and respond with agility should it be needed. We cannot overstate our concerns as to the effect this Bill could have on the certainty and the quality of law as it applies in Wales.

A clear majority of our committee agrees with the Counsel General that the Senedd should withhold its consent to the Bill; not all members of the committee share that view. But, to conclude, I invite the Counsel General to confirm what his plans are for future memoranda and a further consent debate, if the Bill is amended again in the Lords' Report Stage. Diolch yn fawr iawn. 

In a crowded field, the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill may be one of the worst pieces of legislation to come out of Westminster in living memory. By setting arbitrary and unrealistic time frames for the removal of retained EU law from the domestic statute book, regardless of its actual practical effectiveness, this UK Government has once again prioritised its reckless ideological compulsions ahead of responsible governance. It is ill conceived, impractical, and will cost taxpayers tens of millions of pounds, all because of the Tory party's irrational hatred of anything connected to the EU.

Rushing through the review of retained EU law runs the considerable risk of allowing a wide range of vital regulations on areas such as employment rights, environmental standards, food quality, health and safety, and animal welfare, to simply drop off the statute book without adequate replacement. This is the deregulatory race to the bottom that we all, on these benches, feared Brexit would precipitate. Are these consequences by design or just a good old-fashioned Tory party fiasco? You can make your own minds up about that.

As a matter of principle, Plaid Cymru is wholly opposed to the use of LCMs. Decisions affecting devolution in Wales should always, without exception, be made in full by the Senedd. What are the full implications of this Bill? The truth is we don't know yet. During his appearance before the Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee last year, Lord Callanan of the UK Government admitted that the full extent of the Bill would not become apparent before its passing. While the Welsh Government is now undertaking its own exercise to identify Welsh-specific retained EU law, the task will inevitably consume a considerable amount of time, energy and resource that could be far better spent actually addressing the priorities of the people of Wales.

An idea of the scale of the resource implication for the civil service came from the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, which admitted spending £600,000 on staffing costs alone in just two months as part of the review of the Bill, despite holding responsibility for only 318 pieces of retained EU law. With this in mind, I would like to know the Welsh Government's current estimate of the resource demands, both in terms of cost and staffing, that arise from the ongoing review of Welsh-specific retained EU law.

Another troubling aspect of this Bill is its concentration of powers in the hands of Ministers at the expense of proper parliamentary scrutiny. This is, of course, apparent in terms of the power dynamic between Westminster and Welsh Government, given the fact that the Bill opens the door for UK Ministers to unilaterally legislate in devolved areas. With good reason, therefore, this Bill can be regarded as further evidence of this Tory Government's centralising tendencies and predisposition for treating the devolved settlement with contempt.

Yet again, taking back control means, in reality, the clawing back of power away from Wales and towards Westminster. So, it's not just the public finances that the Tory Government is seeking to take from us. Although we acknowledge the fact that Welsh Government did not seek these powers in the first place, it is nevertheless essential that the Welsh Government exerts every effort to ensure that the bad practices that have become par for the course for this Tory Government do not creep into our democracy here in Wales.

To close, I ask this: has the Welsh Government made any recommendations to the UK Government regarding the strengthening of Senedd oversight over the powers granted to Ministers through the retained EU law Bill? Diolch yn fawr.

This has nothing to do with reopening old wounds. There’s nothing to do about not accepting the Brexit result. This Bill is a recipe for terrible law making. It will create uncertainty on what the law is, it will bypass parliamentary scrutiny across the United Kingdom, and it is yet another example of a UK Bill that undermines the devolution settlement.

How on earth does any Government think it’s a good idea to revoke law before even knowing what that law is? By analogy, it’s like me opening a very large statute book, blindfolded, trying to guess that I’m in the right area, and then start ripping out pages of that book and just hope for the best that I’ve revoked the proper law, the right law. And don’t take my word for it: as Peredur Owen Griffiths mentioned, when Lord Callanan was challenged about this, when he was asked how much significant European law would be kept, changed or altered before the Bill is passed, he said he did not know. The UK Government does not know the answer. I have no confidence that this UK Government has thought through the implications of this poor Bill. This is a move driven by ideology rather than by good law making.

The fact, as Huw Irranca-Davies pointed out, that the sunset clause can be delayed until 23 June 2026 shows that the Senedd and its election is totally forgotten or totally unimportant, or both, in Whitehall. Obviously, the date has been decided as some sort of 10-year celebration of Brexit rather than serious law making that shows respect to the devolved legislatures of the United Kingdom.

I’ll go a step further than my colleague Peredur Owen Griffiths when he said about bringing back control. That was a rallying call of Brexit, wasn’t it? Bring back control. But it’s more than bring back control to Westminster; it’s bring back control to the hands of the UK Ministers. It’s not to the national Parliament, but to the UK Government itself. Fortunately—fortunately—there’s been cross-party support across UK Parliaments for greater parliamentary scrutiny. It’s such a shame that the Welsh Conservatives don’t reflect the views of Tory peers at the House of Lords. Does the Counsel General agree with that call, and what steps will he take to strengthen the role of this Senedd to scrutinise the powers exercised by Welsh Ministers?

This Bill is not some sort of niche constitutional argument; it impacts basic human rights. As has been mentioned by colleagues already, important areas in employment law, environmental law and consumer protection, such as hard-fought-for rights to paid annual leave, parental leave and protection against fire and re-hire, could be lost. And again, don’t take my word for it, as the highly respected independent legal charity, the Public Law Project, said this: the Bill’s ministerial powers constitute

'a blank cheque to rewrite or repeal valued rights and protections.'

This isn’t a politically motivated argument from our point of view. This is serious. The UK Government has no idea what they’re doing, no idea of the complex areas they are going into by doing this ideologically motivated move.

Counsel General, a final question: how will the Welsh Government ensure that it complies with its duties under the Equality Act 2010 and protect the rights of the citizens of Wales? Diolch yn fawr.

The Counsel General to reply to the debate. Mick Antoniw.

In closing, Llywydd, I’d first of all like to thank the four Senedd committees who took such an interest in the Bill and have written to me and other Welsh Ministers. I’m particularly grateful to the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee for its scrutiny in respect of the LCM and the supplementary LCMs and their detailed report, much of which I agree with, as has already been noted in my response of 9 March.

As I tried to explain, we are in a very undesirable situation not of our own making. As the Welsh Government, we continue to explain to the UK Government what is wrong with the Bill and to seek the most effective changes that we can, and we are still fighting to secure mitigation of some of the worst impacts. I'll update the Senedd if and when there is any progress. Also, as a responsible Government, our priority is to deal with the Bill in order to minimise the damage it will cause to Wales. That point has been made, and I confirm we will do all that we can, as the Bill proceeds through the House of Lords, in terms of representations with regard to the sort of changes that need to be made. Again, I'll continue to share detailed thinking with the Senedd. 

I'll just comment very briefly on a few of the points that were made. To Darren Millar's points: Darren, this is about parliamentary democracy. It's about the bypassing of Parliament, it's about the undermining of Parliament, and it's about putting powers into hands of Ministers with no accountability or scrutiny. I'm sure you all agree deep down that you know that that is undemocratic. 

Will you take an intervention?

Yes, certainly. 

It is important that we have parliamentary democracy and that things are properly scrutinised. This piece of legislation, of course, is being scrutinised by the UK Parliament, in which there are 40 Members sent from Wales. But I did not hear, at any point, while we were members of the European Union, any complaint or gripe about the fact that you were not able to scrutinise much of the Commission's law making, which was impacting on the people of Wales. Why is it that you have a different attitude now, even though the UK Parliament is able to scrutinise matters?  

First of all, with the EU legislation, of course, there was scrutiny and it was scrutinised within Parliament. But secondly, the point that we particularly make here is that all this legislation is not going to be scrutinised by the UK Government, it is giving authoritarian powers to UK Government Ministers, and, indeed, to Welsh Ministers, and that has got to be unacceptable. It is certainly not taking back control. This is what David Davis, Brexit campaigner and former Brexit Secretary, said:

'we are being asked to sign a blank cheque—one might almost say a pig in a poke—because we do not even know how many pieces of legislation are going through on the back of this Bill, let alone what they are. That, of course, is not democratic.'

You said the UK Government have already looked at 18 per cent of the Bills. What about the remaining 3,800 pieces of legislation that no-one has a clue what they mean, what the contain and how they will be relevant? That has to be done by the end of December.

In respect of the comments made by Rhys ab Owen and Huw, I have, of course, given detailed responses in writing to the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, and I will, of course, no doubt give further sessions. But, of course, one of the concerns we do have is the impact all of this will have on our own legislative capacity, on the demands that will be on the Senedd. I have to say that the task, as expressed by the Welsh Government and by the Scottish Government, is an almost impossible task, and that is also something that is recognised in Parliament. 

Unfortunately, whatever changes we have requested to date, there is no sign from the UK Government that they will be accepted; they don't seen to be open to making significant changes. Without changing direction entirely, I can't see any version of this Bill that the Welsh Government could recommend that the Senedd consent to it. Therefore, Llywydd, I ask Members to reject consent for this Bill.  

I therefore ask Members to withhold consent for this Bill. Diolch. 

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

Item 14 is next, which is a debate on the Final Stage of the Historic Environment (Wales) Bill. I call on the Counsel General to move this motion as well. Mick Antoniw. 

Thank you, Llywydd. Today, after nine months of scrutiny, the Historic Environment (Wales) Bill returns to the Senedd to be considered for the final time. When I introduced the Bill, last July, I highlighted its historic importance as the first consolidation Bill as part of the Welsh Government's ambitious programme to improve the accessibility of Welsh law. The Bill brings together the main pieces of law and legislation that relate to our historic environment. The law is organised and restated in simple, everyday language. For the first time, the law is available in a fully bilingual format, but, importantly, as is required by our Standing Orders, the consolidation work has ensured that the fundamental impact of the law has not changed.

In its welcome report, after detailed committee consideration, the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee recommended that the Bill should proceed to the Final Stage. I want to thank the Chair of the committee, all of the committee members and the committee staff for the detailed attention they have given to this very substantial Bill. The committee's deliberations were informed by evidence from the Law Commission and from stakeholders, and I extend my thanks to all who took the time to contribute. In a number of cases, their input can be detected in provisions of the Bill. My final thanks go to the Bill team, who have worked for a number of years to bring the consolidated legislation for the Welsh historic environment to this point. Their work will continue with the development of the subordinate legislation and their engagement with stakeholders.

The Historic Environment (Wales) Bill is not only a consolidation of legislation, it is also part of a code of Welsh law. Alongside consolidation, codification gives us an important tool to create and maintain order in the Welsh law book. If passed by the Senedd, the Bill, together with the subordinate legislation needed to support it, will form a code of Welsh law on the historic environment and be published together. In codifying law for Wales, we are following the footsteps of one of Wales's earliest known legislators, Hywel Dda, who according to tradition codified the law of Wales in the mid tenth century. We are also taking Welsh law forward to a new era of order, accessibility and adaptability. The Historic Environment (Wales) Bill is only the first step forward in a wide-ranging plan to modernise and reform the law for Wales.

The legislation repeals (Wales) Bill, which repeals redundant provisions no longer of practical utility or benefit, will be introduced to the Senedd shortly. Work also continues on the modernisation and simplification of planning law, an even more significant undertaking than the Historic Environment (Wales) Bill. I trust, therefore, that the Historic Environment (Wales) Bill will meet with your approval, as will our further efforts to consolidate, codify and improve the accessibility of Welsh law. Diolch, Llywydd.

It's my pleasure to speak at the Final Stage of this consolidation Bill. I want to join with the Counsel General in thanking those who've worked so hard on the Bill as it's travelled at some pace through the Senedd over the last few weeks. In particular, I want to thank the LJC committee for their work on the consolidation Bill. Second, it may surprise the Chamber that we as Welsh Conservatives will be happy to support this Bill today as well. Although we were disappointed that our previous amendments were not supported, we are grateful that the Counsel General was willing to listen and consider a range of views.

A number of the amendments concerned shipwrecks, and I'd like to reassure the Chamber they were not wrecking amendments, but amendments on wrecks. I welcome the fact that the Counsel General is open to suggestions on protecting the historic marine environment and that he'll be conducting a review in this area, but I'd like to assure him we'll keep a close eye on how he conducts the review and his adherence to the timetable he set out to the committee of the end of 2024. I'm looking forward to assessing what the Welsh Government comes up with in terms of a historic marine environment Bill and the future protections for shipwrecks. However, until we see that Bill, we'll reserve judgment.

It's my pleasure to support today's Bill on behalf of the Welsh Conservatives, upon which we'll continue to be a critical friend. Thank you.

I've done it again, and forgotten the Chair of the constitution committee. I wonder why. Huw Irranca-Davies.

Diolch, Llywydd. It's because I'm not in the Chamber waving my arms at you. I think that's why it is. I've only got a few brief comments, but I do welcome the opportunity to say a few brief remarks this evening, as we conclude our consideration of the very first Welsh consolidation Bill. At the close of a late Tuesday evening in the Senedd, this Final Stage debate on the Historic Environment (Wales) Bill is itself an historic legislative moment.

The consolidation Bill scrutiny process is very different to what Members will be most familiar with when it comes to Bill scrutiny here in the Senedd. One main difference is that following detailed committee consideration of the Bill, which involves the consideration and disposal of amendments, just like Stage 2 for normal public Bills, my committee had to report to the Senedd and recommend whether the Bill should have a further amending stage in this Chamber, or whether it should proceed to Final Stage. That's the difference with a consolidation Bill. We recommended that the Bill should be able to come straight to Final Stage. 

Our report also sets out two matters that we considered before making this recommendation. Firstly, during our initial consideration of the Bill, we drew to the Counsel General's attention a number of issues with the Bill, and we do believe that these issues have been addressed by the Counsel General during our detailed committee consideration. Secondly, during the detailed consideration, my fellow committee Member James Evans tabled amendments, which have just been referred to, relating to the protection of sites of historic wrecks—though not a wrecking amendment, as we've just been told. These amendments were not agreed, but as a committee we are content with the subsequent information provided by the Counsel General about how the Welsh Government will indeed take forward plans to review all the legislation relating to the protection of sites of historic wrecks and anticipated time frames for undertaking such work.

When I spoke during the initial considerations back in January, I said on behalf of the committee that—[Inaudible.]

I'm afraid we are losing the connection with you, Huw Irranca-Davies. Unless it can be restored very suddenly, I'm going to move on. I'm sure that most of the points you were about to make are a matter of record in your report as a committee. I'm going to ask the Counsel General, therefore, if he has any comments to make to sum up the debate. 

I just have a few closing comments. The points made with regard to the marine environment are valid ones. I think the problem was that with the marine environment, there are many aspects to it. It's not just about shipwrecks; it ranges from submerged prehistoric landscapes to the evidence of modern industrial and military activity. There are certain areas that are potentially reserved. To review the whole of it and to do it properly is quite a considerable undertaking. It is one that needs to be undertaken, it is an area that needs to be consolidated, and it is an area where there will be a review to assess what is required in order to undertake that particular process. So, it's not something forgotten. I'd also remind Members that, of course, consolidation and codification is not a race; it is a long-term process in respect of some of the areas of law. I've mentioned the statute law (repeals) Bill, but also the planning Bill, and no doubt there will be others in due course.

I'm pleased to move the Historic Environment (Wales) Bill. If you pass the legislation today, owners of scheduled monuments or listed buildings in any corner of Wales will, for the first time, be able to find the legislation that they need in one place, in Welsh or English, and in a language that is clear and easy to understand. This will transform the protection and management of the Welsh historic environment. I urge you to support this legislation. Diolch, Llywydd.

Thank you, Counsel General. In accordance with Standing Order 26.50C, a recorded vote must be taken on Final Stage motions, so I defer voting on this item also until voting time.

That brings us to voting time. Unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, I will move immediately to our first vote.

The first vote this afternoon is on the LCM on the Social Housing (Regulation) Bill. I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Julie James. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 39, no abstentions, 12 against. Therefore, the motion is agreed.

The next vote is on the LCM on the Procurement Bill, motion 1, and this was tabled in the name of Rebecca Evans. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 39, no abstentions, and 12 against. Therefore, that motion is agreed.

The next vote is on the LCM on the Procurement Bill, motion 2. I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Rebecca Evans. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 13, no abstentions, 38 against. Therefore, the motion is not agreed.

The next vote is on the LCM on the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill. I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Mick Antoniw. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 13, no abstentions, 38 against. Therefore, the motion is not agreed.

The final vote is on the debate on the Final Stage of the Historic Environment (Wales) Bill. I call for a vote on the motion to approve the Historic Environment (Wales) Bill. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 51, no abstentions and none against. Therefore, the motion is agreed.

That brings voting to a close and concludes our business for today.