Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru

Good afternoon and welcome to this Plenary session. The first item on our agenda this afternoon is questions to the First Minister, and the first question is from Mike Hedges. 

Thank you. The Welsh Government has secured important reforms to the Barnett formula in recent years to put its funding on a more sustainable footing. However, the formula remains flawed as a long-term mechanism for allocating funding across the devolved Governments within the UK.

Diolch. A few years ago, I spent several exchanges explaining to Richard Wyn Jones that there was an element of need in the formula. And we have never given Carwyn Jones enough credit for negotiating the Barnett floor. There’s consensus that it needs changing, but to what? There are two changes that would make Wales substantially worse off, which are population share, or our tax take less our share of the Westminster expenditure. We’ve had piecemeal and asymmetric devolution, which needs addressing. Will the First Minister, as a matter of urgency, contact the Prime Minister and ask for an independent review of Welsh funding via the Barnett formula, creating a new formula?

Thank you for the question. As well as Carwyn Jones, the First Minister, it’s also fair to reflect, as he's in the Chamber, that the then Finance Minister had a hand to play in those direct negotiations to introduce an additional needs-based element in the funding formula, and that work that Mark Drakeford undertook does mean that we’re in a much better place than at the start of devolution on the formula. But we recognise that it’s not a long-term answer. That’s why the manifesto commitments to update the fiscal framework are welcome, and there is more work for us to do. Until we do get to a better long-term formula, in line with the proposals in 'Reforming our Union', actually having fairness on Barnett really does matter. We’ve been used in the last four or five years to having regular attempts to get around Barnett as well. And I think, now that there is more significant devolution in England as well, with metro mayors, it will help us to make the case that, actually, funding for the nations of the UK, and for the regions of England, really does matter. And the Prime Minister made a pledge in his first press conference about power and decision making needing to come out from Westminster. That’s good news for us, good news for the rest of the UK, and, I believe, it will set us on a path to a fairer long-term funding formula.

First Minister, I’ve made my position very clear over many years when it comes to the Barnett formula. I believe it is outdated and that a fairer, needs-based funding model is needed here in Wales. Now, as you know, there are several different models used across Europe, including the models of fiscal federalism in Germany, fiscal equalisation mechanisms in France, and so forth. First Minister, can you tell us what the Welsh Government’s position is on the models used in other European countries, and can you also tell us what sort of model of funding you believe works in both Wales and the UK’s best interests?

Well, we’ve set out the Welsh Government’s proposals in 'Reforming our Union', to look for a principles-based approach to UK funding and fiscal frameworks. It’s a real positive. There’s a recognition that the current fiscal framework for Wales is out of date. And that’s really important on a whole range of areas, about the flexibility we have about managing our money. We saw this during the pandemic, when, actually, because we’d been more efficient about the way we’d spent money and used it, we were actually then treated as another department of the UK Government, where, actually, they had massive underspends in what they were doing. That meant that, on money that Wales should have been able to roll over in an entirely normal way, a decision was made by the Treasury not to allow that. The wider flexibilities we need in updating the fiscal framework will make a real difference whilst we move towards the set of proposals we set out in 'Reforming our Union'.

Question 2 [OQ61405] has been withdrawn. Question 3, Vikki Howells. 

Thank you very much for the question. I am proud that the collaboration between us and the Eisteddfod is stronger than ever. By working together, we ensure that everyone, from all backgrounds, can experience our culture and the Welsh language, and I look forward to attending for the first time as First Minister.

Diolch, First Minister. On 3 August, the National Eisteddfod comes to Pontypridd—the first time it’s been held in south Wales since 2010. With the proclamation having taken place in Aberdare in my constituency last year, and with a programme of events being held throughout the local authority area, this is truly a celebration for all of Rhondda Cynon Taf. I am keen that we maximise the long-term cultural, educational and economic benefits from this. So, First Minister how is the Welsh Government working with partners to ensure a lasting legacy from the Eisteddfod for the local community?

It's a really good question, and I'm pleased that you've reminded everyone that the proclamation took place in Aberdare. The physical event may be taking place in the Counsel General’s constituency, but it really is an event for the whole of RCT. The estimated economic benefit is over £22 million to the local area. But, it’s more than just a sense of pride; it’s actually a two-year relationship, from the proclamation through and beyond, and I hope that it will leave a real lasting legacy and positivity. It is about remembering that the Eisteddfod and the language and the culture belong to all of us, and it’s how we access it with the Welsh language ability we have. I think the venue, actually—making it genuinely accessible through Ynysangharad park—is a really good step forward as well. I know some people like to go to a big tent further afield from a population centre, but having a mix in how the Eisteddfod works I think helps to make it accessible, from one Eisteddfod to another. We are deliberately investing money to make sure that people who come from lower income backgrounds can access the Eisteddfod as well. We’ve supported that with £350,000 this year—a genuine statement about the language and the culture belonging to all of us, regardless of our ability in the Welsh language. I look forward to visiting and to enjoying the Eisteddfod myself and to having the opportunity to showcase my skills as a continuing adult Welsh learner.

First Minister, the National Eisteddfod is an extremely important event for an area to hold, and I’m delighted that it’s being held in my home town of Pontypridd this year, the home of the Welsh national anthem. Not only will it bring tourism to the town, but it will provide significant economic benefit and showcase what the area has to offer. However, as you will be aware, Pontypridd has for some time experienced high levels of alcohol an drug-related anti-social behaviour. RCT council are currently consulting on renewing its public spaces protection order that has been in place since 2018 and covers the town centre, Ynysangharad war memorial park, and the railway and bus stations. The National Eisteddfod is likely to attract hundreds of thousands of visitors to Pontypridd over the nine days it is held. With this in mind, I’m keen to know what the Welsh Government is doing to support local police and the council in helping ensure that anti-social behaviour is kept to a minimum. Thank you.

I think it's important to reflect that, whenever and wherever the Eisteddfod is held, there is a really strong partnership between the Eisteddfod itself, the local authority that hosts it and, indeed, the Welsh Government and other partner organisations, including of course the police. So, I’m very proud of the fact that we provide £1 million of core funding and the additional sums that I referred to in response to Vikki Howells to make it genuinely accessible to people from all backgrounds. So, there will be conversations with the police, with the local authority and with the Government about how we manage the Eisteddfod, in an environment that is generally a family-friendly event, where families can and will attend and deliberately make the effort to go. But, actually, the incidental traffic from people in and around Pontypridd—. I am genuinely looking forward to going to the Eisteddfod, to seeing people access the Eisteddfod, some of them for the first time, and enjoying it in a safe and friendly environment. That is what I have always found whenever I’ve attended the Eisteddfod, both in my current time as a Senedd Member and also when I was genuinely a young man and the president of NUS Wales, going to the Eisteddfod and feeling a genuine welcome on the maes and trying out the bits of Welsh, which I hope I have more of in the last 20-odd years.

We’re very fortunate today as we have the youth parliament of Ysgol Gynradd Gymraeg Evan James with us, which is the closest Welsh school to the Eisteddfod field. I know that they've been preparing bunting, banners, and are hugely excited to have the Eisteddfod in their town. So, I want to follow on from Vikki Howells's point—the legacy certainly can be felt. The fact that we have so many Welsh language events taking place has been fantastic. For someone who usually tries to attend all Welsh language events, it's been impossible to do so, which is very rare in an area such as Pontypridd. But, the concern is that this activity will come to an end. There are a number of funding sources that have been invested in creating these events. So, can I ask, as part of the 'Cymraeg 2050' strategy, how will we ensure that legacy, and the growth that we need in terms of Welsh-medium education, so that we can then get this legacy that we’re all seeking? I do think we need funding and a strategy, as that's not going to happen without Government support, I fear.

When it comes to how we want to continue to grow the language amongst young people, particularly those at school—and it's great to see a host school in the gallery with us today—I will be making a legislative statement confirming our proposals for the future of Welsh medium-education and improvement. But it's more than that; it's actually about how have a cultural and an economic future for the language, for young people to be able to use the language in their everyday life, including through music and socialising, as well as the economic future. So, there's a range of different interventions that go around this, in addition to what we're looking to do within our schools, in both Welsh-medium education and, of course, improving the teaching and learning of Welsh in the English stream as well.

In all of that, we need the staff to do the job, and we need to generate the spirit of enthusiasm and inclusivity around the language as well, so that, whatever your Welsh-medium ability, you feel positive about using that, and that is part of how we'll grow the language. And that is a really important lesson for adult learners, like me, in that you aren't going to have someone judging you for getting some parts of it not perfectly right, but are actually to be welcomed and encouraged to do more and to use more. And I hope to show that not just in the Eisteddfod week, but through various parts of my time as First Minister.

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

Thank you, Presiding Officer. First Minister, yesterday you hosted the new UK Prime Minister. He talked of the Tata plant—[Interruption.] I thought I'd get you a cheer, at least, once in this Chamber, First Minister. [Laughter.] You can thank me later. The new UK Prime Minister came to the Senedd yesterday. Obviously, on everyone's mind is the Tata Steel situation in Port Talbot, which is of pressing time constraints now that Tata have shut the one blast furnace, blast furnace 5, and, obviously, there's the timeline to blast furnace 4 in September. Can you enlighten the Chamber today as to whether the new UK Government has presented a new plan to Tata Steel to secure the longevity of blast furnace 4 so it can stay open as long as possible? And, if that plan has been submitted, what timeline have Tata Steel indicated they are working to to assess it and, ultimately, give you an answer on it?

Thank you for noting that the Prime Minister, just a few days into office, has come physically to Wales. That is a really positive statement. I didn't have the opportunity to meet the previous Prime Minister in Wales. I did see him briefly in Normandy. When people have been asked, of course, what they wanted at that election, I'm delighted the people of Wales chose to implement a blanket ban on Welsh Tory MPs, and we then have an opportunity to deliver on the manifesto on which 27 out of 32 Welsh MPs were elected. And Tata is a significant part of that. We are dealing, though, with a legacy of the previous deal offered by the Conservative Government, that Kemi Badenoch celebrated as being good news—that's essentially the plan that Tata are working too—with eye-watering job losses within it, and we are very much at the very end of the line on this.

And I do have to reflect yet again that, several years ago, when I was first appointed as the economy Minister at the time, Kwasi Kwarteng, as the business Secretary, attended a steel council in Cardiff, and there was a deal to be done that would have delivered significant co-investment and a different and a better future for steel at the time. It was the occupants of 10 and 11 Downing Street at the time who wouldn't sign up to that, and it's no surprise that Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak have left us in no better a position now. We are, though, engaged in good-faith negotiations with the company. That is engagement from the Welsh Government, me and the economy Secretary, engaging directly with Jonathan Reynolds, as the new Secretary of State for Business and Trade, and conversations with the UK and the Mumbai leadership. Those negotiations are on the back of a manifesto that can now be delivered. The £0.5 billion that has not been spent, the £2.5 billion that is available to transform steel across the UK and those negotiations have a limited window over a period of weeks to succeed. We can't undertake those negotiations in public, and I don't think steelworkers or steel communities would expect that. What they do expect is that both Governments, here in Wales and across the UK, will fight for a better deal for steel and for steelworkers, and that is exactly what we are doing.

My question was relatively straightforward: has a plan been presented to the Tata board? Because we were told that you had an oven-ready plan to deliver once you assumed the office of UK Government Ministers and Secretaries of State being able to negotiate a new deal with Tata. That was what we were told. And I note, in your long answer, that you didn't indicate that any deal has been presented to Tata Steel. But what we do know is that, ultimately, the clock is very much ticking on this. So, are the discussions—[Interruption.] Are the discussions focused—[Interruption.] Are the discussions focused more on new investment for future projects, or are the discussions focused on extending the life of blast furnace 4? We understand that you can't go into the commercial sensitivities, but at least give some hope as to the direction of travel in the absence of the answers you have given that indicate that no plan has come forward yet.

I'm afraid that the second question just feeds into a real level of cynicism that people feel around politics. The phrase that the Member used, 'oven ready', was used by the Conservatives in 2019 about the Brexit deal, and we saw what happened there. I have never said that, Jeremy Miles has never said that, the Prime Minister has never said that, Jonny Reynolds never said that. What we have said is what we have consistently said: there is a different level of investment available from the now, current, UK Labour Government. There is a different level of ambition for the future of steel that is available with this UK Labour Government, with a significant mandate and an economic plan that will require more steel in our future, not less. Trying to claim that we had used a phrase that has never been used is—you could almost say that it's act of deliberate deception.

I think, when we get to the serious businesses of negotiations with the company, which is what I set out in my first answer, that is exactly what is taking place. We won't be bounced into the sort of language and the lack of fidelity to the facts that the Member seeks to urge on us. And, on this issue, the Conservatives need to recognise that they are completely without credibility. To now say that the clock is ticking and we're nearly at the end, when actually there have been years when a deal could and should have been done—a better deal was available to be done several years ago. That is the reality of this. You really do remind me of an arsonist with his matches angrily shouting at the fire brigade. We are now in the position of trying to rescue the damage and the dereliction from your 14 years across the UK. I will not take a single breath of lecturing from you or any other Conservative on our ambition and our commitment to the future of steel.

First Minister, you have accused me of being an arsonist; you have accused me of deliberately misleading. You are a First Minister who is standing there with a vote of no confidence around his neck. You are a First Minister who took £200,000 from a man with two criminal convictions. You are a man who, ultimately, has stood there week in, week out and been not able to answer the questions that we have put to you week in, week out about those donations. And I can see your health Minister chopsing away there from the frontbench—

Hold on. I wasn't intervening, but 'chopsing away' is probably not respectful enough to discuss—. She was making comments, as absolutely every single one of you are in this Chamber at the moment. I'm sure you're bringing your question to a conclusion. Carry on, Andrew R.T. Davies.

I asked you for two points. One: is there a plan on the table, and has that been put to the Tata board? You clearly have not indicated that a plan has been put to the Tata board. And two: will the investment that is identified, the £2.5 billion that you talk of the Government making available, be for future projects or to sustain the continuation of blast furnace 4? So, I put those two points to you once again: where is the plan and, above all, is it linked to future investment or is it linked to the continuation of blast furnace 4 that will safeguard the jobs in Port Talbot during the transition to arc furnace, which we have supported and continue to support?

Well, for all of the shouting and the finger pointing, I think the leader of the opposition hasn't been listening to what I've been saying. Listening is important in Government and in politics, and, if you look at what I have been saying, the negotiations are continuing with the UK leadership and with the Mumbai leadership. We're not going to undertake those negotiations in public about what a better deal for steel looks like. In the limited window we have left after the Conservatives have quit the pitch, although, frankly, they were hardly active players over the last few years on these issues, we will understand whether we've been able to secure a better deal with a significant additional co-investment available, with a significant additional ambition for the future of steel, and I just do not believe that any of the Member's words or angry protestations will carry any impact in steel communities. They know who has been on their side and who still is on their side, and they know where he rests in that equation.

The leader of Plaid Cymru, Rhun ap Iorwerth.

Thank you very much. I want to start by congratulating all of the MPs who were elected in Wales last week, and I wish them well in representing communities in Wales. Wales stated its opinion very clearly on 14 years of Conservative Government, but there was a very clear message for Labour as well not to take Wales for granted. Plaid Cymru stood on a positive platform for fairness and ambition, and it was lovely to be with Ann Davies and Llinos Medi in Westminster yesterday, as they joined Liz and Ben there.

I have written to the new Prime Minister congratulating him, and I know the four Plaid Cymru MPs will hold him and his new Government firmly but constructively to account. We've already heard a lot from the Prime Minister about his wish to reset the relationship between the Governments and nations of the UK, but those words, as welcome as they are, must mean something, and I'm afraid I'm still worried about some of what I'm hearing: new Labour Minister, Stephen Kinnock, on the BBC over the weekend saying that the Crown Estate should not be devolved to Wales. 'I don't think we need to be overly worried about process, now, moving the pieces around the jigsaw puzzle', he said—the kind of dismissive approach that echoed what the new Secretary of State for Wales said about the devolution of justice being a matter of 'fiddling around with structures'.

Now, the First Minister knows very well that these issues, as well as fair funding and HS2 funding and so on, are much more than process and structures; they're core matters of fairness. So, did the First Minister forget to make an early pitch to the Prime Minister for a little respect to be shown to Wales, or is the new Government already choosing not to listen? 

Well, I congratulate every new Member of Parliament who has been elected to represent Wales in Westminster. I'm sure they will all do their best for the communities that have chosen to elect them. I won't name all 27 of our Welsh Labour MPs or the 11 new names that are representing constituencies in Wales, but I believe they will be fantastic champions for every part of the country that they represent, and I wish them all well. Because part of our challenge, honestly, is how we remake the case for politics as a positive endeavour to serve the country. There are people across this Chamber who are decent people who simply disagree; far too much of political discourse in the last few years has been to demonise and deny that to people we don't agree with. And I hope that we can do better than that, and that comes from the top, both here and indeed across the UK Government.

When it comes to the position of the new UK Labour Government, I had a very warm and positive meeting with the Prime Minister. I don't buy into the campaign of grievance and disappointment within the first week that the leader of Plaid Cymru is so keen to force upon us. That isn't the view of the people of Wales, either, in the way that they voted. I am keen that we deliver on the manifesto we put before the people of Wales—that will take devolution forward, and it will see real progress across our economy and support for public services on a whole range of areas where a mission for the UK can only be delivered if Wales plays its full part. So, I look forward to not just fairness in funding, but, actually, a much better future for all of us here in Wales, and I believe the election of a UK Labour Government really will deliver the change that Wales and Britain need. I look forward to working with the Prime Minister and a new team of Labour Ministers across the UK to do just that.

Many people listening to that will regret that a Welsh First Minister is not demanding that fairness for Wales and those decisions on funding around HS2. And to have a First Minister saying that he's happy to have a manifesto implemented that did not promise to pursue the interests of Wales in terms of the devolution of crime and justice, that's a worrying sign at the start of this new UK Government.

Now, saving thousands of jobs at Port Talbot has to, certainly, be one of the most important strategic priorities for Keir Starmer. Eight weeks ago, the First Minister himself flew to India and urged the management of Tata Steel to wait for a UK Labour Government before taking a final decision on Port Talbot. Now, we all knew that what the Tories were offering was woefully inadequate, and there is now an opportunity to pursue a different path. But, as my colleague, Luke Fletcher, has pointed out on numerous occasions, despite the welcome commitment of £3 billion for the steel sector as a whole, we have little understanding, I think, still, of what that means, including, crucially, how much of that £3 billion can be dedicated to Port Talbot, how to save the jobs and how it can be used to try to continue primary steel making in Wales. So, can the First Minister update us now, after that meeting with the Prime Minister yesterday, so that the workers of Port Talbot are given the reassurances that they need? Will he give us more detail on the what, the how and the when of Labour's plans to safeguard the future of Welsh steel? 

I think there are three broad points to mention. The first is that the Welsh Labour manifesto does pursue Welsh interests, and it's a manifesto upon which 27 of our nation's 32 UK MPs have been returned. It's a manifesto that will see a greater say for Wales on the future of Wales. It's a manifesto that, I believe, can lead to much greater investment in our infrastructure, including across transport. If you just think about north Wales, where the claim that there was a £1 billion investment was simply not true—it was made by a party at the end of its time in Government—we are looking for a plan to deliver real investment in our transport infrastructure. The appointment of Lord Hendy as the rail Minister is a good example of someone we can work with who does understand the need for further investment here in Wales. I'm confident that our team of Ministers here, and the 27 Welsh Labour champions who have gone to Westminster, will make the case and deliver real investment in our rail infrastructure and much more. 

It's also worth pointing out that the national wealth fund is another example of where I expect Wales to benefit, and to benefit disproportionately. If you consider again the ports investment that took place under the last Government, with £160 million for the whole of the UK, Pembroke Dock and Milford Haven were excluded from that. We are now going to see a quadrupling of that in the national wealth fund, together with the ability to lever in more private investment. All of those things matter in dealing with our climate and nature emergencies, but, more than that, the race for clean power can only be achieved if we deliver a significant chunk of that here from Wales and the jobs that should come from Wales as well. That's why I look for immediate action around the Crown Estate—it's to make sure that we can have a much better offer when it comes to the supply chain. The real value being delivered is that supply chain, with a longer term list of jobs in communities that will see power generated. I want to see opportunities so that people can, then, plan a genuinely ambitious future here in Wales. That is what we are working towards, that is this Government standing up for the interests of Wales, and having a willing and positive partner to do so, and that is what I believe people voted for last week.

The First Minister didn't answer my question on the £3 billion and what share of that will come to steel in Wales; perhaps he can come back to that point. But I'll finish with health. The new health Secretary in England had barely set foot in the department of health before he pronounced that the NHS is broken. I assume he was talking about the NHS in England, although with Labour in Wales having deliberately muddied the waters on that particular devolved issue during the election, I can't be quite sure.

But, if the NHS is broken in England, surely it's broken in Wales too, with its record waiting lists. Now, despite the hard work and dedication of the staff, our NHS is on its knees here in Wales, largely because of the decisions of Labour health Ministers over 25 years, and coupled, yes, with Tory cuts. So, Wes Streeting declared:

'From today, the policy of this department is that the NHS is broken.'

I don't disagree with him, by the way, and that's why Plaid Cymru called on the Welsh Government to declare a health emergency back in February. But can the First Minister confirm whether admitting that the NHS is broken is now also the official policy of the health department of his Labour Welsh Government, or will he continue to take the attitude that, as far as the NHS under Labour in Wales is concerned, there's nothing to see here?

Well, again, the leader of Plaid Cymru is seeking to put words into my mouth that I've never used, and to try to reach a judgment that is certainly not the judgment of this Government. I do agree, though, that our staff are under tremendous pressure, and, without the extraordinary commitment and expertise of our staff in primary care and in hospital-based care, we would not be able to deliver our service. It's a fact that most people have a good outcome and have timely care in their own experience. Our challenge is far too many people do wait too long, and far too many people don't have the experience that we would want them to. We know there's been a huge backlog created after the pandemic with the extraordinary measures that we had to take. Recovery in our healthcare seems to be taking even longer than we thought it would do. We're still not yet at the same level of efficiency on a range of procedures in the service—that has an impact. We've diverted £1 billion into addressing the backlog, with long-term waits coming down, but we know there's more to do. That has meant we haven't been able to invest in, if you like, the front door, the primary and the community care part of our system, which we know will deliver, longer term, better outcomes, and reduce need within our system. We also have huge public health challenges that are society wide. The health service deals with the sharper end of that, but there's actually a whole range of measures that we need to take successfully to try to get on top of those.

I have never and will never be complacent about the challenges and the extraordinary pressure that our healthcare system is under. To get on top of that, to see the improvement that we know that we need to, that we want to, will not just take slogans in this place, it will take real hard work. It will take reform and resources. It will take modernisation. We've been modernising our service in a range of areas. And, actually, Wes Streeting is looking at delivering a range of the improvements in delivery of healthcare that we have delivered here in Wales. We have a much better offer on pharmacy in Wales than in England. He's looking to do more of that. We've changed the way that dentistry contracts—with more new patient episodes. I'm very proud of the work we've done in optometry. Interestingly, when I was seeing people in Ireland, they were very interested in what we had done in moving more services with greater access to front-line optometry. So, we have a number of things we should be proud of, as well as recognising the significant number of challenges we do have.

And on Tata, I refer him to the answer I've given to the leader of the opposition: we are in a negotiation—a negotiation with a limited window. You'll have heard the leader of Community—the largest steel union at Port Talbot, the largest steel union in the UK—indicating in his view a window of four to six weeks, to understand if a better deal can be done, if we can persuade Tata to change course, to invest in the future and give us a different period of transition. That is only possible because there are now two Governments on the pitch, fighting for steel and steelworkers, because there is a different level of co-investment, and a different level of ambition for the future of steel. And I believe that steelworkers and their communities understand that, and know that we are doing everything we could and should do for them, and, indeed, what it means for our economic future as well.

Thank you for the question. We look forward to working with the new UK Labour Government and addressing together the many challenges and opportunities that Wales and the wider UK face. We want to help create a new partnership to provide economic stability, fiscal responsibility and boost growth. I was pleased to have the opportunity to start that direct conversation with the Prime Minister yesterday.

Thank you, First Minister. Sadly, the biggest winner of the general election was apathy. We had one of the worst turnouts ever recorded. My party takes a lot of the blame for that, but so does yours. Far from having a tremendous mandate, your party only secured the support of a third of the electorate that bothered to vote. Therefore, First Minister, you have a huge task ahead of you in persuading people to participate in democracy. You made a huge number of promises during the campaign. When will you now deliver on them, given that you have done little to grow the economy, improve educational attainment, or tackle NHS waiting lists? How will you convince people that their vote matters?

Well, I think people who went to the polls understood that their votes really did matter. They made a decisive shift, both away from the Conservatives and in understanding that it's the Labour Party in every nation of the UK that represented that change. That's why we now have a majority of Members of Parliament in England, Scotland and Wales for the first time in more than 20 years, and I wouldn't describe having more than 400 Labour MPs in the UK Parliament as a poor result. I think it's a really positive result with a mandate that gives us the room to act across the UK, and Wales will benefit from that, but also the responsibility to do so as well, to deliver on the manifesto we have. And, actually, sticking to the pledges we have made in office will make a difference, understanding that the deliberate division of the culture wars that have been started in the last few years is something we have to put behind us. If we think that our main parties will benefit from going towards extremes of view or demanding that everyone accepts that their opponents are somehow extremists when they are plainly not, I think that will actually drive more and more people away from politics. The anti-politics vote for people who voted for an alternative party, the anti-politics apathy that exists with the fall in voter turnout, I think they speak to how our debates are conducted and the cynicism that I believe exists in far too many communities. 

I look forward to having a genuine partnership with the UK Government. I look forward to meeting the honest challenge on many doorsteps about the length of time it will take to put right the last 14 years, showing that who you vote for matters, and that we are basically decent people who disagree with each other about how to improve the country. I acknowledge that there are decent people in the Conservative Party; I disagree with you about the future for the country. I think that honest engagement will be good for all of us, and I look forward to delivering on our mandate here in Wales and, indeed, that wider mandate right across the United Kingdom.  

It is welcome, of course, that negotiations are happening between Tata and the new UK Government. We remain clear that if we want the jobs guarantee, then nationalisation is one way of securing that. Now, I take what the First Minister said about ongoing negotiations, but if the UK Government does pursue the strategy of giving cash to Tata to persuade them to stay, would the First Minister agree with me that that cash must come with specific terms and conditions, unlike the investment given by the previous Government? And would he also agree with me that one of those conditions should be a golden share for Government, so that any investment made can be recouped when that company becomes profitable once more?

Look, there's a number of discussions that have to take place and are taking place, and I think it's one of the things that people should just reflect on the reality of where we've been, not just the position we've been landed in after several years of a Conservative Government that fled the pitch on this issue, but also when there was a real risk that both blast furnaces would close. Myself and Jeremy Miles spoke to each other; I spoke to Keir Starmer, still the leader of the opposition; we spoke with Jonathan Reynolds, still a shadow business Secretary at the time, and we had not just conversations with ourselves, but with the company and other partners as well. And that did make a difference, I believe, in moving to a position where a conversation about the future is still possible, when it might not have been through that election week. And that has continued after the election. 

So, this isn't just about good faith. It isn't just about ambition. It is about a direct conversation with a Government that has a mandate to act, and the ability to co-invest in the future. And I would expect that that co-investment would come with expectations and agreements on jobs and future investment. I do believe that it's possible to secure a better deal. Even if it were just a small possibility, it must be the duty of this Government and any decent UK Government to pursue that possibility, to try to protect more jobs, and that steel-making capacity that is essential for the future of our economy here in Wales and the wider UK.    

First Minister, our criminal justice and prison system is in a dire state, and many of the people in prison shouldn't be there in the first place; they need to be better helped with the underlying factors that lie behind their offending. And, of course, if the prisons are overcrowded, it makes rehabilitation very difficult, and that creates more reoffending, more victims of crime. So, I'm very pleased that our new Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, has made James Timpson the Minister of State for Prisons to deal with these problems, because through his ideas and through his action in his own business, he's demonstrated his progressive attitude and how these matters can be properly dealt with.

So, with this new approach that we will have, First Minister, will you commit to Welsh Government services, such as mental health, skills and training, homelessness and, of course, alcohol and drug abuse? All of those services, will you make sure that they're part of this new constructive approach, so that we have fewer victims of crime and better standards of life in our communities?

I think the Member makes an important point about the real crisis we see across prisons. It's frightening to have seen what the inspectorate has recently said about the conditions in prisons: the overcrowding, the crumbling conditions as well—a wholly inappropriate environment—and also how full our prisons are getting as well. We're at the point where the UK Government may be forced to build new prisons, not because it wants to put more people in jail, but because it simply can't deal with the people that it's got, and the estate is in such a poor state that we're going to need to close prisons as well. Now, that's another part of the legacy that the UK Government inherits.

I agree with you, the appointment of James Timpson is a proper signal of wanting to understand how you bring people in with expertise who can deliver practical progress. There's, if you like, an ideological perspective that many of us will take about what the right sort of answer should be, but it's intensely practical as well. If you look at what the Timpson business has done, and others, they provide a route for people to leave prison and to have a stable life in wider society. Now, that is in all of our interests. It's in all of our interests as taxpayers, as people who may be connected to people within the prison estate now, but also for communities where people return as well. So, this isn't just about the punishment element of putting people in prison; it is about prevention and rehabilitation and needing to get that right, so people aren't simply on a merry-go-round of going in and out of the criminal justice system.

And it underpins the conversation we need to have about the future of probation services. Not everyone will have read the UK Labour manifesto, but it talks about what is already taking place in greater Manchester, where they're able to link devolved services, including housing and others, and they've managed to link that into probation, and it delivers better outcomes. This isn't simply a case of redesigning a map of where we want powers to lie; it's actually where and how you can deliver better services with better outcomes for the people engaged and involved, as well as the taxpayer. And I believe that is not just a discussion that we will have, with Lesley Griffiths being our lead Minister in this Government, but I believe it's a destination point for the UK and Wales, to have a different form of organisation to deliver much better outcomes that each of us can be proud of.

I have had the opportunity to meet and discuss Wales's immediate priorities with the new Prime Minister and the then shadow Chancellor, now the Chancellor, over recent weeks. I look forward to working together with the new UK Government to confront and overcome the many challenges that Wales and the UK face, but also to take advantage of the opportunities that we have in front of us too.

Thanks for that.

The Tories are no longer in Government in Westminster, and hallelujah for that, but will the change Starmer has promised be more than an empty word for Wales? When you met Sir Keir yesterday, did you discuss fair funding for our nation? Did you demand the money we're owed from the Crown Estate and HS2? Because to govern is to choose, to choose what is prioritised. Now, we've heard already that some key figures in Sir Kier's new Cabinet have made clear that Wales will not be a priority for them, either in terms of devolving powers or giving us the cash that we are owed. So, First Minister, how will you stand up for Wales against those devosceptic instincts of the new regime? In whose service will you choose to govern?

I've already chosen to govern in service of the people of Wales, and I'm very proud to do so. And I'll carry on undertaking that role with partners in the UK Government. And, actually, in the conversation with Keir Starmer, of course I discussed the future of fairness around Barnett, of course I discussed the investment opportunities in rail infrastructure and the need to deliver something that will actually meet the needs of our country. I'm looking for a plan that can actually deliver, and I go back to the example of north Wales, as the £1 billion pledge that was claimed was never a plan; there were never real opportunities to do that. What I want is a proper plan that will actually see not just agreement on priorities—some of that work has already been done—and to understand how we have a plan that will see investment that will make a real difference. I think that's the space where the public want us to be as well, and rather than—.

I understand the narrative that the leader of Plaid Cymru wants to have, but if you listened to what the Prime Minister said in his first press conference, he made very clear that there is too much power in Westminster, and it needs to go to people who have skin in the game: local decision makers in regions of England; national decision makers here in Wales and, indeed, in Scotland. The Prime Minister didn't simply do a tour to visit Labour colleagues; he showed the respect that the UK deserves and that has been lacking for the last decade and more, by physically coming to meet the leaders of the nations of the UK and making clear that there really will be a change in the way that the UK is governed and in the choices that we will make, and that will lead to the delivery of the manifesto that 27 out of 32 Welsh MPs have been elected on. Of course, I respect the right of those who have different manifesto pledges to make their case.

Peter Fox. 

Sorry, Llywydd.

It's okay. If you want to ask a question—. No. That's okay. We'll move on. 

Thank you for the question. Our priority is to develop reliable, affordable and sustainable public transport services that deliver for people and communities across Wales, including, of course, North Wales, which the Member represents. We will empower our regions to develop regional transport plans that meet the needs of their area and provide practical support to help deliver them.

Diolch, First Minister. The recent investment of new carriages by the Welsh Government through Transport for Wales is making a huge difference, as is the Welsh Government bus grant, which has kept services running over the last year. As you said earlier, the UK Government did not sign off the letter for £1 billion to electrify the north Wales coast line, and they twice rejected bids for EU replacement levelling-up funding for railway infrastructure in north Wales. First Minister, working with the new UK Labour Government cross-border, would you consider using some of the structural funding—the replacement funding—for integrated public transport and a bus pilot in north Wales, developing clear information and services, which is really important, based on passenger need, working in partnership with Transport for Wales, local councils, operators and residents to develop the network and sustain and return services, such as recently happened in the village of Llandegla in north Wales? Thank you.

I’m delighted to see the return of services to Llandegla, which the Member has highlighted, but also to confirm again that the pre-election pledge by the Conservatives on north Wales electrification was never a real plan. It was not an honest statement to make to the public. Network Rail, as the Member knows, have confirmed that, despite the promise, no formal development work was undertaken. They were not given a remit and no formal work has been undertaken with them since 2013.

When it comes to what we could do in the future, delivering our manifesto pledge to restore decision making over former EU funds is one of the big opportunities that we have. To go through that, we will need to work with partners to understand what those priorities will be and work with what we’ve been able to do already. I’m very pleased the Member has highlighted the bus grant that has kept services in play that could otherwise have fallen away. We’ll probably talk more about buses in the statement later on this afternoon. But that does mean we have opportunities to look again at the regional investment framework that was co-produced with a range of partners before the last election, to update that and to make sure that we have a clear understanding of what we can do with that, in addition to other areas of future devolution.

I’m very excited on the skills front about what we can do in restoring money into apprenticeships and in the devolution of employment support funding. There are big opportunities to make a real difference in every community. What we’ll have to do, though, is decide what are our strategic priorities and how we choose to use those. That is quite properly in the remit of this Government, to be held accountable by the Senedd, and to do that work with our partners is what I intend for us to do.

Thank you. Our tourism strategy, 'Welcome to Wales', sets out our approach for growing the visitor economy. It emphasises the core areas of delivery that focus on increased spend, spreading economic benefit and helping to address seasonality issues, with sustainability at the heart of all our activity. This is backed by a £50 million Wales tourism investment fund for major projects and a £5 million 'brilliant basics' fund for capital investment on a smaller scale.

Diolch yn fawr iawn. You will know, with the crucial summer months coming, that there is widespread concern about the Welsh Government’s potential introduction of a tourism tax in Wales. That concern is so widespread that it has, in fact, spread to the new Chancellor, Rachel Reeves, who, last week, when asked if she supported the introduction of a tourism tax in Bournemouth, said, ‘I’m not in favour of making the staycation more expensive than it already is. I want more people to holiday in Britain. I want to support our vibrant hospitality and leisure sector. So, when we’re in the middle of a cost-of-living crisis like we are today, I don’t think it’s the right thing to do.' So, can the First Minister explain why a Labour Chancellor in one part of the United Kingdom is saying that this tax would be damaging to our economy and make the staycation more expensive than it already is, and a Welsh Labour Government here in Cardiff Bay is pursuing exactly that policy?

Quite apart from the irony of a Member of the Senedd not understanding devolution, it's worth pointing out that a tourism levy won't come into place until 2027 at the earliest. It will be a permissive power for local authorities to decide what to do, and they will then have choices to make over how to use it. It's worth pointing out that this isn't just commonplace in many parts of the rest of the world. If you go on a sun-and-sand holiday to European destinations, you're probably paying a tourism levy of some sort, if not two different types. If you go to North America, you're almost certainly paying a state and often a city-level levy as well. If you look in the UK, greater Manchester have used a levy that they've invested in supporting events, to generate more return for their night-time and visitor economy. Being creative about how we support the sector is important to understand what sustainable looks like. And this is actually about us making sure that devolution doesn't just stop in Cardiff Bay. We're looking for legislation to give powers to local authorities to make choices, for them to be accountable for those choices, to demonstrate the benefit or otherwise of using those powers or not. I think this is a good example. In the longer term, I think people will see this as a real success. Of course, the Member is entitled to carry on making his argument that has had such great success with the people of Wales last week.

Thank you for the question. The Welsh Government is committed to ensuring high-quality healthcare provision to children and young people in Wales. A comprehensive range of policies and programmes, implemented across the Government, play a pivotal role in improving health outcomes and promoting child health and well-being for children here in Wales.

Thank you for your response, First Minister. The situation on the ground with children's health is undoubtedly getting worse. They're not my words, but the words of Dr Nick Wilkinson from the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health. He says doctors are seeing

'increased levels of distress, increasing amounts of tooth decay...and an increase in school absence as a result of health conditions'.

Those health difficulties that take place during childhood, as you'll understand, First Minister, will have an outsized impact and follow those people throughout their entire lives. You will know that's not good for them and it's not good for our under-pressure health services, which will need to look after them for decades to come. So, there's clearly a need to get a grip on children's health here in Wales. First Minister, will you personally commit to working with groups like the Welsh Royal Colleges Child Health Collaborative to make sure that children's health is prioritised and embedded across Government portfolio areas?

I don't disagree with a large amount of what the Member says. We are genuinely concerned about outcomes for children and young people in Wales, but not just claiming this is somehow only a health challenge. The issues you often see in our healthcare system, for adults and children, are actually driven by wider societal challenges and problems. We have much to do on improving public health Wales, in understanding how we persuade people to make healthier choices for them—not for the Government or the health service, but for them—and what it means for their lives. You'll have seen this in your former life when you were on the tools as a physiotherapist. Many of the challenges you'll have seen come through your door have an impact that starts well beyond the healthcare system. What we need to do is not just understand how that works, but how we can persuade people to make different choices.

In terms of the action that will be taken, the cost-of-living crisis was the No. 1 issue on doorsteps in the last few weeks, and we know that has a real impact on outcomes for children and young people. Having greater stability in the country, reviewing what the UK Government could and should do to turn the tide on the increase in child poverty that we've seen over the last 14 years, will make a major difference in child health outcomes. And, more than that, we will, of course, work with a number of coalitions around making better steps forward on addressing child poverty and outcomes for children and young people. That's why Jayne Bryant will be responding to the collective following the letter they recently sent to me just a few weeks ago. 

Thank you, First Minister.

The next item will be the business statement. I call on the Trefnydd to make that statement. Jane Hutt.

Thank you very much, Llywydd. There is one change to this week's Plenary business. The time allocated to the Stage 3 debate on the Local Government Finance (Wales) Bill has been reduced to two hours. Draft business for the remainder of the summer term and the first two weeks of the autumn term is set out on the business statement and announcement, which is available to Members electronically.

Can I call for a statement, Trefnydd, on speeding on the trunk road network? There's an issue in my own constituency in relation to the A494 trunk road going through the village of Llanferres in Denbighshire. Residents there have been calling for a speed limit reduction and improvements to road safety now for many years, but there is simply no progress actually happening. We've got a situation where the speed through the village, according to the eighty-fifth percentile test, is 53 mph, and this is at a time when the speed on non-trunk roads through similar villages is 20 mph. Clearly, that speed through the village is an anomaly. It needs to be addressed. There has been some work that has been done by the trunk road agency, looking at the traffic signs and road markings through the village, but even though they agreed that some action was even needed on that, there is nothing actually been scheduled. So, can I ask for an urgent update on trunk road safety, what is being done to address anomalies like this, so that villagers in Llanferres and elsewhere in similar situations can feel safe? And in addition to that, can I also ask for a clear timescale for the implementation of measures once they have been agreed by the trunk road agents, as is the case in this particular village?

Thank you very much, Darren Millar. I think you have drawn this to our attention on previous occasions. I believe you might have had Ministers and former First Ministers actually visiting this village. It is important that the trunk road agency is looking at this. Obviously, the Cabinet Secretary for North Wales and Transport will be also very much aware of this, and hopefully this will be resolved. I think this is an issue that probably is across the whole of Wales, with those reviews that have been undertaken by local authorities in terms of speeding. But this is a trunk road, and this needs to be addressed via the trunk road agency.

Trefnydd, I just wanted to correct something I said to you last week about fake stamps. I wanted to inform everyone that there is a process at the moment where people aren't being charged for fake stamps while the Post Office looks into this. It turns out that one election candidate had posted letters without stamps on them to lots of people in Pontypridd, hence why I had a number of complaints. But the Post Office are now going to be providing us all with an update around the issue of fake stamps that have been in circulation.

One of the things I did want to raise with you was that a number of constituents have been in touch saying that they faced barriers in voting. Obviously, we know that photo ID was a barrier to some, but the accessibility of polling stations remains to be problematic. Some people physically couldn't get into the polling stations in order to be able to place their votes. So, can I ask if the Welsh Government can work with each authority in Wales to ensure that there is no barrier in place by the Senedd elections, so that we understand what went wrong this time? Because, obviously, everybody should have that democratic right to vote, and to hear that there are still barriers in place now is hugely concerning for all of us, I'm sure.

Diolch yn fawr, Heledd Fychan. Thank you for that clarification on fake stamps. I'm sure we were all intrigued last week when you raised this. But this is an issue on which we will obviously hear more, I'm sure, as a result of that inquiry. 

On barriers to voting, it is really important, because I, certainly, like many, knocked the doors of people who said, 'I cannot vote because I have no voter identification.' There were a couple who had no driving licence, no passport, and—let's face it—a lot of people are in that position, particularly young people and families on lower incomes. So, thank goodness we have control, anyway, over our electoral systems in Wales. I look forward to the Stage 4 debate on the Elections and Elected Bodies (Wales) Bill this afternoon, because that is going to be helping us to address many of these things. On accessibility of polling stations, again, it's very much that we need to feed back across the Chamber on experiences that our constituents had in terms of accessibility to polling stations. I know that there were some improvements in my constituency, and I'm sure that's reflected more widely. But also, it's very interesting to see what can be a polling station. I think we need to just learn from—. Each election, we tend to, perhaps, not learn as much and then go straight into the next one, but really important points—diolch yn fawr, Heledd.

The Trefnydd will be aware of the interest in this Chamber in the fate of the Royal Welsh College of Music and Drama’s junior department, and all the efforts, led by Rhianon Passmore and others, to try to save it. A petition of more than 10,000 signatures was presented to the Senedd, and the Petitions Committee agreed that they would go for a debate. But with recess coming up very quickly, and we understand—the parents certainly understand—that there is going to be an imminent announcement about the fate of the college on 19 July, about its future, is there any way that the Trefnydd can enable there to be a debate in the Chamber, so that there can be a meaningful voice from the elected representatives about this very important issue that will affect the future of our music and drama legacy in Wales?

Thank you very much, Julie Morgan, and thank you for once again bringing this to the attention of the Senedd. This is a really important route, through the business statement, where issues can be raised, and are regularly raised by Members. It’s on the record and, of course, Government then has to respond, but also recognise the work that’s been undertaken with the collection of this petition of more than 10,000 signatures.

I think it is important just to reflect on some of the work that has been undertaken involving meetings, and I have to say that the Royal Welsh College of Music and Drama did write to Lynne Neagle, our Cabinet Secretary for Education, in advance of the launch of a staff consultation in response to the financial challenges faced by the college, and that consultation involved proposals to stop some of its present work with young people of school age, specifically the young acting and music weekend courses. And also to inform Julie Morgan, and other Members who’ve raised this—Rhianon Passmore—Welsh Government officials have met with the Royal Welsh College of Music and Drama to discuss its proposals, and, indeed, Lynne Neagle actually met with Helena Gaunt—she’s come into the Chamber now—the principal of the college earlier this week.

It is an autonomous body. It’s responsible for its own academic affairs, and those courses aren’t funded directly from the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales or the Welsh Government. But, obviously, the college’s commitment to providing opportunities in music and theatre for young people and creating pathways into professional learning and training has been fed back to us very clearly, and they’re going to continue to deliver on a number of areas of project work.

I understand about the decision that you referred to, and this was raised before, but I think it is important to report back that there will be a debate early in the autumn term. Certainly, the Business Committee did agree to this this morning, in terms of recognising the Petitions Committee's request to schedule that debate early in the autumn term.

Can I have a statement, please, on patient waiting times in Glan Clwyd Hospital in my constituency? They have started to see slow improvements in waiting times at Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board, particularly with cancer treatment, but, anecdotally, I’m hearing from constituents about their experiences with excessive waits at Glan Clwyd Hospital’s A&E department. I heard from a patient with a heart condition who arrived at Glan Clwyd’s A&E department with severe chest pains and had to wait for an excessive length of time and being handed painkillers while he waited. Eventually, he was discharged and informed he would need a CT scan and angiogram, which couldn’t be booked in for another two to three months despite the urgency of this condition. Another lady waited three hours in an ambulance and then spent the next 24 hours in a corridor.

Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board issued a red alert as recently as May this year, as their emergency departments are currently under extreme pressure, and extremely long waiting times are to be expected. I’m unsure what has caused this recent spike in excessive waiting times at Glan Clwyd, but it needs to be addressed urgently. So, could the Welsh Government provide an update as to what is causing these excessive waiting times at Glan Clwyd’s A&E department, and what measures are being taken to relieve the pressure as a matter of urgency, given that it is under special measures, which the Welsh Government has direct control of? Thank you.

I thank the Member for that question. As you know, reducing waiting times is a priority for us. We’ve invested £170 million per year to address the long waits that arose due to the pandemic, and two-year waits are 70 per cent lower than they were at the launch of our recovery plan—that’s a huge achievement from April 2022. But we know, as you do know as a north Wales Member, that demand for NHS Wales care has increased markedly in recent years and we have heroic NHS staff dealing with 2 million contacts every month, a phenomenal amount for a population of just over 3 million. Progress has been made. We recognise that waits are still too long, and we’re supporting health boards to drive further improvement.

The legacy of chemical waste in our Valleys is poisoning our land and I’d like a statement, please, from the Government addressing the huge problems thrown up by these forever chemicals. The Chamber will be familiar with the plight of Ynysddu in my region where chemicals called polychlorinated biphenyls, or PCBs, still contaminate the water and the landscape. The actor and campaigner Michael Sheen has drawn attention to this scandal recently in the press, and local councillors and campaigners have long sought answers about why these toxins aren’t being acknowledged or cleared, because PCBs are highly toxic. The production of these chemicals is banned in 151 countries, including now the UK. But, unluckily, those communities where PCBs were left to pollute the land all those years ago—still they are reaping the wreckage. So, can we have a statement giving my constituents assurance that the Welsh Government and local councils are taking this issue seriously and that there will be a national response to protect those communities from these PCBs at long last?

Thank you very much for that question, Delyth Jewell. I think it’s really good that we have a range of Cabinet Secretaries here today—this is very much a cross-Government issue. We recognise this. In terms of the evidence that’s coming out from your region in terms of those particular sites where there are PCBs and contamination, I certainly will be asking the Cabinet Secretary for an appropriate way to look at this in terms of acknowledging the concerns for constituents across Wales.

Good afternoon, Trefnydd. I wonder if I could have an update, please, from the Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs on the consultation process in the animal welfare licensing process. Many of us cross-party here in the Siambr have been campaigning for a ban on greyhound racing, which is part of that consultation process, so we’d really appreciate an update, please, on the timescales and when we might have an outcome. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Diolch yn fawr, Jane Dodds, and thank you for again raising important issues, as you do, in this context of the licensing of animal welfare establishments, particularly relating to the welfare of greyhounds. You know that there was a 12-week consultation on the licensing of animal welfare establishments’ activities and exhibits, and that included greyhound racing and training. It was launched on 8 December of last year. It supports our work to develop a national model to improve the regulation of animal welfare. That consultation closed on 1 March. So, now, it’s a matter of analysis of the consultation on the licensing of animal welfare establishments’ activities and exhibits. There were 1,100 responses received. It’s important to get this right, weigh up the evidence and not pre-empt outcomes, including the future of greyhound racing, any further at this stage. But we do expect to publish the Government’s response to the consultation later this year. Can I say again, Llywydd, and to Jane Dodds, it’s really important that you put these items on the agenda of the business statement so we can update you, and the Cabinet Secretary can hear the concerns and ask for clarity about that consultation and outcomes of that consultation?

I call for two Welsh Government statements. The first from the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care on raising awareness of the symptoms and complications of type 1 diabetes. In March last year I called for a statement here on raising awareness of diabetic ketoacidosis, or DKA, a complication of type 1 diabetes, after meeting Flintshire mum Dee Pinnington to discuss her raising-awareness campaign, following the death of her son Alistair—or Ali—Thomas in 2018 from DKA. Speaking here last October I noted that Dee Pinnington had arranged a music festival—Ali Fest 2024—in Flintshire on Saturday 6 July this year, with all funds donated to Diabetes UK Cymru. I opened this festival last Saturday. Raising awareness for people who either live with, work with, have friends with or come into contact with anyone who has type 1 diabetes is vital, where understanding the symptoms and alerting medical services properly, so that they can categorise their help and prioritise an ambulance, can be the difference between life and death. I call for a statement accordingly. 

Secondly, finally, I also call for a statement on the reform of the 'The Additional Learning Needs Code for Wales 2021', the ALN code. Responding here to the 8 May debate on the petition on this, the Cabinet Secretary for Education concluded:

'we do hear too often that the families of children with ALN have to fight for the right support and education, and this must change.'

In my subsequent meeting with ALN—

I am sorry to cut across you, Mark Isherwood, but you are way over time on this request. If you could bring your second request to a question for the Minister, please. 

Okay. Well, in my subsequent meeting with the ALN Reform Wales campaign, they told me they'd received—

No. I'm really sorry. But I don't want to hear what they told you at this point. Can you just ask for the statement?

So, I call for a statement answering their question: 'Where is the accountability on this coming from?'

Okay. Cleverly done, Mark Isherwood, cleverly done. 

Thank you very much, Mark Isherwood. I think those two points, questions, you've raised have been heard by both Cabinet Secretaries. I have no question at all—doubt—that the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care completely understands. And the feedback, of course, from people with diabetes, particularly their own patient experience, in terms of symptoms and complications, is really important to feed back, and, of course, it will be made aware to all of those involved. And this is from not just our health professionals, but also patient groups and support.

And, yes, the Cabinet Secretary for Education has heard your calls in terms of looking at the ALN code and what it means and how it's being delivered. It is about implementation, which is what the education Secretary is concerned with. Diolch.

Several constituents from the Cefn Glas area in Bridgend have raised concerns with me around the safety of a proposed cycle path in the area, specifically surrounding the gradient of the proposed area and its proximity to residential driveways. Now, residents have worked to seek clarification on the proposed cycle path's safety, but they are met with a lack of transparency. Very little information has been forthcoming around the proposals, and when questions are raised residents have had to wait months for freedom of information responses, that have been unable, then, to provide any new information. So, in light of this, I would like to request a statement from the Cabinet Secretary for Housing, Local Government and Planning on how we can open up the planning process, ensure transparency with information and give a voice to residents? 

Thank you very much, Luke Fletcher. Well, I think, it is really important to recognise the importance of our house building programmes and targets, and, indeed, how we ensure that, in terms of planning, we take this forward. And, of course, we have our targets for new homes in Wales that are set locally. Each local authority, of course, produces its local housing market assessment to provide the basis for targets for markets and affordable homes. And also, looking at that in terms of 'Planning Policy Wales', which we have taken forward, I think it's fortunate that we have up-to-date and consistent planning policies at national and local levels, provided by 'Future Wales', 'Planning Policy Wales' and our local development plans, which, of course, would address some of the issues that you've raised in terms of particular possible sites. 

Trefnydd, as you will be aware, there's been considerable concern among some residents in my region about the way that postal votes were issued for last week's general election. Delays in issuing postal votes for many constituents meant not receiving them in time for their holidays or work commitments, and, sadly, some residents didn't receive postal votes at all and were unable to collect them from council offices. On election day itself, I was also informed—and I don't know if this is true or not—that council officers were out knocking on the doors of people who hadn't received their postal votes and asking them to fill them out there and then. Though I do not suspect any foul play here, if true, you can imagine that this opens up the door to accusations of fraud in the voting system, and it seriously diminishes confidence in the postal voting system. With this in mind, Trefnydd, can I ask for a statement from the Government, explaining how they intend to improve confidence in the postal voting system and ensure that postal votes are received in a timely manner ahead of future elections? Thank you.

Well, I know there will be an analysis—there always is—to look at, with electoral returning officers, the implementation of all of the rules, regulations, procedures and policy relating to the last election. I think, across the parties, we know there was an issue with Royal Mail in terms of postal votes, and, I think, earlier questions as well about accessibility, all of which we are certainly addressing in terms of our electoral powers. I'm sure that the Counsel General, as we move forward, I hope, with Stage 4 of the Bill this afternoon, will also be responding to these points—not this afternoon, but in terms of his future roles and responsibilities.FootnoteLink

Can I ask for an urgent statement to the Senedd, outlining both the short-term and longer term impacts of the proposed sudden closure of the young artist junior department at the Royal Welsh College of Music and Drama, outlining how this has come to pass and what the future is for the many distraught young students, the majority in receipt of means-tested bursaries, and the talented musicians who are today being told they are no longer needed, many also impacted by WNO cuts? And can the statement to this place outline the future for Wales's only conservatoire with no junior department and no pipeline, as that will be unsustainable for Wales and untenable for those talented students, now and in the future?

Thank you very much, Rhianon Passmore, and thank you again for bringing this to the attention of the Chamber via the business statement. I won't repeat what I said earlier on in response to Julie Morgan's question. I think it is important to say that we will be debating this early in the next term as a result of the petition. And, again, there's the fact that our Cabinet Secretaries have met with partners not just in the Royal Welsh College of Music and Drama and Welsh National Opera, but all our great cultural institutions—have met them and have discussed these issues and these challenges. But, also, for the royal Welsh college, again it's stated its full commitment to providing those opportunities in music and theatre for young people. Also, they reported back on the fact that they have their weekend immersive workshops in music, the National Open Youth Orchestra residency, and holiday courses in production arts.

Trefnydd, can I please call for a statement from the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care on the provision of adult day-care centres in Wales? The Pembrokeshire County Council-owned Anchorange day-care centre in Pembroke Dock has been a safe haven for vulnerable adults with learning difficulties and additional needs for many decades. Many important relationship between attendees have developed over this time. Indeed, one parent told me that it's like a family. Sadly, the centre is earmarked for closure, despite a petition signed by hundreds calling for it to remain open. Its closure would mean serious disruption for those who attend—some of the most vulnerable adults—and would severely impact their well-being.

Page 9 of the Welsh Government's statutory guidance for adult placement services states that the following requirement on service providers is made, and I quote:

'Maintaining oversight of financial arrangements and investment in the business to ensure financial sustainability so that individuals using the service are supported to achieve their personal outcomes and are protected from the risk of unplanned removal or change in the service provided due to financial pressures'.

So, family members of those who attend Anchorage believe that the actions of Pembrokeshire County Council have contravened these regulations, and I would be grateful if the Cabinet Secretary would give either an oral or written statement on the provision of adult day-care centres in Wales so that sites such as the Anchorage day-care centre can be safeguarded for future generations. Diolch.

Well, thank you for that question. We've talked about the great joy, as far as I'm concerned, and us here, of having a new UK Labour Government, working in partnerhsip with our Welsh Labour Government. Also, I think that what's really important, which we haven't mentioned today, is how good it's going to be for local government in Wales and for the third sector because, actually, this is a partnership. Where we will see change, it will be difficult, and our Cabinet Secretary for finance will be watching me closely on this—[Laughter.] But, there will be change, there will be opportunity, because so many of these wonderful centres and places of care have been threatened by 14 years of austerity. Let's hope there will be some change, but let's also support our local authorities in the challenging decisions across all of Wales that they're still having to make, and look to the needs of the people they serve.

Could I ask for a statement from the Cabinet Secretary for Housing, Local Government and Planning, please, on the process of applying for and receiving a blue badge for people with disabilities? Now, obviously, they're the badges that people are given to allow them to use accessible parking spaces. The current system forces individuals to reapply for their blue badges every three years, and that is causing concern for many, because there's a high percentage of blue-badge users that actually have long-term or lifelong conditions, yet they still have to apply every three years for their new blue badges. It's important to note that you don't have to renew your driver's licence for over 10 years—or it's 10 years at a time—and likewise with a passport, it's 10 years. So, this is causing issues, particularly, of course, when you need a new passport picture for each new application, and photo booths very often have accessibility issues, and that's before you start filling in the very long forms. So, I need to understand from the Cabinet Secretary whether the Welsh Government will take action to ease this burden, because surely, if you have a lifelong condition, then you should be able to get a lifelong blue badge.

Thank you very much, Llyr Gruffydd. It's a very important question.

This is something that we have discussed over many moons. Probably you've been in committees where we've discussed changes and developments in relation to the provision of blue badges. It is important in terms of inclusivity, accessibility and also supporting disabled people as they seek to not just apply for blue badges, but, actually, retain them and renew them. So, thank you for raising it again. It has been raised in a statement on an earlier occasion, and I hope we'll be able to update you with a statement on blue badges.

Could I have two statements, please, Trefnydd, with the first with regard to the proposed closure of Maindy Centre velodrome, the final sporting venue of the 1958 empire games in Cardiff, and a training ground for cyclists such as Geraint Thomas. Maindy park is owned by a charity, of which the council is the sole trustee. Now, arguably, the closure of the velodrome is a breach of the council's powers and, perhaps, its public sector equality duty if the rights of disabled residents have not been included in impact assessments.

Secondly, could I please support the call of Julie Morgan and Rhianon Passmore for a debate on the youth programme of the royal college before the summer recess? We saw yesterday the Prif Weinidog and the Prime Minister being mesmerised by Ysgol Treganna, and I'm sure some visitors on Thursday will be equally impressed by our young singers. I appreciate your comments about the royal college being autonomous, but we need to protect Wales's reputation as a land of song and of famous actors. Diolch yn fawr.

Diolch yn fawr, Rhys ab Owen. Well, the Maindy Centre is a matter for Cardiff Council, and I'm very aware, as we all are, of its history and its place, and I won't comment on it any further, because I'm sure you will be raising it as a regional Member in terms of the prospects and the alternatives that are being discussed for that provision.

And again, as to the importance of the Royal Welsh College of Music and Drama provision for young people, yes, we've only got one week to go for Plenary business, and I think the debate will be important in September, and it is very important to all those affected that we have given it such an airing this afternoon.

Finally, Natasha Asghar.

Thank you so much, Presiding Officer. Business Minister, can I please request a statement from the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care about the ongoing issues at the Grange University Hospital in my region of south-east Wales? This matter has come up a number of times, but, last week, it pretty much hit the lowest point of all. A constituent of mine attended the Grange hospital last week after falling seriously ill. She was left in the hospital's waiting room in agony, being violently sick in front of all the other patients. This, I'm sure you can agree, business Minister, is just simply not acceptable. After contacting my office for help, I reached out to the Aneurin Bevan health board to see if anything could be done to provide the constituent with a little bit of privacy. In response, I was told that beds are not currently available and that it might be some time before one becomes free. So, business Minister, I appreciate what you responded to my colleague Gareth Davies, but the Grange hospital, as we all know, only opened in 2020 and is already struggling to meet demands. Whilst I have absolutely no issue with the staff and my loyalty is completely towards them for the hard work that they do, the Welsh Government has invested £14 million in improving the hospital's emergency department, and that, of course, is welcome news, but something needs to be done to increase bed capacity as well. So, I appreciated the health Minister's comments last week, which she made here in the Chamber, when she said that her team were keeping a close eye on it, but can the health Minister please bring forward a statement updating the Chamber on how the Government plans to improve the Grange, because, as things stand, my constituents are really, truly suffering? Thank you.

Thank you for that question, Natasha Asghar. This is for the Aneurin Bevan health board to address. We have heard from you this afternoon about the circumstances of huge pressure, and, as I said earlier on in relation to an earlier question, demand in the NHS has increased so much in recent years, and our, again, heroic NHS staff are dealing with 2 million contacts every month—that phenomenal increase in pressure. But, again, we are making progress, and I believe we will make further progress because we now have a Labour Government in Westminster as well as here in Wales.

Thank you, Trefnydd.

I have agreed that Hannah Blythyn may make a personal statement. Hannah Blythyn.

Thank you, Llywydd. I'd like to start by thanking everyone who sent messages to me. Thank you very much.

I may not have been in a position to respond to them all, but they meant a lot and they made a difference. This is not a statement that is easy for me to make, nor one that I take lightly. Indeed, there have been times in the not too recent past when I was not sure I would or could stand and speak in this Siambr again. I do so today because I know my removal from Government has been a focus of discussion in this place while I have not been here. I also feel a sense of responsibility to those closest to me and to my many constituents who have demonstrated great patience, understanding and confidence in me.

Llywydd, I will start by just briefly addressing the circumstances around my leaving Government. I know that I can look all my colleagues who sit on these benches in the eye and say that I have never leaked or briefed the media about any of you. In fact, I can say that to everyone in the Siambr. Whilst I will not share the detail, I will share that I have formally raised concerns about the process by which I was removed from Government, including not being shown any alleged evidence before being sacked, not being made aware that I was ever under investigation and that at no point was I advised or was it evidenced that I may have broken the ministerial code. I absolutely recognise and respect that it is within the gift of any First Minister to appoint and remove members of their Government. I understand the nature of politics and completely accept that. I raise concerns not out of self-interest, but because I fundamentally believe in devolution and public service. I have also very real concerns that lessons have not been learned from the past. Proper process not only needs to be in place and followed for the dignity and respect of individuals involved, but also to uphold the integrity of the civil service and the office of the First Minister.

I want to take a moment to reflect on something that is very personal and somewhat difficult for me, but I feel it's important to say for the sake of how we do politics. I know that there's been speculation about my circumstances and about whether I have been well enough to work. This has ranged from what was tantamount to misinformation and what could be put down to misunderstanding. It should not be surprising that what happened has been hugely detrimental to me on a personal level, and led to acute anxiety and stress. I have never been signed off work before when I have struggled with this in itself, but there was a point when the thought of just putting my camera on to vote and seeing you all literally took my breath away. I share this now not in search of sympathy—I don't want people's sympathy—but because my recent experience has brought home to me that whilst we all talk the talk on mental health, there is still more to do to improve our understanding and the impact that it has on individuals and their ability to do things we would ordinarily take for granted. Sadly, I think, sometimes, we get so caught up in the politics that we don't always think about the person.

I recently listened to a podcast called Broken Politicians, Broken Politics. I am not broken, but I know now more than I did before that I am breakable, as, actually, we all are, and I don't believe politics is broken, but it certainly could be better. We've talked often in this place of a kinder politics, but we can't have a kinder politics without kinder people, and we won't get better politics without being better people. Our own conduct and character is key to the public having trust in those who serve them and believing that politics can be a force for good.

Llywydd, it has been a privilege to serve in my country's Government, particularly under the leadership of Mark Drakeford. The trade union movement not only shaped my values, it helped give me my voice, and I am proud to have taken through the most progressive trade union legislation in the devolution era. And a younger me, who struggled with her sexuality, would never, ever have believed that, one day, I would spearhead the plan to make Wales the most LGBTQ+ friendly nation in Europe.

I am truly grateful for that opportunity and it will always, always be an absolute privilege to serve the community that shaped me as a Member of the Senedd. I'm only who I am and where I am because of where I come from. And in spite of the challenges and the difficulties—perhaps because of them—I do feel a renewed sense of commitment to the politics of public service and a real determination to continue to contribute to our devolved democracy, my community and our country. Diolch. [Applause.]

Thank you very much, Hannah Blythyn.

The next item will be a statement by the First Minister on the legislative programme. Vaughan Gething.

Diolch, Llywydd. It is a pleasure to be able to set out today the legislative priorities for my Government. I have been clear that we must focus our resources on what matters most in people's daily lives. Both our record of delivery and our plans for the future reflect our commitment to radical, progressive and transformative change for every corner of Wales.

Our legislative achievements over the last 12 months reflect this commitment as we have passed laws crucial for the long-term future of Wales. The Environment (Air Quality and Soundscapes) (Wales) Act, which received Royal Assent earlier this year, shows our commitment to improve the air that we breathe and to promote healthy soundscapes. As we move towards net-zero emissions by 2050, we need to transform our economy to power green prosperity. The Infrastructure (Wales) Act, passed in April, will play a key role in delivering our renewable energy targets and will simplify the consenting process for major infrastructure projects.

We are committed to ensuring effective, high-quality and sustainable health and social care to deliver better outcomes. In May, we introduced the Health and Social Care (Wales) Bill, which will eliminate private profit from the care of looked-after children as part of our programme to transform children’s services. The Health Service Procurement (Wales) Act, which received Royal Assent this year, will enhance efficiency and patient-centred healthcare. Together with regulations later this year, this will deliver a new regime for the procurement of NHS services to meet the needs of the sector and the people it serves. These are an example of the significant subordinate legislation that underpins our legislative programme, including regulations to implement Acts of the Senedd, such as the Environmental Protection (Single-use Plastic Products) (Wales) Act 2023.

Llywydd, the Bills we brought forward in the third year of the legislative programme will also make positive changes for democracy in Wales. The Senedd Cymru (Members and Elections) (Wales) Act, which received Royal Assent last month, will create a modern Senedd, better able to represent and serve the people of Wales. Further measures to reform the Senedd will be considered when we debate the general principles of the Senedd Cymru (Electoral Candidate Lists) Bill next week. We share an ambition across the Senedd to introduce a recall mechanism for Senedd Members and my Government stands ready to support that work. We have also committed to enable legislation for the Senedd to consider on the issue of deception by Members of the Senedd and candidates standing for election to the Senedd. We look forward to the recommendations of the Standards of Conduct Committee on both of these issues as part of its work on the accountability of individual Members.

Later this afternoon, we will consider Stage 4 of the Elections and Elected Bodies (Wales) Bill, which will develop an electoral system fit for the twenty-first century. Members will also consider amendments to the Local Government Finance (Wales) Bill at Stage 3 later today. The Bill forms part of our work to reform non-domestic rates and council tax. The final Bill of our year three programme, the Welsh language and education Bill, will be introduced next week. Our aim is to help pupils in Wales to become independent and confident Welsh speakers.

Llywydd, I now turn to those Bills that my Government will introduce in the rest of this Senedd term. We have a packed legislative agenda ahead as we continue to make laws that will deliver positive and progressive change. My Government is committed to improving transport networks, helping to tackle the climate emergency and restoring a sense of belonging, connection and community. We will radically reshape the public transport system, bringing forward a bus Bill to enable all levels of government in Wales to work together. We can then design bus networks that allow people to access reliable, sustainable services and to provide real options other than car journeys.

Llywydd, alongside this, we are committed to modernising taxi and private hire vehicle licensing to create a safer and fairer sector. So, we will consult on a draft taxi and private hire vehicles Bill this Senedd term, and we will continue to work with passengers, the trade and licensing authorities to take forward reforms through non-legislative means. Members may wish to note a declaration of interest concerning the company Veezu, in addition to my membership of the Unite and GMB trade unions.

We will continue to demonstrate our commitment to tackling the increasing threat to the environment by bringing forward an environmental principles and biodiversity Bill. This will establish a statutory environmental governance body for Wales, embed environmental principles into Welsh law and introduce a legal duty with targets to protect and restore biodiversity. The Bill signals our clear commitment that action and leadership to tackle the climate and nature emergency will remain as a top priority for this Welsh Government.

Coal tips are a legacy of Wales’s mining past. The disused tips (mines and quarries) Bill will give greater security to the people living in their shadow. It will protect critical infrastructure and safeguard the environment by enshrining in law a sustainable, fit-for-purpose regulatory regime for disused tip safety.

Llywydd, I have been clear that we must focus our efforts on the issues that matter most to the people of Wales. Everyone should have somewhere to call home, and the safety of our residents is paramount. Our homelessness Bill will help people remain in their homes and focus on prevention and early intervention to significantly improve the homelessness and housing system. A suite of secondary legislation that brought in tighter building controls came into force in April. Our building safety Bill will extend this by establishing a new building safety regime. This will fundamentally reform the occupation and ongoing management of multi-occupied residential buildings and address fire safety issues.

We will introduce a Bill that will give local authorities powers to introduce a visitor levy. The money raised will support tourism, helping our communities and preserving the beauty of Wales for future generations. The visitor accommodation (regulation) Bill will enhance the visitor experience by ensuring visitor accommodation meets required standards. The Bill will establish a register of visitor accommodation and enable providers to demonstrate compliance with safety requirements.

Improving the accessibility of our law is another important facet of our legislative programme. Our next legislation Bill will remove obsolete and spent provisions from the statute book and formalise the system of making and publishing Welsh statutory instruments. I know that Members are keen to see the consolidation of planning law, which has become increasingly inaccessible and overly complex for operators and users of the planning system. We will bring forward a Bill towards the end of this Senedd that will simplify and modernise the law in this area.

The Welsh Government will seek to work in partnership with the UK Government in respect of UK legislation, and we will update the Senedd following the King’s Speech later this month. There will also be a programme of subordinate legislation to implement UK Acts made in the previous parliamentary session. This includes the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024, which provided powers for Welsh Ministers to deliver reform in this area.

Llywydd, I would like to thank Senedd Members and committees, as well as our social partners and stakeholders, for the role that they play in developing and scrutinising legislation. Our legislative programme will make a real difference to people's lives, it will help to improve transport links across the country, protect people and our communities, and help us to tackle the climate emergency. I commend this programme to Members. I look forward to continuing to work together on these priorities to build an ambitious future for a fairer, stronger and greener Wales. 

Thank you, First Minister, for your statement this afternoon on the legislative programme. I say this on an annual basis: it always amazes me when we stand here to think back to the legislative competence Order days, where Members, if they wanted, or even if the Government wanted, to bring legislation through, would have to hurry up to Westminster and, obviously, present that as an initial case, and then, if they got approval for that, they could bring their Measure, as it was called in those days, before the legislative process began, and how that inhibited us here in the Welsh Parliament from bringing legislation that, I agree with the First Minister, should always seek to improve lives of the people of Wales and improve services. And it's with that thought in mind that I do point to the limited nature of the legislative programme that the Government have brought through to date. When you look, since 2021 in Scotland, for example, 43 Bills have been brought forward in Scotland; if you look at the UK Government's legislative programme in Westminster, which I appreciate is a far bigger legislature, about 165 Bills, and here, since 2021, we're talking 13 pieces of legislation—13 pieces of legislation. So, there is a lack of ambition, I would suggest, from the Welsh Government. I appreciate the health Minister is constantly wanting to barrack today. If she put so much effort into solving the waiting lists here in Wales, then there might be improvement there. What I would say to the First Minister is trying to understand exactly how this legislative statement will make those improvements to the people of Wales.

You talked about the health and social care Bill in the early part of your statement, which was introduced in May. Given the changing landscape, because of the change in Government in Westminster that is being brought forward in England, where many services are sought by authorities here in Wales, in particular when it comes to looked-after children, and Wes Streeting's commitment on making sure there is greater use of the independent sector in providing those services, how compatible will the legislation here in Wales be with the policy initiative of making sure that it is actually the best outcome for the individual, rather than the legislative constraint, that actually delivers for that person? Because there is now a wide gap opening up with the policy intentions of your colleague Wes Streeting and what he wants to use the independent sector for in health and social care, and, obviously, what you as a Government are promoting in this legislation. And if you live in mid Wales, for example, a huge amount of the provision that you would access would be across Offa's Dyke, rather than, obviously, within the area of Powys, for example. So, if the First Minister could explain that, I'd be grateful.

On the building safety law that he touched on, could he confirm today whether that building safety law will use, as one of the bases of its legislative compacity, sections 116 and 124, because many campaigners that have pointed to that particular piece of legislation in England have highlighted how important that is in enabling them to seek restoration and empowerment when it comes to challenging developers over deficiencies within their buildings in England, but, sadly, the Government to date here in Wales hasn't brought forward similar provisions in any legislation? So, I see what he says in the statement about it helping on fire safety prevention. Could he confirm today whether the Welsh Government have looked at that and will include it in the legislation?

On the planning law in particular and the infrastructure Act—again, another big policy area and changing landscape in England, as we saw from the Chancellor yesterday—. I get devolved politics; obviously, the Government here has the right to have its own policy and its own legislation, but, when investors are looking to put money into projects, they clearly are looking for the quickest route to market and the most enabling framework that is available for them to make that choice. And so Wales can remain competitive, is he confident that the infrastructure Act that was passed last year, I believe, and the planning Act that he's talking about being implemented before the next Senedd election, will be the most competitive environment that can be possible whilst protecting communities against overdevelopment and, ultimately, safeguarding what we care passionately about, which is the great landscape and countryside of Wales, which is very often endangered by developments that aren’t suitable for those particular areas.

Could the First Minister touch on where he sees the benefits of the disused tips Act that he's talking about—this piece of legislation? As someone whose own area, South Wales Central, covers a lot of these areas, it talks in the statement today of, obviously, covering infrastructure and protecting infrastructure and communities. Could the First Minister indicate how this piece of legislation will actually do that and what it will deliver for communities, especially in the old coalfield areas? Because, obviously, there is a severe danger in some of those communities unless those tips are, not just protected by legislation, but also enabling legislation for communities and local authorities to draw down assets to protect those communities.

The environmental principles and biodiversity Bill—

You're over your time. Could this be your last one, please?

I could go on and on.

I know, but you don't have the time.

I'll just touch on this final point, if I may, then. On the environmental principles and biodiversity Bill, this obviously will be a key piece of legislation. We will be the last Parliament to enact such a piece of legislation—I think I'm correct in saying that. Scotland and England have already put such legislation on the statute book. Will this be a uniquely Welsh piece of legislation, or will it just be a hybrid of what you've seen delivered in other parts of the United Kingdom, Scotland and England, and brought forward here in Wales? So, could you give us a taste of the capacity and ambition that the Welsh Government have for that particular piece of legislation, and what exactly will be the protections contained in it? Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer.

Thank you for the series of questions. I don't accept his criticism about the lack of ambition in the legislative programme. To date we've had a busy programme, as people who serve on scrutiny committees will recognise, and the Ministers piloting legislation through. We will of course, in the future, have a Senedd with an increased capacity to scrutinise legislation. What we also need to reflect on is how we deliver a fit-for-purpose piece of legislation that can really make a difference.

I think there's often a desire in scrutiny to add more things into the Bills that are presented. It takes place in every Parliament, to be fair, regardless of its political make-up, but having a giant blockbuster Bill often makes the process less certain and less targeted at delivering the real improvements we need to make. So, I'm interested in laws that can and will make a difference to outcomes for people as well.

I'd have to say that I think, in his comments about Wes Streeting, he’s searching for division where it simply does not exist. We are interested in how we improve outcomes across health and social care. And the Bill that we have introduced to eliminate profit in children's residential care services is not just something where I was proud to re-sign the declaration on behalf of the Welsh Government with care-experienced children and young people, it is about how we deliver better outcomes. At the moment, we have a system that is going to get more and more expensive without intervention, and actually we want to deliver a system with better outcomes within it. Better outcomes for the taxpayer, but, crucially, better outcomes for the children and young people who experience care during their lifetimes. And I hope that will also lead to a change in the tenor of debate around the measures that we seek to take to improve outcomes with and for care-experienced young people. I want to make clear that I remain very proud of what this Government continues to do in supporting care-experienced young people with a basic income pilot, and I hope that some of the disgraceful and untrue statements made about that pilot will cease now that there is a different series of leadership and management at a UK level, and I hope that will be taken on board on all sides of this Chamber and outside it.

On building safety, we have considered what is in the UK Building Safety Act 2022, in sections 116 to 125. What we already have in Wales is a new route to address fire safety in all residential buildings of 11m and over. It's not limited to buildings with cladding, and it applies to both internal and external fire safety issues. We are the only UK country to have made that commitment, so our approach is different to that of England. I know that Julie James has rehearsed this many times in the Chamber as well. We have also been clear that leaseholders should not be made to pay for work to rectify fire safety issues that are not of their making. That's why we're going to have a scheme for responsible persons, so they can invite all leaseholders that find themselves in that building to be properly supported, and we also have support provided for leaseholders who may need to take action. 

On the infrastructure Act, I do believe the infrastructure Act takes us forward. It was the deliberate reason why we passed it, to update our planning structure so that people who want to invest in major infrastructure and development here can have a fit-for-purpose framework for doing so. And there is a balance, as the Member has pointed out, between our wider ambitions to deliver economic benefit and infrastructure investment, and some of the challenges where that development takes place, and where infrastructure around it takes place as well. That's why we've tried to balance that already to give investors certainty, but to understand how people can influence the planning system and the considerations to be properly taken into account when doing so.

For example, I would not think it would be a sensible thing, given the energy and effort we've spent on peatland restoration across Wales, to then plough up large areas of that peatland with all of the additional significant benefit it provides for biodiversity here in Wales as well. So, I do think the legislation that we have will help with that investor certainty, because I want to see investment take place here in Wales. I want to see it take place where we get the jobs that come with it, not simply the opportunity to generate one part of that economic chain.

The planning Bill is actually a consolidation Bill, and that's still important to ensure that in one place you have all of the planning legislation that applies. The danger otherwise is that you have planning considerations in different parts of our legislative framework, and you actually need lots and lots of legal ability and searching to make sure you gather all of that in one place. Now, if you're a well-resourced planning authority or planning consultant working in the private sector, you have the ability to do that. Actually, there's still an element of uncertainty that we can help to get through if we pass the planning Bill in the form that is going to be presented. I think, again, that will be good for businesses, good for local authorities, and good for individual residents and communities to have a single place to go to for planning considerations. 

On the environmental governance and biodiversity Bill, this will, as I said in the statement, set out our commitments for restoration and improvement. So, the environmental principles and biodiversity Bill will be uniquely Welsh in considering what we need to do here in Wales, but we will, of course, have taken the opportunity to learn from what other parts of the UK have done, and that is what we should do. We should not be afraid to learn and look where there are other good ideas that we could apply here, and, equally, we should be clear-sighted in our determination to have legislation that is genuinely fit for purpose. And I'm sure that Members across the Chamber will engage in scrutiny of that legislation to ensure that they're content with the scheme that we've set out, but also the targets we'll have for restoring and improving biodiversity and nature across the country.

When he became First Minister back in March, he outlined his ambition to deliver positive and innovative change, and we on these benches were willing to promote that vision, in a way, and to work constructively with Government to deliver it. After all, delivering positive and bold change was at the heart of the co-operation agreement that had already introduced very innovative approaches in areas such as free school meals, for example, protecting the housing market, childcare, Senedd reform, and so on and so forth. 

But as the First Minister moved from one scandal of his own making to the next from the very outset, we also saw that ambitious vision being pushed to one side, and many legislative commitments that were ambitious were shelved as the Government, I'm afraid, prioritised protecting its own interests rather than delivering on behalf of the people of Wales. And, indeed, if Keir Starmer in becoming Prime Minister is sincere when he says that he wants to see a Government turning back to its proper work of serving the people who elect that Government, it would be good for the First Minister to also consider what's been happening over the past four months.

We are now in a regrettable position where there's more to be said about what's been dropped from the Government's legislative programme than what is in it: post-Brexit environmental governance arrangements that have long been in place in other nations of the UK are still being held up; pioneering measures to create a fully gender-balanced Senedd being repeatedly delayed, possibly now until 2030; the implementation of a transformational package of council tax reforms, developed as part of our co-operation agreement, being pushed back until after the next Senedd election. You're guaranteeing that the most deprived households will continue to be disproportionately penalised by an unfair, regressive and outdated system for at least another four years.

Now, amidst those disappointments and, you know, major disappointments, there are some glimmers of hope that we certainly would still urge the Government not to lose sight of in the remaining year and a half of this Senedd term. We do believe that bus franchise reform to better connect our inherently disconnected communities is an urgent necessity. I welcome what we have in the statement today about legislation to promote Welsh language opportunities for all through education, and building a more resilient tourism sector in Wales. We also welcome the fact that the Government has pledged to introduce legislation to prohibit lying in politics, in response to the good work of my colleague Adam Price.

But, on the whole, I think the people of Wales need and want more than we have in this programme. It's a yearning for more fairness and ambition for Wales that drives our new, enlarged group of Plaid Cymru MPs at Westminster. They will certainly make the case at Westminster for fair funding for Wales's fair share from HS2, and also for measures to combat child poverty and to secure further devolution, including of the Crown Estate. But as I say, what's conspicuous in this legislative agenda that we've heard being outlined today is what's missing.

For instance, it's approaching six months now since the Independent Commission on the Constitutional Future of Wales published its final report. There's nothing outlined here that would give effect to any of its recommendations, recommendations that this Senedd wanted to see being accepted in full and with urgency. There's nothing outlined in paving the way to further devolution, including of crime and justice, something which Labour in Wales have long insisted is a priority, but which the new Secretary of State has consistently and explicitly ruled out. If this legislative agenda represents the scope of Labour's ambition for Wales, well, many people will be left cold. I want a Government that pushes the boundaries in terms of what the current devolution settlement can deliver, and that's not what we have in front of us today.

We in Plaid Cymru are clear on the types of things that we do think that a devolved Government should seek to deliver for Wales. We will outline many of these between now and May 2026: securing economic development based on ambitious targets; a real strategy for tackling child poverty—again, with measurable targets; a sovereign wealth fund for Wales, which ensures that revenue from our natural resources is retained and invested here in Wales.

We often hear, Dirprwy Lywydd, do we not, that Labour Governments at both ends of the M4 have to collaborate for the benefit of Wales. Well, if that's the case, does the First Minister agree with me that there's now no excuse for the Welsh Labour Government not to be ambitious in planning its agenda, because what's been brought forward today, I'm afraid, is very short from what we as a party and what, most importantly, the people of Wales expect?

Well, some of the comments made by the leader of Plaid Cymru did refer to the legislative programme, but much of it was nothing to do with our legislative programme and the simple disagreements between our parties about the direction of the future of Wales. I'm proud to say that I believe in the future of the union delivering for Wales and Britain, that I want to see reform for that to take place. We have our opportunity to take devolution forwards, now we do have a pro-devolution UK Labour Government. Much of that could and should be delivered without there being a need to see additional legislation for that to happen.

I'm looking forward to powers being restored. I'm looking forward to new areas of devolution coming to this Senedd and to the Welsh Government, and I don't think we need a vision that attempts to recast reality on what we have already done, whether it be through the co-operation agreement or commitments we have, or the reality of how you actually deliver a legislative programme. It takes time to develop and go through the policy engagement stages, the White Paper, then engaging in Bills to be put before the Senedd. The idea that we could magic up a list of seven or eight different Bills the Member suggested might have happened, that's not very realistic and it's not an honest prospectus to the people of Wales.

We are, though, continuing to work through a number of areas that follow on in good faith from the co-operation agreement. We've been honest about where we've reached on council tax reforms, and there were genuinely respectful and constructive conversations about that. I don't see that as a failure; I see that as honesty in where we are, and in the reality that we didn't have the money to deliver the sort of scheme we'd have needed to. Living through a cost-of-living crisis that we still are not through, to have delivered a scheme that would have taken money to deliver to the wealthiest households I do not think is something that we could have done at this point. We’d have needed to have something to transition to the scheme. That’s an honest conversation that has taken place. And when it takes place about where we get to with Stage 1 on the candidate lists Bill, I think, again, there’s honesty about the position that took place at the end of my predecessor’s time in office, about needing to understand that Stage 1 report and to consider that, and understand how we take matters forward.

We have acted in good faith, and we will continue to do so. That’s why you continue to see commitments around the visitor levy and visitor accommodation Bills in this statement, because we’ve made commitments that we are sticking to. It’s why we’ll carry on delivering against the buses Bill, because we understand that will make a huge difference to communities across Wales, to have a much more rational way of investing public money in our bus network. We already invest a huge amount in the bus network. The majority of the money going into buses in Wales is public funds. If we pass the Bill, we’ll have a much better way to regulate that, to understand how the franchises work, and to make sure that money actually serves an economic and social purpose as well. We should get a better bus network as a result.

I’m proud of the programme that we are putting before the Senedd. Passing these Bills, I believe, will make a practical difference in the lives of people right across Wales. It will enable us to look people directly in the eye and say that what we have done here in passing laws will have made a positive difference in their day-to-day lives—and more than that: all of the other powers and responsibilities we have here that don’t require legislation but are very much part of our agenda to make a difference for people here in Wales. There is absolutely no dimming of the ambition, or the requirement for that ambition, for the future of Wales. I believe we do now have a real opportunity in having two Governments that can be genuine partners in the success of Wales. I look forward to leading this Government to do just that.

Mike Hedges, as Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee. 

You've called me for the wrong one; I'm on land transaction tax.

Sorry, Mike, you're down on this list. [Interruption.] No, he doesn't have five minutes. [Laughter.] In that case, Vikki Howells. 

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd, and thank you, First Minister, for your statement here today. As Chair of the Standards of Conduct Committee, I welcome your reference to the important work that my committee is undertaking on individual Member accountability and your restated commitment to enable legislation on the important matter of deception. First Minister, do you agree with me that this work has the potential to enable our Senedd to become an exemplar Parlimament in the UK and help to restore public trust in politics?

Secondly, First Minister, I’d like to turn to the bus Bill, legislation that is of utmost importance to my constituents, and vital, of course, to undoing the damage caused to our bus network by Thatcher’s deregulation all those years ago. I welcome the plans to radically reshape our bus services, and I note your comments about working with all levels of Government to achieve this. Our communities and other groups such as the trade unions representing bus drivers also have a crucial role to play. So, how will the widest possible involvement from civil society be encouraged as plans are developed?

Thank you for the comments and questions. I will address your comments as the standards Chair first, and then on what I think is more of a constituency interest in the buses Bill.

On standards, we all understand why we have come to having a conversation about recall, following a significant sanction against a Member and our understanding of what our system should look like. That’s partly because of changes made in the UK Parliament, and partly because we all, across parties, consider that it probably should not be the way that matters are dealt with in the future. And it’s the same point around deception: it's about the point around the standards that we expect of Members, and, in that case, for candidates to the Senedd as well.

My interest is in how we have a coherent scheme for this Senedd to consider that properly takes account of the standards we expect of each other, what the public expect of us, how those choices are made, and then the consequences of those choices as well. I think there are issues to think about in terms of improvements that have been made in the UK Parliament—I think the recall process is an improvement—but also to think about areas where I would not be so keen to follow the Westminster model.

I think it has been a mistake to have a separate process for individual staff harassment that comes outside conduct of Members. The decoupling of those, I think, makes the system less coherent. I’m interested in how, working with the standards committee cross-party, we have a genuinely coherent scheme that looks at all forms of behaviour that we could and should expect of Members, that decision-making process, and then the expertise to undertake that as well.

It is no criticism of any individual who might be the standards commissioner, but you would not expect one individual to have all the understanding necessary to investigate every single potential complaint that comes in. So, it’s how we have a system that supports whoever the commissioner is to undertake their investigation. I’ve had the fortunate opportunity to be both a trade union rep and an employment lawyer, so I understand large parts of how the world of work works, including, because I was a specialist discrimination lawyer—. And actually, that can be challenging and different. There are other employment lawyers who won’t be specialists who don’t have the same understanding and expertise.

So, there’s something about how do we support whoever the commissioner is to have the right access to the right support to undertake their investigation work, and then to make sure we have a coherent scheme that meets the genuine cross-party desire to improve on our process. The Government is seriously committed to enabling the Senedd to consider that coherent scheme and for Members to be able to vote upon it before the end of this term, so it is in place for the next Senedd term in 2026.

On the bus Bill, I think this is one of the more exciting pieces of legislation that will make the difference that we often talk about. Not every member of the public is excited when they’re told that politicians are going to create a new law, but I do think this is one that will make a real practical difference across communities. Within the Member’s community that she represents, having a more coherent approach to bus services will make a real difference—and in my consistency too. Everyone in this Chamber, I think, can point to where a better system of bus regulation and support would make a bigger and better difference.

We’re proposing a new system, to move away from what is a deeply unstrategic and inefficient way of investing public money to one where we can have greater coherence and genuine work with local authorities to understand the routes that they require in a proper commissioning and franchising process, rather than, as we have now, local authorities often being left trying to rescue a route that is socially essential but isn’t necessarily always privately profitable. It will move away from simply competing for the most profitable routes and ignoring the ones of huge social value. At the moment, local authorities and the Government have all the pressure of being, if you like, the investor of last resort. We can do better, and the bus Bill, I think, will show us a way to do that in genuine partnership with colleagues across local government and beyond.

First Minister, can I start by just recognising the events of last week? I hope that your Government and our new Government in the UK can bring benefits to Wales. I look forward to taking my part in scrutinising the progress of that. We do need to see benefits flow from that new relationship.

Regarding the legislative programme, whilst I’m not going to reflect too much on what’s in it, I recognise there are some good things coming forward around environment and planning and things like that. My focus really is more about what isn’t in it. I know that there’s probably no time now to put it in, but you will no doubt recognise my interest in food, so I was disappointed that the legislative programme hasn’t recognised the crucial subject of food security. There’s a lot of talk about biodiversity, environment, and things like that. Well, the fundamental thing that derives from that is food. Food security is so fundamental to this country—indeed, the whole of the world—and we need to do more about it.

Whilst my food Bill fell, and I’m not mourning it, it had a weight of support from around the country, recognising the importance of this really important subject around getting local food into local people to address crucial societal issues. I welcome the role that the Future Generations Commissioner for Wales will play in trying to raise the profile of food security, and what he’s already doing. But can I urge you—

Peter, you need to ask your question, please.

I'm sorry, I thought I had more time.

No, one minute per person.

The question, First Minister, is this: can I respectfully suggest that your Government needs to take this area extremely seriously and take action to legislate to bring an all-Wales approach to food security and the food system, as opposed to a more piecemeal approach, as we see at the moment?

Can I welcome the conciliatory and positive remarks that the Member made at the start? I do regularly reflect outside this Chamber that the Member has had a history of having to work with Labour local authority leaders and being able to do so in a pragmatic way to get things done. I wanted to do that with the previous Government. There were times we were able to do that, but I hope we'll have more opportunity to benefit the country now. And I respect the fact that the Member will scrutinise and challenge us throughout that process. 

When it comes to food and food security, I welcome the future generations commissioner's initiative. It's actually about looking at how we provide food in a secure and sustainable way for ourselves, and also what it means for food exports. Actually, the significant growth in the Welsh food and drink industry has been a real success story that we don't talk about enough, and that's a genuine success story in lots of parts of Wales. And it's adding value to that as well, so we're not just selling the raw product. I know Alun Davies isn't in the Chamber today, but when he claimed we were going to be increasing the food and drink output of the country and its economic value, lots of people thought that we would not achieve the difference he talked about. Actually, we outachieved that. And there's also the point about getting further upstream for economic value and food manufacturing. Those are still things we need to do and we can do in a genuinely sustainable way. 

I think this is actually a good example of where you don't need to change the law to improve outcomes. Actually, it's the way in which we balance our environmental responsibilities for high-quality food and drink production. That will help us in food security and understanding where our food comes from—the food that we export and import—in a way where we have a genuine eye to what sustainability looks like in a whole food system. That will also deal with some of the challenges that I think we'll get when it comes to some of the comments that Jenny Rathbone makes on a regular basis about needing to understand the public health impact of food that is not healthy and how we deal with ultra-processed food as well. I think this is a rounded debate that we can have that doesn't necessarily require a large-scale change in the law but does require a difference in approach and in the levers around resource and policy.

First Minister, I would like to know how much of a priority the coal tip safety Bill will be for your Government. When will the people of the Valleys be able to see the legislation introduced on that subject? In light of the detailed work that has been undertaken by the climate change committee in the Senedd on Ffos-y-fran and opencast sites, would you consider expanding the scope of that Bill to include those sites?

When you met Sir Keir Starmer yesterday, did you repeat to him your belief that the cost of clearing these coal tips should be shared with Westminster? Because the fundamental truth, the ethical case, has not changed. I presume, therefore, that your position on that has not changed either.

Finally, First Minister, your statement talks about a Bill on environmental principles and biodiversity. Could you confirm that that will meet the calls of the RSPB and others to improve biodiversity by 2030 and for it to be in a robust state by 2050? If you could give us an update on that. Thank you very much. 

On the last question first, we do expect to be able to meet the call of a range of actors in the wider nature advocacy field on seeing significant improvement by 2030 and further improvement beyond. So, I think people can be positive about not just a statement, but when the detail of the Bill comes out as well. I think that, and your reference to the disused tips (mines and quarries) Bill, is part of the significant disagreement I have with the leader of Plaid Cymru that this is somehow an unambitious programme. These two pieces of legislation on their own will make a major difference across the country—a major positive change in helping us to have a better way to manage the environment and to understand how we can make disused quarries and tips safe. Because there are too many people who live in the shadow of them. We have a disproportionate number of those in Wales, because of our industrial past. That's in north, south and west Wales. So, it's not just an issue concentrated in one part of the country. 

I'm genuinely pleased that we are going to bring forward that Bill. It should be introduced before the end of the calendar year. That's our plan. I think that you'll be positive about the Bill when you see it, albeit there is a choice about not including opencast within it. That would significantly expand the legislative reach, and I think we need a different piece of legislation to consider the future management and restoration of opencast. This is about addressing disused quarries and mines, which is a significant undertaking in itself, and that's what we are committed to doing. On your point around future support for how to go about this work, I've already had conversations with both the Secretary of State for Wales and the Prime Minister around the fact that this is a priority for this Government. I expect us to make further bids into future funding. 

One of the more disappointing parts of the recent past is that the now former Secretary of State for Wales at one point agreed to support a bid for funding to come to Wales—and it was actually, in UK spending terms, not a huge amount of money. He then reneged on that commitment and refused to make and support a bid for that resource to come. I think we can be confident that there will be a real and significant change with the new partnership that we have. Far from being disappointed with the partners we now have, I think there is real room for optimism and positivity. So, I look forward to being able to deliver on that. 

I'd just like to briefly touch on the Health and Social Care (Wales) Bill. Firstly, I'm proud to be in a Wales that is looking to eliminate the profit from care. And I do urge everybody, particularly if there are sceptics in the Siambr—for example, perhaps the Conservative leader—to meet with some of our care-experienced young people. Georgia Toman said that she felt exploited by private companies who make profit from scared and traumatised young people. So, I will be talking with the leader of the opposition to see if we can make that connection so that you have the opportunity to listen to our care-experienced young people.

But the second issue for me is around unpaid carers. Currently, equality monitoring forms do not ask whether someone has unpaid caring responsibilities. There is no direct requirement for simple, reasonable adjustments to be made for them in the workplace. So, I'd like to ask your view on whether you think a particularly transformative way of tackling this discrimination would be making care status a protected characteristic. Diolch yn fawr iawn. 

Look, it's an interesting suggestion. I want to start by welcoming what she had to say about our Bill to eliminate private profit. I believe it is not just a value statement, though, as important as that is, it's a practical step forward to make sure that the money that exists and has to be spent within the system is used for a better purpose and, actually, in a more efficient way. There's a real efficiency case for doing this that goes beyond whether people do or don't like the private sector operating in this space. But it does matter to children and young people who have been through the care system. And I was really struck by how strongly held that view was, that they'd felt—with exactly the same words you used—exploited by the fact that money was being made out of them, and in a way when, actually, their experience hadn't been a good one. 

I do think back to a number of the conversations that I had when I was the Deputy Minister for health, but actually one of the things that really struck in my mind was a conversation with Mark Drakeford, where he said, 'We spend lots of money in this system, and we don't buy good outcomes for our children and young people. On the whole, we buy poorer outcomes than should be delivered. So, standing back and simply putting more money into the system isn't the right thing to do.' And that still is the case now, for all of the improvements  we have made. So, I'm generally very proud to support the Bill that my Government is bringing forward on eliminating private profit, and I think it will be seen as something that is a much better use of money on all fronts. 

As for whether unpaid carers should be a protected characteristic, I'm open-minded but not persuaded. I'd be interested in seeing what practical difference that would make, how that could happen. It's not within this legislative programme. There will be people in this room who are unpaid carers, with caring responsibilities not just for children but for older adults as well. I'm not persuaded that this in itself is a way to improve outcomes for unpaid carers. There are other things we are doing, but I'm more than happy to continue to engage in the conversation, as indeed I'm sure other Ministers in the Government will be, around how we can make the biggest difference. Because that is the point here: how do we make a difference with and for those unpaid carers to recognise what they do, not just for their loved ones, but what it means for all of us. 

Looking at this afternoon's statement from a transport view, it was something very difficult for me to get excited over. There is, of course, mention of a bus Bill, which I look forward to going through in greater detail, and a taxi and private hire vehicles Bill, but that, for me, First Minister, was just about it. It wasn't really very ambitious, in my opinion. The consultation on the taxi and private hire vehicle Bill closed in June 2023, and we haven't heard anything since. So, First Minister, can you please outline why this piece of work has been so slow in coming in front of us? 

This afternoon's statement makes no mention of your Government's controversial 20 mph speed limit scheme. First Minister, what consideration have you given to bringing forward a backing of drivers Bill, which would give the public what they want by reviewing your flawed 20 mph project and giving communities a stronger voice over these matters. Again, I’m deeply disappointed there’s no message or indeed any say of a road-building agenda. We all can agree that roads are important not only for our economy, but they are essential for getting people from A to B, whether that be on public transport or private vehicle. There’s a long-needed list of projects that need to be included and built, such as a third Menai crossing and Chepstow bypass. So, First Minister, will you commit to bringing forward a package of measures focused on road building? Only last week I raised the issue of Cardiff Airport with your Cabinet Secretary. If the Welsh Government is that confident it can turn the airport’s fortune around, then why isn’t a piece of work setting out these measures being brought forward? Trains are also another area that has been neglected in today’s statement, and I fear that it shows—

You need to ask your final question now, please.

—a clear lack of ambition from this Government. So, going forward, First Minister, please feel free to prove me wrong this afternoon by outlining what other transport-related Bills will be coming forth in this Chamber in the future. Thank you.

Well, I set out the transport-related Bills that will be coming forward in this legislative programme statement. The clue is in the title: much of what the Member said has nothing to do with legislation. When it comes to our capacity to legislate, we are legislating in a way that I think Members of the Senedd will be very busy dealing with this legislation. When Members are saying more legislation, then, on top of this, I think that is a real misunderstanding of the amount of work that lies ahead of Members, both Ministers leading Bills and indeed any backbenchers looking to introduce legislation. You may want to talk to your colleague about the significant amount of work he’s had to engage with as a Member in wanting to introduce a discrete piece of legislation, and indeed all backbenchers who will scrutinise the Bills that will come forward.

On your wider commentary, I think it’s important to reflect on the comments from Peter Fox in recognising the significant change that took place on Thursday. When people in Wales were asked about what they wanted to see, one of the clear proposals in the Conservative manifesto that was roundly rejected was the backing drivers Bill, the full-frontal assault on devolution that would have taken powers away from this place, as opposed to our manifesto commitment on 20 mph and the review that I’m delighted Ken Skates is leading on, which I believe will show that we’re listening to the public and acting on that. So, far from there being a mandate for the calls that you make, I’ll simply remind the Member, when the people of Wales were asked, they chose to implement a blanket ban on Welsh Tory MPs, and I salute their sound wisdom and judgment in doing so.

There are four Bills in your legislative programme that are of specific interest to me as Plaid Cymru’s new housing spokesperson, so I look forward to seeing the homelessness Bill and the building safety Bill. I do notice that there’s a new Bill for the statutory licensing Bill, which is the tourism accommodation Bill, which establishes a register. Can you confirm that this Bill will include statutory licensing as well as establishing a register, and can you confirm a timetable for the introduction of this Bill? You do need statutory licensing if this is to be an effective piece of legislation.

In the programme for government, in light of the agreement with my party, there is a commitment to publish a White Paper to introduce proposals on the right to an adequate home. I do understand that this will not now be published until the autumn. Can you confirm that and also confirm that the White Paper will give due attention to the right to an adequate home?

Finally, I note the reference to planning, and I do think that the original intention was to consolidate current legislation, to have a consolidation Bill. I now see that you’re talking about simplification and modernising this law, which is to be welcomed. So, can you confirm that this simply won’t be a consolidation Bill and that there will be a real opportunity to reform planning law for the benefit of communities across Wales and to facilitate the building of new homes?

Well, I think there are important points around how we facilitate the building of new homes. Planning is a part of that, but it’s not often the main part of it. Actually, the main part is often land supply and certainty and decision making; that’s capacity within the planning system rather than the rules as they actually apply. The consolidation Bill will make this a great deal simpler, to understand how we’ve already had planning reform. I think in both previous terms of the Senedd, we had planning reform legislation go through. What we need to do is to make it much more accessible so that the rules are clear for everyone, and we then need to do a piece of work that I’m delighted that I’ve agreed with Julie James that Jack Sargeant will lead a working group on to look at what we can do in terms of bringing forward supply, and how we actually have a clearer understanding of not just the amount of housing we need, but the quality of the housing as well. It's of real economic benefit. It will help us meet some of our climate targets as well if we are able to deliver not just more homes, but much better homes as well, and that will often lead to significant local employment outcomes.

The visitor accommodation and regulation Bill is due to be introduced in 2025, in plenty of time to be passed in this term, and it will look at registration and licensing, so you can expect that to happen. The economy Secretary is the lead Minister on that, given its direct links to our economic prospects and futures. We needed to choose who the lead Minister was. There was interest from many more people, but I'm confident that we will see a piece of legislation that delivers against our manifesto and, indeed, as I said earlier, the good-faith commitments we have made in the co-operation agreement.

That also applies to building safety and for our homelessness legislation. I think the homelessness Bill will again be another piece of legislation that people will recognise as being genuinely progressive—earlier intervention and prevention of homelessness, what that means for families and children, what it means for how we use the public estate we currently have, as well as, to finish on the point that you ended on, the impetus for building homes that are genuinely fit for purpose. Everyone deserves a place to call home, a safe and decent place to call home. That is what we are committed to doing.

One of the issues that was loud and clear on the doorstep was the need for more and better buses, so I very much welcome the bus Bill so that we can direct the investment we make in buses to where we can maximise social value. However, I'm disappointed that the taxi and private hire vehicles Bill is being delayed and is only being consulted on in draft. And I wondered why it's not been possible to link the taxi and private hire vehicles legislation to that of the bus Bill, because there is real concern in Cardiff, which tries to retain a balance between supply and demand—instead, what we have is taxi drivers unable to make a living because there's unfair competition by the uncontrolled licensing of taxi drivers from other local authorities, who then come into Cardiff and undermine the business of other people. So, I think I'm concerned that we're not planning to regulate that better in this term.

I just wanted to add to the—

Quickly, please.

—concerns from Delyth Jewell about the disused tip spill, because on the principle of regulation being that the polluter should remain responsible for the environmental harm of its actions, going forward, how could that be made to apply to companies like Monsanto, which have now left these shores? And have you had the opportunity to discuss with the new UK Labour Government how their attitude towards coal-tip responsibility will not, of course, be the outrageous position of the previous UK Government, where it was nothing to do with them, even though—

Thank you, Jenny.

—all the coal tips were closed down well before devolution?

On buses, I welcome the Member's support for the bus Bill. It's a significant issue within the Cardiff Central constituency, and in the current Cardiff Central in the Senedd, of course, the new bus station is finally open, and a proper interchange, together with rail, and indeed with taxi services as well.

On buses and taxis, we previously had a proposal to do both things in one piece of legislation, and the Bill ended up being unmanageable and too big, and we also needed to make sure that we had the expertise focused on delivering against the piece of legislation that mattered, rather than having to shoehorn them both in. We do, though, have a policy issue and a practical issue around cross-bordering. I hear it loud and clear. We also, though, need to work through with different stakeholders, including representatives of taxi drivers themselves, to understand what a solution could look like. That is work that Ken Skates is engaged in with his officials, with local authorities, with operators and, as I said, representatives of taxi drivers themselves, because I'm keen that we see progress. I also know that there are commitments to look at this issue in England as well, because in large parts of Wales, cross-bordering isn't simply about local authorities in Wales, it is about people moving from one local authority across the whole border as well, so you see a number of people travelling from Bristol to work in Wales. You see that movement, which is entirely necessary and reasonable for lots of journeys in north-east Wales, where we have a number of areas where the border runs through settlements.

On coal tips, as I said in response to earlier questions, I do believe we will have a much more positive response from the new Government on respecting and reflecting on the industrial legacy of coal tips and disused quarries. It is an industrial past that predates devolution, and yet very real challenges exist now. I would not want a major slip to take place on my watch. I want us to have a shared programme where we understand how both Governments are prepared to invest in putting these things right. Some work to understand what that looks like has already been done. What we now need is willingness from the UK Government to invest alongside us to do just that.

Thank you, First Minister, for outlining the legislative programme as you have done here this afternoon. I am surprised at the lack of focus on health services within the legislative programme, as you have outlined. Clearly—[Interruption.] Well, legislation relating to health services—shaking heads on the front row there. Health, of course, forms the largest part of the Welsh Government budget and is the most consequential area under this Government's control, and we do know the challenges that health services in Wales are facing. In particular, we're aware of the record waiting lists, and we're aware of people not being able to access ambulance responses within the eight minutes. It clearly needs attention at a legislative level.

Sam, one second. Can Members on the Government benches please allow the Member to actually contribute to his statement?

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. So, my question is, First Minister: do you think that this legislative programme accurately reflects the attention and focus that our health service deserves?

Well, that is a significant misunderstanding, innocent or otherwise, about the purpose of a legislative programme. We as a Government commit our most significant areas of funding resource to the national health service and are proud to do so: a 4 per cent and more increase to the NHS budget in the budget that this place passed last year, compared to just over 1 per cent over the border in then Conservative England. The reforms that we need to see delivered, together with the resource in the health service, don't require us to pass blockbuster Bills. You can't legislate your way to improving productivity. You can't legislate your way to changing every single part of public health behaviour. And I'm sure the Member does understand that this statement is not where significant improvement in health services is delivered. We don't need to change the law to improve health outcomes; we actually need to change the way that we're able to invest in the future of our service and to organise it around the patient and around our staff to deliver the best possible care in the right place at the right time.

I'm sure many of your constituents, Prif Weinidog, will be very pleased to hear that a building safety Bill is to be introduced, but given that seven years have passed since Grenfell and many people are still unable to move on with their lives, when does he foresee that that Bill will be introduced?

Secondly, it's three years since we received the Law Commission's report on devolved tribunals, but we still haven't got a timetable with regard to legislation in this area. Through the devolved tribunals, we have a foundation to build a fair Welsh justice system. When will the necessary legislation be introduced?

And finally, I'd like to repeat concerns referred to by the leader of the opposition. Since the last election, the Scottish Parliament have passed 26 Acts, with a further five Bills awaiting Royal Assent and 14 Bills in the legislative programme for this year. In contrast, only 10 Acts of the Senedd have received Royal Assent. Is the Prif Weinidog satisfied that legislating receives enough resources from the Welsh Government? Diolch yn fawr.

I think there are three relatively brief points. The first is that the building safety Bill, as I have indicated, is a priority for this Government. It'll be introduced in the next year. We do already provide, without having passed previous legislation—. As I responded to Andrew R.T. Davies, we provide practical support for leaseholders who wish to consider taking legal action against the developer of their property around fire safety issues, and we're also running a route to help improve fire safety issues, including those buildings that don't have cladding. We're the only UK nation to do that.

On your point around tribunals, I appreciate that lawyers in recovery will be interested in this. It is important that we’re having a coherent system around Welsh justice. That is a Bill that we may come to at the end of this term if we can deliver all other parts of the programme. So, it’s a possible introduction right at the end of the term, but it does depend on the length of time it takes us to legislate. I can tell you, I have been a Member in this place since 2011, and I have regularly seen how, at the end of a term, legislation is either rushed or is lost in a way that is not helpful for any of us. I do not want the major Bills that we have set out here to be at risk of being lost in the last week or two of term. If we’re able to make good progress on all of the radical and significant legislation that we have set out, then there may be opportunities to introduce a final Bill at the end, but these are the key priorities and this Government has taken a view on de-prioritising—difficult choices, but that allows a firmer platform to deliver this radical and progressive legislative reform programme, and I’m proud to do so; I will not get lost in simply comparing numbers of Bills as opposed to the practical impact of the legislation that we pass. That is the test that I want us to set: how can we use our powers to make a difference with fit-for-purpose legislation, not just simply count the numbers and not be concerned about the difference they have made.

First Minister, thank you for statement today. During time on the Children, Young People and Education Committee, I was truly privileged to meet so many young people across Wales, especially those children who were care experienced, and it’s very good to hear people across the Chamber today mention our care-experienced children and the work the Government’s doing in this area. In the report that we put forward, the committee mentioned up to nine recommendations; these recommendations came forward from actually the young people who took part in that inquiry, with areas where the Welsh Government could legislate to actually improve the lives of looked-after children across Wales. On top of what the Government is doing, can you outline anywhere where the Government could potentially legislate in the future to improve the lives of our young people right the way across Wales? And on top of that, First Minister, I also look forward to working with you and one of your Ministers, Jayne Bryant, here on the development of my mental health standards of care Bill.

Thank you for the comments. On future opportunities, we do take seriously reports that are provided by our scrutiny and policy committees. The Government doesn’t always agree with them, but there are times where we see the development of ideas that can lead to improvement in policy and delivery, or potentially in legislation. I’m talking today about the legislative programme we have, as opposed to what might take place at the end of this term, and of course parties will have their own manifestos for the future. So, there isn’t a closed mind to what the future can bring, but we have a set period of capacity within the rest of this term: that is both the Bills we have set out in the Government's programme and of course the Bills that I’ve committed to, and the Counsel General, in support of the work of the standards committee, which actually may not be a significant length of legislation, but the impact of it will be really significant, so the consultation and getting that right I think is really important, and it’s an area where we can see it’s not the length of the Bill that is the issue, it’s making sure we get things right in the legislation and the guidance that will need to come after that as well.

And I do look forward to continuing the constructive conversation we have had on the legislation the Member wants to take forward. With the UK Government that has just been elected with manifesto commitments to revise mental health legislation, which is welcome, I look forward to seeing if there is a practical area to make progress with the Member with the area he has chosen, and I know he’ll continue to have constructive conversations with Jayne Bryant, which I am properly supportive of.

Thank you, First Minister. 

The next item will be item 4, the Land Transaction Tax and Anti-avoidance of Devolved Taxes (Wales) Act 2017 (Amendments to Schedule 5) Regulations 2024, and the Cabinet Secretary for finance to move the motion—Rebecca Evans.

Diolch, Llywydd. The regulations before the Senedd are subject to the draft affirmative procedure. If the Senedd approves them today, I expect them to come into force on Friday. I’m grateful to the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee and the Finance Committee for their reports. The Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee has raised a technical scrutiny point and we have responded. The very minor error identified in the draft statutory instrument has now been corrected in advance of the regulations being made. The regulations will make changes to the land transaction tax higher residential rates refund and exception rules. LTT partial refunds are available to those who have paid the higher residential rates when buying a new home prior to selling their existing home. LTT higher residential rate exceptions are available to those who sell their old home before purchasing a new one but who own an interest in another dwelling at the time that they buy the new home. The refund and exception periods are available for three years from the time of a relevant transaction and are beneficial to homebuyers bridging between homes.

Evidence indicates that, while three years is usually long enough to support homebuyers, it can be too short in some truly exceptional circumstances. We are therefore proposing that the refund and exception periods be extended without limit for property transactions that are delayed by unresolved fire safety defects and emergency restrictions. In relation to unresolved fire safety defects, the new rules will allow future refund claims in relation to transactions that take place after the regulations come into force, but also in relation to claims where the three-year period has already expired, providing they would otherwise have been eligible within the original three-year period. In relation to emergency restrictions, the new rules will extend the three-year period for refunds and exceptions relating to relevant transactions where such emergency restrictions take place in the future. Recent public consultation has indicated a strong degree of support for the proposals, and I ask Members to approve these regulations.

The Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, Mike Hedges.

Diolch, Llywydd. The committee considered these draft regulations last week, and our report, which includes the Welsh Government's response, is available on today’s agenda. As the Cabinet Secretary has just outlined, these regulations amend Schedule 5 to the Land Transaction Tax and Anti-avoidance of Devolved Taxes (Wales) Act 2017 and will extend the three-year periods applying to the replacement of main residence exception from higher residential rates of land transaction tax. The Cabinet Secretary is therefore exercising a Henry VIII power available to Welsh Ministers.

The committee report contains only one technical and two merits reporting points. We only requested a Government response to the technical reporting point, which I will briefly summarise as follows. Paragraph 35 of Schedule 5 to the LTT Act makes provision in relation to where a buyer holds a major interest in a dwelling outside Wales. The committee was unclear why the regulations add certain references to subparagraph (4) of paragraph 35. The specific details can be found in our report. We asked the Government to clarify the approach taken regarding these references. The Welsh Government has accepted the point we have raised, and is going to amend the regulations prior to making so that the references we identified as being incorrect are removed.

Can I just say, on a personal note, I very much appreciate the changes being made? I think they'll benefit a number of people, so thank you very much.

I have no further speakers, and, therefore, does the Cabinet Secretary wish to respond? Rebecca Evans.

Just to say thank you very much to Mike Hedges, particularly for those final comments made in that more personal capacity, but then also to him and his committee for the work that they've done, particularly in identifying that minor drafting error. As I said, we have now removed the references to which Mike Hedges referred, and officials have replied to the LJCC report, and the text of the statutory instrument has been corrected in advance of the regulations being made. And then just to concur again with Mike Hedges in terms of these regulations being very important to people who find themselves in some very difficult but exceptional circumstances.

The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? No, there are no objections. The motion is therefore agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Item 5 is next, Stage 4 of the Elections and Elected Bodies (Wales) Bill. I call on the Counsel General to move the motion. Mick Antoniw.

I move the motion.

Thank you, Llywydd, I'm delighted to move the Stage 4 motion on the Elections and Elected Bodies (Wales) Bill. During the course of this Senedd, we have delivered radical and groundbreaking legislation. This Bill is one of the most radical, as it goes to the heart of our democracy, our electoral system. It introduces not only a new management system for Welsh elections, but it also introduces a system of automatic registration of electors. Through digitisation of the electoral register, it opens the door to technological opportunities to make our electoral system more accessible than at any time in our history.

It is a Bill that will begin to modernise our Welsh electoral system, to create a system that has our democratic health at its heart, fit for the twenty-first century. With this Bill, we are seeking to improve our democracy by improving how elections are run and how people can engage with them. Allowing automatic registration; ensuring that clear information is available to explain elections and the choice before the voter; putting in place services to encourage people from the most under-represented groups to participate in decision making that impacts on all our lives through the privilege of serving our communities and elected bodies; establishing the electoral management board, putting the excellent voluntary work of the electoral community on a sounder footing. While the Bill will result in the abolition of the Independent Remuneration Panel for Wales, the principles and evidence-based approach that the panel has taken will be built upon and strengthened as the remuneration function becomes part of the Democracy and Boundary Commission Cymru.

These reforms complement reforms to the Senedd made through the Senedd Cymru (Members and Elections) Act 2024 and will also open the door to additional legislation, which I committed to at Stage 3 last week, to introduce a further Bill for 2026 to introduce a system of recall or removal of Senedd Members where serious malfeasance has occurred, and to legislate for candidates and Members to be held to account for statements of deliberate deception. I am pleased to note the cross-party support for this objective. I look forward to receiving the recommendations from the standards committee in due course.

We have a new Government in Westminster, and I am pleased that they have also committed to legislating for automatic registration and extending the electoral franchise to 16 for UK elections. In Wales, we have led the way by extending the electoral franchise to 16-year-olds already. Via automatic registration, we will be responding to the challenge posed by the Electoral Commission to tackle non-registration. Having a comprehensive electoral register is fundamental to our democracy. Automatic registration will have the potential to add the missing 400,000 Welsh electors to the register. For UK elections, it has the potential to add around 7 million to the register. If citizens are not on the register, they cannot vote. If they are on the register, they can.

The stability of our democracy and our democratic health is dependent on the participation of voters and their mandate. We can see around the world, and indeed at home, the increasing challenges to democracy, freedom and the rule of law. I recall the political wisdom displayed on the Tower colliery National Union of Mineworkers' banner, 'The price of freedom is eternal vigilance', and we must indeed be vigilant in opposing those who would undermine the foundations of our freedom and democracy and civil rights, fought for so hard and with so many sacrifices by our predecessors.

We can be proud that, through this Senedd, Wales has taken the lead across the UK in beginning the process of building a twenty-first century electoral system, upholding the highest principles of electoral accountability, accessibility, inclusion and diversity. So, this is not the end of the road, and there is more to do.

This Bill has broad consensus. We have seen this within the Senedd, and with the wider community of interested organisations that welcomed the Bill’s contents, both in our October 2022 White Paper consultation, and indeed during scrutiny. And I’d like to express my thanks to all Members and committees for their consideration and scrutiny of this Bill. I am particularly grateful to Joel James for working with us on his amendment, which will help to ensure proper relationships between town and community councils and their clerks. I would like to thank Adam Price for his considerable engagement with this Bill. We agreed some of his amendments in committee and supported the principle of many others, but disagreed, sometimes, on the means. Your contributions have ensured that this Bill is in the best position it can be, and I'm very grateful to you. I'm grateful to all the stakeholders and experts who have contributed their views and expertise during the Bill’s legislative scrutiny. Also to officials of the Welsh Government and Senedd Commission for their support to myself and Members throughout this Bill’s journey. I hope the Senedd will support the well-thought-out and well-thought-through provisions contained in this Bill.

I now look forward to hearing the opinions of my fellow Members on this Bill. Thank you very much.

First of all, I would like to, again, thank the whole Bill team for all of their work—they've put in a huge amount of it. Also, could I thank both Adam Price and the Counsel General for your generous engagement through the process? Whilst we didn't always agree with things, it was a healthy opportunity to come together.

While we are saddened, or I'm saddened, that not more of our amendments were accepted, such as our accessibility amendment, which would have made voting in person more accessible to all, we are grateful that our amendments that include an increase in the notice period from 45 days to 60 days after which a person will be registered to vote without application were accepted. As I have mentioned in all stages of the Bill, we need to be careful with people's information, and people are often wishing to remain anonymous for a good reason, so we are glad that this notice period has been extended. Also, our amendment that requires Welsh Ministers to undertake consultation before making any pilot regulations in relation to electoral registration without application was also accepted by the Senedd, which I'm grateful for. 

I would also like to thank Joel James for all of the work that he has done on amendments 23 and 24, which ensure that clerks are not able to become community, county and county borough councillors, which will ensure that their roles as officers—proper officers—are independent and not politically motivated. We are grateful for these amendments also being accepted. 

Llywydd, whilst I recognise the amount of work put into the Bill from all sides of this Chamber, I'm afraid we can't fully support it, even amended, due in the main to our opposition to the registration to vote without application.

One consequential, though, out of the Bill, which was driven through the process to date, was, obviously, the new offence of deception that Adam Price brought forward. Now, I know that that has fallen away, but your commitment in the Chamber last week was very welcome, and identified in the legislative programme earlier today. That gives me confidence that we can take that forward and start rebuilding the trust that we really do need to.

I'd like to thank, again, everybody for their work on this Bill, but for the reason that I shared just now, the Conservative group will be voting against at Stage 4.

We in Plaid Cymru will be supporting this important Bill because of the progress it represents in reforming our democracy in Wales, and the main focus of the Bill, of course, in terms of automatic voter registration, as the Counsel General outlined, which will ensure that our democracy can represent the views of our citizens more effectively. We also welcome some other aspects of the Bill that the Counsel General referred to, namely the attempt to ensure greater diversity within our democratic system, at a Welsh Parliament and local government level, and that, once again, so as to ensure that our democracy can reflect the whole of society, and also to create and tailor individual schemes or plans to address lack of representation in terms of some important sections of society. So, I welcome those positive elements.

We are disappointed, as was mentioned by Peter Fox, that there were some amendments that weren't accepted by the Government, for example, those related to accessibility, particularly the ability of blind people, for example, to participate in the democratic process in an equal manner. We are also very disappointed with the Government's rejection of putting the electoral system on an equal footing in terms of language, and making the electoral system subject to the Welsh language standards, and we still hope that the Government will change its view on that.

There were a number of other issues that were brought forward during the scrutiny process, for example, an effort to use the powers that we have to regulate the possible negative impacts of artificial intelligence, deepfake videos, and so on. Lee Waters has put forward some comments on this based on the seminar that he participated in in Singapore recently. I do very much hope that this will be an issue that we can return to in due course, and if there isn't action on a UK-wide level, we should certainly use the powers that we have to regulate our own democracy here in Wales.

I welcome the amendments that the Government had accepted. I would have liked to have seen greater engagement and a greater willingness to collaborate, to reflect the fact that the Government doesn't have a majority in this place. We will be supporting this Stage 4 motion, but without the support of some opposition parties at this point, this Bill would fall. So, I do think that we need to improve the way that we do collaborate on a cross-party basis across the Senedd, to reflect the arithmetic of our democracy, and that no single party, including the party of Government, has monopoly on truth or good ideas.

I should make reference, as the Counsel General and Peter Fox did, to one of the great topics of discussion during the course of this Bill, this issue of deception, which is a crucially important issue, not only for our democracy here in Wales, but on a global level too. We look forward now to co-operating on a cross-party basis as we take this idea and implement it by means of the Bill that was mentioned in the legislative programme earlier this afternoon.

It is important that we do address the lack of trust in our politics, because we are facing a challenge and a crisis in democracy, indeed. We saw the lowest percentage that's participated in a general election in Wales—only 56 per cent—so we do face challenges in terms of strengthening our democracy. I would say that it's only through the cross-party co-operative spirit, everyone bringing their own ideas forward, and everyone trying to work together in order to reach the aim that I'm sure we all share, having the most lively democracy possible in Wales—. In that spirit, we will be supporting the Bill at Stage 4. We welcome the progress it represents, but look forward to continuing on to the next chapter with the other Bill that I mentioned.

I've just got a few words to say, really, because both Peter Fox and Adam Price have covered really key areas here. But I'd like to begin by thanking those involved in this Bill to date, including the Counsel General and officials, Members across the Siambr and the other staff as well.

I welcome the position that we've arrived at. There have been significant negotiations and hard work to get to a place where I think we are moving forward in relation to how we can really make ourselves transparent and accountable. We have to remember that we need to operate with integrity and honesty, and this Bill makes sure that we take steps to reach that. As Adam has said, we do need to improve the health of our democracy here in Wales, and ensure that more people participate. We have gone through a general election where we had the lowest rate of people participating—56 per cent this year, which is actually down from 2019's figure of 67 per cent. That should be a real challenge and a wake-up call to us all here in the Siambr, particularly as we move forward to 2026 and ensuring that we have a really representative Senedd here in Wales.

So, I look forward, finally, to the steps that will be taken, particularly with regard to the introduction of a Bill and legislation to address the issues around deliberate deception. This Bill is an important and necessary step to ensure that Wales is more democratic, freer and fairer. It is one step on a road that I hope is not too long to ensure that we get the democratic Wales we deserve and need. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

The Counsel General now to reply to the debate.

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. I welcome all the comments that have been made. Referring to Jane Dodds's comments last of all, the health of our democracy, I think, is an issue of such importance. The points you raised we are all aware of and have been commented on. We recognise how important it is to our stability, but also to our fundamental freedoms. Of course, the ability to make these changes today—and these are very radical changes—comes from the Wales Act 2017. It was one of the key parts of why I was so supportive of that Act, because if you don't have control over your electoral system, you are effectively disempowered, and our ability today to make radical change electorally and to modernise our system is really important.

If I could refer to Peter Fox's comments, I am very disappointed that the Conservative opposition is not supporting this Bill. I have to say right at the beginning I always thought that as a group you wouldn't, because the Conservative Party has supported all sorts of methods of voter suppression over the past years. It is so disappointing that you are actually opposing the introduction of automatic registration and the possibility of there being another 400,000 Welsh electors on the electoral register. I'm so disappointed because I suspect that is the main reason why you are actually opposing this Bill—because it opens out democracy in a way that I think would be far more inclusive and involve far more people. I think you have struggled to find reasons to oppose this Bill. I hope you will reconsider, but I doubt that that will actually happen.

Adam, in terms of the point you raised, I very much take note of the points you make on diversity. Diversity and inclusivity is a very important part of this particular Bill. In fact, this Bill takes us further in those particular areas than, I think, in any other previous legislation. The issues relating to the potential digitisation of the electoral register really open the door to very radical, very dramatic and very fundamental change. I think this legislation is a very significant step forward.

Thank you for the support. I urge all Members now to support Stage 4 so that this radical—groundbreaking for the UK—legislation can go forward for Royal Assent. Diolch.

There will now be a vote in accordance with Standing Order 26.50C. We must have a recorded vote on Stage 4 motions. Unless three Members wish for the Bill to be rung, I will proceed directly to voting time.

I don't know what's wrong with my screen, but I cannot get onto the voting. Can I vote orally?

Yes, I will allow the vote to be cast orally if there is a problem. 

We will move on to the vote on Stage 4 of the Elections and Elected Bodies (Wales) Bill. I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Mick Antoniw. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 39, no abstentions, 12 against. Therefore, the motion is agreed.

We will now take a short break before we start Stage 3 proceedings on the Local Government Finance (Wales) Bill. We will ring the bell five minutes before we reconvene.

We’ll start with group 1: duty to consult. The first group of amendments relates to the duty to consult. The lead amendment in this group is amendment 3, and I call on Peter Fox to move and speak to the lead amendment.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Thank you for the opportunity to contribute to the Local Government Finance (Wales) Bill. I would also like to thank the team for all the work that they put into this Bill. I will speak specifically to my amendments. These amendments set out a duty on Welsh Ministers to consult with people they think are appropriate before conferring or withdrawing relief and before making regulations. This will ensure that the voices of councils and other organisations are heard. Also, consulting will increase the levels of accountability and transparency that we all aim to achieve. While we understand, as the Cabinet Secretary noted at Stage 2, that these regulations will follow the usual consultation process, we believe that by putting the duty to consult on the face of the Bill, this will help to build confidence as well as improving transparency and accountability. It is for this reason that I urge Members to support these amendments.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary.

Thank you. Before I speak to the amendments in this group, I’d just like to outline for Members the importance of this legislation and the purpose of the Bill. We’re bringing consistency, flexibility and progress to ensure that local taxes continue to be effective and operational for years to come. We’re legislating for the future and not the past. Local taxation is an integral part of local government. Across the Chamber, Members champion local government and the difference it makes to our daily lives. Our contribution to essential services comes in part from council tax and non-domestic rates, providing a foundation to local democracy.

The key provisions in the Bill improve the fairness of council tax and non-domestic rates by ensuring that they reflect economic circumstances on a more regular basis. It tackles non-domestic rates avoidance and improves administration. We’ve also sought to modernise the law, and make it more responsive to changing policy needs. This Bill therefore delivers meaningful change to council tax and non-domestic rates, not only in the short term but also in paving the way for further reforms in the future. It’s an opportunity to make a real difference to a taxation system that impacts almost every person and business in the country.

I’d like to put on record my thanks to those Members and committee staff who have been involved in the scrutiny of the Bill. I’m grateful for their careful consideration of this legislation and for the constructive approach that they have taken. A revised version of the explanatory memorandum has been tabled, reflecting my commitments in response to committee recommendations and Stage 2 amendments.

I’ll turn now to the amendments in this group, all of which would require consultation before Welsh Ministers could exercise most of the regulation-making powers in the Bill in relation to both NDR and council tax. As I set out during earlier stages of scrutiny, a statutory requirement in this regard is not necessarily and may be disproportionate in some circumstances, such as where minor administrative amendments may be made to regulations. When considering whether to consult with stakeholders, we take into account the Welsh Government's policy on consultation and we act in accordance with common law consultation duties. None of the range of existing powers for Welsh Ministers to make regulations in relation to NDR and council tax are subject to statutory consultation duties.

Whilst I do appreciate the principle underpinning all of these amendments, it's important to be clear about the very real unintended consequences they would risk. Statutory consultation in all circumstances could disadvantage local tax payers in Wales by delaying or even preventing the provision of new support. These amendments would make it practically unworkable to provide new support to ratepayers in certain circumstances, including when the Welsh Government's approach is affected by a UK Government autumn statement. This is not a theoretical issue—it arises annually as a core consideration in the setting of the Welsh Government's draft budget.

During earlier stages of scrutiny, I gave examples of recent circumstances where we couldn't have acted to provide support in the required timescales if such a requirement had applied to our existing powers. Whilst the effect of these amendments would not apply to those existing powers, the examples do help demonstrate the barrier to positive intervention that these amendments would present.

I'll now comment on the individual amendments in this group, with reference to the most relevant examples that I previously provided. Amendments 3 to 5 relate to power to confer and withdraw NDR reliefs by regulations. We could not have brough forward regulations in time to provide transitional relief for the 2023 revaluation if we had been compelled to consult on the proposals first. This is an intervention that achieved cross-party support in the Senedd and was welcomed by ratepayers. Providing the relief a year later would have been too late and thousands of ratepayers would have been disadvantaged. I don't believe that this is an outcome that the Senedd would have wanted or should risk in relation to interventions it will wish to support in future that rely on the powers provided in the Bill.

Amendment 8 relates to powers to confer and withdraw NDR exemptions by regulations. Similarly to reliefs, this amendment could disadvantage ratepayers in Wales by delaying the provision of a new exemption in circumstances where this is considered to be the most appropriate way to reduce NDR liability to zero.

Amendment 10 relates to the power to set differential multipliers by regulations. During earlier stages of scrutiny, I provided a detailed explanation of potential unintended consequences of such a duty, and I committed to consult before introducing any differential multiplier. However, an ongoing duty to consult in relation to the annual maintenance of differential multipliers could disadvantage ratepayers. This is because any such annual maintenance couldn't be implemented until after the UK Government's autumn statement, which informs the Welsh Government's approach to the annual setting of the multiplier. If consultation were required in relation to the annual maintenance of differential multipliers, there would simply be insufficient time to prepare regulations and to bring them into force before local authorities undertake their annual billing.

In recent years, we have made regulations to support ratepayers by freezing or limiting inflationary growth in the multiplier, generally with cross-party support in the Senedd. This amendment would not afford us the equivalent annual flexibility in relation the relative level of any differential multiplier that might exist in future. It could, therefore, prevent us from considering potential options that the Senedd may support, such as freezing or capping a differential multiplier. This is an approach that the Welsh Conservatives themselves have argued for, when we set the multiplier for the current year. It's not currently possible to consider such an approach, and that situation would persist if amendment 10 is adopted.

Amendments 13, 16 and 17 relate to powers to make regulations about council tax discounts. These amendments could disadvantage council tax payers in Wales by delaying or even preventing the provision of new support, especially in emergency situations. During earlier stages of scrutiny, I gave examples of when we were able to respond quickly to ensure host households offering accommodation to people Ukraine seeking safety from war did not lose out entitlements to discounts and incur additional council tax costs. This support would not have been provided expediently if such procedures had applied. So, in conclusion, I would ask Members to resist amendments 3, 4, 5, 8, 10, 13, 16 and 17.

Peter Fox to reply.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for your response. I thought that would be the case. It's just that I think it's important to reiterate the importance of the need for a robust consultation period, which will increase transparency and improve confidence. Consultation should always be something that is strived for and should be built into processes. That's all I have to say, Dirprwy Lywydd.

The question is that amendment 3 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is objection. We will therefore proceed to a vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 24, no abstentions, 25 against. Therefore the amendment is not agreed.

Peter, amendment 4.

Move.

The question is that amendment 4 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is objection. We will therefore proceed to a vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 24, no abstentions, 25 against. Therefore, amendment 5 is not agreed. Peter, amendment—. Sorry, I apologise; amendment 4 is not agreed.

Amendment 5.

Move.

Open the vote.

Oh, sorry—no. [Interruption.] Now, hang on a second. [Laughter.]

The proposal is that amendment 5 be agreed. Does any Member object? [Objection.] We'll move to a vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 24, no abstentions, 25 against. Therefore, amendment 5 is not agreed.

The second group of amendments relates to charitable rate relief. The lead amendment in this group is amendment 6, and I call on Peter Fox to move and speak to the lead amendment and the other amendments in the group.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. I'll speak to my amendments 6, 7, 22, 23 and 25. These amendments require the Welsh Ministers to publish guidance on how billing authorities in Wales should decide applications for charitable rate relief in respect of unoccupied hereditaments in Wales. This will help to ensure that billing authorities have a set criteria when it comes to deciding on applications for charitable relief. While we welcome that the Cabinet Secretary said at Stage 2 about them accepting the committee recommendations at Stage 1 on the publication of guidance, we felt that it was still important to reiterate the push for more guidance and support to be provided for billing authorities, as with this guidance they can make fully informed decisions that will ensure that organisations are able to receive charitable rate relief if they meet the requirements. Thank you.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary.

Amendments 6 and 7 would require Welsh Ministers to publish guidance for local authorities on the strengthened eligibility criteria for charitable rate relief for unoccupied properties. The focus of that guidance would be on the new tests that require a local authority to be satisfied by the reasons why a property is unoccupied and its intended future use. I have accepted the Local Government and Housing Committee's Stage 1 recommendation to work with local authorities on guidance to be published before section 6 of the Bill comes into force, but a statutory requirement is not necessary. We already work closely with local authorities to support the implementation of policy changes and have existing guidance on the full range of non-domestic rates reliefs, including in respect of charities and unoccupied properties. Our guidance is routinely updated to support local authorities and ratepayers.

Amendments 22, 23 and 25 are consequential on amendment 7, and I would ask Members to resist amendments 6, 7, 22, 23 and 25. 

Peter Fox to reply.

Thank you. We believe that a firm commitment in this Bill to provide guidance to billing authorities can only benefit both the billing authorities and the organisations that apply for charitable rate relief. So, again, it is unfortunate that the Cabinet Secretary will not be supporting these amendments. Thank you.

The question is that amendment 6 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] We will proceed to a vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 24, no abstentions, 25 against. Therefore, the amendment is not agreed.

Peter, amendment 7.

The proposal—

No.

If amendment 7 is not agreed, amendment 23 will fall. The question is that amendment 7 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection. We will proceed to a vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 24, no abstentions, 25 against. Therefore, amendment 7 is not agreed.

Peter, amendment 8.

Moved.

The question is that amendment 8 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection, so we will proceed to a vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 24, no abstentions, 25 against. Therefore, amendment 8 is not agreed.

Group 3 is next. And the third group of amendments relates to non-domestic rating multipliers. The lead amendment in this group is amendment 9. I call on Peter Fox to move and speak to the lead amendment and the other amendment in the group.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. So, I will speak to, in the main, my amendment 9, which will require the Welsh Minister to make regulations under the new proposed differential multiplier powers in paragraph A16, with the effect for hereditaments of certain rateable values to be determined by Welsh Ministers in regulations where the applicable multiplier is less than the standard multiplier.

In summary, this amendment calls for the creation of a separate small business multiplier in the same way that England and Scotland has. It is important that the differences between small businesses and medium and large businesses are recognised in the rates that they pay. At Stage 2, the Cabinet Secretary stated that there was no current policy to adopt a small business multiplier and that a small business multiplier has not been consulted on. However, a majority of Welsh businesses are either small or microbusinesses, and these businesses should be supported and helped to grow. It is due to this that it is important that small businesses should not be facing the same multipliers as medium and large businesses. It is for this reason that we encourage Members to support this amendment.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak in this debate today, and thank to everybody who’s supported the work to bring this Bill forward. We will be supporting amendment 9, because we agree with the need to tailor the powers that are in this legislation for small businesses in particular, and to ensure that the design of NDRs from now on favours the domestic business sector.

I'll go on to speak now about amendment 1.

Amendment No. 1 would place an obligation on Welsh Ministers to publish a statement of policy on setting the non-domestic rating multiplier in Wales and to lay this before the Senedd for debate. While we fully support the rationale for the Senedd to have the necessary powers to set its own NDR multipliers, which would allow for rates to be tailored according to the needs of our business sector, we are disappointed that the Government has failed to specify this policy intent in assuming these powers, thereby kicking their practical application into the long grass. As it's fair to say that seeking and obtaining powers in writing, but not using them in practice, has become a recurring trend with this Government, the fact that they have yet to enact section 48(1) of the Wales Act 2017, which would align the Senedd's legislative competence over water with the geographical boundaries of Wales, is emblematic in this respect. At a time when our domestic SMEs are continuing to feel the pinch of the post-pandemic fallout, high energy prices and the cost-of-living crisis, the very least they deserve is for Welsh Government to be upfront as to the rationale behind setting the multiplier for each financial year, including instances where it remains unchanged. Diolch.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary.

Thank you. Turning first to the amendment tabled by Peter Fox, amendment 9 would, in effect, require the powers provided by section 10 to be used to set a small business multiplier, and as I set out during the earlier stages of scrutiny, there's no current policy intention to create a small business multiplier in Wales. This is just one example of an approach that would be possible to adopt under the powers in section 10 of the Bill. There are other ways in which the Welsh Government might wish to target the use of any differential multipliers in relation to our priorities and the needs of Wales, and section 10 is intended to enable analysis of a wider range of policy options when considering whether to introduce a differential multiplier for Wales. Importantly, there has been no consultation on introducing a small business multiplier. Amending the Bill in this way would actually be counter to the principle behind amendment 10 in relation to consultation and my commitment to consult before introducing a differential multiplier.

Turning to the other amendment in this group, tabled by Peredur Owen Griffiths, amendment 1 would require the Welsh Ministers to publish a statement of their policy on the use of the powers to calculate NDR multipliers. This would apply not only to the power to proscribe differential multipliers in section 10, but also to the existing power to set the single multiplier that currently exists. As I explained during stage 2 proceedings, this amendment is not necessary as the existing framework already allows for the intended clarity and opportunity for scrutiny. The long-established default calculation of the multiplier, as set out in primary legislation, maintains NDR revenue in real terms. Each time we use our powers to depart from that calculation, we will continue to set out the Welsh Government's policy as part of the debate required to seek the Senedd's approval of the associated regulations under the affirmative procedure. I've committed to consulting before introducing any differential multiplier, which will naturally involve setting out our policy. Once any differential multiplier is implemented, the established annual considerations and processes will apply. So, in conclusion, I would ask Members to resist amendments 1 and 9.

And I call on Peter Fox to reply.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. I've not much to say, just that we should always be striving to help our smallest of businesses to get on their feet, especially recognising they have struggled so much. We should be really thinking about looking at creating a multiplier for small businesses, as Scotland and England have. Now that you have a partnership across the UK, perhaps you will take some advice from them and perhaps put that forward in the future. Thank you. Thank you, chair.

The question is that amendment 9 should be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection. We will therefore proceed to a vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 24, no abstentions, 25 against. Therefore, amendment 9 is not agreed.

Peter Fox, amendment 10.

Move.

The question is that amendment 10 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is objection. We will therefore proceed to a vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 24, no abstentions and 25 against. Therefore, amendment 10 is not agreed.

Peredur Owen Griffiths, amendment 1.

The question is that amendment 1 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is objection. We will therefore proceed to a vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 24, no abstentions and 25 against. Therefore, amendment 1 is not agreed.

We will move now to the fourth group of amendments, which relate to regulation-making powers. The lead amendment in the group is amendment 11. And I call on Peter Fox to move and speak to the lead amendment and the other amendments in the group. Peter.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. So, I will speak to amendments 11, 12, 15, 18 and 27. These amendments provide for a minimum period of 60 days, excluding periods of dissolution or recess of more than four days, to allow the Senedd to scrutinise draft regulations, such as powers inserted into the 1988 Act by sections 5, 9, 10 and 12 of the Bill, which purport to do any of the following: confer or withdraw reliefs from liability to non-domestic rating of hereditaments in Wales; confer or withdraw exemptions from non-domestic rating for prescribed hereditaments in Wales; and make provision in relation to different multipliers for the calculation of non-domestic rate liability for hereditaments in Wales.

At Stage 2, the Cabinet Secretary commented that the 60 days makes it a superaffirmative procedure, which can delay changes. However, by having this time for scrutiny, it will improve transparency and accountability and it's in this spirit that we encourage Members to support these amendments.

We're happy to support these amendments, which follow on from the recommendations made by the committee on the need to allow for a minimum period of 60 days for relevant committees to scrutinise regulations proposed under the powers in section 5. We believe that the nature of the powers sought by the Government demands an appropriate level of oversight from the Senedd, which these amendments would guarantee. Diolch.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary.

As we've heard, most of the amendments in this group would subject regulations made under most of the powers in the Bill to a superaffirmative procedure in the form of a minimum laying period of 60 days. A superaffirmative procedure is only used in exceptional instances where the affirmative procedure is not considered to be sufficient. And, as I set out during previous stages of scrutiny, I don't believe that that is the case in relation to the provisions in this Bill.

Amendment 11 relates to the powers in relation to NDR to define artificial avoidance arrangements, confer and withdraw reliefs and exemptions, and set differential multipliers by regulations. Amendments 12, 15 and 18 relate to powers to make regulations about council tax discounts. None of the range of existing powers for Welsh Ministers to make regulations in relation to NDR and council tax is subject to superaffirmative procedures. Whilst I do appreciate the principle underpinning this amendment, it is important to be clear about the real unintended consequences that it would risk. Superaffirmative procedures could disadvantage local tax payers in Wales by delaying or even preventing the provision of new support. This would be a particular problem where the budget available to inform the Welsh Government's approach is affected by the UK Government's autumn statement, or where we decide to provide new support in emergency circumstances. The examples that I set out in relation to the proposed statutory consultation duties are equally relevant to this matter. These examples, which I will not repeat, demonstrate how this amendment could prevent interventions to support local tax payers, which this Senedd would support. A superaffirmative procedure would also lead to a delay in addressing identified NDR-avoidance arrangements, resulting in the prolonged avoidance of liability. 

Amendment 27 would apply the affirmative procedure to the commencement of the new duties for ratepayers to provide information to the VOA. It is not standard practice to subject commencement Orders to a scrutiny procedure. As I explained during earlier stages, the provisions are set out in full and available for scrutiny during the passage of the Bill. I have provided clear assurances that the provisions will not be commenced until the Welsh Government is satisfied that ratepayers can be reasonably expected to comply.

The VOA's evidence to the Local Government and Housing Committee during Stage 1 provided further assurance about the work that they are doing to ensure the arrangements are straightforward for ratepayers to engage with. I'm not, therefore, persuaded that further Senedd approval is necessary when we are ready to commence the provisions. So, in conclusion, I would ask Members to resist amendments 11, 12, 15, 18 and 27.

Peter Fox to reply to the debate.

Move to the vote.

The question is that amendment 11 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is objection. We will proceed to a vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 24, no abstentions and 25 against. Therefore, amendment 11 is not agreed.

Peter, amendment 12.

Move.

The question is that amendment 12 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is objection. We will therefore proceed to a vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 24, no abstentions, 25 against. Therefore, amendment 12 is not agreed.

Peter, amendment 13.

Move.

The question is that amendment 13 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] We will proceed to vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 24, no abstentions and 25 against. Therefore, amendment 13 is not agreed.

Group 5 is next, and the fifth group of amendments relates to council tax: single person discount. The lead amendment in the group is amendment 14, and it's the only amendment in this group, and I call on Peter Fox to move and speak to the amendment.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. Amendment 14 is somewhat of a probing amendment. We would like to ask the Cabinet Secretary to commit to maintaining the single person discount at a minimum of 25 per cent, and without imposing new conditions or restrictions on eligibility for the discount. We welcome that the Cabinet Secretary, during Stage 2, stated that she will be adding this. However, we would like to ask the Cabinet Secretary to reiterate that commitment today, because, as we know, in the explanatory memorandum, on page 90, there's very clearly a line there that allows councils to disapply this discount or reduce it in certain circumstances. So, I think it's absolutely important we get a firm, absolutely solid commitment that 25 per cent minimum will always stay in place. Thank you.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary.

Amendment 14 introduces a requirement that, in any future regulations made relating to the future of the single person discount, the discount must be at least 25 per cent. This is an important area of support for over £0.5 million households right across Wales. The wider purpose of section 18 of the Bill is to modernise, consolidate and provide consistency across the range of powers in the 1992 Act that currently set council tax liability. The legal landscape is complicated and inconsistent, having grown incrementally over 30 years, making it hard for taxpayers to understand the range of discounts, exemptions and disregards. It's also complex for advice agencies, such as Citizens Advice, to navigate when helping people, and for local authorities to administer. I have been absolutely clear, however, that I will restate the single person discount at 25 per cent in regulations. The single person discount is and will continue to be enshrined into law. So, in conclusion, I would ask Members to resist amendment 14.

Peter Fox to reply.

Thank you, and thank you, Cabinet Secretary. I don't doubt that you are going to do that; it's just that the law through the regulations currently allows those councils to apply the ability to disapply those elements, and that's what gives us some concern. As you recognise, there are so many people dependent on this 25 per cent discount, and a lot of those people are very cash-poor. They may be elderly single people in large houses, who are paying huge amounts of council tax, probably run-down houses in many ways, and so it's important that that does stay in place. So, I am heartened that you will do that. However, I will be moving the amendment.

The proposal is that amendment 14 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is objection. We will proceed to a vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 13, no abstentions, 36 against. Therefore, amendment 14 is not agreed.

Peter, amendment 15.

Move.

The question is that amendment 15 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is objection. We will proceed to a vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 23, no abstentions, 26 against. Therefore, amendment 15 is not agreed.

Peter, amendment 16.

Move.

The question is that amendment 16 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is objection. We will therefore proceed to a vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 24, no abstentions and 25 against. Therefore, amendment 16 is not agreed.

Peter, amendment 17.

It's moved.

The question is that amendment 17 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection. We will move to a vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 24, no abstentions, 25 against. Therefore, amendment 17 is not agreed.

Peter, amendment 18.

I move.

The question is that amendment 18 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is objection. We will therefore proceed to a vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 24, no abstentions, 25 against, therefore amendment 18 is not agreed. 

Group 6 is next, and the sixth group of amendments relates to the publication of notices. The lead and only amendment in this group is amendment 19, and I call on Peter Fox to move and speak to the amendment.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. Before I speak to this amendment, I would really like to acknowledge the Cabinet Secretary for trying to introduce a late amendment to find a way forward on this. I really do thank her for her engagement with this. Unfortunately, that wasn't to be.

Amendment 19 removes section 20 of the Bill. This will ensure that changes of council tax notices will continue to be printed in newspapers. While there has been a move of most things online, it's important to note that these online notices are not always accessible to everyone. There are people who rely on the publication of these notices in newspapers, and maintaining this will help to increase accountability and transparency.

During Stage 2, the Cabinet Secretary commented that technology has moved on, and that there is a wide range of information on council tax changes available, and that people will be notified through their bill. While we accept that the Cabinet Secretary noted that, if a local authority wanted to keep using papers to publish notices, this section will not remove that from them, the Welsh Conservatives believe that it is still important for these notices to continue to be published in local newspapers, as it will ensure that this information will be accessible to everyone.

What we were hoping we could have done was to find a transition period that would enable this to kick in over a five-year period. We weren’t able to do so, so I will be moving forward with the amendment as is.

The discussions between Peter and the Cabinet Secretary and myself around this amendment have been very productive, but that amendment wasn't able to be taken forward. But this one is, and we're happy to support this amendment, which would remove the provision currently contained in the Bill to disapply the statutory requirement for councils to publish council tax changes in printed local newspapers. Not only would this be a retrograde step in terms of upholding the rights of the public to access information, especially those that are digitally excluded, as often highlighted by the Older People's Commissioner for Wales, we also believe that it would deprive local journalism of a vital source of revenue at a time when such media sources are under sustained financial pressure. Wales is particularly poorly served by its media environment, caused in part by the retreat of local journalism from our communities over recent years. This provision of the Bill would undoubtedly compound the issue, which brings with it broader detrimental implications for the democratic health of our nation.

Will you give way? Just very briefly, I totally understand your argument, but I've spoken to the editor of the Caerphilly Observer, and one of the things that Richard Gurner said is that this is a subsidy, as you say, to an extent, but we also need an honest discussion about how we subsidise hyperlocal journalism, and really, in future, this isn't going to be the way to do it. We need to think carefully about how we do it, and a further discussion is needed on that.

And that's one of the discussions that we were having, and having a transition period would have allowed for that discussion, but we haven't been able to do that in this instance. But I’m certainly happy to talk about that, and how that discussion goes forward, because I think it's so important that that happens.

Furthermore, the appetite for printed public notices of this kind clearly remains widespread among the Welsh general public. A recent survey by the News Media Association found that 47 per cent of respondents from Wales used local news media to inform themselves of council tax decisions—the highest proportion of all UK nations. The rationale for introducing clause 20 to the Bill is therefore based on assumptions on digital engagement, and it poses unnecessary risks to the commercial viability of local print journalism, similar to the Caerphilly Observer mentioned earlier by Hefin, which performs such a vital role in enriching and empowering our civic society.

So, with support for this amendment from all sides of the Chamber, as seen in the statement of opinion by Mike Hedges, I'd urge Members to support this amendment.  

I just wanted to pick up on some points here, because the principle behind this I think we all agree on: we want to ensure that local newspapers continue to be around, particularly for those who don't access information online. But, nevertheless, these particular notices go directly to people's homes anyway because, obviously, they're particular to the individual. And a lot of these newspaper notices are actually unreadable to most people, because they're in a font that is so small that particularly elderly people, who are some of the most avid readers of local newspapers, are simply not going to be able to read them. So, I think we have to think of a different way of supporting local newspapers, and I appreciate that there's agreement that we won't do anything radical, but this really isn't the best way of trying to do this. 

Just briefly, I think it's important we don't confuse means and ends here. I think the ends we want to see is to support local journalism. Subsidising impenetrable adverts is not the way to do that. We want to support accessibility for people to information. Publishing impenetrable adverts in newspapers is not the way to do that. We're not going to reach agreement today, but I think this does throw up that this is a much more complex issue than is being presented, and does require further thinking from us all.

I agree very much with that. I disagree with what was being said earlier. The circulation of the Gwent Gazette is 393 people. Now, the readership will be somewhat higher than that, clearly, but to suggest that this is a means of communication for a local authority or anyone else is simply a nonsense. It simply isn't true. The numbers don't sustain the argument. And at a time when particularly the Conservatives are talking about saving some public expenditure, the state funding of some of the largest newspaper groups in the country is probably not the place to start. So, I would suggest that—. The Cabinet Secretary has made this agreement this afternoon, but I would suggest that we revisit this very quickly because, at the moment, what we are doing is saying on the one hand that public services are under enormous pressure, and on the other hand we're going to throw away tens and hundreds of thousands of pounds on adverts that are read by virtually nobody.

I think that, coming from a working-class background, I have to explain things to some people. [Interruption.] There's a lot of elderly people who rely on printed media in order to get information. There's also a problem of people putting things out on social media and other forms of media that are easily edited, easily changed to give entirely incorrect information. And I think that you can rely fairly carefully on what is printed in a local newspaper because they need to keep local people happy. That may not be true of national newspapers, but if we're talking about subsidising things, can somebody explain to me why we have Radio 1 where we subsidise pop music?

I call on the Cabinet Secretary. 

Thank you. So, amendment 19 seeks to remove section 20 of the Bill, which replaces the current outdated requirement for local authorities to publish council tax notices in a local newspaper with a requirement to publish the information electronically. And I think this has been the surprise star of the show in relation to what's a very complex and wide-ranging piece of legislation reforming local government finance.

I am grateful to all colleagues for the points that have been raised in this debate, and I'm very grateful indeed to the Senedd committees for their intense scrutiny of this particular provision. In fact, the Local Government and Housing Committee held an additional evidence session on this topic, which heard differing evidence and views from a range of stakeholders. I've written to Members setting out my rationale for including these measures in the Bill, which are intended to modernise working practices relating to council tax, and I also took the opportunity in that correspondence to correct some of the misunderstandings that have been expressed as well.

The statutory requirement for local authorities to publish council tax notices was put in place in 1992, when communicating with citizens was commonly carried out through notices in newspapers, but now, 30 years on, this is widely considered to be an inflexible approach to providing council tax information, left behind by technological advances and other changes in the tax system.

I absolutely acknowledge the invaluable work that our local and national newspapers do to inform and engage with communities across Wales, and I fully appreciate the difficult economic climate that print newspapers are currently operating in. Last week, I met with and listened to representatives of the News Media Association. I was able to provide them with reassurance that the intention is not to remove statutory requirements for other types of notices—indeed, that would fall out of the agreed scope of this Bill.

There is a clear reason why council tax notices are different from other types of public notices. Public notices about planning applications, for example, provide important information for residents to have the opportunity to object to or voice their support for plans that impact directly on their neighbourhood, which they might otherwise be unaware of. However, the council tax notice provides information that all council tax payers will receive directly as part of their annual Bill, whether they choose to receive that electronically or in hard copy, and for this reason, the arguments, I think, about digital exclusion don't really hold water. The Bill does, nonetheless, provide a duty on local authorities to ensure the information is accessible to people who can't access a website, and I did accept a Stage 1 recommendation to work with local government to monitor the implementation of that provision.

I'm afraid I also don't think it's reasonable to argue that the loss of revenue generated from one advert per financial year, which might bring in as little as £600, would make a newspaper unsustainable. But I do agree with colleagues this afternoon who have talked about the importance of having that wider discussion about what's really a much more complex issue in terms of how we support local media and also how we communicate most effectively with residents. An annual advert published on an unspecified day in March that reaches less than an estimated 1.5 per cent of residents doesn't appear to achieve the outcome of effective communication.

But, Deputy Llywydd, having said all of that, I do absolutely recognise the strength of feeling amongst colleagues on this particular issue, and I'm always keen to find areas of compromise where we can, and to work with other parties. I'm very grateful to Peter Fox and also to Peredur Owen Griffiths for the collegiate and creative discussions that we've had on this particular issue.

I have had to ask colleagues to resist other amendments today, because of the potential unintended consequences that might negatively impact on taxpayers, but I don't think that this amendment is in that space. So, in the spirit of listening to colleagues and also listening to stakeholders and respecting those conversations, we'll be abstaining in the vote on this particular amendment today.

I call on Peter Fox to reply to the debate.

Thank you, and thank you to everybody who took part in that debate. Something relatively small in such an important debate managed to get so many people up on their feet; it's a shame that some of the more important areas perhaps didn't have so much enthusiasm.

Can I thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for listening and working with people? Because whilst this might be seen as a trivial issue, there are two areas that are being conflated here: obviously, as Mike points out, it's the access to information for those who still aren't competent online as yet—and hopefully that number will diminish, as we go forward—and there's this other issue about supporting newspapers and journalism and things like that. So, there is a need for a discussion in the future, there's no doubt about that. So, I thank the Cabinet Secretary for abstaining. For the time being, that will leave things as they are, but hopefully there will be a deeper discussion at some point in this Chamber about the wider issues. Thank you.

The question is that amendment 19 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection. Therefore, we will proceed to a vote. Open the vote. In favour 24, 23 abstentions, two against. Therefore, amendment 19 is agreed.

The seventh group of amendments relates to council tax reform. The lead and only amendment in this group is amendment 2. I call on Peredur Owen Griffiths to move and speak to the amendment.

I move the amendment. 

Year after year, council tax imposes a disproportionate burden on lower income households, thus exacerbating entrenched social inequalities. A case for replacing this regressive system of taxation with a fairer, more progressive model is incontrovertible, long overdue and widely acknowledged. Reforming this broken and outdated system of taxation has been a cornerstone of Plaid Cymru policy for many years, and we were proud to work jointly with the Government to deliver this within the current Senedd term. We firmly believe that we had a credible framework that could have been in place by the start of the next financial year, as promised, but sadly the Government thought otherwise, and not for the first time, we’re faced with a key part of their legislative agenda being deprioritised due to internal Labour Party problems.

We’re under no illusions that this reform will be a complex undertaking, and I’m sure that the Cabinet Secretary will try to justify the delay on that basis in her response. But such is the nature of the radical and necessary solution we need to create a fairer society, I would ask Labour Members here particularly to reflect on the real-world implications of kicking this reform into the long grass, especially for lower income families who are continuing to struggle to make ends meet during the cost-of-living crisis. As you said earlier, Cabinet Secretary, a delay would disadvantage the most vulnerable, but by not acting on council tax reform until 2028 at the very earliest, this Government is condemning those with the least means to another three years of disproportionately high council tax bills, whilst those with the broadest shoulders are not made to pay their fair share for public services.

Even though we have heard time and time again in the recent election campaign that this was an election for change, at the first opportunity for change in Wales we get the status quo for the next three years. So, change means more of the same. But it’s not too late for course correction. It’s in this spirit that we have brought forward this amendment, which will place an obligation on the Welsh Government to implement council tax reform by April 2025, as was originally intended. For the sake of easing the pressure on the household budgets of the most disadvantaged in our society, I would urge Members to grasp the nettle and commit to this vitally important reform as soon as possible. Diolch.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary.

Amendment 2 would add a requirement for the Welsh Ministers to implement council tax reform by 1 April 2025. However, there’s no definition offered in the amendment of what is meant by council tax reform. Therefore, the drafting of this amendment is too broad to constitute workable or clear law in relation to the council tax system.

We have demonstrated that we are committed to making council tax fairer and less regressive. We’ve published a great deal of evidence about our considerations, in partnership with the IFS, and we’ve released two consultations in 2022 and 2023 seeking views on proposals. Colleagues will be aware that this is part of the work that we carried out in partnership with Plaid Cymru. I'm hugely grateful for the work that I undertook jointly with Cefin Campbell on this as part of the previous co-operation agreement. We did make some really significant progress in our considerations. That important work led to the release of a range of proposals in the phase 2 consultation, which closed in February of this year, seeking views on the scale and the pace of reform.

The outcome of the consultation was that people and stakeholders expressed a clear appetite for reform of the system to make it fairer, but over a slower time frame, from 2028. Although 2025 was included in the consultation as the fastest option, it is no longer feasible to deliver a different system in that time frame. The deadline for regulating for new bands and tax rates has now passed. It's a large-scale operational exercise, involving independent bodies and local government. Crucially, we wouldn't now be able to offer transitional relief to support households through the changes.

We're listening to the people of Wales by moving forwards with council tax revaluation and reform in 2028, and every five years after that, keeping council tax fair and responsive to economic circumstances. This Bill underpins delivery of what we worked on together with Plaid Cymru. In the meantime, I am also delivering a number of other reforms to council tax to make it fairer, as outlined in my statement of 15 May, for example on the treatment of households in debt, on appeals, and on discounts and reductions. So, in conclusion, I would ask Members to resist amendment 2. 

Peredur Owen Griffiths to reply.

Diolch, Cabinet Secretary. I am disappointed that the Government has not agreed to this amendment on this matter. As I've intimated already, council tax reform is not an issue that's come out of the blue—it's been the subject of serious and comprehensive scrutiny over many years, and formed a key part of our co-operation agreement for the current Senedd term. The moral case for implementing this change is overwhelming, and given the continued financial pressure facing households across the length and breadth of our nation, now is the time to strike whilst the iron's hot. By postponing this vital programme of work until after the next election, the Government is making a conscious decision today to forgo this vital window of opportunity where the parliamentary arithmetic is clearly in favour of change. I would urge Members to vote for the change and vote for this amendment.

The question is that amendment 2 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection. Therefore, we will proceed to a vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 12, no abstentions, 37 against. Therefore, amendment 2 is not agreed.

We move on now to group 8. The eighth group of amendments relates to council tax increases. The lead amendment in this group is amendment 20. I call on Peter Fox to move and speak to the lead amendment and the other amendment in the group.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. These amendments will require a local referendum to be called in prescribed circumstances. Council tax increases will have had a direct impact on all citizens in Wales. It is for this reason that their voices and the voices of councils should be heard when these decisions are being made. In addition to this, holding these local referendums will help to increase the transparency and accountability of any potential tax increases. While we understand that the Cabinet Secretary expressed, during Stage 2, that this is a move away from the Welsh Government's view on localism, we believe that giving a voice to the people who will be impacted by these changes is vitally important. I agree with that. Localism is about giving local people choices. Councils can't keep hiking council tax excessively year on year. I put council tax up, I admit it, every year. We had to do that. But there is a limit to how long the public can keep putting their hands in their pockets. Sometimes they need to have a say in if this is right or not, and the councils have to go back to the drawing boards and find other ways to supplement their funding. With that, Dirprwy Lywydd, I move the amendment. 

We oppose the amendments in this group that would oblige local authorities to hold referenda wherever they have to raise council tax by more than 5 per cent. As we've discussed many times before, local government finance in Wales is on an utterly unsustainable trajectory. Welsh local authorities are facing a combined deficit of almost £0.75 billion by 2027—a direct consequence of the disastrous legacy of austerity that starved vital public services of funding, year on year. This amendment portrays a complete lack of awareness and understanding of the extreme adverse circumstances in which our local councils are forced to operate, and the fact that the local government sector has consistently borne the brunt of the economic mismanagement of both Westminster and the Welsh Government. The solution, therefore, isn't through unhelpful measures like this, which would only serve to exacerbate existing pressures on local government resources, but rather to ensure that the sector is properly funded in the first place. This means consigning the disastrous policy of austerity to the dustbin of history for good. While neither the Tories nor Labour seem willing to kick the habit of public spending cuts, we will continue to stand up for our hard-working councillors across the length and breadth of the country by making the case for restoring local government funding to a level that truly reflects the needs of our communities. Diolch.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary.

As we've heard, amendment 20 would place a new duty on Welsh Ministers to make regulations requiring billing authorities in Wales to hold local referenda on council tax increases that exceed 5 per cent. I outlined during Stage 2 scrutiny that I regard this amendment as a significant deviation from the Welsh Government's long-standing and celebrated approach to localism. I'm also concerned that no consultation with taxpayers or stakeholders has happened on such a significant policy change. In Wales, we have a relationship with local authorities based on mutual respect. It's important that local authorities have the freedom to set their own spending priorities and council tax levels. They're independent, statutory authorities responsible for managing their own financial affairs. We're all well aware that local authorities are democratically elected to make these important decisions.

Members may know that local referenda were introduced in 2012 in England, to control budget-setting procedures and restrict local government accountability. To date, no council in England that has held a referendum has been able to proceed with its original budget needs, adding cost and time to the annual process. It's been the experience in England since 2012 that setting limits in this way effectively becomes a target for all local authorities to raise council tax to the maximum allowed, rather than carefully considering what's necessary. In Wales, we have seen a wide range of annual increases, demonstrating variations in local pressures. Local authorities have flexibility to respond. This is an important feature of local democracy and makes local authority leaders accountable to their residents for decisions. It's not for the Welsh Government to intervene in this democratic process.

Part of this discussion between Members at Stage 2 committee focused on the broader question of funding available for local government. We've provided the most generous funding settlement to local government that we could, taking into account the real-terms pressures on our own budget. Our own budget position is a result of the level of UK Government funding provided to us. Service demand and cost inflation mean local authorities are making difficult decisions.

And finally, turning back to the idea of requiring local referenda on council tax, it is important to recognise that the complexity and cost of holding referenda places an additional burden on local authority resources. This would further exacerbate the financial pressures currently faced by them. Amendment 26 is consequential on amendment 20. In conclusion, I would ask Members to resist amendments 20 and 26.

I call on Peter Fox to reply to the debate.

Thank you. Nobody will stick up for councils more than me. I ran one for 13 years. Don't forget that a 5 per cent council tax increase is a big council tax increase. We're talking about council tax increases above and beyond this, where it's reckless—I think it can be reckless. So, who sticks up for the citizens? We're sticking up for the councils, yes. We always do that. But who sticks up for the citizens, the person who's always got to put their hand into their pockets to bail out decisions that haven't been thought through? There is an opportunity—[Interruption.] You've taken me off my thread now, Alun. [Interruption.] Yes, it works. 

[Inaudible.]—listen to the backbench—the opposition spokesperson. 

Thank you. So, as people have said in here many times, we need to find a sustainable way to fund local authorities so that we don't have to keep going back to the council tax payer. Peredur is on about bringing in council tax reform earlier because so many people are disadvantaged, but then you're saying, 'Councils, you go ahead and shove as much council tax on those people as you like.' We're saying, 'Let's look after the citizens. Let them make the choice when the council tax is too expensive.' So, I make no excuse for bringing this referendum forward—not this referendum, but this amendment to have a referendum forward, and I move.

If amendment 20 is not agreed, amendment 26 will fall. The question is that amendment 20 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection. Therefore, we will proceed to a vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 12, there was one abstention, and 36 against. Therefore, amendment 20 is not agreed. 

The final group is group 9. The ninth group of amendments relates to a review on the use of powers. The lead amendment in this group is amendment 21, and I call on Peter Fox to move and speak to the lead amendment and the other amendment in the group.

Yes, these amendments will require the Welsh Ministers to undertake a review of the powers proposed in sections 5, 9, 10 and 18 of the Bill and to publish the conclusions of that review by the end of 2029, as it will be important for these powers to be reviewed against the policy aims that are yet to be set out. It is for this reason that I am encouraging support for this amendment.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. As this is my final opportunity to speak in this debate, I'd just, once again, like to thank colleagues from all parties for their constructive input and also to thank the Commission staff for their support in getting the Bill this far. And I'd also, of course, like to thank our very talented and hardworking, committed Welsh Government officials for their excellent work over many years on this Bill. So much work goes on behind the scenes during this process, most of which is unacknowledged beyond this Chamber, but I'd like to recognise the enormous effort that goes into producing legislation of this scale and the high quality of the advice provided to Members on what are really complex matters.

And overall, I do believe that this Bill is a really good example of collaborative working and I'm really proud of the progress that it achieves. And the fact that the Government hasn't been able to offer its support in favour of amendments this afternoon shouldn't suggest for a moment that there hasn't been absolutely excellent cross-party working for a long time on this particular agenda. And I'd just like to express my thanks to colleagues from all parts of the Senedd for their work on this Bill. 

So, turning now to the amendments in the final group, amendment 21 would require the Welsh Ministers to undertake a review of the use of regulation-making powers introduced by the Bill. I appreciate the importance of the intention behind this amendment, and that's why I accepted in principle the related Stage 1 recommendation from the Local Government and Housing Committee. As a consequence, I have since published an updated explanatory memorandum, which includes my commitment to undertake a post-implementation review of the operation and impact of this legislation before the end of the seventh Senedd. This would include consideration of regulation-making powers in the Bill. I remain of the view that agreeing piecemeal statutory reviews of individual pieces of legislation is unnecessary and partial, and the Senedd would, of course, be able to undertake post-legislative scrutiny, should it choose to do so. 

Amendment 24 is consequential on amendment 21. So, in conclusion, I would ask Members to resist amendments 21 and 24. 

Peter Fox to reply. 

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. It's my last opportunity to speak as well, you'll be all glad to know. And can I also echo the Cabinet Secretary's thanks to all involved in bringing this Bill forward, and, again, repeat the collaborative way that we've engaged on this? Whilst we don't always agree on the amendments, we recognise each other's positions.

I brought this group forward just to reiterate the concern and the comments that the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee have made about the powers in these sections. Dirprwy Lywydd, with that, I don't think I need to say any more for this Bill.

If amendment 21 is not agreed, amendment 24 will fall. The question is that amendment 21 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is objection. We will therefore proceed to a vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 24, no abstentions, 25 against. Therefore, amendment 21 is not agreed.

Peter, amendment 22.

Not moving. Okay. 

Therefore, we move to amendment 25. Peter.

[Inaudible.]—likewise, as 23.

Not moved. Can you confirm it's not being moved, Peter?

Not being moved.

And that brings us—

Amendment 27, Peter.

Moved.

The question is that amendment 27 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is objection. We will therefore proceed to a vote on amendment 27. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 24, no abstentions, 25 against. Therefore, amendment 27 is not agreed.

And we have reached the end of our Stage 3 consideration of the Local Government Finance (Wales) Bill. I declare that all sections of and Schedules to the Bill are deemed agreed. And that concludes Stage 3 proceedings, and it also brings today's business to an end.