Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru

Good afternoon and welcome to this afternoon's Plenary meeting. The first item on our agenda will be questions to the Cabinet Secretary for Housing and Local Government, and the first question is from Samuel Kurtz.

Diolch. We are committed to using all available levers to ensure we maintain a viable private rented sector in Wales, offering high-quality and choice of accommodation. We have a number of grant schemes that are available to landlords or tenants and provide guidance and information through Rent Smart Wales.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. Recently, I had—well, I can’t call it an honour—I visited some housing stock in my constituency, which is owned by a private landlord, and the conditions, which the tenants live in, I can only describe as squalid.  And I’m thankful to Carmarthenshire County Council and Pembrokeshire County Council—this landlord owns properties in both local authorities’ areas—because I’m working with them now to try and help these tenants because of the situation that they find themselves in. But one thing that really took me aback was that Rent Smart Wales has the ability to deter good-quality landlords from the sector, but not then hold those rogue landlords to account at the same time. So, what are you doing within your role and with other Cabinet Secretaries to make sure that Rent Smart Wales has the teeth to go after rogue landlords that are taking advantage of their tenants, but also to make it as welcoming and forthcoming as possible to get more private landlords into the sector to provide those high-quality, affordable homes that you mentioned in your opening response?

Diolch, Sam, and I'm sorry to hear about the issues that your constituents have. Rent Smart Wales is responsible for the registration and licensing of landlords, ensuring that they’re trained and meet requirements in respect of being fit and proper persons. If the landlord is in breach of standards set out in the Renting Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) (Wales) Regulations 2022, then the tenant should report this to the relevant local authority's environmental health team, who have the responsibility to investigate those breaches. So, if a landlord is in breach of their contract, then any notices that they may serve in the future, including for rent or a no-fault eviction, may be invalid. So, I’d very much make sure that your constituents are raising that with the local authority.

Unfortunately, rogue landlords are probably not a rarity in Cardiff, which they may well be in Pembrokeshire and Carmarthenshire—I hope so. But I’ve got a tenant who has been living in this property for quite a long time with a young child, and we all know how difficult it can be to get a tenancy when you’ve got a child. And they’ve just been suffering for years and years from the landlord refusing to do the necessary repairs. They’ve now been issued with a compulsory improvement order by environmental health, but, frankly, they should have been taken out long before now, because this landlord owns the majority of the flats in this large block and this is not the first situation of this kind that I have experienced. And I think that there’s a disconnect between environmental health and the licensing system, because environmental health needs to be reporting to Rent Smart Wales that they’ve had this problem with the licensee and, therefore, there needs to be a massive question mark over it. Rent Smart Wales just seem to lack the teeth that we need to make the licensing system have more effect.

Thank you for that question and for raising your constituent's concerns and their situation, as well as Sam's in his initial question. Again, if a landlord is in breach of standards set out in the fitness for human habitation regulations, then the tenant should report that, as your constituents have, to the relevant local authority. The local authority then should inform Rent Smart Wales of any enforcement or improvement notices that have been served on a landlord or, if they fail to rectify that issue, Rent Smart Wales can issue fixed-penalty notices and consider revoking a landlord's licence, which would mean that they could no longer legally manage the letting and would need to appoint an agent. A tenant may also be entitled, under the new occupation contracts, to withhold their rent if they have reported issues affecting the habitability of the property and the landlord has failed to rectify the issue. So, there are ways to make sure that tenants have recourse to this.

But I would just like to put on record that we do have the White Paper on adequate housing, and we’re keen to look at annual check-ins that will confirm whether landlords and properties are active in the sector to ensure that we’ve got up-to-date data rather than waiting for the end of the five-year registration or licensing period, so we've got a better understanding of who's in that. So, we do have the White Paper at the moment. And I'm also keen to see how we can support good landlords who provide high-quality, safe and affordable accommodation, so that people feel safe to stay and invest in the sector for the future.

Diolch, Luke. Available evidence on rent controls in the private rented sector indicates such measures would likely to be ineffective or may even have negative impacts on affordability. As such, and as set out in our recently published White Paper, we are not currently proposing to take forward national rent control measures.

I have to say it is very disappointing that the Welsh Government is retreating from the idea of rent controls, despite the clear power imbalance that exists between tenants and landlords. Now, the White Paper on adequate housing that was launched on 24 October cites an insufficient evidence base for taking forward rent controls—you alluded to that in your answer. But there is a clear evidence base of immediate affordability challenges for tenants, and we can say for sure that private rents have increased dramatically in recent years. There are plenty of examples of places in the world where limits on rent increases have worked to stabilise housing markets. So, I wonder if the Cabinet Secretary could therefore clarify the Government's intentions? Does this mean that the Government is planning to revisit the idea of rent controls when sufficient data is gathered, or has it dismissed the concept altogether, because there is a space and there is a clear need in Wales for a well-designed rent control system?

Diolch, Luke. The evidence from the Green Paper consultation, and evidence from the national rent cap in Scotland, indicates that rent control measures are unlikely to be effective and may have an adverse impact on the affordability and supply. Scotland have now lifted their national rent cap and are now taking forward legislation that will require the collection of rent data and provision for local authorities to apply for specific areas to be designated a rent pressure zone. We've always been clear that we would not introduce rent controls without an understanding of the potential unintended consequences of rent control on the private rented sector. So, we've considered a range of evidence, which has informed the White Paper, and, as I said, that evidence available at the moment indicates that rent control measures would likely be ineffective, and, as I said, may have that adverse impact on affordability.

I don't think the Welsh Government's position on rent controls is clear, because you have flirted with rent controls in the past, and have consulted on this topic, with the idea, thankfully, being ruled out, albeit tepidly, from the Government. But I'd appreciate if the Welsh Government could actually make their position clearer on the subject and confirm to the Senedd that the Welsh Government does not have plans to follow Scotland's disastrous lead by implementing rent controls, which end up exacerbating the very problem they are designed to remedy, with thousands of landlords taking their properties off the rental market. I'm sure they wouldn't have done that if the Welsh Government's messaging on this matter were clearer. The National Residential Landlords Association said that rent controls would serve only to decimate this sector further and would be a disaster for tenants. And looking over to Dublin and the Republic of Ireland, we can see the real-world effect of this well-meaning but foolish policy, which has greatly exacerbated their housing crisis. So, could the Cabinet Secretary outline whether the Welsh Government's position remains one of rejecting the idea of rent controls, and whether that is also the position of the UK Labour Government, and that the Welsh Government will instead focus on house building, to ensure an adequate supply of housing in the social and private rented sectors? I think we need less ambiguity and more clarity around this subject. Thank you.

Thank you, Gareth. As I said in response to Luke Fletcher, in our recently published White Paper, we are not currently proposing to take forward national rent control measures. As I said, the White Paper is looking to approve the affordability of the private rented sector by exploring how to achieve better and more localised rent data, to improve our understanding of the market rents. We confirmed to social landlords back in May that the current rent settlement, CPI+1, would be extended to cover the next financial year, while we're working with the sector to develop our proposals for a future social rent policy, thereby providing them certainty for 2026. We're going to consult on our proposals for a new social rent policy for Wales next summer.

I now call the party spokespeople. First of all, the Welsh Conservative spokesperson, Mark Isherwood.

Diolch. Labour Welsh Governments slashed funding for housing from 1999, ignoring repeated warnings of a housing crisis, and setting in train the housing supply crisis, which has led to almost 140,000 people on social housing waiting lists now. The 2012 UK housing review stated that, by 2009-10, the Welsh Government had by far the lowest proportional level of housing expenditure of any of the four UK countries, and the Welsh Government has continued to lag ever since. North Wales housing associations have highlighted now the Audit Wales report, which found that, without additional funding, the Welsh Government will miss their 20,000 target by up to 4,140 homes. As the Bevan Foundation states, the delivery of new social homes is lagging behind the Welsh Government’s aspirations, as well as the reality of growing demand. And as Community Housing Cymru states, what they really need is a longer term, sustainable multi-year settlement. What assurances can you therefore provide that the affordable homes funding, which the Welsh Government will receive in consequentials from the UK Government—and, hopefully, more—will be fully allocated to affordable housing in Wales?

Thank you, Mark. In terms of your point on affordable homes, I think affordable housing is, and really should be, a priority that we all support in this Chamber. In terms of the work we’re putting in on building more homes, we have—. Over the summer, I wrote to all local authorities, all registered social landlords, and asked them specifically what were the red flags in their programmes in terms of building more homes to rent in the social sector, and we’ve got that information now. And, again, I’ve announced a taskforce as part of that, which will look at the specific blockages within that.

So, I think we are doing everything we can, and I really feel that there is that pace behind it. We all know that we need to build more houses, and that is something that we’re looking to do, as we have done in the past, and we want to see where these blockages are and make sure we do what we can to unblock them.

Thank you, but the question was: what assurances will you provide that the allocation for affordable homes funding you receive in consequentials from the UK Government will be fully allocated to affordable housing in Wales?

Following on from that, last week, Shelter Cymru published a new report showing that, in 2023-24, the total cost of temporary accommodation in Wales reached £99 million, more than double what it was in 2020-21, highlighting the significant increase in temporary accommodation in Wales, and the human impact of this, with over 11,000 people, including almost 3,000 children, now living in such places. Their research also shows increasing reliance on private sector provision. How, therefore, do you respond to calls by the National Residential Landlords Association for Welsh Government action to tackle an acute shortage of homes for private let, with demand outstripping supply, not only putting upward pressure on rents, but also undermining tenants’ purchasing power in the market, making it more difficult to hold bad and criminal landlords to account, and to the statement by Community Housing Cymru—the voice, as you know, of housing associations in Wales—that, as we come up to Welsh Government budget time, there is a need in particular to at least sustain the housing support grant in real terms and to keep people in their homes?

Thank you, Mark, and I can assure you that I’ll be making that argument around the housing support grant around the Cabinet table. I’ve heard directly from people and organisations, as you’ve outlined in your question, and we know that the housing support grant has been really, really important, and the uplift that we’ve managed to put in that. We’ve done as much as we can possibly do in the last budget round, but I really think that the work of people who work in the sector is incredible, and, without that, we just put more pressure on other parts of the system.

Going back to the first question—apologies—that you did raise around the UK Government budget, again, this is something that we’re looking at very carefully. We have our budget-setting process going on, as you know, at the moment, but we’re doing all we can to fix—. We’re seeing a UK Government who want to fix the foundations of the country, after the budget and the last 14 years of economic mismanagement we’ve had by the previous Government. We know that we need to build more houses. As I said, we're looking at what more we can do, and I can assure you that I, the First Minister and the Minister for Delivery, and our new taskforce will be very much focused on that, because we know that there are too many people in temporary accommodation. You mentioned the human cost of that, and I do feel that myself very strongly. We often see numbers and we see those statistics, but behind those are individuals.

Thank you for answering some of the questions, but you didn't respond to the question about the National Residential Landlords Association highlighting an acute shortage of homes for private let and calling for Welsh Government action accordingly. And, of course, the previous Conservative Governments dealt with the largest deficit in the G20, a global pandemic and a global cost-of-living crisis, and still left a deficit, as a proportion of gross domestic product, at two and a half times less than had been left by the UK Government in 2010. But that aside, I was trying to avoid those sorts of comments today.

The Home Builders Federation stated last month that Wales continues to face a housing affordability crisis, caused in part by a lack of new supply of housing over many decades. Indeed, they say, the latest Welsh Government data on housing supply confirms that new dwellings built in Wales in the 2023-24 financial year was the second lowest on record. Furthermore, the Welsh Government's 'Future Wales: The National Plan 2040' estimates that on average 7,400 additional homes were required annually from 2019-24, with the majority for market sale or rent. However, the average number completed over the last five years was just 5,498. They also—.

You need to ask your question, please, Mark.

Well, noting the statement earlier by yourself on support for housing delivery, issued only 50 minutes ago, do you agree that we need a whole-market solution to the housing crisis in Wales? And if so, how will you co-produce, co-design and co-deliver solutions with housing providers, including private landlords and house builders, with social landlords and local authorities across the whole sector?

Thank you, Mark. We do have a proud record of delivery in difficult circumstances here in Wales in terms of housing. We've provided record levels of funding to support the delivery of social housing in this Senedd term; it's more than £1.4 billion allocated. Despite the challenging budgets that we have seen over the last 14 years, we have protected the budget for social housing. In 2023-24, we awarded an additional £61 million on top of the original £300 million budget for that social housing grant, but there is always more to be done. You know, I'm very acutely aware of that, and I'm really focused on what more we can do together. And that's why one of the reasons I wrote to all the registered social landlords, and wrote to local authorities, to see what more can be done. And I will work in partnership across all elements of the sector to see how we can do this, because it is really important we come together. We all have this ambition, and I think we need to really focus on how we can deliver for people in Wales.

Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Peredur Owen Griffiths.  

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. 'Austerity has ended'—these were the words of the First Minister yesterday. I know it will be news to the councils across Wales that are in the midst of a financial crisis, facing a £559 million shortfall. They need a 7 per cent revenue increase just to maintain the current services, let alone investment in improvements. I'd be interested to know if the Cabinet Secretary also believes that austerity is over. The UK budget announced funding of £1.7 billion for Wales. Could the Cabinet Secretary provide a timeline for this £1.7 billion spend and let us know how much she is requesting for local authorities, when in discussions with the financial Secretary, and will it be enough to cover the whole of the £559 million gap? 

Diolch, Peredur. You know, we have to remember here that we've got that £22 billion black hole from the previous UK Governments that the new Chancellor of the Exchequer, Rachel Reeves, has started to have to fix. The position of the new UK Government that we've inherited cannot be turned around in one budget, and I think we have to be aware of that, and it's going to take time for public finances to recover. The budget is welcome and it's a welcome investment in Wales, its people and its communities, local businesses and public services. You know that the wider financial context remains challenging, remains difficult, but the budget does represent vital first steps forward to fixing that damage that we have inherited.

In terms of local authorities in particular, I obviously meet local authority leaders regularly, I speak to them regularly. And this is all about how we work in partnership to deliver the best that we possibly can, because local authorities have been under a huge amount of pressure over a number of years now, and we’ve done the best we can here in Wales to protect our local authorities. They’ve been under that pressure, as I say, for a number of years, and I’m very acutely aware of that and I hear that directly from them.

Diolch. It is disappointing that that assurance isn’t there at the moment. I’m sure you are listening to local authorities. I’ve been speaking to them as well, and they are making those asks as to how much of that £1.7 billion will be coming their way to help the most vulnerable in our societies. We also heard yesterday that the changes in national insurance contributions will be fully funded, separate from the £1.7 billion, based on the ONS definition of public sector workers. Could the Cabinet Secretary clarify this definition and confirm whether it includes third sector workers contracted to local authorities? Does the Cabinet Secretary acknowledge that employer national insurance increases will have a huge impact on the third sector and the services that they provide on behalf of local authorities?

Diolch, Peredur. HM Treasury have acknowledged that the change to employer national insurance contributions from April will increase costs for public sector employers, and they’ve said that they’ll provide funding to the public sector to support them with additional costs associated with these changes. We’re working with HM Treasury to clarify the details, and I can assure you that we’ll provide further information as soon as we possibly can.

Okay, that’s not quite as positive as what the finance Secretary said yesterday, but I know there are lots of things to be worked through. I’ll look forward to getting that update from you.

Finally, can the Cabinet Secretary assure us that consequentials from the social care spend in England will go directly to Welsh councils rather than being absorbed into the Welsh health budget, to ensure that councils are able to fund the vital services?

I can certainly make sure that we write to you further on that, because this is something that I know local authorities are very concerned about. Again, I speak to them regularly, and social care is one of those challenges that comes up time and time again. I’ve heard the pressure that they’ve been under and face, and I know that the finance Secretary is very much aware of that as well. I can make sure we write to you with some further information specifically on that.

Diolch, Adam. Through our funding programmes, we're working with local authorities to redevelop empty properties, including empty commercial properties across Wales, with many of these disused properties being revitalised for mixed-use development, including residential housing.

I'm grateful to the Cabinet Secretary for her response. There is a dire need in terms of homelessness and social housing in the Ammanford and the Amman Valley area. For example, there are around 400 people on the council’s housing waiting list in Ammanford alone, with most of them on the highest level in terms of need, namely band A. Many of them need one-person accommodation, which is very scarce, of course.

In discussing with the food bank locally and with the council in terms of how we can be innovative in responding to this need, we have been having discussions with Habitat for Humanity, a charity that is currently developing pilots in England in order to turn empty buildings into social housing. They're interested in doing something in Wales. There are empty buildings in Ammanford, and the council is interested in being part of such a pilot scheme. So, what support can the Welsh Government provide in order to facilitate that and to make it a plan that can be emulated in other communities across Wales?

Diolch, Adam. I do very much understand the situation of our town centres, in particular, are facing, and when we see empty properties in those town centres I think we all look at them and think, 'Could they be used for businesses or accommodation?' I know of some places like in my own constituency, actually, where they've worked really hard to put—. The local registered social landlord has actually bought up some of those properties and created extra housing in the city centre, which has been really successful to bring people to the high street as well. So, this is something we are obviously keen on and looking at, and working with local authorities and RSLs to ensure that that happens.

We do have a number of loans and grant schemes that are available that might be useful to know, and different funds. We've got our land and buildings development fund, which is about low-carbon homes through a strong, short supply chain to make use of modern methods of construction. We also know that we've got our empty homes grant. Just for you to know, we've had 904 valid applications for this scheme to date and 122 of those properties completed. But I can write to you on specific funds, and perhaps you could write to me about that particular scheme that you mentioned as well, because I'd be very interested to hear about that. 

I thank my colleague Adam Price for raising this really important issue, because for years we've discussed the shortage of affordable homes. I will declare an interest in this matter and refer Members to my declarations of interest. We have so many empty properties in our constituencies within town centres. One only has to look at towns like Bangor and Caernarfon; those high streets now look really sad because there are so many closed-down properties. It's a fact that the commercial market is shrinking and many ground-floor retail properties are suitable for easy conversion back to homes, but this is of course dependent on an innovate-thinking local authority planning department. Too often, such applications struggle to obtain the necessary change-of-use class allowing conversion to make these homes. So, will you, Cabinet Secretary, perhaps work with or send out guidance notes to local authorities to almost suggest to them that one way they could lower the increase in temporary accommodation spend would be by turning some of these commercial units back into lovely homes, and that planning authorities should see it now as a new direction for some of these town centres? Diolch.

As I say, I do agree and I've seen where it's started to be done really well. Earlier this week I visited Torfaen County Borough Council, and just across from where they are they're redeveloping an empty property within Pontypool town centre, which will be for assisted accommodation, assisted living, which is really, really interesting. So, I look forward to that scheme opening, but that's just another example, perhaps, on our high streets of seeing a building that isn't suitable or no longer used being brought back to life with people living in it.

I'd also like to take the opportunity to mention our Leasing Scheme Wales campaign. I try to encourage it as much as I can when I go to all local authorities, and I just think if every Member here could also look into the Leasing Scheme Wales campaign that we have got going on—. That actually looks at some private landlords who might actually be looking to leave or give up their property, or perhaps have a property that's empty, and that's a scheme that local authorities administer, so they can contact their local authorities. And I think it's just something that we can help promote. There is a video on Welsh Government website with Rent Smart Wales. Rent Smart Wales, I believe, have sent out information to landlords who might be interested in Leasing Scheme Wales. It started off small. It's only been announced recently, but we are making some really good progress. Some local authorities have only just brought it online, so I know, when I was speaking to Torfaen, that that's just come on. But I really would encourage Members to share that video as much as possible, and perhaps I could write to all Members to make sure you've all got that information.

Diolch, Tom. Welsh Government has awarded £2.65 million of grant funding to Bridgend County Borough Council for remedial works on affected homes in Caerau. My officials recently met with BCBC and we will receive an update on progress to treat the affected properties in early December.

I'm grateful to you for your response. Obviously, what has happened in Caerau I think is one of the biggest injustices that we've seen in a long, long time. What we saw was one of the poorest communities in Wales receive remedial works—or not even remedial works, works to insulate their properties, in the first instance—through a Welsh Government project, delivered by the local council, who then contracted a company where a sitting Labour councillor was its director and found shoddy workmanship that meant those houses were in a much worse condition than before they had the work done. Now, it has taken over a decade for work to even begin on fixing the damage done. This is a huge problem, and it has really damaged the faith, I think, that people in Caerau have not only in the scheme but in politics and in politicians. Now, I asked this question alongside Luke Fletcher just over a month ago of the First Minister, and the First Minister said in response to me,

'I know that my colleague the Deputy First Minister has been making sure that the lessons are being learnt.'

Now, that will have been news to me and all of us, I think, and the first time we would have heard that, so can you inform us exactly what that work entails? Is that a formal piece of work commissioned by the Welsh Government, and when can we expect to hear the lessons-learnt exercise from the Deputy First Minister?

Diolch, Tom, and, again, I'd just like to put on record that I recognise and understand the frustration of home owners in Caerau. I know this, as you say, has been a long-standing issue, and I know that residents are being kept informed of progress now. I know that drop-in sessions happen at least weekly, and I know that there will be opportunities to meet an appointed co-ordinator. Bridgend County Borough Council have appointed that community liaison manager to answer any queries from concerned residents, so I just hope that everybody could share that as well with residents in Caerau to make sure that they are aware of those weekly meetings.

And in terms of the lessons learnt, some of the things from the lessons learnt, from those legacy issues at Caerau, have influenced our new Warm Homes programme, in which we have incorporated a higher standard of quality assurance. Just to say, officials are in regular contact with the local authority and we will receive progress updates on a quarterly basis, but I will also ask my officials to update Members of the Senedd as well. But there are some lessons to be learnt as well as that Warm Homes programme, for example, reducing potential conflicts of interest by letting separate contracts for our advice and referral provider and our delivery provider, introducing key performance indicators for complaints received. So, there are lessons that we definitely need to learn, and I can assure you that that is what we're doing.

Luke Fletcher.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd, and I appreciate you allowing me to come in on this. Tom Giffard is right, the residents in Caerau—or at least the feeling I'm getting—have lost complete faith in politicians and organisations to resolve this issue after over a decade or more dealing with it. One resident's daughter has lived in these conditions for as long as she's been alive. Now, I wouldn't accept those living conditions; you wouldn't accept those living conditions; nobody in this Chamber would accept those living conditions.

I just want to pick up on one thing that was said in your answer to Tom Giffard, which is that residents are being given a timeline and a timetable for when works are going to happen. That's not what we're hearing on the ground. A number of residents have approached me over the last couple of months with different dates in hand about when works are going to start, so there's a real communication issue here. So, what I would impress on the Government is that they need to co-ordinate how they're communicating with residents a lot better, because right now that is equally causing as much frustration as the works begin to progress.

Diolch, Luke. I know of yours and Tom's, and, I know, the Deputy First Minister's, interest in this area. I think, from my perspective, it's hopeful and helpful to know about the new community liaison manager who answers queries from residents, and I think it's important that I can feed that back and that that is fed back to the community liaison manager as well, because I think, as you say, communication is so important, isn't it, if residents have been living with this for such a long time. I think that we can make sure that communication is as clear as possible for residents. So, I'll take that information back as well. But I think it's important that there is somewhere for people to go. There is a drop-in session that happens, as I say, at least weekly, and I would encourage residents to go to that as well.

Diolch, Mark. Local authorities are democratically accountable to their electorate. Responsibility for regulating and enforcing the Equality Act 2010 and the public sector equality duty falls to the Equality and Human Rights Commission.

Thank you, and, of course, they have limited powers to pursue individual cases. But, for over nine years, I've worked with disabled people and others across Flintshire seeking to work with Flintshire County Council to remove all barriers along the Wales coastal path, managed by the council, allowing access for all. The campaign includes TCC, a charity that supports 40 member groups in tackling social justice issues within north-east Wales, Cycling UK, TheFDF Centre for Independent Living, Sustrans Cymru, Disabled Ramblers UK, Wheels for Wellbeing, Chester Wheelers, and people with lived experience of the impact of these barriers on them. The current situation contravenes both the UK Equality Act 2010 and the legal and policy frameworks of the Welsh Government and Flintshire County Council itself. Age Cymru also contacted me in the context of the Equality Act after respondents to their annual survey noted that public spaces were becoming increasingly inaccessible for older people due to the disappearance of public toilets, benches, dropped pavements and other essential pieces of infrastructure. What actions can you therefore take when breaches of the legislation such as these are identified by external bodies and people with lived experience?

Diolch, Mark, and thank you—I know you've raised these sorts of issues over a number of years now—and for the work that you do with disabled people's groups as well. I know that you have a long-standing history of that.

The Welsh Government does take a leadership role in promoting the Equality Act across the public sector, including in social partnership, through the workforce partnership council, and the workforce partnership council has promoted the Disability Confident scheme across the public sector, social partners, and produced a variety of statements and reports on diversity, monitoring and things like the gender pay gap. So, there is work ongoing, and I think that it's really important that we also find where there are areas of best practice and how we can share that. There are opportunities where that happens. It includes events such as the one being planned for spring 2025 that showcases best practice and develops new approaches to encourage greater diversity in local democracy. So, there are ways, but we do take that very seriously.

Diolch, Mike. We're committed to supporting the development of co-operative and community-led housing in Wales. We have increased funding through Cwmpas to £180,000 annually between 2022-23 and 2024-25. Cwmpas is prioritising support for 41 community-led housing groups seeking to deliver affordable housing in Wales.

Thank you for that answer, Minister. In terms of co-operative housing, Wales and the rest of Great Britain have substantially less co-operative housing than Europe and North America. Why is co-operative housing so popular in places as diverse as New York City and Scandinavia, but has failed to become a standard form of accommodation in Wales and the rest of Great Britain? As we all know, John Lennon lived in the Dakota building, a co-operative apartment in Manhattan. Some progress has been made, but I believe Vancouver still has more co-operative housing than the whole of Great Britain. The Welsh Government has prioritised registered social landlords as a means to providing social housing. What further action can be taken to increase the number of co-operative housing units?

Diolch, Mike, and getting John Lennon into a question is no mean feat, so thank you for that. It must be recognised that we do have different models in Wales when compared to some European countries, and our traditional social housing model is one where local authorities and registered social landlords play a central role. The Danish model, for example, has chosen to drive forward community-led housing instead of our more traditional social housing approach. But we do look to learn where we can. Community-led housing is and continues to be an important part of the housing solution in Wales. We're focusing our efforts on our ambition to end homelessness by providing support at both ends, providing more homes alongside early intervention, prevention and support systems. So, we are working with Cwmpas on a future package of support to continue the growing of the sector, and I'm looking forward to the publication of research being undertaken by Cardiff University and Co-op Dan Do to support needs for the sector.

Cabinet Secretary, while we of course welcome any moves to encourage more housing co-operatives, these are only a small piece of the puzzle. We need to urgently address the supply of housing for rent in the social sector and you are a long way off achieving the 20,000 target. So, while co-operative housing initiatives will play a part in addressing Wales's housing needs, and, hopefully, in time, a large part of that need, we have to address the here and now. Cabinet Secretary, what immediate steps are you taking to address the housing shortage and ensure that no families are forced into long-term temporary accommodation? Thank you.

Diolch, Altaf, and, as I said earlier, affordable housing is and should be a priority that we all support. We know that we can't solely continue to deliver homes in the traditional way, which is why innovative housing solutions have been mainstreamed into the social housing grant funding programme. I'd like to encourage all RSLs and local authorities to explore alternative housing solutions, such as community-led housing, as a mechanism to meet the needs of their communities. To support this, we've launched a range of initiatives that will deliver more genuinely affordable homes as quickly as possible to meet that housing need, such as our transitional accommodation capital programme, or as I know it and many in the sector do, TACP, and, as I mentioned earlier, Leasing Scheme Wales. So, we do know that there are lots of things to do on this, but I think this does—. Community-led and co-operative housing certainly has its role, but we know that it's a small sector.

Diolch, Cefin. The Welsh Government will continue to protect local authority services as far as possible, including in rural areas. We're committed to continuing to use and maintain a fair and transparent funding formula for all local authorities, which is agreed with local government.

Thank you. As four leaders in councils led by Plaid Cymru in rural areas noted recently, in a letter to the Chancellor before the budget, they noted many of our local authorities are finding it difficult to provide services in rural areas, particularly in core services such as education and social care. As well, of course, we have to realise the great pressure and stress on county councillors who have to make these decisions, and the WLGA has recognised that recently. And we do have to remember that there is great pressure on councils in rural areas because of the additional cost of providing services, particularly the cost of travelling from one location to another.

Cabinet Secretary, last week, I launched a strategy on rural poverty, and one of the recommendations in the strategy was that we needed to set on a statutory basis rural-proofing of every Welsh Government policy. Would you agree to explore the possibility of legislating for such a duty?

Diolch, Cefin, and thank you for raising the issues within rural communities. We do recognise that there are particular challenges in rural communities, associated with things like the cost of living and poverty, for example. We know that there are those challenges, and I've heard from local authorities on that in particular, and I'm looking forward to visiting Carmarthenshire and Pembrokeshire in the next week, I think—so, very shortly—and I'm sure I'll hear some of those issues that you've raised today. 

It's not the Welsh Government's intention to develop a rural strategy. We are committed to delivering support across all parts of Wales through a range of policy interventions and funding mechanisms, and we remain steadfast in our core priorities. The Welsh Government does undertake a rural-proofing assessment as part of its integrated impact assessments when developing any policy, and we are committed to eradicating poverty and agree that support should be available to everyone in all parts of Wales. As I said, we do recognise that lived experiences of poverty can be different for many in rural areas.

Question 8, Natasha Asghar.

Thank you so much, Deputy Presiding Officer. Cabinet Secretary, physically, times are tough and we know that our local authorities have been stretched beyond belief. When it comes—. Sorry, I do apologise, I didn't ask my first question. I'm so sorry. 

Local authorities in Wales are democratically accountable bodies. Audit Wales, Estyn and Care Inspectorate Wales assess their performance. This includes consideration of their compliance with statutory requirements and guidance.

Thank you so much, Cabinet Secretary. As I mentioned just previously, physically, times are tough for everybody. Therefore, I'm sure that you would have been appalled, as I was, when hearing the recent revelation that Caerphilly County Borough Council has awarded their ex-CEO a £209,000 pay-off in a deal drawn up behind closed doors. Cabinet Secretary, that's a staggering amount of money and could pay for just shy of seven doctors' salaries per year, including pay increments as well. And I think this figure does put everything into perspective for all of us. I'm sure my constituents in Caerphilly would rather that this money was, in fact, spent on more nurses or doctors or, in fact, anything else that would, indeed, be to the local authority's benefit, but not on just a golden handshake for a soon-to-be ex-employee. So, Cabinet Secretary, do you agree with me that this cloak-and-dagger approach is entirely unacceptable, and will you commit to ensuring that councils are as open and transparent as possible with the people that they serve? After all, public funds are, indeed, their money.

Diolch, Natasha. Local authorities make decisions. They are accountable for their decisions, so I do agree that local authorities make those decisions and are accountable for them.

And finally, question 9, Russell George. 

We are in the early stages of the new Warm Homes programme, which is an ambitious programme to tackle fuel poverty and the climate emergency. Officials are undertaking a six-month review to ensure the scheme meets the requirements of Welsh householders.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, and I'm pleased to hear that officials are taking that six-monthly review. Care and Repair tell me that their caseworkers and home energy officers have experienced difficulties in successfully referring their clients into the scheme. Secondly, there's also an issue that has been encountered where there are serious challenges when it comes to meeting the heating needs of their most vulnerable clients. Many of them, of course, have inefficient homes and complex health needs as well.

So, given these challenges, I wonder if the Welsh Government would consider reviewing the eligibility criteria and the funding criteria of the Warm Homes programme to better accommodate the urgent and particular heating needs of the most vulnerable, particularly in cases where like-for-like replacements are essential for their health and well-being.

Diolch, Russell. We're investing more than £30 million this year in the new Warm Homes Nest scheme to reduce the number of low-income households living in cold, damp homes. Eligible households will receive a bespoke package of measures to insulate and decarbonise their home, leading to lower energy bills and moving them out of fuel poverty. We are targeting the least well-off, and so that income threshold has been introduced, rather than relying solely on that means-tested benefit.

The new Warm Homes programme does respond to the current cost-of-living crisis and it takes a fabric, worst and low-carbon first approach to improve the long-term energy efficiency of the least thermally efficient low-income households in Wales. It’s going to take a two-pronged approach, through an advice service and through physically improving the homes of the fuel poor. The scheme is in its infancy and my officials are reviewing progress to ensure that the programme meets its primary objectives. Free energy savings advice is available to all householders in Wales and I’ve also introduced a crisis route for vulnerable households without heating and hot water on 7 October, and I’m pleased that this service has already helped 26 vulnerable households.

 I thank the Cabinet Secretary.

We'll move now to item 2, questions to the Cabinet Secretary for Education, and the first question is from Julie Morgan.

I am committed to ensuring equality of opportunity, encouraging a culture of science literacy and learner progression. We provide support from nursery to higher education and beyond, prioritising STEM across the Curriculum for Wales, pledging £1.6 million for STEM enrichment activities, and promoting initiatives such as the science education scheme Wales.

 Thank you for that response.

We know that getting young people, especially girls, into STEM and ensuring that they pursue it into further and higher education means that it has to start at an early age and should be reinforced at every level of education. So, since April, Sacyr, the company that is building the new Velindre Cancer Centre in my constituency, has delivered STEM engagement sessions relating to construction to more than 1,400 young people in secondary schools across south Wales. They’ll also be providing STEM education activities for pupils in as many as 19 local primary schools that are close to the new Velindre centre. Sacyr is also working with Cardiff and Vale College to encourage STEM subjects, and this is so important at every level of education. So, what more can the Welsh Government do to encourage this type of partnership working in education, to make sure that young people continue with STEM in further and higher education?

I’d like to thank Julie Morgan for that supplementary question, and I know from my own work as a local MS that when construction projects like this deliver these tangible educational benefits, then it can really help our learners to understand how studying STEM subjects can lead to practical and well-paid career opportunities. And I would add as well that I’m also working closely with the Minister for skills, because this is a cross-cutting area, and one of the key things that we’re working on is to agree how best to progress some of the recommendations made by Hefin David MS in his report on transitions to employment, which of course emphasised the importance of effective partnerships between our schools, colleges and employers, alongside, of course, the recommendations made in the vocational qualifications review.

Minister, I welcome the announcement today, actually, but my question was just asked by Julie, so I just want to say that I really welcome what you said today. Not enough has been done at all when it comes to STEM subjects to date. You’ve had a whole host of opportunities to do things, but I’m looking forward to this Government hopefully now stepping up and at least becoming parallel with what’s going on in England, because they are streets ahead, particularly as they’ve kept their triple separate sciences in their schools, whereas we’ve moved to the double science thing, which immediately puts our children and young people at a disadvantage when going into STEM subjects, and it sends the wrong message, when it's STEM subjects are where they should be focusing for the jobs of the future. I do think it’s completely unfair that we’re disadvantaging our children like that. But it was promised that STEM industries—local, particularly—would engage with schools, so as Julie said, I really look forward to hearing more examples, and I want to hear what you’re going to do to ensure the whole of Wales can benefit from those STEM industries, not just Cardiff. Thank you.

Thank you, Laura Anne Jones, for your supplementary there. And I would disagree with what you said there; I think the Government has got a really strong track record of investing in STEM. A £1.6 million commitment will reach across the STEM portfolio to deliver a range of enrichment activities, and also professional learning opportunities for teachers, because that’s important too, all encouraging the take-up of STEM subjects at GCSE and A-level. And, of course, that additional £1.1 million that was announced this year will improve attainment in literacy, maths and science as well.

I'd just like to pick up on the point you raised there about science. It has been proven through stakeholder engagement and through all of the professional channels that there is no dumbing down of the science qualifications here in Wales.

The north Wales regional safeguarding board have commissioned a child practice review. We need to allow the CPR to run its course before considering what action is needed. The outcome of this review will therefore inform our next steps.

I've been informed of constituents' concerns in relation to the communication process for parents and young people who wish to share information with the north Wales safeguarding board as part of the child practice review that you've just mentioned, following the conviction of former headteacher Neil Foden for sexual offences against schoolchildren. Are you confident that the response is appropriate and timely for those who wish to provide information or share concerns? Secondly, has the remit of the child safeguarding review yet been published? This is crucial to ensure transparency and confidence in the process. If it hasn't been published yet, when will that happen and what is the reason for the delay? I remain convinced, as do an increasing number of people, that a public inquiry would be the best and fairest way of dealing with this situation, particularly given the further allegations that came to light in a recent television programme. The power to call a public inquiry is in your hands—

Siân, you must conclude now, please.

The power to call a public inquiry is in your hands. Will you do that, please?

Can I thank Siân Gwenllian for her supplementary question, and can I say that my thoughts remain with the young people and the families affected by the horrendous abuse perpetuated by Neil Foden? Siân Gwenllian raised several points there. I'm aware that some Senedd Members have raised concerns over the process for communicating with the child practice review. I understand that a letter was issued before half term with an e-mail address that people could contact if they wanted to contribute to the review, and that children, young people and their parents do not have to go via the local authority or school to make contact. I will follow up with officials to check, and maybe you could write to me about specific concerns if you're talking about the timeliness of a response. Obviously, this is a review that's being undertaken under the auspices of the north Wales safeguarding board, so it's not our Welsh Government review, but I would be very happy to follow up any particular concerns you've got over the responses that are coming from the child practice review to families.

In terms of the publication of the remit, I can certainly ask officials to follow that up with the north Wales safeguarding board as well. I think it's important that everything is as transparent as possible.

If I can come to your substantive point, really, about a public inquiry, we do need, I think, to allow the child practice review to run its course before we consider what further action is needed, including the possibility of a public inquiry. You'll be aware, Siân, that public inquiries are lengthy processes that will also prolong this process. I think it's right that we wait to see what the child practice review reports, and then Welsh Government will consider next steps.

This individual is one of the most evil sex offenders in Welsh history, and there was a litany of failures, negligence, red flags that were missed that allowed this abuse to continue unchallenged.

Perhaps the most shocking of the allegations is that Neil Foden gave advice to the Welsh Government. He was also disgracefully defended by the Plaid Cymru leader of Gwynedd Council, who refused to apologise to Foden’s victims after the disgraced headteacher’s conviction. Thankfully, the leader of Gwynedd Council has now stepped down, following pressure to do so from his own party. But there remain questions that need to be answered as to why he remained in the employment of Gwynedd Council when his trial started. And questions also arise regarding the thoroughness of Welsh Government vetting, given that the Welsh Government were unknowingly taking advice on education policy from a prolific paedophile.

Neil Foden was also reprimanded by the teaching regulator and kicked out of his union in 2020. Yet, a year later in 2021, he was given more responsibility as a strategic superhead overseeing two different schools in north Wales. So, clearly there are huge deficiencies—

You need to ask a question, Gareth, please.

—in the reporting process, in communications between agencies and in Welsh Government vetting. So, what is the Cabinet Secretary doing to ensure that these deficiencies are identified and fixed as soon as possible so that these mistakes are never made again?

Thank you, Gareth. I do think it's regrettable to bring party politics into a subject that is this serious, whether that's—[Interruption.] I think that that is a regrettable thing to do. This is a really serious issue. A prolific offender has flown under the radar and we have to take that very seriously.

As I explained, we're having the child practice review, which is being undertaken by the north Wales safeguarding board. I have not had any advice from Neil Foden. Like many headteachers, he would have had contact with the Welsh Government previously. In fact, he gave evidence to the Children, Young People and Education Committee when I was Chair, because he was a senior official for the NUT at the time. Obviously, all headteachers are subject to really stringent procedures around safeguarding, so there could never have been any inkling at Welsh Government level, or even at the committee level, that he was the kind of prolific offender that he was.

I think that it’s really important that we let the child practice review take its course. If, during the review, the reviewer, the panel members or board members identify any issues with regard to individual professionals or agencies that need to be explored further, these issues will be remitted to the relevant organisations and they will take any further action required. So, any organisations that have learning from this case have to do that.

The child practice review will involve asking all agencies that are represented on the board, and any other agencies that have had contact with the victims and their families, to prepare a timeline of their involvement, and this information will be merged to create a multi-agency chronology of all known contact with agencies. That will be scrutinised and challenged by the independent reviewers, chair and panel members, sense-checked with practitioners in a learning event, and then there’ll be further challenge and scrutiny at regional safeguarding board meetings.

As I said in response to Siân Gwenllian, when we’ve had the information from the child practice review, we will then consider whether there is any further action that we need to take. But you can be assured, Gareth, that I want to make sure that we are as thorough as possible in the interests of having justice for the young people who have suffered at the hands of this man.

Questions now from the party spokespeople. First of all, the Conservatives' spokesperson, Tom Giffard.

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Dirprwy Lywydd. Yesterday, as part of your statement, I asked you whether the pay rise you announced for teachers—. Sorry, I was asking the Cabinet Secretary, not the Minister. 

I've been notified that the questions are to the Minister.

I believe Cefin's questions are to the Minister and mine are to the Cabinet Secretary.

We were notified that both sets of questions were for the Minister. 

Right. There's clearly a misunderstanding here somewhere that has happened.

Well, we are telling you what we were notified.

Okay. I'm not sure what's gone wrong there. I haven't got a question prepared, I'm afraid, for the Minister. 

I'm happy to take the questions.

The Cabinet Secretary will take the questions.

I'm grateful to you, Cabinet Secretary, for taking the questions. Thank you, and I apologise for that if it's an administration error on the part of the Welsh Conservatives.

Yesterday, you announced the 5.5 per cent pay rise for teachers in Welsh schools. I asked you whether that would be funded in full by the Welsh Government and that no schools or local authorities would have to find that from within their own budget. Can you confirm today that no school and no local authority in Wales will have to find the money to pay for that pay rise from within their own budgets?

We've already made provision, Tom, for some of that pay rise in the money that's been allocated to local government. Thankfully, because we have a UK Labour Government now in Westminster that is really committed to protecting our public services, there will also be additional money that will be coming to enable us to go further than the independent Welsh pay review body recommendation, which was 4.3 per cent, to take us to 5.5 per cent. So, I think we are making very good provision. That is not to say that I don't recognise the pressures on schools, and I've been very clear with you before that we have done what we can to protect the money that goes to schools through the revenue support grant. And obviously, we're going through a budget process at the moment to look at the budget allocations for next year. But the Welsh Government, in partnership with the UK Labour Government, has made good provision for that pay rise.

I'm grateful to you for your response. Obviously, I read your written statement that was sent out about an hour ago, and what was made very clear in that statement was that this pay rise would not be funded in full by the Welsh Government. I think there's probably an expectation from the public and from schools that, if you announce something, you should pay for it. Schools at the moment are making really difficult decisions. We've seen schools cut back on subjects in curricula, cut back on school trips, school improvements, even some teachers are being made redundant. Without the announcement that this is going to be funded in full by the Welsh Government, schools will have to take a decision as a consequence of the announcement that you made yesterday to make further cuts in their budgets, let alone the decisions local authorities might have to make. So, on that basis, what do you advise that schools should cut?

Thank you, Tom. I think I've been very clear that we've made funding available to meet the pay increase that we have allocated. We've also protected the funding that has gone to schools as best we can. And can I remind you that we were in the situation of school budgets, and indeed all public services, being under pressure because of the actions of your Government in Westminster, who consistently short-changed this Government in terms of funding of public services? This is a Government that protects public services, and, by working in partnership with the UK Labour Government, we have identified funding for the pay rise for our school teachers.

Under a Conservative Government, we consistently saw the largest ever budget settlements given to the Welsh Government, and what did the Welsh Government do with it? They spent money on more politicians, they spent money on 20 mph zones, propping up airports—the list goes on and on. And yet, at the same time, schools were struggling to make ends meet, letting teachers go, cutting back on subjects, and delivering the worst education outcomes anywhere in the United Kingdom. You can blame the last UK Government all you want; you are in charge on both ends of the M4, and yesterday we heard the First Minister say that austerity is over. So, will you now commit—given that austerity is over—to funding the thing that you announced yesterday in full, so that schools will not have to cut back any further as a consequence of the announcement that you made?

Well, the UK Labour Government has been in power since July—it's a matter of months. It's absurd, really, to—. I'm incredibly impressed by what they've done already. Your Government had 14 years of raining destruction down on our public services. We have made provision, in partnership with the UK Labour Government, for a pay rise for teachers that is above what was recommended by the IWPRB. You could be a bit more graceful and welcome that money that's been made available to teachers. And what's more, Tom, I'm confident, following the budget last week, you heard the huge amount of additional funding that's being made available to us here in Wales, which is the biggest boost that we've had since we last had a Labour Government in Westminster. This is a Government that will be spending that additional money on our priorities, and education is one of our priorities.  

Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Cefin Campbell. 

Thank you very much, Dirprwy Lywydd. On Monday, the education Secretary of the UK Government announced that students will pay more for going to university in England next year, with tuition fees rising to £9,535. Setting aside the fact that Keir Starmer has broken his promise on this, it is clear that this will certainly have an impact on Welsh universities, as well as our students.

Both have been let down over the last few decades by Conservative and Labour Governments that haven’t put a clear strategy for the sector in place, and by a lack of funding, investment and support, and cuts to research and innovation. Plaid Cymru believes in the principle of universal access to our universities, but it is clear that we have to put our education institutions on a much more sustainable footing before we can do that.

So, in the wake of that announcement, could I ask you, Minister, will the Welsh Government increase fees in the same way as has been announced in England? And if so, does the Welsh Government accept that, even with any increase, universities will still face a financial crisis? And finally, what steps will you take to support access to higher education for those from the most disadvantaged backgrounds?

I thank Cefin Campbell for those questions. I will begin by saying that I recognise that our universities, just like universities across the UK and beyond, are under significant financial pressure. I’m working with my officials to consider the impact of the UK Government decision to raise tuition fees by £285 per student per year. I think it’s important to look at the impact of that, both on the higher education sector and on students. I want to make a decision on that swiftly, with an informed evidence base, so that we can provide certainty both to the universities and to the students themselves.

I can confirm today that all Welsh students on courses at regulated institutions will have the full cost of their undergraduate tuition fees met by the Welsh Government through the student finance system, whether they choose to study in Wales or elsewhere in the UK. This continues our long-standing policy of no Welsh student paying upfront costs for their undergraduate tuition.

Dirprwy Lywydd, I’m not sure if the Member asked all his three questions in one go.

I will remind the Member that he has three questions. He doesn't have to put all three into the first one and go over time. I'm sure he didn't intend to, and I'm sure he won't do it in the future either. 

Is that all three of your questions?

No, I'll give him the credit to ask more. He won't do it again. 

Thank you very much. I look forward to that statement about whether you intend to raise fees in the same way, and I’d like to hear some kind of timetable about when that’s likely to happen, because there is great uncertainty in the sector at present.

Another announcement in the Westminster budget in recent days was the increase in employers’ national insurance contributions. This is also going to have a great financial impact on our universities, and the estimate is that this is going to add about £20 million to costs.

So, could you, Minister, provide clarification to us as to whether you believe universities in Wales could receive any support under the UK Treasury’s plans or not? Because we heard the Cabinet Secretary for finance yesterday saying that the public sector was free from those payments, but the universities sector is part of the private sector. So, could you explain to us whether the staff in universities come under the public sector or the private sector, and, if there is no support available—

Thank you, Cefin. 

—are you concerned—

Cefin. 

—that there won't be any—

Cefin. 

—financial support for you? Thank you very much. 

Thank you, Cefin Campbell, for the question. I acknowledge that the Chancellor's announcements of changes to employer national insurance contributions from April next year will increase costs for our universities, and I'm currently working with my officials with the affected sectors to understand the scope of these new costs. We're considering the impact of employer national insurance contributions on all public sector employers and public sector services in Wales, and I look forward to being able to provide an update in due course.   

So, even before this most recent kick in the teeth for Welsh universities—having to deal with rises to national insurance contributions—Welsh universities have been on the financial brink for a while, with cumulative deficits upwards of £100 million. Now, a fortnight ago, I asked the Minister had she or the Cabinet Secretary for Education had discussions via official correspondence with individual Welsh universities regarding the transformation fund that she mentioned. Now, the Minister responded by saying, 

'Yes, I have started that already'. 

So, I've contacted all Welsh universities directly, asking them what correspondence they've had between themselves and the Welsh Government regarding this transformation fund or any other potential support package. I'm afraid the answer that I've had so far paints a different picture to the one painted by the Minister just a fortnight ago: Trinity St David's, no correspondence; Aberystwyth University, no correspondence; Swansea, no correspondence; Cardiff, no correspondence. It seems, yet again, Welsh Government Ministers are saying on the floor of the Senedd one thing, which doesn't seem to match the reality from our evidence. So, the question remains, therefore, what steps have the Welsh Government actually been taking at a ministerial and official level to develop this transformation fund and any other support packages for Welsh universities in conjunction with Welsh universities?

Thank you, Cefin. Correspondence, as I'm sure you're aware, is written correspondence. All of my dealings with the universities to date have been through face-to-face meetings and discussions, and I've been really pleased to be able to meet with so many vice-chancellors, Universities Wales, stakeholders from across the sector, and I'll be continuing to do that as I tour each and every higher education institution in Wales. And I explained to the Senedd that the Welsh Government is continuing to explore what, if any, potential support mechanisms are feasible to support the higher education sector in Wales. Those discussions, as I've outlined twice, both in writing and here on the floor of this Chamber, are at an early and exploratory stage and will need to be considered in the context of our wider budget priorities. But, as I've said before, and as I know the Member is aware, the funding that the Welsh Government provides to our HE institutions comprises 10 per cent of their overall funding, and so it is really important that each and every university looks at the rest of their funding streams. And I know that that is exactly what they are doing—exploring innovative ways of working, greater collaboration with the FE sector in particular, which can only be of benefit, so that they can explore ways that they can cut costs and meet these challenging opportunities. The Welsh Government's Digarbon fund, that I mentioned here previously, has had £33 million-worth of applications from our HE institutions, and that shows just one way in which they are exploring different ways to cut costs and to make those savings. 

Before I move on, I do expect all backbenchers to continue to keep to their time and ask their questions within their time. I expect the same from spokespeople as well, and, if they have multiple questions, spokespeople have the advantage of having the ability to ask more than one question. So, please, in future, keep to your times to ensure that everybody has a fair opportunity to ask their question, including backbenchers. 

We continue to support recruitment into initial teacher education programmes through a range of activities. These include providing incentives to support recruitment to priority subjects and for Welsh-medium trainees, expanding the subjects available through the salaried PGCE programmes and the Teaching Wales marketing campaign.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. Unfortunately, teacher morale is at an all-time low. Decisions being taken by local authorities to cut school budgets, leading to lay-offs of teachers and teaching assistants, are increasing the workload on the remaining teaching staff, with many warnings that class sizes are set to grow, adding to the pressures. But, the biggest threat of them all is the behaviour of the pupils and the lack of support given to teaching staff who are subjected to abuse and physical violence. Cabinet Secretary, teachers in my region have had to strive to get their voices heard regarding attacks on staff. I note your earlier statement regarding the school social partnership forum and the steps you’ll take to address pupils’ behaviour. However, it does little to protect staff in the here and now. Cabinet Secretary, what immediate steps will you take to protect staff in our schools? We politicians get issued with panic alarms; have you considered issuing these to our teachers?

Thank you very much, Altaf, for your supplementary. You raised a number of points there. I would like to assure you that we take the issue of teacher recruitment and retention very seriously and that we recognise the huge pressures teachers are under, and also the link between workload and their well-being. It’s essential that teachers are able to maintain an appropriate work-life balance, and there’s a commitment from all stakeholders to make tangible, impactful changes that will make real positive change for teachers.

We’ve worked in the last year in particular with our stakeholders and our partners around the issues of workload, and we’ve had an independently chaired strategic workload co-ordination group, membership of which is drawn from key stakeholders and representatives from across the education system. I issued a written statement updating on our efforts to tackle teacher workload a few weeks ago.

In terms of the points you raise about behaviour in schools, as I made clear yesterday in answers to question, I am really worried about what schools are dealing with. They’re dealing with a really complex range of societal issues that are now presenting in schools, because they are the places that are there all the time, and teachers are focusing on those issues when they want to be focusing on teaching and learning.

You’ve seen my letter, so you know that I have the meeting with the trade unions coming up next week, and that we have the headteachers conference with secondary heads on Friday, where we’re going to be focusing on behaviour. Local authorities and schools are under a legal duty to make sure that schools are a safe place to work. But what I will do is, following those meetings, I’m very happy to consider the issues arising from those. I mean, things like panic alarms, that may be raised—I don’t know. I want to listen to the people who are at the front line when we consider how we can help with this, and that’s, of course, in addition to the other things that we’re doing like the behaviour toolkit and the research that we’re doing on behaviour.

My priorities for schools in South Wales East include raising levels of attainment, attendance and closing the gap for our poorest learners.

Thank you so much, Cabinet Secretary. The Ebbw Vale Institute in Blaenau Gwent is a cherished community asset that currently provides an array of services, two of which are work experience programmes and volunteering opportunities. Both are, indeed, a vital part of building a well-rounded education as well as setting people up from all ages and backgrounds for work and building self-esteem, additionally benefiting the local community. But, Cabinet Secretary, just like so many various prosperous local assets, the Ebbw Vale Institute community hub offering these services has relied quite a lot on levelling-up funding. However, in the wake of the new Government taking over management of the site, I'm naturally concerned about the future. So, Cabinet Secretary, what assurance can you give me today that you will work with the Cabinet Secretary for Housing and Local Government to support brilliant hubs like this to ensure a holistic approach is indeed taken in education, where both young people and adults can enhance vital skill sets whilst benefiting their communities at large? Thank you. 

Thank you, Natasha, and you raise a really important point about work experience. It's good for all young people to get those opportunities, but, in my experience, it's often our most vulnerable learners who get the most from those opportunities to do things in a slightly different way, and to experience the real-life world of work. I wasn't aware of the funding issues at the Ebbw Vale Institute that you've referred to. Obviously, the levelling-up fund and other funds are in a state of transition at the moment, but I do give you my commitment that I will talk to Cabinet colleagues, not just the local government Minister but also the Cabinet Secretary for finance, about the issues that you've raised, and I'm very happy to write to you about that. 

We want to ensure all our young people are able to positively engage with a world increasingly driven by technological and digital innovation. This financial year, the Welsh Government is providing over £1.6 million for STEM activities in schools, with a focus on encouraging girls into STEM qualifications and careers.

Diolch, Minister. Women and girls are still hugely under-represented in STEM subjects, and they are still often stereotyped as subjects for boys. I was delighted to see that Pembrokeshire College and Pembrokeshire County Council are trying to address this bias by joining forces with local industries like RWE Renewables, Blue Gem Wind, Floventis Energy, Port of Milford Haven and Ledwood Engineering. At the end of last year, they created a careers initiative called SPARC to help inspire a more diverse workforce in STEM industries, and these industries are also massively under-represented by females and, of course, this often starts with the subjects that they study at school or in college. Cabinet Secretary, do you agree with me that initiatives like these are crucial if we are going to ever address the imbalance of girls and women studying STEM subjects?

Dirprwy Lywydd, I'd like to thank Joyce Watson for that supplementary question, and I absolutely agree with her about the importance of initiatives like that. And, in fact, I'm undertaking a joint visit to Pembrokeshire College in just two weeks' time with the Cabinet Secretary for economy, so I really look forward to hearing more about this work when I'm there. Building partnerships between schools and industry can inspire our young girls to follow their passion for STEM subjects, and, of course, that can lead them to rewarding and fulfilling careers. As part of our funding to the Engineering Education Scheme Wales, we're supporting the Girls into STEM initiative, and this is helping to break down barriers, giving girls the opportunity to visit employers and universities, and encouraging them to follow STEM qualification and career pathways. In the last financial year, 390 girls were involved in the Girls into STEM initiative, visiting a range of industry partners. And you'll be aware, Joyce Watson, that, on Tuesday, the Cabinet Secretary announced as part of her oral statement additional investment in the Engineering Education Scheme Wales, including to further enhance the Girls into STEM initiative. That brings our total investment in this work to £196,000 in this year alone.

I met with SPARC at Pembrokeshire College recently, at the launch of the skills transition hub, which has been part funded by Shell. On Friday, in Pembroke Dock, I'm meeting with Cymbrogi as they're doing an event with four schools in the area, advocating for STEM subjects for young boys and girls in secondary school to show not only are they able to go into fantastic careers using STEM, but the other opportunities that are out there in the workforce to stay locally in the areas in which they were born and raised, which is really important, especially in west Wales where we're seeing a demographic shift of young people, unfortunately, leaving, and the age demographic shifting and putting pressure on those care sectors. So, if it's okay with you, Minister, would you be able to meet with Cymbrogi in the future, as they've got some really exciting plans about how they're having that outreach into our education establishments, getting people thinking about careers in STEM and the alternatives that come in fields such as engineering, mathematics and science? Thank you.

Thank you, Sam, for that supplementary question. I absolutely agree with everything you said there. It's so important that we don't just look at these skill sets, but at how they can enable our young people to stay in the communities that they are born and raised in and to have a positive impact on those local economies. And that's exactly the kind of cross-cutting work that I'm looking into with the Minister for skills, and I'd be delighted to receive more information about that project. I look forward to finding out more and hopefully visiting in the future.

E-sgol is an innovative project delivered across Wales. In September I launched an e-sgol partnership in Monmouthshire and saw how it enables learners to access subjects that might not otherwise be offered. E-sgol is currently delivered in three authorities in South Wales East for pupils in years 12 and 13.

Thank you for that response. During the last few weeks, I've been having discussions with the education profession on the use of e-sgol in my region. As you said, this resource was established online originally to help with the provision of sixth form in rural areas, but it's an option that's been favoured in some areas and certain subjects rather than face-to-face teaching. As you've mentioned, teaching Welsh at A-level in Monmouthshire is one of the examples of this.

Although this kind of learning does have its merits, it shouldn't become the norm at the expense of face-to-face teaching. In my view and the view of many educators, nothing can replace face-to-face teaching in terms of providing a rich and varied experience for pupils. Can you, therefore, provide a pledge that this Government will tackle the shortage of teachers in certain areas and certain subjects, so that e-sgol doesn't become more common, particularly in the context of the provisions of the Welsh Language and Education (Wales) Bill and the main objective of having all pupils as being confident Welsh speakers by 2050? Thank you.

Thank you very much, Peredur, for that question. Without e-sgol there is, unfortunately, a distinct possibility that Welsh A-level wouldn't have been delivered for the nine A-level students in Monmouthshire—two in Caldicot School, two in King Henry VIII school and five in Monmouth Comprehensive School. And I do believe that e-sgol can help rebuild Welsh language provision in Monmouthshire, so that the numbers increase again. There is some face-to-face provision as part of the project, and I was assured of that when I went to see it; they do get opportunities to meet together, face to face.

I think you raise important issues, though, about the numbers of young people who are taking A-level Welsh and I'm keen to look again at the A-level to ensure that we've got a qualification that motivates more young people to choose to do the subject at A-level. More work is going to be done with schools, pupils and parents to showcase the e-sgol provision and its quality to give them the confidence that it provides high-quality teaching and a good experience for learners. And you may find it reassuring that the initial pupil questionnaire came back with a 94 per cent positive response in relation to the provision. I know that the local authority have undertaken a lesson observation cycle recently and had very positive feedback. As I said, I went to see it in action with the Spanish lessons in September and had the opportunity to talk to the young people. It seemed to be going really, really well and they were happy with how it was working. I think the academic results are encouraging as well. The 2023 A-level results show that 15.2 per cent of learners achieved A* grades through e-sgol, compared with 13.5 per cent across Wales, and similarly, there's a slightly higher achievement of A to C grades with e-sgol, compared to the rest of Wales. You'll also, I'm sure, be assured that Estyn have recognised the e-sgol provision in their post-16 partnership report.

The strategic head of e-sgol is very happy to come and meet with Members of the Senedd to talk to you about your concerns if that would be helpful. You do make an important point about the Welsh language and education Bill, and I hope that the work that we're doing, not just through the Bill but through our Welsh in education strategic plans and through our workforce plan, will mean that we will increase the stream of young people that are coming forward to do A-level Welsh, because, clearly, what is creating the challenge here is the fact that there aren't that many pupils, and we need to address that.

It's really good to hear about advancing technologies, such as e-sgol, and how they're connecting classrooms across Wales. I hope you enjoyed that visit to the Spanish class in Caldicot, and we know that that, as you've shared, is sharing provision with Monmouth comprehensive, and it's great that Monmouthshire is taking a lead. It is great that these technologies exist to ensure that pupils can maximise their attendance but also learn new subjects that might not have been available, whilst also ensuring that no child is left behind.

Unfortunately, though, Cabinet Secretary, pupils in Wales are still being left behind, based on the 2023 Programme for International Student Assessment scores. I note your predecessor stated at the time the results were released that plans had been launched to raise standards. Can I therefore ask, Cabinet Secretary, what progress has been made on improving the standard of education systems in Wales, and on ensuring that the gap between Wales and other UK nations is not just narrowed but eliminated altogether?

Thank you, Peter, for your supplementary. Indeed, the e-sgol project was a pleasure to visit; I think it has got lots of potential for subjects where there aren't that many learners who are opting to do it. There's good evidence now that we're starting to see it being rolled out in primary schools, where young people are getting opportunities they would never get otherwise to work with things like the Goethe-Institut, so, you know, it is a really good opportunity and I commend the council for their work on it.

Obviously, you went on, then, to make a wider political point about the school standards in Wales. I did make a statement yesterday on that, which I would refer you to. That set out that it is a Welsh Government priority to increase attendance and attainment; that we're going to have an absolute focus on literacy and numeracy. I went into considerable detail in the session yesterday about how we are going to do that, so I would refer you to that statement, which sets out our plans in some detail. 

Our approach in Wales is on early help and prevention, providing support to families from an early stage to help ensure children experience a smooth transition to school.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. A new report released last Friday by Child of the North and the Centre for Young Lives explains that in 2022-23 a third of children were not considered school-ready, with concerns around speech and language development and arriving to school whilst still wearing nappies. Even a report from some 10 years ago revealed that at least half of primary school staff observed an increase in children unable to successfully take themselves to the toilet during the day. In speaking with my own headteachers locally, concerns of children arriving in nappies now are growing.

Over half of children who are not school-ready perform below expectations in their key stage 1 reading assessment, so there is some direct correlation here. What guidance, Cabinet Secretary, can you provide to parents and families? Also, what resources will you be able to provide to headteachers and schoolteachers, because, clearly, any time spent changing nappies is time away from the classroom? Obviously, there is some guidance needed on this now, because it's an ever-growing problem. Diolch.

Can I thank Janet for her question? Indeed, I've heard myself from some headteachers that they are seeing children coming to school who aren't toilet trained, and how challenging that can be. It's part of what I've described in the Chamber about schools picking up a wider range of issues that are not education related, and that's putting a lot of pressure on them. We do have our ‘Parenting. Give it Time’ campaign and a Teulu Cymru campaign and webpages, which provide vital information for families including parenting tips, advice on parenting concerns such as behaviour, tantrums, bedtimes, mealtimes and potty training, and which signpost parents to sources of further support. The ‘Parenting. Give it Time’ campaign has worked with the Children's Bladder and Bowel Charity to co-brand two of their resources, one called ‘Thinking of wee & poo now you've reached the age of two’ and one called ‘Thinking of wee & poo now you're on your way to school’, to explain the importance of healthy bladder and bowels.

You'll be aware as well of our Flying Start, which we've maintained in Wales despite it not being in place for so long over the border. Our transitional guidance for Flying Start families takes a holistic approach to ensure that children experience positive transitions in the early years, and promotes the importance of understanding the needs of children, including toileting.

And finally, question 8, Laura Anne Jones.

Investing in our sports facilities is a programme for government commitment and we work closely with Sport Wales to improve and renew facilities across Wales. Since 2022-23, our £60 million community-focused schools capital grant programme has delivered sporting facilities and improved access to our school sites for the community.

The Welsh Government made a shiny announcement about a year or so ago that twenty-first century schools would then be named ‘community schools’, but unfortunately they haven't lived up to their name, have they, Cabinet Secretary, as many schools do not open past school hours and provide the community with access to those brilliant sporting facilities that are on offer there? This is a particular problem in rural areas where we are sporting facilities poor across Wales, and the schools could provide that unique opportunity to encourage children, young people, the entire community to carry on using sporting facilities out of school hours. The things that are holding the schools back from opening are safety concerns, but also the inability to pay for someone to open and close the school after school hours due to already stretched school budgets, as you can imagine. What action will you be taking to try and get over those hurdles? Thank you.

Thank you, Laura. Well I have to disagree with you that this isn't an area where we've made good progress in Wales. As I said, you know, by the end of this financial year, 2024-25, we'll have invested £60 million in community-focused schools. That's on top of the billions of pounds that we've spent on new school buildings et cetera, so I think our track record in Wales on investing in school buildings is one that we can be proud of.

In terms of South Wales East, we've invested specifically £9.5 million for projects in the South Wales East area. That supported sports facilities in the area through other capital grants, such as the new 3G pitch in Torfaen at Ysgol Gymraeg Gwynllyw and a new sports hall in Newport in Ysgol Gyfun Gwent Is Coed, delivered through the Welsh-medium capital grant funding, and almost 30 per cent of this funding is specifically targeted to deliver and improve a wide range of indoor and outdoor sports facilities.

Now, the Member does make a valid point that not all schools do this, and many schools in Wales do accommodate extended school and community services including sports, but it is down to the governing body, which plays a crucial role in controlling use of these facilities, both outside and inside school hours. The decision to facilitate wider community use normally sits with the governing body and the headteacher, and it's really important that there's a clear vision communicated by senior leaders and governors at the school. In sharing resources, the right fit between schools and other partners will vary depending on the nature of the community, and school leaders need to be clear about how the role of the school is nested within wider initiatives at a local level, and develop the partnerships most relevant to them.

Obviously, in addition to capital we've also this year invested £6.5 million in family engagement officers to work with families and communities around schools, and that's an important contribution to this as well. But we're also continuing to fund a trial of community-focused schools managers who will work on developing better engagement between schools and their communities, and, hopefully, that will lead to a more consistent application of people being able to benefit from this funding.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary.

Item 3 is the topical questions, and the first will be from Hannah Blythyn.

Thank you. I met with representatives of the WRU on Monday and issued a written statement later that afternoon. My aim now is to fully understand the circumstances surrounding the recent contract negotiations for women's players and how improvements to existing processes can be taken forward more positively in the future.

Thank you for that update, and I obviously very much welcome that you promptly met with representatives of the WRU, following the most recent allegations. And I'm sure we were all shocked and saddened to see these allegations when they appeared in The Telegraph last week, and I want to pay tribute to the journalist Fiona Thomas who broke the story, and of course to the women who had the courage to come forward.

For me, the most appalling revelation relates to how the players were threatened with disciplinary action, and the potential of the team being withdrawn from the world cup, if they did not conform to the WRU's will and sign their new contracts. Can anyone in the Siambr imagine the men's team being subjected to such treatment? And subsequently, at a hastily arranged WRU press conference on Friday, it was reported that the WRU apologised profusely and was sorry for not treating their women players as employees and for any stress and hurt caused, but denied claims of sexism.

Minister, the definition of sexism is prejudice, stereotyping or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex. I think it's clear to many that what the national team has experienced is the very definition of sexism. Do you agree with me that this is what the women's team have experienced? And whilst I'm sure the apology was appreciated by the team, we've been here before, and words aren't enough. An apology is not, and cannot be, the end of it. It's not about individuals; it's institutional.

So, as well as the WRU's own review, what further action will the Welsh Government take? Will you review the Government's relationship with the WRU, and that there needs to be greater transparency and accountability? I would also urge the same caution here as I've done previously regarding your offer to meet the players. They must not be put in a position where speaking out potentially risks not just their professional career but their mental health too, and they must be protected.

Any cosy establishment consensus must end. We can't hold people to account if we're sharing information or a hospitality box with them, and, this time, there has to be tangible and meaningful cultural change. We owe it not just to the women of the international team but to all young girls wanting to play rugby in Wales.

Presiding Officer, can I thank Hannah Blythyn for tabling this important question and for the way in which she contributed her supplementary question this afternoon? I think it's fair to say that all of us in this Chamber were shocked and saddened at last week's revelations in The Telegraph, and I join Hannah Blythyn in thanking in particular the players for having the courage to come forward too because of that process.

As I set out in my statement on Monday to Members of the Senedd, Presiding Officer, I met with the WRU as a matter of urgency, following the media focus over the weekend on the allegations of sexism faced by the women's national team in their contract negotiations. I left them in no doubt of my disappointment that, once again, Welsh rugby was in the headlines for all the wrong reasons, especially given the context of recent years. In my meeting with the WRU, and as Hannah Blythyn has pointed out already, it is clear that the WRU has already accepted some failings of the process and is looking for areas of improvement that need to be followed. The WRU themselves are looking to meet with the players to issue that apology, and, as I said again in my statement on Monday, the review of the process is taking place, and that report is yet to be published. Therefore, I have not had sight of the report, but I'm hoping to do so in the coming weeks to get a full picture and full understanding of what has taken place and what action needs to take place to address the issues, because I agree with Hannah Blythyn that words aren't enough.

My view on any allegations of this nature is clear: the Welsh Government will not be a bystander to any form of sexism, bullying or abuse, and that women and girls should be and should feel safe in all aspects of their life, including in their workplace, and we expect the same level of commitment from all our partners and stakeholders and citizens in Wales, including the WRU.

Presiding Officer, what's most important to me in this process is how the women themselves feel about this, and if they feel they have been treated differently. I take the Member's point around the men's team, and I'm sure many in this Chamber will feel the same way as she does and as I do, that the men's team would not have been treated in this way, with the prospect of not going to the world cup being an option on the negotiating table. That's why I'm seeking to meet with the authors of the review's report in due course, and indeed the players of the women's national team, and I'm seeking to do that in a space in which they feel comfortable and protected, and those meetings will take place in confidence. Presiding Officer, in closing, the players can do that either through the WRU themselves or directly to me, either themselves collectively or through their representative bodies, so it's a safe space where they feel comfortable sharing what they want to share with me, so that I have the full understanding of what action needs to take place.

I should say, Presiding Officer, in all of this, we all want this issue to be addressed because we do in Wales want rugby to thrive in the future.

Thank you, Hannah, for tabling this question. Less than two years ago, wasn't it, we saw the BBC documentary into the toxic culture and sexism that existed at the heart of the Welsh Rugby Union, and, in the wake of that documentary, we were assured that lessons had been learnt and that things would change at the Welsh Rugby Union. But I think the report we saw in The Telegraph at the tail end of last week shows that there is still quite a long way to go in terms of tackling sexism at one of our premier institutions in Wales.

I think one of the remarks after the publication of the report that concerned me the most was, when asked if this was a failure of one individual at the Welsh Rugby Union or whether it was collective, the Welsh Rugby Union said it was a collective failure, which does raise questions about whether those lessons have been learnt and about whether things have changed. So, I wonder what assessment you had prior to the publication of this report about the culture at the Welsh Rugby Union, whether you felt that it was a welcoming place, a safe place to work, and that people who engaged with it were treated with the respect and the dignity that they deserved, and what action you've taken since that report has been published to ensure that it lives up to the standards that all of us in Wales expect it to.

Can I thank Tom Giffard for contributing this afternoon? I think, Tom, it's important, isn't it, that we join forces politically in the Senedd and take action, and make sure that we call out this type of behaviour where we see it, and I thank Tom for doing that as well.

The points the Member makes are important and valid points. I should stress, Presiding Officer, that the report on this allegation has not yet been fully published. I haven't seen the content within that report, but will be doing so in due course. I've asked to see the report; I want to understand the content of the report, but not just see that report—I want to meet with the authors of the report and also Dame Rafferty, who leads the work on the oversight group, which reflects the Member's point around the issues a year ago. I want to do that for two reasons, Presiding Officer: firstly, to get Dame Rafferty's view on where the WRU are up to in terms of changing the culture, the very much needed change of culture that was there a year ago, and the allegations in front of us again, and what further needs to be done and what support can be offered to the WRU to make sure that this does not happen again. I can't stress enough, Presiding Officer, my disappointment, as I said in the written statement on Monday, and I think, just going back to the clear importance and utmost importance in this of the players in the national team, what I find particularly distressing over the most recent period and allegations made in The Telegraph was the lack of acknowledgement of the power imbalance in this situation. These women, Presiding Officer, have worked all their lives to get to the elite level of their sport. To represent their nation on the global stage is the very pinnacle of their careers, and to be treated in the way in which the players were during the contract negotiations is wholly unacceptable, and that's before we even consider the fact that a strict deadline was put into place.

So, I've heard Heledd Fychan’s contribution to the Trefnydd yesterday during the business statement, and I agree with what the Member said during that statement and the request for a further statement from me, Presiding Officer. Once I've understood what is in the report from the WRU, once those meetings have taken place with the authors and the players themselves, then I will come back to the Senedd Chamber and update Members further.

And Heledd Fychan.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. May I thank you for that response? I think you've seen, over the past few years, when the WRU has, unfortunately, been in the headlines, how concerned Members of the Senedd are, and I would like to associate myself fully with Hannah Blythyn’s comment. It is sexism. This would never have happened to the men’s national team. We need to be clear on that. And I would like to associate myself with the tribute you paid to the bravery of those that have come forward, and the journalists as well, because they will be penalised for speaking out unless we call it out as well, because it is institutional sexism. Looking at Jess Kavanagh’s statement, which was extremely brave as a former player, saying,

'It's a shame really because we've heard apologies over the past three and four years, and we are still hearing the same apologies today.'

So, we have to question what's changed, because we're trying to encourage more participation in sport. This will put women off rugby unless the WRU show meaningful change.

I would like to follow up on Hannah’s question to you, because I don't think we got that point of clarity, in terms of the Welsh Government's continued relationship with the WRU. Obviously, they are a key partner, often in terms of our international relations, for instance. They are a key partner as well, as we've seen, in terms of promoting Wales to the world, but also the economic benefits their huge matches have here in Wales. So, they are a key player. So, we've seen, previously, Welsh Government support the WRU, including providing a loan in 2022. Can I ask what the expectations are in terms of that relationship, and how that relationship is progressing?

I'm very glad that you'll be coming back to the Senedd. I'm sure the culture committee will also be taking a keen look at this. We need assurances that the WRU are not just listening, but progressing real change. It's not good enough that we're seeing the WRU hit the headlines once again and that people have to speak out about sexism. We need to be able to move forward and ensure that everybody that plays rugby here in Wales is respected, whichever team they are playing for.

Diolch yn fawr, Heledd. Again, I agree with the points that you've made this afternoon. As I said at the start, yes, I want rugby to thrive, Presiding Officer, but I will not be a bystander in this process. I thought it was important for me, at the first opportunity, to meet with the WRU on Monday, that I did meet with their chair, their chief executive and their executive director where I could express my disappointment to them, but remind them that—. You're right, the partnership that we have as a Government—. And we reminded them, in the renegotiation of their loan, that, particularly, workplace practices should be fair for all, both on and off the field. That remains the commitment of our side. It's the expectation I place not just on the WRU, but it's the expectation I place on all employers in Wales. As I said previously and in the statement, I'm keen to satisfy myself that a robust process will be in place to ensure those improvements to the processes within the WRU to ensure that the culture is changed to support a thriving and inclusive rugby union in Wales.

And I want to have the confidence in that process. It's why I want to speak to the players; it's why I want to speak to the chair, the authors of the review; it's why I want to speak to Dame Rafferty around the oversight group and the recommendations, and it's why I'll be meeting with the chief executive and the chair again to discuss those actions, because they are important actions, as all Members who've contributed this afternoon have recognised. We must have a rugby union in Wales that is supportive of inclusive participation in the sport at whatever level and whatever game the players play.

I'll repeat my disappointment about what's happened in the headlines. I hope that we can get to a better place. Of course, I'll bring forward a further statement to Members of this Senedd, and I'm happy to engage in those conversations with Members outside the Senedd because I recognise that this is a matter of importance to them, and I welcome the scrutiny on this issue as well.

Thank you, Minister. The next question is from Peredur Owen Griffiths.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Safety is always the main priority for Transport for Wales and Network Rail. They’ve carried out enhanced checks to both the trains and the railway line itself to enable the reopening of the Cambrian line, and I’m grateful to their staff who have worked tirelessly since the incident to resume services.

Thank you for that response, Cabinet Secretary.

Crashes like this one that took place in Powys last month have thankfully become a very rare occurrence. It resulted in the death of a passenger, and my sympathies and condolences go out to his family and friends, but this could have been much worse and I worry that there is a potential for it to become more widespread given the nature of the fault.

Inspections following the crash reveal that hoses meant to spray sand during wheel slippage were blocked. What measures will the Welsh Government take to ensure that the hoses on other Transport for Wales trains are free from similar blockages and similar faults?

Cabinet Secretary, can you confirm whether the system failure occurred on one of the new Transport for Wales trains? And if so, will the entire new fleet be inspected for similar faults, and how would that be funded and what contractual warranties are there in place that can be called into place to fix any systematic faults?

And further to that, what conversations and consultations have you had with rail unions and Transport for Wales staff to talk through some of the lessons to be learnt from this tragic incident?

I'd like to thank the Member for his valuable comments about, first of all, rail safety and how rare, thankfully, incidents of this type are on the UK railway network. The UK has the safest railway network in the whole of Europe. However, incidents such as these are dreadful when they occur and it's vitally important that we give the experts—those rail investigation experts—the time that they require to assess fully what might have gone wrong and what lessons can be learned. And it would be inappropriate for me to speculate over the cause of the incident.

The report that was published is an interim report and provides no further detail than that which the Members have already seen. However, I have written to both the chief executive of Transport for Wales and also the chief executive of Network Rail. I've been asking them to provide me with an update on what they are doing in terms of advanced checks to ensure that the network and our trains that travel across our lines are as safe as they can possibly be. I will, of course, Dirprwy Lywydd, provide an update as soon as I receive a response from the chief executives. 

I've also met with the chief executive of Transport for Wales. Quite obviously, the incident was the primary reason for that meeting and I was assured that Transport for Wales, along with trade unions, are working very closely with Network Rail and the incident investigators to ensure that, where lessons can be learnt, they can be implemented as soon as possible. But I think it would be inappropriate to speculate over the cause of the incident.

In terms of the sanders, these are fitted to trains as standard technology, to ensure that adhesion between the rail line and the wheels can be maximised when the lines are slippery. Now, the new class 197 trains, which the Member has referred to, will be coming into service in the summer of 2025—next summer. But, as I say, we need to give time to the investigators, those experts, who are carrying out very extensive work, and ensure that the lessons that we learn are based on the evidence that they are able to ascertain.

Of course, it's not for us to second guess the investigation into this awful incident, and it is important to remember how rare deaths are on the railways, but the report yesterday suggested that the blockage in the pipe that sprayed sand when there are slippages may point to an issue with maintenance. And there have been historic challenges with the performance of maintenance depots that Transport for Wales sub-contract to. So, separate to the investigation by the Rail Accident Investigation Branch, would the Cabinet Secretary ask Transport for Wales to conduct a review of the performance of the maintenance depots, and whether any steps will be prudently now taken to improve them?

Can I thank the Member for his question? He's absolutely right: none of us in the Senedd are experts in rail accident, and we need to leave this work to the experts, to the bureau that has been invited in to make sure that we can ascertain exactly what happened. I think it's important that we recognise that the sanding systems are standard technology, and that there is a standard that is applied in terms of how and when they are maintained. The rail investigation bureau will be, I'm in no doubt, carrying out all of the relevant investigations regarding the maintenance standards for those trains, and will ensure that they were complied with. But it would be wrong for me to speculate, again, as I stress, it would be wrong for me to speculate over the cause of why those hose pipes were blocked on that day of the incident.

I'd like to thank my colleague Peredur Owen Griffiths for raising this really important question this afternoon. My thoughts remain, as I'm sure do those of my colleagues as well, with the loved ones of David Tudor Evans and all those involved in this horrible incident.

Cabinet Secretary, it is clear from the Rail Accident Investigation Branch's initial findings that the train's emergency braking system, made up of sanding hoses, was blocked—my colleagues have mentioned that already—and I appreciate that you cannot speculate, but I would really sincerely appreciate it if you could look into what actually caused the blockage. I know you mentioned slipperiness—I appreciate all of those things—but I'd like to know why it wasn't actually picked up in the checks before the train journey actually took off.

I'd also really like to know and understand more as to how often safety checks are carried out on all new and old TfW trains, and if any directions have been given by Welsh Government to TfW to increase and strengthen these checks as a result of this tragic incident. And I'm also very curious to know, Cabinet Secretary, if any further issues with other TfW trains have been identified since this collision took place. Because, as I'm sure we can all appreciate, steps must be taken to ensure that passenger safety is paramount and the No. 1 priority is to ensure that something like this never ever happens again. Thank you.

Can I thank Natasha for her questions? I repeat that it's very dangerous to infer from the interim report the ultimate cause of the incident. Yes, those pipes were blocked, but we do not know why they were blocked, and I will not be drawn into speculating over the reason why that was the case. I can guarantee that the trains, as part of Transport for Wales's fleet, are being maintained in accordance with the requirements that are laid out for their safe operation, and enhanced checks are taking place. And as I mentioned earlier, I will keep Members updated when I receive a response from both the CEO of Transport for Wales and the CEO of Network Rail.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. The final question is from Sioned Williams.

I’d like to extend my sympathies and condolences to the families of the health and social care workers who tragically lost their lives during the pandemic. Data in relation to deaths as a result of COVID-19 infection are gathered from a number of sources. The evidence heard by the COVID-19 public inquiry yesterday related to the completion of rapid surveillance documentation, which was one such source.

Diolch, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet. It was extremely concerning to hear that testimony from Professor Fu-Meng Khaw, the executive medical director of Public Health Wales, about those major data failings during the first wave of the pandemic. Around 17 per cent of the data on COVID deaths amongst health and social care workers is missing, while the extent of the impact of the pandemic on ethnic minority communities was significantly underreported, with missing data on more than 1,000 COVID death records. I can’t imagine how distressing this must have been for the loved ones of those affected, to hear these revelations.

I hope the Cabinet Secretary will apologise on behalf of the Welsh Government, but apologies alone are worth little if lessons aren’t learnt. And this is key, isn’t it, especially when it comes to getting to grips with entrenched health inequalities that cost the NHS £300 million a year, and lead to disproportionately poorer health outcomes for ethnic minority communities. So, any policy making to address this is doomed to fail if we are relying on information that is faulty, even if that’s only in part, and, critically in this context, understates the scale of the issue.

So, can I ask what measures are being put in place to address the data gaps? How soon can we expect this missing data to be retrieved, if at all? And how is the refreshed 'Anti-racist Wales Action Plan', which the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice told us yesterday, in emphatic terms, is a cross-Government responsibility, going to address this? It really was shocking to hear that software was classifying ethnicity based on names. Does the Cabinet Secretary accept that a Welsh-specific inquiry to analyse these failings is the best and most effective way for those crucial lessons to be learned?

Well, in relation to the last point, I would, of course, remind the Member that the reason she is asking the question is because of the questioning of a Welsh official in relation to practice in Wales, the very kind of question that I’m sure she would welcome, as do we all.

In relation to the points that the Member made in her question, I think it is important to say that in his evidence to the inquiry, Professor Fu-Meng Khaw from Public Health Wales was asked specifically about the form that was put in place to provide a rapid surveillance picture, in what was obviously a very quickly evolving pandemic. And she will know that the Office for National Statistics produced, separately, official statistics on mortality throughout the pandemic, based on an analysis of death certificates. And in his evidence, Professor Khaw pointed out that the purpose of the surveillance wasn't to provide a comprehensive capture of information, and he referred to the official statistics for that broader purpose.

In relation to the point that the Member makes, which is a very important point, about the capturing of data around race and ethnicity in the health and care sector, I had a meeting this morning, actually, with Professor Anton Emmanuel, who has been head of strategy and implementation for the workforce race equality standard. And as part of the broader commitment that my department is making, as part of the 'Anti-racist Wales Action Plan', there is a clear commitment, and progress has been made to improve the data that is captured across the sector in relation to the ethnic origin of the workforce. And the critical thing now is not just to capture the data, but to be able to use that data meaningfully to improve the experience of workers from black, Asian and minority ethnic communities in our workforce.

Obviously, this is concerning evidence that we will have heard at the UK COVID inquiry yesterday, and one of the most concerning elements we read from the testimony was, to quote, that

'there were over a thousand elements of missing data in the question of key worker status.'

Now, obviously, you will have been using this data as a Welsh Government to make decisions around which restrictions to lift, and pandemic practices and workplace practices during the pandemic, and that will obviously relate not just to health and social care workers, but to other key workers who will have been impacted by decisions made by the Welsh Government. So, as an example, during the pandemic, I know you will have been education Minister, making decisions about restrictions on schools, for example, and their ability to open, and the risk, therefore, that school staff were exposed to during the pandemic. 

So, can I ask, is this a picture that is likely to emerge from across the Welsh Government, from across sectors, that this data was incomplete during the pandemic and the Welsh Government, effectively, was operating and making decisions, if you like, with one hand tied behind its back? Or is this something exclusively limited to health and social care workers and to Public Health Wales? 

I think the Member will have heard the answer that I gave to Sioned Williams a moment ago. Whilst evidence is being given by the Welsh Government in the inquiry, I'm not sure it's particularly helpful for me to provide a commentary on that. Obviously, we're midway through quite an extensive inquiry, and the Member's question, actually, casts the timeline and the scope of that question very much broader. We have a mechanism for giving evidence and for that to be challenged as part of the inquiry. When the evidence is complete, when the inquiry has reached conclusions, there will a separate mechanism for this Senedd to satisfy itself that all relevant questions have been asked, and I think that's the appropriate context in which to reflect on the question that the Member asked. 

I'd like to thank Sioned for asking this important question, because this evidence highlights two of the most fundamental problems that we have within the health service. And it's no surprise to many of those working in health and care sectors in hearing this story, because it is clear that there are grave problems within the health service when it comes to data or rather a lack of data. Last night, I was at the NHS Confederation dinner; today, I was at Cardiff University; committee witnesses have mentioned it time and again. At every turn, people in these places mention the data problems that we face here in Wales. So how can we develop effective policy unless the data is accurate or if there is no consistency in the data collected?

And the second problem is grave deficiencies in the digital infrastructure, never mind the racism that was part of this story, with ethnicity being recorded on the basis of names, which is quite disgraceful. It's about time that we saw a complete transformation in the Government's attitude towards the digitisation of medical records, as well as the habit of gathering data and standardising data. So, would the Cabinet Secretary agree that Digital Health and Care Wales should be funded properly in order to tackle this issue? Will you also conduct a comprehensive audit of the appropriateness of the data sources that we have in Wales currently? And will the Cabinet Secretary recognise, in light of this evidence, that there have been fundamental failings and they continue to exist, and that steps should be taken to address those? 

I have answered some of those questions in my answers to Sioned Williams. I hope that the Member will have found those answers helpful to his questions. Data and the role of digital development in the NHS is a priority for the Government, and it runs as a thread through everything that we try to do in the NHS. But in terms of the circumstances raised in the inquiry yesterday, namely the subject of the first question, I hope that the answers I have already given will have been adequate.   

Can I thank Sioned Williams also for raising this important question in the Chamber here today? And I associate myself with the comments raised by Members in this place already. It particularly piqued my interest because yesterday, of course, Cabinet Secretary, you'll recall the discussion we had here on the back of your statement around escalation processes. One of the points I raised in that discussion on your statement was around the accuracy of the data and the information that you receive to be able to do your role as best as possible.

You've probably answered a number of questions that I had already, but I wonder whether you think there's a role in particular on a broader issue that's been raised by Members here today on data, data accuracy and the information being as helpful as possible. Do you think there's a further role outside of Government that this Senedd could play to scrutinise the data that's made available and support the work of Government, to ensure that people across Wales are being delivered services and policies have been set with the most accurate and helpful information possible? 

We seek to publish data on a regular basis in relation to the performance of the health service and care services in Wales, and that data is available for Members to scrutinise, as it ought to be. It is often used as a basis for how I am challenged appropriately in this Senedd. I think that's in the interests of transparent public services and also improving our delivery of them. So, I very much welcome that.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary. 

Item 4 today is the 90-second statements. There is only one this afternoon. I call on Julie Morgan.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. Happy fortieth birthday to Friends of the Earth Cymru.

This year marks the fortieth anniversary of Friends of the Earth Cymru. Founded by Margaret and Robert Minhinnick in 1984, originally based in Porthcawl, the organisation became a hub for environmental activists in Wales. Early campaigns focused on increasing awareness of acid rain and recycling. In the 1990s, alongside their growing network of local groups, FOE Cymru was gathering evidence of the Sea Empress oil spill and campaigned to protect rich marine habitats like Cardigan bay. More recently, the organisation has worked on issues such as fracking, bees, sustainable fashion, plastic pollution, active travel, incineration, and got pension funds to shift millions of pounds out of fossil fuels.

The climate and nature emergencies are the most urgent issues facing our planet. In the 25 years since devolution, Friends of the Earth Cymru has helped shape ground-breaking policies and legislation, such as the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015, the action plan for pollinators, and life-saving clean air legislation. Over the past four decades, this NGO has worked tirelessly to make Wales a greener and more sustainable place to live. Alongside their network of activists and groups, Friends of the Earth Cymru will continue to fight for a just and sustainable future for people and the planet. We wish them every success in their continuing work in Wales.

Diolch, Julie.

Item 5 today is the debate on the Standards of Conduct Committee report—the seventeenth report to the Sixth Senedd under Standing Order 22.9. I call on the Chair of the committee to move the motion. Hannah Blythyn.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. As Chair of the Standards of Conduct Committee, I formally move the motion.

The committee considered the report from the commissioner for standards in relation to a complaint made against Andrew R.T. Davies MS regarding the use of the term 'blanket' to describe the default 20 mph speed limit following the publication of the Standards of Conduct Committee’s eighth report. The Standards of Conduct Committee gave the commissioner’s report careful consideration and our report sets out the committee’s judgment.

The committee received two reports on this matter from the commissioner and agreed to consider them together. Given the number of complaints and the Member’s acknowledgment that he was aware of the finding in the Standards of Conduct Committee’s eighth report, the committee is recommending a censure on this occasion. The facts relating to the complaint and the committee’s reasons for its recommendation are set out in full in the committee’s report.

I would like to take this opportunity, Dirprwy Lywydd, to remind Members of the importance of acknowledging and acting on the findings of the Standards of Conduct Committee. In this instance, the committee had previously advised that Members should take care to not intentionally make statements that are imprecise and inaccurate.

The motion invites the Senedd to endorse the committee's reccomendation. Thank you.

A censure by the Senedd is a solemn thing. None of us should take lightly a rebuke by our peers or a finding against us by the independent standards commissioner. But I’m bound to note a pattern of behaviour from the leader of the opposition, Andrew R.T. Davies. The fact that he’s not here this afternoon, is not on screen—I’m not aware, Dirprwy Lywydd, if he’s offered any explanation—speaks of a contempt about our standards. This is not the first time his words and conduct have been questioned.

Today, he faces two separate reports from the standards committee about his conduct—two. And in the second of them, he did not even reply to invitations to make written or oral representations to the committee’s work in the complaint about him. He intends to keep shrugging them off. This is not the behaviour we are entitled to expect from a Member, let alone the leader of the opposition of our national Parliament.

Describing the change in speed limits as a ‘blanket’ one, when it only applies to a minority of roads, is clearly deliberate and intended to mislead. But this isn’t some jolly jape; lives are at stake, and confusion is sowed by this inaccurate use of language. The Conservative transport spokesperson, Natasha Asghar, has already been censured for her dishonesty.

The Conservatives have said that the change in speed limits has caused tourists to stay away. From comments I’ve seen online, the reason given by people who were put off from visiting is that they are worried that the speed limit is a ‘blanket’ one. It is the misleading terms used by the leader of the opposition that are doing the damage that he then complains about.

But this isn't an isolated incident. He's also claimed repeatedly that there is a ban on road building in Wales. Not only is it not true, he knows it's not true, but he shrugs it off. He suggested children were being forced to eat halal meat, without evidence. Even when the Muslim Council of Wales warned of the real consequences on our streets of what they called

'ham-fisted attempts at dog-whistle racism',

he was still unrepentant. In his finding of fact, the standards commissioner tells us that Andrew R.T. Davies says what he says

'should be tolerated as "an inaccurate exaggeration".'

So, he accepts what he says is not right. He just doesn't think it matters. Well, Llywydd, it does matter. Honesty matters. Accuracy matters. Standards matter. 

I call on Hannah Blythyn to reply to the debate. 

I'd just like to thank the Member for his contribution and once again reiterate the invitation to the Senedd to endorse the committee's recommendation. Diolch. 

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

Item 6 is a debate on the Standards of Conduct Committee report, the eighteenth report to the sixth Senedd under Standing Order 22.9. I call on the Chair of the committee to move the motion. Hannah Blythyn. 

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. As Chair of the Standards of Conduct Committee, I formally move the motion. The committee discussed a report from the standards commissioner on a complaint against Andrew R.T. Davies MS related to a Twitter message that was believed to be misleading and dangerous. 

The Standards of Conduct Committee gave the commissioner's report careful consideration and our report sets out the committee's judgment that although we considered the Member is in breach of the code of conduct, we do not consider that any further action is warranted. The facts relating to the complaint and the committee's reasons for its recommendations are set out in full in the committee's report. 

I would like to again take this opportunity to remind Members that whilst we recognise that social media is a tool that has the potential to be used effectively for communication and debate, it is for Members to determine the accuracy of the information they are posting and that every effort is made to differentiate between actual fact and an expression of opinion. We would also advise Members that quoting or actively repeating or posting social media posts does not absolve them of their duty to consider the suitability and sensitivity of what they are sharing and fact-check information for accuracy. 

The committee is aware of and acknowledges the steady increase of complaints being made against Members' conduct on social media. The Llywydd has also written to the committee raising the same concerns that we and the standards commissioner share on this issue, so it's our intention to consider this matter further more generally as part of our inquiry into Member accountability. We will of course report back to the Senedd with any proposals in due course.   

The motion invites the Senedd to agree to the committee's recommendation. Thank you. 

I have no other speakers. Do you have anything to add? The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? No. The motion is therefore agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36. 

Item 7 is a debate on the Equality and Social Justice Committee report, 'Annual Report: European Union Settlement Scheme'. I call on the Chair of the committee to move the motion. Jenny Rathbone. 

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. The Equality and Social Justice Committee called this debate to draw the attention of all Members to the evidence our committee has gathered about the EU settlement scheme, both in a report we published in April and further evidence we gathered in the last few months, which are causes for concern. I thank all the people who contributed to our work, some of whom are in the gallery today. First of all, there's the staff from Settled, a charity supporting European citizens to navigate their way through the minefield created by the UK withdrawal from the EU, which is now focusing on supporting those making late applications who've had their applications refused, as well as trying to find people unaware or too scared to apply. I'd also like to welcome members of the independent monitoring authority, the citizens' rights watchdog established under the withdrawal agreement—set up by, but independent of, the UK Government—with whom the committee has worked since it was established. You are all very welcome to hear this debate.

EU citizens who lived in Wales before Brexit were supposed to apply to stay here by the end of June 2021. As you'll recall, that was just as the sixth Senedd committees were being set up. The committee I chair has been monitoring the quarterly statistics published by the UK Government since 2021 and extracting the figures that apply to Wales. Originally, it was estimated that 95,000 citizens would need to apply in Wales, but that was a guess. How many mainly vulnerable people have missed out on their entitlement is a work in progress. Total applications of 125,000 to date are already significantly higher than that estimate. Of these, over 86,000 have been granted the permanent right to remain. We welcome them. The cause of this committee's concerns are all the other people who've only been given temporary leave to remain, refused leave to remain, whose applications are pending, or who have yet to apply to remain in this country.

I very much appreciate the work that the IMA has done with public bodies to help them identify vulnerable people who failed to apply by the original deadline—for example, care-experienced children; care leavers; frail, elderly people who need help with the application process. Between 500 and 800 new applications have been submitted from people in Wales every month for the last three years or more, and we really don't know how many more people may be affected. Not unreasonably, if the Home Office granted someone definite leave to remain well before we joined the European Union, anyone who is not well informed on the momentous decision to leave the EU after nearly 40 years might easily think this process doesn't apply to them. This has all the hallmarks of a second Windrush. Anyone who comes into contact with the state who should have applied has a mere 28 days to submit an application, and in the meantime can be denied access to the NHS, to social care, lose their job, and, in the worst-case scenarios, can be deported. There are over 40,000 citizens in Wales with pre-settled status, in limbo land effectively.

The IMA achieved a landmark legal victory in December 2022 when the High Court ruled it was illegal to require those with pre-settled status to reapply. The UK Government decided not to appeal, and in July 2023 announced that all these citizens would have their status rolled over by two years and that from the current year, 2024, people would automatically get upgraded to settled status on the basis of automated checks. How anybody is supposed to track exactly what their status is is something that needs to be clarified, because unless the citizen's digital footprint is available, they can be told they've got to apply again. So, for example, unless you pay taxes or receive benefits, you may simply not be able, online, to prove that you have been here for the requisite five years. They may be automatically upgraded to settled status by the expiry date, but they may not, and some will need to apply for a second time.

Late applications are now being subject to narrow criteria and a higher evidence threshold is required. The whole scheme is becoming disproportionately complicated. Reports are intensifying that new and troubling outcomes are occurring, not least because the EUSS is a digital-only system, and it's the first that's being trialled as a guinea pig in the UK. Any digital-only scheme will confront challenges of digital literacy, digital exclusion and errors, and we've seen all of those in this situation. Those with the required proof of residency and language skills, like members of my family, have found applying to the EUSS to be a straightforward process, but for others that is just not the case. Even with status, how do you prove it when the whole thing is digitised? We heard how some landlords, employers, local authorities and statutory services have denied people services because they're risk averse to falling foul of the process, and refuse citizens their entitlement because they don't understand the nuances of how they get to check.

Failure to obtain status, as I said earlier, is really serious and can even lead to deportation, even for people who have got generations of family living in this country. I think, in particular, time and time again we've heard how this presents challenges, not just for those who need to be applying today, especially the most vulnerable in our society: children and young people; older people; children in care or who are looked after; the Roma community who don't speak either English or Welsh or any of the languages that are normally common in this country and they don't have the literacy levels to read any information; people who are homeless; victims of domestic abuse; victims of trafficking. This is a particularly concerning problem for those who may have children in this country whose own status will be affected if these individuals do not apply. So, we applaud the efforts of those who work tirelessly to support EU citizens to stay here in Wales, their home. That includes Jane Hutt, the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice, and the Welsh Government, who have consistently provided funds to enable organisations to support Members through this very, very difficult process for some people.

So, we need to raise awareness of the need to apply, as Members, as a committee and as a Senedd. We welcome the Welsh Government's statements of support for EU citizens and the steps taken to help, such as regularly renewing the funding for these specialist advice services. But we called this debate for one main reason, and that's to ask all Members and the Senedd collectively to do more to highlight the issue in our communities, which will create another Windrush, which is a denial of justice and an abuse of justice, and that is what we must avoid, otherwise we will be talking about this in 20, 30 years' time.

I'd like to start by thanking the Chair for opening the debate and the clerking team for compiling such a comprehensive report. As you can see from the European Union settlement scheme and citizens' rights after Brexit report, it is quite encouraging, the Welsh Government's actions in addressing the issues that have been raised and that its recommendations are fair and realistic. And I'm delighted that the proactive measures taken by Welsh local authorities have been rightly recognised, with all 22 being graded green. I also know that the Cabinet Secretary works very hard on these matters and is a passionate advocate, which comes over in many of the positive aspects of this report. That said, I would like to pick up a few points, which are more areas to think about rather than criticisms.

I am surprised that there are still so many late applications. I know, Cabinet Secretary, that these are mainly repeat applications and not new, and that there are concerns that these are increasingly complex. However, given the impact on people's lives, I believe that it would be very beneficial to understand the predominant reasons for refusal in the first instance. Obtaining that data would certainly help with the guidance that could be given and the steps that could be taken by the Welsh Government to support applicants. 

I note in the report that it is highlighted that almost 425,000 people had to wait for longer than six months and almost 65,000 people had to wait for more than a year to get their status. And whilst I accept that an influx of applications is going to push up waiting times, I would argue that there might well have been issues in obtaining data from the country of origin and a greater need for enhanced scrutiny that would have substantially contributed to this, which is something I think we should try to find out. The IMA has previously expressed concerns over the accurate record keeping, data capture and storage of applications, particularly for those cases relating to children and care leavers, as we have heard, and that whilst this has started to improve, it nonetheless means that there are lessons to be learnt as to why these new standards weren't enforced from the outset. 

Finally, acting Presiding Officer, I'd like to highlight the issue of the lack of awareness and the fact that it is predicted that we may not know for maybe a generation who hasn't actually applied to the scheme yet. The UK officially left the EU over four years ago, and I find it very hard to believe that any EU citizen would not be aware of this and not have been aware that they needed to review their immigration status. But as the report highlights, we need to be asking what are the barriers, and even more troubling, are there people being forcibly stopped in making applications? Sadly, acting Presiding Officer, human trafficking is a huge issue, and the more data that we can obtain will certainly help in identifying individuals who might be victims of this.

It is mentioned that there are people who have been in the UK for some time that should have been granted settled status, but have been granted pre-settled status on the account that they have very little footprint to show they have been here. I believe we need to continually ask why this is the case. Whilst it is shown that digital skills is one major barrier, we can nonetheless expect that, as time goes on, this will become less of a case and therefore we need to keep on top of and better understand the ever-changing new barriers that could arise. In a past life, when I was a local councillor, I held advice surgeries specifically to help EU citizens understand the process, and I have seen at first-hand some of the difficulties and concerns that they had. There's always more that can be done and we need to be ever vigilant, but at the moment, it looks like the Welsh Government is making good progress. Thank you.

Thank you, Llywydd dros dro. We heard no mention of the adverse effects of Brexit in the Chancellor's statement last week. Indeed, the Labour Party has been very careful not to pay any attention to the huge elephant that sits in our country's political room—the elephant that is having such a significant impact on our economy and our culture, and on the rights of European citizens living in Wales.

As a result of our scrutiny of how the tens of thousands of EU citizens who live in all parts of Wales are aware of, and have access to, the process that needs to be followed now in order to have the right to stay in our nation following Brexit, the report has sounded several important alarms that require urgent and robust attention from the Governments of Wales and the UK, because if no action is taken now, we could face an entirely unacceptable situation in a few years, which would see tens of thousands of people and their descendants who live and work in Wales losing their right to live and work here, losing their right to healthcare and education, being unable to rent a home, and facing the possibility of being driven from the country. It is not for nothing that experts have told the committee that we face a situation that would resemble the Windrush scandal.

The first thing to note clearly is that the data being collected and reported on this are inadequate. The numbers that are being reported do not include information that would drive and support an effective campaign to ensure that there are no people at risk of losing their opportunity to secure their right to stay, or to then adapt processes in accordance with that information. The data sets on many stages of the process are either not available for sharing, or are not being collected by Westminster Government departments and agencies. We really need to resolve this as a matter of urgency. And as we heard from Jenny Rathbone, it is the most vulnerable people who need the most support, and who are most likely to suffer adversely as a result of this complex and confusing mess—a mess directly caused by Brexit. Because experts have emphasised to the committee that children, older people and low-income people are those most likely to suffer as a result of this situation. People with long-term illness, people with dementia, people in care, people who are victims of slavery and domestic abuse. 

There has been a change of Government in Westminster since we published the report and since the Welsh Government responded to it. We therefore need to hear from the Cabinet Secretary what discussions, what changes and what plans are under way to address current and future possible injustices, and the likely distress and harm that that is causing to a significant number of people who live in Wales.

I would like to hear an update to the responses to recommendation 1, for example—the most fundamental of our recommendations as a committee—namely how are the Labour Governments of Wales and the United Kingdom going to work together on this? Have the significant challenges with the Home Office—as they were described by the Welsh Government in its response—been resolved, and if so, how? Has the Government accepted the importance of funding the work of Settled and TGP Cymru, in accordance with your response to our second recommendation? And in terms of your response to our second recommendation, namely that the Welsh Government continue to support European citizens, including those applying for the EUSS, has the Welsh Government called, therefore, on the new Government in Westminster to review the narrower eligibility criteria and reintroduce the right to an administrative review, both of which have led to increased demand for advice and support?

Is the UK Government now willing to listen to the request by the Welsh Government to expand the family reunification scheme, for example, outlined in your response to recommendation 5, in order to ensure that it's more accessible for asylum seekers who have family members in the UK, whatever their nationality?

This is a serious problem that's not going away, a hidden problem, to a certain extent, but a problem that could have extremely serious consequences for thousands of people who live in Wales and contribute to the future of our nation. It is crucial that the work of raising awareness, securing support and improving the process is supported both politically and financially. So, what assurance can the Welsh Government give that there will be no cuts in funding for the important work of identifying, encouraging, supporting and ensuring that those who need to apply to stay or to convert pre-settled status continues for the future and does not decline? Because we must listen to the warnings of the experts such as Migration Observatory, and I quote to conclude, Dirprwy Lywydd:

'There's been, to a certain extent, a sense in Government that the EUSS will be an issue that will gradually go away. It's been a long time since the scheme was introduced. But these problems will continue to be here for a very long time, and I think it's very important that that certainty is available, both for these groups and for the organisations that are supporting them.'

So, I would like an assurance this afternoon that the Government is listening and is going to press its sister Government in Westminster to listen too. Thank you.

I now call on Mike Hedges as Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. The LJC committee is responsible for international obligations, including UK-EU agreements, and the withdrawal agreement is one of them. The committee is also responsible for the constitutional aspects of external affairs, and there are many resulting from the UK’s exit from the European Union. The withdrawal agreement governs this exit and, with it, guarantees the rights of European Union citizens and their families.

Many of us will have followed the High Court case mentioned by Jenny Rathbone earlier, which held that the former UK Government’s approach to citizens’ rights was unlawful under the withdrawal agreement, a matter that should concern us all. The court held that pre-settled citizens, those with a temporary status, should not automatically lose their rights because they had not made a second application to upgrade their status to a permanent one.

There have been around 125,000 applications from EU citizens in Wales to the EU settlement scheme. Some of them have been granted a permanent status, some a temporary one, and some no status at all. Others have not yet applied, and nobody knows who or where they are.

Yes, the EU settlement scheme is complicated. But that should not mean that we shy away from implementing our obligations, nor fail to grasp what it means for the people and for us as a Senedd. We have a duty to observe international obligations—the Government of Wales Act 2006 is absolutely clear on that—and how international obligations work on the ground is a key question for us all. When we considered withdrawal agreement compliance for the Northern Ireland Protocol Bill debates in 2022, Welsh Ministers left no doubt of the risks posed by non-performance of international obligations to Wales and to the UK. Here in the Senedd, we have a strong record of holding our international obligations in the highest regard. The LJC is the guardian and gatekeeper of this work. We'll continue to follow the matters debated here today with great interest, and I thank the Equality and Social Justice Committee for tabling this debate. Diolch.

I now call on Delyth Jewell as Chair of the Culture, Communications, Welsh Language, Sport and International Relations Committee.

Thank you, acting Llywydd. Citizens’ rights are a fundamental part of the withdrawal agreement, but they're often lost in discussions about the Northern Ireland protocol, or the Windsor framework. I thank the Equality and Social Justice Committee for this opportunity to discuss citizens’ rights provisions. As Chair of the committee responsible for international relations, I always welcome the opportunity for the whole Senedd to discuss UK-EU matters.

Acting Llywydd, today, our committee published a report on the impacts of Brexit on our culture sector. This looks primarily at the effects of the trade and co-operation agreement between the UK and the EU, but there is a common thread in our work and the subject of this debate, namely the effects of Brexit on people. We all know that Brexit brought about an end to freedom of movement. In our report, we talk about how this didn’t just slow the movement of people, it also slowed the free movement of creativity, ideas and potential.

Now, I welcome the Equality and Social Justice Committee’s regular reports—the maps and the graphs and the charts that are so important. But, like we say in our report, we must look beyond the data to the gaps to truly see the effect on people's lives—people we all represent; people who've built their lives in Wales; people who belong here.

Jenny has outlined the increasing complexity of the EUSS, the bureaucracy, barriers, burdens placed upon or in front of those least able to overcome them. The UK’s departure from the EU has created a need for EU citizens to apply to stay somewhere they may have lived for years, or for decades. And just five years later, here we are, talking about the risk of a second Windrush. That, surely, must be a wake-up call. In my own committee’s report today, in the foreword to the report, I've said that we must all do more and do better. We must all follow the example set by the organisations watching us here today and the Equality and Social Justice Committee, with their work, and not take our eye off what is at stake for people's lives. Surely, it's incumbent on all of us not only to debate these matters, but to help raise awareness in the heart of our Welsh democracy. I propose that that is, indeed, the very least that we can do.

So, once again, I really truly do thank the Equality and Social Justice Committee for its ongoing work on this, for tabling this important debate and for its unwavering support for EU citizens in Wales. They live alongside us, they are our friends and our neighbours, and, Llywydd dros dro, they belong here.

In 2016, Vote Leave promised that EU citizens would automatically be granted indefinite leave to remain in the UK, and assured that there would be no significant changes for those lawfully residing here. A shameful requirement for those people who have given so much to this country. And those assurances and rights quickly unravelled. What should have been a straightforward process has instead become a complex, frustrating ordeal. Through no fault of their own, thousands of EU citizens in Wales are now caught up in a confusing system that jeopardises their right to stay here. It is the vulnerable who are especially at risk: long-term elderly EU residents often unaware that they need to apply, even; members of the Roma community, as we've heard, who are sometimes unable to access a system that operates entirely online.

So, there are some things that we have done in Wales well. I'm glad to see reflected in the report progress in supporting these communities. Notably, I commend all 22 Welsh local authorities that have achieved green status from the independent monitoring authority for assisting looked-after children and care leavers. Yet the Welsh Government's response to our report's recommendations is really concerning. The commitment to support services like Settled only until March 2025 betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of what witnesses have clearly told us—that this is a generation-long issue that won't simply fade away. Future funding tied solely to annual demand reviews fails to provide the stability needed to avoid, as we've heard many times today, a possible repeat of the Windrush scandal. I, therefore, firstly urge the Cabinet Secretary to commit to sustainable long-term funding for support services beyond 2025.

Another key factor in maintaining support is improving data sharing, as we've already heard from Sioned Williams. Organisations like Settled stress that, without data, we can't identify who needs the support or where they are, diminishing the effectiveness of any efforts. So, will a new UK Labour Government now in office be persuaded and influenced by this Welsh Labour Government to take advantage of renewed collaboration and use all of the available influence to secure access to this vital data?

Finally, I'd like to address the impact of the rapid digitisation of the UK's immigration system, accelerated by the previous Conservative Governments. This shift has created a system that many say is unfit for purpose and already harming vulnerable people. Our evidence sessions revealed how the digital-only status of the settlement scheme continues to exclude many with limited digital literacy or English proficiency. As Fiona Costello highlighted, within communities like the Roma in Wales, many applicants struggle, often relying on children or family members to manage and verify their status.

Soon, the stakes will rise. Starting 1 January 2025, as many as 4 million to 5 million people living in the UK may find themselves, effectively, undocumented. These individuals haven't lost their right to be here—they're lawful residents—but they're trapped by a digital system that was supposed to protect them. So, finally, and to finish, I call on the Welsh Government to press Westminster to ensure that EU citizens and their families in the UK are given physical proof of their right to remain. This is a simple yet essential step to prevent vulnerable residents from being unjustly penalised by a flawed system. Please show us that your role here in Cardiff as a Labour Minister has an influence on a Labour UK Government. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice, Jane Hutt.

Thank you very much, and good afternoon everyone.

I really would like to thank, first of all, the Equality and Social Justice Committee for their report. It is so good that we are debating it here today, and that we're joined by all of those who are so committed to ensuring that, together, EU citizens in Wales have access to the support they need to ensure a settled and stable future here in Wales, and I think that has been the strong message that we all share today.

But coming from that evidence—all-important evidence—from the Equality and Social Justice Committee for your report earlier this year, and, indeed, your monitoring report as well, which was published in September, I thank the Equality and Social Justice Committee for not just these reports, but your continuing commitment and scrutiny—scrutiny, rightly so, of the Welsh Government—and I will talk as well about the reset of relationships with the UK Government, the new UK Government, which I hope will give encouragement to Members here today.

I'd also like to thank the Chair of the culture committee, welcoming your report as well, which I'm sure will be very relevant, from what you've said. You've highlighted key findings and themes in terms of the impact of the effects of Brexit for so many citizens in Wales, but, particularly, I will be looking at it in terms of the impact on our EU citizens.

I can say quite clearly that Welsh Government is committed to being transparent about sharing the information. Anything that we have, we know and that we seek, we share with you, providing Members of the Senedd, but also all of the stakeholders, partners and EU citizens themselves, with a level of confidence regarding our approach to the EU settlement scheme and EU citizens' rights. I've always focused on those rights. This is about EU citizens' rights; they are our people, as you said in this debate.

So, we did support all of the recommendations of the Equality and Social Justice Committee report earlier on in the year. It was before the general election, of course, in July that that report was published. I'd like to thank Members of the Senedd for all of the contributions that you've made today, which have been very valuable and informative, and which I can reflect on further in terms of the debate. Many of the issues we've discussed are a result of the evidence that you took in your committee inquiry, and they are issues that Welsh Government has already been addressing, working on and raising with the UK Government—the previous UK Government—and now we have an opportunity with the new UK Government. But also the way in which we're working to ensure that we understand from our stakeholders and from those who we support and fund that we get that evidence to ensure that we are delivering our support in the best possible way.

Now, yes, as has been acknowledged, in September the new UK Government announced plans to automate the process for upgrading eligible individuals from pre-settled to settled status, and there will still be a cohort of individuals who will need to apply for an upgrade and that's where we have to make sure that the support systems are in place. I can say today that I recognise that it's vital that support services remain in place post March 2025. I think that's a direct response to the point that Jane Dodds and others have made today.

And I've mentioned the new UK Government. Just this week, Seema Malhotra MP, Minister for Migration and Citizenship, actually visited Wales. We haven't had a Home Office Minister visit Wales since I can't think when. We now have Ministers from the new UK Government. She visited Wales, she met with the Welsh Refugee Council, she met with Windrush Cymru Elders as well, and she met with myself and the First Minister, and we discussed many issues, including e-visas and other migration issues. I will be reporting back to her on this debate today and the issues that have been raised, including—and this is something that I've been raising with every UK Minister and Secretary of State—the importance of data sharing. In fact, we touched on this yesterday in my refresh of the 'Anti-racist Wales Action Plan', and I think there will be a breakthrough in terms of data sharing as a result of the new UK Government, and also the evidence that we are giving that this excludes people, this is unnecessary, and we need to disaggregate data on every level, and that's what we're seeking.

I also recently met with Dame Angela Eagle, the Minister for Border Security and Asylum, and Lord Wajid Khan, the Minister for Faith, Communities and Resettlement. Again, they sought out to meet with us and they are going to take part in our nation of sanctuary oversight strategic board. They want to get engaged with Wales, they want to learn what we're doing as well, which is also a real breakthrough in terms of that kind of engagement. It's a more collaborative approach between our Governments, supporting migrants including EU citizens in Wales, and as I said, I'll report back on the debate today and the issues raised as a result of the inquiry.

The Welsh Government very much values, as we've always said, the contributions that EU citizens make to our communities, culture and economy. We'll continue to ensure their needs are met in terms of support, and that is the commitment that I give you today as the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice. Since 2019, the Welsh Government has been committed to ensuring EU citizens can continue to live and thrive in Wales. We've provided nearly £3 million of grant funding to support EU citizens in applying for the EU settlement scheme, and to remain here in Wales should they wish to do so. The funding has complemented the support provided by the UK Government, so there has been a collective effort to support EU citizens in Wales, and obviously it's really good to know that we've got Settled and other partners here with us today. Settled has been awarded £140,000 for this financial year, and then we look, as we are setting our budgets, to the next financial year, but I’m also very pleased that very recently we announced the funding for Tros Gynnal Plant Cymru, which of course is crucial for the support of Gypsy, Roma, Traveller people. I think also the recruitment—we're supporting the recruitment of an outreach worker in north Wales for 12 months as well. That's another development to show our commitment.

It's really important that the citizens who may have missed the EUSS deadline, those who need to make another application for settled status, any citizen who has appealed a decision, continue to have access to the support they need, and that is my commitment. So, just conscious of the time, in collaboration with stakeholders, you'll be aware that the Welsh Government has developed the EU citizens' rights forum to replace the previous EU settlement scheme Wales co-ordination group. I attended this new forum in October with our stakeholders, and I also acknowledged the positive role of local authorities. The remit of the group is now wider, covering not only the EU settlement scheme, but also access to rights and other issues that may impact EU citizens with pre-settled or settled status. So, this is the start of important work.

Also, a very positive change, a substantive change in policy, which came about as a result of the High Court judgment regarding the rights of pre-settled status holders, resulted in a second round of changes to the EUSS. So, now, automatically, EU citizens with pre-settled status will automatically have their status extended to five years before it expires, if they've not already applied for settled status. Additionally, a process is implemented where individuals with pre-settled status who have a digital footprint with the Department for Work and Pensions or His Majesty's Revenue and Customs will automatically have their statuses upgraded to settled status, without the need to make another application.

So, in conclusion, as I said, we are moving forward, I believe, in the right direction. This debate today is important. We have a reset set of relationships with the new UK Government. The independent monitoring authority—I congratulated them on their High Court win for EU citizens—will continue to ensure that EU citizens are treated fairly. We support the IMA. Their annual report is really important for the EU specialised and joint committees, which, of course, was laid only last month. It showcases—

Cabinet Secretary.

—the great work that is being—

Cabinet Secretary, you must come to an end. I've been very generous.

—undertaken across Wales. Diolch yn fawr. Thank you for your time today.

I call on Jenny Rathbone to reply to the debate.

Thank you very much. It's good to know that Joel James, in his role as a councillor, was promoting the EUSS scheme, and that's something that all councillors and, indeed, Senedd Members and MPs should have been doing.

We have to remind ourselves that not all people read newspapers, not all people have smartphones, and 25 per cent of the population have considerable literacy challenges. So, understanding about the need to apply for something that you never ever thought you would have to do, if you got here in the 1950s and 1960s, well before we joined the European Union, that is why it has proved so difficult to be able to say with certainty that everybody is covered by this. And as Sioned Williams listed, there are so many people who are going to have difficulty: those with mental illness; those who've been subject to slavery and domestic abuse. These are not people who can go down the road to a lawyer and say, 'Give me a hand filling in this application.' And what is the most scary thing is that this isn't just about the rights of the European citizen and their ability to stay in this country, but also the rights of their children to stay in this country, which they may be completely oblivious of.

We also, in our report, highlight some of the digital errors that have already occurred, which are bound to occur in a digital-only system, particularly when it's a pilot. So, for example, some people have been refused status and have been marked down as having had accepted status. Well, probably the reverse has also taken place. Some people have quite erroneously been charged for health services that they absolutely—. About 141,000 were being charged for NHS treatment, and we were very pleased that, when we wrote to the Cabinet Secretary, she went around every single one of the health boards to ensure that nobody in Wales was charged, or if they were, the money was handed back. So, that is very important. But it just highlights how it is not possible to say, 'This is a perfect system and it'll all be sorted out.'

I suppose one of the things that I didn't mention in my earlier remarks is the removal of the right to appeal.

Just on that point that you made there about health charges, something else that came up in the report were the charges that are sometimes wrongly made on students also, that they're not being charged home fees, when actually they should be as a European citizen, and they're also having trouble about renting. So, it would be good to hear that the Welsh Government are going to do some work with, perhaps, Universities Wales and Medr around that as well, because equally it's stopping people from taking up opportunities, isn't it?

I absolutely agree with you, and I see the Cabinet Secretary nodding, and I'm sure that we'll be able to work together on that. It's very good to have the support of Mike Hedges in his capacity as Chair of the LJC and indeed Delyth Jewell of the culture committee, which has international relations in its remit. I think it's so important that we see this in the round, and you're quite right to highlight the maps, the graphics, and the data that have been compiled by our Research Service and our clerks, because this is crucial to understand what is a really, really complicated story, actually. That is why we absolutely have to continue talking about these matters.

Jane Dodds highlighted that there was a promise made in 2016, amongst so many promises—what about that £230 million a week or whatever for the NHS? But we have an obligation to deliver for people who are otherwise going to suffer injustices, and also to thank all the people who continue to fight on behalf of European citizens to ensure that they're not suffering injustice: Travelling Ahead, Settled, the3million, the people who are part of the citizens' forum of the IMA. These are people who are committed to ensuring that all European citizens are given the justice they deserve. And we all have to ensure that when we are talking to people, we don't hold back in asking them, 'Did you apply?', 'Have you got settled status?' It's only a quick conversation, but it's really important, and I'm fully aware that this is a question that I need to continue to ask of my neighbours who are quite elderly, and it may impact on their children too.

So, I think the removal of the right to appeal is a really serious matter, because mistakes do get made, as are outlined in our report, and I think it's really important that we now have a really good relationship with the UK Government because it gives us the ability to raise matters and say, 'This doesn't feel right.' And we have to counter the anti-immigration discourse that's going on, with that wonderful exhibition that is still available at the foot of the Senedd steps, which I believe Seema Malhotra visited. It's fantastic that she came here and met so many of the relevant people on this. We need to continue to champion the rights of European citizens to remain here and to continue to be valuable members of our community.

The proposal is to note the committee's report. Does any Member object? No. The motion is therefore agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

We'll move on now to item 8, which is a debate on petition P-06-1400, 'Fair and Adequate Resourcing of General Practice in Wales'. The Deputy Presiding Officer has decided to limit contributions by Members to three minutes to allow as many to be called as possible in the time available. The limits for the Chair and Cabinet Secretary remain unchanged, so I'd be grateful if Members could stay within the time limits so that I can call everyone. So, I will now call on the Chair of the committee to move the motion. Carolyn Thomas.

Diolch. On behalf of the Petitions Committee, thank you for the opportunity to introduce this debate today on GP funding. The petition was created by Lewis Williams of the British Medical Association as part of their campaign, 'Save our Surgeries'. It collected 21,620 signatures. The petition text reads,

'Fair and Adequate Resourcing of General Practice in Wales.

'General Practice in Wales is under significant and growing strain. GP numbers are declining, demand is rising, and practices are struggling to recruit and retain staff.

'General practice is being forced to try and cope with inadequate resources, an unsustainable workload, and a workforce under pressure across the whole of Wales, with some areas in crisis.

'Current inadequate capacity is a product of longstanding workload, workforce, and well-being issues, which correlate to the chronic underfunding of general medical services.

'BMA Cymru Wales's Save Our Surgeries campaign asks Welsh Government to commit to a rescue package for General Practice, to provide GPs and their patients with the support they need.'

At the end of September, the Health and Social Care Committee held a workshop with GPs to inform a piece of work they'll be doing later on this year. At the event, the message from GPs was clear: the current funding model is unsustainable. Over the last two decades, while the number of face-to-face appointments, digital contacts and phone calls has risen, the complexity of the work has been transformed, expenses have risen, and the cost of premises has leapt up. Yet the share of the health budget spent on GP services has shrunk. This is the background to the BMA's campaign.

There are no easy solutions. We know that money is tight across public services, even after the budget, but we have to find a way to ensure the long-term viability of primary care services and of our GP surgeries. We know that workload, workforce, and well-being pressures are increasing in general practice, and I look forward to hearing what that means in different parts of Wales as we hold this debate today. In some areas, recruitment and retention is their main worry, but in other areas it's the crumbling fabric of buildings. In others, it is the rapidly ageing population or a growing workload that isn't matched by an equivalent rise in capacity. But underlying all of these is money to pay for the services that we all want to see.

As I mentioned earlier, the health committee will be doing further work on GP services later in the year, but I hope that today's debate provides an opportunity to set the table for that in-depth piece of work, to highlight some of the challenges, and maybe even suggest some solutions. I look forward to hearing the debate and the Minister's response. Thank you.

Can I thank the Chair of the Petitions Committee for opening today's debate on fair and adequate resourcing of general practice in Wales, and the committee as a whole for considering this really important petition that Lewis Williams, as you rightly pointed out, Chair, submitted? I think the significance of this petition is shown through the number of people who signed it—over 21,000, I believe. And we sometimes forget, in terms of Senedd petitions, that's a huge number. We sometimes look at it in light of some of the issues around 20 mph, and forget that 21,000 people signing this petition shows the importance that general practice has to the people of Wales, and to communities up and down this country. It's clear that people across the country also feel that general practice is underfunded and is forced to cope with resources that are inadequate and a workload that is frankly unsustainable. I'm sure many of us in this Chamber today have heard from GPs directly how unsustainable the existing situation is for them.

As it stands, we know that 8 per cent of NHS Wales funding goes towards GPs and GP practice, a percentage that is actually lower than levels from 2005-06, which I think probably reflects a little bit of the value in which GPs are perhaps held at from Welsh Government at the moment. If they were properly valued and properly understood, then there would be resources to match that. The reason why we've seen over 100 surgeries in Wales shut down in the last 12 years, with no real sign of reversal, is exactly because of the funding not matching the pressures that they are under. And that's really impacting people across Wales, in particular in rural Wales. I'm looking forward to the short debate that James Evans will be leading later this evening on the impact of GP closures in rural parts of Wales.

I was pleased with the timing of this petition as well, because the Welsh Conservatives led a debate based on the BMA Wales Save Our Surgeries campaign just in the last couple of months. I echo again the calls that we made in that debate, including asking for the Welsh Government to ensure there is a clear workforce strategy to ensure that we do train, recruit and retain enough GPs for the long term. Because we know that they have a core role in improving the well-being of citizens, and, importantly, preventing ill health. We know that prevention is so much better than cure. Get it right in the first place at a primary care level in our communities—that's exactly the right solution. So, again, in closing, I thank the petitioner and repeat the calls for the Welsh Government to commit the funding to GPs to deliver the sustainable services that we all want to see in our communities. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

I'm very pleased that this petition has been submitted before the Senedd. It does draw attention to a problem that does affect our health service. I've had more than 600 e-mails across my region, from some who work in this area, but also from a number of people who are very reliant, and there are great concerns. As Mabon ap Gwynfor, as our health spokesperson, has mentioned a number of times, primary care services are a vital part of the preventative agenda, and this will become more prominent over the next decades, as a result of the demographic changes in our population.

According to the most recent statistics, there were 372 GP services in Wales at the end of June, which is 14 fewer than when the BMA launched the Save Our Surgeries campaign. It is clear, therefore, that these consistent warnings about a shortage of provision across our communities has fallen on deaf ears within Government. I'm sure that all of us in this Chamber will have heard concerns from our constituents about the lack of availability of GP services, particularly those of us who represent rural constituencies, for example, where the availability of a community facility is more of a luxury these days.

In terms of workforce, Wales is still 500 GPs short in terms of the OECD average. It is clear, therefore, as the petition highlights, that the Welsh Government does need to address the huge underinvestment that there has been in this sector over a period of a decade. Part of the solution is to restore the percentage of the health budget to GPs back to historic levels of 8.7 per cent, and we in Plaid Cymru do urge the Government to use the additional funding that has emanated from the UK budget for health to deliver that.

But funding is only one part of the solution. We also need to consider reforms to the structure and strategy within the sector in order to cope with the increase in demand that we will experience. Over recent years we have seen a tendency of large companies, often located outside of Wales, starting to step into the market of GP services, buying and running a number of surgeries. In the Aneurin Bevan area, eHarleyStreet is a clear example of this. This continues with the damaging trend of profits being taken out of the health system into private pockets, and also makes the provision vulnerable.

Clearly, we need some sort of plan to guard against this possibility of losing more and more of our GPs, and the important surgeries in our communities. We also want to see more collaboration between services in order to respond more effectively to an increase in demand. Could I therefore ask, as the Government considers this petition, what consideration has been given to the fact that there are so many concerns expressed? Does the Government accept that there is a crisis in terms of GP services? They feel that this isn't being recognised by the Government at the moment, and I want that clarity today from the Cabinet Secretary.

I think this is a very welcome petition, because all health boards need to spend more money and energy and time on primary care. I just want to have a quick look at some of the social justice issues involved in this, because there are 389 practices in Wales, unless one or two have closed in the meanwhile, but the Deep End project is looking at those serving the super-output areas of deprivation, and they have on average 30 per cent more patients per GP than those in the 100 least deprived practices.

These are really important figures. If you look at those who are delivering healthcare as a whole—so not just the doctors but all the other allied professionals—there's an even more stark difference. Those having to serve the populations with the biggest health challenges, who are getting sicker earlier, with less health literacy, have fewer people. I very much welcome the fact that the Petitions Committee is going to look further at this, because I think there's a great deal more that we need to say about this.

We clearly need to have a lot more multidisciplinary working, because there simply aren't enough GPs or, indeed, nurses to go around. We have to think outside the box. We need to grow our own. We need to recruit from our own communities, rather than bringing in people from outside, and give them recruitment and retention pathways so that they are staying in the communities that they have grown up in and are very much less likely to leave. So, I think there's a great deal more that we can do on this, and we need to come back to this and have a fuller debate, which we can't do within this short time. 

I'm glad to be talking in this debate to try to highlight the importance of this petition. Our GP services in Wales are in chaos and it's simply not good enough. As my colleague Sam Rowlands has already said, 21,000 people have signed this petition, calling on the Government to offer a rescue package to GPs. It's high time that this Labour Government took responsibility and acted. Across Wales, we hear stories of people unable to get appointments. I know from my own surgery that it's the same old story, day after day—a booking system that seems to be designed to make it impossible to get help, and that means that patients are waiting around for hours for a callback just to see if you have an appointment, the alternative being an online system, which of course immediately wipes out many of the elderly and those with disabilities. 

A GP in Torfaen recently e-mailed to point out that Wales lost 51 full-time equivalent GPs between September 2023 and March 2024. In a recent survey, 37 per cent of GPs in Wales reported that they may not be in the profession in five years' time. This GP went on to say that 74 per cent of their members believe that they could alleviate hospital pressures if only they had more staff and resources. GPs across my region are crying out for help and some sense from this Government. It is clear that general practice could be a big part of the solution to the NHS crisis, but this just isn't happening. We see new homes being built, but where are the schools and GP services to match? Houses are being built, but no thought to the already stretched infrastructure to meet the demand, particularly in rural areas where there are fewer practices. Community pharmacies can play a key role in helping here, but where is the information campaign to let people know about the increased services that they can offer to try to alleviate this and help our GPs? 

In Wales, we've already lost 100 GP sites in the last 12 years, yet patient numbers continue to rise. Why can't we be innovative here, bringing in different offers, capabilities, to relieve GPs and, of course, A&E, for onsite referrals there and then? We need to know exactly how much more GPs will be paying in national insurance contributions. The Minister should have this information already, but if he doesn't, I call on him to find out and let us know as soon as possible. Cabinet Secretary, our GP practices need proper support. Their workload is unsustainable. Our constituents need access to GPs, not more of the same excuses, and I urge the Minister to address this growing crisis in this vital primary care. 

I welcome this debate—a primer debate, I think, for a lot of the work that's going to be happening through the Health and Social Care Committee, coming down the line. We can listen to contributions that are being made across the Chamber and I think we're all in agreement that there is an issue within GP practices, whether that's a funding issue or a lack of GPs. I think the frustration for GPs comes from the fact that, despite all of us agreeing that there's an issue, we still have yet to come up with the solution. 

I want to focus in particular on locum GPs. This was an issue that was raised with me by a number of GPs in Bridgend. Data from England tells us a bit of a shocking story. A survey carried out by the BMA has found that nearly four out of five locum GPs can't find work, despite patient waiting times reaching record highs. That's in England, but here in Wales the symptoms of the same crisis have been visible for a while, yet the data doesn't seem to be available, and I believe that this should be investigated a bit further. Anecdotally, I've been told of locums in Wales looking to other fields. Some are considering jobs in retail and driving taxis. At a time when we're crying out for GPs and we all accept that there's a shortage of GPs, this situation is madness. Trained doctors are being forced out of healthcare by what is essentially a funding structure that fails to recognise their value, because that's ultimately what this does come down to. The situation with local GPs and sessionals is, as one GP described to me, the canary in the coal mine, warning us of the potential for a much larger collapse. That collapse will happen if we continue down this path. The ripple effects will extend beyond GPs to reception staff, practice nurses, not replacing those partners that leave practices.

So, without a change, we will face longer waits for appointments, more patients forced to seek emergency care due to lack of GP access, and an NHS under unbearable strain. So, we can't afford to overlook these warning signs when it comes to locum GPs, and I would hope that the Cabinet Secretary is aware of the situation in relation to locums, and I would appreciate his thoughts on how we can get to grips with this particular issue.

I'd like to take this time to briefly focus on GP funding in Cardiff North. Across the last year, I visited many surgeries in Cardiff North, in Llandaff North, Llanishen, Gabalfa, Heath and Birchgrove and others, and the story has been the same message from all of them: they're struggling to maintain safe levels of service and are worried about being able to continue. I'd like to pay tribute to their commitment to their patients and to their desire to improve their services, particularly including preventative work, which obviously they're in an absolutely ideal position to provide, but there's so much more that they would like to do and there's so much more that I think we would want them to do, but it's enabling that to happen, I think, is the key answer. They are struggling to meet demand, they've all said the same thing, and they've all had to mostly reduce their staff, and this means that people are not receiving the service they need or that GPs want to provide.

Now, there is this particular funding issue that has been raised with me about funding for GP practices in Cardiff North, and they maintain that they are in a particular position that they receive less funding per head than other practices throughout Wales, and one GP partner told me that North Cardiff is in the bottom 1 per cent of funded practices in the UK. And I'm told that this is because the Carr-Hill formula, which calculates the funding received by GP practices, is outdated and urgently needs reforming. So, I wondered if it is possible for the Cabinet Secretary to comment on this formula in his contribution to the debate. That is something that has been raised very strongly with me from the Cardiff North GPs.

So, in conclusion, I welcome this debate very much, and I think that what we've got to do is shift to the preventative agenda, and I think the key to the preventative agenda is GP practices, and what we're able to do in conjunction with that. The expansion of what pharmacies are able to do is obviously a big step forward, the additional funding for community nursing teams, again, is a big step forward, and I think we've got to think of all that as a whole.

The wording of this petition is not new to me. I was the sponsor of an event, working alongside the BMA, back in July, which recognised it was one year on at that point since the BMA launched their Save our Surgeries campaign, calling on the Welsh Government to introduce an urgent rescue package as part of their Save our Surgeries campaign. So, over the years, many constituents of mine, GPs I have spoken to, have talked about the significant pressures that they're under, and how they're also competing with the issues about not being able to recruit staff. So, we do need the restoration of NHS funding for general practice before we see a total collapse of this service in Wales. I don't think that that's scaremongering at all, that's the reality.

Now, Carolyn Thomas in her opening to this debate today referred to the Health and Social Care Committee doing work in this area, and that's right, the committee members agreed to do that earlier this year. But not only did they do that, it was other Members that were writing to the committee asking us to consider this work as well. There were several other Members contacting the committee in that regard. And we held a stakeholder session back in September. We held it in private session; we wanted GPs, nurses, other health professionals to be as open and frank with us as possible, so we held that in a private session, and they were very frank and candid with us. And the messages that they gave to us as a committee were that funding pressures are putting the sustainability of general practice at risk; inflationary pressures and the cost of managing and maintaining buildings are further squeezing GP budgets; practices are struggling to recruit and retain staff at all levels, from GP partners to admin staff; and GPs and others working in general practice are managing increasing complexity in their workload as more healthcare services are moved into the community. So, the committee is in the process now of developing its terms of reference. Once it's done, of course, we'll put a formal call-out for evidence.

But it struck me that what I just read out—I think we're all aware of those issues, and, as Luke Fletcher pointed out in his contribution, it's the solutions that we need. I think it's going to be a really complicated piece of work for us as a health committee, because I don't think finding the solutions to some of these issues is going to be incredibly easy for us. That's going to be a challenge in itself.

I would like to begin by thanking BMA Cymru for their Save our Surgeries campaign. I was there at the Senedd reception back in July that Russell has just referred to, and it was incredibly sad to hear the stories of GPs who face incredible challenges in 2024 and beyond. GPs are the first point of contact in the life of a patient, and are often now intervening more, given the longer waiting lists. Thank you, diolch yn fawr iawn, to all of those who work in surgeries as GPs, practice managers, nurses and additional staff. It is hard going, and we are grateful to you.

The statistics, in their most recent report, paint a sad picture of the state of GPs and their practices here in Wales. But GPs are not statistics, they're our friends, our neighbours, our colleagues, and their well-being should not be an afterthought. Their well-being, physical, mental and emotional, is crucial if we are to ensure that they work to the best of their abilities. This is impossible without adequate financing of GP practices.

Six months ago, I visited the GPs in Brecon and Radnorshire and heard from them all about the significant challenges in recruiting and retaining GPs in rural areas. I have called, and I call again, for a GP rural premium to recognise the significant and additional challenges for GPs in our rural areas. But I finish with a very specific question for the Cabinet Secretary: will you continue to fund and recruit GPs through the innovative practice and programme that there was previously? It was a really innovative programme that allowed GPs in rural areas to both be recruited and to be retained. Diolch yn fawr iawn, Dirprwy Lywydd dros dro.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care, Jeremy Miles.

Thank you, acting Deputy Presiding Officer. GP provision provides crucial preventive services, and I'm very grateful to GPs and their staff for working so hard every day. For many people, as we've discussed during the debate, the surgery is their first and main contact with the health service, and it's very understandable, therefore, that a petition that expresses concern about the future of surgeries has attracted so much interest. We all want assurances that our local GP will always be there to provide the care that we need, and I want to be clear that we believe that GPs will continue to be central to primary care now and for the future, particularly as we will want to move more care from hospitals and into local communities.

The BMA Cymru campaign Save our Surgeries and the petition do highlight some very concerning aspects of working in this area today. I want to reassure GPs that we have heard the messages about the huge demands and the pressure on staff welfare, as Jane Dodds mentioned. We are taking steps to address these issues.

Surgeries in Wales see around 1.5 million people every month, which is an astonishing number, but perhaps not every one of the 1.5 million needed to see a GP. They could be seen by another member of the primary care team or by another primary care service. As a Government, we have been developing primary care and community care services to make it easier for people to get the right care more quickly from the right person at the right time.

The new united contract that was introduced last year was developed to recognise that GPs are part of the broader care system that I mentioned. It provided useful clarity as to which services every surgery in Wales should provide.

Dirprwy Lywydd, part of making general practice sustainable is about allowing GPs to care for their patients more efficiently and relieving some of the pressure and demand they're experiencing, by working more collaboratively with other primary care services—a matter I discussed in my recent meeting with the Royal College of General Practitioners. In the last year, pharmacies have created additional capacity by delivering more than 600,000 consultations. Urgent primary care centres have been developed across Wales to help respond to demand and are now seeing more than 70,000 people a month. We've invested £5 million a year in allied health professionals and more than £8 million to increase the community nursing workforce at weekends. This will further increase the support available to GPs via community resource teams, whilst helping people living with frailty. We've also targeted investment at increasing staffing in general practice to improve access for patients. An additional £4 million has been made available via health boards over the past three years to support practices to increase staffing resources. This funding enables GP practices to take on additional administrative and clinical staff. And we are continuing to invest in multidisciplinary teams to ensure that people can access a wider group of primary care health professionals, including practice nurses, physiotherapists and pharmacists.

In response to the point that Julie Morgan made in the debate, I am aware of a report from Cardiff University, which looks at the distribution of funding and addresses the question of the Carr-Hill formula, which she rightly identifies as being the formula that provides most of the practice-level funding to GPs. Whilst I am not able to comment on the specific situation in Cardiff North, though I'm very happy to look into it, I'm also aware that there is a connection between that report and Deep End Cymru, to which Jenny Rathbone referred in her contribution, which has done very valuable work in helping us understand exactly that challenge of the pressures on practices serving particularly disadvantaged communities. And I'm glad that the Government has been able to contribute to the funding of that work.

I know Members are concerned about the future of the GP workforce. We've increased the number of GP trainees—199 were recruited last year and we continue to provide financial incentives in the way that Jane Dodds was asking about to encourage GPs to work in areas where recruitment has traditionally been difficult. We are also reviewing the National Health Service (General Medical Services—Premises Costs) (Wales) Directions 2015 to support investment in GMS facilities across Wales, which will help improve the sustainability and safety of patients and staff in GP practices.

Dirprwy Lywydd, we've made a choice to commit £1 billion over the course of this Senedd term to clear the backlog and reduce waiting times, which built up during the pandemic. By necessity, this means that a larger proportion of funding has gone to secondary care. Redressing this imbalance will be a priority for future—[Interruption.]

The Minister has—[Inaudible.]—time, so he's not going to give way, because I won't let him.

—funding decisions, and we are committed to the principle of providing more care closer to home.

Dirprwy Lywydd, I'm grateful to you for allowing me to speak a little beyond my time. I would like to say that I'm grateful for the relationship we have with the GP profession in Wales, and we'll continue to work with GP representatives to ensure that Wales has a sustainable model for general medical services as part of a thriving primary care model into the future.

I call on Carolyn Thomas to reply to the debate.

I'd like to thank the Members for their responses. Sam Rowlands and Laura Anne highlighted the number of signatures—21,000—so it shows how important this issue is and that funding is not actually matching the pressures as well. Everybody spoke about the importance of prevention at the primary level and so did the Cabinet Secretary in his response. Rural communities, in particular, are an issue, and Jane Dodds asked for a GP rural premium and mentioned a programme as well regarding the retention of GPs, and I think that might be something that the Health and Social Care Committee could look at.

We also need to look at restoring the infrastructure as well—so, it's not just GPs themselves, it's also the buildings—and Heledd mentioned corporate services taking over, putting profit before services in some rural areas, and better collaboration is needed.

Jenny mentioned that it's also a social care issue. She highlighted that health inequalities are also need-linked as well to certain areas, so, where there are bigger health inequalities, there might be more need as well, and mentioned the Deep End project as well.

I think the issue was that, the people serving the poorest communities, there are fewer of them, serving people with much greater need.

Thank you. Thank you for that clarification. Laura Anne mentioned also the booking system, and that getting an appointment is still difficult in some areas, so we need to look at shifting resources. You know, very often, new homes are being built, but the infrastructure doesn't always follow. 

Julie Morgan spoke about this funding formula—the Carr-Hill funding formula—which I hadn't heard about before. We did have a response from the Cabinet Secretary, but maybe that's something that we just need to pick up on further. Russell, thank you for coming in, as Chair of the Health and Social Care Committee. You talked about the inquiry you've done, looking at building on those terms of reference ready for the inquiry taking place next year. 

I'd like to thank the Minister for his response, speaking about the importance of primary and community care services, making sure that the focus is on that. Also, he spoke about staff welfare, which is really important, and the keenness to work with GPs, going forward, and support them.

This is an issue that won't be solved this afternoon, but it has given us all a chance to reflect, before our own budget is finalised, on an area facing considerable pressures. It isn't the only area crying out for additional funding. Increasingly, as a Petitions Committee, we see petitions being used to highlight those areas where funding is disappearing or in too-short supply. Today's debate has given us a chance to take the pulse of GPs' surgeries and to hear some of the urgent issues that they're facing.

The draft budget will be published later this year, and the health committee's work, I believe, will start in 2025. This debate is not the last word on the issue, and I hope it's the start of a renewed focus on primary healthcare in Wales. Thank you to everybody who's taken part and thank you to the petitioners. 

The proposal is to note the petition. Does any Member object? No. The motion is, therefore, agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Item 9 this afternoon is the Welsh Conservatives debate: the Welsh Government's response to the UK Government budget. I call on Peter Fox to move the motion.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd, and I move the motion in the name of Darren Millar. Forty billion pounds—that's how much additional taxation Labour have levied against the people of the United Kingdom. Frankly, I've been shocked at how disingenuous the Labour Government in Westminster has been surrounding this budget. Even the Institute for Fiscal Studies have said that Labour knew the broad outlines of the financial challenges the country faced, but they refused to confront them in their manifesto or pre-election statements.

It's astonishing that one of the first things that the Labour Government did was strip the vital heating support from our pensioners, a move that we are told could see 4,000 premature deaths in Wales. Now, this is a move that every single Welsh Labour MP supported and a move that Labour Members here have failed to condemn.

The Labour Party promised not to raise taxes on working people, and have conveniently decided that business owners do not count as working people, despite the fact that many are struggling and do not take more than the minimum wage home. The Chancellor promised not to alter her fiscal rules to enable more borrowing, yet now we have billions of pounds added to the country's debt through her blatant fiddling of her own fiscal rules.

Contrary to what Labour would have everyone believe, this budget is profoundly anti-growth. Now, we know that Welsh businesses are already saddled with the highest business rates in Great Britain, and now the IFS has highlighted the fact that employers will have to pay an additional £900 for each employee on the median average earnings; even an employee on the minimum wage will cost employers an additional £770.

Now, the chief economist of the Institute of Directors has said, and I quote:

‘A hike in national insurance represents a straightforward increase in business costs. It is essentially the equivalent of a poll tax on companies, and takes no account of whether a business is profitable or not. At a time when business confidence is low, hiring plans have already been hit, and vacancies are falling, this will hit employment prospects and earnings.’

His words, not mine. And this sting will be particularly damaging for the economy of Wales, where we already have the highest rate of unemployment in the United Kingdom.

I hope that the Labour Government here in Cardiff Bay takes the time to contemplate the damage this policy will have on businesses in Wales and implement tax cuts of their own. At the very least, we need to ensure that business rate relief for the hospitality, retail and leisure sector is in line with what is on offer in England, so that the businesses here are not punished for operating in Wales.

Labour's tax rises are also set to hit rural communities, and will rip the heart out of family farms, despite what has been said, causing irreparable damage to our rural economy and, most importantly, our food security. This isn't the first time that Labour have abandoned the people of Wales when it's politically convenient. After years of calling for billions of pounds—we've heard it in this Chamber time and time again—in consequentials from HS2, Labour's Secretary of State in Wales is happy to do a complete 180 degree u-turn, saying Wales shouldn't get these levels of consequentials anymore. At the same time, Labour Members here are happy to call for comparative pennies compared to the billions they used to call for in the past.

One thing we were disappointed not to see in the budget was funding allocated to the electrification of the north Wales line, a move that was promised—[Interruption.]—a move that was promised by the previous Conservative Government.

Will you take an intervention on that?

Yes, Alun.

I'm interested that you make that point, because I wrote to Network Rail, of course, when the UK Government, the Conservative UK Government, made an announcement of £1 billion to be spent on the electrification of the north Wales main line, and what Network Rail told me was that no money existed, there was no budget, the UK Government hadn't instructed them to do any design work and nothing had been done on it for over a decade.

The commitment was there from the Conservative Government to do it and it would have been—[Interruption.] It would have been carried forward, and it would provide a massive boost for the north Wales economy.

Will you take an intervention?

Yes, I will, Darren.

Thank you very much indeed. I seem to remember the current Cabinet Secretary for finance making a clear commitment over a decade ago to spend money on a brand-new hospital in Rhyl, which has completely been abandoned and not budgeted for in the Welsh Government's own budget. Will you agree that that's a shocking hypocrisy on his part, not to be making that money available at a time when he's sneering about the previous UK Government and the billions it wanted to invest in Wales, including in high-speed rail services in the north?

I agree it's disappointing when people are misled in Wales and nothing comes as a result of that. What do we know? What we do know is that Labour's tax-and-spend policy will inevitably come back to bite the people of Wales, and while this additional borrowing may artificially inflate the economy in the short term, when this borrowed money runs out, because it will, growth is set to remain largely unchanged in the long run, with the economy set to grow less than was predicted in March. The influx of borrowed money may look good now, but the proof will be in the pudding.

We need the Welsh Government to use any additional consequentials to effectively tackle our NHS waiting times, which successive health Ministers have clearly lost control of. This will involve a holistic approach to our health service, taking into account the increasing pressures on social care. And I know the Cabinet Secretary has mooted similar.

We also need to see additional funding allocated to our education system, which has clearly been let down by 25 years of Labour mismanagement. But, ultimately, we need—[Interruption.] Oh, sorry, yes I will, Joyce.

Thank you. I just want to ask you for an honest answer about taxpayers' money being used for the benefit of the taxpayers. Would you condemn the mismanagement of your Government, your previous Government, by allowing Michelle Mone to benefit personally from personal protective equipment profits by £60 million?

Sorry. I couldn't quite hear the last bit of that, Joyce.

Just agree with her.

Sixty million pounds of PPE profit going directly to Michelle Mone: will you condemn that, because that was taxpayers' money being thrown into the pocket of one individual to no benefit whatsoever?

We could stand here for hours, Joyce, talking about how money should have been spent in different ways. I could probably highlight millions of pounds spent in Wales by Welsh Government that perhaps could have been spent in a different way, so I don't agree with you, Joyce.

But, ultimately—[Interruption.] But, ultimately, we need a better funding formula, something most of us here are agreed on, one that seeks a needs-based formula that replaces the current Barnett system, and I think we all agree that needs rethinking.

Finally, I know the First Minister has said that she has as much influence over the next President of the United States as she does Keir Starmer, but I think that is an absolute cop-out; we all know that. Ultimately, what Wales needs right now is Labour Members here willing to stand up to their counterparts in Westminster and stop this raid on people's pockets. It's clear—[Interruption.] It is clear that the Labour MPs here in Wales do not want to, but I would hope that the Senedd Members in here would reconsider. Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd.

I have selected the six amendments to the motion. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendments 2, 3, 4, and 5 will be deselected. I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Welsh Language to move formally amendment 1, tabled in the name of Jane Hutt.

I move.

I call on Heledd Fychan to move amendments 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6, tabled in her name.

Thank you very much, Dirprwy Lywydd. It is ironic, is it not, that the Conservatives have brought forward this debate today and that they are complaining about a budget that includes a better settlement for Wales than if they were still in charge in London. Their austerity policies had a damaging and destructive impact on so many in our communities, normalising situations where people were unable to afford the basics, such as food and a warm home. There is a legacy of seeing foodbanks normalised and more numerous than McDonald's; a legacy of rising child poverty; a legacy of a shattered economy following Liz Truss's appalling budget and the after-effects of Brexit.

Also, while welcoming the fact that the Tories support Plaid Cymru's position in terms of HS2 funding and in terms of reforming the Barnett formula, it would be remiss of me not to point out that their masters in London had 14 years to change this and that they chose not to.

These are early days when it comes to the new Labour Government in Westminster, as the Cabinet Secretary reminded us yesterday, and, without doubt, Wales's expectations are high in terms of what this will mean for this Senedd, following years of hearing how different things would be with two Labour Governments in power. There are positive signs in that regard. The additional funding is to be welcomed, along with a number of elements that I made reference to yesterday. But, of course, there are other things that we want to see the new Labour Government achieve, and this is our opportunity today, through this motion, with our amendments, to send a clear message from this Senedd in terms of our expectations.

The Cabinet Secretary responded robustly to me yesterday when I said that austerity continues in this budget, even though I quoted others who share this view, who are not politicians. But there is no denying the fact that continuing the two-child cap and removing the winter fuel allowance from millions of pensioners is a continuation of austerity. Perhaps it is not the same degree of austerity as was seen under the Tories, but these are harmful policies that affect people in our communities. There is also no doubt that the budget announced last week undermines Labour's pledges during the general election campaign in terms of taxation, something that the Chancellor admitted in an interview at the weekend. And instead of committing to more progressive reforms in terms of taxing the wealthiest in our society, the Keir Starmer Government has set about raising national insurance for employers. The notion that workers will not be affected by this is a complete fiction. The OBR has already estimated that growth in wages and living standards will be damaged over the coming years as a result of this measure. This has also followed this Government's decision to reduce business rates relief from 75 per cent to 40 per cent, so there is a double whammy facing Welsh businesses as a result of Labour's decisions at both ends of the M4. It is therefore essential that the Government assesses the potential impact of the rise in national insurance on businesses in Wales, and in the meantime looks at what support this Government can offer in the wake of this additional funding.

What has also become clear is the impact on the third sector. I would like it if the Cabinet Secretary, in his response today, could answer the questions that I and others asked him yesterday regarding this specific issue, and whether the Government has made an assessment in terms of the impact of this on services that the third sector provides in Wales. This is something that also greatly concerns local government leaders, because of the number of services they are responsible for that are provided by the third sector. Clarity on this is very important, therefore.

It was good to hear yesterday from the Cabinet Secretary that this Government continues to agree with Plaid Cymru on the need to reform Barnett, for the full devolution of the Crown Estate to Wales, and for securing the money owed to Wales in terms of HS2, together with other reforms that are needed, such as on borrowing. Labour may have only been in charge in Westminster for 14 weeks, but they have had 14 years in opposition and 25 years of governing here in Wales to ensure that these changes are implemented, so I really hope that we will see that implemented, and soon.

It is important that we as a Senedd, where there is agreement, continue to work together to demand fairness for Wales. And certainly, this Government will have our support in Plaid Cymru in terms of demanding what is owed to Wales. I therefore hope that this Senedd can today support our amendments, and send a clear message to Westminster that this Senedd wants to see further steps taken to ensure the resources and the powers that we need in order to deliver for our communities.

Let's start by making clear the context within which this first Labour budget is being set: 14 long years of austerity; 14 years of attacks on public services; 14 years of rampant wealth inequality; real-terms wage cuts for workers; a nation-wide housing and rent crisis; councils on the brink; the NHS brought to its knees; sewage wrecking our rivers and seas; debt as a percentage of GDP at its highest rate for more than 60 years; mortgage rates through the roof; energy bills soaring; and more foodbanks than the branches of McDonalds. That is the Conservative legacy, and it's hardly a legacy to be proud of.

The budget is the first major step on the road to repairing the country, and how refreshing it is to have a Government that believes in public services and is honest about the fact that good public services need to be paid for. That payment, yes, is in the form of higher taxes—it's an investment. It's an investment in making the NHS the jewel in the country's crown once again. It's an investment in our schools and the future of our children. It's an investment in building the houses that future generations will call their homes. These are much-needed investments in the very building blocks of our country, as I do keep asking for all the time, but it's really important, and they're investments in the millions of people who work in the public services that we all rely on upon a daily basis.

For Wales, this budget represents the largest real-terms funding settlement for a long, long time. What greater signal can there be that we finally have a UK Government that believes in the potential of Wales and is willing to invest in that potential? These investments are a down payment on a brighter future. We know the long-term impact of investing in public services. We know that a healthier country is a happier one; it's more productive. We know that public transport is one of the biggest weapons that we have in the fight against climate change. We know that investing in sports and leisure facilities is a crucial step in preventing illness. We know that creating a well-educated workforce is the basis for future prosperity. And we know that the security of housing creates certainty and stability.

Fundamentally, Government is about choices. For the last 14 years, we've had a Government that's chosen austerity, a smaller public state, and now we have a Government that chooses investment, a Government that chooses national renewal, and a Government that chooses to believe in the power of public services and people who work in them. This budget isn't just an investment in health, education and housing; it's an investment into the engineers, the doctors, the teachers, the carers, the builders, the nurses, and the children of tomorrow. It is a belief in a better Britain and a commitment to a brighter future, free from the ravages of austerity. We need to build a decent life for people. That's all they ask for—a decent life—and this is what it's all about. Thank you.

Last week’s first attempt at a budget by the UK Labour Government was a sad realisation that we are in for a painful five years, or one term, shall we say. This must surely be described as a budget of broken promises, with a plethora of measures that contradicted their own manifesto pledges by the Rt Hon Sir Keir Starmer, the Prime Minister. He misled, he lied, and he failed to deliver what he had promised the electorate, in writing, in his manifesto, whilst betraying our country, its people and, in particular, the people of Wales.

Most concerning for Wales, of course, is the unprecedented increase in the tax burden. So much for Welsh Labour's constant criticism of the previous Conservative Government. Yes, they were in power for the last 14 years. Thank goodness. A Government that saw a growth in our economy during a Brexit transition, a global COVID pandemic and the war in Ukraine, and faced up to the shocking crisis we are now seeing in the middle east. When Labour came into power, they took over the fastest growing economy in the G7, with inflation down to its lowest level, and interest rates, for those with savings, increasing.

We are now facing, as a result of this budget, a tax burden that is now projected to reach 38.2 per cent of GDP by 2028-29—the highest level since the late 1940s. This is largely a result of a £25 billion increase in national insurance, affecting both the employers and workers too, because the burden gets passed down to employees through lower wages. The budget's own architect, the Rt Hon Rachel Reeves, explained:

'It will mean that businesses will have to absorb some of this through profits and it is likely to mean that wage increases might be slightly less than they otherwise would have been.'

Already, my business owners in Aberconwy take home much less than the national median rate. This policy is going to exacerbate regional economic disparities and drive more Welsh workers towards economic hardship. The OBR has warned that this budget is likely to stoke inflation further, by keeping it above the 2 per cent target until 2029. This will have catastrophic consequences for living standards across Wales. With the cost of living still high, and inflation now on the rise, household budgets will be squeezed even more, making it more challenging for families to cover everyday expenses, increasing reliance on welfare services—maybe that's what you're happy with—and placing further strain on already stretched resources.

The fairytale that two Labour Governments would lead to a more Wales-focused agenda is utterly debunked by this budget. Yesterday, I witnessed here the First Minister and the Cabinet Secretary for finance trying to justify this shambolic first attempt of a budget. At a time when we face energy insecurity, there has been no commitment to the Wylfa project, which was well under way by the previous UK Conservative Government. There is no commitment—[Interruption.] Behave. There is no commitment to a HS2 consequential, despite all the jumping around that Welsh Labour—

Janet—. I'd like to hear the contributions. It's actually her backbenchers that are making so much noise, I can't hear her.

Yes, behave.

So, please let us all have some quiet to hear it.

Yes. And no commitment to improve the north Wales main line. Ironically too, the only place they do seem to be teaming up is to double down on the attack on our farmers: a callous commitment to extract funds from hard-working farming families, many of whom lack the liquidity to cough up a 20 per cent inheritance tax, and will be forced to sell their land to meet their obligations. Can we just be serious for a minute? It has seen the tragic instance of one farmer taking his own life in despair at the prospect of this budget.

Labour's economic plans, characterised by rising taxes and increased borrowing, threaten both immediate economic stability and long-term growth. The OBR has downgraded growth by 0.7 per cent over the next five years, and debt is now projected to reach £3 trillion within two years. That's £3,000,000,000,000. The budget's effects on inflation, investment and real wages mean that Wales, despite its ambitions and resilience, will be left more vulnerable to both economic and environmental setbacks. During the—

Janet, you need to conclude now.

Right, okay. We are now left with the challenging task of mitigating the impacts of this budget. Yesterday, you were really pleased that you're putting all this money into the public sector and that it would grow the economy. The only way you grow the economy is by supporting your businesses who employ more workers, who pay more tax. That tax pays for your public services. End of. It's a disastrous budget and I, for one, will never support it. Diolch.

I think a budget is best judged in the context of the budgets that precede it and follow it. Obviously, there isn't a budget that precedes this one, other than the disastrous Conservative budgets, but the ones that follow it then put it into context, and you need to judge those over those months and years.

So, let's take for example the 1987 budget of Nigel Lawson, which at the time was lauded for £2.6 billion of tax cuts, which led to Margaret Thatcher winning the 1987 general election. But what it also led to was a consumer boom that led us into one of the worst recessions we've seen, and it took us from 1987 to 1997 to recover from, and the Conservatives digging themselves out of their own hole of their making. So, a budget that is welcomed immediately or a budget that is attacked immediately needs to be judged in that context, and this is a budget that fixes the foundations. And it is about ideology. Conservatives want—and I'm sure you'd agree—a small state, limited and constrained public services, and an attempt at lower taxes. But when you attempt to lower taxes, you find out you get the experience that Nigel Lawson had, or you get the experience that Kwasi Kwarteng had under Liz Truss. That is what happens when you try and achieve a small state in a European country.

Labour's priority is to prioritise those public services, and that means that those with the broadest shoulders do need to carry something of the burden, which is where the tax cuts came from, but it can only be judged again over that period of time in which the budget plans take effect. And of course, we also need to think of pensioners. I noticed the comments about the winter fuel allowance, but next year's state pension increase is 4.1 per cent because of the triple lock, and you will see—[Interruption.] And it is happening next year, under this Labour Government, and you will see it. [Interruption.]

The £1,700 million boost to the Welsh Government's budget is also massively significant, and we await with interest the Welsh Government's budget in December, when the Cabinet Secretary will unveil exactly how that will contribute to the many areas that are required as a result of 14 years of austerity. We've also seen a pay boost for up to 70,000 Welsh workers through an uplift to the national living wage—you cannot not support that—and I also welcome the £25 million provided to make coal tips safer. And I actually believe—perhaps I'm feeling a little bit Conservative on this one—that some of that money needs to be matched with private money, and that's what's happening in Caerphilly, with the redevelopment of the coal tip and coal being removed and made safe as a result of private sector involvement. I think we can still have that private sector involvement, which is then supported by £25 million this year from the UK Government.

Would you give way?

Yes.

Thank you. You've referred to a few historical budgets that I'd be happy to debate, but there isn't time. Gordon Brown ignored international warnings, including from the IFS, that if he continued to increase borrowing faster than the growth rate of the economy at a time of growth, there would be a day of reckoning, and he left the biggest deficit in the G20, which has since been defined as austerity, meaning not having enough money. Now, by increasing borrowing in the way we have, by removing headroom and risking bigger cuts in the future, we're risking—

I can't hear you.

Mark, there are too many conversations going on between your benches and the Labour backbenches. Let's have those conversations outside of the Chamber so that we can hear the people speaking in the Chamber. 

Can you not see that we're at risk of repeating history if we continue to increase borrowing in this way and the markets lose confidence? We could end up with bigger cuts, as were forced upon us—

This is not an intervention, it's a speech.

—by Alistair Darling initially and subsequently those who inherited the mess in 2010.

Can I have an extra 10 minutes for that? I really respect Mark Isherwood; I don't want to devalue his comment. I do want to say that it was a global credit crunch that began as a result of the mortgage markets in America.

But I was actually in the House of Commons in 1997, sitting behind both Nigel Lawson and Jeffrey Archer in the gallery. I managed to get a ticket from Allan Rogers for the Lords gallery, sitting behind Nigel Lawson. I remember him, as Gordon Brown was announcing his budget, making a note on his piece of paper as Gordon Brown was speaking, 'Medium-term financial strategy, mark 2'. So, actually what Nigel Lawson was seeing was that the approach by Gordon Brown in 1997 was quite conservative. It was only later that extra money was spent, and that had the biggest ever boost to the NHS that has happened before or since. So, I'm not going to criticise Gordon Brown's budget. The later days of that Government were affected by a global crisis that affected economies across the world. 

I also want to raise something I wanted to say yesterday: two Labour Governments working together. We've also got a Labour council in Caerphilly, and £88 million has been provided to unlock growth in Welsh towns and cities. This is benefiting towns in my constituency, like Caerphilly, Ystrad Mynach and Bargoed. We are seeing an anchor town strategy being introduced by Caerphilly County Borough Council, and that is benefiting those towns in my constituency. 

So, just to wrap up—although I suspect I've probably been underdone for time today—I would say that this is a budget that fixes the foundations. But any budget that takes place in the first year of a Government needs to be put into the context of what happens next, and I'm confident that we're going to start to see some economic growth and classic Keynesian progress.

Today I'm here to expose the real impacts of Labour's reckless changes to agricultural property relief and the threat that they pose to farming families and rural communities here in Wales.

The Chancellor's autumn budget has sent a clear message: Labour is willing to sacrifice the backbone of Welsh agriculture and the communities that depend on it. From April 2026, any family farm valued at over £1 million will face 20 per cent inheritance tax. APR has long allowed family farms to be passed down through generations without damaging tax bills, recognising the central role that they have in feeding the nation and caring for our landscapes. Labour is stripping away that support, claiming that this tax will only impact 25 per cent of farms. That is simply not true, and it just shows how out of touch Labour is with rural Wales. 

Labour's £1 million threshold for relief is shockingly low. Here in Wales, it's almost impossible to buy even a modest family farm for under £1 million. With land prices soaring, the cost for an average family-sized farm easily hits £1.5 million to £2 million and above, and that doesn't include the vital equipment and buildings, which add hundreds and thousands of pounds to that cost. And land alone now costs between £8,000 and £10,000 per acre—far beyond what Labour's thresholds are. [Interruption.] Yes, go on, Lee, why not?

In the debates around tree planting, you and your colleagues often make the case that we can't ask farmers to do things like that because it impedes their ability to act as a business and they should be treated as a business. Well, now they're going to be treated as a business and you're still not happy.

The thing with our benches is that we want to plant the right tree in the right place; what your Government want to do is plant trees everywhere, right the way across Wales. I suggest to the Labour Party that if you want to see the true price of farms in Wales, have a look on Google and type in, 'The price of farms in Wales'. You'll soon find that a lot of them are over £1 million.

A lot of Labour colleagues seem to think that farmers are rich, wealthy landowners. A lot of farmers are not rich, wealthy landowners; they are asset rich and cash poor. In 2018, upland farmers in Wales earned as little as £15,000 a year, working 365 days a year. These are hard-working families, often earning below the national average wage. They rely on tight budgets to keep their farms going. Under Labour’s new tax rules, they could face tax bills as high as £200,000 for simply wanting to pass their family farm on to the next generation. Families could be forced to sell-off land and equipment just to foot the bill, dismantling generations of the Welsh family farming heritage.

And let’s not forget Labour’s broken promises. Just before the election, DEFRA Secretary Steve Reed pledged:

‘We have no intention of changing APR.’

Roll on a few months, now they’re telling farmers, ‘Do more with less’. That just shows where Labour are when it comes to farming in Wales. These changes will push our small family farms out of the industry, while big corporations buy up the farms for greenwashing, just so they can meet their environmental credentials. They don’t care about Wales. They don’t care about the people who live here; they only care about making sure that they look green on the international stage.

And something I’m sure Alun Davies would like to hear about: we only have to look at Europe to see what happens when small family farms are driven out. Between 2005 and 2016, 5.3 million small farms disappeared across the EU, and that was all because of the green agenda being pushed by the European Union. And if Labour have their way, Wales is going to be next. This policy doesn’t just threaten rural Wales, it threatens everybody who depends on the food we produce. When family farms struggle, food prices go up. And as the saying goes: no farmers, no food.

That is simple. This isn’t just a countryside issue, it’s an issue about food security for everybody across the country. It’s about time that Labour reversed their attack on our farming communities. Let’s stand together to protect the backbone of Wales: our farmers, our rural community and our food supply chains. Remember what I say: no farmers, no food.

We’ve had some lively contributions from all sides of the Chamber this evening. I’m slightly concerned that I’m going to let Members down with my contribution now, because what I want to talk about specifically here is business rates. Of course, there is a perception that there is a better deal when it comes to business rates across the border. What we saw in this budget was the potential of business rates reform. We saw that 40 per cent business rates relief as well. I could try my luck and ask the Cabinet Secretary what the Welsh Government’s response will be in its own budget, but I imagine the answer is either going to be, ‘It's too expensive’ or, 'Wait for the budget’, which I think is actually the more likely answer.

But what I really want to get out of the Cabinet Secretary this evening is his thoughts on varying the business rates multiplier. Because prior to this budget, a number of conversations were had between myself and his predecessor around that proposal for varying the multiplier, and she conceded prior to this budget that to match what was on offer in England was too expensive for the Welsh Government. But I really think here we have an opportunity to deliver something for businesses on our high streets—those small businesses, those Welsh businesses—that is going to be relatively inexpensive, so changing the emphasis on who pays what within the business rates system. I’ve said a number of times that supermarkets, out-of-town shopping centres and large chains should be paying more business rates, using that funding then to lower the business rates for some of our smaller businesses, some of our Welsh businesses on the high street, and then by doing that, helping to regenerate the high street.

So, I’d be really interested in his thoughts on what the potential of varying the multiplier would be, and if he agrees with me that this might be something that, although it might seem quite boring, would have a massive impact for those small businesses here in Wales on our high streets.

I agree with my Conservative colleagues. [Interruption.] That's obviously not much of a surprise. Of course I do. This UK Labour autumn budget has been utterly barmy. It's been hugely damaging, breaking election promise after election promise, and it's been hugely damaging to rural communities. It's their first UK budget back in power, and once again, we see their utter contempt for the countryside. So, once again, I feel compelled to speak again on rural issues. Coming from a farming background myself, I know first-hand how hard it is to run a family farm. I've spoken to many farmers now in Monmouthshire and across my region, and they're deeply worried about these changes to the inheritance tax and agricultural property relief. For farmers, as I said yesterday, these are not just numbers on a page, they are threats to their livelihoods, to the future of family farms in Wales.

Yesterday, the First Minister stated that by defending family farms against the budget of tax rises, I was defending the richest in society. Clearly, she does not understand that many farming families are making just above the minimum wage and that high-value assets do not mean a high income. Labour are getting their maths wrong once again, and it is Labour that are misleading the people of Wales by mixing up assets with income. Under the new rules, any farm worth over £1 million will face a massive hit when it's passed down. Farmers want to hand their farms to their children, as my colleagues have just said, and ensure that food in Wales is produced by local families, not industrial companies and not through imports. But any family members hoping to take over a farm will be faced with hundreds of thousands of pounds in a big bill. We could lose an entire generation of farmers this way.

In the run-up to the last general election, at a hustings in Raglan market, my own local MP, Catherine Fookes, dismissed concerns about changes to IHT for farmers, assuring everybody present that Labour would stand up for Welsh farmers. It is therefore incredibly disappointing that just a few months later those same farmers face losing hundreds and thousands of pounds and their livelihoods as a result of these ill-thought-out changes by the Labour Government. I've now written to our Monmouthshire MP asking if she still supports what the UK Government is doing and whether what you're saying in here, in this Chamber, is right, if she understands the impact of this budget on local farms, unlike the Labour Members in this place, and if she will speak up on behalf of farmers in our community who stand to lose so much.

These changes do not target the wealthy as the Government claim; they target the very people the Government said they would protect: the working people. Because farmers are the working people of the countryside. These changes affect a huge percentage of Welsh farms, alongside other budget pressures like the rise in national insurance contributions, which will hit small businesses very hard. Even the Chancellor has admitted that this could mean low pay rises for workers. We also need clarity from this Government. I'd love someone to stand up and tell me now what the budget will mean for the public sector. I urge the Welsh Government and my local MP to support family farms so they can keep doing what they do best: producing food, supporting rural communities and keeping Welsh traditions alive.

Today, Cabinet Secretary, you have a choice. You can once again nod along to the budget that you know will damage Welsh agriculture, that you know will harm Welsh businesses, or you can stand up, speak out for Wales, speak out for farmers and show that this Senedd is not just an echo chamber for Westminster Labour politicians, but a true defender of Welsh interests. I urge Members to support this motion today.

Rachel Reeves inherited a broken economy and has begun the work of repair. This was a necessary budget, necessary because austerity failed. And again, it's been left to a Labour Government to repair the damage. Let's remember the policy of austerity was a political choice. Other choices were available in 2010, but the Conservative and Liberal Democrat Government chose—[Interruption.] Not yet. They chose an approach that history will show caused real harm to our country. They not only shrunk the state, they shrunk the economy: a fall of 2 per cent in GDP. Their austerity policy made us poorer and made our key services poorer. Spending fell in real terms per person every year between 2010 and the start of COVID. At the time an ageing population demanded greater investment in the NHS and social care, Tories flatlined spending budgets.

It was the key workers who had to absorb that through frozen wages. This Labour budget has thrown a lifeline to our front-line services with pay rises to key workers to start to make up for those years of sacrifice. But the Tories have learned nothing from their wipeout, with no contrition, no acknowledgement of the consequences of their chaos. Today's Tory motion, unbelievably, condemns rises in taxes and calls for even more spending. But as the Institute for Fiscal Studies points out, if the Tories had won the election, their first budget would've implemented sharp cuts to spending—a £20 billion cut, according to the Resolution Foundation—and yet they criticise this budget. No wonder voters are cynical about politics.

Dirprwy Lywydd, no budget is perfect. There are aspects I'd like to have seen done differently, but I applaud Rachel Reeves for getting the big call right. I do regret that we've stopped making the case for progressive taxation; the idea that the more you earn—[Interruption.]—no, thank you—the more you should contribute. It's the price we pay for a civilised society. It's an idea with a strong Welsh tradition. It was Jim Griffiths who put in place the national insurance system that funded the welfare state after the war, and Lloyd George, in his people's budget, who placed death duties at the centre of efforts to tackle intergenerational inequality. There's a strong Welsh progressive tradition of using the tax system to advance fairness, and I'd hope that the Liberals and Plaid Cymru would remember that inheritance tax is a progressive tax. But the thing about inheritance tax is that even though very few people pay it—only about 4 per cent of people get captured—polls show that 10 times as many think it'll affect them, and that's what we're seeing again: claims that this budget will destroy the future of the family farm are getting way ahead of the facts. Paul Johnson, the highly respected head of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, says that the complaints are massively overdone and that the tax change will affect a very small number of large farms, he says, and they're still going to be better treated than anyone else in terms of inheritance tax. Those of us who are not farmers—[Interruption.] Yes.

You say 'large farms'. There's a farm up for sale in my constituency, and it's a farm with 20 acres and valued at £1.9 million. Do you actually say that that's a large farm?

Let me go through the figures. Those of us who are not farmers will face death duties of 40 per cent on anything over £325,000 that we pass on. That will not apply to farms. There'll be no inheritance tax to pay on any estate worth under £1 million—a huge tax advantage for farmers. The Financial Times says that last year, just 462 farms inherited more than £1 million across the whole of the UK. And the Government points out that when you add in the other allowances, the real threshold is nearer £2 million. The tax specialist, Dan Neidle, says that it could capture as few as 100 large landowners across the UK. Not many of those, if any, will be in Wales. When wealthy farms are eligible for inheritance tax, they will face a rate of 20 per cent instead of 40 per cent like everyone else. So, let's get this in proportion. I've heard much angst from the rural community about companies and rich individuals buying up farms to exploit tax loopholes. Well, this change is designed to tackle that. If there are genuine issues, if there are unintended consequences, let's address them as they arise, as the example that has just been given.

But let's remember the huge contribution that this budget will make to starting to repair our economy and our public services, because, in this budget, our Senedd will have £21 billion a year to invest in Wales—the largest settlement, in real terms, in the history of devolution.

I think it's really important that we have this debate because the budget is the most political thing that we do in the year, because it's where we say and where we state our priorities—what is important to us, what is important to us as a Parliament and what is important to us as a Government, where we are going to invest and where we are not going to invest, how we are going to raise our funds, and from who and how. It's the most political thing that we do because it speaks to us of our values and our priorities. And I very much, like the previous speaker, welcome the priorities that have been set out in this budget by Rachel Reeves. I welcome that the investment in—[Interruption.] I'll take the intervention, but I very much welcome the investment in schools, which the Member has been calling for for the last four years. I'll take the intervention.

Absolutely. So, you'd agree with your UK Government's stance of punishing pensioners, then.

I very much agree that we should be investing in people and investing in public services. You can't come here—I'll be absolutely clear to the Conservatives—you can't come here every Wednesday afternoon demanding money be spent on anywhere under the sun and then object to taxes. You simply can't do it, and you're not credible when you do so. And the context for this—[Interruption.] No, I won't take another one yet. Don't worry, I'm going to say something that is going to provoke you soon—you can have an intervention then, right? The reality, and the context that this budget was set in, is a context of economic stagnation for a decade and a half. Austerity failed the United Kingdom and Brexit has made austerity far worse. You can look at the numbers. I would advise the Conservatives to read some economic texts and not just their press releases. They really would learn far more, because we have seen poor investment in the public realm and we've seen people becoming poorer as a consequence of Conservative Government policy, not as a side effect, but as a consequence of policy.

But the Welsh Government also has to respond to these challenges, and my questions today are towards the Welsh Government, since we are having this debate in the Welsh Parliament, and I think it's important that we do have this conversation here. I would like to understand how the Welsh Government will take forward issues around the financial framework. We had a good conversation yesterday on this through the statement, and I think there was wide agreement from all parts of the Chamber that the financial framework that we have at the moment is failing Wales. Wales is uniquely badly served by the Barnett formula and by the current financial framework. The Welsh Government has a very clear policy on this, so how now are we going to take this forward? The Cabinet Secretary for finance has spoken about this being a two-stage budget process, so will the Welsh Government, for example, be publishing a White Paper on these matters to enable this Parliament to debate and discuss how the Welsh Government intends to take forward reform of the financial framework?

The second question I have for the Welsh Government is: is there a reform agenda for public services? Both the finance Secretary and others have spoken very clearly and very convincingly of the need for more funding into public services, and I agree with that argument. I accept it completely. But are we simply going to invest more finance and more funding in the public services as they are today, or do we want to reform public services for the future? I'd be interested to know and to understand how the Welsh Government intends to take that forward.

Thirdly and finally in this debate, an economic agenda. Now, where I have difficulties with this budget is that I think it's pretty clear that the UK Government's growth agenda is not sufficient to mitigate the impact of being outside of the European single market. We've seen the impact of Brexit on our economy, we've seen the impact of Brexit on our ability to spend. One of the reasons we have a relatively high tax environment today is because there is far less trade intensity in the United Kingdom as a direct consequence of Brexit. As a consequence of that, you have to raise more taxation in order to raise more income. So, I think we need to have some serious thinking from the Conservatives on this. So, what then is the approach of the Welsh Government to an economic agenda? Does the Welsh Government believe that being outside the single market is going to have an impact on our own tax revenues in the in the coming years? Are we going to have an economic strategy and policy that is based on the work that is being done in London, and how then will we be able to deal with that and debate that?

And finally, let me finish with this. Many of us were burning the midnight oil last night watching the results from the United States, and one of the graphs that stayed with me—one of the graphics that I saw on CNN last night—was a correlation between the fall in support for the Democratic Party and the impact of inflation on wages. Where people had seen the quality and standard of living fall the greatest, so then did the vote for the Democratic Party, and that may be at the heart of the story of the election last night. So, the Welsh Government has 18 months to get these things right, and what we have to do is to invest—

Alun, you need to conclude now, please.

—in our services, our people and our communities to ensure that we have the opportunity to continue doing so in the future.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Welsh Language, Mark Drakeford.

Diolch yn fawr, Dirprwy Lywydd. It was Prime Minister Disraeli who said that the Conservative Party was an organised hypocrisy, and the motion in front of the Senedd today digs deep into that rich tradition. A series of colleagues here have exposed the basis of the advice that we are offered from the Conservative benches, advice drawn on a 14-year period of austerity, which its author, George Osborne, said would last three years and lasted for 14. The longest period in our history of anaemic growth. [Interruption.] I'll make a bit of progress, Joel; I think a minute is a bit early for an intervention. I won't detain the Chamber long with this rehearsal, Dirprwy Lywydd, because others have already done it. But we're offered advice by a party responsible for the longest period in our history of anaemic growth, stalled productivity, wage erosion, reductions in funding for public services, and a devastating collapse in capital investment, and all this while engineering the most acute crisis of financial management in the post-war period by a Prime Minister who may have been outlived by a lettuce but whose own legacy lives on in the lives of Welsh citizens, with higher mortgage rates, higher interest rates and eroded living standards. Dirprwy Lywydd, this is the foundation from which the party opposite seeks to instruct others about their responsibilities. And while one after another Conservative spokesperson were sent over the top in variations of Apocalypse Now speeches, what we will do on this side is to vote against their motion because it so clearly fails to represent the facts of last week's budget, facts captured in the amendment in the name of the Trefnydd.

And I say, Dirprwy Lywydd, that these are facts, because, two weeks ago, we had a debate in advance of the budget and now we know what actually happened. And in the things that we highlighted two weeks ago, each one of those has been borne out in the budget presented by Rachel Reeves, a budget that, as Hefin David said and Alun Davies echoed, is inherently a political act—a budget that went further in demonstrating that this new UK Labour Government approaches the business of boosting the economy in a way that flies in the face of the failed policies of neoliberalism and makes certain that there is a different future for people here in Wales. I spoke two weeks ago about a Government that will regard workers as key assets in the business of building our economy. That's why the national living wage was increased by 6.7 per cent in the budget and the national minimum wage by 16.3 per cent, in a budget as well that, here in Wales, righted the wrong done to the miners' pension fund, returning it to the trustees where it belonged.

Two weeks ago, we said that the Chancellor would deal with the £22 billion gap between funded and actual expenditure in this financial year. The Chancellor said that she would accept all 10 recommendations of the Office for Budget Responsibility, and she would have to draw together a package of measures that do indeed ask those most able to do so to make a contribution to filling that black hole. In another of those highly inflamed contributions—[Interruption.] Yes, I will now. Yes, Joel.

I'm grateful for that. You said at the start that it was George Osborne who was the architect of austerity. That is factually incorrect. Alistair Darling set the first austerity budget. Would you amend your statement?

No, of course I will not. Alistair Darling responded to the economic circumstances he found himself in. George Osborne—[Interruption.]. No, no, no—[Interruption.] Calm down. Calm down. Calm down. George Osborne embarked on a policy of austerity as a matter of policy and choice. It was his determination to shrink the state, a policy I hear echoed by the current leader of the Conservative Party— [Interruption.] 

I have in my folder an article from The Guardian from 2009, where Alistair Darling states—

Don't tell your friends. [Laughter.]

—that if the Labour Party were to get re-elected, their cuts would be worse than Thatcher's. And the Liberal Democrats at the time were promising swingeing cuts if they were the Government. So, to say George Osborne, and that it was his policy, again is factually incorrect.

Well, this is a fairly heroic attempt, Dirprwy Lywydd, at the rewriting of history. I’m afraid George Osborne himself wouldn’t agree with what the Member has said, because he set out, as he said at the time, to reduce the scope of the state, and in three years’ time the sunny uplands would be there for all to enjoy, except those uplands disappeared ever further into the future.

Dirprwy Lywydd, let me give just one example of the way in which the Chancellor used the budget to deal with that £22 billion gap. She found £80 million to support workers in Port Talbot, whereas the Conservative Party simply announced a fund, a fund that it turned out had no money in it at all until last week’s budget.

We said two weeks ago that the Chancellor would start the journey of repairing the damage done to public services. What a contrast last week provided, because it wasn’t just George Osborne who set out to shrink the state, but Kemi Badenoch has made that the centrepiece of her Conservative values. She has one remarkable achievement to her credit already, in that she has managed to be too right wing to be supported even by Andrew R.T. Davies. The contrast between Mrs Badenoch and the Chancellor of the Exchequer could not have been clearer.

Here in Wales, we now have the opportunity to begin to repair the damage done—

Will the finance Secretary take an intervention?

Of course.

I’m grateful. Thank you, finance Secretary. Could you pinpoint to me where the OBR—because you use this as a line of defence for the budget and the £22 billion supposed black hole—could you pinpoint where the OBR highlighted the existence of that £22 billion black hole? Because I can’t find it, and they certainly did not highlight it in their report.

I think the OBR said yesterday in front of a House of Commons select committee that the Conservative Government may have broken the law in concealing—[Interruption.] The OBR—it was the OBR giving evidence yesterday in front of a House of Commons select committee who said that the UK Government may have broken the law in concealing from the OBR the extent of the black hole in Jeremy Hunt’s last budget. That’s the OBR. You can read their evidence for yourself from just yesterday. [Interruption.] I’m aware of time, Dirprwy Lywydd. Diolch.

I set out yesterday the extent to which Wales now has an opportunity to begin the process of repairing the damage done by those 14 years—£700 million more this year, £700 million more next year, to invest in our public services. Finally, and most importantly, perhaps, of all for the long term, the budget provided investment for growth, £300 million between this year and next for us to be able to invest in the conditions, in the infrastructure, in the machinery, in the equipment that will allow workers here in Wales and businesses here in Wales to succeed. Alun Davies asked me about public service reform. Well, I have been talking with all my colleagues and with other organisations about the way I want to try to use that capital opportunity to bring about reform so that Welsh workers in the private and the public sector can be as productive as those in other parts of the European Union. That is why, Dirprwy Lywydd, the IMF supported the Government’s focus on boosting growth through an increase in public investment. It’s why the IFS said that the budget’s combination of extra investment, planning reform and greater stability will all help boost growth.

And let me just for a moment repeat the point that Lee Waters made. It was the head of the IFS, Paul Johnson, that highly respected independent view of economic matters, who has said that the inheritance tax changes in agriculture will fall on a remarkably modest number of farms. Now, when opposition Members don’t like independent advice, they shake their heads at me, but that is what somebody who has no stake in trying to exaggerate the impact or underplay the impact has to say.

You now need to conclude, Cabinet Secretary.

Let me conclude, in that case, Dirprwy Lywydd. This was a budget that was never going to solve every problem, fill every hole, right every wrong. But what it has done, it has set the United Kingdom's economy and prospects here in Wales on a different pathway to the future. Of course this Government will continue to speak up for Wales, to be clear about our priorities, but now to work alongside a Government elected so emphatically here in Wales only a few months ago, so that we can create a pathway to a decent life, as Carolyn Thomas said, for the future, and an economy that thrives and works for us all.

I call on Sam Rowlands to reply to the debate. 

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and thank you to everybody for taking part in this important debate here this evening in the Senedd. Alun Davies was unusually correct when he said in his opening remarks that a budget debate is important because it demonstrates the priorities and attitudes of a Government. What this budget has demonstrated in its priorities and attitude is that a Labour Government will always tax you more, will always increase the burden on working people and always increase the burden on job-creating businesses, because the Labour Party thinks it knows how to spend your money better than you know how to spend it yourself.

Peter Fox opened the debate here this evening by pointing to the budget's harsh impact on those hard-working businesses, with the IFS highlighting that employers will have to pay an additional £900 for each employee on median average earnings. Even an employee on the minimum wage will mean that employers will be spending an extra £770 in a national insurance contribution.

Imagine thinking that working people were not being taxed further because of this budget’s implications. Imagine thinking that business owners are not working people. Imagine thinking that farmers are not working people. This is the hypocrisy of the Labour budget that was presented in Westminster last week. They continue to hold this line, that they're not punishing working people, but we've seen in this debate here today that all people through society, working people in particular, are being punished because of this budget.

We heard from Heledd Fychan—and it worried me slightly in the opening of Heledd Fychan's contribution, decrying the democratic will of the people of Wales to leave the European Union, clearly forgetting that our economy in the UK is performing much better than that in the eurozone—and Heledd Fychan was absolutely right to raise the impact of national insurance contributions on the third sector and charities. I'll be willing to hear more from the Cabinet Secretary in the future on that, and all the Cabinet Secretaries, on the portfolios they represent—the impact that increased national insurance will have on the third sector and charity sector.

Carolyn Thomas was keen to highlight the last 14 years of challenge within different sectors here in Wales, sadly forgetting that nearly all the ones that she mentioned—housing, health, the environment, transport, local government, education—all those areas are the responsibility of the Labour Welsh Government here in Wales.

Will you take an intervention? Don't you find it astonishing that Members for north Wales in this Chamber aren't united on all sides of the Chamber about the need for investment in north Wales, in things like the electrification of the north Wales railway line, which I didn't hear the Member opposite refer to, or the investment in hospitals in north Wales, which we're not seeing to the same extent as in the south?

I'm grateful for the intervention from the Member for Clwyd West, because Janet Finch-Saunders was also keen to highlight this point about the lack of announcements for the rail investment.

Sam, in case you can't hear, there are requests for interventions.

I do apologise for not looking over there. I'll take the intervention.

I'm just interested to hear, because you were previously leader of a council that had to cut budgets because of your Government cutting our budget, so I'm just interested to know whether you supported cutting the budgets when you were leader, and denying services to your constituents, because you supported a Government that clearly didn't believe in public service.

It's an interesting intervention. Clearly the Member has forgotten again that Welsh Government is responsible for funding councils here in Wales, so councils up and down Wales are having to deal with those challenges with a Welsh Government funding formula punishing councils in north Wales, which all Members in north Wales I'm sure would rally behind, to see more funding into those local authorities.

Hefin David's contribution started to threaten to sound a bit like a young Mark Isherwood taking a trip down memory lane, and then the real Mark Isherwood thankfully intervened to put him right on the additional consequences of previous Labour Governments. I was grateful to James Evans and to Laura Anne Jones for their contributions, reminding us of the impact on farmers in Wales that this budget will have. James Evans particularly pointed out that the new DEFRA Secretary had previously pledged no changes to agricultural property relief before Labour made that screeching u-turn just last week, leaving our farming communities in the lurch. And we must remember, as James Evans and Laura Anne Jones both pointed out in particular, that our farmers are working hard to protect our environment and provide food on the table for people up and down Wales, and we need to protect them as much as possible. Lee Waters of course did his best to defend the Labour Party's policy on this, but I think was unable to do so adequately.

I was grateful to Luke Fletcher for his honesty at the risk of being boring. I'm not going to perhaps suggest whether he was accurate in his risk assessment at all, but he was absolutely right to challenge the issue around business rates and the multiplier effect and to support our high streets. Because without our high streets functioning well, and the impact of the business rates multiplier on those high streets—if that is not dealt with soon, then we see a real problem ahead. Alun Davies certainly was boring when he started talking about the financial framework, but was right to raise that point because it is an issue that does need dealing with, to ensure that services can be delivered properly here in Wales.

We were grateful, of course, to the—I was going to say 'First Minister'; I do apologise. We were grateful, finally, to the Cabinet Secretary for his views on things, but, sadly, his focus on facts I think risked slipping into the Trumpian phrase of 'alternative facts'. Because his challenge was around the facts laid out in our motion here today. And we're going to stick by our motion here today because they are factually correct. I'll read these out here now to Members across this Chamber. On this bench, we believe that

'the UK Government’s Autumn Budget breaks Labour’s manifesto commitment to not raise taxes on working people.'

That's been highlighted here multiple times today. We regret

'that many pensioners will have to choose between eating and heating as a result of the withdrawal of winter fuel payments.'

That's a fact. We recognise

'that the increase in employer national insurance contributions will make it harder for businesses to employ and retain staff.'

That is a fact. We express

'disappointment that the UK Government’s budget has failed to deliver either the electrification of the North Wales main line or Barnett consequentials from the HS2 project for Wales.'

So, in short, Dirprwy Lywydd, this budget we heard last week is anti-growth, anti-business, will produce higher debts, higher taxes, and is against the working people of Britain and Wales. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

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

That brings us to voting time. Unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, I will move immediately to voting time. Therefore, the vote this evening will be on item 9, the Welsh Conservatives debate. I call for a vote on the motion without amendment, tabled in the name of Darren Millar. If the proposal is not agreed, we will vote on the amendments tabled to the motion. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 15, no abstentions, 38 against, therefore the motion is not agreed.

I now call for a vote on amendment 1, tabled in the name of Jane Hutt. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendments 2, 3, 4 and 5 will be deselected. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 27, no abstentions, 26 against. Therefore, amendment 1 is agreed.

We will now move to a vote on amendment 6. I call for a vote on amendment 6, tabled in the name of Heledd Fychan. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 11, no abstentions, 42 against. Therefore, amendment 6 is not agreed.

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