Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru

Good afternoon and welcome to this afternoon’s Plenary meeting. The first item will be questions to the Cabinet Secretary for Transport and North Wales, and the first question is from Adam Price.

We are currently procuring an employer's agent, which should be complete in January 2025. Then a contractor will be procured to design, finalise the business case, and draft orders under the relevant Highways Acts required to enable the proposed improvements. And I'm pleased to report that there are no delays to the current programme.

The Minister for climate change, who was then responsible for this project, did make a statement—in fact, it was actually earlier this year, in February 2024—about an accelerated timetable. Following that, I was informed that the employment agent was to be appointed in August of this year. You just said that they’re going to be appointed in January. That is a five-month delay. Will that have a knock-on effect on the later stages in the project development? I was informed that the early contractor involvement award was going to be made in December 2025 and that the draft orders were going to be published in May 2027. Any further delay would be a matter of grave concern, because this is already a project that is eight years now in the making since the original decision. In fact, we had other questions on this when you were last in this ministerial role. Can you reassure us that there will be no further delay to this project and that the original dates that I’ve just shared with you will be kept to?

Well, can I think the Member for his supplementary question, and whilst there was a slight delay in the previous element of the programme, there is no delay in the current programme. If I could just outline the target dates for the project to be progressed and delivered: following the appointment of the EA, the Welsh Government will procure an early contractor involvement—an ECI—in winter 2026, and then further outline design development will continue in 2026 to allow the drafting and publication of draft orders and the environmental statement in spring 2027, as the Member outlined.

Road connectivity in south-east Wales reflects the area’s mix of towns, villages and cities. The network is anchored by several major roads and motorways facilitating movement within the region, supporting the local economy, as well as connections to key developments and employment areas in mid and west Wales.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, and, as you'll know well, the Monmouth constituency in south-east Wales has some of those most important trunk roads: it has the M4, obviously, connecting Wales to London; the A465 between Neath and Hereford; the A40, travelling from Fishguard to London; and, obviously, the A48 that runs through Chepstow and links Carmarthen through to Gloucester. So, some major trunk roads. But the A48 is a specific concern, because it's something that has cropped up many times, certainly, in my inbox, and I know in the Government's inbox, especially around the congestion we have at Highbeech roundabout, which is where the A48 meets the A466. Much traffic comes from Gloucestershire and other parts of Monmouthshire and feeds down onto the M4 and the M48, and it is a nightmare, Cabinet Secretary. I've spoken with the Government over several years and there've been plans to do more and more to alleviate the situation there. So, Cabinet Secretary, could I ask for any updates that there may be on potential works to improve Highbeech roundabout? And could I request, perhaps, if you're in the area, that you meet with me and look at some of the very important congestion issues that we have in Chepstow?

I'd be more than happy to meet with the Member on site to see for myself the congestion in that area. His area of Wales is very similar to mine in that it is a key access point on a cross-border basis for motorists travelling to England, as well as motorists travelling into Wales. In regard specifically to Highbeech roundabout, I've asked Transport for Wales to complete the Welsh transport appraisal guidance 1 and 2 studies by the end of this financial year. That will then lead to the agreement of a preferred package of measures for the roundabout, and it's likely to include changes to the existing road network at the roundabout and also improvements to public transport and active travel. Now, once that package of measures is identified, we'll be working with the south-east Wales corporate joint committee and seeking inclusion of the proposals in the regional transport plan, so that it can then seek the investment that is required to deliver the upgrades.

Cabinet Secretary, in the Severnside part of my constituency, campaigners, local councillors and Monmouthshire County Council have long campaigned for a short link road, linking the M48 with the B4245, which would also link with Severn tunnel junction. This is an area that's seen an awful lot of housing growth over a sustained period of years, and the infrastructure just hasn't kept pace with that rate of development. I know you're familiar with the issue, Cabinet Secretary. I wonder if you might perhaps, when you come to meet with Peter, also meet with local campaigners and Monmouthshire County Council to consider the issues on that potential link road at this current time.

I'd be more than happy to meet with them, absolutely. If I could just give some background information to this particular stretch of road, though, analysis by the Burns delivery unit suggests that a link would actually increase traffic on the M4 towards Newport, and so they gave very considerable caution to whether it should actually proceed. That said, if the corporate joint committee decided that, after considering all of the impacts on the south-east as a whole, it wished to move as a priority to deliver the link, then the Welsh Government of course would reconsider the case for it. And that includes the possibility of reclassifying the M48, if it can be shown to have wider benefits for the region.

Questions now from the party spokespeople. The Conservative spokesperson, Natasha Asghar.

Thank you so much, Presiding Officer. Cabinet Secretary, it's not often that I stray too far from my region of south-east Wales. However, I recently crossed the border and headed to Rhondda Cynon Taf, donning a boiler suit. With my transport hat on, I met with the fantastic Rhondda Tunnel Society, a group that I know has the backing and support of my colleague and their local MS Joel James. Many people believe the life of an MS is glamorous, but, having delved 1,000 ft underground, crawled through plenty of mud, and re-emerged looking like I'd been dragged through a hedge backwards, I certainly beg to differ. Regardless of my dishevelled state, it was a truly fantastic visit, and the society have a grand vision for Rhondda tunnel, which, if delivered, will really put the area on the map. The group is working to turn this historical defunct landmark into Europe's longest walking and cycling tunnel, which would transform it into a must-see attraction, enticing both locals and tourists from further afield. This truly remarkable initiative could be delivered with just under £15 million-worth of funding. Cabinet Secretary, the group would be delighted to meet with you, to share their plans and take you down the tunnel. However, if you don't fancy putting on your wellies and getting stuck in the mud, I'm sure an online meeting or somewhere above ground would be greatly appreciated by the society. Either way, Cabinet Secretary, will you agree to meeting with the society, to find out a bit more and explore what steps the Welsh Government can indeed take to get the ball rolling? Thank you.

I'd love to meet with the society again; I've met with the society in the past. I think there are a few Members in this Chamber who are yet to experience the warmth of the Rhondda Tunnel Society. It would be a great pleasure not just to meet with them again to discuss the potential of it becoming a must-see—and, indeed, a must-do—attraction, but I'd also welcome the opportunity myself to go into the tunnel because that is an experience I've yet to enjoy.

Thank you so much, Cabinet Secretary. I look forward to seeing your experience on social media.

Cabinet Secretary, it was recently revealed that purchases of pure electric cars—in fact, used cars—have reached record levels, with more than 50,000 cars changing hands between July and September this year. However, it has been warned that a lack of charging infrastructure is causing motorists some nervousness, and this could, indeed, be putting them off from making the switch. As you know, I've consistently been pushing for more charging points to be rolled out all across Wales, and I have started looking at other countries around the world to see what they're doing. One country that really has caught my eye was Sweden, with plans afoot to build the world's first e-highway in Stockholm. Now, I'm not deluded—the chances of this Labour Government rolling out something similar to that may be pretty far-flung, given it is a major challenge to get your party to invest in our current roads, let alone building new ones. But other countries are, indeed, leading the way when it comes to electric vehicle charging points, Cabinet Secretary. Norway has more than 34,000 charging points across the country, with a goal of hitting 500,000 by 2030. And the Netherlands has one of the highest densities of public charging stations, with a ratio of one station to every five electric cars. So, Cabinet Secretary, a year on from the Senedd report that branded Wales’s progress in getting more EVs on the road, and I quote, 'embarrassing', I would be grateful if you could please shed some light on what the Welsh Government has done to improve the situation. And I’d be curious to know if you’ve been looking at similar initiatives from other countries as some form of inspiration. Thanks.

Well, can I thank Natasha Asghar for her question and her interest in this subject? It’s a subject that I’m also very interested in. I think part of the challenge with infrastructure to support EV cars is being able to predict where technology is going. And with Toyota recently saying that they’ve been able to develop a solid-state dry battery cell for vehicles, that could have major implications in terms of the range of vehicles. My understanding is that it could lift the range of the average electric car to around 800 miles, which would be game-changing in terms of the need and the requirement for EV charging on the motorway network. That doesn’t, though, prevent us from focusing very much on at-home charging and support for at-home charging. The UK Government, I believe, already offers support—financial support—for people looking to have an EV charger installed at home, but our focus is very much on how we can adapt those most intensely urban areas, particularly streets with no off-road parking, for the arrival of electric vehicles on a mass scale, particularly with the phased elimination of new internal combustion engine-driven cars. So, that’s where are focus very much is as a policy. But we also are encouraging the market itself to develop new and innovative solutions to the problems with EV charging. And the example that the Member has pointed to today follows another example that the Member pointed to during our last oral question. There is great innovation out there; we need to harness it, and we need to make it attractive within Wales to invest.

Cabinet Secretary, just last week, the Motor Insurers' Bureau released data collected over two years, which has unveiled that, on average, every 20 minutes, someone is hit by an uninsured or a hit-and-run driver in the UK. They’ve also found that, so far this year, 115,000 uninsured drivers have had their vehicles seized. The horrific, traumatic and physical impacts of injuries from these incidents are huge, and often even more distressing when considering the perpetrators of these incidents have fled the scene and just left victims on their own to process what, indeed, has just happened. As well as this, it is significant to note that injuries caused by hit-and-run drivers are estimated to cost the economy almost £2.5 billion a year in emergency services, medical care, and loss of productivity and human cost. So, with that in mind, Cabinet Secretary, I’d really like to know what the Welsh Government is doing to support victims of hit-and-run incidents, and how the Government is going to be working with key stakeholders to clamp down on these crimes, going forward. Thank you.

It’s a very, very timely question, because I yesterday met with equivalent Ministers from the devolved administrations and the UK Government, and we met in part to discuss the latest work of the UK insurance taskforce. And part of that work considers the impact that uninsured drivers are having not just in terms of insurance premiums, but also in terms of the impact on the police, emergency services and hospitals. I’d be very pleased to provide an update to Members on the work of the UK insurance taskforce.

Llefarydd Plaid Cymru, Peredur Owen Griffiths. 

Diolch, Llywydd. The aim of any transport network, or transport Secretary for that matter, is straightforward—it’s to get people to where they want to go, when they need to be there, whilst taking into account cost, accessibility and sustainability. People deserve the certainty that their train will run on time, or, at the very least, that it will show up.  But right now, these basic expectations are simply not being met. Taking train journeys in Wales, for example, people are struggling to reach their destination by train. Data from the Office for National Statistics shows that only 50 per cent of people in Wales live within 30 minutes' walking distance of a train station, leaving many reliant on their cars and an increasingly limited bus network. Just recently, we learnt that the construction of the new HS2 station in England will add an extra 15 minutes to several routes in south Wales until 2030. This only adds insult to injury, knowing that Wales will not receive the billions it's owed from spending on HS2 in England, while Labour in Wales refuses to stand up to Keir Starmer to rectify this injustice. And on the issue of costs, research from the TUC found that rail fares have increased at twice the rate of wages since 2009. This is simply unsustainable for the average passenger. So, what does the Cabinet Secretary make of this? Would he agree with me that the rail network underperforms and doesn't meet the basic standards expected of a transport network, and what is he doing about it?

I think, Llywydd, I could probably talk for some time on this very subject. So, what I suggest I'll do is issue a written statement on performance, on the latest position regarding rolling stock and the farebox. In brief, though, I think the Member is absolutely right that the purpose of a transport network is to move people and goods as swiftly, efficiently and in the most sustainable way possible. But to pick up on some of the very, very specific points you raised, first of all, we have not given in on HS2. There's a very big difference between collaboration and confrontation. We are collaborating with the UK Government to get a better deal than the £320 million to £350 million consequential that we would receive otherwise, and that's through working jointly through the Wales rail board in identifying the pipeline of improvements to infrastructure across Wales. And where we've been able to direct that infrastructure improvement, for example here in south-east Wales with the metro, we are seeing huge benefits in terms of reliability, which is better than the average across the network as a whole, and in terms of frequency, and in terms of the arrival of new electric trains. There is still more to do across the TfW network, of course, but at the moment reliability stands at 76 per cent of trains arriving within three minutes of the scheduled time.

In terms of driving the farebox, which is crucial in ensuring that it's sustainable, I'm pleased to say that Transport for Wales have increased passenger revenue this financial year by £27 million. They have met our stretching targets and exceeded them. They have also—and I think this is really, really important in terms of making sure that we have a sustainable rail service—seen the highest passenger growth across Britain, with a passenger growth this year of 27 per cent. So, in terms of delivering for passengers, reliability has improved, cancellations have been reduced, and in terms of the outcome for passengers and the taxpayer, the improvements will be there as we seek to further increase the farebox, and in so doing reduce the level of subsidy required.

Thank you for that response. 

I appreciate the answer, and I agree with you on some parts of it. Obviously, we would want the consequentials as well as the investment; it's not an either/or. So, that's that.

But I'd like to turn to look at Avanti West Coast in north Wales. Last year Avanti was directed to develop an improvement plan to tackle the poor performance issues on vital routes across the north Wales coast. Earlier this year, more than 20 per cent of Avanti West Coast services on the north Wales main line were cancelled on the day, and the timetable has yet to return to pre-COVID levels. These cancellations are causing significant disruption to commuters and are harming the economy. The route plays a vital economic role, linking the port of Holyhead with the rest of the UK rail network. It also serves as a key route for students travelling from across the UK to study at Bangor University in north-west Wales. Yet, this essential line is being run into the ground by the operator and has proven inefficient. I understand that the UK Government may strip Avanti of its franchise earlier than anticipated and potentially bring it into public ownership, if it fails to meet its improvement plan and services. Could the Cabinet Secretary please explain why services in the north of our country are so poor and what his department has been doing to hold Avanti to account? 

Well, I'm very, very grateful for the opportunity to put on record how disappointed I am with Avanti's performance and how much I look forward to the creation of Great British Railways, under the UK-led Government, to take back that franchise service. Because the Member is absolutely right, over the years performance has declined, and not just performance, the number of services operated by Avanti West Coast has dramatically reduced, and we're way past COVID now, so COVID can no longer be used as an excuse for not reinstating those services.

I met recently with the transport Secretary, Louise Haigh. We discussed Avanti, we discussed the process of creating Great British Railways and, vitally important, the part that we now will play, and the Senedd will now play, in specifying future services, because they affect a huge number of people travelling by rail, not just in north Wales, but also with CrossCountry in Wales, and also GWR. So, we're going to be having a greater role, a greater say, in the specification of those services in the future, and that's as a result of two Governments working as one, and the Member is also right to point to the proportion of cancellations that we've seen of late with Avanti. The very, very latest figures still show that cancellations are in double figures, and that's simply not acceptable.

Cancellations in double figures—so, you get that information. It brings me on to a question possibly closer to home for me, in my region in south-east Wales, and looking at performance. I was recently contacted by frustrated constituents. As I've outlined today, they find that their basic expectations of the rail network are simply not being met. Their entire family is actively trying to use public transport, including local train stations as part of their shared commitment to reducing their carbon footprint and embracing sustainable travel. However, they're growing increasingly frustrated by the number of key commuter services from Rogerstone station that are being cancelled. Given that the service runs through the town only twice an hour, just one cancelled service can mean a huge impact on whether or not they arrive in work on time or not. With this in mind, could the Cabinet Secretary please inform us how many direct trains from Ebbw Vale to Newport have been cancelled since the service began, if you've got that detail on you, or you could write to me if you don't? And what impact has that had on the Newport economy, local road congestion and on citizens, especially marginalised groups who lack the access to private transport? And could you tell me what 'good' looks like, and what you would expect from a cancellation rate, if anything?

Well, again, can I thank the Member for his question? Another opportunity to just outline the success that we are seeing here in Wales where we have control over services, and it relates to the new trains. We've ordered £800 million of new trains for the network, and they're contributing to the increasing reliability and punctuality that Transport for Wales is reporting. But even in spite of the £800 million of new trains, almost half of delayed minutes of Transport for Wales services do not relate to the trains; 44 per cent of delayed minutes relates directly to matters concerning the infrastructure, and that's why it's so important that we work with Great British Railways and the UK Government to get the investment in our infrastructure that we need; a consequential of £320 million to £350 million simply wouldn't pay for it. We need to have a significant sum of enhancement investment, and that's what we are seeking to agree very soon.

Now, in terms of the rolling stock, I must also say that I was staggered this week, when I was joined by Vikki Howells for the arrival of the first electric train for the metro, to be told that the last time before TfW introduced a new train—the last time that Wales saw a new train with the former operators was 1991. We're going to take a fleet that was one of Britain's—indeed, one of Europe's—oldest train fleets that we inherited from Arriva Trains Wales in 2018, of 270 trains—that's how many we inherited; one the oldest fleets—and by the end of next year, we will have one of Europe's newest fleets, comprising not 270 trains, but 484, and I know of no other part of Europe that is seeing such a rapid increase, a substantial increase, in the rolling stock and the decrease in the average age of trains running on their networks. It is something that I think we should be proud of. I know that there is some way to go in terms of reliability, but I do believe that the scale of the ambition is being realised.

The Welsh Government routinely review personal injury collision data from the police to identify collision cluster sites to then inform the local safety scheme programme, and the collision cluster sites criteria on the strategic road network is four collisions in three years within 100m. This work would include junctions.

Thank you very much for the response.

I just wanted to raise the junction of Pontybat, which I've written to you about on quite a few occasions. Pontybat junction is between Llyswen and Bronllys, and in 2021 the trunk road authority identified Pontybat junction as a priority for improvements after 10 collisions in five years. They drafted plans for a four-arm roundabout, yet, despite these plans being ready to go, local people and the community council are still waiting for yet another assessment, which is to be updated.

Powys endures Wales's highest rate of road deaths and serious injuries per capita in Wales, and the A470, which we know is a very long road, but home to the Pontybat junction, remains one of Wales's most dangerous roads. Alongside the other commitments you've made to visit many junctions and roads here in the Siambr this afternoon, I wonder if, on your road trip, or perhaps in your helicopter, you might be able to drop in with me to the Pontybat junction to meet residents and the community council to see, actually, the site and the concerns that people have. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Jane Dodds. For the record, can I just clarify I do not have a single helicopter? I have three. [Laughter.] [Interruption.] Absolutely. I would very much enjoy a site visit with the Member and to meet community leaders and residents in the area. I am pleased to say that we committed to undertaking a study, as the Member knows, at Pontybat, in line with the new, proactive approach to road safety, which I'll come to in a moment. We're hoping to begin that process either later this financial year or in 2025-26. So, that's our target.

I mentioned the new, proactive approach that we're taking. In the past, data would be utilised using collisions—just reported collisions. We've gone to personal injury collision data, because it more accurately reflects what is actually happening with reported incidents, and it also enables us to identify those areas at greatest risk, including the junctions. So, we're taking a more intelligent approach to planning and being proactive in terms of implementing road safety measures. But I'd be very happy to come and see the site myself and to meet with residents.

We provide significant financial support to bus services in south-west Wales, including TrawsCymru and Fflecsi services. The forthcoming bus legislation will introduce franchising to allow us to support the industry, and local authorities to deliver improved bus services in the region.

Diolch. Since its introduction over 10 years ago, the bus services support grant has remained static at £25 million. If it had risen in line with the consumer price index, it would be worth £34 million today. The Confederation of Passenger Transport Cymru recently published research showing that every additional pound of investment into improving bus services generates nearly £5 of benefit to the economy, and also to the environment and people’s well-being. So, while I'm proud to say that communities in my region will be at the forefront of the move to franchised bus services once the Government bring forward the highly anticipated bus Bill, the local network continues to face enormous challenges. Wales is now the only nation within the UK where passenger numbers are still lower than before the pandemic, despite the emergency investment in maintaining services the First Minister outlined yesterday.

So, can I ask whether the Cabinet Secretary will consider an increase to bus funding for services in the budget? What actions are the Welsh Government taking now to ensure passenger numbers grow in order to make more routes sustainable, ahead of the introduction of the bus Bill? And are you looking at and assessing the impact of and learning from initiatives both here and outside of Wales, such as the Scottish Government’s free transport for young people scheme, or local initiatives such as that in my region of seasonal free bus travel by Swansea Council? Diolch.

Diolch yn fawr iawn. Again, it's a very timely question, because during the conversation that I had with other Ministers from other administrations yesterday, we agreed to share innovative practices and the outcomes from them and to share further information regarding legislative change.

Now, I'll take a number of those points, if I may, Llywydd. First of all, in terms of the funding, we've allocated £0.25 billion for passenger services since COVID to support the network, and, at the moment, we’re spending something in the region of £180 million a year on learner travel. So, the public investment in public transport, when you combine it with rail, is enormous indeed. And my Cabinet colleagues regularly remind me of that when it comes to discussing budgets. It would not be appropriate for me to discuss today or to make suggestions today about where budget discussions are going within Government, but I’m hoping that we will be able to meet the Government’s priorities of protecting bus services as we move towards franchising, which will make an enormous difference.

On passenger numbers, the picture varies quite considerably across Wales, and what the data shows is that, whilst fare-paying passengers have increased back to pre-COVID levels, it’s the concessionary fare passengers who’ve not been attracted back, and I think that’s worth further investigation. I’m looking at working with various groups to understand what it is that is inhibiting or preventing people with concessionary passes from returning to the bus network. And I think there’s a key role, actually, there for the older persons' commissioner.

Cabinet Secretary, one of the biggest barriers to wider adoption of buses as an alternative to the car is the large variation in cost to take public transport in Wales. However, across the border in England, there’s a £2 cap, although this is set to become £3 in the new year. How will Welsh Government ensure an affordable, dependable network going forward?

Well, can I thank Altaf Hussain for his question? He makes a crucially important point that bus travel has to be affordable for the travelling public. And where the Member previously had identified the great economic benefit of investment in bus services, for me, it’s actually the benefit in terms of driving social justice and access to opportunities, particularly for the lowest paid and the most vulnerable in our society. That’s really, for me, the greatest value in investing in bus services.

Now, in terms of learning from other areas and how we may mirror such programmes, of course, we’re considering various programmes across the UK, including a programme that, albeit temporary, is soon to be in operation again in Rhondda Cynon Taf, I believe, which is a flat fare during the month of December. What is for sure is that it’s the reliability and punctuality of services that drives increased patronage, and also the degree to which you have a functioning network across a functional region, if you like—a travel-to-work region. Ultimately, it’s our ambition, through franchising, to create one timetable, one network and one ticket for all public transport, and that will include a fare regime that is fair and transparent.

Electric trains are now operating on the core Valleys lines for the very first time. This is both a historic moment and a significant milestone towards delivering the south Wales metro. It is only possible thanks to our investment of over £1 billion to transform the network into a 'turn up and go' service.

Thank you very much for your response. This week, we’ve seen the opening of the new Porthcawl metro link as part of the south Wales metro plans. I recently attended a meeting of the Porthcawl Shout Forum—a meeting of residents in Porthcawl, where issues are raised, and I know you’ve accepted a number of invitations today, but you have also been invited, so you’re more than welcome to come along. There were two issues raised about the new bus station. First of all, there are four routes, currently, going from the bus station, but, looking at one as an example, the one that comes here to Cardiff Bay takes nearly two hours, and there’s no toilet included in the new metro link bus station in Porthcawl, and people locally seem to think that that might be a bit of an oversight on the part of the metro scheme. Secondly, it was established to—and I quote—improve public transport links across south-east Wales. Now, you’ll be aware of the geography here; we are on the very western point, if you like, of the south-east Wales, Cardiff capital region and residents are worried that this new bus station, this new plan, doesn’t sync up with journeys that might go west in the future, particularly as the Swansea bay metro scheme is much further down the track, if you like, than the south Wales one. So, how will you ensure that projects like this that fall between, if you like, geographical regions actually serve the interests of the populations that live on both sides of these barriers and are not just self-contained within that one region?

I thank the Member for his question. He makes a really important point that there has to be cross-border planning in terms of services. We've got the regional transport plan being developed for south-west Wales, and the regional transport plan being developed for south-east Wales, but there's a critical role that's being played by Transport for Wales in ensuring that they are interfaced.

Now, with the legislation that we're bringing forward in March of next year, it'll be followed by an intense period of planning, and that planning will look at regional networks—zones, if you like—for bus services. South-west Wales will be going first with the franchising, and we'll be able to then ensure that, with the franchise services that come in south-east Wales, they are fully planned and integrated with the assistance of Transport for Wales. I know that it's a journey that will take some years, but it is a journey that will be worth it. And the amount of work that will be required cannot be overstated, but it is work that we are determined to progress with.

We continue to provide vital funding to local authorities to support local bus services across Wales, recognising the essential role these services play across our communities. We also continue to build upon our existing TrawsCymru network through further improvements and the introduction of new routes.

Diolch. Thank you. Responding to my colleague, the shadow transport Minister Natasha Asghar, regarding bus services yesterday, the First Minister stated that the finance Minister must operate in line with her priorities, and that the Welsh Government is working with Transport for Wales and local authorities to plan and implement bus networks. Independent research compiled by the Confederation of Passenger Transport, which found that every £1 of additional investment and improving bus services would generate £4.55 of further economic benefits, has already been referred to. 

Given the high cost of bus franchising evidenced in Manchester, which included a council tax levy, how, therefore, do you plan to maximise these benefits, what specific work are you doing with local authorities in north Wales and elsewhere to identify opportunities for bus priority schemes and to provide capital investment to deliver them, and how do you plan to support the industry to navigate the additional funding challenges created by the additional cost to national insurance, following the UK Government budget, estimated at £800 to £1,000 for each employee?

Well, there are various questions that are being raised by the Member. I am going to repeat again, though, the headline fact that we have invested £250 million in bus services since COVID. That’s a huge sum of money that has maintained a network that is so vital for people across Wales, and that’s in addition to the money that we also invest in learner travel. I cannot overstate the importance of the bus Bill in providing us with a vehicle to ensure that we have a national integrated public transport system that responds to people’s needs. We will be working with the sector, not just during franchising, but between now and the point at which franchising will begin, to capture as much innovation, ideas and creativity to solve the problems of today, but also to embrace the opportunities of tomorrow. And the Member once again raised a key fact that, for every £1 invested in bus services, more than £4.50—I think it’s £4.65 in total—is accrued by the economy that it serves. But, again, I would stress that my priority is to drive social justice in terms of the provision of local buses, and to make sure that, whether you’re a learner, whether you’re employed, whether you are seeking employment, whether you’re seeking services, or for leisure opportunities, and particularly if you’re vulnerable, you’ve got a bus that’s turning up regularly and on time, and that’s what we’re striving to achieve through legislation.

Yes. Transport for Wales expanded their penalty fare zone on Monday 18 November. The penalty fare zone now covers north Wales main line services east of Llandudno, some Cambrian line services, as well as services to Liverpool and Manchester.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. We've spoken several times in the past about Transport for Wales’s penalty fare zone expansion and the issues it is causing for passengers, particularly when it comes to concessionary passes. However, the problem hasn’t exactly been rectified, Cabinet Secretary. Signs have been put up at the Severn tunnel junction warning people that they run the risk of being fined if they board the train without a ticket. On the signage it says that if you cannot buy a ticket online and the station office is closed then you must get a ‘promise to pay’ ticket from the platform machine. Yet despite these signs at this very station there is no option on the machines to get a ‘promise to pay’ ticket, leaving travellers in a rather precarious position. Passengers potentially face being slapped with a fine because of this sheer failure. So, Cabinet Secretary, will you please instruct Transport for Wales to look into this as a matter of urgency to rectify this issue ASAP? Thank you.

I absolutely will do, because I'm not familiar with those signs and the fact of the matter is that, if you are unable to buy a ticket before you get on the train, there is discretion there for the conductors and enforcement officers to not apply a penalty fare. Indeed, all conductors are able to sell tickets on the train not just to people using cashless payments, but also to people using cash. Mencap at the weekend raised this very issue, so I'm pleased to be able to assure Members that cash can be used.

The whole point of penalty fares is to crack down on those who are deliberately dodging paying for tickets. We are not pursuing prosecutions wherever possible because we do not want to put people into the criminal justice system and run the risk of people having criminal convictions. Instead we apply penalty fares, which are a far more proportionate way of dealing with ticketless passengers. We've estimated that the cost of fare evasion, that's people who deliberately avoid paying for tickets, is around about £10 million annually to Transport for Wales. It's a significant sum of money. It's a significant sum of taxpayers’ money that could otherwise be spent on improved services, more services or in other public services, so we want to make sure that the system operates fairly and proportionately, and that we recoup any money that is deliberately being withheld. I very much welcome the review by the ORR, the Office of Rail and Road, into revenue protection measures across the UK. It was announced by the Secretary of State for Transport. We're very keen to contribute to that review, because I do believe there has to be a level playing field and consistency across the UK, because different operators are adopting different discretionary measures. That needs to be ironed out and I'm looking forward to contributing to that review.

The Welsh Government is supporting walking, wheeling and cycling in Cardiff North through providing funding for infrastructure improvements, community and school initiatives. By fostering confidence through safer infrastructure and inclusive programmes, our goal is to provide long-term benefits for communities, encouraging active everyday journeys for all.

Thank you for that response.

According to Cardiff Cycle City, the Taff Trail is the busiest commuter and leisure cycling route in the city. It's a wonderful route for people to take, with a trail running alongside the river and covered by trees the majority of the way, and passing through my constituency of Cardiff North. Issues with pedestrian safety have been tackled, and improvements are also proposed for a section of the trail in Hailey Park, while ensuring the protection of the wild waxcap fungi in the park, of which I am a species champion. We must ensure that our active travel network is accessible for all: for cyclists, for walkers, for disabled people. So, what more can the Welsh Government do to improve the Taff Trail in Cardiff and other trails throughout the city?

Julie Morgan is very, very fortunate to have the Taff Trail running through her constituency. It's a fabulous trail, it's hugely popular for people of all ages, and I myself enjoy the Taff Trail as a running route. I think it's fair to say that there are too many places, though, where the route is too narrow to accommodate all users comfortably, and I'm especially concerned for blind and partially sighted citizens. I know that the Member has invited me to meet with the Royal National Institute of Blind People, and I will happily do so, to discuss those pathways that are too narrow, not just on the Taff Trail, but elsewhere as well, where there is heavy congestion of both cyclists and pedestrians.

We've provided funding to Cardiff Council over a number of years to improve sections of the Taff Trail or to construct adjacent routes as well, to alleviate pressure at bottleneck locations. For example, recent investment includes construction of ramped access onto the trail from Western Avenue, where previously there were only very steep steps, and Cardiff Council is also currently reviewing their original plans for the Taff Trail through Hailey Park and working on revised proposals to be submitted for funding. We, and also colleagues at Transport for Wales, will support the authority to ensure that the proposals meet the needs of all users.

Finally, question 9, Russell George.

Yes, of course. Overall in 2024, Transport for Wales services have been more reliable than other operators in Wales. TfW put a plan in place last week for services on the Cambrian line, in response to the current fleet situation. This will provide consistency and clarity for customers, as well as improved reliability.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for your answer. Now, the Government, rightly so as well, encourages people, of course, to use public transport, but people aren't going to use a train service if they can't get a seat. Perhaps they will do, perhaps they're prepared to do that for a short journey, but not for a long journey. And they're not going to do that when trains are, on a regular basis, overcrowded. There have been commitments after commitments for additional rolling stock on the Cambrian line for several, several years, and those commitments have consistently, sadly, been broken. I get correspondence on a weekly basis about the poor service on the Transport for Wales Cambrian line, despite what you say.

One constituent, last week, tells me that he got on the train, there were two carriages, he got on one, there was difficulty getting a disabled passenger onto the train because it was overcrowded, and passengers were standing in the aisles. That, of course, made the journey very difficult from Newtown to Shrewsbury, which is very uncomfortable, and when they stopped at Welshpool, even more people squeezed onto the train and, of course, he puts the question, 'What would happen if there was an accident?', as there was in Talerddig the other week as well.

It would be great to have a service where people could actually get to a toilet, a toilet that was clean, and have room for prams and pushchairs and bikes, et cetera, get Wi-Fi, and have a food cart that regularly comes up the train. These things aren't common, I'm afraid, on the Cambrian line. But the most basic of things is to actually get a seat. So, can I ask when will we be in the position when I can stop standing up in this Chamber asking for people to have a good service on the Cambrian line?

Can I thank Russell George for his question and the opportunity to share with Members the latest information regarding the deployment of new trains on the Cambrian line? Brand-new trains are of course operating in many areas across Wales and, next year, we will see them introduced onto the Cambrian line. And I think the Member makes a really important point regarding space and capacity. So far, we have delivered 223 new trains, and in total, there are 365 carriages for use—that's a 35 per cent increase in the number of carriages that we inherited. But it's still 120 or so short of the total fleet that we will see next year, providing vastly increased capacity and far more seats across Wales, including in areas served by the Cambrian line, routes that people in Russell George's constituency depend on.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary.

The next item will be the second set of questions this afternoon, the questions to the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice. The first question is from Peredur Owen Griffiths.

Thank you very much for your question.

Between 2022 and 2025, we've provided support worth almost £5 billion to support people in Wales, including older people in South Wales East, through programmes to alleviate financial pressures, help maximise income and keep money in the pockets of Welsh citizens.

Thank you for that response.

Much like the argument about HS2 funding, there was once agreement between Plaid Cymru and Labour that women born in the 1950s had been conned out of the retirements they'd planned for. Women who had carefully calculated their pension pot had the rug pulled out from under their feet by the Tories' premature state pension equalisation policy. This has meant that thousands of women are now spending their golden years in poverty through no fault of their own.

Now that Labour are in a position to do something about it, after winning the last general election, just like HS2, we have not seen or heard anything yet. There was an opportunity to put things right at the recent Westminster budget, but it was missed. When it comes to doing the right thing by 1950s-born women, what pressures are you putting on your party colleagues in Westminster to come good on all the promises that you made whilst in opposition? Will you also reiterate your commitment to getting justice for these women?

Well, thank you very much, and I'm grateful for that question, Peredur. It is very close to many of us in this Chamber, the campaign for those women, the 1950s women. Many different campaigns: WASPI—. We have actually all got women in our constituencies and women in this Chamber who are affected by this, and we've taken a consistent line in support of those women to seek justice for them. So, this is something where I will follow this up, not just with the UK Government, with the pensions Minister, but also take stock again with those who are leading the campaign in terms of what they would like us to do. I mean, you know that there had been some progress, and I would say that Stephen Timms, who was formerly Chair of the select committee, had been very robust and constructive with this. He's now in the new UK Government. So, I will take this back and then share the responses with the Chamber, with colleagues.

Cabinet Secretary, I'm sure you have seen the latest DWP statistics highlighting just how catastrophic the decision to remove winter fuel payments from pensioners was. It seems that 50,000 extra pensioners will be thrown into poverty next year, and another 50,000 by 2030. Now, we know Scottish Labour have had the sense to go against their leaders in Westminster and pledge to reinstate the payment in Scotland, whilst sadly Members and Ministers here continue to defend the appalling decision. Cabinet Secretary, with that in mind, how many pensioners in Wales need to be plunged into poverty before the Government condemns this devastating policy?

Well, we continue to support all those at risk of falling into fuel poverty. It is important that we use all the levers that we have to do that, maximising the levers, continuing to invest in our fuel voucher and discretionary assistance schemes to help people with fuel costs, getting more money into people's pockets, maximising incomes, making sure that people can and still do apply. They still have time for pension credit in order to access the winter fuel payment. In fact, at a meeting with the Older People's Commissioner for Wales recently, we agreed that we needed to continue to join forces to encourage older people to claim pension credit by the December deadline.

But I think it is important just to tell colleagues that this is very much a Welsh lever that we have,  that is, the discretionary assistance fund. Between May 2023 and 30 April 2024, more than 70,000 awards were made to older people in crisis from the discretionary assistance fund. Also, another lever we have is our council tax reduction scheme, which provides essential financial support to almost 260,000 households, and almost 102,000 pensioners are in receipt of the council tax reduction scheme, with over 76,000 paying no council tax at all.

So, I think it is also important, working with the UK Government, to acknowledge that, in terms of their pension credit uptake campaign, they are writing to 6,600 Welsh households directly—that's the Department for Work and Pensions—in Wales, who they've identified are eligible for pension credit, because as you know, there has been a disappointingly low take-up of pension credit, Peter Fox. So, those households are being invited directly to claim pension credit. And of course we have seen the intervention of authorities like Neath Port Talbot, with Policy in Practice demonstrating that we can, through working with local authorities, directly approach pensioners, and through the 'Claim what's yours' campaign, that people can take this up.

I think it's also really important to recognise the £30 million this year that we're investing in our Warm Homes Nest scheme, because that's what we need to do: ensure that people are living in homes that are warm. That helps us to tackle fuel poverty for home owners and households renting from private landlords, and it's free expert energy advice that's so important through that programme, via the Nest helpline.

Diolch yn fawr, Luke Fletcher. We work closely with the UK Government to support people in custody, assist with their rehabilitation, and ensure that they're supported on release. And by working together with our local authorities and partners in the third sector, we ensure that the relevant public services are available to those leaving prison.

Thank you for that response, Cabinet Secretary.

I'm afraid the reality on the ground is very different to what you set out in your answer. The impact of the UK Government's early release scheme is being felt acutely in my region, especially in Bridgend where we have Parc prison. Many of the people being released at the moment are being released with little or short notice, with little support; some in the early hours of the morning; some having meetings organised for them, but then not being released in time for them to actually attend those meetings; and some with nothing more than the shirt on their back to their name.

Rebecca Lloyd, chief executive officer of BARC community outreach centre in Bridgend, has contacted my office several times about the scheme’s impact. She has told us that she's seeing, on a regular basis, and I quote, 'People walk from the prison onto the streets, and that then people are deliberately reoffending to return to the relative security of prison.' These people are now bracing for winter, which is going to be about survival. Many of them in the area rely on services like Rebecca’s when local authorities struggle to source housing. So, how is the Welsh Government engaging with and supporting those organisations on the ground, and what work is under way with the UK Government to find a more permanent solution, because the current arrangement is consigning people to misery?

Well, thank you very much for your question.

You will recall, it was on 12 July, shortly after the general election, that the Lord Chancellor, Shabana Mahmood, gave a speech explaining that if prisons were to run out of places, courts would be forced to delay sending offenders to jail and police unable to arrest dangerous criminals. And it is a crisis made be the former UK Government, and I'm sure you would agree and recognise that crisis.

This is a short-term response, but, obviously, we need radical, long-term reform of our justice system. But I think the importance of looking at the early release scheme is that it was a decisive action that the Government took to address the capacity issues in prisons. We have been engaged in the process. It's not devolved, of course, but we've been involved in the process, and we were represented on the taskforce that oversaw the implementation approach, and represented on the Wales-level implementation board led by HM Prison and Probation Service in Wales. Importantly, and this is the issue about what happens when you are released, as you described, housing officials are involved with our local authorities, working closely with the Ministry of Justice, HMPPS and probation.

So, obviously, it has to be, as well, about lessons learnt from the first tranche. The first tranche of release was 10 September. The feedback has been that relationships worked effectively between probation, housing and health leads. But I will, of course, meet with, and I did in fact meet with the Minister, Alex Davies-Jones, prior to the early release, and I will be meeting her again shortly, and feeding back to HMPPS. So, it is important that you shared those points with me today.

I thank my colleague for raising this important issue. Cabinet Secretary, sadly, the reoffending rate remains stubbornly high, particularly among women. One of the main reasons many reoffend is due to the lack of support, such as housing and mental health support. In a recent interview on Sky News, highlighting the homelessness issue in Bridgend, one interviewee spoke of the likelihood of reoffending just to have a warm bed for the winter. Cabinet Secretary, do you agree that this is a sad state of affairs? And will you outline the actions that the Welsh Government will take to ensure that those leaving prison are provided with accommodation and all necessary support?

Diolch yn fawr, Altaf Hussain, and, again, an extremely important question following on from Luke Fletcher’s question. We have a homelessness support and prevention budget. We provide over £267,000 to support accommodation provision for people leaving prison, and this includes £90,000 to co-fund six accommodation pathway co-ordinators, and that's in collaboration with His Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service across Wales. We also have a Prison Link Cymru service in north Wales—vital support provided for people leaving prison and reducing the risk of homelessness and reoffending.

In terms of offender housing and resettlement—and this is working very closely on the, as we call it, jagged edge between devolved and non-devolved responsibilities—we have a community accommodation service tier 3. It's been rolled out across 12 local authorities in Wales. It offers people who'd otherwise be at risk of homelessness on release from prison up to 84 nights temporary accommodation. To date, 165 bed spaces have been created. And, as I've said, we have accommodation pathway co-ordinators across Wales. 

We also, I think, importantly, have learnt lessons from the post-custody accommodation working group. And Shelter Cymru has been funded this year to deliver housing and homelessness advice and assistance to women and transgender individuals in custody at HMP Eastwood Park. This is through a combination of regular physical presence and remote working at HMP Eastwood Park. So, what’s important is the way in which we are responding in terms of our responsibilities, working in partnership, of course, with the UK Government, and that the funding is being made available.

But I would say—and I responded to Luke Fletcher on this point earlier on—that the Lord Chancellor had to take decisive action because of the long-standing capacity issues in prisons as a result of the failures, I have to say, I'm afraid, Altaf, of the former Government. This is the sustainable early release scheme that we were talking about earlier. But we actually need radical, longer term reform of the justice system. Our vision for justice is for a preventative, trauma-informed approach that also addresses the underlying causes of offending, stops crime happening in the first place and keeps people out of prison.

Cabinet Secretary, I was very encouraged by the UK Government appointment of James Timpson as Minister of State for Prisons, Probation and Reducing Offending. In his own businesses, he’s shown an example of taking on ex-prisoners, which is so important to them. It gives them the opportunity to rebuild their lives for themselves and their families, it reduces reoffending, and it’s a very effective and worthwhile policy. I just wonder, Cabinet Secretary, if you could work with businesses in Wales to give them confidence to go down this route. Statistics show that 90 per cent of employers who have taken on ex-prisoners are very satisfied indeed with the performance of those staff, and it’s worth while for society in general, as we know.

Thank you very much, John Griffiths, very much following on from the points I have made as to how we can keep people out of prison with a preventative approach, but also those who are in prison, to intervene and to support to prevent reoffending. I was very pleased to meet Lord Timpson, the UK Government Minister of State for Prisons, Probation and Reducing Reoffending. That’s his title—there’s never been a title like that, certainly not with the previous Government. We discussed our shared priorities, and you will be aware that he’s been very clear—publicly clear—about the fact that he doesn’t believe that all people should be in prison, particularly women, but also that we need to look at the prevention opportunities.

It is important that prisoners have access to the Working Wales advice and guidance service, that they have impartial employability and careers advice. We do have Working Wales advisers who act as a referral point to the Welsh Government, to employability and skills support programmes. Learning and skills development is devolved, so we are responsible. It is important, the message you give to businesses, because this is something, also, with probation, where we can work to ensure that, as happened many years ago—unfortunately, it was stopped by the privatisation of the probation service by the former Government—. But that experience, particularly for people on probation, leaving prison, and making sure that they have got the support—so, working directly with prisons and prisoners to provide meaningful skills and employment upon release—will clearly help with preventing reoffending.

Thank you to Luke Fletcher for this important question. It's so easy for us to forget about prisoners. Trefnydd, I don't quite agree with your analysis that the early release programme has led to this problem. Perhaps it's brought the problem to the fore, but it's an old problem. The lack of support in prison, and then after release from prison, is a problem that goes back decades, and, indeed, is a problem that the previous Labour Government were involved with. There was a huge increase in the prison population under the Tony Blair and Gordon Brown administrations.

One key way of ensuring that people don't reoffend is that they get the right support in prison, that they get the mental health and the physical health support within the prison. The cost of health expenditure in public prisons in Wales is £7.1 million, but the block grant is £2.5 million, and this has remained static since 2004, without taking into account inflation or the increase in the prison population. It is crucial in terms of rehabilitation and reducing risk that people have the right access to the treatment and medicines that they need. I saw that when I was a criminal barrister—I saw that clients weren't getting the medicines and support that they needed.

This issue, in terms of the shortage in the block grant, has been raised a number of times by Dr Rob Jones and even by the Health and Social Care Committee here. So, has the Trefnydd spoken to the UK Government about increasing the block grant? Because the gap we have at the moment is simply not sustainable. Thank you.

Thank you for your question.

It is important that we also see what we're responsible for as a Welsh Government and what the UK Government is responsible for, and how we collaborate. You raised very important points. In terms of offender health and mental health provision, we do have a partnership agreement for prison health in Wales. It's an agreement between the Welsh Government, HMPPS, health boards and Public Health Wales. It's jointly chaired, again, like much we do, across the two Governments. But I think it's important for me just to quote from the priority from that agreement:

'prison should be a place where an individual can reform their lives.'

It commits to

'the shared objective of ensuring those in prison can live in environments that promote health and well-being and where health services can be accessed to an equivalent standard of those within the community.'

Indeed, we've also recently published the 'Better Learning, Better Chances: prison learning and skills provision' policy. So, we've got the policies, we've got the partnership, we've got the collaboration, and we've got the determination, very much led by Lord Timpson, to address these issues, in partnership with the UK Government and HMPPS. I'm looking forward to meeting Dr Rob Jones from the Wales Governance Centre in the next couple of weeks, with colleagues from HMPPS, particularly to look at his really important factfile on prisons and sentencing in Wales, and the more recently updated one for 2024.

Questions now from the party spokespeople. Conservative spokesperson, Joel James.

Thank you, Llywydd. Cabinet Secretary, Wales's communities are becoming increasingly diverse and face many challenges, due to economic migration, deprivation, poverty, intergenerational differences, and, worryingly, the rise of hate crime and the threat of extremism. Community cohesion is therefore essential in helping to reduce potential problems and help resolve issues before they occur. As you are well aware, there's also a direct correlation between community cohesion and a person's view as to whether or not they can influence local decisions. Higher levels of community cohesion are reported by people who feel that they understand local politics, for example, where they have a good grasp of the work done by their local councillors, and where there is a close working relationship between elected officials and their community. The most recent data published by the national survey has revealed that only about 30 per cent of people in Wales feel that they’re able to influence decisions at a local level. We also know that there is an increased apathy towards voting in general, with voter turnout, on the whole, decreasing at nearly every election. With this in mind, Cabinet Secretary, and for the purposes of improving community cohesion, what current initiatives do you have to improve and encourage interest in local politics and the work of locally elected representatives? Thank you.

Thank you very much for that interesting and profound question, Joel James. I’m not sure if you contributed yesterday to the statement made by Jayne Bryant, which was directly on this issue, in terms of ways in which we are seeking to improve local democracy and enhance public engagement in local democracy, and democracy as a whole. I recognise your key points about community cohesion, and that we want to seek to have a nation that looks to hope not hate; that’s our campaign in Wales. We had a targeted burst of Hate Hurts Wales earliers on this year, and you know that we had the hate crime statistics most recently, which were worrying in terms of the increase, for example, in religious hate crime in Wales.

I would say that there are many ways in which we’re seeking to address this from my portfolio. I’m very keen that we have got a real opportunity with the Elections and Elected Bodies (Wales) Act 2024 that went through—I can see the former Counsel General is joining us virtually; he took this through in July—where we’re going to have, as was said yesterday, the opportunity for more people to be registered, in terms of compulsory registration, to encourage more people to engage and to vote. I also think that we all have a responsibility as political parties, haven’t we, to encourage our young people, and particularly our 16 and 17-year-olds, to take advantage of the voting system.

I think one point I would make is that we have an opportunity, and I hope you will respond to the draft guidance that I have led as a result of that legislation—section 32—for political parties to develop diversity and inclusion strategies, and also take responsibility for delivering on the data and the numbers of diverse people we seek to bring into elected office, and also to consider a voluntary route to gender quotas. That’s just one part of my responsibility in terms of trying to ensure that this place can reflect Wales in running Wales.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. Volunteering has been shown to be an aspect of social interaction that has proven positive benefits, both in terms of health and well-being. Moreover, there is what is called a virtuous cycle between volunteering and social cohesion, whereby contributing to the benefit of the community provides a sense of solidarity and a connection with other people and their area. Not only does it help people to get to know others in the community, but research has shown that it also helps increase a sense of trust, pride in the place you live, and a connection between people from different backgrounds, thus building an overall resilience within the community in the face of potential division and challenging times. Therefore, encouraging volunteering is of huge benefit to communities.

We know that there are challenges in recruiting and retaining volunteers, and this, I believe, comes from a misplaced sense that volunteering, whilst starting as a willingness to help and to be involved, often ends up becoming a burden, in particular an administrative one. Cabinet Secretary, what initiatives have you taken to promote the benefits of volunteering to communities, and what action do you think could be taken to reduce administrative burdens on volunteers? Thank you.

Diolch yn fawr. A very important question, and also a key responsibility of mine to support the third sector, and the third sector infrastructure, which actually underpins all the initiatives to encourage volunteering in Wales. I am very pleased to have worked with the voluntary sector, and the third sector partnership council, in supporting our volunteers.

It was interesting during the pandemic how many people came forward to volunteer in many ways. People who were furloughed came forward to volunteer. But, following the pandemic and people were trying to return after very troubled times back into work and their communities and their families, and then the cost-of-living crisis, it became very difficult for volunteering. So, it is now a question of us supporting volunteers to come back into the important roles that they play in our organisations. So, actually, it very much links to your first question, because this is the lifeblood of Wales, isn't it, the civic engagement, community cohesion, and, I think, we all meet volunteers in our constituencies and in everything that we do. I think the volunteering that we see, which we can then support by making sure that the funding is available for the volunteering infrastructure, in the voluntary sector at local authority level, and are supported.

Now, there is something that, I think, during this week as White Ribbon Week and following on in the next 16 days of activism—. There are a lot of volunteers involved in tackling violence against women, domestic abuse and sexual violence, and I do praise the work that they do. And I'd also like to praise all the work that's going on at the moment in terms of our communities supporting our warm hubs. And, just only recently, I visited a hub in Ely in Cardiff, where not only were the statutory services run, but there were volunteers who were working and getting experience. And, of course, that is a key benefit of volunteering, at all ages—getting experience—which can often help in terms of moving forward not just in their health and well-being, but into jobs and employment.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. As you know, there is a clear trend towards increased community cohesion and deprivation in an area. One of the reasons why this is the case is because people feel safer in their homes and safer travelling and walking around their area. Evidence shows that 72 per cent of people who live in the least deprived areas feel safe in all situations, compared with just 54 per cent of people who live in the most deprived areas. Sadly, one of the other reasons is that more deprived areas have more community tensions, which, as we have seen this year, can lead to anti-social behaviour in public spaces, hate crimes, intimidation, harassment and so forth, and this increases anxiety and fear within the community, especially between different generations. It also frequently leads to a breakdown in relationships with the police and local authorities, due to a distrust of those in positions of authority. In order to tackle this, research shows that communities that have lots of activities for younger people, places for them to go and have worthwhile experiences, and where they can have the support of community mentors, tend to have fewer instances of anti-social behaviour. With this in mind, what actions are the Welsh Government taking to improve the number and variety of activities for younger people in deprived communities? Thank you. 

Thank you for that question, Joel. I think that there are many of us in this Chamber who have supported over the years and in Government—and now, fortunately, are being able to recover it—our great youth service, the youth services that many of us probably also enjoyed ourselves as young people and, indeed, in our constituencies. But it's crucially important that we can rebuild those youth services in partnership with local authorities and the third sector in the most deprived areas, and that's something where I can see that the investment that we're making in our youth services with local authorities is crucially important. Now, on 28 November, just next week, we do have a Wales Safer Communities network with local Safer Communities partnerships. And, next week, they're going to be showcasing excellent partnership working, successes in community safety, which will include the ways in which they are working with young people, partnerships that show mentoring and peer support, taking forward public information campaigns, and working closely with communities as well. And can I thank our schools for taking a lead on this, and our community and family support services, which are making such a difference in terms of reaching out to young people in these communities?

The Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Sioned Wiiliams.  

Diolch, Llywydd. Cabinet Secretary, both you and I and all those present held powerful testimony on Monday evening at the candlelit vigil held here at the Senedd to support the International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women and the White Ribbon campaign. It's always heartbreaking to hear survivors bear witness to the impact of the terrible violence they have suffered at the hands of men. But we also heard about how survivors find light in that darkness, and we know that specialist support services are often the path to that light. Welsh Women's Aid's upcoming state of the sector report, which will be published on 10 December and of which I've received an advance copy as chair of the cross-party group on violence against women and children, highlights the ongoing issue of short-term funding in the VAWDASV sector in Wales, with most grants only lasting 12 months, and, of course, this adversely affects staff recruitment, retention and the ability to provide trauma-informed support. And the issue of the need for sustainably funded services is also highlighted, of course, in the national advisers' annual report, published this week. So, does the Cabinet Secretary acknowledge that we need to see sustainable long-term funding models to ensure services can plan effectively and provide uninterrupted support to survivors? And have you evaluated what implications the UK Government's decision to increase national insurance contributions has for these third sector organisations who support survivors in Wales?

Thank you very much for your very important question.

It's really important that you have—. Thank you for asking this question this week, because it is so relevant to what we all shared on Monday and which we continue to share, not just through these 16 days of activism, but all year around, and in my responsibility as Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice.

It is vital that we invest in these specialist services, investing in VAWDASV services, because it is key to our commitment in the Violence against Women, Domestic Abuse and Sexual Violence (Wales) Act 2015. So, we are working with our specialist sector providers to review funding arrangements for VAWDASV. I'm really admiring of our national advisers and the role that they play. Yasmin Khan has been chairing a sustainable funding work stream of our violence against women, domestic abuse and sexual violence partnership strategy. I mean, it is complex, as you know—the range of funding streams that come through. PCCs have been funding many excellent schemes, including perpetrator schemes. We heard about those on Monday at the event that was chaired by Joyce Watson and the National Federation of Women's Institutes. We're looking at how we can have fair and effective and consistent funding for those specialist services in Wales. But, just looking at the capital programme, for example, it was £2.2 million last year. It's been maintained at that level for this year. Those capital projects are really important for those services, and we've given direct funding to a number of organisations, not just Welsh Women's Aid, but BAWSO, New Pathways, Safer Wales, Hafan Cymru, Western Bay, Calan DVS, Adferiad. We do fund across Wales.

Now, I'll just quickly say that I met with Alex Davies-Jones, who, of course, is the Ministry of Justice Parliamentary Under-Secretary, and we talked about the fact that—. Again, back to the jagged edge. Who is funding what? We need consistency between streams from the UK Government and the Welsh Government. And, of course, we are assessing with the third sector the impact of the national insurance increases, in terms of employers' responsibilities. I think it is important that we're working with the third sector across the board. We do have a very robust third sector, in terms of working with the third sector partnership council, which I chair. We're currently engaging—and this is across the board with the third sector—with our third sector partners, in line with the code of practice for funding the third sector, to assess their budgetary needs following the UK Government's autumn budget.

We're almost out of time on this set of ministerial questions and we're only on the second question of the second spokesperson. So, if I can ask for shorter ministerial answers, please. Questions can be as long as they're timed for. Maybe we do need to reflect on the timing of ministerial answers now. I know it's the favourite subject of the Deputy Presiding Officer, and he's about to come into the chair. So, keep to time, please, everybody, and maybe we'll need to time everybody in the future.

But, Sioned now. 

The vigil helped us remember those women whose lives have been lost due to male violence. Yesterday, you asked us all to recommit ourselves to recognising that women should feel safe in public—safe to go out, safe to walk the street. Stalking often starts with minor obsessive behaviours, but can escalate to harassment and even deadly violence. It's one of the most significant predicators of femicide. According to the latest crime survey for England and Wales, one in five women have experienced stalking, and black women are also more likely to be stalked. But conviction rates are still alarmingly low, with only 1.7 per cent of cases resulting in a conviction. Campaigners such as the Suzy Lamplugh Trust say that we need to recognise stalking as a distinct and urgent threat, and this should have a distinct and proper response, a proactive approach that targets stalking directly, intervenes early and supports victims. So, has the Welsh Government explored the possibility of introducing a tackling stalking plan to complement the VAWDASV strategy? And what steps are you taking to ensure that public sector professionals, such as those in healthcare, receive independent specialist training on handling stalking cases? Diolch.

Diolch yn fawr. Well, we are delivering our violence against women, domestic abuse and sexual violence Act, and, of course, that includes all aspects of sexual violence and harassment. We have, therefore, got a work stream in our strategy on tackling violence in public places. And I'll certainly be taking forward options for a stalking strategy of that kind. 

Diolch, Cabinet Secretary. The majority of women in the criminal justice system are victims of violence, domestic abuse and sexual violence. Nearly 60 per cent of women who offend have experienced domestic abuse. The criminal justice system is failing Welsh women, as recently highlighted once again by the research of Dr Rob Jones, in his latest report. The Welsh Government's women's justice blueprint is meant to offer a fresh approach to female offending, but instead of seeing a decrease in the number of women in Wales, we're on track to witness an increase, according to Dr Jones's research. When the Wales Governance Centre requested information, for instance, on how many Welsh women in prison are pregnant or are mothers to children under 18, the Ministry of Justice refused to release that data, although we know that separation for women from their children is often cited as one of the most distressing aspects of imprisonment, with profound impacts on mental health. Dr Jones's report makes it clear that the situation for Welsh female prisoners isn't improving, and underlines the need for Wales-only data. So, how does the Welsh Government propose to identify and address the challenges that are seriously impacting the way that Welsh women are treated by the criminal justice system? And could you provide an update on the progress towards establishing the residential women's centre in Swansea?

Thank you, Sioned Williams. I'm meeting Dr Rob Jones shortly, and not just Dr Rob Jones but also with HM Prison and Probation Service, to look at how we can ensure that we have proper access to disaggregated data. There is now clear willingness and agreement with the new UK Government to ensure that we overcome that, in terms of the situation where the work of the Wales Governance Centre really has highlighted the importance of that disaggregated data, and we need to bring that to the fore in terms of making that accessible, to make sure that the justice system is working in Wales. We, of course, have our women's justice blueprint, and also my colleague the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Welsh Language recently went to a meeting, which was a meeting about justice and women's justice, where the women's residential centre was raised, I know, by my colleague. It was chaired by the Lord Chancellor, who is very keen on women's residential centres. We've got the only pilot in England and Wales, and I'm pressing forward for it. We've got the site; it now needs to be opened.  

Diolch, Buffy Williams. Last month I was pleased to confirm funding of £1.5 million this year for safe and warm spaces in the community under the title Warm Hubs—Open to All. We will continue to work with local authorities to promote our collective efforts to help in our communities over the coming winter months.

I'd like to declare an interest, Dirprwy Lywydd. I'm still a trustee at Canolfan Pentre. I know the difference this warm-hub funding makes to the day-to-day running of the canolfan. It means we can continue to provide our well-established services as well as additional service sessions, but we can keep our doors open for longer and support more residents. I know that past warm-hub funding has supported community groups like Pontygwaith and the Waun Wen centres, the community interest companies like Manage Money Wales and Mothers Matter, and churches like Bethany Baptist in Ynyshir and Seion in Maerdy, in similar ways. But one of the biggest challenges previously was communication with residents. So, what steps is the Welsh Government taking to ensure clear communication and accessibility to warm hubs this winter?

Diolch yn fawr, Buffy Williams, and can I pay tribute to your work? You are a trustee, and I’ve been to Canolfan Pentre and it does provide such a brilliant service to your local community. I have recently written to all Senedd Members and Members of Parliament to highlight the new funding for warm hubs. I mean, it’s interesting, just in terms of Rhondda Cynon Taf, that it’s going to receive this year £124,170 from the warm hubs programme that I have announced. But already, Rhondda Cynon Taf has also been providing funding itself over the past two years to local groups and organisations to run winter welcome centres, so that is now going to be supported by our new Welsh Government funding.

Cabinet Secretary, the additional support you've provided for the warm hubs scheme will undoubtedly make a difference to communities, and particularly isolated ones this winter. I think we can all agree that any initiative that helps bring communities together is one worth investing in. How do you see the warm hubs scheme expanding in the long term? Considering that this initiative is probably most likely accessed by the elderly and vulnerable, do you see potential for warm hubs to link up with other basic health services, using it as an opportunity to do routine health checks, for example? If so, what needs to be put into place to make this happen? Thank you.

Diolch yn fawr, Joel James. Many warm hubs have already been established, so I'll just mention one I've visited, in Ely, and Cardiff actually has hubs in every part of the community. They're very good for signposting to other services, and, of course, that includes health and well-being, but I think most importantly for all age groups who use warm hubs, particularly older people, it will be an opportunity to break down isolation, meet other people, have refreshments and be signposted to important advice services to, for example, get advice about taking up not just pension credit, but access to other benefits, such as the discretionary assistance fund and the council tax reduction scheme.

The Welsh Government's funding for warm hubs this year is extremely welcome in Wrexham, where, once again, our libraries will be taking part in the initiative. They provide safe, comforting spaces, and, as you said, they're a place to meet people also. Despite highlighting the importance, just a few short weeks ago, when promoting warm hubs, Wrexham County Borough Council are now doing a consultation on the future of our libraries, stating it needs to save £185,000. Whilst of course I understand there are financial pressures, the impact that this relatively small amount of money makes is significant. I know the Cabinet Secretary will agree with me that libraries play a crucial role in our communities—it's very important that Wrexham people respond to the consultation—but will she continue to work with the local authority to make them realise that libraries are not just there for library facilities, but that they also have additional benefits such as the warm hubs? Diolch.

Diolch yn fawr, Lesley Griffiths. Well, the community hubs that I visited that are based in libraries—when you talk to the library staff, they say that, actually, the use of the library and the library resources, the children's libraries, has always increased as a result of being part of something wider. I would just say that Wrexham has got, in this round of funding, £64,470 towards warm hubs, which should enable it to look creatively at the ways in which it can build its community libraries. But also, I have to say, across Wales, there are a range of ways in which local authorities have managed to keep their community libraries going, both by running the services directly and through some asset transfers to community groups or community and town councils. But it's clear that people must respond, and I hope they will respond to this consultation, but it's clear the role of the community library is much more than just its traditional role and it can be vital in terms of cutting isolation and enabling people to access other services.

Thank you very much. I had a very productive meeting with the Minister for energy consumers last month. The UK Government have important levers to help alleviate fuel poverty, and I welcome the opportunity to work with them on an open basis to share policies to better protect Welsh households.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. I volunteer at a foodbank in the Swansea valley and one woman who regularly attends the foodbank had asked for help because she had seen her energy bills shoot up recently and was struggling to cope. She was eligible for support under the ECO4 scheme, which is funded by the UK Government, and she received solar panels, insulation work and had a new heating system. But now, even though she can prove that her bills have risen since the work undertaken as part of this scheme was completed, and needs to discuss what could be the cause of these increases, those who did the work are not available to help her. I'm hopeful that National Energy Action Cymru will be able to assist her, but my constituent’s plight raises the question, Cabinet Secretary, as to what discussions you are having with the UK Government to ensure that vulnerable people who have to plan every penny that they spend aren’t left in crisis, rather than in a better position in terms of their costs by fuel poverty prevention schemes. Are you confident that the Welsh Government’s plans offer a sufficient level of protection and advice after these energy efficiency measures are installed in people’s homes?

Diolch yn fawr, Sioned Williams. I very much recognise the work that you do in the cross-party group on fuel poverty, and I'm sure these issues will be raised in due course. As I said, I met with the Minister for energy consumers last month—Miatta Fahnbulleh MP—and we talked about the ways in which the UK Government can, indeed, work with us as a Welsh Government to tackle fuel poverty. But I've been very concerned about the impact—and it's very clear—the adverse impact Ofgem's October price cap increase has had. Indeed, I will now go back to the Minister to raise this issue about the ECO4 scheme, not devolved to Wales, but you know, of course, and I've mentioned the Warm Homes scheme, the £30 million that is, of course, now being implemented this year.

I think it is important that I have also met with energy suppliers. The Bevan Foundation did a very good report recently that actually encouraged people to approach their energy suppliers, because they can help with energy bills, but also, consistently, and I've raised this with the Minister, I've been asking for a social tariff, which I think would help customers.

Can I finally say that I hope that colleagues here will have visited the Fuel Bank Foundation who were here yesterday in the Senedd, who are reaching out to thousands of people in Wales? You, in fact, can all be referral agents for the Fuel Bank Foundation. I announced a further £70,000 to support the work of the Fuel Bank Foundation. That's particularly going to help people with prepayment meters, but also people off grid.

Question 5 [OQ61890] has been withdrawn. So, question 6, Janet Finch-Saunders.

Diolch yn fawr, Janet Finch-Saunders. We're committed to working in partnership to reduce crime and anti-social behaviour in north Wales. While policing is currently a reserved matter, we work closely with policing colleagues and other criminal justice stakeholders to engage with communities and support the safety of people across Wales.

Thank you, Minister. As a previous cabinet member in Conwy County Borough Council for public protection and community safety, going back a few years now, we used to have measures whereby the Crown Prosecution Service and the youth justice people and police would be able to come together to stop prevailing anti-social behaviour. I have to say that, recently, I’ve become very concerned when residents are approaching me and talking about feral youths and some of the anti-social behaviour and community safety issues. We’ve just had some fabulous new shelters along the promenade in Llandudno, around about £25,000 each, and 17 windows have been smashed. We’ve had a fire recently started and fighting in Mostyn Street. This is not a good look for a nice town that wants to attract tourists.

Now, the big issue that I’ve had with matters such as this—

You need to ask, Janet, please.

The CPS and the courts are unwilling to give out custodial sentences, or do anything, really, to keep these youngsters in check. When they’ve approached the parents, the parents would say, ‘Well, there’s nothing I can do. It’s not my responsibility.’ Well, I was just wondering, £160 million has been put into this budget, but how do you work with local authorities, the CPS and youth justice to ensure that, where you’ve got a gang culture starting up, it’s nipped in the bud immediately and that people are not living in fear of 11-year-olds, 13-year-olds and 15-year-olds who then have gangs supporting them? It’s just unacceptable in this day and age. Diolch.

Diolch. I am aware that you recently met with North Wales Police, raising these issues of concern. I have to say that some of us really enjoyed our weekend in Llandudno—thank you very much—last weekend, and it seemed to be a very cohesive and friendly community. My understanding is that, of course, we have to address anti-social behaviour, but it is about actually reaching out, and we talked earlier on about the importance of the youth service diverting young people away from this kind of behaviour, enabling them to have access to services that meet their needs. And I understand that there’s been—. And from my youth justice blueprint, we know that we can keep young people out of the criminal justice system if we intervene appropriately. Schools have a role to play with this, and there have been quite a few grants that have been made available to local partner agencies, which have benefited young people. So, I think this is something where youth justice and youth work work closely together and community engagement as well.

I’ll just finally, quickly mention the fact that there is this Wales Safer Communities network; they are showcasing good examples of partnership working, which will include working with young people through youth justice, and it’s very much a partnership approach, and they will be announcing their awards next week. I will particularly look for ways in which we can learn about ensuring that we can divert young people away from anti-social behaviour and the criminal justice system.

Diolch, Julie Morgan. I have met the UK Minister for victims in the Ministry of Justice, Alex Davies-Jones, who is keen to engage and learn from our work in Wales, and the UK Minister for victims in the Home Office, Jess Phillips, who has demonstrated a long-standing commitment to tackle violence against women.

Thank you for that response.

On Monday we will mark the United Nations's International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women, or White Ribbon Day, and I was pleased to attend the event and vigil this week, hosted by Joyce Watson, and I will be holding my own vigil, as I do every year, in Cardiff North.

Almost every week, we hear another story of another woman who has been killed through violence or has been the victim of violence. Very sadly, earlier this year, one of my constituents was murdered and became one of the 71 women so far this year who have lost their lives to male violence in the UK. We seem to be in an epidemic, and it has to stop. The theme of this year's White Ribbon Day is 'it starts with men'. Men have to become our allies and call out this awful behaviour. What more does the Welsh Government plan to do to stop violence against women and girls in Wales?

Diolch yn fawr, Julie Morgan. Thank you, again, for reminding us of the 71 women who've lost their lives—those victims who've lost their lives to male violence. It does have to start with men. Can I say how impressive it was to have the men from across the Chamber speaking at the vigil—cross-party contributions—and the White Ribbon ambassadors? Yesterday, I met with, virtually, 140 civil servants who were White Ribbon ambassadors. The Welsh Government is the only Government in the UK that's actually accredited for White Ribbon ambassadors.

But, just very quickly, I think we have to look at the ways in which we are trying to tackle that culture of violence against women. We've got to address misogyny and sexual harassment. We've got a very effective ‘Sound’ campaign, which is about how we can focus on behaviours and harms around public sexual harassment. It is about men engaging with each other, and it is making a difference to how they see women and their relationships with women. But also, of course, it has to go back to education and our new, pioneering curriculum, which we know is, starting at the age of three, to enable children to learn about healthy and respectful relationships.

There are a broad range of funding streams and initiatives in place across the Welsh Government to support pensioners in South Wales East. Examples include investment in the regional integration fund, funding for warm hubs, and action to increase pension credit take-up, end abuse and create age-friendly communities.

Cabinet Secretary, Labour’s disgusting decision to scrap winter fuel payments will hit some 540,000 pensioners across Wales, including nearly 100,000 in my region of South Wales East alone. This Welsh Labour Government has yet again let the people of Wales down, and in particular our pensioners, by not doing the morally right thing just by speaking out against this cruel attack.

Last week, the First Minister proudly boasted that the Government had invested £1.5 million in warm hubs across the country to keep residents warm this winter. It’s a damning indictment of Labour that these sorts of centres are even being established in 2024. The First Minister refused to be drawn on whether she was proud of her Government’s decision to withdraw winter fuel payments—a move that will lead to 4,000 premature deaths here in the UK. But, as far as I’m concerned, her lack of words showed that, deep down, she knows that this policy was a very grave mistake. So, Cabinet Secretary, will you stand up for Wales, in the absence of any of your colleagues doing so, and admit that this cut was a grave mistake, and fight tooth and nail to get it reinstated for the benefit of each and every resident who needs it here in Wales?

Well, I have answered many questions this afternoon, and I've put the record straight in terms of the ways in which we are addressing this with the levers that we have got, supporting older people in many different ways through our initiatives. But I have to say: why are we in this position? Why are we in this position? We are in this position because of the £22 billion black hole that your Government left. Therefore, we have to find ways in which—. The UK Government, of course—it's their policy. We have to find ways in which we can not only rebuild our economy but, most importantly, rebuild our public services, which are so important to older people.

And, finally, question 9. Mick Antoniw.

Diolch yn fawr, Mick Antoniw. Along with my colleagues, I've had a range of conversations with the UK Government, including on their manifesto commitments to explore the devolution of youth justice and probation. 

Thank you for that answer. Of course, our justice system is at a precipice after 14 years of disastrous Tory Government policy. Cabinet Secretary, considerable work has been done by Welsh Government in preparation for the devolution of youth justice and probation. The overwhelming elements to make those areas successful are devolved functions. The UK Government has agreed to explore the devolution of these areas. Bearing in mind the amount of work that's been done, do you agree with me now that the time for further exploration has now been completed, and we need to get on with the implementation of the devolution of youth justice and probation in order to deliver better justice for those impacted by those services?

Thank you for this question, and, of course, I thank you for the work that we started together, when you were Counsel General and Minister for the Constitution, on this matter. Can I thank all those who've engaged with us in this journey already, and the progress we've made to make the case—actually, not just make the case, but prepare—for the devolution of youth justice and probation? I think that's where we thought we would be now, and we're very glad that it was in the UK Government manifesto. So, I'll be working closely with the Deputy First Minister and Counsel General as we take forward discussions with the UK Government on their manifesto commitment to devolve youth justice and probation.

I thank the Trefnydd.

Questions now to the Senedd Commission. The first question will come from Gareth Davies and be answered by Hefin David.

The Commission's budget provision for Senedd reform costs for 2023-24 were £571,000. In the current year, 2024-25, the budget is £2.1 million. And the Commission's draft budget for the next financial year, 2025-26, includes a £6.5 million provision for Senedd reform, but that is, of course, subject to a vote of this Chamber later this afternoon. These Senedd reform costs include provision for new staff to prepare for the seventh Senedd, increases to non-staff budgets and funding for reconfiguring the Chamber, and additional Members' officers in Tŷ Hywel. There will, of course, be further cost pressures for future years, but these remain estimates and projections that have yet to be refined in detail and incorporated into an annual budget, which again will be subject to the scrutiny of the Finance Committee and to be decided by this Senedd as a whole.

Thank you for that very comprehensive response, Commissioner. The 2025-26 Senedd Commission budget represents a total increase on the 2024-25 budget of close to 17 per cent, but the budget does not take into consideration the additional funding required to staff the offices of an additional 36 Members. Unlike Labour, Plaid Cymru and Reform UK, the Welsh Conservatives are opposed to Senedd expansion, one reason being the £120 million price tag for an enlarged devolved Parliament at a time when both Welsh and UK Labour Governments are making spending cuts and raising taxes. So, it’s of concern to me that a more detailed costing of Senedd reform hasn’t been published that takes into consideration the staffing costs of new Members.

The cost of the Senedd reform was also revised, increasing by £1.2 million on the previous projections, which adds to our concern that the true cost would be far higher still. The budget has also neglected to make targets for potential savings that have been identified in previous budgets. So, could the Commission outline what the true cost of Senedd reform will be, taking everything into account, and whether the Commission has been diligent in identifying potential ways to minimise the financial hit of Senedd reform to the public purse? Thank you.

Well, there were quite a few questions in there; I’ll pick out the ones that are relevant to the Commission. First of all, I think it’s important to note that the actual decision on Senedd reform was a decision for the Senedd as a whole, and it was passed by a two-thirds majority, and I think any gripes about that whole thing need to be directed at Ministers, who are there are decide, rather than Commissioners, who are merely here to serve.

The other thing I would say—[Interruption.] The other thing I would say is that he mentions a £1.2 million increase on the projected costs. Actually, that was a £1.2 million increase in capital costs, but staffing costs have actually fallen, so it only comes out at a £400,000 increase on previous costs. And, in fact, if the budget that is before the Senedd is passed later today, and we agree that staffing costs match Welsh Government staffing costs, then, actually, you could argue that the adjusted pay awards would lead to a reduction in the costs on Senedd reform from the regulatory impact assessment previously. So, we’re actually seeing costs, given the principles that we may agree later, actually falling. It’s an argument I’ve been reluctant to deploy, because I think it depends on the Senedd debating and passing the budget.

But, reflecting on a £120 million cost, I don't know where that comes from, because the Senedd Commission can only pass a budget on an annual basis. We don't carry reserves. We can only pass a budget, and we only produce a budget, on an annual basis, with a projection for the following two years. But that is very much subject to the agreement of the Senedd, and it can be stopped at any time with a vote of the Senedd, which will take place this afternoon. So, I think it would be very foolhardy to try and project costs into the future beyond the next two years. And we will reach a steady state in the seventh Senedd, but, of course, one Parliament can't bind the next one, therefore those will be issues for the seventh Senedd.

The second question will be answered by Joyce Watson and will be asked by Julie Morgan.

I thank you for the question, Julie. First Minister's questions are interpreted into British Sign Language each week on Tuesday afternoons, shortly after the item, and uploaded on Tuesday evening. Live interpretation is provided for the proceedings in both Plenary and committees in response to the content of those proceedings or when they are requested. Recent examples in Plenary include a Member debate by Mark Isherwood and a Health and Social Care Committee debate on mental health inequalities. Subtitling of proceedings is not possible at the moment with our existing broadcasting infrastructure. However, Commission officials have already started the process of changing this, using the latest AI software. The Commission's intention is to start using technology that will allow subtitling for the relocated Plenary sessions in Siambr Hywel from May 2025.

Thank you for that response.

I know, Joyce, that you're aware that I've raised these difficulties in the Chamber before and I have been contacted since that time by a number of deaf and hearing-impaired people, both constituents and from across Wales, to say how excluded they still feel from Senedd proceedings due to no subtitles being made available for all proceedings, and I'm glad to hear what you've said today about what you're going to try to do about that. But one constituent has noted that subtitles aren't even available on the recordings of the proceedings, and that leaves him wading through hours of texts in order to find the debate or statement that they're looking for.

I'm also disappointed the Senedd doesn't have the regular use of an interpreter. I also recently learned that it's the responsibility of the Senedd Member to try and source an interpreter if they are meeting with a deaf constituent, and that the Commission play no role in helping with this. So, I do feel that there are things that can be done, and I'm pleased to hear what is being done, but I think we've just got to make a much bigger effort to ensure that proceedings are available. I know some proceedings may be accessible and available, but it needs to be all proceedings, so that somebody doesn't have to prepare and request before they do something. So, I wondered if you've been able to look at any international ways of making proceedings accessible to deaf and hearing-impaired people. I know that the Scottish Parliament has done an awful lot in this area and I wondered if you could look at that.

Again, I know that you care, and others care, passionately about this, and I know that we are committed to delivering an equal experience to all people. I also know that myself and the Llywydd are happy to meet with you to discuss further some of the issues that have been highlighted today.

But there is a multi-year project to install brand-new broadcasting systems and infrastructure under way, and we hope that it will be complete within two years, but in incremental stages. It will deliver significant accessibility improvements, and that is the main driver for that work. As part of that project we are proposing to buy and install equipment with built-in features allowing data to be ingested, converted and displayed as subtitles, and the Commission's intention, funding permitting, is to start using the new broadcasting infrastructure for the relocated Plenary sessions in 2025, and then, subsequently, introducing it across committee rooms and in the new Siambr.

We will thoroughly test subtitling and captioning capabilities on the new broadcast system once they've been installed and commissioned, and hope to report on progress at the start of the summer recess in 2025. And as part of that testing, we'll investigate the use of automated AI-generated voice-to-text tools and how they can be integrated into the system.

We are also proposing to run a project during 2025 to replace the current Senedd.tv service. As part of the requirements for the new service, we will be seeking accessibility improvements, including an advanced video player that can display subtitles and captions. Thank you.

The third question will be answered by the Llywydd. Joel James.

There is an internal protocol in place to decide on illumination. There are two categories to the protocol. The first is to illuminate the building on five annual days that are usually marked by wider Senedd Commission activity. Those five days are: Holocaust Memorial Day, St David's Day, International Women's Day, International Day Against Homophobia, Biphobia and Transphobia, and International Day of Persons with Disabilities. The Senedd is also plunged into darkness each year to mark Earth Hour.

The second category in the protocol is for one-off events of national significance. These would be occasions that are either unexpected or do not happen every year, when a significant event is being celebrated or commemorated.

My office receives a large number of requests to illuminate the Senedd in support of charities, campaigns and good causes. Unfortunately, it is impractical to accommodate all such requests. For example, we have received 12 requests since September. Every day, every week marks some good cause, occasionally more than one.

As Llywydd, the protocol that I have mentioned and that I implement on illumination is only known internally at the moment within my office. I think I need to make that protocol public and I will be doing so as a result of this question, so thank you for asking it.

Thank you, Llywydd. And I'm grateful that, earlier this year, you allowed bowel cancer awareness posters to be placed in the Senedd, and I know how valued and appreciated this action was. However, I was disappointed that we were not able to get the Senedd lit up to recognise Ostomy Awareness Day, which falls on the first Saturday of every October.

From the discussions I had with your office and from your response today, I've understood that the reason as to why the Senedd could not be lit up was because of concerns that if it was done for one awareness day, then it sets a precedent to do it for all awareness days, which would not be possible, and I understand that argument. However, I do still think that it is disappointing that we are missing a great opportunity to engage with charities and organisations, to engage with the work that they do, and ultimately raise awareness of their causes.

You mentioned there that you were looking to publish your internal procedure, and I welcome that really wholeheartedly actually, but I was wondering if there's scope to expand that procedure to link up with these charities and organisations, because it would be good then to show that the Senedd fully supports the work that they do. Thank you.

Thank you for the supplementary, and I appreciate your understanding of the issues that you've faced and that other Members have faced in making a request for the lighting of the Senedd in support of a good cause and then not seeing that that met with the current protocol. 

Just to give you a flavour of some of the additional requests that have been used for lighting over the last five or six years and more, they have included: the Welsh football team in the Euros; the homecoming for Geraint Thomas as winner of the Tour de France; clap for carers during the COVID-19 lockdown; the centenary of the Urdd. There aren't many that have had that request approved. And as I said, the situation that faces us is that we do sometimes get multiple and frequent requests for various days or weeks in order to highlight charitable causes and good causes. I mentioned the 12 that we've received since the end of September—yours was one, of course, on the Ostomy Awareness Day. Organ Donation Week, leukodystrophy awareness, baby loss awareness, and others, have all come in as requests from Members.

I think now, as a next step, following your question—which, as I've said, I really welcome, in order to provide us with an opportunity to reflect on this—once I've published the protocol onto the Senedd intranet, then I think it may be useful for any Member to come up with any ideas that you may have, to reflect on whether the protocol meets your wish for how the Senedd estate is used to highlight good work in Wales, but, of course, understanding the multitude of applications that could inundate the Senedd and its inability to be multicoloured every single day of the week. So, getting the balance right is important. You've challenged that balance, and I think that's important to do, and we'll find a way that reflects the majority view of the Senedd in how we proceed. Felly, diolch.

Question 4 [OQ61906] has been withdrawn, and also question 5 [OQ61892] has been withdrawn. Therefore, I thank the Commissioners.

Item 4 today is the topical questions. The first question is from Janet Finch-Saunders.

Thank you, Janet. Wales is second in the world for recycling, meaning our recycling performance is already comparable to international deposit-return schemes. As our local authorities already deliver recycling at the level that a narrow recycling-only DRS would provide, it's vital that the scheme in Wales matches our high ambitions, including for reuse.

Oh, sorry, I was expecting a longer answer—sorry. [Laughter.] On that note, though, I have to say, and credit where credit is due, Conwy County Borough Council—and it goes back to the time when Sam Rowlands, my colleague to my left, was leader as well—we've got fantastic recycling rates in Conwy, and Wales itself is playing its part in recycling, and we've got to acknowledge that. However, if you do a beach clean, and work with organisations like the Marine Conservation Society, there's still a lot more to be done. There are still lots of bottles and things found on beaches when doing a beach clean. These then are ingested by many of our sea mammals, and we must never forget that we have a nature recovery crisis here.

So, for me, I brought to the Senedd—I think it was about three years ago; four years ago—a legislative proposal for a DRS and a waste reduction Bill. It secured cross-party support. Now, I've said before that it's all well and good bringing these forward, having them supported, but, then, putting that into policy. But the DRS was something that lots of people were looking forward to. I understand the issues around glass, but I don't agree with them. But to have stopped this in its tracks completely, I think you are—

You've lost your bottle.

Yes, you've lost your—. Do you know what—

You're asking a question on a topical topic. Please focus it to the Cabinet Secretary and not your colleagues, and ask the question, please.

Sorry, Janet.

No, you're all right. So, thanks to your actions now, as UKHospitality Cymru have stated, DRS now looks further away than ever. It is truly a symptom of the need to reform this Welsh Parliament, that it will have taken over a decade of debate to introduce a DRS for Wales.

So, Minister, what is your target date for the Wales-only scheme to come into force? Two, you have publicly blamed the previous UK Government and the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020—you used that as an excuse—yet you do not agree that your party, which is now the UK Government, could change the Act. Another question: I once supported the inclusion of glass, but have listened—. The First Minister says she listens, but I listened, and I agree with the way forward being pursued in the other three nations. So, what assessment have you made—

You've lost your bottle.

Cabinet Secretary, let the question be asked— 

You tell him.

Apologies.

Let the question be asked and I'm sure the Member is coming to the last question in her questions.

I'm astonished. My gast is flabbered.

What assessment have you made of the impact this is going to have now, not having a deposit-return scheme? What assessment have you made, before pulling out, of the cost of your decision to go it alone to the Welsh Government, and, more importantly, to our businesses in Wales? Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd.

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Janet, and I apologise, Dirprwy Lywydd. I’m utterly flabbergasted to see that the Conservatives have once again u-turned on a strongly held position of principle, and those principles, if they’re not saleable on one day, 'We'll find another set of principles so we can go forward.' I really, actually, commend that individual who brought forward that Bill, who said,

'There has been increased interest in whether glass bottles should be included in a DRS. I am pleased to agree...that glass should be part of the scheme in Wales.

'Recycling glass bottles lowers the risk of injury to people and wildlife as well as reducing our environmental impact. In fact, by including glass...there will be a reduction in CO2eq emissions of more than 50,000 tonnes each year—or nearly 1.3 million tonnes over 25 years!'

This will help, said that person,

'tackle the plague of glass bottles littering communities because its inclusion of glass will see the recycling of an additional 53,000 tonnes of containers. It would be fantastic to see'

this happening in Wales too.

How much I agree with that, Janet, because those were your words introducing your Bill. Now, I notice that you’ve done a u-turn and you’ve lost the bottle; the Conservative front bench seems to have lost the bottle as well. We have been consistent on this. We were actually consistent, Dirprwy Lywydd, when the four-nations approach to consultation went out three years ago, when all four nations were agreed that an all-in glass, plastics, aluminium, and others, reuse, not just recycling scheme, should be the way forward, for decarbonisation, as well as tackling litter, and as well as tackling the scourge that we have of our marine litter and so on. So, I simply ask for consistency here.

You ask me what the negative consequences would be. Well, let me tell you. The negative consequences if we were to proceed on a four-nations approach would be: first of all, we run right against the clear outcome of that consultation, where 86 per cent of the public were in favour of an all-in scheme, including glass. Not only that, we would risk a drop in recycling within Wales, because we are already achieving the level of recycling at a level that would be delivered now. And, fair play, England, Scotland and Northern Ireland want to lift their recycling rates, and we applaud them in doing that. We are already achieving it.

If we have to tread water, Janet, for the next five, six, seven years, we will drop back in recycling, not go forward. A narrow recycling-only approach has already faced challenge, Janet, from our local authorities around the justification and the impact of their approach—which has not been achieved without some pain, some real effort—to recycling performance. A scheme without glass would mean that significant additional cost and disruption would be required to retrofit the infrastructure needed to accommodate glass in the future. And make no mistake, Dirprwy Lywydd, we will need to have glass and aluminium and plastic reuse in schemes in the future, and that will add cost if we have to retrofit the machinery to do it. And also, there would be no clear pathway whatsoever for the glass sector to decarbonise in line with net zero, or for producers to be able to deliver their own individual decarbonisation targets.

So, this is trying to help and work with the supply chain to get there, and we simply ask for consistency from Members who have seen the evidence before, and have said they support this, and to stand by what they’ve said before.

Cabinet Secretary and Deputy First Minister, this is something that we’ve discussed many times in this Siambr, and it’s something that we know there’s significant support for in the community, for a DRS scheme.

But you acknowledge that we come at this from a different starting point, given where we are with our success at kerbside recycling here in Wales, and the behaviour and culture change that have come with it. I know when we first looked at a DRS in Wales, an on-the-go option was one of the ones that it was decided not to proceed with, in part because of taking that four-nations approach. Now that we are going our own way, could that be reconsidered as a way to both better complement our kerbside collections, but also reduce litter and encourage recycling and reuse? I think, Cabinet Secretary, whatever we decide to do in Wales, we need a system that supports and enables where we are, and that works for Wales.

Absolutely. Hannah, thank you so much for that. In answer to your question, and to pick up the point, Janet, sorry, I forgot to mention to you in terms of timing, we have the time now, actually, not to delay inordinately, but to work with supply chains, with local authorities and others, as we have always done. We are in a very good position here in Wales to do that work and to get it right, and to look at the different ways we should take this forward. Just to remind people, it is within our competences to take this forward. And I do note, Dirprwy Lywydd, the UK Government also put out a statement, because they are, to their credit, proceeding with a recycling-focused DRS. They actually say:

'With Wales already ranked second in the world for recycling, they are in a unique position of implementing a scheme into an already high recycling nation. For this reason, they prefer to continue to work on a scheme that is right for their context. We will continue to work in partnership with the Welsh Government, as they make decisions regarding a Deposit Return Scheme in Wales.'

But you are right, Hannah. We need to work with all our partners on this, and I've engaged intensely over recent months with all of those partners, including on the supply chain, to get this right, but we have time. The next step for the development of the scheme in Wales will be a reuse scheme at scale in Newport, building on the work we've previously done in Brecon and elsewhere, on which we're already working in partnership with industry. We will then bring forward proposals for this scheme, informed by that trial, for a consultation before the end of this Senedd term, and then our aim is to bring forward the legislation to implement the scheme in Wales as early as possible in the next Senedd term. So, we'll do the work now, and we'll bring it forward. There won't be any great delay or whatever and we'll work with all partners to bring it forward. But it must be something that works for the context and the high ambition of us here in Wales. We've led before, we're going to lead again.

I'm grateful to the Cabinet Secretary for setting out that timeline there. I think it is fair to say that there has been a bit of a mixed reaction and some confusion around the DRS in Wales. The problem, I think, was the fact that it was torpedoed by the previous Government, when they announced that they weren't including glass in their scheme. I have my reservations on the inclusion of glass; I have been consistent on that point. And there is, very clearly, some anxiety amongst businesses on how the inclusion of glass will actually affect not just the financial position of those businesses, but also the logistical position of those businesses as well, the additional costs that will be there. You will, of course, be aware of Bang-On Brewery on Bridgend industrial estate, who have been very vocal in their concerns. So, what I'm really keen to understand here is how the Cabinet Secretary will address those issues and concerns that are raised by small businesses in Wales regarding the potential inclusion of glass in a deposit-return scheme, and then what steps will be taken to ensure that any scheme introduced is both fair and practical for those businesses.

Luke, thank you for that. That's a really good point. One of the things that has characterised our approach over recent months and, indeed, years, where we've held a consistent position, is our close engagement with the supply chain. And even though, yes, we will have had some of the supply chain say, 'Well, what does this mean for us?'—microbreweries, smaller corner shops, when you have DRS equipment and so on—there are ways through. That's the reassurance I can give to Bang-On Brewery, who, by the way, I hope to visit very soon as well, and I'm happy to talk through the details with them and others.

Because if we look at the 53 nations and rising who have implemented a DRS with reuse, some of which operate within countries where there is slight divergence even within countries and the same big corporate suppliers who operate within those countries very successfully, it doesn't fragment the market or disrupt the market, you can find ways to do it. But we will make sure that we do not disrupt those smaller businesses, those smaller retailers, the smaller brewers; we'll work with them on this. So, I'm looking forward to meeting with Bridgend breweries and also others in order to discuss this, because we actually need their help now in devising this scheme in the right way.

We're not doing this in a gung-ho way, believe you me, and we're not coming to this with a blank sheet. We have spent years not just being consistent on the best way forward, but working with people, looking at international examples, to say, 'What's the way we avoid unintended consequences?' and minimise the impact on our wonderful—I have to say—microbreweries, small-scale breweries and our food and drink sector. So, we will do that. You have my commitment that we will do that, and we have some time to do it, but we're not going to delay inordinately; we want to bring this in as early as possible within the next Parliament. So, actually, it's not far off in parallel with the England, Northern Ireland and Scotland schemes, but ours will be focused on reuse as well as recycling.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary. The second topical question will be posed by Rhun ap Iorwerth.

On 15 November, Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board made a statement on its decision to delay planned and urgent surgery for open abdominal aortic aneurysm in north Wales. It has worked with Royal Stoke University Hospital to put plans in place for the small number of people who will need this treatment.

The news of the cuts to operations for open abdominal aortic aneurysm came as another blow to a region that has seen real deficiencies in vascular services over recent years. I don't need to say that moving services over the border to Stoke is going to be inconvenient. It'll be inconvenient for those living in the north-east, but for anyone living in my constituency on Anglesey, or further west on the Llŷn peninsula, for example, this decision will have a very real impact on the accessibility of this key surgery.

But what creates the greatest frustration here, I think, is the recent history and the way that Betsi Cadwaladr has treated vascular services, and the fact that local campaigners, and  ourselves on these benches, had warned time and time again about the risk in terms of what was done, and that it would lead to a very real long-term decline in vascular services that were excellent. The justification that we received for the closure of the world-famous vascular unit in Ysbyty Gwynedd, and to centralise services at Ysbyty Glan Clwyd, was that it would lead to better outcomes for patients in north Wales. None of us believed that. Six years later, not only have vascular services within Betsi Cadwaladr been placed in special measures, they are now sent to England without any talk of reintroducing the service in the foreseeable future. So, services that were excellent have been in decline, and it's the people of north Wales who are paying the price for that.

The progress report into vascular services in north Wales over recent years was encouraging—I am looking for the positives here. But what we see here and what we feared is a great retrograde step. So, can the Cabinet Secretary inform me what the timetable is in terms of returning these services to north Wales? And most importantly, when will the pledges made back in 2018 about the benefits of centralising vascular services at Ysbyty Glan Clwyd bear fruit? Because very few of us believed that the service would improve at that time as a result of that decision.

I hope it's helpful if I provide some context to the decision that has been taken. The decision to suspend both planned and emergency open AAA surgery clearly highlights that further work is needed to improve the vascular service for residents in north Wales. The decision was taken, as Members would expect, on the basis of clinical advice from vascular experts in Wales and the wider UK, as well as clinicians within the health board itself. The kind of surgery that is affected by the decision is very specialist; it's complex and it is important. It represents less than 0.5 per cent each year of vascular services generally. As I said in my initial answer, arrangements have been made with the Royal Stoke University Hospital, which builds on an existing relationship with that hospital, both in relation to trauma and to vascular services. The decision may impact people in the order of about 10 to 15 annually who need this particular kind of intervention.

The fact that patients are being treated in England for something of this level of speciality is not new. It does, of course, happen for some AAA procedures already, as well as, as I said, for some trauma and neurological conditions. The board has developed and agreed a protocol for the safe management of patients, which will clarify the new pathway for clinical teams, and it is in discussion with each of those individuals who it expects will be affected by this decision. I had the opportunity to meet the health board chair, Dyfed Edwards, on Sunday, in the course of another meeting, to discuss this with him, and that was followed up later this week in my regular discussion with him as chair of the board. He's committed on behalf of the board to keep the public and key stakeholders informed of developments as they review the provision now, but as yet there is no date for when those services may restart.

Can I thank Rhun ap Iorwerth for tabling this topical question here today, and also thank the Cabinet Secretary for his initial response to Rhun ap Iorwerth, but also support the Member in his broader concerns around vascular services in Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board? The Member has already laid out those concerns that we receive as Members of the Senedd from our constituents that we represent, and he's absolutely right to share them again here today. I also support the Member in some of the challenges that some of our constituents are likely to face in terms of access and travel with this particular procedure.

I also want to acknowledge, Cabinet Secretary, the clinical advice that the board has received on this specialist treatment and recognise that where it is clinically right to do so, working with health boards and health trusts in England can be at times the right thing to do. You'll recognise the number of times I've raised that point in this Chamber, that cross-border working is at times the right thing to do, because we do need to look at ways to tackle waiting lists here in Wales, and cross-border working is part of the important strategy to do that, in my opinion, especially when the treatment can be done either more safely or more quickly in other parts of the NHS across the United Kingdom. So, I want to acknowledge the clinical advice on this specific treatment and recognise also, as you've outlined, that whilst it's important to that particular group of people, it is a limited number of people that this will directly affect every year.

My concern is perhaps how this type of decision making forms part of a broader strategy and plan for working across the border, and whether decisions like this are perhaps knee-jerk at times and not necessarily part of the broader plan and thinking of a health board. I'm also interested to hear, if these numbers do increase—they're fairly limited numbers at the moment—whether you would expect the health board to bring this procedure back in-house, as it were, in north Wales, and how that's going to be monitored to ensure that, actually, if things do change in the future, perhaps the clinical advice is reconsidered to be either safer or more appropriate back in Betsi Cadwaladr health board, even when the numbers may shift. Thank you.

I can assure the Member that the reason it has been possible, as I understand it, for the health board to be able to develop the arrangements with the Royal Stoke hospital is because, as I indicated earlier, they have an existing relationship with the hospital in relation to AAA specifically, but also vascular more broadly and trauma as well. So, in the sense that the Member puts his question, it is part of that broader plan, if you like, already. He acknowledges the point that I know it is his view that, for the right reasons, for the right situation, it can be appropriate for people to travel in both directions across the border to get the treatment they need when the treatment, perhaps, is a particular level of specialism.

In relation to developments in the future and the number affected, I should just say that the AAA screening arrangements that exist to identify those who may have the condition—because very often it's non-symptomatic until the point at which it becomes particularly problematic—are unaffected by the decision that the health board has taken, because it's a nationally commissioned service through Public Health Wales. So, it would be possible to identify those who are at risk of AAA through that existing service, which is continuing.

Cabinet Secretary, I'm sure you'll understand that vascular services in north Wales being in the news again creates concern for my constituents. We've already heard in here that it's hit the headlines before, but since then Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board’s vascular services, generally, were de-escalated in 2023 by Healthcare Inspectorate Wales after progress was shown, albeit they recognised improvements still needed to be made. So, Cabinet Secretary, given the latest news, how do you consider that BCUHB are acting on the recommendations of Healthcare Inspectorate Wales in their de-escalation review? And what further assurances can be sought from the health board on vascular services so that my constituents and others can be reassured?

Well, I do recognise the point that the Member makes. In the context of vascular services at the health board, her constituents and others will be concerned to hear this news. I hope it's been helpful for me to be as specific as I have been about the services that are affected, because I want to reassure people about the particular effect of this particular decision, and to give a sense of the context around that, which I hope Members have found helpful.

She makes an important point about the fact that, because of challenges in the vascular services at Betsi Cadwaladr, there have been a number of reviews of those services, which other Members have touched on as well. So, the Royal College of Surgeons review, the Healthcare Inspectorate Wales review as part of its escalation and de-escalation mechanism, in addition, then, to the separate assurance review that the Welsh Government undertook, and then a case notes review as well. So, it is a set of services that has been under consistent oversight since the changes were first introduced. A number of recommendations were made in the course of the decision by Healthcare Inspectorate Wales to de-escalate the service last year, and those are being taken forward by the health board. There have been improvements overall in the broad service since the previous Royal College of Surgeons review in particular, with clear evidence of clinicians working more collaboratively, and more of a role for multidisciplinary teams, but there is additional work that needs to be undertaken, of course, and the board is working its way through those recommendations on an ongoing basis.

I'd like to focus on Glan Clwyd Hospital, if I may, and as we embark on the fifth anniversary of the COVID-19 outbreak, and in response to significant increases in casework matters in my constituency, I've submitted a freedom of information request asking Betsi Cadwaladr on the number of operational procedures and surgical procedures in that particular hospital. And what we've seen is nearly a 4,000 drop in surgical operations in Glan Clwyd Hospital, from 26,256 in 2019. There was a slight dip during the COVID years, for obvious reasons, but in 2023 that had dropped to 22,620, which is a decrease, as I say, of nearly 4,000 surgical procedures happening in that hospital per year. Given in mind the chronic wait—

Can I remind you this question is on vascular services, not the whole range of surgical operations?

Yes, I'm aware of that. So, given that in mind, will the Cabinet Secretary outline his response to that and what remedial work the Welsh Government will undertake to solve some of these problems that are very acute in the local hospital in my constituency? Thank you.

Dirprwy Lywydd, as the Member's question is not in fact in relation to AAA surgery at Glan Clwyd, I'm afraid I don't have the answer to his question in front of me. But if you'd like to write me, I'm sure I can provide the information that's available.

Cabinet Secretary, people are concerned in north Wales. They're concerned about the fragility of a number of services, and this, I'm afraid, is just the latest issue that is flagging up in the media with our constituents, and is, understandably, going to cause some angst and alarm.

The reality is that whilst it might affect only a small number of people, the impact or the potential safety implications for those individuals are very, very significant indeed, given the long distances, particularly for urgent cases that are not planned, which need this sort of surgery. So, can I ask what has the Welsh Government done, in conjunction with Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board, to assess the likely impact on mortality for those urgent cases of the many extra miles that people will now be required to travel in order to access these vital services?

Well, I think the Member is correct to say that each individual affected will—you know, it's a serious issue for that individual. I wasn't seeking to minimise that, I just wanted to create come context to give his constituents the reassurance of the sorts of services that are affected and the numbers that are likely to be affected, so I hope my comments were taken in that spirit.

Obviously, we've been in regular contact with the board as part of the special measures process in any event, and in the days leading up to the decision by the board in particular around this issue. I think the existing arrangements with the Royal Stoke hospital in relation to trauma in particular provides some experience to the board to inform its decision to take this—. In relation to any individual patient, I'm not a clinician—I'm not able to give that direct assurance—but I would anticipate that it depends very much on the individual circumstances of that individual patient, and I imagine in many cases the geography will be one consideration but perhaps not always the main factor. But these considerations have been part of the board's thinking in reaching the decision it has taken, based on the experience of the service it feels able to safely provide.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary.

There are no 90-second statements today.

So, we'll move on to the motions to elect Members to committees. In accordance with Standing Order 12.24, unless a Member objects, the three motions to elect Members to committee, NNDM8741, NNDM8742 and NNDM8743, will be grouped for debate and for voting. I see that there are no objections, and I call on a member of the Business Committee to move the motions formally.

I move.

The proposal is to agree the motions NNDM8741, NNDM8742 and NNDM8743. Does any Member object? No, therefore the motions are agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Next we have the motion to appoint an acting standards commissioner. I call on the Chair of the Standards of Conduct Committee to move the motion—Hannah Blythyn.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. As Chair of the Standards of Conduct Committee, I formally move the motion to appoint an acting standards commissioner.

The commissioner for standards has notified the committee that he needs to recuse himself from consideration of a complaint. This means that an acting commissioner must be appointed in his place, and the committee has agreed to recommend the appointment of Melissa McCullough. Melissa has been the Northern Ireland Assembly commissioner for standards since 2020, as well as the pan-Ireland commissioner for standards since 2023. Because of these roles, the committee is confident that she has the necessary skills to undertake this role in a timely and efficient way. I commend this motion to the Senedd today. Diolch.

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

Item 6, the debate on a Member's legislative proposal, has been postponed.

So, that takes us to item 7, a motion to approve the Senedd Commission budget for 2025-26. I call on Hefin David to move the motion.

I move the Commission's budget motion for 2025-26 and ask that it be incorporated into the annual budget motion. Dirprwy Lywydd, this year the Senedd Commission has been tasked by a two-thirds majority of this Siambr to produce a transformational step-change budget. In these turbulent times, strengthening a democracy in any nation is often a difficult but certainly noble endeavour, and while I in no way devalue the objections of those opposed to reform, those Members who have supported Senedd expansion have done so in order to build a stronger Parliament for the people of Wales, and that strengthened Parliament must of course be supported if it is to achieve the aims of the legislation that has created it. In order to deliver a 60 per cent increase in the size of the Senedd, the Senedd Commission today requests a 16 per cent uplift in our budget. The Commission budget request for 2025-26 is therefore £83.845 million, an increase of £11.65 million, and down on the £456,000 that was included in the supplementary budget. 

The budget request addresses four clear growth pressures: of course, Senedd reform, which we have discussed in Commission questions; a critical infrastructure programme for the Senedd estate; staff pay increases that simply reflect the UK Government's recent pay mandate; and a Ways of Working programme that will address the end of the lease of Tŷ Hywel in 2032. Tackling all of these measures now is by far the most cost-effective and efficient approach, and I will now turn to each area of the budget. 

For the Senedd reform programme, Members will note that the cost in the budget is £6.5 million, which is an increase on last year's budget of £4.4 million. The Senedd reform programme includes provisions for new staff to prepare for the seventh Senedd, increases to non-staff budgets and funding for reconfiguring the Siambr and additional Members' offices in Tŷ Hywel. This budget for 2025-26 has increased from the initial regulatory impact assessment estimate that was prepared for the Senedd Cymru (Members and Elections) Act 2024. In the preparation of this budget, I attended a scrutiny session with the Finance Committee on 3 October, which I'm very grateful for, and have had questions asked of me in the Siambr, and I have held informal discussions with Members through their groups. Members have been thorough in interrogating the difference between the RIA and current costs, and it is important to note that, although the RIA was lower than the current estimated costs, the net difference is less than an 8 per cent increase, at £400,000. And if Members agree the pay request, then actually it could even be argued to be lower than the RIA.

Capital costs have increased in order to deliver a specific design of Siambr that was requested by Members. The process for identifying a Siambr design began in the summer of 2023, involved a Members' reference group, which was attended by Members of all parties, also there were several drop-in sessions held in the cwrt through the course of the year, and there was discussion in political groups, which I was party to. The process is now far advanced, and we have to meet a clear construction deadline of 2026. Members have had a paramount role in the Siambr design, and the new Siambr will be fit for the future because of that. And to delay any further would inevitably cause delay in the delivery of Senedd reform.

Through careful analysis of resource need, future staffing costs have fallen from the initial 60 full-time equivalent staff in the RIA to a 48 full-time equivalent figure, which then accounts for a small uplift on the RIA, despite increased capital costs, subject to the caveat I mentioned about staff pay. 

Overall, the Commission is confident that we are proceeding on a resource-efficient basis that adheres to the five principles that the Finance Committee require directly funded bodies to consider when preparing a budget. It was their first question to me at the Finance Committee session. Most notably they require us, where increases in funding are needed, to provide evidence of the need, benefit and attempts that have been made to reduce such costs. I'm pleased to say that, in the report following the scrutiny session on 3 October, the Finance Committee recognised that we've achieved this important goal and, by a majority, support the budget in full. And I'm sure that the Chair will have more to say on that in his speech. But I would say to the Chair of the Finance Committee that the Commission, in turn, accepts all 17 recommendations that your committee made in the report that followed that evidence session.

The estate critical infrastructure programme has a cost in the budget of £2.5 million. The budget also reflects the peak in costs of the critical estate programmes that we need to look at, and the details are in the budget report. But a number of key items are nearing end-of-life in both the Senedd and Tŷ Hywel. Spending will be prioritised, but a clear need has been identified to replace ICT and estate infrastructure this year. Members will note that one of the lifts is not functioning today, for example. Those costs for repairs cause problems in future budgets, and therefore are not actually saving by putting these things off. To delay these into future budgets will not be cost-effective and will lead to further budget requests. 

The staff pay increases cost £2.7 million. This is a 9 per cent increase, compared to the 2024-25 laid budget. This partly reflects the UK and Welsh Government's 5 per cent increase in pay for the public sector, announced since July. And I would remind Members that the Government of Wales Act 2006 requires the Commission to bring parity between staff in the Commission and staff in the Welsh Government, which is why we need to agree that 5 per cent. There is no permanent growth in our existing staff base, with four temporary posts included to support additional committees requested by both the Welsh Government and the Senedd. These posts and costs will fall away when the committees' work is completed.

And finally the Ways of Working and Bay 32. That is a cost of £2.4 million in this year’s budget. Over this past 12 months, we’ve established a number of options that are available to the Commission on the future of this estate. As a result, we’re engaged in a competitive process to ensure best value to the public purse and to reflect public procurement best practice in the procurement of a future building. I’ve committed to providing further evidence through public scrutiny sessions with the Finance Committee on this project early next year and I look forward to doing so.

It has been noted that this draft budget does not offer savings, but the Commission has made a total of just under £1.6 million in savings in the last two years and our budget will continue to be managed very tightly, with a clear justification for every request we make. Further cuts to the Commission’s operational budget, especially in a year when we’ve asked to expand the Senedd, would be very difficult to deliver in reality without permanently degrading services to Members. It would also lead to perhaps negative comparisons between us and other Parliaments. I was pleased to note that the Finance Committee supported this position unanimously.

We’re going to reach a steady state in the seventh Senedd following the step-change budget and then we will return to our ongoing savings analysis provided by our medium-term resource plan. The budget I’ve presented today meets the democratic decision of this Senedd and I want to thank all Members who have engaged so constructively in its development, as well as especially the Finance Committee, who so rigorously scrutinised our proposals.

By supporting this budget today, Members will be setting the path to a Parliament that works for Wales, and I commend it to you.

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

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. At the outset, I’d like to thank Hefin David, the Senedd Commissioner for budget and governance, and Senedd officials, for attending the Finance Committee on 3 October to discuss the Commission’s budget proposals. I’m also grateful to the Commission for providing its response our report ahead of this debate, and I’m pleased to see that 16 of our recommendations have been accepted, with one being noted. I’m particularly grateful to the Commissioner for confirming that the funds allocated within the draft budget related to back pay for lower-grade staff in the Commission have been removed in light of the Senedd agreeing the first supplementary budget on 22 October.

As the Commissioner has alluded to, this is a step-change budget, with the majority of the increases required to implement the Senedd’s decision to increase the number of Members after the election. The majority of the committee recommends that the Senedd supports this overall request. There are, however, a number of areas where greater clarity is required. On the whole, we were pleased with the way the budget is presented and welcome the continued separation of ring-fenced budgets for Senedd reform, Ways of Working, and election costs, with all underspends against those budget lines returned to the public purse. However, the committee believes that the Commission could do more to demonstrate how it is driving efficiencies in managing its budget.

Our statement of principles is clear that all directly funded bodies should continually seek to improve processes and accrue efficiencies, and we believe that the Commission should not be immune from this because of Senedd expansion. Whilst the lack of a savings target in this budget is understandable, because of the cost pressures relating to Senedd expansion, the committee believes that including targets with an aim of generating savings is essential. We note that the Commission, in its response to these recommendations, confirmed that it will adopt a new approach to its budget submission so that it comprises a growth plan, an efficiencies plan and a savings plan. We look forward to seeing how this approach will be developed ahead of the next budget round.

Moving on to other aspects of the Commission’s budget, in relation to plans for developing the Senedd estate, we welcome the Commission’s openness in engaging with the committee on these issues and look forward to holding those public evidence sessions in the new year. As the Cardiff Bay 2032 project develops, we also believe that clarity is required around who will make decisions relating to the project and whether Members will have a final say in Plenary. We also have asked for information regarding the Commission’s obligations for repairs and maintenance on the Tŷ Hywel estate during the term of the lease, including clarity on the arrangements for agreeing any dilapidation payments.

The committee also seeks further information on the Commission’s long-term estate strategy over the next five to 10 years, including any estimated costs, as well as an update on the Pierhead review project, which is due to report in the next month or so. We have also asked for details of the Commission’s project pipeline for 2025-26 as well as its long-term project plan to be shared.

Dirprwy Lywydd, the committee has consistently stated that it cannot take a view on operational matters, such as staff pay, within the directly funded bodies, as these are the responsibilities of the senior leadership within those organisations. However, the committee would like to be kept updated on progress in relation to these issues, given their impact on the Commission’s budgetary plans.

In terms of staff well-being, we welcome the steps taken by the Commission to understand sickness levels and their impact on the wider organisation. In addition, although we believe artificial intelligence could lead to benefits to Members and staff, we are not blind to the risks involved and want further information on governance arrangements as its use in the Senedd expands.

To conclude, Dirprwy Lywydd, Members will be aware that the window for the committee to scrutinise the Commission’s budget is narrow, with Standing Orders allowing only three weeks between the draft budget being laid in October and the publication of our report. This makes it difficult to understand what's driving changes in costs across the draft budget, and we would like to be kept informed of how the budget for 2026-27 is being developed to get a better idea of what a 'steady state' budget beyond the 2026 election will look like.

The committee also recognises the steps taken by the Commission to engage with Members ahead of the draft budget being published this year, and believes that this approach was helpful and should be formalised in future years. Thank you very much.

First of all, can I thank our Commission finance people for their dedicated efforts in preparing the 2025-26 Commission budget? I'd like to thank the Finance Committee, and you, Peredur, as the Chair, and also Hefin David as our Mr Chancellor. I honestly think it's the most difficult job that you do have. The invaluable scrutiny that you gave this budget has been very instrumental in shaping this process. We have reviewed their recommendations carefully, and we appreciate the opportunity to take them into account, and, as a very proud Welsh Conservative Commission member, I am very mindful of how we, this Commission, use taxpayers' money and the spending of it. I'm also aware too of the budget pressures.

So, it's clear that this budget does reflect significant efforts to ensure effective management of resources, whilst addressing the operational needs of the Senedd, particularly as we approach the transition to the enlarged seventh Senedd. The Commission demonstrated, in my opinion, foresight by ring-fencing funds for critical areas such as preparatory works for Senedd reform, the Ways of Working programme and pre-election preparations. I commend the thoughtful efforts made to manage budget pressures, resulting from the creation of new committees, and, as noted by the Commissioner to the Finance Committee, these have notably increased some operational costs, highlighting how the budget has had to remain flexible and responsive to evolving need. As the Finance Committee has noted, we are seeing a 16 per cent increase in budget for a 60 per cent increase in the size of the Senedd, and these costs compare favourably, actually, with other Parliaments, observing that the Scottish Parliament is nearly £200,000 more expensive per Member than the Senedd Cymru/Welsh Parliament.

The Commission has made a clear commitment to value for money, and notes the responsible approach to managing cyclical costs associated with the pre-election period. There is also a focus on redesigning our estates and services, whilst preparing for an expanded seventh Senedd entails substantial investment into estate modifications, ICT upgrades and infrastructure maintenance. Similarly, the transparency around staffing costs and the adjustments made to account for pay awards and employer pension contributions signal our Senedd Commission and its commitment to fairness and efficiency. As the Commissioner explained regarding the 11 per cent increase in operational costs, the issue we do have is there is a pay deal of 5 per cent, which is higher than we'd bargained for, and factors such as this are just simply beyond our Commission and its control.

However, I must point out the elephant in this room. We, the Welsh Conservatives, maintain and endorse our firm opposition to the expansion of the Senedd, the introduction of new Members, the new voting system that is going to come in, which we believe is less democratic for our voters, and, of course, the additional costs. Whilst we acknowledge the need to prepare for changes stemming from the Senedd Cymru (Members and Elections) Act 2024, we still believe that these resources would be better allocated to essential public services such as healthcare, education, our road infrastructure, social services—I could go on.

Expanding the Senedd from 60 to 96 Members does entail substantial long-term costs, as made clear by the increase in the budget to over £84 million, representing a 16.77 per cent increase over the previous year. And it is fair to say, as the member for Aberconwy, I have been inundated with numerous people saying, ‘Why are we not having a referendum on this matter?’ Some members of the public are not even aware that this is happening, because, unless you’re very interested in politics, you can miss these things. The vast increase in budget—the vast increase—is down to Senedd expansion, as seen in the 147 per cent rise for Senedd reform and related works, and £3.9 million only for upgrading this Chamber—I say that, ‘only’, in terms of comparison. This, sadly, we feel is not justified, especially given the financial pressures facing public services in Wales.

The budget for the Ways of Working programme, which will shape the future estate strategy for Commission staff, Members and support staff, appears well structured, but I’m aware that this, again, can be an evolving process. I must make it clear that there should be continued transparency on this, and I think it’s fair to say that we’re seeing more transparency in our workings out. As a Welsh Conservative, my stance remains clear: the expansion of the Senedd is a step we cannot support. It was a challenging task, therefore, to be involved with this budget, and, no doubt, the Commission and everyone involved have risen to that challenge. Diolch.

The Finance Committee noted the Senedd Commission’s draft budget 2025-26, and, by a majority, recommended that the Senedd supports this budget, subject to the comments and recommendations in the report, which the Commissioner responded to earlier.

I was one of those who supported the budget proposals. I wish to raise three points. Firstly, the Commissioner explained how the Commission seeks to improve processes and efficiency. I believe that the Commission would benefit from a flatter structure. I know, from conversations that I’ve had with the Commissioner, that he doesn’t agree.

What is the role of artificial intelligence and how can it reduce costs? Is there a role for the use of a computer translation service and then a check and correction of it by a translator, rather than using translators to translate all of it? Could voice-to-text be used for Plenary and committee meetings and then be checked for errors and corrected?

Secondly, I support the committee’s recommendation that the Senedd Commission provides a list of planned projects for 2025-26, with estimated allocated funding for the start of the 2025-26 fiscal year, and for such an approach to be adopted for future budgets; that a capital programme plan is produced, and, if slippage occurs, projects can be brought forward, and, if the projects overrun on costs, then projects can be slipped into future years.

The third point is that, if we go ahead with Senedd expansion in 2026, the costs involved are inevitable. I believe that Senedd expansion is being rushed and we all know that, when something is rushed, mistakes are made. For the final time, I’m requesting publicly that the First Minister brings forward proposals to postpone Senedd reform until after the elections of 2026.

I call on Hefin David to reply to the debate.

I'd like to thank the contributors to this debate, who’ve done so so constructively. I think quite a bit of challenge came from Peredur Owen Griffiths, which I’ll just answer in a second, but, thank you, Janet, for those kind words, and Mike too.

Pred, just regarding the engagement plan, communication. I want a formal codified engagement plan presented to the Finance Committee and to the Senedd as to how we engage in future budgets, and I’ve asked for that from officials to be drawn up as soon as possible. I think having that identifying both the formal processes and the informal processes, with some recommendations for how we go forward, would be really helpful, and I’m really keen that you see that as soon as it’s available.

Will Members have a final say on Bay 32? Well, definitely in the budget, because it’s a budgetary decision; we will have to have a vote in this Chamber on it. If you are asking me for a further say on these things, perhaps it's something that I could discuss with the committee in an evidence session early next year, so we can talk about what you are actually looking for and how we might achieve it.

Mike, the project pipeline—absolutely right. We need to present that, and that will be done. I have asked for that. On cyber security, I'm hoping that we will be able to write a letter again to the Finance Committee on how we are dealing with cyber security and the implications of artificial intelligence and its use. The timescale of the three-week turnaround following evidence to the Finance Committee, that's a symptom of something that is beyond the Commission's control. I absolutely agree with you, though, in what you say.

And finally, Janet Finch-Saunders's objection on Senedd reform. I note that it is the only objection from the Welsh Conservatives. They don't seem to have any wider issue with the operational budget, which shows the rigour with which this has gone through. The opposition to Senedd reform is what has driven what I suspect may be a 'gwrthwynebu' at the end of this debate. I'm pleased that the operational budget is to be accepted.

Final points. A referendum on Senedd reform: that's not a role for a Commissioner to discuss. Mike Hedges's final comment about delaying Senedd reform: again, it's not my role to discuss. It lays well without my responsibilities and, I suspect, even beyond the Deputy First Minister's responsibilities too. So, with that, I want to say thank you to the Commission staff, who are absolutely incredible, but also the Members who have taken part in this debate today. 

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

Item 8 today is a debate on the Finance Committee Report, 'Review into the operations, processes and investigations carried out by the Public Services Ombudsman for Wales'. I call on the Chair of the committee to move the motion. Peredur Owen Griffiths.

I move that motion. Thank you very much, Dirprwy Lywydd. Last April, the Senedd passed a motion instructing the Finance Committee, under Standing Order 17.2, to conduct a review into the operations, processes and investigations carried out by the Public Services Ombudsman for Wales. This followed allegations that a team leader in the ombudsman’s code of conduct team had expressed personal political opinions that included offensive language on social media.

As widely reported, the team leader was initially suspended and subsequently resigned. The committee has now completed this work and we laid our report before the Senedd earlier this month, on 8 November.

My intention today is to set out the views, conclusions and recommendations included within our report, and to explain the approach that we took in conducting the inquiry. I do not wish to repeat or revisit the social media posts that led to this inquiry taking place, but let me be clear: the incident was deeply regrettable, and should not have happened. All public bodies in Wales should adhere to the principles of integrity and fairness, but within the context of the ombudsman's work, these are fundamental. Any hint of bias or unfairness in the ombudsman's processes needs to be promptly dealt with.

The committee began its inquiry shortly after the ombudsman had commissioned her own external independent review in April. We agreed to look at the events leading to the resignation of the team leader; the process followed; the arrangements for code of conduct investigations; and the mechanisms in place to ensure impartiality and fairness. We also agreed to look at the scope, extent and findings of the independent external review commissioned by the ombudsman.

We held two evidence sessions with the ombudsman, one on 9 May and the second on 10 October, after the independent review’s report had been published on 27 September. These sessions were essential in providing the committee with opportunities to scrutinise issues relating to the incident, including the ombudsman’s response, as well as the findings of the independent review and any lessons learnt. We are grateful both to the independent review team for conducting its work thoroughly and quickly, and also to the ombudsman herself for engaging with us in a spirit of openness and transparency throughout the inquiry.

Our report comes to nine conclusions and makes four recommendations. What we found was that the social media incident had undoubtedly negatively impacted the ombudsman’s reputation. It had the potential to undermine public confidence in its work. However, we also found that the swift action taken by the ombudsman to proactively deal with this matter ensured that further reputational damage to the institution was avoided.

The committee also concludes that it was necessary and correct for the ombudsman to commission the independent review. It was imperative that the independent review was led by a person with the correct professional background, appropriate expertise and experience to ensure that this work had integrity and credibility. We concluded that Dr Melissa McCullough was the right person to lead the independent review. Dr McCullough has experience in dealing with complaints against elected politicians, and we were satisfied that the review was conducted in a thorough and robust manner.

We also believe that the terms of reference and methodology of the independent review were robust and provided sufficient scope to ensure that the issues relating to the specific social media incident, and wider practices within the ombudsman’s office, have been fully and independently investigated. Our consideration of the issues, both in assessing the findings of the independent review, and the evidence presented to us by the ombudsman during the evidence sessions, has led us to conclude that we continue to have confidence in the ombudsman to undertake her work with impartiality and fairness.

We welcome all the conclusions and recommendations of the independent review, particularly that all decision making within the ombudsman's office is based solely on evidence and facts, and that there is no evidence of political bias, and that the ombudsman’s code of conduct processes are robust, consistently applied, fair and fit for purpose. We note that the independent review found no evidence of political impartiality, and that the decisions made by the ombudsman and her staff were based purely on facts and evidence that were not influenced by political affiliation. The committee is assured that the incident does not point to wider cultural issues within the ombudsman’s office that need addressing.

These findings are clearly to be welcomed, nonetheless, the committee has made a number of recommendations aimed at ensuring that lessons of this review are put into practice, and that similar incidents are not repeated. This includes asking the ombudsman to share a timeline for implementing any changes arising from the independent review, and introducing a new key performance indicator to ensure that sample checks are made of investigating officers and code team manager decisions.

We also want the ombudsman to provide us with updates on whether any follow-up work will be conducted following the independent review, and we have asked for further information on how the ombudsman is monitoring staff compliance in respect of social media policy. They are intended to provide the committee and the Senedd with additional assurances that robust processes are in place to ensure that the episode is not repeated, and that continuous improvement is embedded within the ombudsman’s work.

On the issue of staff, the committee does not want to lose sight of the human impact of the incident, and we want to note that this has been a difficult time for all involved. It has been particularly stressful for those working in the ombudsman’s office, and we welcome the approach undertaken to ensure that they are being supported throughout the period, and that their well-being has been prioritised.

Dirprwy Lywydd, the ombudsman plays a vital role in Welsh public life, and our report concludes that we continue to have confidence in the processes in place to deal with and investigate complaints. In terms of the next steps, I’m glad to say that the ombudsman has already written to the committee with an action plan of how she intends to respond to the independent review’s recommendations, and we are expecting a formal response to our report early in the new year. The committee welcomes this approach and we hope that the ombudsman can move on from this incident. I look forward to hearing the views of others during today’s debate. Thank you very much.

I want to begin my welcoming the thoroughness of this investigation into what was an incredibly delicate matter, and I concur with everything that the Finance Committee Chairman has just said. I am confident that things were done well. Despite the initial rocky start, as we heard about, with the appointment of the person who was clearly the wrong person, it was good that the subsequent appointment was able to command confidence throughout the process.

The original complaint, which stemmed from, as we know, hateful comments from a senior member in the ombudsman’s office, was deeply shocking, and had a very real risk of damaging the reputation of the office, especially considering the emphasis that the ombudsman’s office puts on values such as dignity and respect. It was important for the ombudsman’s office to acknowledge that the behaviour of the member of staff in question fell well short of the standards of conduct expected of staff, and I’m glad that swift action was taken.

In the last year, we have seen the damage that even just the perception of wrongdoing can have on the reputation of even the most senior offices in Wales, so I'm glad that this robust investigation was carried out and determined that there is no political bias in the ombudsman's office. I am glad to see that a number of lessons were learned from this event and that all of the recommendations of the independent review have been accepted by the ombudsman. I welcome also the co-operation that the ombudsman has shown throughout.

I look forward to seeing the progress that the ombudsman makes regarding the recommendations of the committee, especially the introduction of key performance indicators based on a sample of decisions made by the investigating officer and code team managers undergoing additional checks. This, combined with the recommendation that the ombudsman's office updates the committee as to how it is monitoring staff compliance in respect of its social media policy, will go a long way to ensuring that incidents like this do not happen again.

Dirprwy Lywydd, it is important that our public bodies demonstrate impartiality and are not even perceived to have political bias, and I am confident that the ombudsman has demonstrated that thoroughly.

Just over a year ago, on 26 March, the Public Services Ombudsman for Wales received a substantiated complaint setting out allegations that a team leader in the code of conduct team had expressed a personal political opinion that included offensive language on social media. This was widely reported in the media. The team leader was initially suspended and subsequently resigned.

In April this year, the Senedd considered and agreed a motion tabled by the Welsh Conservatives relating to Public Services Ombudsman for Wales. That motion included an instruction to the Finance Committee, proposing that the Senedd,

'In accordance with Standing Order 17.2, instructs the Finance Committee to urgently review the operations, processes and investigation carried out by the Public Services Ombudsman for Wales to ensure:

'a) that impartiality and fairness are present throughout the employment of the former Head of Investigations; and

'b) that the Senedd can have confidence that the office is able to undertake further investigations with impartiality and fairness.'

Following allegations of political bias, the ombudsman announced on 9 April 2024 that an independent review would be conducted to provide assurance that its code of conduct processes were sound and free from political bias. The report of the independent review was published in September this year. The ombudsman welcomed the report and the confirmation that decision making in respect of code of conduct complaints is free from political bias. She added:

'This review recognises the excellent work done by the Code of Conduct Team and we are pleased that the Independent Reviewer has stated that it should provide reassurance, to the public and elected members, that they can trust and have confidence in the work of PSOW.'

The committee unanimously found this episode shocking and deeply regrettable. Independence, impartiality, fairness and openness are fundamental principles underpinning the role of the ombudsman. Any action that undermines confidence in the ombudsman is a cause of concern for all of us.

Delivering on these principles is essential to ensure that the work of the office has integrity and public confidence. The committee agreed that this incident had negatively impacted the ombudsman's reputation and had the potential to undermine public confidence in its work going forward. I hope that won't happen. The committee unanimously agreed that the committee has confidence that the Public Services Ombudsman for Wales is able to undertake its work with impartiality and fairness.

Should the Public Services Ombudsman for Wales staff code of conduct policies and practices relating to social media use be more comprehensive in relation to setting out the circumstances in which social media activity by an employee amounts to misconduct, both in their work and private life, with consideration of current case law in relation to freedom of expression and other relevant precedent cases? Most people working in the public sector will hold political views. While this case was straightforward and resolved thanks to the action of the ombudsman and the independent investigator, the ombudsman clarified that she believes there's a difference between expressing a view on a policy that affects everybody and actually making specific comments about a political party, which is the situation we were in.

I will end by asking about five different actions, and would they be considered as showing political bias by ombudsman staff. Would the level of seniority matter? Would the area they're responsible for matter? On social media, liking a Daily Telegraph headline and article; opposing a major part of the Welsh or UK Government’s budget proposals; liking Senedd politicians’ political posts, e.g. against 20 mph; supporting the manifesto of one party; expressing a view on events being investigated by the ombudsman service. I would say that No. 1 is fine, No. 5 definitely is out. You now have to decide where in the middle you draw the line. I think that is something that we as the Finance Committee will need to have further discussions with the ombudsman about, because I think that it's only fair for the staff and the public in Wales that they know exactly what can and cannot be done.

I call on the Chair of the committee to respond to the debate.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. I'm very grateful to my fellow members of the committee for their contributions this afternoon. I thank, first of all, Peter Fox.

Thank you for your comments, Peter. I know we went through things very robustly, and we spent quite a lot of time going into detail with the ombudsman. You did mention the misstep at the start with regard to the person chosen, but as you rightly said, it was testament to the ombudsman's adaptability to be able to see that, change it and then get somebody that is particularly good at doing this sort of investigation for us. Thank you for your comments.

Mike, thank you very much for your contribution as well. The complexity around social media policy is difficult. Because you're right, you do have freedom of expression, but there are different situations in different organisations. We are in a different organisation to the ombudsman, and we see things coming to the standards committee around social media, so there are different levels in different places, and it is something that we'll probably pick up in scrutiny in due course, when we go through the budget process with the ombudsman. I think being able to get to grips with some of that is very important.

I realise that I've gone over time, Dirprwy Lywydd, but I would just like to conclude as follows. As mentioned earlier, I'm pleased to say that the ombudsman has already responded positively to the independent review and has committed to implementing all recommendations and lessons learned. An independent and robust complaints process is essential to give people in Wales a voice and to ensure the highest standards of conduct are embedded within local government in Wales. I firmly believe that the findings of Dr McCullough's independent review and our inquiry, as well as the response of the ombudsman to this incident, provides assurances that the investigations carried out by the ombudsman are fit for purpose and that the Senedd can have confidence that it is able to undertake future investigations with impartiality and fairness. I'd like to thank everyone for their contributions.

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.

Item 9 this afternoon is the Plaid Cymru debate on employer national insurance contributions. I call on Rhun ap Iorwerth to move the motion.

Thank you very much, Dirprwy Lywydd. Today's debate relates to the practical and far-reaching impacts of poor decisions made by Government, and it also relates to honesty in politics. Many will remember the warnings given by Plaid Cymru and others during the general election campaign this year that there was a lack of honesty displayed by Labour and the Conservatives in terms of their tax and spend plans. They will remember the IMF warning that there was a conspiracy of silence between the two parties about the reality of a financial black hole of tens of billions of pounds in the plans that they put forward to constituents.

Time and time again we heard Labour promising not to increase taxes on workers, but here we are, just four months into a new Government, and Keir Starmer has gone back on his word and hit the pockets of workers. Because that's what's happening here—something that he had pledged would not happen. And this isn't a party political analysis. There are arguments about taxation levels always, of course, but very highly respected commentators, such as Paul Johnson from the IFS, say that increasing the national insurance contributions of employers is breaking the Labour Party's manifesto pledge.

According to the OBR assessment, over three quarters of the cost will be passed on to workers, either through a squeeze on salaries or a reduction in the workforce itself, damaging opportunities to create employment and to retain employment, and that, in turn, is sure to erode living standards. And for our domestic businesses, the backbone of our economy, the increase in their NI contributions mean an added bill, on average, of £900 for every worker annually.

As I said, I and my fellow Members on these benches did consistently warn during the election campaign that Labour's spending plans didn't hold water, and that they would lead to greater austerity. That has been borne out in what is emerging now, following the budget, and it's ignoring our demands to introduce bolder measures to increase revenue, a tax on wealth—there is so much that hasn't been looked into in that area—or more far-reaching options on capital gains. So, Labour has dug itself a hole, and it's the people of Wales who will pay the price. Not for the first time, Sir Keir Starmer's measures ignore the needs of Wales.

The changes to employer NI contributions are an echo of how the Prime Minister has punished pensioners by removing the fuel allowance from them without warning, and the decision to disrespect Wales by not giving a fair funding formula and depriving us of HS2 funding. Employment levels are at their lowest for almost a decade, lower than anywhere else in the UK, and the additional burden on employers is sure to have a disproportionate impact on employers in Wales. 

There has to be, I think, recognition that these changes will impact workers across the board, affecting job creation, affecting wages—a squeeze on wages. For many businesses, employers, it's a double whammy from Labour, with the Prime Minister's national insurance hike and the First Minister's business rates relief cut. Labour are quick to accuse others of fantasy economics whilst their own plans represent nightmare economics for thousands of employers and employees. But it's not the private sector only, of course, that is bearing the brunt. Charities, GP surgeries, universities, sectors already feeling the squeeze, to say the very least, have been taken to the brink. Our inboxes, all of us, across political parties in this Senedd Siambr, will bear testament to that.

Let me cite just a few examples of how these sectors will be impacted. One surgery in Pwllheli is estimating the annual cost of the increase to NI employer contributions to be £19,000—a pretty eye-watering figure—but the RCGP says that, for some surgeries, it could be £90,000. The BMA has warned that more GP surgeries could close as a consequence of the punitive approach being taken by the Labour Chancellor. That affects the people that we represent. Marie Curie Cymru and the mental health charity Platfform both face an annual bill of £250,000 each—a quarter of a million pounds. We know that Welsh universities, already crippled by financial challenges and forever waiting for the Welsh Government to put a sustainable funding model in place, will also face very significant further pressures.

If the First Minister's so-called 'partnership in power' slogan is to mean anything, then the Welsh Government must, at the very least, press the UK Government to apply the StatsWales definition of the public sector to ensure that third sector organisations, GP services, the higher education sector, some of those other sectors that I've mentioned, aren't captured in Rachel Reeves's plans. Plaid Cymru will be listening carefully for this commitment in the response from the Cabinet Secretary today.

I will just end by placing on record Plaid Cymru's deep regret at the manner in which the UK Labour Government turned the recent budget into a missed opportunity to take bold decisions, to help the least well-off in society, as well as our subsequent disappointment at the Labour Welsh Government's apologism, frankly, for this. A budget that punishes businesses, farmers, GPs, charities, universities is no cause for celebration, is it? So I urge all Members who wish to show their support for these sectors and more to do so by backing Plaid Cymru’s motion today.

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

Formally.

I call on Peter Fox to move amendment 2, tabled in the name of Darren Millar.

I move, Dirprwy Lywydd. Can I thank Plaid Cymru for bringing forward this debate today? There is little I can disagree with within the motion. My position, and the position of the Welsh Conservatives, has always been clear: if we want genuine economic growth, we need to be creating the right business environment in Wales. Even a 1 per cent rise in employer national insurance contributions for the public sector will cost the Welsh taxpayers and extra £100 million. And yes, the UK Government has said that it will provide funding to cover the cost of national insurance contributions for those workers, however this will still come out of the taxpayer’s pocket. Whilst I do support the point in the motion that calls on the levy increase to be paid for by the UK Government, ultimately it is the taxpayers who are going to pay for the Chancellor’s tax increase.

Furthermore, much like the practicality of Labour’s rise in inheritance tax on farmers, there has been little clarity as to the fine print on this policy. Much of our public services rely on private business to help them run, as we've already heard—GPs, dental practices and care homes. They're all struggling and could face further financial pressure as a result. Will there be Government support for these businesses? We don't know. We hope they will be taken into consideration. Ultimately, the real losers, when it comes the rise in national insurance, are the hard-working small business owners who have had to struggle through the pandemic, the global rise in the cost of doing business, and now, just as they are starting to rebuild and plan for the future, they are hit with further tax increases. The chief economist of the Institute of Directors noted that this is an especially bad time to be raising this tax, as

'business confidence is low, hiring plans have already been hit, and vacancies are falling, this will hit employment prospects and earnings.'

And she's bang on when she noted that

'The effects of higher national insurance costs will be borne by workers.'

Finally, one thing that this motion does not address is the simple fact that the UK Labour Government has broken a manifesto commitment to not raise tax on working people. Time and time again, the Chancellor went on tv and made the claim, only to u-turn after they got into power. This means one of two things for the Labour Government: this is either a broken promise, or that small business owners are not working people. There is no alternative way of spinning that.

The truth is that this isn't the first time that Labour have been dishonest with the people of Wales. They didn't tell voters that they were going to strip pensioners of winter fuel payments, they have u-turned on the funding for HS2, and they have u-turned on this. Dirprwy Lywydd, I hope everyone will back our amendment, noting the breach of a manifesto promise, and I hope Labour Members will begin to stand up for the people of Wales and stand up to their colleagues in Westminster. Diolch.

Small and medium-sized enterprises are quite literally the backbone of the Welsh economy, when you consider that they make up over 90 per cent of business activity in Wales. And let's face it, they’ve faced some challenging times. They've had the pandemic, the cost of living, inflation, energy prices, cuts to business rates relief, and now, undeniably, there's this additional challenge facing them. The increase in employer national insurance contributions will lead to added costs.

To put that into context, for a microbusiness employing five people on the minimum wage, this adds up to an extra £3,800 pounds per year in overheads, which then equates, roughly, to 4 per cent of the average annual turnover of Welsh microbusinesses. It's also worth emphasising that the highest relative increase in cost would fall on employers of part-time or seasonal workers, which would then have implications for the hospitality and independent retail sector in particular. And, of course, we wax lyrical in this Chamber about wanting to support the hospitality sector and about how important pubs, restaurants and local shops are in enriching our town centres and high streets. Well, the cost of failing to support them cannot be measured simply in pounds. They're an important cultural aspect to our high street.

Now, I acknowledge that the employer allowance has been upscaled to offset some of the damage, but this needs to be claimed by employers. So, I would therefore urge the Government to ensure that businesses are fully informed of the changes in eligibility criteria and thresholds well in advance of the next financial year, and we also then need to see the Welsh Government looking at how it can use its own resources to provide businesses with every opportunity to thrive in these testing conditions. I think that's why the upcoming Welsh budget is an opportunity to extend that olive branch. We have heard regularly now from Labour Members that the consequentials received through the autumn budget will be transformational—well, here's an opportunity to show that. Does the Government look at freezing the non-domestic rate multiplier as it currently stands? Does it look proactively at the use of its new powers in relation to the multiplier when they come available in April? Does the Government look at rates relief? These are questions that are being asked by businesses right now.

Finally, Dirprwy Lywydd, as Rhun has already mentioned, the claim that these measures won't hit the pockets of workers nor curb employment simply isn't true. Even when you avoid the definition of what a worker is, workers will be hit by higher prices and lower wage increases. We know that the NIC rise will be a drag on a Welsh jobs market that is already anaemic, which in turn will further hit stagnant living standards. Now, I wasn't sure about the Government's response to the latest ONS statistics that showed Wales with the lowest rate of employment of all the UK nations and regions. The Welsh Government's written statement simply casts doubt on the validity of the statistics themselves. When I asked the Cabinet Secretary, through a written question, what the total cost is to Welsh businesses of the UK Government's decision to increase employer national insurance contributions, do you know what the answer was? The Welsh Government doesn't hold the information requested. So, we can't trust the ONS, according to Welsh Government, and we should just take the Government's word on this. Look, if it's not as bad as all that, then share the data that forms the basis for that assertion, because there is anxiety amongst SMEs right now, and they are looking to the Welsh Government to alleviate some of that.

The problem with debates like this is that they do actually enhance the anxiety rather than alleviate it, because a lot of what we are talking about today is speculative, and some of it, I would say, factually inaccurate. There are 248,000 small firms in Wales, and of those small firms, 95 per cent of them don't employ anybody. They rely on social capital in their communities. So, when it comes into areas of national insurance contributions, they won't be paying them, and they'll benefit from a growing economy as a result of the policy. So, it's worth considering the fact that the small-firm sector is often romanticised to the extent that you perceive them to be these vastly exciting, fast-growing firms, when, in fact, what they are is still romantic but in a way that is more reliant on things like social capital, where firms rely on family, friends, networks, to build and grow, and the kinds of communities they create tend to be communities that are socially inclusive as well rather than dynamically economic. And my argument, from the PhD I wrote 11 years ago, is that the small-firm sector is a steady and reliable contributor to the economy, but it isn't ever going to be a source of hugely dynamic growth, because small-firm owners always have an alternative to employment. They've got social capital to rely on. And even when they move away from family and friends, they will find networks of other businesses that will be there to support them through the process. I've long argued, and this was in the days when I was teaching this stuff, that those firms that are going to grow, yes, they need help and support, but they are going to grow. Those firms that are foundational that exist within the economy are not going to grow in the conventional sense that we consider. So, I think we can probably over-exaggerate the impact of national insurance contributions on the small-business sector.

The other thing I wanted to say is that this is a budget that has had to make difficult decisions, and if you don't make those decisions, then you've still got to fill that £22 billion black hole that was left by the Conservatives—ah, Peter Fox is waking up. I thought he was going to intervene then. And it has to be placing those right measures in the right places. So, I do worry that we end up in this very negative spiral of debate, in which we talk down the economy and end up in a place where we, rather than looking at what we can do together—and I reach out to Plaid Cymru on this—we're in a place where we're just criticising the UK Government for actually trying to fix what is an economy that needs a huge set of building blocks at the foundations. 

So, we have to ask ourselves, 'Do we want better public services?' And if we do, how do we pay for them? And we have had this austerity over the last 14 years, and I disagree with what Rhun ap Iorwerth said, that this is a return to some kind of austerity. I think it's asking larger employers to pay a bit more, but there are measures in place, then, to make sure that those small and micro firms, in the way that I've described, actually benefit from the changes. And I think those of us who have advocated the foundational economy will see that benefit coming through in that way. So, yes, tough decisions have to be made, but I think that in the longer term, this is to everyone's benefit. 

When the effects of poverty and illness become evident through our constituents' experiences, Labour Governments at both ends of the M4 point fingers at Conservative austerity policies over the past 14 years. And I agree entirely that there is a great burden of blame to be shouldered among the ranks of Conservative Prime Ministers who were entirely open about their ideology of eviscerating public services, undermining the social welfare system while safeguarding the interests of their class, and allowing the gap between the wealthy and the poor to increase to a shocking degree.  

As we do not levy enough taxes on the wealthiest to fund the public services that we need and that the people of Wales deserve, our third sector is crucial in filling those gaps. They also provide vital expertise in working in partnership with public services, contributing over £6.6 billion-worth of social and economic benefit to the Welsh economy every year. But the sector is already on the brink, with inflation endangering and squeezing services and their ability to recruit and retain staff. 

The Labour Westminster Government’s decision to raise the funds that the Chancellor needed for her plans by placing additional pressure on this sector was not only surprising, but also senseless. It felt as though the plans had been drawn up on the back of a fag packet rather than drawing up a careful and thoroughly drawn-up financial strategy over the past few years in opposition. And by not committing from the outset to fund the additional costs facing the sector as a result of the increase in national insurance contributions—a cost that there is no way for this sector to absorb in the same way as larger businesses in the private sector can—Starmer’s Government has created the unfortunate and unacceptable impression, I believe, that this sector is a kind of 'nice to have', which doesn’t deserve the same level of support as statutory services. 

But where would the Government’s efforts to address mental health issues, for example, be without the heroic work done by Mind, which now faces an additional cost of £20,000 per annum in Cwm Taf Morgannwg alone? How much worse would the situation facing some of our most disadvantaged citizens be without Citizens Advice Cymru services, which now faces additional costs of between £125,000 and £180,000 per annum in some parts of Wales? How much more uncertain would the situation facing cancer patients in Wales be without the support of Tenovus Cymru and Marie Curie, which now face additional costs of £250,000 per annum? How can we hope to tackle the shamefully high levels of poverty in our society without the contribution of charities like Wastesavers Charitable Trust, which is now facing additional costs of £107,000 per annum? And other crucial sectors are also facing the same threat and unfairness. And I'd like to talk specifically about the childcare sector.

How can we ensure that more of our young children have the opportunity to access early childcare through the medium of Welsh when Mudiad Meithrin says that some of their cylchoedd now have to find up to 10 per cent more in their budgets to pay staff costs? Childcare providers cannot claim employer's allowance, so the sector feels the impact of these measures without being able to access the mitigating policy measures. They're also limited in terms of their ability to offset these costs. It's very difficult for them to cut staff numbers to do so, due to regulatory requirements for care, and although the recent announcement by the Welsh Government that childcare providers will be permanently exempted from business rates is to be welcomed, this will not be enough to mitigate the impact of the increase in their costs.

Supporting this sector is central to gender equality, to ensure the best possible start for every child, and is a cornerstone of the child poverty strategy. These are but a few examples, examples that will undermine the crucial task of supporting those most in need of our support.

And while Rachel Reeves insists that austerity is at an end, the truth is her measures will undermine this very layer of the public sector that has achieved so much to shield the people of Wales from the most damaging impacts of austerity over the last decade and a half. It clearly underlines that the Government's strategy to restore our public sector is based on a defective rationale, because there will be no recovery or restoration if you're simply taking resources away from one part of the sector to give to another. That is austerity; that's the definition of austerity.

With one hand tied behind their backs, due to a pledge not to adopt a truly socialist approach towards taxation, they're now giving with one hand and taking away with the other, and the people of Wales are going to have to cope with the impact of this. And the Welsh Government is once again going to have to step in to rectify that, to rectify the damaging effects of Westminster policy on Wales. But this time, there will be no pointing of fingers, no—excuses will be made and blame will be denied rather than highlighted or called out.

We are clear that we need a conclusive end to austerity, rather than creative accounting, and our motion shows the first important steps to enable this to happen.

Once again, we just see another hit to Wales and its businesses. The UK Government's decision to raise employer national insurance contributions in the autumn budget is nothing short of a disgrace. This policy is misguided, it's damaging, it's a direct attack on businesses and workers, with the potential to stall wage growth, limit job creation and weaken the already fragile Welsh economy. The Chancellor, the Rt Hon Rachel Reeves, claims this tax hike is necessary to fund public services. But let us be clear, the burden will not fall on her desk in Westminster, it will fall on our employers, our employees, our small businesses, their families—already struggling to make ends meet. We've already seen two massive protests in Llandudno and London by our hard-working farmers, and whilst the emphasis was, yes, on the inheritance tax, many that I've spoken to within Aberconwy say the national insurance implications and the increases are going to really make them struggle.

The Government's decision to increase employer national insurance contributions from 13.8 per cent to 15 per cent breaks even their own manifesto promise not to raise taxes on workers, and that was enticing people to vote for them. How can they betray people who then voted for them and do the opposite? It's just disgraceful. Darren Millar is quite right to put forward an amendment from us on this.

This policy, which disproportionately impacts Wales, is a betrayal of trust, and a blatant disregard for the challenges faced by the people and businesses in our nation. Small and medium enterprises are the backbone of Wales, making up 99.3 per cent of businesses. These enterprises are already grappling with economic pressures, and now the UK Government, the UK Labour Government, is asking them to shoulder even more financial strain.

On Welsh tv last night, Mountain Warehouse claimed it will see an increase of £800 per employee, stopping growth and ultimately could see implications for the number of workers they employ and also possibly passing on the cost to customers who can't afford it, because customers are already facing high home expenses and things. There will be stagnant wages and fewer job opportunities. However, these consequences don't stop there. This increase will place an additional £100 million burden on public sector employers in Wales, affecting the 460,800 public sector workers across the country. We heard yesterday that it is also going to deeply affect our GP surgeries across Wales, with one surgery having to cough up an extra £30,000, the entire salary of a vaccinations nurse. Where's the sense in that?

This is money that could and should be used to improve essential public services, not to patch up Westminster's poor policy decisions. We keep being told, finance Cabinet Secretary, about this £22 billion hole. Well, I can tell you the OBR dispute that, and I would love you to tell us today the proof, the evidence, that supports that £22 billion hole. Even limited company directors, who are already squeezed by high costs, will be hit hard. If they pay themselves a salary, they too will face higher national insurance contributions. A survey by the Federation of Small Businesses revealed that 92 per cent of small employers are already worrying about the costs and risks of hiring. Wales was the only UK nation where visitor spending in 2023 failed to return to pre-pandemic levels. Since the pandemic, 17 per cent of hospitality venues in Wales have closed, compared to 14 per cent in England and 13 per cent in Scotland. This tax hike will hit these sectors hard, particularly those reliant on part-time workers.

But all we've seen since July is a Welsh Labour Government without any backbone, allowing Westminster to dictate policies that harm our own people and businesses. Let me be clear: the Welsh Government may not stand up for small businesses, but there is one party in this Chamber that does, and it is we on these Welsh Conservative benches. We will continue to fight for fairer policies that protect jobs, encourage growth and ensure that Wales prospers. It is time for change, it is time for policies that work for Wales, not against it, and in 18 months the voters in Wales will have that chance. Bring it on.

As Rhun has already noted, there can be no doubt that universities in Wales are currently facing the gravest crisis in their history. And it’s worth us reflecting on the current situation first, before we discuss the implications of the proposed changes as a result of the increase in national insurance contributions. Recently, we've seen Cardiff University having to introduce a programme of redundancies in response to a £30 million deficit in its budget. Aberystwyth has introduced a programme in the same vein to fill a gap of approximately £15 million in its budget, while Swansea has already had to make 240 members of staff redundant due to a similar financial pressure. And only last week, we heard the news that the University of Wales Trinity Saint David is intending to move its undergraduate courses from the Lampeter campus to Carmarthen, which will potentially bring to an end over two centuries of higher education in Lampeter.

And in the meantime, Welsh universities are struggling to attract enough students to counterbalance the increase in their operating costs over the past few years. For example, Bangor is facing a deficit of £9 million as a result of a 7 per cent decrease in undergraduate applicants compared with last year, and a 50 per cent decrease in postgraduate applicants. 

It's clear therefore that now, more than ever, we need a Government that is willing to stand up for our universities, and to do so robustly, to offer those progressive and bold solutions that will ensure their long-term future. But, through the measures announced during the budget, the Labour Party in Westminster, partners in power of the Welsh Government here, have completely ignored the clear warnings that universities have been highlighting for some time regarding the serious and wholly unsustainable financial situation facing this sector. 

According to initial estimates, the increase in national insurance contributions will mean an additional annual cost of over £20 million across Welsh universities—over £1.5 million for Aberystwyth, almost £2 million for Bangor, over £4 million in addition for Swansea and £7 million in addition for Cardiff, to give but a few examples. Without a shadow of a doubt, these additional costs could push our higher education institutions over the precipice, whereby there won't be a way back for them, although they play a vital role in preparing our young people for the workplace so that they can contribute to Wales’s future economic prosperity.

I urge you as a Government, therefore, to use every lever available to you at Westminster to echo the serious concerns expressed by our universities and to ensure that they have a secure financial future that reflects their vital contribution to the future of our nation. 

The Cabinet Secretary for finance now to contribute to the debate. Mark Drakeford.

Thank you, Llywydd. And thank you for the opportunity to respond to the debate. 

I'm replying to a debate on a matter for which neither I nor the Welsh Government have a responsibility. I will come to the specifics of employer national insurance in a moment. But at the root of this debate is not national insurance itself, but a cast of mind that unites the Conservative and the Plaid Cymru benches. Both of them are willing to spend money on almost anything; neither of them are willing to raise the money necessary from anyone. You don’t have to sit long in this Chamber before the bills start flowing in. I was here for an hour earlier this afternoon, Llywydd, in which there were demands for more expenditure on bus fares, more expenditure on free bus travel, more expenditure on seasonal bus travel, more expenditure on supporting rail fares—you name it. You don’t have to be here long before opposition parties are very keen indeed to spend money. Yet they are entirely unwilling to raise the money from anywhere: pensioners mustn’t pay; farmers mustn’t pay; employers mustn’t pay; the third sector, Sioned Williams told us, mustn’t pay; universities, Cefin Campbell tells us, mustn’t pay. This afternoon, the Conservative benches were telling us that fare dodgers weren’t supposed to pay either. There’s nobody—

Will you take an intervention?

Of course.

Do you believe in a wealth tax? Because that's what we advocated. You said we didn't want anybody to pay: we advocated, in our manifesto for the general election, for a tax on the most wealthy. That's how we said we would try and raise money for the services we need. 

I understand that—

Do you agree with that—directly, would you say 'yes' or 'no'? 

—and the Member will, no doubt, understand that neither she nor I nor anyone in this Chamber has any power whatsoever to introduce a wealth tax—

No, but we can advocate for one. We can advocate for one.

She wants to spend money on the things for which we have responsibility, and she wants to raise money in a way for which we have no responsibility at all. It is the politics of the playground, and we've seen it in virulent display here this afternoon. I thought it was brave—

It's the politics of socialist values.

I thought it was brave of the leader of Plaid Cymru to recognise that his policies are generally referred to as fantasy economics, and much of what we heard from his benches went on to demonstrate exactly that.

Now, Llywydd, the Chancellor found the public finances in a state, where the gap between what the previous Government had set in motion in spending terms and the amount of money that that Government was raising to cover that expenditure was £22 billion—

Will you take an intervention?

Of course I'll take an intervention.

That is incorrect. The OBR pointed out—. Yes, we accept that there was a gap, but that gap was about £9 billion and it is quite commonplace, in a £1 trillion budget, to have shortfalls and surpluses mid term, or a quarter way through the term. But the OBR pointed to £9 billion, not £22 billion. The £22 billion gap was inflicted on the country by inflation-busting pay rises that didn’t bear any resemblance to the pay review bodies', which recommended far lower pay review settlements.

Well, Llywydd, of course, I've understood that it's long been the policy of the Conservative Party here—we've heard it time and time again—that they didn't want to pay workers for the work that they do here in Wales. Complaints always from them that these were pay increases that ought not to have been implemented. What the OBR said was that there was £9 billion of a gap that even they weren't aware of, because the previous Government had not revealed information to them to allow them to make a proper assessment of the gap that existed.

The Chancellor had to find the money, and she did so by returning national insurance broadly to where it had been as a share of GDP for 13 of the 14 Conservative years. And, in doing so, as Hefin David suggested, the Chancellor also took a series of measures to offset the impact of employer national insurance rises on small employers by more than doubling the employment allowance. The Federation of Small Businesses said that this uplift in the employment allowance

'is very welcome, as it more than doubles from £5,000 to £10,500, which will shield the smallest employers from the jobs tax and is therefore a pro-jobs prioritisation in a tough Budget.'

That is what the Federation of Small Businesses had to say.

The truth of the matter is, Llywydd, that bills have to be paid, and the Chancellor made her decisions that the burden would fall where it can most be borne. I will be in the Treasury on Monday of next week. I will explore, of course, with Treasury Ministers, the definition that the Treasury will use of public sector workers, because they too—. The cost of employers there, too, will be borne by the Treasury.

The result of it all, Llywydd, is that this Welsh Government and this Senedd has £1.7 billion more to invest in public services than we would have had, had last March’s budget continued to be in place. Now, I have never argued—. Luke Fletcher said that that money would be transformational. I have never argued that, in a single budget, we could make up for all of the harm that had been done in 14 years. And, no doubt, Llywydd, opposition parties here will complain, when it comes to the budget, that the £1 billion extra that we have next year is not enough. There will be another long shopping list of all of the things that they would like to find money for, while they remain, as usual, entirely silent as to how that money can be found.

Llywydd, I ask the Chamber to do the sensible thing: the thing that will be reflected in the lives of our fellow citizens. If you want to pay for things, you have to find the money to do so. That is what the Chancellor had to do. That is how we will get the money that will come to public services here in Wales. Vote against the motion, support the Labour amendment, and introduce some sense of proper economic management into our debates here on the floor of the Chamber.

Rhun ap Iorwerth to reply to the debate.

Thank you, Llywydd, and I'm grateful to everyone who has participated in this debate this afternoon. As I said at the outset, there are very grave concerns across public sectors and private sectors on the impact of the changes announced by the Labour Party to national insurance contributions. It was pledged that a change of Government would protect ordinary people, would protect our communities, after all of those years of austerity imposed by the Conservatives. But this change is going to perpetuate that austerity for so many people in a practical sense.

Austerity has undermined public services over the past 15 years. This will also undermine public services. Austerity has taken money out of people’s pockets for over a decade and more. That will happen again now. The Conservative-imposed austerity was painful. It had a grave impact on some of the most vulnerable people that we represent. But this is Labour austerity replacing it. And it’s not surprising that people who have been faithful to Labour for so long are so disappointed in seeing what’s happening.

Hefin David suggested that, by talking about this, we were creating anxiety. But it's not talking about austerity that generates that anxiety, it's the austerity itself that does that, and that is why I appeal to Hefin David, and his fellow Members on the Labour benches, to support us in calling for a change of direction from his bosses within the Labour Party. And he is also falling into the trap of saying that there is no choice, but of course there is a choice. I talked about some of the alternative choices that I referred to during the election campaign this year, and I'm continuing to do so now, about, yes, bringing more money into the coffers in order to ensure that public services are properly funded, but Labour has fallen into the trap of following in the footsteps of the Conservatives.

My fellow Members on these benches and I have set out the significant practical problems generated by these changes, and those are to public bodies, institutions that provide key services, and private businesses, who were in a very fragile state already after all of those years of austerity. I will turn to the comments made by the Cabinet Secretary.

I'll turn to the Cabinet Secretary for finance's comments. He called it a motion about something for which the Welsh Government has no responsibility, but our asks in this motion today are very, very specific: it’s a call on Welsh Government to stand up for Wales, to make the case for Wales. It’s calling on the Welsh Government to make the case for Wales on the protections that could be put in place for Welsh businesses and Welsh service providers. It’s calling for an impact assessment, which the Welsh Government is in a position to conduct. It’s calling for support for those affected, including businesses. But Labour chooses instead to close ranks.

The Labour amendment today deletes all of Plaid Cymru’s motion. It deletes our concerns that we raise, in all honesty, on behalf of the people that we represent. Read it. It is an amendment that seems as if it’s on behalf of the Treasury. It could have been written by the Treasury. And this is a real, real issue. If our Labour Government in Wales has as its priority the defence of the actions of the UK Labour Government, whatever those actions are, rather than prioritising the well-being of the people of Wales, and challenging—positively, yes; firmly, absolutely—UK Government on behalf of the people of Wales, then we have a real problem. And we have ever clearer evidence that we need a change in the way that Welsh Government deals, negotiates, puts pressure on and holds to account a UK Government. We need a Plaid Cymru Government to stand up for Wales. So, support this motion today.

The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There are objections, and therefore we will defer voting on this item until voting time.

That brings us to voting time, and unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, I will move directly to the vote. Voting time, therefore. So, the first vote this afternoon is on item 7, a motion to approve the Senedd Commission budget for 2025-26. I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Hefin David. Open the vote.

Can I just check that interpretation is working? Testing interpretation. Is it working? It's working for everyone now. Okay, thank you very much for your patience.

We will move to the votes under item 9, the Plaid Cymru debate, employer national insurance contributions. I call first of all for a vote on the motion without amendment, tabled in the name of Heledd Fychan. Open the vote.

—25 against, and therefore the motion is not agreed. 

Amendment 1 is next, and the next vote is on amendment 1, tabled in the name of Jane Hutt. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 will be deselected. We will therefore vote on amendment 1, tabled in the name of Jane Hutt. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 23, no abstentions, 21 against, and amendment 1 is agreed.

Amendment 2 is deselected. We will therefore vote on the motion as amended.

Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 23, no abstentions, 21 against. The motion as amended is agreed. 

Just to confirm the result of the vote on item 7, as it was not broadcast: the result of that vote on item 7, on the Commission budget, was that there were 31 in favour, no abstentions, and 13 against. That concludes voting time.

We will now move to the short debate. This afternoon's short debate is to be introduced by Gareth Davies, so Gareth Davies is welcome to introduce his short debate.

Diolch, Llywydd. Thank you very much. I'm grateful for the opportunity to table this debate and I appreciate this remit is very broad, but I am grateful for any Member willing to share their views on the subject however they see fit. I've agreed to give Natasha Asghar a minute of this debate time tonight.

Edmund Burke, the founder of modern British conservatism and one of the best political philosophers of the eighteenth century, once wrote of a contract, a partnership, between those who are living, those who are dead and those who are to be born. For myself as a Conservative, it is important to conserve what is valuable to us and what we love from those who want to destroy those things, because once they are gone, they are gone, and there's rarely an opportunity for us to resurrect them. It is about discerning what we should fight to conserve and what we should change. It's not to refuse all change for the sake of it, and conservatism is not equivalent to nostalgism, and does not include a yearning to return to a perceived golden era of the past.

But we can undoubtedly agree that the pace of societal, cultural, technological and economic change has been dramatic over the past few decades, and we must all decide how a responsible Government should respond to this, if at all. The effects of these changes have led to deindustrialisation, demographic change, a social media revolution, a so-called culture war, climate change, a mental health crisis, globalisation and many more. All of these things have, without question, changed the way in which people live their lives and interact with one another.

And how does the state manage this change, which is often far larger than one national Government's abilities alone, and mitigate the impact on the country at large? There are no easy answers to these questions, and I'm grateful for any Member who is willing to share their two cents on how broader social change has impacted their constituents, and how we can address this as elected representatives, and how this should be addressed by devolved and national Governments.

To begin with my shadow ministerial brief, mental health and early years, I am all too aware of the mental health crisis we are in the midst of across the western world. The effect of the crisis on young people is devastating, with nearly a quarter of secondary school pupils reported as having high levels of mental health symptoms, by the School Health Research Network, SHRN, at Cardiff University. Thirty-two per cent of adult respondents to a survey in Wales reported having low mental well-being, and many people anecdotally report that the world is a more complex place, and thus the complexities of life affect their mental well-being. The advent of social media has brought enormous benefits to us as a society and, in some ways, improved our quality of life, but the evidence is overwhelming that the ubiquity of social media has had a hugely detrimental impact on the mental well-being of young people.

Psychologist Jonathan Haidt argues that those born after 1995 were the first people in history to go through puberty with a portal to an alternative universe in their pockets, and the toll this has taken on their well-being has been devastating, with unprecedented levels of anxiety amongst Gen Z, particularly affecting girls. How do we address this as legislators? It's very difficult to protect people's right to freedom of speech whilst, at the same time, protecting the mental well-being of our young people. And there is no silver-bullet solution that the state can deploy to fully address the harms that come from social media. These sociocultural changes brought about during the pandemic have had a lasting impact. Changes in workplace culture, such as working from home, where most social interaction is virtual, has brought some benefits in terms of productivity, although the evidence is not conclusive, but it has also contributed to social isolation and loneliness.

According to Welsh Government data between 2022 and 2023, 48 per cent reported feeling sometimes lonely. The rise of working from home and a general cultural shift towards a more individualistic society, where the bonds between those in a community are less important, have also contributed. How a responsible Government responds to this again is contentious, but in my opinion, we should be encouraging businesses and the public sector to be bringing workers back into the office and equipping employers to better support the well-being of their staff. However, this is still addressing the symptoms of a broader problem.

As the Senedd Member for the Vale of Clwyd, I represent Rhyl, a seaside town that is often aligned in the media with tropes of decline, nostalgia and faded glory; a town built on the tourist industry, with a fraction of the tourism that used to descend on the town in its heyday. Today there is a sentiment in Rhyl that they have been left behind. The old industry that formed the backbone of the town has declined, and crime and social deprivation have steadily increased. We often hear claims that Government is entirely to blame for deindustrialisation, but this is a low-resolution conclusion. There are many factors that contribute to deindustrialisation that have affected towns the length and breadth of Wales. And it's not entirely clear how communities built on an industry can recover and adapt once the community has been uprooted.

Globalisation, again, brings benefits, but the consequences of globalisation for communities has also brought challenges and undoubtedly led to a rise in populist politics and nativism as a response. Globalisation has brought free exchange, cheaper prices for consumers, and workers to fill labour shortages, but communities that bear the brunt of the loss of industry and demographic change no longer feel connected to their community, and feel they have lost their stake in society, and this drives the rise of populism, unfortunately. Again, as legislators, we must balance the benefits that come from globalisation whilst mitigating its challenges and listening to the concerns of those who resent the pace of change. We cannot and should not insult or belittle their concerns. However, how this translates to policy and legislation is tricky in that process. But we have to be cognisant that it is a duty of the Government to listen to the concerns of the electorate and shield communities that never signed up to be economic zones, considered a chess piece on the board of global commerce. They are delicate communities with fragile relationships and traditions that must be respected.

Economic changes have completely changed the priorities and capabilities of our younger generation, where home ownership is now seen as unattainable for many young people. A survey by The Week of 1,500 young adults in Britain conducted in 2023 adds further support. This survey found that 81 per cent of young adults were either furious, frustrated or angry about housing affordability, and 44 per cent either had completely given up or thought it was unlikely they would ever buy a house. Housing has been debated in this Chamber many times, and will no doubt continue to do so, but we should seriously consider the implications of an entire generation who will never achieve home ownership at the age their parents did due to a housing crisis exacerbated by a growing population, coupled with low house building due to a broken planning system.

The inability to own a home and have a stake in society has implications on people's priorities in life and consumer behaviour, with many young people choosing not to have children, which will become, in the coming decades, one of the biggest quandaries of our age. This gives rise to an increasing feeling amongst people that liberalism and globalism have failed to deliver a strong economy, robust national security, successful industrial policy and a cohesive national story.

Across the nations of the developed world, the birth rate is collapsing. In the 1960s, British women each had an average of around 2.6 children, and now it's fewer than 1.6. The fertility rate in the UK is now well below replacement, and it continues to fall. There are currently around four working-age people for every pensioner in the UK, but based on current projections, in just one generation's time, in 2053, there will be fewer than three working-age people for every pensioner. This is an impending disaster hurtling down the line that, at some point, responsible governments will have to address, as we have done with climate change. The economic and social consequences of the collapse of our birth rates could be catastrophic.

I appreciate the outline of this debate has been very broad tonight, but I hope it has given food for thought on how we address our rapidly changing society and culture, some of the problems we are not currently accounting for, and how Government should best react for the benefit of this country. Thank you very much.

I'd like to start by thanking my colleague Gareth Davies for bringing forward this really important short debate today. Without a doubt, we all know our society continues to change at a rapid speed. Technology is constantly evolving, from the development of AI to the rapid uptake of social media channels. However, with unprecedented changes comes the unknown, and as a society we have to adapt incredibly quickly, whilst not knowing what's next, often resulting in the older generation feeling and being left behind. Many have said to me that they feel, as Gareth put beautifully, like a piece on a chess board, and he mentioned this in great depth in his contribution.

I know that in my region of South Wales East I have had countless constituents contact me in regard to digital exclusion, whether that has been about the increasing number of closures of high-street banks or the inability to renew concessionary travel passes online. Presiding Officer, whilst technology affords us many opportunities, I fear that so much of our lives being online has left more room for the older generations in particular to be left behind.

Whilst I am in no way, shape or form an advocate for more big-state Government intervention, I do believe this Government has a duty of care to work with businesses and stakeholders, as outlined by Gareth in his contribution. They must use innovative solutions to keep services inclusive and positively evolving going forward. In addition to this, Presiding Officer, I do believe there's a real issue in some cases with the law keeping up with the rate at which technology is advancing. We do all live in a world where, sadly, there is plenty of racism, sexism, misogyny, and online predatory behaviour. Therefore, we must ensure that the law is strong enough to protect us all, but particularly our children and young people, who are at a greater risk of harm when it comes to those wishing to take advantage on social media platforms. 

Presiding Officer, whilst I'm on limited time today, I just wanted to close by thanking Gareth again for bringing this debate forward. I do hope this is an area we continue to have an open debate on, and also carry on discussing these issues in depth going forward. Thank you very much.

Jane Hutt, the Minister, to respond.

Thank you very much, Llywydd. Thank you very much to Gareth Davies for raising this very important topic.

Thank you very much for bringing this debate to us this evening. I do think this debate is timely, because we are at a turning point, as you've acknowledged, in world history, where today's decisions will shape the future of society. The debate does give us the opportunity to look at the ways in which the Welsh Government is responding to but also shaping cultural and societal change in Wales. Natasha, you touched on that as well—what are our responsibilities particularly in Government. 

I think, if you look at recent years, highlighting the scale of challenges we face across the world, there's a pressing need to work collaboratively towards a more sustainable future. I look to our Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015, and that's going to be a key theme of my response, that we do have in Wales a world-leading framework to help us improve quality of life in Wales by encouraging us to tackle economic, environmental and social issues, while preventing decisions that will disadvantage future generations. I think all of us who've got children and indeed grandchildren increasingly think about the future for our children and our grandchildren and the decisions that we make, some of which we have very little control over.

But I do think, if we look to the Act, it is helping us embed sustainable working across the public sector, equipping policy makers with skills and resources to consider the consequences of today's decisions, both now and in the future. And again, we look at the Act to see the key tools to help us in this endeavour. We have our 'Wellbeing of Wales' report, which helps us to better understand our progress towards our national well-being goals, and also our future trends report helps us to explore possible disruption and anticipate potential future scenarios. So, I think, using the Act as our guide, thinking about the well-being goals that we as a society set ourselves, drawing on the Act's five ways of working, does help us navigate current and future challenges. It is about prioritising long-term strategic thinking and fostering co-operation with our partners.

I think we all feel better, don't we, when we co-operate and collaborate, and we feel it across this Chamber. I think the scrutiny role, in terms of Government and in cross-party committees, is crucial to our democracy and to our Welsh Parliament and Senedd, and we do learn from that way of working. And that's very much underpinned by the ways of working in the well-being of future generations Act.

I'm not sure how many are aware, but the Act has just been awarded a World Future Policy Award, which is very much the theme of your debate, Gareth. It's been awarded by the World Future Council, and it's been awarded on the basis of its innovative approach to embedding intergenerational justice and helping create the conditions for peace across Welsh society. I hope we can live up to that award in the way that we work together as a Senedd, a Welsh Parliament.

For me, culture encompasses a society’s values, beliefs, principles, how we communicate and how behave towards one another. Our shared well-being of future generations goals recognise the importance of building a more equal Wales and a society that enables people to fulfil their potential, whatever their background or circumstances. You've referred to so many of the challenges of young people in the debate. I'm conscious of the fact that, in our national milestones for Wales, which form part of the work of the well-being of future generations and the well-being expectations on the Government, we have those milestones that have to guide us and direct us and then be monitored on as a Welsh Government.

Just to look at some of these issues in terms of the points you've made, one of the national milestones is to improve adult and children's mean mental well-being and eliminate the gap in adult and children's mean mental well-being between the most deprived and least deprived areas in Wales by 2050. That is a milestone; then we have to unpick that and say, 'Well, what does that mean in terms of policy and legislation, and what role have our partners got to play in that?'

Will you take an intervention? Thank you. It's not, perhaps, usual in a short debate to have an intervention, but it just struck me, as you were speaking there, that one of the most important social structures we have is that of family. I wonder whether at times we have been guilty as politicians of neglecting, perhaps, the importance of strong, secure family structures—whatever that family structure may look like. Families come in all sorts of different shapes and sizes, and none of them are perfect, but I wonder whether you would reflect with me in that sometimes we perhaps don't always provide enough focus on strengthening and supporting families to be the best that they can be, to help tackle some of the very issues that you've raised there.

Thank you for that. I think it is very important that much of our policy in terms of health and social care, but also education, is about supporting families and households. I would say in that respect we have a very strong parenting strategy and support that we give to families. From my perspective, some of the families who are the most disadvantaged need the most recognition, and they do tend to be—and we know they are—families that are single-parent families. We must respect and support their needs. This is about reducing the poverty gap between people in Wales with certain key and protected characteristics and those without those characteristics by 2035. We have stretching targets as well.

I just wanted to take the opportunity—and I hope you will bear with me on this just for a few minutes—to say that when I was thinking about responding to this report—. You could cover so much ground, couldn't you, Gareth? But I did feel that I wanted to turn to something that is very current and topical at the moment, which is how we need to respond to the societal and cultural change that is needed to tackle violence against women. Natasha touched on this. Because I think we are at the start of the 16 days of activism. I really do think that there is commitment across this Chamber, and Gareth, you were on the steps for the vigil, and so many spoke of being fathers, brothers, uncles—the men around this Chamber. 

I did, with your permission, Gareth, and Llywydd, just want to highlight that about societal and cultural change. If we can't get rid of that deep hatred that seems to drive this epidemic of violence against women, where are we going to be in terms of our families, our children, and their circumstances? So, I just wanted to say that we know this is a societal problem that needs a societal response. This 16 days of activism is being led by a commitment that says, 'It starts with men', and I do hope that we can, over the next 16 days, work together across the Chamber. Please ask me questions, wherever you can. It came up, and I saw the Llywydd was surely tested by the length of some of the responses that I was giving and the questions that were coming. But it is so important that we focus on this. It's a societal challenge that we need to address together.

So, I would just say that, despite the many complex issues we are facing, I do believe your debate has touched on some key points of understanding, which we could perhaps take forward in other debates. The Welsh Government is seeking to strike the right balance in terms of supporting progress here in Wales, preserving the best things—and I'm sure that, from your Conservative ideology and the philosophy you've mentioned, you would agree—that have been handed down from previous generations for us. But it is for us to pass on and to respect those things, and preserve them when they are worth handing on. And that we keep working together in our different areas of policy, drawing from our strengths and upholding our principles. If we do that, we will be successful in shaping a good future not just for ourselves but, most importantly, for future generations. Diolch.

Thank you. That brings today's proceedings to a close.