Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru

The Welsh Government is committed to improving access to healthcare through real practical action. On top of the £22 million that we're spending on new vehicles to modernise the Welsh ambulance service's patient transport fleet, we're also putting £2.5 million into the non-emergency service, to help reinforce capacity during evenings and weekends, to help more people to get to their appointments on time. 

Thanks for your response, First Minister. Care homes, as I’m sure you can appreciate, rely on heavily on the service in getting residents to and from important medical appointments. I’ve been speaking to one care home in South Wales East about this service, which was absolutely essential for them. First Minister, in the last month alone, more than 60 per cent of journeys booked in advance by the care home have either been cancelled on the same day, not turned up at all or have arrived late, resulting in residents missing their appointments. With the care home not having its own transport, they are unable to pick this up when they have indeed been let down. I appreciate that the service may be struggling with demand at the present time. However, it’s becoming a quite frequent occurrence, and residents are missing out on crucial medical attention. There have been occasions where taxis have been provided by the service instead of an ambulance. So, First Minister, will the Welsh Government please look into this matter to ensure that residents aren’t being let down in the future? And will you please set out what contingency plans are indeed in place for health and social care settings like care homes if there are staffing shortfalls or vehicle issues meaning that a planned journey cannot go ahead? Thank you.

Well, thanks very much. And you’re quite right—we’re aware of this, which is why we gave an additional £400,000 to ensure that we can address those kinds of issues. And what we’ve seen, as a result of that additional investment, is a cut in the declined transport requests due to capacity issues by 60 per cent. So, we are heading absolutely in the right direction. I think we’ve got to recognise also that the responsibility goes both ways, though. So, 70,000 journeys were cancelled on the day of travel by patients. Of course, I understand that it is unlikely to be the care homes, but the point is that those people were booked up and, all of a sudden, those slots are not available to be used by care homes. So, it is important, when people take advantage of the services that we give, that they give notice if they intend to cancel. The Welsh ambulance service aims to give patients at least 24 hours’ notice if they can’t fulfil their booking. So, there’s responsibility on all sides here. Clearly, we need to make sure that we get to as many people as possible.

The Welsh Government has centralised services in the Grange hospital in Gwent, and this is delivering a far higher level of care than was possible previously, and I think people appreciate the levels of care being provided in the new hospital. However, access to that hospital is difficult for people I represent in Blaenau Gwent. The Welsh Government has, on a number of occasions, given an undertaking that transport will be provided, either through buses or through other means, for people both visiting the hospital for care, or for visiting people receiving care in the hospital. But, five years later, we still do not have the access and the facilities, and the transport required for people to easily access services in the Grange. Would the Welsh Government now be able to give an undertaking that you will look at procuring services, such as a Fflecsi service, to ensure that the people I represent are able to access high levels of care and, also, take care of relatives who are receiving care themselves?

Thanks very much. I think what we should all be interested in is making sure we get the best possible outcomes for people. And if that does mean sometimes having to travel to more specialised services, I think most people in Wales accept that. But I do think what’s important is that we then recognise there are people who find it difficult to get to them, and so we do need to make sure that we step in. I know there’s been a huge amount of work with bus services to make sure that we’re able to give better access to the Grange. That will be a lot easier once we get the bus Bill passed, so that we’ll have a bit more control on where those bus routes go. So, I think that is going to be an important change. But, also, I think it is probably worth pointing out that, because of the additional money we've had from the UK Labour Government, we've been able to say that we are going to deliver now an additional 200,000 out-patient appointments across Wales. But what we recognise is that some people may struggle to get there, which is why we've put this additional money in to support non-emergency transport, particularly at weekends and evenings, when, actually, this additional work will be taking place.

Thanks very much. We're all looking forward to the Eisteddfod in Wrexham and we as a Government are very proud to be backing it, not just as a celebration of Welsh culture, but also as a model for a greener future. Now, the Welsh Government has invested, as you know, in new trains. We've spent £800 million on a rail upgrade, and we’re working closely with the Eisteddfod and local partners to make sure that they put on additional rail services to promote greener travel.

Thank you for that answer, First Minister. It is very welcome that Transport for Wales have ensured National Eisteddfod attendees are able to travel by public transport not just in Wrexham itself, but those who are coming from further afield. It is absolutely vital that the many large events we will see over the summer, particularly across Wales, particularly those who receive Welsh Government support, are environmentally sustainable. So, can you assure me discussions have taken place between the Welsh Government and the Eisteddfod organisers to reduce waste, to source local and organic food, to choose sustainable and eco-friendly materials for their signage, to provide free water refill points, and to utilise renewable energy, amongst other initiatives?

Thanks very much. We know that the Rhondda Cynon Taf Eisteddfod was the greenest Eisteddfod ever, and I know Wrexham have plans to build on that. Their long-term plan, in fact, by 2030, is to become the first net-zero festival in Wales. So, they will have to put in place the kinds of initiatives that they saw in Pontypridd. Those additional transport services—four additional train services, in each direction, for Wrexham—are going to be important. There are also going to be shuttle buses to make sure that people are able to get back and forth. But, also, there will be 400 bike-parking spaces. So, there's real encouragement here to make sure that people not just attend the Eisteddfod, but attend it in a way that won't harm the environment.

The National Eisteddfod is a vital cultural event and I welcome its return to Wrexham this year. It's an important celebration of the Welsh language, heritage and identity, and it draws visitors from across the country. Recent initiatives like the £900,000 grant to Margam castle for the Urdd Eisteddfod focus on improving energy efficiency and accessibility, which is commendable. The Llangollen International Eisteddfod, which I attended on Friday last week—and I had the pleasure of meeting the widow of Luciano Pavarotti, as she was there to mark 30 years since the legendary singer last sang there, in 1995—has secured Arts Council of Wales funding to support sustainable operations, ensuring cultural events don't burden taxpayers. These steps show a commitment to fiscal responsibility, while preserving our traditions. Whilst I support a sustainable transition in the culture sector, we don't want cultural events to be bogged down in bureaucracy. With many sports clubs and cultural institutions crying out for money, it's important to ensure it's being prioritised in the right way and they get the funding for the things they are actually asking for. So, how will the First Minister ensure efforts for the National Eisteddfod to become environmentally sustainable are balanced with their other financial needs and don't come at the cost of other things, such as its core ambition of preserving and celebrating our Welsh heritage?

Diolch yn fawr iawn. I don't need to persuade the Eisteddfod to do this; they are very keen to do it as an ambition for themselves. What we do as a Government is to make sure that we put support in place, and that includes £1.25 million for the National Eisteddfod. We've seen this year a £250,000 increase on the last financial year, and the great news here is that £200,000 of that will enable the Eisteddfod to provide free access to low-income families, and that's something we're particularly proud of in the Welsh Labour Government.

First Minister, today your Government has published its revised sustainable farming scheme. It comes more than 18 months after the publication of the previous scheme, a scheme that was hatched by Labour and Plaid Cymru as part of your co-operation agreement, and a scheme that would have devastated our agricultural industry. By your own Government's estimates, that previous scheme would have led to 5,500 job losses, a £200 million hit to the rural economy, a reduction of hundreds of thousands of livestock, and a ridiculous, unrealistic per-farm tree-planting target. It is no wonder that that initial Labour and Plaid scheme resulted in the largest protest that this Senedd has ever seen. And rightly, you bowed to pressure and a review was announced. But what hasn't been published alongside the new scheme today is an economic impact assessment. So, can you tell us how many job losses will this new scheme cause? What will be the financial hit to the rural economy? And why are you waiting until September to publish a full economic impact assessment of the scheme?

Well, I'm really proud that today we're announcing this new sustainable farming scheme. I'd like to pay tribute to the Deputy First Minister for the incredible work he's done over months and months and months, talking, and listening, more importantly, to all of the people involved. And what we will have is a world-class scheme that is unique in the world. We've got a whole-farm approach. It's the only one in Europe, certainly, where we will see the balance between the needs to make sure that we have quality food, high animal welfare standards, making sure that we address the nature and climate emergencies. That whole approach is exactly what we were looking for. We have listened to the agricultural community. We recognise the valuable contribution they make to our nation not just in terms of the economy, but in terms of those wider issues like the environment, like the contribution to our tourism economy.

When it comes to the impact assessments, there will be a ready-reckoner tool available, so that, prior to the Royal Welsh Show, people will be able to punch in their particular circumstances and they will be able to assess how it affects them. I think that's where the interest will be, and that will come up in the next week or so. So, there's an opportunity there for people to see the impact on them. I'm very proud that we've got to this point. We are very keen to make sure that people come on board after a significant amount of listening and learning. I'm not going to apologise for that, Darren. I think that's a good thing, but I think you should probably go back to your constituents and the people you represent and try and explain to them why you tried to block the additional money that we had put into this, because we're putting the same amount in as before. And I do think this is something that you need to explain to your constituents, because we're very proud of the offer we're putting on the table.

The farmers in my constituency and the constituencies represented in this Chamber don't want a ready-reckoner, they want to know if their jobs are on the line and whether they have still got the opportunity to make a decent living. You say that your scheme is unique in the world, and the truth of the matter is, it is, because it doesn't even mention the term 'food security' throughout the whole document. It's not mentioned one single time, because you do not give a hoot about food security, First Minister. In contrast, the word 'environment' is mentioned almost 80 times. Your scheme still wants to sacrifice an area half the size of the Vale of Glamorgan to tree planting. And recently, we saw the UK Climate Change Committee recommend a 19 per cent reduction in livestock numbers, something that my party rejects. Can you tell us why there is no mention of the term 'food security' in your new scheme's document? Why are you still prepared to sacrifice an area of 17,000 acres, half the size of the Vale of Glamorgan, to trees? And do you accept that appalling recommendation of the UK Climate Change Committee in respect of a reduction in livestock numbers of almost 20 per cent? 

What I know is that we're in this situation because we left the European Union, and there were many people, including you, who argued for that point. This is a consequence. We had to create—[Interruption.] We had to create a new—

I do need to hear the First Minister's response, please. Can we show to some respect to the First Minister and listen to what she has to say?

We had to create a new regime because the people of Wales voted for a new regime, including many farmers, who were very keen to leave the European Union. We made it clear to them before that vote that there would be consequences, and this is a part of the renegotiation that has happened as a result of Brexit.

What I can tell you is that we have listened, that there will be major environmental benefits. We know that farmers are very serious about the environment. We know that they are hyperaware of the very dry patch that we've been through recently and how that's affecting them, how they need to make these long-term investments. And they know, more than anyone, the impact of climate change. We're asking them to help us to make a contribution to addressing the issue of climate change, and I think planting trees has an important contribution. Farmers will choose the right tree in the right place, and we'll be providing incentives for early planting, the budget and the advice, and we will give guidance to farmers with that. But we're not going to apologise for the fact that we do want to see some tree planting. But it will be more flexible than what was initially suggested.

First Minister, Welsh farmers are more interested in food security and their job security, frankly, and it's a shame that neither of those things is mentioned in the document. Farmers deserve to know how many of their jobs your Government is prepared to sacrifice. If this was any other industry, you would quite rightly be up in arms, but it is simply a statement of fact that you do not appear to care about our farmers.

Let's talk about the budget announcement that you've made today. Last week, the Cabinet Secretary for finance announced that all departmental budgets would receive an inflationary uplift next year—every single department. Yet, today, your Deputy First Minister has announced that the new sustainable farming scheme will keep the universal farming payment budget at £238 million, exactly the same as it is this year—frozen, with no uplift—which, effectively, means that it's going to be a cut in real terms. You have money—[Interruption.] You have money to spend on planting trees in Uganda, but you don't seem to have money to invest in our farmers here in our own country. Why is it, First Minister, that farming is the only budget that is going to receive a real-terms cut, and why does your Labour Government hate farmers so much?

Well, thanks very much. Look, we are putting the same amount of money in—in fact, more money than we were before. Let's remind everybody that you didn't support that additional money going in. I think it's really important that people understand that there's additional money there—no thanks to you. Let's be clear, that's not all of it: that's just the money for universal payment. There will be additional money for the optional and the collaborative approaches. So, it is important to recognise that that's one part of the programme.

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Llywydd. Now, is Wales a nation that could thrive running its own affairs like so many other similar nations? If you believe in the potential of Wales and its people as I do, the answer is an obvious 'yes'. Surely, it's a question to which every First Minister should answer 'yes'—how can any First Minister not believe in their nation's potential? Now, the last First Minister but one, now Secretary for finance, agreed it was perfectly viable for Wales to be independent; he just didn't think it was desirable, and I beg to differ with him on that. But how disheartening and yet sadly predictable it was when the current First Minister was asked the question, on the News Agents podcast, 'Could Wales manage?', and it was a 'no'. 'Wales would be extremely poor', she said. But, of course, Wales isn't somehow inevitably poor. Remember that our current position is a direct result of our place within the UK. Breaking out of those cycles of economic stagnation, of too many families living in poverty, is pretty difficult when successive Westminster Governments fail to address the issue of fair funding, underfund transport, as they did again recently with rail, deny us the powers over our natural resources and so on. It seems that, under Labour, as with the Conservatives, Westminster's answer to Wales is always 'no'. So, it's little wonder that more and more people are saying 'yes' to wanting more say over our own future, with enhanced devolution being the absolute minimum, like the devolution of justice—

I'm going to need a question from you, Rhun ap Iorwerth.

—that we were told clearly yesterday was not a priority for UK Government. This is particularly true of young people, of course.

I'm going to need a question from you. 

Every indicator shows that the union is on borrowed time. So, why doesn't the First Minister believe in Wales?

I can tell you that there's nobody who believes in Wales more than I do. I have got a red dragon running through every little blood vessel in my body. But what I will tell you—what I will tell you—is that we are dead serious about being positive about this country and about talking it up, and that's what we don't get from Plaid Cymru. It is interesting, isn't it? I thought that you were going to go on to say, 'And that's why we believe in independence, that's why we'll be looking to do that in the next term.' You're not saying that, are you? So, you've got such faith that it's possible and viable, then you're not offering that. I think that it is important for us to recognise that a huge amount of money additionally comes from the UK Government. It is important that we recognise that. That has increased in the most recent budget—a budget, let me remind you once again, that you tried to block. But I am very keen to make sure that we look to the future with hope and ambition, which is why I was dead proud to be, yesterday, at Tata Steel, where we're seeing significant investment in the new electric arc furnace, giving hope to those communities. And that's what we want to give to the people of Wales today, hope for the future, and make sure that we're looking to the future, to build a stronger economy so that we can spend any additional taxation on providing the public services that we're very keen to do, to provide. 

This is a First Minister who believes that poverty is inevitable for Wales, and that's why she keeps on talking Wales down. The First Minister is actively choosing to be at the whim of Westminster, which works against Wales's interests, rather than showing some faith in our nation and its people's ability to decide matters for themselves.

Let's go back to one of those perpetual Westminster injustices, the matter of fair funding for Wales. It's something that Plaid Cymru has promoted for decades. It was disappointing to hear the First Minister's comments over the weekend when questioned on Radio 4, the James Naughtie interview. When pressed, she couldn't say when the Barnett formula will be reformed by the UK Labour Government, or indeed whether the Chancellor believes that Wales is unfairly funded. Now, all the First Minister could say was that she will keep on making the case, but she keeps on saying that and nothing happens. Her Westminster Labour colleagues ignore her day after day, week after week. Now, when I last asked the First Minister what her next move will be on fair funding, in a reply that appeared to embarrass all of her front bench, she said that she was going to the football. Can she come up with a better answer today?

Look, I'm at the table and I'm getting things done, and we have had additional support from the UK Government, including £5 billion in additional funding that you and the Tories tried to block from coming in. I do think that it is worth making sure that people hear that again and again. We have been given a poor deal, when it comes to rail, for years on end, and we're getting to a better place. Is it far enough? No, we want to go further. But it's definitely in a much better place than it was before. That was because we put significant pressure on the UK Government. The same thing when it comes to the coal tips. When it comes to coal tips, we asked for years on end for support from the UK Tory Government; they didn't listen. The Labour Government has understood that this is a legacy from the past and there is a responsibility on the UK. I'm at the table, and I'm delivering. And when it comes to things like youth justice, for example, we are moving on in that area as well, edging things forward, as was the manifesto commitment. And it is important, I think, for people to recognise that the difference between us and them is that they shout from the sidelines and I'm sitting at the table. And it's lovely to hear that he's following every movement that I make on weekends. Lovely.

All we had yesterday again was a sign on the devolution of justice that Labour was determined to block anything that gives Wales any more powers, and it's unbelievable that we have a First Minister continuing to defend the £445 million given to rail in Wales, when the rest of the UK, or Wales and England, is getting £35 billion. It's a drop in the ocean of what we're owed, and the people of Wales know that.

There was another Labour voice on that programme at the weekend, the Member of the Senedd for Llanelli. I agree with his take on things. He's right: there is a non-Tory alternative to Labour in Wales. That alternative is Plaid Cymru's positive vision for bringing down waiting lists, for supporting small businesses, for backing agriculture, for helping households with the cost of living, implementing a child payment to tackle the scourge of poverty, whilst also fighting for those powers that enable us to make decisions better suited to Wales's needs.

Now, whatever has been claimed about the benefits of two Labour Governments working together, Lee Waters added that signals coming from Labour colleagues at Westminster are disdainful. That's the reality. So, whether it's the refusal to reform Barnett, the injustice of HS2, the lack of devolution of the Crown Estate, does the First Minister agree with Lee Waters about the poor treatment of Wales from Labour colleagues at Westminster, or will she head into the summer recess continuing to defend their actions?

What I know is that the vision that you're trying to project is one that is uncosted and undeliverable. What's important for people to recognise, I think, is that there's very little experience in the Plaid Cymru benches, and, if that's true for you, that is certainly true for Reform, who are also being taken seriously in this country. What we need to do is to make sure that we present, that we look at what we're able to deliver and what we have delivered over the past few years. Let's not forget free prescriptions. Let's not forget free school meals. Let's not forget free transport for the over 65s. You voted against money going to all of those things. And the important thing for us to do is to look to the future with hope, for people to recognise what's at stake in the next election, and to make sure that there is an understanding that it's only Labour that is at the table and can speak to the UK Government, because we're the ones who are able to pick up the phone, to make a difference. We're not over yet. It's not over yet. And it is really important for us to recognise that there is a huge amount of opportunities for us to go further. If you look at what we're doing in relation to the longest waiting lists, for example, an 86 per cent drop in the number of people waiting—for the longest waits—since the pandemic. This is delivery in action, thanks to that additional money that's come from the UK Labour Government.

The Welsh Government is trying hard to encourage families across Wales to put healthy, affordable food on the table. We're delivering over 50 million free school meals and breakfasts every year, and we've invested more than £27 million to support those facing food poverty. Our community food strategy is boosting local food production, and our new 'Healthy Weight: Healthy Wales' plan will target action where it's needed most, starting with children.

Thank you very much. I agree that there's great work going on in the education department, led by the Cabinet Secretary. It's fantastic to see that more and more pupils are learning how to cook in school, which is obviously going to help mend the deficit of six out of 10 households never cooking from scratch. It's great to see that food literacy developing in the way that pupils have analysed the food miles involved in a chicken curry in Monmouthshire and come up with an alternative chickpea curry when they realised that that chicken was coming from Thailand. Pupils in the region that the First Minister represents have devised a song to celebrate Mrs Robinson's famous vegetable cawl, and that's going to be performed at the Green Man festival. So, watch this space.

But, looking at how we can improve the quality of our school meals, the school food cross-party group has identified that not enough cooks in school have got any qualifications beyond a level 2 in food hygiene, which is good for opening up bags of food provided by big food, but not the skills required to expand this good practice I've just mentioned across the whole of our school estate. So, how can we ensure that nutritious meals are available to all pupils, where schools have the skills and the appetite to provide healthy, nutritious lunches made from food grown in Wales?

Well, there are many challenges to recruitment in this sector, so what local authorities do is they try to make the roles as accessible as they can, so they recruit to the minimum level and then they undertake the further training. So, they have to get to level 2 basic hygiene qualifications, but then what they do is they get trained in things like nutrition, allergies, safeguarding, professional cooking, first aid—all of those things come on top once they have been recruited. Lots of local authority catering teams have development chefs now on their staff, and they are also playing a key role in front-line training. So, you’re quite right, we need to make sure that the people cooking the food for the people in our schools are qualified to the very best of our ability and their ability, but the key thing is that we need more people to be going into that sector, so you get them in at the lowest levels and then you train them up once they are in.

I don't think, First Minister, you answered a part of Jenny Rathbone's question, because what we do have in Wales is a childhood obesity epidemic, and actually if we are going to address that epidemic we need to start by looking at what we feed our children in schools. I think we need healthy, locally sourced products given to our children to make sure that they are having the best food possible. So, I’d like to know what plans and what programmes the Welsh Government has in place to make sure that we are getting locally grown, home-sourced food into our children's diets, to make sure that we can address the obesity crisis that we are seeing across Wales. 

Thanks very much. I do hope there is an opportunity that we have already started on through the free school meals programme that we offer in primary schools to make sure that they become more nutritious. So, there is a lot of work being done on that at the moment, and on top of that I know that the Deputy First Minister has championed the community food strategy, and there is an opportunity there to make sure that we improve the production and supply of locally sourced food. There’s a working group going on at the moment on that and a consultation that is taking place, so I would encourage people to respond to that consultation.

Good afternoon, First Minister. A healthy balanced diet for children in Wales is only an option if you are not a child that is living in poverty, and we are currently at the rate still of 29 per cent, rising to 30 per cent, sadly, of our children here in Wales living in poverty. Many of us continue to raise this across the Siambr because it is such a shameful issue, if you live in Wales, to have that high level of children who are living in poverty. The Bevan Foundation said that devolution has not done anything to help those children living in poverty. That is our chance to do something different. So, I am asking you again: could you consider looking at targets to reduce the children living in poverty? New Zealand and Finland have done this, and it has affected the number of children living in poverty. So, I say again to you, please, that we need to take action here to reduce the number of children living in poverty in Wales. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Thanks very much. We take our responsibility to reduce child poverty very seriously, but it is also something that the UK Government has to step in with. I am really pleased that, when it comes to the UK Government's 10-year health plan, one of the things they have done is they have increased the amount of money that is provided through Healthy Start. So, pregnant women and children aged one or older, but under four, are now going to be receiving £4.65 a week, and children under one will receive £9.30 every week. So, there’s an increasing amount of money that is going in via the UK Government. Since 2019, we as the Welsh Government have provided over £27 million, including more than £2 million this financial year, to tackle food insecurity, and that clearly goes to help many families with children as well.

We're investing in the future of north Wales, and we are doing it with purpose and we are doing it with ambition. Since 2020, over £47 million has been delivered through our Transforming Towns programme across the region, bringing empty buildings back to life, creating jobs and putting culture and the community at the heart of regeneration. In Rhyl, we have supported the brand-new Queen's Market. In Wrexham, we are backing a £4 million creative hub right in the city centre. And let's not forget Theatr Clwyd, a national treasure for north Wales, rebuilt with £23.5 million of Welsh Labour Government support.

Our towns matter. They're more than places; they are part of who we are. As somebody that grew up in a small town and now lives in a town—it's a constituency made up of many small towns—it's not just important to me politically, but personally as well. You referenced the transformation of Theatr Clwyd, which will not only improve that facility as a jewel in our cultural crown in north-east Wales, but boost the local economy in the town and the surrounding area as well. Rhyl market opened, as you said, just last week, and I'm proud just to have played a part in establishing the Transforming Towns fund and starting that project that has come to fruition in the Queen's Market now.

As you said, Transforming Towns has delivered a significant amount of funding across Wales and across north Wales, with nearly £5.5 million in Flintshire and Denbighshire alone. So, First Minister, can I ask if you can confirm that the Welsh Government will continue to back our towns in this way? And can I ask for consideration of a commitment to seek ways to involve the community more, to give them more of a say and a stake in the decisions and influence their own communities and towns, not just to survive, but to thrive well into the future? Diolch. 

Thanks very much, and it's been a great pleasure to go and visit many of the towns that have benefited from our Transforming Towns fund. It was great to go with you to The Dolphin, the vacant pub that's in Flintshire. They've received a £0.25 million grant to transform that venue right in the middle of the town. I think there are many, many examples of that all over Wales, including, for example, another one I visited recently in Gwynedd, the Nyth project, the conversion of an empty church in the town centre in Bangor. It was a fantastic, vibrant area. Also, I think it probably is worth putting on record the fact that we now have the renovation of Theatr Clwyd, and it was great to see that you were there. Jack Sargeant was there for the opening, and it's something that truly should be celebrated and a jewel in the crown of culture in north Wales.

The previous UK Conservative Government allocated £126.46 million of UK shared prosperity funding to north Wales, which incorporated investment for towns across the region, including better open spaces in Conwy, a placemaking programme for Anglesey's town centres and larger villages, electric car charging points and improvements to community centres in Gwynedd, new village community facilities and improvements to the townscape of Ruthin in Denbighshire, the town centre investment programme in Flintshire, and funding for community infrastructure and development within Wrexham. Wrexham's Gateway project also received £9 million from the north Wales growth deal, initiated and 50 per cent funded by the previous UK Conservative Government.

However, although the current UK Labour Government has extended shared prosperity funding to 2026, it is understood they will then move the distribution of funding from a needs-based to a population-based formula, which will generate a huge funding cut for Wales, and that devolved decision making by local authorities and regions will then be scrapped and recentralised in the Welsh Government. What assurance can you therefore provide that towns and communities across north Wales will not then lose out once again?

I'm really pleased to see that the UK Government has listened to our concerns about the potential for the replacement of EU funds, which could have been distributed on a Barnett formula. That hasn't happened, so we retain about 22 per cent of the entire budget that's in the UK. So, we're not in the situation that we feared, and that additional money that previously came to Wales that we were promised would continue to come by people like you, when people in Wales were told that they wouldn't lose out as a result of Brexit—. There was a real threat that that might happen. I'm really pleased to see that we've managed to convince the UK Government that that would have been totally unfair, and that money continues to benefit our communities.

We're committed to ensuring public sector jobs are accessible in every part of Wales, not just in our cities, but in areas like Montgomeryshire. Representing the Mid and West Wales region, I see first-hand how vital it is that people in rural communities have the chance to build a career close to home, and to stay and thrive in the places they know and love. Our roles are advertised pan Wales, and Welsh Government has staff working across 20 different sites.

First Minister, I'm delighted with that answer. I fully agree with you. It is, of course, really important that people across Wales have the opportunity to work for the Welsh Government from every region, and the civil service would be all the richer for it, if it were to employ people from all communities, not just those who live in the Cardiff area.

Now, recently, I asked a written question about Welsh Government offices, First Minister, and you responded to me that the Welsh Government is undertaking a review of its business accommodation in the Powys region, including Ladywell House, indeed, in Montgomeryshire. Now, of course, Ladywell House has been a Welsh Government office since the very first Welsh Government, and prior to that, with predecessor organisations as well. It employs 80 people, and those 80 people are attracted from across different Government departments. I wonder would you agree with me that it is important to have Welsh Government offices across Wales, including in Newtown, because those offices and the staff who work there support shops and services in towns as well. And would you agree with me that it is important to employ and retain people who live in mid Wales to make the Welsh Government more reflective of the needs and requirements of all people, from all communities across Wales?

Well, thanks very much. Yes, we do have an office in Newtown that is able to accommodate 82 people. We've got a centre in Aberystwyth that is able to accommodate 275 staff plus 137 tenants. We are having a review at the moment, partly because of the change in the way that people work. We can't justify continuing to hold offices open if people don't turn up. It is important that we encourage people to come into work; we are encouraging them to come in. But, clearly, there will come a point where you have to say, 'If you don't turn up, we cannot justify keeping this particular office open.' So, it is incumbent on those people to understand that if they don't go into the offices, there is a danger that we will be in a situation where it'll be difficult for us to continue, if they don't turn up.

Well, 14 years of Tory austerity saw local authority jobs cut by 40 per cent, yet councils and health are still the biggest employers across Wales, or one of the biggest employers across Wales. At jobs fairs, we often see that they promote jobs in businesses, but how is the Welsh Government promoting jobs in the public sector, such as nursing jobs, teaching, planning, public protection, all these really important jobs helping keep our communities safe and vibrant, and looking after people, basically? How are you working with the UK Government to ensure that these jobs are properly funded again, after 14 years of cuts and austerity? Thank you.

Well, thanks very much. What we've been able to do with that additional funding that, of course, the Tories and Plaid tried to block, is that we have been able to give an above-inflation pay rise to public sector workers in Wales for the second year in a row. We never got rid of things like the nurse bursary, like they did in England. We have done significant work to try and promote people coming to work in the care sector, with the WeCare Wales website, and to try to encourage that, and we pay the real living wage for care workers. So, there are areas where we are still very challenged, but as a Labour Government, we are trying to make sure that we lead with our values, that we make sure that people understand that, actually, it is very often the people who are paid the lowest who are holding our communities together and deserve that reward.

Welsh Government is spending more than £294 million this year to train the NHS workforce of the future. Record numbers of people are employed in the NHS, including doctors, and since 2020, we've increased anaesthetics training places at all levels.

Diolch, First Minister. As highlighted in the health questions last week, a shortage in anaesthetists will have a significant impact on our ability to conduct surgical operations and tackle waiting times. According to the Royal College of Anaesthetists, Wales has 17 per cent fewer anaesthetists than needed to meet demand. First Minister, we need to increase the number of training places if we are to have any hope of addressing the shortfall of 90,000 operations and procedures each year. With this in mind, will your Government fund additional anaesthetist training places for 2026?

Thanks very much. The number of consultants in Wales has increased by 16 per cent in the last five years. We have 467 who specialise in anaesthetics, and that's risen by 5.6 per cent over the past five years. We're very confident that we have a situation where we're injecting money into the NHS. We're keen to take 200,000 patients off our waiting lists, and we're confident that those plans are deliverable with the configuration of the workforce that we have in place at the moment. But I do think it's probably worth emphasising that the number of people working in the NHS today is at record levels, and the number of medical and dental staff has increased by—listen to this—45 per cent in the past 10 years. I think it's worth people recognising that that is a significant increase. Clearly, there is demand upon demand upon demand, but we're working really hard to keep up with that demand, and I hope those statistics tell their own story.

Our rivers and coastlines must be clean, safe and protected for future generations in Swansea, and this Welsh Labour Government is taking real action to make that happen. Through the Swansea Bay opportunity catchment, we're working with Natural Resources Wales and the council to tackle pollution from source to sea, cleaning up the River Clyne, investing in green drainage, and doubling tree cover by 2044. We've worked to ensure over £56 million has already gone into improving water quality, and we're proud that Wales now leads the UK on clean bathing waters, with 103 out of 110 rated good or excellent.

Thank you for that very positive response, First Minister. We, however, know that water quality is under attack. Sewage and urban pollution, agricultural pollution and industrial pollution all contribute to this problem. What is the Welsh Government doing on further solutions, like improving agricultural practices and farm infrastructure to address chemicals, surface run-off and the erosion of soil, restoring natural features, such as wetlands and woodlands, which act as natural filters for pollutants, creating green infrastructure to slow the flow of surface run-off and reduce the risk of sewer systems overflowing, stopping sewage overflows from Trebanos pumping works, which pollutes both the Tawe and then finally the sea in Swansea, dealing with microplastics in the River Tawe and the sea? My major concern is both sewage and agricultural pollution in the River Tawe going into the sea. How are we going to stop that happening?

Thanks very much. I think it is important to recognise that we've got work to do, but actually, if you compare us to England, 44 per cent of our rivers have achieved good or better ecological status. That's three times higher than the situation in England. What we've done here is we've introduced the Water Resources (Control of Agricultural Pollution) (Wales) Regulations 2021 to improve nutrient management, and that's been backed by £52 million in infrastructure grants.

But I think it's probably also worth underlining that we've got other legislation in place, including world-leading sustainable drainage systems, to make sure that all new developments manage surface water sustainably. That reduces pollution and flood risk, and that is now an example, I think, for others to follow.

Every year, thousands of parents will face pregnancy loss or the death of a baby. The charity Sands has found that only one in six bereaved parents gain access to psychological support from the NHS. I've been contacted by constituents who've gone through this horrific ordeal who, to their credit, are campaigning to make sure other parents do not have to face what they've had to go through, either alone or without all of the support that they could have benefited from.

Bereaved parents are more likely to experience family strain, financial difficulties because of sick leave, and they also face an increased risk to their lives. I know no words of comfort can make that right, but surely having specialist pathways for psychological support would lessen the burden on them. There are many things that need to change, including baby loss certificates, but this emotional support is of urgent importance. So, please could you update the Senedd? And would you meet me with Sands and campaigners to talk about what needs to change?

Losing a baby is obviously a really devastating experience for the families, and it is important that the state is there to give them the support at that really challenging time in their lives. That's why all families who experience late pregnancy loss at maternity units in Wales are supported by bereavement midwives. There's always more we can do. I know that Sands does a terrific job in terms of speaking up for those families and pulling together the concerns. I think it's really important that we listen to feedback from people who've been through this trauma. I know that the Cabinet Secretary for health is listening very carefully and is very much in this space, particularly at the moment when we know many people have that acute awareness of the difficult situations in some parts of Wales.

The Welsh Government continues to implement the Environment (Air Quality and Soundscapes) (Wales) Act 2024 following Royal Assent in February 2024. Most provisions within the Act are currently in force, and we continue to work to improve air quality and reduce the impacts of air and noise pollution.

Counsel General, the passing of the Environment (Air Quality and Soundscapes) (Wales) Act 2024 was an important moment in the fight against air pollution, but 17 months on we've still not seen the draft regulations needed to deliver the Act and protect people from toxic air. When will the Government bring forward regulations on statutory idling and solid fuel? Why have these regulations not been brought forward to date? Is there a risk, as we get closer to the election and the pressure on the legislative programme, that these might be delayed even further?

Thank you very much for that. I run a programme of looking at the implementation of all Acts that the Senedd has undertaken. I undertake regular meetings with the various Cabinet Secretaries responsible for this. I very recently met with the Cabinet Secretary for climate change and the Cabinet Secretary for transport to discuss those two issues. We remain on track to develop the new air quality targets for Wales in line with the statutory duties under the Act. We expect the public consultation on targets for PM2.5 will be launched during autumn 2025.

We're also consulting shortly on regulations to introduce a new fixed penalty range for engine idling, allowing for higher fines. I'm sure the Member remembers, as all Members of the Senedd do, that it's already an offence, but the penalties for that offence were thought to be insufficient to enable behaviour change, which is what we're looking for. It isn't a revenue-raising point at all; it's about making people aware of the implications of idling. Of course, many new cars automatically do it, so it's just about reminding people. This will strengthen the framework to tackle idling vehicles, to be applied specifically in high-risk areas like schools, hospitals, and outside care homes. We're very keen indeed to do that.

On domestic solid fuels, in the clean air plan for Wales, 'Healthy Air, Healthy Wales', which was put forward in 2020, the Welsh Government committed to prohibiting the sale of the most polluting forms of solid fuels for domestic use in Wales, subject to the consultation. We consulted on reducing emissions from domestic burning of solid fuels in 2021, and the summary of responses was published in October 2023. Following this, we've been considering the scope for introducing regulations in the current Senedd term to restrict the sale of bituminous and traditional house coal, wet wood, and manufactured solid fuels with high sulphur and smoke emissions. I've discussed this with Huw on a number of occasions, and we are looking to bring forward those regulations shortly. I do run the legislation programme for Wales as part of my remit as well, and I have a Cabinet sub-committee to discuss the schedule of various secondary legislation that we want to make sure is implemented before the end of the Senedd term. That's very firmly on the agenda. So, I can assure you, as the Member who actually took the Act through, that I'm very keen on making sure it's implemented.

Thank you. At last week's climate change committee, we were taking evidence from Dr Robert Lee. He is the director of education for the Centre for Environmental Research and Justice at the University of Birmingham. We were taking evidence on the environment Bill. Dr Lee explained that pollution globally is the single largest cause of premature death. I was really shocked by it. It runs at 15 per cent on average of the population, and it's far bigger than the combined effect of malaria, tuberculosis, AIDS, and all those infectious diseases. Do you agree with me, Cabinet Secretary, that reopening coal mines is a retrograde step that would exacerbate dangerous air pollution, and that renewable energy, using wind, wave, and solar, is the way forward?

Thank you very much, Carolyn, for that. It is a shocking statistic, isn't it, that pollution is one of the main killers. It's something that I think most people don't really quite realise, and when it's brought home to us, it does make it really obvious why we've got to make efforts to make sure that we clean up our air and our land and water, of course. In order to meet our ambitious net-zero targets, we absolutely have to reduce emissions from energy generation by reducing fossil fuel generation and increasing generation from renewable sources. The extraction and use of fossil fuels for energy is not compatible with a pathway to reach net zero at a pace that even remotely addresses the climate emergency.

Our vision for the future of industry and energy generation in Wales is one in which sustainable industries are retained in Wales and continue to generate high-quality jobs and the other benefits for the communities they serve. We want that industry to substantially reduce its reliance on fossil fuels and its generation of greenhouse gases, which cause the pollution that we're discussing. It's absolutely the established policy of the Welsh Government to bring to a managed end the extraction and use of all coal. We do not intend to authorise any new mining operation licences or variations to existing licences. In November 2024, the UK Government confirmed it would legislate to restrict future licensing of new coal mines by the Mining Remediation Authority, except for safety and restoration purposes. This prohibition will apply across the UK, so that should see applications for new or extended coal mining operations come to an end across the whole of the UK.

I just want to come back to the issue of the delay on implementing the idling regulations. Unfortunately, far too many drivers in my constituency do not understand that they are breaking the law at the moment. I'm sure many headteachers would really value ensuring that the fines for this offensive behaviour are increased in order to protect their pupils. I appreciate that this is now out for consultation, but when do we expect to get this made enforceable in law, so that we've got more people like the parking attendants being able to enforce this?

Of course, they can already enforce it. It's just that the penalties for enforcement are not particularly severe, and so it's not thought to change behaviour in any particular way.

So, just to be really clear: it is already an offence. It was an offence before the Act was taken through. What the Act does is it allows local authorities to put a range of penalties in place, and they are accumulating penalties, so a smaller amount for a first offence, and then rising. And the idea for that is to affect behaviour change. It’s not, in any way, intended to be a revenue raising tax; it would be most effective if it was never used. The local authorities are enabled to enact that once the regulations have been put through the Senedd, and they will be brought forward to the Senedd through the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee.

Just to be clear, they’re not delayed. The Act always envisaged a consultation before them being brought forward, and the consultation, of course, is with local authorities about the manner and implementation of that. But just to be really clear: it is already an offence.

The Welsh Government is committed to the sound operation of the Sewel convention. Implementation powers, processes and timescales are different for every piece of legislation, and we therefore consider them on a case-by-case basis.

Diolch, Cwnsler Cyffredinol. It’s the Sewel convention that I want to discuss with you this afternoon. In my view, the Sewel convention is dead and buried. You will remember a time when the Sewel convention was respected by UK Government, but the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 changed all that. At the time, Michael Gove said that the withdrawal Act was unique, and therefore allowed the UK Government to ignore the views of this Parliament and other devolved Parliaments. But we’ve seen several examples since then of the UK Government ignoring the will of this Senedd. A perfect example would be the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill, which was debated in this Parliament—I remember the Trefnydd quite clearly saying it fell within competency. And now we are seeing people being arrested, in Cardiff, over the weekend, in an area that the Trefnydd here said fell within devolved competency—being arrested under protest law, in an area that we didn’t agree to, an area that we wouldn’t allow consent for.

So, what discussions are you having with your colleagues in the UK Government on how to resolve issues that fall under the Sewel convention when there’s a dispute with regard to legislation? Diolch yn fawr.

So, I know the Member already knows this, but the way the law works, of course, is that we objected to it, and the previous Conservative Government largely ignored those objections twice in the dying days of the Parliament. We haven’t had that situation with the current UK Government; we’ve had good conversations with them about upholding Sewel, and I would very much hope that that Government continues to respect them.

I know the Member knows, but just to repeat: the point being that, if the law is passed at a UK level, it is the law, and so it can be enforced. We can, of course, make representations about how it’s enforced, and we have conversations with our local police forces and our local authorities about that. And to give an example—a long-standing one, which I’m very glad will now be repealed—the Vagrancy Act 1824, for example, went directly against all our homelessness policies, and I had, when I was the relevant Cabinet member for that, long conversations with the police and with local authorities about how we would implement that in a more compassionate, trauma-informed Welsh way than was otherwise the case. And I know that my colleague the Cabinet Secretary for social justice is having similar conversations. But in the end, the UK law is the UK law.

And that’s, of course, why it needs to change. I agree very much with the First Minister. In her speech in the Norwegian church, she said that the UK Government should never act in devolved areas without Welsh Government consent. We objected to this under the Tories, she said, and she continued to say that we are not happy with this under Labour. And I agree with the First Minister.

But the position is as you have described it, and the position is as Rhys ab Owen has described it, that we have a dysfunction at the heart of our constitution. Is it not time now for the Welsh Government, the Scottish Government, the Northern Irish Executive and the UK Government to agree a different constitutional settlement, where our democracy is respected within the United Kingdom, and that this Parliament plays a full role in the governance of the United Kingdom on an equal basis to the United Kingdom Parliament?

Yes, it’s absolutely the position of the current First Minister, the current Welsh Government, under all of its First Ministers, that that is the case. It’s certainly my position. It was the position of the former Counsel General also. So, we continue to have those conversations with the UK Government. As I say, I’m pleased that, so far, we haven’t had a breach of the Sewel convention. I very much hope that that will continue, and we continue to have those discussions. But the Member knows, absolutely, as well as I do, that until those things are enshrined in proper statutory functions, then they cannot be protected, and they are indeed at the—. Well, so many of the constitutional conventions turned out to be not worth the paper they're written on, to quote the classic law. During the previous Conservative premierships, of one sort or another—and there are too many to list, aren't there—those things turned out to be worthless, because they are conventions and therefore they can be breached. So, I couldn't agree more, and we continue to work towards that.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. On Friday, the First Minister said:

'actually, our record on delivery is really very good.'

Do you agree?

Yes.

Thank you for that answer. Will you hit your target of 20,000 low-carbon social homes for rent by the end of this Senedd?

Yes, we are working extremely hard to make sure that we will do that. Let me explain the nature of a target to the Member, who's clearly never, ever worked in an organisation that has targets. I know the Member thinks that the targets are something to beat somebody with, but, in fact, what the targets do is drive delivery. We have a target that is stretching in order to push the organisation towards that target. That is what it's for. If it was an easy target to reach, it wouldn't work as a target. As I say, I know the Member clearly has no understanding of how targets work in actually delivering things, but that is how they work.

You set that target, Counsel General—

I did.

—in your manifesto. You promised the people of Wales that you would deliver it, and you were unclear as to whether you actually would.

I was not unclear at all.

You said that you were working towards reaching that target—and I'm happy to reflect on the Record afterwards. You said you were working towards reaching that target. You did not guarantee this Senedd you would reach the target that you promised you'd reach by the end of this term. Because we've seen, haven't we, report after report saying that this is a target that you're simply not going to reach. Audit Wales said that the target will not be met unless a significant uplift in funding is implemented, and so the figure would still fall short. So, do I take it from your answer that you disagree with Audit Wales's findings, and if you don't disagree, why has the funding not increased?

The funding has increased. I was incredibly clear. I said we are working towards a target—

That's not what I asked you.

I explained to you what a target is—

I didn't ask for that either.

If you could guarantee delivery of a target, it wouldn't be a target, would it? It wouldn't be stretching in any way—

But you're the Minister for Delivery.

The whole purpose of a target is to drive an organisation forward to delivering it, and that is what we are doing. We are not yet at the end of the Senedd term. It remains to be seen whether we make the target. We are pushing towards it with all the power we have. We have incredibly increased the financing for that. Our transitional accommodation capital programme alone has seen record levels of investment. I know the Member doesn't like the idea that a target is something that drives an organisation forward, but, in fact, that's what it is. And just to remind the Member that, unlike any Conservative Government that we've ever seen, Welsh Labour promises things that it always delivers.

But do they? I'm sure you found the annex of the Welsh Government's annual report—[Interruption.]

Adam, one second. I wish to hear the contribution of the spokesperson for Plaid Cymru without disruption from the Conservative benches, please. Adam.

As Minister for Delivery, I'm sure you found the annex of the Welsh Government's annual report setting out progress against the commitments in the programme for government as instructive as I did. What stands out is the number of policies and promises that you have already given up on. There will be no community bank, no national supply pool for teachers, no museum of north Wales, no national construction company, no shadow broadcasting authority, no reform of the school year, no European Union twinning fund, and the pavement parking ban, the taxi Bill and the council tax reform promised for this Senedd will not happen in this Senedd term. Why do you think you've failed across such a wide range of areas? Were you too radical at the start of this term or too conservative at the end?

Well, I think that's a very interesting list. I always—. I'm really disappointed, Adam, that Plaid Cymru, forever the most dismal, gloomy party in the history of the world—. You could have started at the beginning of the annual report and read for several, several, several, several sessions all the things we have achieved. But, of course, you always, always, always want to concentrate on the gloomy and pessimistic end of the spectrum. We had a very ambitious set of promises at the beginning of our manifesto. We have delivered the vast majority of them, by any percentage reckoning. Of course, we had the tail end of the pandemic in 2021, when we were elected with the biggest majority we'd ever had, might I remind you, and then, of course, we had the cost-of-living crisis, the appalling Conservative omnichaos, culminating in the Liz Truss omnishambles of a budget. Just for an example, a £1 million-worth of social housing grant, before the Liz Truss budget, bought us seven houses, but now it buys us four. So, despite all of that, we have delivered the vast majority of our promises.

When you're appointed as a Minister for Delivery, you can't blame me for being gloomy when I just point out the pledges that you haven't delivered. 

Well, you could have started at the other end.

Don't publish an annual report, then. Can we try again? Do you accept, Minister, that, at the current rate of progress, your flagship targets for 20,000 new homes, as we've just heard, but not just that, the universal free childcare for two-year-olds, eradicating long NHS waits and creating 125,000 apprenticeships are all now unlikely to be met in this Senedd term? Welsh Government, in office 2011-16, reported delivering 90 per cent and 95 per cent of their programme for government commitments, respectively, but our analysis suggests your Government is on course to fall short of both those figures. Will you commit to publishing a definitive end-of-term delivery figure? And do you expect it to be equal or surpass the record of your predecessors? 

Yes, we will absolutely do an end-of-term report. This is the last of the annual reports, because, of course, there's not a full Senedd year in the last year—it finishes in May—and any report on that would come later. Lots of the statistics in that report are, of course, delayed, so the figure on housing, for example, is two years old because those are the verified statistics. I know that we've put record levels of investment into the 20,000 homes, for example, and I know that we are close to meeting that target, having had record levels of new build right the way through the last two years. The figures reflected there are the Knowledge and Analytical Services's verified statistics, so there's a two-year lag. We have a lag in lots of the statistics, and so you always have to do a catch-up report at the end, which we absolutely will do.

In terms of health spend, for example, since the new UK Government and the investment in public services that have seen the consequentials for Wales have come forward, we've been able to see record falls in the waiting lists for the longest waits, and, in many health boards across Wales, zero two-year waiting lists, and I, for one, really celebrate that. We continue to drive that forward, and I work with all of the Cabinet Secretaries, not only on the headline ones, but right across the programme for government to drive the delivery where at all possible. And as I said, the point of the target—it's a convenient stick to beat Ministers with, of course—the actual point of the target is to provide a stretching set of criteria against which to push the delivery associates of the Welsh Government, so local authorities and health boards, but, actually, the internal civil service as well, to reach those targets, and a very handy tool for that they are.

Another promise in the programme for government was to promote and support the work of the UK-wide constitutional commission being established by the UK Labour Party, and in the annex you say this commitment is now complete. And yes, you did support and promote the work of the Gordon Brown commission, which recommended the devolution of youth justice and probation. The problem is the UK Labour Party didn't reciprocate. You will have heard the comments of the prisons and probation Minister yesterday, when he told us that the Home Office needed to stabilise the crisis that the Home Office had created before powers could be devolved to Wales. Are we, in Wales, being patronised by Westminster, Counsel General? And is the UK Labour Government just stringing you along?

I don't agree with that characterisation at all. The Deputy First Minister had an extremely good meeting with the Lord Chancellor, in which she authorised officials to work together on the beginnings of the steps for the devolution of youth justice. That work is going on apace. We've appointed a head of youth justice devolution here in the Welsh Government in order to push that work on apace. Various other meetings on probation are occurring. Myself and the Minister for social justice are going up to visit the Manchester model for probation during August, for example, with a view to looking at that.

Lord Timpson has done an enormous amount of work on the absolute shambles the Conservative Government left the court and prison system in. They should be hanging their head in shame, as opposed to the nonsense we actually get. You've only got to look at any of the prisons—I have one in my own constituency—to see the terrible overcrowding and dreadful, dreadful outcomes of terrible years of failure to invest. Lord Timpson has been concentrating on that. To be fair to him, the devolution process is not within his remit. He's a Minister looking very specifically at some things. It is not our experience that that's what's happening. The manifesto of the UK Government said that it would explore the devolution of youth justice and probation, and we are doing that. I am confident that we will get the steps towards that that we expected in this first year and a bit of the UK Labour Government, and I'm sure that that journey will continue.

Welsh Government continuously promotes responsible and ethical procurement through the Welsh procurement policy notes and the 'Code of Practice—Ethical Employment in Supply Chains'. These principles support ethical treatment of all vulnerable groups, including pensioners.

Thank you, Counsel General. I'd like to highlight the concerning issue of the unethical treatment of pensioners, namely those with defined benefit pensions accrued before 1997. I've heard from a constituent in Rhyl who is a former Hewlett-Packard employee and is now facing the reality of inflation eroding his retirement income simply because his former employer chooses not to increase pre-1997 benefits in line with inflation, even though they have the discretion and likely financial ability to do so. People who gave decades of service to their employer are seeing their real-terms income fall year after year with no legal protection. Also, the number of pensioners across the UK below the minimum income standard nearly doubled between 2009 and 2022, which is around 20 per cent of pensioners. The matter is primarily reserved, and Westminster's Work and Pensions Committee has written to the pensions Minister, Torsten Bell, on this issue. But, major corporations like HP, BP and Shell could be benefiting from public contracts here in Wales, yet choose to treat their former workers so poorly, which raises questions regarding—

You need to ask the question now, Gareth, please.

—whether it's right for them to receive taxpayers' money. So, what legal advice has the Counsel General provided to the Welsh Government regarding the steps it can take to ensure that procurement processes reflect this ethical treatment of pensioners? And will the Counsel General explore excluding companies that engage in such unethical practices from future public contracts?

Thank you. Responsibility, as you said, for pensions lies with the UK Government and is the responsibility of the Department for Work and Pensions. Actually, our Cabinet Secretary for finance is meeting the pensions Minister, Torsten Bell, tomorrow to discuss that and a number of other issues around pensions affecting the Welsh economy and Welsh pensioners.

In the meantime, the Welsh public sector has made significant advances towards ethical business practices in recent years, ensuring contracts are awarded compliantly with the highest standards of social responsibility. The Welsh Government's legislative framework enables contracting authorities to carry out robust due diligence and access to exclusion grounds to ensure only suppliers that meet robust standards can bid for public contracts. Any suppliers under contract later found to be in breach of their commitments under the Procurement Act 2023 may face penalties, including the termination of contracts and exclusion from future procurement opportunities, and that covers all of the range of people protected by vulnerable people, including pensioners.

Diolch, Rhys. Legal aid deserts remain a serious concern in Wales. While legal aid is reserved to the UK Government, the Pro Bono Committee for Wales plays a vital role in supporting the most vulnerable. However, voluntary support cannot replace a properly funded legal aid system and is not really a sustainable solution.

Diolch, Cwnsler Cyffredinol. I recognise, as you've said several times here, your concern with regard to access to justice and the impact that has on the people of Wales. I am concerned with regard to the criminalisation of peaceful protest and the fact that that leads people into a system where they cannot receive the advice, the support and, ultimately, the justice they deserve. You've heard me asking before about Cardiff University having an injunction against peaceful protest within their grounds. Research by the University of York shows that only 20 per cent of cases with regard to people breaching an injunction with regard to peaceful protest—only 20 per cent—receive legal aid. Over the weekend, you will have heard that 13 people were arrested in Cardiff because they were protesting peacefully outside the BBC. They, too, deserve and need legal advice. What can you do to prevent a situation in which peaceful activists face the prospect of having to defend themselves without legal aid? Diolch yn fawr.

Thank you, Rhys. I share your concern absolutely on that, and it's unfortunately not the only area where people are denied access to justice because legal aid is no longer there. We've spoken before, haven't we, about the particular concern around housing in disrepair and immigration as well, both of which are areas where people really do need access to good legal advice and legal aid is often not forthcoming and has been removed in most of those areas. I said before in answering a question to you that we welcomed the first steps towards restoring some legal aid, but there's a long, long way to go.

In the meantime, I do welcome the invaluable work of the Pro Bono Committee for Wales and the Pro Bono Week committee in developing the guide for pro bono and other free advice in Wales. I have written to the committee fully endorsing the guide, and they intend to share it with Members of the Senedd so that all of you will know how to refer people for pro bono legal advice, and I can't speak highly enough of the lawyers who provide that pro bono advice. I'll lapse into anecdote myself, but when you're a young lawyer, pro bono work is a very good way of getting good experience, and I myself worked for Rape Crisis for many years in London as a pro bono lawyer, and you get really invaluable experience, but also, of course, it's a way of giving back. So, I'm really pleased that the committee is so active in Wales, but, as I said in my opening answer, it really is not a substitute for a comprehensive set of legal aid provisions to allow people to have access to justice. And we do continue to have conversations with the Lord Chancellor, and I make common cause with the Law Society and with the Bar Council in order to try to push for proper legal aid settlements to be put in place as soon as possible. 

And then, just as a further remark, of course, encouraging lawyers to go into areas of work like criminal justice is increasingly difficult, because although it's a characterisation of lawyers that they're all rich, actually making a living off legal aid is really hard, and most of the legal aid practices have shut because they just cannot do it. I'd be very keen indeed, as soon as I'm no longer a serving Minister in this place, as of May next year, to get very involved in trying to start again a fully comprehensive law centre in Wales to try to do that. And I will be speaking with a range of progressive lawyers about how we might be able to do that as soon as possible. But, just to reiterate the point, there is no substitute for a proper, comprehensive legal aid system.

Yes. The annual report that we published last Friday sets out a comprehensive account of this Government’s impressive record on delivery. As Minister for Delivery, I work with my colleagues across the Cabinet. My successes are their successes, and together this Cabinet is delivering the things that matter most for the people of Wales.

Counsel General, your job title is Minister for Delivery, yet it often feels to many of us in this Chamber like the Minister of delays, whether that's in housing delivery, delivery in education, delivery in our NHS. You're meant to unblock legal and legislative knots, oversee the delivery of the Government's programme, which we've heard from others is failing, ensure access to justice and the timetable for legislation, but time and time again we've seen Bills coming forward riddled with legal and grammatical errors, and we've also had calls from scrutiny committees here for greater transparency, which often go unheeded by the Government. So, can you talk us through some real-world examples of where your unblocking role has delivered measurable outcomes, where you've unjammed those legal blockages, accelerated legislation, improved court access or tightened up delivery of the Government's programme, or should we start calling you the Minister for apologies, not delivery?

Well, that was very poor, even for you, if I might say so. The entire Cabinet supports the priorities, and, as Minister for Delivery, I provide support to the Cabinet Secretaries in whichever ways they need. You asked for some measurable outcomes, so let me provide you with just a few: waiting lists slashed by 86 per cent from the pandemic peak; record-setting levels of affordable housing; directly supporting 40,000 jobs; on track to fix or prevent 200,000 potholes; more new trains than ever before, and over 77 per cent of the fleet made up of new carriages, just to start. And you can shake your head as much as you like, but those are incontrovertible facts—I know you don't like those. I meet very regularly with every Cabinet Secretary to review progress on the programme for government—[Interruption.]

I would have thought that you'd like to let the Cabinet Secretary respond to the question and not interrupt the response.

If it was worth listening to.

I think that is out of order. Every response is worth listening to, and should be listened to.

The entire Cabinet meet twice a term to specifically review our progress against all the priorities and to ensure that every part of the Government is driving forward the things that matter most. So, for example, just to give you one example, very recently, we've unlocked a number of housing sites across Wales by getting the Cabinet Secretary for climate change and the Cabinet Secretary for housing together with Welsh Water and a number of councils to unlock the phosphate issue and unlock sites for thousands of homes across Wales, and that's very demonstrable indeed. And, of course, we have a range of things set out in the annual report that we've also delivered.

There is actually a very interesting question to be asked here; it's a shame that James Evans could not find it. The Welsh Government has over a number of years sought to create a number of different delivery mechanisms, but you are, I think—to my knowledge—the first Minister for delivery that has been appointed to the Welsh Government, and it would be useful if this Parliament were able to understand the means and the mechanisms that you employ as the Minister for delivery to working with your colleagues to ensure that delivery occurs according to the Government's objectives and ambitions, and it would help us with our scrutiny as Members if we were able to understand what those means, mechanisms and processes are, so we could understand the role. I'm very supportive of the role of Minister for delivery; I'd like to understand the role that you play around the Cabinet table and working with your colleagues.

Yes, thank you, Alun. I'm very happy to set that out. So, as I say, I conduct a series of meetings at least once every half term with every single Cabinet Secretary and relevant Ministers to go through the programme for government commitments, to understand where we are in delivering those commitments and what is necessary to make sure they get over the line, or to understand why they won't get over the line and what we can do about that, if that's where we are. I meet very regularly with people with the top four priorities to understand what the data sets look like for that and what we can do about those data sets to make sure that we have the right information and that we're driving the right kinds of improvement. Quite often, it's not about additional resource; it's about deploying that resource in a different way. I have asked a number of backbenchers to undertake things to assist me with that. So, Lee Waters, for example, did a piece of work on affordable housing for us. That piece of work identified a number of things that we could do to accelerate delivery in some areas. We've unlocked quite a lot of the phosphate problem on houses for that, and, of course, that has also helped us clean up our rivers, which is a mutual benefit point.

I also make sure that there are not cross-Government blockages—as you know, Governments can be quite siloed—to make sure that something that's happening here isn't actually actively working against something happening here and to bring them together to make sure that happens. And then, twice every half term, we have a whole Cabinet devoted to where we are with the programme for government and what those particular stats look like in terms of delivery. It's been very interesting, actually, and I'm very happy to share with some of the scrutiny committees some of the data analysis that we've been able to do, some of the things we didn't know that we perhaps ought to have known and some of the things that we've done as a result of that.

Trefnydd, I would like to request an urgent statement regarding planning in special areas of conservation. I recently met with local businesses who are deeply concerned that planning authorities in west Wales are adopting a precautionary approach to applications, based on a letter they've recently received from Natural Resources Wales. This is despite any formal planning guidance being updated, and so this approach is happening despite any actual change taking place.

It has been made clear by local planning authorities that planning applications that involve any potential run-off into a special area of conservation will not be determined until NRW updates its official planning guidance, though planning applications have been progressing until recently under existing NRW guidance, and the guidance has not yet changed. Trefnydd, the economic implications for west Wales cannot be ignored. If developments are stalled, it will seriously affect local businesses, and jobs could be at stake. We therefore urgently need a statement from either the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs, or, indeed, the Cabinet Secretary for Economy, Energy and Planning. It's essential that the current situation is clarified for all concerned and the Welsh Government must ensure that development is not brought to a standstill in west Wales.

Diolch yn fawr, Paul Davies. You've drawn attention to something that is a matter for local planning authorities, and, obviously, democratically elected local authorities, their planning functions are very much guided by 'Planning Policy Wales', but also, of course, take into account guidance from other bodies, such as NRW. You've raised the question. It obviously needs a lot more explanation about impacts in terms of, already, whether these changes are being made, but, anyway, I think it's important that you have raised it, and I'm sure the Cabinet Secretaries will respond in terms of further questions.

Trefnydd, as you'll be aware, Interceltique de Lorient takes place again this August, which, as many Members will know, is the largest annual festival of Celtic culture. Wales will, as always, have a delegation at the festival, including, from my own region, Treorchy Male Choir, but Nation.Cymru reported last week that there will be no Welsh Government presence, meaning that the only Celtic nation without a promotional stand will be Wales. I'd like to know if this is the case, and I'd also like to ask for a written statement from the First Minister outlining why this decision was taken, especially in light of the fact that we do have a memorandum of understanding between the Welsh Government and the Regional Council of Brittany, and culture features as part of that MoU.

Diolch yn fawr, Heledd Fychan, and thank you for drawing, again, to the attention of the Senedd that really important annual festival, Celtic festival. I certainly have recalled Welsh Government engagement, and indeed ministerial and first ministerial presence at that. I would like to take this back and clarify the position. Diolch yn fawr.

Could I ask for two statements today, please? First of all, please could we have a statement from the Government following the publication of the infected blood inquiry's additional report last week? The inquiry felt it necessary to hold further hearings at the beginning of May because of serious concerns about the way the Infected Blood Compensation Authority was being set up, the significant delays being experienced, and the complete lack of consultation with those who should have been at the heart of decision making.

I was very pleased that my constituent Lynne Kelly, the chair of Haemophilia Wales, was a witness at the hearings and was able to put forward the concerns of those infected and affected. The report was published last week by the inquiry's chair, Sir Brian Langstaff, with some very damning remarks and conclusions, such as that anyone who listened to this

'will have been in no doubt that trust has not yet been regained but has instead been further damaged and that people have been harmed yet further by the way in which they have been treated.'

This is a scandal that has been going on for 40 years. Could the Welsh Government make a statement as to how it is going to respond to this latest report?

I'd also like to ask for a statement—

You used your time up in asking that question.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you. Diolch yn fawr, Julie Morgan. Can I thank you for raising this question? It is a question that, of course, has come to the fore again as a result of this report. Can I just pay tribute to Lynne Kelly, Haemophilia Wales and the constant work, the diligence, the commitment, she has shown to this campaign? I recognise the frustration of those who are affected by the infected blood scandal and their families and relatives. I think, across the Chamber, we have all got constituents—I certainly have—who we are representing as far as this is concerned.

I think also the inquiry has been led so ably and with such commitment by Brian Langstaff, and we must recognise that today. This is a matter for the UK Cabinet Office, and of course—and I’m sure we’ve all corresponded with Nick Thomas-Symonds, the Minister responsible—they are considering the recommendations made in the report, and the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care is meeting this Thursday with the Minister, Nick Thomas-Symonds, along with all his colleagues in the devolved nations, to discuss the recommendations and next steps.

Trefnydd, I know that you’re well aware of the increasing antisemitism in our country, and it is particularly upsetting to see this hatred land disproportionately on young people. Indeed, I’ve even received complaints about statements put out by Urdd Gobaith Cymru, an organisation I’ve always associated with fairness and inclusivity. A report has recently been released, commissioned by the Board of Deputies of British Jews and backed by the UK Government, that shows that antisemitism has now been normalised in Britain. The review warned that Jewish people in the UK were suffering increasing prejudice in our professions, cultural life and in our public services, and found that antisemitism has become pervasive in our NHS, in our universities and in our arts sector. With this in mind, can I ask the Welsh Government to bring forward an oral statement as a matter of urgency on what actions it is taking to address this report and tackle antisemitism in our NHS, in our universities and in our arts? Thank you.

Thank you, Joel James, for your question, and for drawing attention to a new report, which was co-chaired by Dame Penny Mordaunt and Lord John Mann. To say, obviously, as I've said and the Senedd knows, that the Welsh Government condemns antisemitism in all its forms and stands in solidarity with Jewish people and communities across Wales and the UK. We welcome the findings of the commission. In Wales, we’re committed to building a fairer, more inclusive society where everyone feels safe, respected and valued, and, through our ‘Anti-racist Wales Action Plan’, we are working with communities, public services and educators to challenge hate, promote understanding and ensure that racism and discrimination have no place in our nation. We continue to engage with Jewish communities in Wales to ensure that their voices are heard and their concerns are addressed. Also, we will be, of course, looking at these recommendations ourselves.

Diolch yn fawr, Mabon ap Gwynfor. As you say, a written statement was published on Monday, on 14 July, and shared with Members in respect of progress on the inquiry's module 1 recommendations, and the response of the Welsh Government did reaffirm our commitment to continuous learning, not only from inquiries, but from incidents and exercises. We've already taken action to improve our understanding of risk and our preparedness. The Welsh resilience framework, published in May, provides our plans for enhancing preparedness, response and recovery capabilities and ensuring a more resilient Wales, both now and for the future. I think it is important and it is very welcome that there is a debate tomorrow, and that the Public Accounts and Public Administration Committee has also agreed to take responsibility in taking this forward in terms of the report that was done by the special purpose committee, but thank you for raising this today in advance of that, Mabon.

Please could I ask for a statement showing a commitment to publishing a national beaver strategy and wild release licensing framework for beavers, following a written statement last September by the Deputy First Minister confirming that the Welsh Government supports moving towards the managed reintroduction of beavers in Wales? By the time we return, it will be 12 months since that statement. I know he's been very busy, but we are waiting for this. Thank you.

Diolch yn fawr, Carolyn Thomas. Well, you have the Cabinet Secretary here in the Chamber. He has been reminded of the importance of our statement of support in terms of the reintroduction of beavers. I think we've already seen that occurring across the UK, and I'm sure that, in the autumn term, the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary will wish to update the Senedd.

Business Minister, can I please request a statement from the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care about supporting women with menopause? Menopause is a major health and workforce issue, affecting thousands of people across Wales. From my understanding, around 900,000 women have left the UK workforce due to unmanaged symptoms, and menopause is estimated to cost more than £10 billion annually in lost productivity and absence, yet support, sadly, remains fragmented, with long NHS waiting times, inconsistent work policies and limited access across menopause-trained professionals.

The south Wales menopause community, who I was pleased to meet with recently, is working really hard to change that. They have proposed a joined-up, regional model for menopause support, as one of the things that brings together healthcare providers, employers and holistic services. Their vision is a dedicated menopause well-being hub that supports medical, mental health, lifestyle and workplace needs under one roof, with a digital arm to ensure inclusive reach. They are interested in launching a pilot programme, and I have put them in touch with Aneurin Bevan health board, but a statement from the Cabinet Secretary outlining what steps the Welsh Government will, indeed, be taking to support women with menopause would be greatly appreciated. I'd also implore the Cabinet Secretary to meet with the south Wales menopause community, something that I'd be more than happy to facilitate. Thank you so much.

Diolch yn fawr, Natasha Asghar. Of course, you raise such an important issue for all women, in terms of supporting women through the menopause. Of course, we now have a real opportunity to address this comprehensively across Wales with the women's health plan and also the expectation and the financial support for women's health hubs in every health board area. I know that the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care will welcome your focus today on supporting women through the menopause, and also I'm sure that the Minister for Mental Health and Well-being, who's taken a lead role with the women's health plan, will want to respond as well.

Good afternoon, Cabinet Secretary. Could I ask for a statement, please, from the Cabinet Secretary for Transport and North Wales to explain how the Welsh Government plans to better integrate public transport in rural communities, looking particularly at bus and train transfers, particularly in areas like Knighton? Knighton is right on the border between England and Wales; in Wales, it feels very neglected. One of the things it does have is the Heart of Wales line running to it, but there is very little opportunity for people to connect from the train on to a bus; for example, the 9 p.m. train arriving at Craven Arms to allow people to go on to Knighton misses totally the bus link to take people on. While the Bus Services (Wales) Bill promises to improve integration between bus and rail, questions actually still remain about what it will mean in reality. So, please could I urge you and the Cabinet Secretary to set out how the Government will make sure that communities like Knighton don't feel left behind? Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Diolch yn fawr, Jane Dodds. It is important that you draw attention today to communities like Knighton—beautiful communities. I remember walking through, and in fact staying in, Knighton as a result—just walking, of course. It’s such a place for visiting, and for residents, of course. But I think this is where we need to make sure that Transport for Wales take into account the ways in which active travel and trains on the Heart of Wales line link up in terms of the timetables, working closely with the local authority as well to make sure that there are those connections and that communities like Knighton are involved in that. Transport for Wales are developing multimodal approaches to improve public transport connectivity in the Heart of Wales line area, and the bus Bill, of course, will help us deliver through bus franchising. So, I'm sure that this is something that, in terms of the Heart of Wales, and particularly Knighton, there will be improvements in terms of that multimodal response to services. 

I would like a statement from the Cabinet Secretary for Education on the provision of post-16 school transport. I've had quite a shock recently. I've had a few young people—girls—wanting to go into science, technology, engineering and mathematics subjects, and what have you. Basically, they want to study at their local campuses, which, for us, is Grŵp Llandrillo Menai, or on the island as well. Now, the local authority's own school post-16 transport policy restricts support to a learner's nearest college, without taking into account course availability or individual learner needs. Since this change, the college have seen a significant increase in inquiries from students, particularly in engineering and STEM. And for 14 years, I've sat through when they've been saying, 'We need more women, we need young people going into STEM and engineering subjects', yet the local authority, Conwy County Borough Council, are refusing to fund their transport.

Could you perhaps have a look into this and maybe speak with Conwy County Borough Council? This is two pupils that have come forward at present, but I believe others will be coming forward to request this. This is not something the local authority, I believe, should be rejecting the funding for. It's vital we get these people into STEM subjects.

Thank you very much, Janet Finch-Saunders. I think we absolutely agree on that point. It's great to know that there are pupils, school students, who want to study STEM subjects, and particularly for girls to study STEM subjects. We've invested a lot of funding to encourage under-represented groups, and it is often girls, to go into STEM subjects. And, of course, that is about availability of those courses in the communities where they live and that are accessible. You've raised a question there about access to these courses in your consistency in terms of post-16 educational transport, and I'm sure this is something that the Minister for Further and Higher Education will want to look at in terms of access and availability. 

Trefnydd, I'd like to ask for two statements, please. Firstly, a statement on what plans the Welsh Government has to fill the 2,000 nursing vacancies here in Wales. We know that there are plans to reduce the number of undergraduates taken on at the Cardiff nursing school. Surely this will exacerbate the recruitment problems and sector needs. I recognise that the Welsh Government recruited 200 nurses from abroad earlier this year, but I know that many of my constituents feel that bringing nurses from overseas is not a sustainable way to staff our struggling NHS, and that we have to ensure that we look after and grow our homegrown talent as much as possible, and train and nurture these people in Wales to these crucial roles. So, I'd like to request a statement from the Welsh Government reacting to that.

Secondly, it has been now over three months since the Supreme Court ruling, and we're still waiting for the Welsh Government to provide an oral statement on what the next steps will be. I'm not sure that a delay of this kind can be justified, Trefnydd, and I think—I know, in fact—that there are now moves to take this Welsh Government to court over not acting swiftly and in accordance with the law on this. The Senedd is now about to break for recess, and we will not hear a statement now until September. So, can I ask you, Trefnydd, please, as a matter of urgency, can we have it in that first week back in September? Diolch.

Thank you very much for those two questions, Laura Anne Jones. I'm sure that the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care would welcome the opportunity to update the Senedd on the very encouraging levels of not only training, but also actual staffing in terms of nursing levels in Wales. Clearly, we have to address the vacancies, but I think this, again, is an opportunity to show that, as the First Minister said, the highest level of NHS staffing, and that obviously includes our all-important nursing staff.

As far as the Supreme Court judgment is concerned, you know that I issued a written statement on this, and also that I responded to the consultation, as did many, that was launched by the Equality and Human Rights Commission. The closure of that and what it could mean in practice in terms of guidance and the result of that consultation, of course, we await. It only finished on 30 June. I have also taken the opportunity to meet organisations who are affected by this and who are interested in the outcomes of the consultation. I have met them across all interests over the last few weeks, but we await the outcome of the Equality and Human Rights Commission consultation, and move forward in terms of understanding the impacts of this in the way that we respond. It is really important that this is about being inclusive, compassionate and recognising needs and impacts already.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Trefnydd, can I request a statement from the Cabinet Secretary for Transport and North Wales on support relating to the A465? The Welsh Government have been pleased to announce the conclusion of the A465 improvement works, and I agree it is an impressive project that I am sure will be the subject of debate on value for money for many years to come. The Welsh Government have said the scheme is finished and the communities near the road are open for business, but for many in my constituency the scheme is not over, as they are still suffering with the consequences of the work, such as the lack of promised improvement works, business support and compensation. A number of my constituents are still waiting for a number of resolutions, with one specific case having been ongoing for over 12 years, relating to the access to property that has been impacted by the new road. This wait is simply just not good enough and our residents need outcomes to be able to get on with their lives. Too many are stuck in limbo. I would therefore welcome a statement by the Cabinet Secretary outlining what the Welsh Government are doing to ensure all outstanding cases of support, access or other issues relating to the A465 are resolved, so that the project can be considered as finished once and for all.

Thank you very much, Peter Fox. I am sure we would concur with that. Obviously this is a major development that will support your region, your constituency and all of those who will benefit from it, and all those indeed—and I recall this discussion last week—who have engaged in the construction, and the benefits to local people and communities in terms of education and apprenticeship opportunities. Clearly, where those issues need to be resolved, that will be the priority now. Diolch yn fawr.

Our ambition is for a thriving, confident agriculture sector built around innovation and growth, rising to challenges and grasping opportunities. The people of Wales value farming, and that’s clear to see. They understand a farmer's role in nurturing land and the Welsh language, producing world-renowned food, and protecting fragile habitats. But more is needed. Extreme weather and drought are signs that the climate and nature emergencies are here. It is not possible to consider future food production without mitigating these emergencies, as set out in the sustainable land management objectives.

The people of Wales want to know that the money we are investing in agriculture is bringing the benefits they want. They back Welsh farming, and they want soils protected, water quality improved, countryside access maintained and nature supported. So, with this in mind, the scheme represents a new agreement between the people of Wales and our farmers. 

This is not just a scheme for farmers; this is a scheme for the whole of Wales—a whole-farm, whole-nation approach. And it is a product of unprecedented collaboration. We have listened to wide-ranging views and worked intensively with the ministerial round-table and with supporting groups, and my thanks to everyone who has engaged with us. This has resulted in a scheme that works for the industry and meets the needs of everyone. I intend for the ministerial round-table to continue as we strengthen and embed the SFS across the industry. So, we’ve listened, and we will continue to listen.

No two farms are the same, so we’ve ensured that the scheme is accessible. It offers flexibility to accommodate different farming types, tenants and new entrants with access to land. The framework of universal, optional and collaborative actions responds to the asks from the industry. The framework provides stability whilst helping farms to be more resilient and productive by improving soil health, animal health, managing pests and developing skills.

We’ve reduced complexity by reducing the universal actions, simplifying requirements and simplifying the administration. We commit to supporting the universal actions and legacy basic payment scheme with the same budget in 2026—£238 million—that we currently spend on the basic payment scheme. Social value accounts for a significant proportion of the universal payment in 2026, reflecting the multiple benefits farmers provide alongside the sustainable production of food. We have set this budget to encourage farmers into the scheme in 2026 to realise the scheme benefits sooner.

However, our environmental commitments will only be met with substantial uptake of optional and collaborative actions. The earlier the uptake, the earlier we’ll see the benefits at scale. This is why we’ve bolstered the budget available for these actions in 2026, and why we commit to further shifting the balance of future budgets to optional and collaborative actions. This is essential for our climate and nature objectives, and to offer a truly sustainable future to Welsh agriculture.

We will continue developing the evidence base underpinning social value to better understand how individual actions contribute to different elements of social value, including the benefits that come from protecting our environment, and to refine this approach and then apply it more widely to optional and collaborative actions.

We’ve changed our approach to tree planting. We need to plant more trees and hedgerows to meet our climate ambitions. And that is why, having listened to farmers, we’ve moved away from 10 per cent tree cover on every farm towards incentivising farmers through generous and flexible planting support in the optional layer. As a minimum, we’re asking farmers to plant at least 0.1 hectare by the end of 2028, or have arrangements to plant by the end of March 2029. To incentivise early planting, we’re proposing enhanced payments for those planting in the first three years.

Trees benefit livestock as well as capturing carbon and providing habitat, which is why our tree planting offer supports a range of planting types, including shelter belts and integration of trees alongside food production as part of an agroforestry system. We are not expecting, nor do we want, farmers to plant on their most productive land. They will decide where to plant, with guidance, to ensure the right tree in the right place.  

Following extensive stakeholder discussions, I’m confident this will achieve as much, if not more, planting than would have been achieved under previous proposals. At scheme level, we’re aiming for at least 17,000 hectares of planting by 2030, with an aspiration of 21,500 hectares. But, if by the end of 2028, we’re not progressing, we will review our approach.

Change isn’t easy. This scheme is a big change, but it’s a change we believe is good for farming, production and the environment. I believe and hope that the majority of farmers join the scheme. The BPS is available for those outside the SFS, although reduced by 40 per cent next year. This is the same as it would have been had we introduced the SFS in 2025. We're prioritising the SFS to encourage farmers to join the scheme and to start benefiting. We continue to fund other schemes to help farmers transition to the SFS and to deliver farm sustainability and other rural priorities.

These are challenging times for rural communities, where farming is not solely a livelihood, but a way of life. The scheme will support a thriving, productive, sustainable farming industry, underpinning these communities for generations to come. The scheme starts in January, but that’s the beginning. We’re supporting farmers and food for the long term. The scheme depends on farmers, their families, and all who support them, so I hope farmers will now take the time to understand how it works for them.

Thank you, Deputy First Minister, for your statement today. Our thanks must also go to every farmer, and to the wider agricultural supply chain across Wales, for all they do to produce high-quality, sustainable and traceable food. We also pay tribute to those farmers who took to the steps of the Senedd, or gathered in livestock marts across Wales last year, to protest the Welsh Government’s then proposals. Thank you. Your voices were loud, clear and necessary. Thanks must also go to the National Farmers Union Cymru and the Farmers Union of Wales, the Country Land and Business Association Cymru, the Nature Friendly Farming Network, and many others, for their tireless advocacy on behalf of an industry that is the backbone of rural Wales.

Deputy First Minister, you personally have been working on this for a year, but the industry has been waiting over seven years for clarity. Welsh farmers deserve certainty, not just for one year, but for the long term. This new scheme will replace decades of support that has kept Welsh farming and rural communities viable. A shift of this scale must be built on evidence, collaboration, and, crucially, trust. But, right now, that trust is broken. According to a CLA Cymru poll, just 3 per cent of farmers trust this Welsh Labour Government.

Firstly, it’s disappointing that you’ve decided to cut the basic payment scheme to 60 per cent for those not singing up on 1 January, shortening the transition period. I know, as you argued in your statement, that this reflects what would have happened had the SFS launched in 2025, but it didn’t launch, because the scheme was so heavily criticised that you had to go back to the drawing board. So, now, farmers are being punished for that failure, and, as NFU Cymru rightly say, this cliff edge overshadows much of the rest of the scheme.

Securing a universal layer budget, matching the current BPS allocation—£238 million—is to be cautiously welcomed. While this Government has refused to increase this budget in recent years, holding the line at least offers some short-term stability. As you know, a ship is balanced at its hull, and, here, the universal layer is where stability must be anchored. But that certainty only extends to 2026. There is no guarantee that the universal layer budget won’t be cut in future years, with funds diverted to other layers. From your written statement published this morning, it seems that actually is the intention, and, for me, that’s unacceptable. Let’s remember: £238 million is not the full farming budget. It stands at £340 million. So, where will the remaining £102 million be spent? Had this Government increased the budget in line with inflation, it would be now be worth closer to £500 million. So, Deputy First Minister, putting aside the small matter of a Senedd election next May, what funding guarantees can you give that a floor will be set to ensure the universal layer never falls below £238 million?

While the 10 per cent tree planting target is no longer mentioned, there does remain a scheme-wide 17,000 hectare tree planting target by 2030—only four years away—with an expectation for farmers to plant 250 trees by 2028. So, really, there does remain a tree planting target per farm. We’ve always said, from these benches, the right tree, in the right place, for the right reasons. But trees are mentioned 115 times, food only 66 times. So, does this scheme really prioritise tree planting over food security?

Finally, and most importantly, you could promise the finest scheme in the world, but if the economic impact assessment shows it leads to job losses, livestock cuts and falling incomes, then farmers will rightly reject it, as they did before. What's deeply troubling is that no economic assessment has been published alongside this announcement today, yet you've already admitted, on Politics Wales, on Sunday, that you've seen the modelling. But we haven't. Why? Without it, you're asking farmers to take a blind leap of faith, based on your statement on Politics Wales that, 'My feeling is that it will be better'. That simply isn't good enough. You must publish the impact assessment ahead of the Royal Welsh Show and allow Senedd Members and the wider industry to judge the evidence for themselves.

Because those figures in an impact assessment aren't abstract numbers; they represent families, communities, and livelihoods. They don't even capture the full ripple effect on rural supply chains and local economies. There is much more that I could ask and challenge you on this, Deputy First Minister, but trust is not built on sentiment alone. It is earned through transparency, partnership, and a scheme that supports, not punishes, Welsh farming. Diolch.

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Sam. Thank you for those comments. You are right: trust is based on open collaboration, seeing the evidence together, working together, confronting the facts together as well, agreeing the outcomes together as well, and then moving ahead together. That's what we've been doing for the last 12 months. We've built that trust, both with the farming community, with the farming unions, with the other stakeholders, the environmental groups around that round-table, with the officials—over 300 hours of work that has gone into this, to get this scheme right. 

At the start of this, I said I would burn the midnight oil. It's not just me who's been doing it, it's every one of the participants in it: the farming unions, the nature-friendly farming, the organic sector, everybody who's played a role, the wildlife trust, Coed Cymru—all of those; everybody has been deep in the engine room of this. That's the way you build trust. And the great thing about launching this today is that that year has not just been to get the technical detail right, and the design of the scheme right, but it's to build that relationship, and, as I've made clear in the statement, that we keep this going—this style of working that is actually deeply embedded. 

If you want to see an illustration of the well-being of future generations Act's ways of working, it's this co-production of an outcome. That does mean I still make the calls and the judgements, but this is the way to build trust. There will be people today who will say, 'I wish he hadn't pushed so hard on that', 'I wish he would have gone further on that'. I accept that, that's my call. But you build it through looking at the same evidence and where the outcomes are agreed. Right at the start of this process, we said we would work to those SLM objectives—all of them—and recognise the importance of dealing with, as well, the nature and climate emergency.

And by the way, in some of my statements today, contrary to what has been said, we have actually put in there—. This is not a word count game by the way, but food security has featured within it; so has food production, so has high animal welfare standards, so has livelihoods and ways of life, so has social value of farming, so has Welsh language. But that's what you build the trust around. I'm absolutely focused on that, entirely.

You mention the 40 per cent taper. The 40 per cent taper, as I outlined in my remarks here, we're 12 months further down the line. We would have been hitting the 40 per cent by now already. But there is a genuine message here as well, Sam, which is to say to farmers: BPS is going. It is going. Come into the SFS. Grab hold of the opportunities within this. Work to make your farm good, innovative, productive. Make it climate resilient as well. Work with the money and the funds that we're putting into this scheme, and come into it early. So, that's why we have genuinely geared it towards, if you come in early, you will see. In the optional layer, for example, on the tree planting and tree creation, there will be opportunities there for farmers to get into that sooner and get more generous funding for it. It's deliberately designed that way. But it's designed around the work we've done in the round-table as well.

Thank you for the cautious welcome for the universal layer. But, importantly, the universal layer isn't the be-all and end-all. The universal layer is critically important because that ensures that we can make it, as we've always said, as accessible as possible to every farmer in the land, and we've designed the scheme in that way. That's why we've been proud to actually make sure that the quantum of fund that, two years ago, we guaranteed for the BPS, and that we at risk guaranteed last year, is now carried over into the universal layer. I have to say that is a marked contrast with what we were offered when we left the EU, when it was going to be a land of milk and honey, and, all of a sudden, money would be flowing into farming, remarkably. There would be no Cabinet discussions to be had about the balance between driving down waiting times or investing in transport or hospitals or schools and farming. That land of milk and honey was a complete fallacy. I'm not saying it was you, Sam, but there were people who were saying that. They were wrong then, and they're wrong now.

What we've been able to do, as a Labour Government, because of the budget that we voted for, is to actually deliver this once again, so we can give that certainty. But the real benefit going forward is, and this includes in the taper as well—. The discussion we've had on the round-table has been that, as the years go by and we migrate people off the BPS, because eventually the BPS will stop—that's a legacy issue now—everybody will move into the SFS. And, as we do that, the funds go into the optional and collaborative. So, we can have farmers working at a landscape level, working, for example, in the upper reaches of somewhere like the Conwy river stretch, where the river now is in the mid twenties degrees, where there is nothing living in the river when you have these heatwave temperatures, where we should be on a landscape catchment basis—lots of farmers planting trees alongside that river—and including dealing with pollution going into the river as well. That's what this scheme can do. 

You mentioned the scheme headline commitment. That is a proud achievement of this scheme. You were right in saying some people do not like the fact that we've walked away from the 10 per cent per farm commitment. I understand that, but what we have here is a headline target that has been through the round-table, that we're all committed to, to deliver 17,000 hectares. It would be above and beyond what would be delivered by 10 per cent per farm. But farmers will have the ability to devise their own plan for their own farm, not planting trees on areas that have other biodiversity needs within them, not planting it on prime productive land, but mapping and then delivering it, and dropping down from the optional layer of money that will be made available to plant as well.

And finally, on the business plans and the impact assessment, we've already done the modelling and the assessments, both environmental and economic. We're very well sighted on those in bringing forward this today. We've analysed the potential impacts of the scheme, and that has helped us make the decisions that we've come to. But just to be clear—just to be crystal clear—these are scenarios, not forecasts. These are scenarios, not predictions. So, we will keep the scheme under review as we gather further evidence. I'm really confident that this scheme will be better for both farm businesses and for the environment. We've made a number of changes to the scheme, including what I've just mentioned and described with tree cover. It's resulted in different outcomes to the scheme as previously devised. There will inevitably, I've got to say, be a cost to the farmer from completing some of the universal actions, and that's recognised in the evidence that I've seen. But there is also a significant number of benefits to those farm businesses from the scheme, such as stability, increased productivity, greater efficiency.

We will, Sam, finalise the analysis and the assessment ready for publication in September, and it'll be complete and it won't be out of context. It will be the whole picture for you and I'm sure you'll welcome that. And just to come back to the point—. Sorry. And for individual farms, Sam, because—[Interruption.] And for individual farms, just to say to you, there will be a ready reckoner available. So, any farmer in the land will be able to walk into the Royal Welsh and subsequently, or do it online, and see what this will mean for their farm. Do you know, that's the real economic impact that people will be looking for, not in aggregate, not headline figures, but actually, 'What does it mean for my business?' That's what they'll be looking at. 

One thing the sector was looking for today was long-term certainty, or at least clarity to give them confidence that this is the right way forward, not next year and within the 12 months, but beyond that. I haven't seen that in sufficient measure this afternoon. It's disappointing that we've only had a one-year funding commitment, albeit retained at the current level. I can say here now that Plaid Cymru would commit to a longer term funding cycle, based, at a minimum, on the level that you've outlined today. That is something that we would be willing to commit to, and if other parties would be willing to commit to that, then hopefully that would give you confidence maybe to go further today. I would ask you to reconsider that and whether you are able to give a longer line of sight when it comes to funding the scheme.

You also say that shifting the balance of future budgets from the universal action to optional and collaborative actions will happen. You don't tell us when. You don't tell us how much. Again, that will ring alarm bells in people's minds to give them the confidence as to whether they step into the SFS or not. If somebody joined the scheme today, they need to know—not next year, they need to know what happens in year 2, 3, 4, 5. So, a bit more clarity around your thinking—. Because it's modulation, effectively, isn't it? It's moving from what was pillar 1, universal payment, to pillar 2. So, maybe some more information will be forthcoming on that.

The transition rearrangement and condensing the transition now I think is the wrong approach. I think a 40 per cent drop in the first year is too significant. You're right when you say it's taking us to where we would have been had the scheme proceeded as intended last year. But it didn't, did it? It didn't proceed as intended. And if the principle of a five-year transition was necessary last year, then I think it's only fair that that remains this year. So, I would urge you to reconsider on that front as well and revert to your original plan. For one practical reason as well, of course, in that I know we want people to come into the SFS as soon as possible, I understand that, what if there's a huge influx in year 1, when the Government's systems haven't been tested, when the processing of applications is maybe clunky, to use a word that you've used in different contexts in the past? There's a risk in that as well. So, maybe a more gradual transition would actually not only support those who want time to adapt their business models to the new scheme, but would also help the Government in seamlessly implementing the new scheme.

On the social value payment, in an early statement that was released first thing this morning from yourself, you said that you were still developing your understanding on the social value payments, but I now see, of course, in the document released this afternoon, that there will be a £107 per hectare payment for 2026. I welcome that. That's a positive step. But what I want to know is what happens, then, in year 2, 3, 4 and 5, et cetera, because social value is social value. The social value of farming doesn't diminish, so can you assure us that the payment for social value will not diminish either?

I know there are a lot of questions there, Deputy First Minister, but there will be even more that people will want answered. As I say, that will be forthcoming, hopefully, over the next weeks and months. There are still big gaps in the details, but they will emerge, I hope, in time. I thank you and all of the stakeholders for the work that you've done to bring us to this point. It is an improvement, but there are a lot of questions that need answering.

Thank you, Llyr. Look, I acknowledge that, and I think the deliberations that we've been involved with over the course of the last year and more being landed in front of people, even though we landed the headline outline of the scheme back in November last year, which was very welcomed and gave some idea of those important pillars of the universal, optional, collaborative, and some confirmation of how we were going to deal with sites of special scientific interest and common land—. We tried to give a little bit as we went along. But this is now all the detail at once for everybody. So, it is important, actually, and the message out there for farmers is: 'Go and look at that ready reckoner.' It sounds really glamorous—it's not, I promise you. It's basically a sort of spreadsheet application, but it will give them a really good idea of whether this works for their farm: 'So, when that's available next week, go look at it, take some time, don't just get clouded with the headlines going on, take some time, look at what it means for your farm business.'

And I think it's the same for us as Senedd Members as well. Members of the Senedd, this will have been a great reveal, with a heck of a lot of detail—the sheer weight of evidence and material and data we've gone through. But curiously, the importance that you attach to not just the quantum of funding that's gone into the BPS transition to the universal layer of SFS this year, but the future of the optional and collaborative, because there's a quantum of funding in there—. Now, we have made very clear, and we've been very frank and honest about this, that there's a maximum that we're putting into the universal layer. Because it's really important for the transition, but we actually recognise that the value-for-money case for those wider benefits comes through the optional and collaborative. So, there's a maximum on the universal level—we're being very frank and honest about it—and there's a minimum level on the optional and collaborative, which will grow over time as more people migrate across from BPS and that money is released into the optional and collaborative. We have things like the draw-downs for those landscape-scale interventions that we could have, which benefit productivity and innovation for the farmer, but also nature and the environment as well. 

But just to say to all Members, I'd be very keen to keep on engaging on the detail of this as we go through the summer, through the autumn, through the shows and so on, so that we can get more detail. That's also, by the way, why we do want to—Sam, just to come back to you—keep on working through the summer, because if you’ve seen some of the responses from some of the environmental non-governmental organisations as well, they're very much taken with that piece, along with Nature Friendly Farming Network and others, of saying that we need to absolutely now fine-tune that optional collaborative piece to make sure it delivers on those multiple benefits. So, by the time we get to the September piece, you will have a well-rounded piece of economic and environmental analysis and the full business case and the value for money. Because bear in mind, the value for money case of this is also critically important—does it deliver those wide benefits?

The systems are in place, by the way, to deliver this. I would love it if we had a really rapid uptake of this by farmers, and we're ready to do it, because it's been based on, just to reassure colleagues, systems, adaptations of the systems, that are already in place. We're not building new bureaucracies to do this, we're adapting the ones that work really well. So, it'll be familiar to them and we can deal with whatever the uptake is. But that exactly is the point. Why can't we predict further into the future? Because this depends on the uptake by farmers, the entry of farmers into it, and then it depends on what options they actually go for, and the higher level options as well. So, we can't actually model that definitively. We'll be able to get an idea when we're in year 1, year 2, whatever, and we'll keep on dynamically adjusting. And just to assure you, social value is integral to the scheme going forward, but you do touch on a wider piece about actually—and Sam, sorry, I didn't answer this to you as well—the issue of the annual budget cycle. Well, just to say, it's not new. We've been doing this on the BPS as well. So, we always have to go through the Cabinet process of arguing where does this lie within the grand scheme of things.

What I would say to you, by the way, and to all those outside—because you will notice that there are many people who say we need even more money in this, and curiously there's an alignment here between environmental organisations, farmers and others—is that I actually agree with them. One of the biggest arguments we now have because of this scheme, when we sit around with the Cabinet and the Welsh Treasury, is to actually say we're not only doing high standards of food production, high standards of animal welfare, all the food security pieces and so on, we're also delivering on clean rivers, clean air, we're delivering on the climate and nature emergency, all of those things that we're asking here. So, there is a stronger argument because of what we've delivered today than there formerly was when you were simply saying, 'This is just food production over here and the farmers.' We're now saying, 'Look at what farmers have to deliver for us.' It puts a much stronger argument.

And the second thing is that we have designed this in a way that if, in future, there are opportunities, for example, for green or blended finance to come into elements to supplement it, we've designed it in a way that that can be taken on board as well to do more for the farmer, but also for nature and climate as well. So, we'll keep engaged with everybody on it, but, yes, we've given you a lot of information today, I appreciate, but thanks for acknowledging that we've offered technical briefings as well. I suspect that we might need more of those in the weeks to come.

I want to pick up on what Sam Kurtz said about this idea of trees versus food, because why is it not possible to see trees as a source of food as well? And obviously we're talking here about fruit trees. It's very disappointing that the English Woodland Trust continue to talk about only native trees being able to be planted when in fact there are plenty of Welsh fruit trees that are part of our heritage. So, I want to know why there's no mention of fruit trees in your quite right venture to promote more trees. I'm not sure that sufficient trees are being planted because the climate is changing so hugely, but I do want to know why fruit trees are not an essential part of the increase in tree production.

Thanks, Jenny. It's a really good question. We need to recognise the multiple benefits of tree planting. Tree planting within this scheme, in the right place, is to do with a myriad of things, including climate resilience, including shelter belts for animals. Why are shelter belts for animals good? Because they increase the productivity of the animal. Why does that work? Because if they're not suffering through the heat or dramatic weather incidents, they fatten better, you get more value for them at market and all of that. There is, by the way, just to say in terms of fruit trees, a fruit and nut tree mix as part of our optional actions for tree planting. So, we have actually listened to the representations you've made before, and we've worked that into the scheme as well. So, they can plant, for example, fruit and nut trees, and get paid for it as part of this scheme as well. What we do want is to get those multiple benefits, though, from tree planting. That's really critical. And it could be for animals and livestock, it could be for actually production of fruit and so on, or it could actually be because some farmers want to go into agroforestry, in the right place, not shifting into areas where there's high food-productive land or into areas where there's other high biodiversity that we don't want to displace. But there is room for the right tree in the right place in this scheme, including fruit trees.

I have to say, I agree entirely with Jenny Rathbone on her previous question about why can't there be fruit trees.

So, Cabinet Secretary, you do know—I've raised it with you several times—about the universal element of SFS in terms of common land graziers. I've a number of farmers who are very angry, in my constituency, that there are active common land graziers and there are those who do not graze the common land but are still drawing in the grants. The farmers that do graze the common land find this to be quite unacceptable. Non-active graziers of common land should not be receiving any financial inducement for not using their own grazing rights. To take an example from my constituency, we have an area of over 250 hectares of common land known as Conwy mountain and Alltwen. It has been abandoned by registered graziers for years, but they are continuing to receive BPS payments. You've no idea currently how much money is going to farmers who shouldn't be receiving this. Will you look at this again and maybe go back and review how many farmers are not actively grazing common land, or put that money back in, to support those that are? Grazing associations in Eryri and Brecon have also contacted me, because I've raised it before, and they believe they're not being listened to by the Welsh Government, and I think that means you. So, can we work together on this, and let's find out which common rights graziers are using their rights, which are not, and let's maybe review the payments to some of those, to allow more money in the pot for genuine hard-working farmers?

Thank you, Janet, and thanks for also supporting Jenny's point as well. Jenny and Janet, I forgot to mention, traditional orchards that are well-established orchards are actually included within the universal level as well. So, just to say that, as well as new planting that you can get on with as well.

On common land—listen, thank you for making this point, Janet, and it's something you've been consistent on. We deeply understand the value of common land, both economically but also ecologically and culturally as well. So, the universal code includes requirements that farmers wishing to receive universal baseline payment on their common land right must adhere to. And this includes the need to have relevant livestock and the ability to graze the common. This has been specifically included to ensure that only active farmers, as you say, Janet, who graze the common, are paid under the universal layer.

The existing agreements under the Habitat Wales scheme for commons can continue in 2026, and this includes established agreements between graziers on the use of the commons for grazing in support of the HWS payments. We will include a payment for individual graziers who hold grazing rights and who can turn out suitable livestock. Payment will be included on their whole farm and social value payments and will be apportioned in a similar way to the current BPS.

Now, the Habitat Wales Scheme (Commons) will be available in 2026 to the already-established grazing associations in order to be able to support co-ordinated grazing regimes. We are also considering how to support the formation of new grazing associations, to enable more common land to be brought forward into co-ordinated management from 2027 onwards, and more targeted management, which I've seen first-hand, such as management of bracken and other invasive species, or peatland restoration, often requires consent from the owner of the common, ideally working in partnership with the graziers. So, this will be supported through a continuation of our existing landscape-scale collaborative schemes, such as the integrated natural resources scheme, or Ffermio Bro, which supports activity within designated landscapes, and the national peatland action programme as well. So, supporting commons to enter into agreements where they don't exist may take a bit of time, and some will need support from the Government, which they will have. So, lots of good work going on in that space, Janet, and I hope you can take that message back to those graziers, those common land graziers, that you regularly engage with.

Thank you for your statement, Minister. As you say, the universal layer is a very important entry point to this scheme, but really it needs to act as a stepping stone to the optional and collaborative layers, and in that way support farmers to meet pressing environmental challenges and restoration of nature and help for the climate. On the Gwent levels, for example, Minister, this would include helping farmers manage those sites of special scientific interest and help rare species, such as the shrill carder bee. So, I just wonder if you could say a little bit more as to how these layers will be developed as we move forward, and when they will be available to farmers, and how monitoring and compliance will be taken forward. Should we be confident that the scheme will deliver on its ambitions through effective compliance and monitoring?

Yes, absolutely. On the latter point, John, we've built in schemes to regularly monitor compliance with this through the Food Standards Agency and other measures so that we have accurate data about what's happening on farms across our land, across the whole of Wales, already, and where we need to see the improvements as well. So, when farmers enter into these agreements, either at the universal level, or drawing down the option of the collaborative space, we'll be able to work with them, but also to monitor that.

When I was out today, actually, at a cracking farm down near Margam with Robert and his dad—a three generation farm—he was saying to me, 'Well, some of the things that we've tried over the years have really worked well. Some of them haven't; they've actually had a detrimental effect on the environment.' He said, 'Is this scheme going to be able to deliver the ability to learn and do better?', well, yes, because we will very closely monitor it, but also work with farmers to make the improvements necessary, allow an element of risk so that we can see that improvement on the farms as well.

Certainly, in terms of the Gwent levels, and things like species down there that are so important, such as the shrill carder bee and so on, this scheme gives that flexibility to adapt on that whole-farm basis to individual plots of land, to individual habitats and species, and to make sure it delivers for them. That's the joy of this, that it's not a top-down, prescriptive, one-size-fits-all approach; it's work with the evidence and then work to the themes that are within this about actually delivering all those wide benefits of farm sustainability in terms of a commercial point of view, but also sustainability in terms of an environmental approach as well. I think one of the testaments to the last year of working with all the stakeholders, environmental groups and farmers of all different types is actually all of us coming on a journey that says that we agree with the outcomes that we're trying to achieve, and I think it feels very different, and we need to maintain that going forward.

Thank you so much, and thanks for recognising this really is based on the work that's been done, and my thanks to everybody who's been involved, including some of the Members of the Senedd here as well, who've fed in what their constituents were feeling as well. I think we've got a far, far better scheme, even though, today and in future weeks, it'll face some criticism here and there. I think this was always going to be one of those schemes where there were going to be people moderately unhappy on this bit, moderately unhappy on that bit. But, if we're agreed on what we're trying to achieve here, then this is a major step forward and we're all working towards it.

Now on the tree planting, the commitment within the scheme will—. As I've said previously, this has the potential to go further than 10 per cent on every single farm, recognising that each farm is different, but recognising that some farmers want to do a heck of a lot more in terms of tree planting, for various reasons. Some of them will want to supply wood that goes into those mills in the centre of Wales that go into our homes for long-term, locked-in carbon, into the wood-built homes that we're building now increasingly within Wales, and need to do so much more with our timber industrial strategy.

But how do we do it? Well, we start from a very good point, because, over the last couple of years—. We've done two iterations now in the period I've been here. Even though I've only been in post for whatever it is—I can't remember now—18 months or whatever, we've been through two iterations of the HWS mapping on tree planting. We also have other mapping that we have as well. We had some challenge back from farmers 15 months ago, saying, 'Well, that map doesn't accurately reflect what's on my farm.' We said, 'No problem. Here's what we've got. Now, we'll come out with you. Let's look at it. Yes, you're right—that tree we hadn't spotted there, that copse down there.' So, we've done two years of adjusting it. So, we've got very accurate mapping now of where the trees and woodland cover are, including those trees within hedgerows. On that basis, farmers now will be asked, farmers now will be compelled, to actually devise that opportunity plan for trees and hedgerows on their farms, and then to plant to it, to draw down money from the optional level. And we've pushed heavily, into the first three years of the scheme, additional money, ring-fenced within that, to actually plant those trees and get on with it, because we know, and I think you will share as well, that we need to actually do this for all the reasons we've outlined and get on with this tree planting as well.

But we can monitor it now because we know where the trees are. We work then on the opportunity plan for hedgerows and trees that farmers bring forward. We expect them to draw down that money and to actually deliver on it. And the trajectory we have will be an increasing trajectory, to be quite frank. So, what the Climate Change Committee have said to us now, for our 2030 targets, is they've acknowledged this is where we can go by then, and then it will accelerate. But, by that time, we might have many more farmers saying to each other, 'Look at what I've done in my patch. It works. It does work.'

I'd like to welcome much that's in the scheme and to commend you for the efforts you've put into trying to find consensus, building on the work that Lesley Griffiths did over a number of years. I'd just like to ask you about that increasing trajectory, as you just referred to, to Rhun ap Iorwerth, on the tree planting. In order to reach net zero by 2050, we said that 5,000 hectares a year needs to be planted, and last year we planted something like 960 hectares, so well short. You do seem to have abandoned the 2030 target the Government had committed to of 43,000 hectares by 2030, whilst keeping the ambitious 2050 target. So, I'm a little puzzled of how we're intending to achieve a stretching 2050 target whilst lowering our ambition in the immediate future. Perhaps you could explain that.

Yes, I can, and thank you for that question. And Lee, thank you as well for your engagement on this, because I know you are absolutely, as many Members are, wedded to doing what we have to do, which is to increase tree planting across the whole of Wales, both in terms of farmland, but also on things like our woodland estate, on things like Crown Estate, and up the ante in terms of tree planting. We absolutely have to.

So, back in May—I've got to get my correct phraseology here—revised advice was put forward by the Climate Change Committee. As you know, as a former Minister, they periodically revise it. They looked at the practical and pragmatic approach to tree planting in Wales, and they also looked at what you quite rightly point out is our failure to plant so far. So, rather than do a shoot-for-the-stars straight line, they said, 'Realistically, including what you're trying to devise in this with farmers, with landowners, we think you can do this by 2030', and their figure was 22,000 on that balanced pathway. But they've also said, Lee, just to be clear, 'That doesn't let you off the hook; in fact, you're going to have to then accelerate to achieve a slightly more ambitious—'. Because their overall path here—. Let me just get the figures right. By 2050, their advice for woodland planting in Wales has increased from 180,000 hectares to 208,000 hectares. We're committed to that, but we want to work with people to do it. We want to really work with people to do it. We've got to own this together. Landowners and farmers have to own it as well; so do NRW, so do Crown Estate, so does everybody else. So, we haven't walked away from that longer term ambition. What we have said is: 'We're going to do what we can now to 2030, based on the revised CCC advice, and then we know we're going to have to do more.' What I would say to you, though, is that if this does bring people with us—and there is a genuine ask here, I have to say, of all the farming unions, of the CLA, of the forestry people, of everybody, to actually deliver on this headline target; 17,000 is what we're aiming for, but with an ambition to hit 21,500, which is within spitting distance of that revised CCC advice—then we'll have won the hearts and minds of people to bring them with us on this. We'll have demonstrated it can be done, and then we can go further. So, we haven't walked away from that longer-term advice, and, as I say, the CCC advice for 2050 is now even more ambitious. But what they've done is they've recognised that, to get there, there is less of a straight-line trajectory, and we've got to take that managed pathway to get there.

Diolch for your statement, Deputy First Minister. Well, I suppose it could have been worse. We would broadly but cautiously welcome the changes, although this document is heavily weighted, as has already been said, towards trees rather than our food-producing sector, as is your round-table.

There are good things within it, which have already been outlined by other Members, but I have concerns that the good things will be completely overshadowed by the shortcomings, the obvious example obviously being 80 per cent to 60 per cent in the first year, which is a massive change to stomach. There is an improvement on the previous iteration of this scheme, which was really a mask-slip moment, wasn't it, for the Welsh Government and their real attitude towards our farmers. Our farmers are valued by the public, and they should be valued in this place as well, especially as the deliverers of your environmental schemes.

Look, this massive, 200 page, weighty document is full of complexity and terminology that many farmers won't be familiar with. Deputy First Minister, the weight of the detail is unquestionably daunting. Don't you agree that this needs to be simplified? And due to there being obvious problematic areas within this document that are likely to present themselves in the future, is this going to be a scheme like Glastir that will be able to evolve and adapt as problems present themselves? I have real concerns, for example, that, to some landowners, this scheme will be lucrative, but, to many tenant farmers, they will now obviously be very worried about being stuck with huge rents, and I'd like your thoughts on that, please. Diolch.

Diolch yn fawr iawn. 'It could have been worse.' That statement reminded me of the day that I walked down as a young boy in shorts on Christmas Day and found a beautiful new shiny bicycle wrapped up in the best room, as it used to be called—the best room, the front room—and I walked into the front room and thought, 'Wow, my dad has bought me the bike. Look, great'. 'No, no, that's your brother's present.' [Laughter.] It could have been worse; I did have a present.

But, look, I think the glass is more half full than half empty here, because I think this is a unique opportunity for us to work together in Wales to deliver those multiple benefits. We have rightly described this as the only whole-farm approach. This is not a 'bits of' scheme, like they've delivered over the border in England—a bit of environmental, but a bit of standard support and whatever—this is a whole-farm scheme, but it's also a whole-nation scheme. The people of Wales genuinely want farmers to succeed and have thriving businesses and to be able to bring their children through into the farming business, but they also want that lush pasture land to have really good soil. They do not want run-off into the rivers. They do not want rivers that are baking in the heat because there's no woodland cover. They want the whole thing. So, this is a contract between the people of Wales and the farmers of Wales, and it shows the integral nature of farming to Wales as well. Farmers will deliver this for us, but they'll deliver it with us—with us, together. That's the way it has to be.

You talk about the terminology and the narrative. It's been a common theme of the round-table. All the people sitting around it, from the environmental groups, to the meat and livestock and processors people, to the unions and others, have all said what we need to do is deliver this in a way that's very understandable to farmers. The immense documentation you have is immense documentation for a purpose, so that you and I and people who want to can get our heads into the details. We do not expect every farmer to want to do that. I will expect every farmer to want to actually get their head into 'What does it mean for me?', hence why we're bringing forward the ready reckoner next week at the Royal Welsh, hence why we're bringing forward separate guidance for farmers, that makes sense to them.

So, for example, when you say to a farmer, and this is one of the original criticisms, 'Well, what is CPD?' Well, I know what it is because I did a HNC and a HND in college, so I know what continuing professional development is. But if you actually say to farmers, 'Right, let me explain that in terms that you know. So, that training course that you go on, that you've done with other farmers down the road, that has helped actually drive productivity in your livestock because of doing x, y, and z, that's CPD.' 'What, you mean those six hours I did down there on that weekend away?' 'Absolutely.' Yes, so we will absolutely do that.

And you also ask whether this will be able to evolve and adapt: yes. Just to tell everybody, we have built within this scheme, even though we've got the stability Llyr and Rhun were talking about, the need for stability and certainty is delivered in the framework that we have and the payments that we've outlined; the ability to adapt and be flexible and to learn dynamically is built into it as well. We will monitor success on this, on every element, and we will then work with farmers and with the environmental NGOs to say, 'If this doesn't work, like Rob on the farm this morning, we can try something else. We can innovate. We can put more funding into this bit and the optional and take a bit away and try and do something else.' So, it's a dynamic scheme as well. So, whether it's me or somebody else sitting here in future, all of us will be able to keep an eye on them to say, 'Right, this bit isn't working, have a tweak on it, have a change on it', but still have the platform that gives stability to farmers.

Good afternoon, Cabinet Secretary. Thank you for engaging with me on this issue and also for the technical briefing. I am very grateful, and it feels that there are some real steps forward here that we can build on. As Llyr has said, we do need to see the detail and the opportunity to look at how that will apply. We must just recognise, though, the stresses that have been on farmers, not just over the past year, but even longer. We've had farmers who've seen these changes, been really concerned about them. They're dealing with health and safety obligations, environmental rules, disease testing. We've had bluetongue in the last couple of months, and now these changes as well. On top of that, rising energy costs, higher national insurance, and of course the shameful family farm tax. They've all added to the strain.

Farmers and their families are under immense stress. A UK-wide survey by the Farm Safety Foundation showed that 91 per cent of farmers believe poor mental health is the sector's biggest hidden challenge. Sadly, in the year 2022, 44 farmers in England and Wales took their own lives. There's a real mental health crisis. One of the issues that they do say very clearly, and you've referred to this in your response to Llyr, is about having a multi-year stability in terms of the income that's coming in. We all have that. Industry has that. Our public sector have that. Surely we should have that for our farmers, and I'd just like you to commit in principle that that is something that is top of your list in terms of the considerations you have. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Thank you very much, Jane, and thanks for your engagement on this, as with other Members as well. You're absolutely right about the stress that is within the farming sector, and recognising that not every farm is a family of many individuals, all sitting around the table in the evening, chatting through their problems and their issues; some farmers will be individual farmers in isolated locations, who will be—. The only time—. I mean, this is the benefit of farmers' markets; it's the time when farmers come together and go, 'Do you want to hear my woes?' And they chat about it and so on there.

But the multiple stresses within it, generally, and the uncertainty, that's one thing we can fix with this now. So, actually having been clear on what the scheme is, what the rates will be, getting people to actually look at that ready reckoner and say, 'What does this mean for me? Will it be worth my while? Does it give me financial certainty?', all of those things will help take away one of those uncertainties that we've been wrestling with since we left the EU, quite frankly. I've had to roll over, each year, BPS settlements, and we've done it through Cabinet colleagues engaging with me and agreeing that we've wanted to give that stability over the last couple of years. Now we give the stability going forward as well, and there will be options for the optional and collaborative layers as well that farmers can draw down. So, I strongly urge them to look at that.

On the multi-year stability issue, it's good to hear parties today saying, 'We'll definitely give the investment.' I want you to give more than that. It's not just the investment, it's give your support to the design of this scheme, because the worst thing that could happen for farmers' certainty is that we have any idea that we'll come back in and we'll start again, we'll remodel it. This scheme is a good scheme. This scheme is a whole-farm scheme. It tries to do multiple objectives, as well as looking at the financial investment, and I've said to you that the scheme is designed so that if there was more funding available in the years to come, you could lever it in. As the BPS taper goes on, there will be more funding coming in to the optional and the collaborative as well. As green or blended finance becomes available, we can push that into elements of the scheme.

But on the way forward, I think I've shown very clearly my commitment, and this Cabinet and this Government's commitment to the scheme, delivering the quantum of funding we've been able to put into it from the start. And then the next Government will face the same challenges, and will have to have those discussions, whether it's you sitting around the table or somebody else. You'll have to balance this up against other competing priorities. But our commitment is very clear. This scheme doesn't work for nature, for the climate emergency, for farmers, for viability of businesses, unless you have sufficient quantum within the scheme. It's a strong argument. It's probably the most powerful argument we've ever had, because this is a whole-farm scheme, not just a food production scheme.

We are already out of time on this statement, but I know there are many eyes on this statement today. So, I will call the three remaining Members who've indicated that they want to ask questions. The first of those is Carolyn Thomas.

Diolch, Llywydd. I really welcome that the scheme has been co-designed with the stakeholders, with farmers and environmentalists together. I also welcome the requirement to have 10 per cent for biodiversity, and I hope that this will help reverse the loss of biodiversity in Wales. It will help work towards it.

Ensuring farmers receive appropriate advice and guidance is really important going forward, those that need it. So, I was wondering: would you be able to outline how farmers will receive that advice to help achieve the aim going forward? Thank you. 

Thank you, Carolyn. It's critically important because the approach that we've taken in designing this needs to be replicated out in the field, by actually working with farmers with the right advice in a collaborative space as well. So, not only Farming Connect, but also some of the environmental organisations are very keen to work with farmers, because they're already doing it as well. There are farmers who are desperate to have this engagement as well. So, that's already lined up, ready to go. In fact, we're not waiting until 1 January, we've got it happening now in the stuff that we're already doing, and we're going to take that forward as well.

You're right in terms of the co-design approach. The co-design of this scheme needs to be actually reflected by what we do on the farm level in co-designing the solutions for that farm. It's a whole-farm approach for that individual farm. What works best for biodiversity, for clean rivers, and for fattening up your livestock, delivering the product to market as well, and so on. So, yes, the advice will be there.

I'd like to register a relatable interest. Thank you. Cabinet Secretary, I speak to farmers every day in the work I do and due to my family, and a lot of them were very unsure whether they were going to enter the sustainable farming scheme. And because of that, that's why they were told there was going to be that gradual move away from the basic payment scheme with the graduated cuts of 20 per cent. Now we have that 40 per cent drop, many people I spoke to today on the phone who weren't sure about going into SFS feel like that's a cliff edge for them now, and feel like they're almost being pushed into something that they weren't quite sure whether they were going to enter anyway.

Some farmers have already planned their year ahead now, and they can't just change their businesses overnight to be ready for January. That's just simply not how farming works. So, I ask you, Cabinet Secretary, if you will look again at the phased move away from BPS. What we don't want to see is farmers making knee-jerk decisions, either they're not going to go into it, or they will. Every decision has to be made on an individual business basis. I'm sure you could understand that, and the industry understands that as well. So, will you please look again at this, because I think this is a key element that needs to be addressed?

Thank you, James. Like you, I speak to a lot of farmers on a daily basis as well. We realise that the 40 per cent will mean that there is more of a push for farmers to join the scheme early, but I would also say that there are more opportunities for those farmers in joining the scheme early as well, in some of the funding streams that we've put into it. We've always been clear that BPS was going to be phased out; SFS is the future. We don’t want to have farmers who think, ‘Well, I’ll sit back and wait for a few years’, because it was going to taper anyway, and end. So, we’re prioritising encouraging farmers to join SFS and to start benefiting from the scheme.

Just to remind everybody, we’ve committed the equivalent of this year’s BPS budget, £238 million, to the universal payments and legacy BPS to provide the financial stability for farmers. But it’s important to point out as well that, if farmers enter the scheme—. And this is why I would say, ‘Look at it. Do that ready reckoner at the Royal Welsh. Look at it through the summer to see if it works for you’, because we’re talking about January, by the way, so we can think ahead and do this. Because if it works for you, you can also draw down then the optional and collaborative layers, and the payments that come from those as well. So, I’d encourage farmers to look at this and work out what it means for you, and come into the scheme early.

Diolch, Llywydd. It's good to see this statement brought forward today. The design of the new scheme to pay Welsh farmers was an opportunity to deliver an approach that would work for the agricultural sector, but also the Welsh taxpayer. But I do have some concerns about delivery. We need our farmers to lead on a just, low-carbon transition. We need them to lead on the reversal of biodiversity loss. And the sector itself needs to be supported to be more resilient in the face of the far-too-regular extreme weather events that we are experiencing.

We do need to be planting more trees, and as others have said, it’s extremely disappointing to see the Welsh Government’s policy for new tree planting of 43,000 hectares slashed to 17,000 hectares. This watered down target will not help Wales, I believe, reach net zero by 2050, and I heard your answer to Lee Waters on this. Also, the removal of the 10 per cent requirement. I appreciate that it was controversial, but it would have done a huge amount, Cabinet Secretary, to help you reach that target. I’ve yet to meet anyone outside of the agricultural sector who does not want to see more trees planted.

So, will the SFS help Wales achieve net zero by 2050? I note that you state that you hope to see the majority of farmers participating in the scheme, and I agree that that’s very, very important. So, what percentage of farmers do you expect to join the scheme from the outset, and what percentage of farmers joining the scheme would you view as a success?

I was great up until you asked the question of 'What percentage of farmers do I see entering the scheme?', because, to come back to the starting question from Sam, a lot of this is modelling, which are scenarios not predictions, so I’m not going to get into the business of predicting, no more than I would in a football match or a rugby match, what the score will be. What I can give you assurance of is that this scheme is absolutely designed to be very accessible to all farmers and different types of things, and as I’ve said in answer to previous questions, we want farmers to join because there’ll be benefits for them, but also because they can then get on with year 1, doing their management plans for trees and hedgerows.

Within the universal layer, it actually has options within—sorry, ‘options within’, I’m mixing my terminology now. In the universal layer itself, you have to maintain, deepen, thicken and widen the hedgerows that you have, so not doing that annual cut, but doing it on a biannual basis instead, and making sure that it gets that little bit fatter and good for wildlife already. But we also have, in the optional layer, that ability to draw down generous funding—generous funding—to plant more hedgerows and to plant more trees. As I explained in response to Lee—and I know both of you are so committed to planting trees, as I am—this is a different way of going about it, and I realise that it doesn’t give the certainty of saying, ‘We demand that farmers plant x amount, or a percentage of trees on their land’, but in that just transition piece, part of the just transition is the winning of hearts and minds and of bringing people with you. And I realise that this means that the farmers’ unions, the CLA, the nature-friendly farmers and all of those will all have to now tell their members, urge their members, say to them, ‘We are committed to this 17,000—ideally to go to 21,500—we’re all committed to achieving it’, as opposed to, ‘The Minister is telling us we have to just get on and plant x number of trees’, and so on.

I think this will deliver more than the original concept of the scheme, but we will monitor this, we will test this, and if it doesn’t work, we will adjust it, Lesley—we will adjust it. But thank you for pushing me on that, because I share the same ambition. The trajectory, I appreciate, as in the revised-in-May CCC advice to us, is a different trajectory. But, to make clear, as I responded to Lee, another former Minister: it then accelerates, so we have to actually hit that trajectory by 2050, which is now more ambitious than it previously was.

Diolch, Lywydd. It was remiss of me not to register my interest, as there are animal welfare matters within the SFS, as an honorary member of the British Veterinary Association. 

I think we probably have several honorary members of the BVA in the Chamber at this point, me included, and the Minister, so we'll make a mass declaration. Thank you for that.

On behalf of the Welsh Government, I also want to repeat the apology I made recently to all those who haven't had the service or care they deserved and expected. The experiences highlighted in both reports are reflected in the recent Llais report, and those that I heard myself when I met families last month, and they must never happen again.

I've had a chance to review and reflect on the findings and conclusions of both reports. Both reports are, understandably, very distressing to read. I am assured that the independent review has been conducted independently and, viewed alongside the family review, that it sets out all of the concerns fully, in an open and transparent way.

I know that there will be many people, especially families who have accessed or are currently having care provided by maternity and neonatal services in Swansea Bay, who will find the contents of the report distressing. I would encourage anyone worried about their birthing plans to contact the health board to discuss their concerns.

Following receipt of the family-led review, the publication of the independent report and a special board meeting this morning, Swansea Bay University Health Board have committed to continuing this conversation to ensure that any women and families who missed the review, or felt unable to participate, can still contribute their experience. They will be able to do this through the health board website, and the review triage midwife will remain in her support role over the next few months. The psychological support will also remain in place for the foreseeable future.

Dirprwy Lywydd, both reports are very detailed and thorough, and highlight a significant number of issues that the health board need to address urgently to not only improve the safety of their maternity and neonatal services, but to improve quality and governance processes. I have met the chair of the oversight panel and the chair of Swansea Bay University Health Board to discuss the safety and quality of care in maternity and neonatal services.  

This morning, I published two written statements, one about my detailed response to the recommendations in the reports that relate to the Welsh Government and one about the escalation decisions I am making today in relation to Swansea Bay University Health Board and other boards to support Members’ scrutiny of these very important matters.

Dirprwy Lywydd, the report indicates that while many women reported a largely positive experience of pregnancy and birth, some women had, and continue to have, a poor experience; some described examples of severe birth trauma. As a result of the issues raised today, and the ongoing concerns from women and families about patient experience, staff attitudes and care provided, I am today increasing the escalation level of Swansea Bay’s maternity and neonatal services to level 4. I am also appointing an independent member to sit on the oversight panel, who will provide assurance to the Welsh Government and liaise with families on progress in implementation of all the health board recommendations.

The health board has today indicated it will be accepting and adopting the 10 priority recommendations in the independent review that are specifically targeted towards it, and improving maternity and neonatal services in Swansea Bay. It will also seek to work collaboratively with patients and staff to outline the immediate and subsequent actions through a comprehensive improvement plan. I welcome this approach.

There are a further 11 recommendations, which are addressed to the Welsh Government, and I am accepting all of those as well. In some areas, work is already under way; in others, work will start immediately. The recommendations relate to a wide range of issues, from changing 'Putting Things Right', to neonatal critical care capacity, paediatric and perinatal post-mortem examinations, and to paediatric radiology. The written statement I issued earlier today provides more detail about our response to each of the recommendations and the work required to respond to them.

The family-led review itself sets out a series of recommendations for the Welsh Government, Healthcare Inspectorate Wales, Health Education and Improvement Wales and Audit Wales. I will discuss these with the appropriate bodies before responding in full to the Swansea Bay maternity support group. The health board has, rightly, welcomed the family-led review and says it will take the findings into account in the health board’s improvement plan.

Our focus must now be on improving maternity and neonatal care, and I don’t believe that undertaking a further separate review in relation to Swansea Bay will help with that, given the contents of the recent reports. Members will also recall that I have already commissioned an assurance assessment of all maternity and neonatal services in Wales. This will start work this month and it will be independently chaired. It will take account of the recent reviews into maternity units and care across the UK, including in Swansea Bay.

Dirprwy Lywydd, as I mentioned, the written statement that I issued earlier today sets out my decision in relation to the escalation of Swansea Bay University Health Board. It also sets out the revised escalation levels of other NHS organisations. This includes my decision to escalate Cardiff and Vale University Health Board to level 4. Over the last 18 months, the health board has reported an increasing financial deficit and has breached its duty to agree a three-year balanced plan. It has the second largest number of people waiting more than two years for treatment, and there have been a series of worrying cultural and leadership challenges that are indicative of an organisation that needs additional support. As part of the level 4 intervention, we will work with the senior leadership team to assess capability and capacity in the organisation to deliver and implement the required improvements and support them to appoint a team with the appropriate skills and expertise. 

Dirprwy Lywydd, I also want to also recognise where progress is being made. Cwm Taf Morgannwg University Health Board has met and achieved all the requirements to be de-escalated from level 3 for finance, strategy and planning to level 1, which are routine arrangements. Aneurin Bevan University Health Board has been de-escalated from level 4 to level 3 for finance, strategy and planning. And Hywel Dda University Health Board has been de-escalated from level 4 to level 3 for cancer services, and from level 3 to level 1, which are routine arrangements, for children and young people’s mental health services.

Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board will remain at the highest level of escalation, at level 5, otherwise known as special measures, although there have been some signs of progress, including in relation to the financial position, to governance and quality improvements. And there are no changes to the escalation level at Powys Teaching Health Board or at the NHS trusts and special health authorities. Dirprwy Lywydd, I am also making some changes to the oversight and escalation framework in pursuance of a commitment I made earlier this year, and these are explained in the written statement that I published earlier this morning.

Finally, if I may, I want to put on record once again my thanks to all the NHS staff who work so hard to make improvements to people's care, often under very pressured circumstances. Thank you for everything that you are doing day in, day out, to support the delivery of care in our NHS.

Can I thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for the number of statements that you've released today and the statement that you've given in the Chamber just now? I'd also say it's very pleasing that the Government have accepted the 11 recommendations that were made to the Government, and I'm sure everybody in this Chamber would welcome that as well.

Cabinet Secretary, I do want to begin by recognising the strength and bravery of the families who contributed to both the independent and family-led reviews into maternity and neonatal care in Swansea Bay. The reports published are deeply distressing. They detail serious clinical failings, poor communication, a breakdown in trust and, more tragically, avoidable harm. They expose a culture in which far too many women were dismissed, traumatised or left grieving. And it is disappointing that it took a family-led review, driven by those 50 families, to force the level of transparency that we're now seeing. That should never, ever have to happen again. I welcome your apology and the health board's, but we must be clear that warm words are not enough, and apologies must be matched by urgent, visible and sustainable action. I know you highlighted some of that in your statement today, and it's pleasing to hear some of the work that is going on.

Your decision to escalate Swansea Bay maternity and neonatal services to level 4 is a necessary step, but it also raises serious questions about the escalation and intervention arrangements in NHS Wales and more broadly. Under the current framework, we do have the five levels of oversight, from level 1 routine arrangements to level 5 special measures, as you said. But for many families, these sort of intervention levels mean very little unless they deliver better care and greater accountability in the system.

Cabinet Secretary, I have several questions for you today. First on accountability and oversight, you announced the appointment of an independent member to the oversight panel, and I'm just interested: will the families who participated in the review have a voice in that appointment? How will you ensure that the panel operates with genuine independence from the health board to make sure that the health board are held accountable? What is the timetable for the first independent audit of maternity services under level 4 escalation? And will you commit to publishing monthly progress updates, both from the health board and on the intervention levels from the Welsh Government?

Secondly, on the support for families, we have heard the deeply traumatic stories from women who experienced physical and psychological harm. I'm just interested: will you now establish a clear, well-resourced redress process for the affected families, including access to legal and psychological support? I know that was mentioned in the statement, but we need to make sure that it is also well-resourced and continues going forward. And can you also provide firm assurances that whistleblowers within the health board, whether that be patients or NHS staff, will be fully protected from anybody who seems to want to retaliate against them actually raising concerns?

On learning, Swansea Bay is not alone. We have seen failures across different health boards—Cwm Taf, Betsi and now Cardiff and Vale. The current state of health boards does raise serious concerns. Cardiff is now at level 4, Betsi Cadwaladr remains at level 5, and Swansea Bay has only deepened. While, as you said, some health boards have made progress, variation in care and quality of leadership does persist across the piece. So how confident are you that the escalation framework is working as it should be? Do we identify problems early enough, and are we intervening effectively across the Welsh NHS before harm actually occurs?

I just want to move briefly on, finally now, to Cardiff and Vale University Health Board, which was put into level 4 intervention, which did come as a surprise to me today. On reading the health board's report for last year, which was only published a few weeks ago, it said that

‘This year, we have made significant progress in supporting the delivery of the People and Culture Plan’.

Yet we do know there's been a series of worrying cultures and leadership challenges within that organisation. It's been raised in committee and it's been raised on the floor of the Senedd a number of times. The escalation and intervention report gives more detail, saying there are

‘worrying cultural and leadership challenges, mainly relating to the operating theatres and a high level of never events have been reported this year.’

So, finally, Cabinet Secretary, can you outline exactly what those never events are? Because those never events are actually causing unnecessary harm to people, and sometimes death, and we need to make sure that that is rooted out of the system, and that Cardiff and Vale, which is one of our biggest health boards, serving one of our biggest populations, is delivering for the patients of this area. So, thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. I'd like to thank you, yet again, Cabinet Secretary, for your statement this afternoon.

The Member made a range of points and questions. He is right to say that it's important to listen to the voices of women and families who have had experiences that have, in very many ways, fallen well short of what they were entitled to expect. I had the opportunity of meeting I think about 20 families through the auspices of the Swansea bay maternity support group a few weeks ago, and they shared their experiences with me in a very candid and painful way. I found the experience profoundly distressing, but it will have been as nothing compared to the experiences they've had and the bravery that they needed to be able to share those experiences again.

I don't think it's especially helpful to talk about the health board being forced into this action. I don't believe that is a fair characterisation. My engagement with the chair and the chief executive—and I know this reflects the experience of the oversight of the independent review as well—has been that they have embraced the findings in all their painful detail, and have made a clear commitment to act on them. I will hold them to those commitments and I'm confident that they will take those seriously. This is obviously a delicate area where we are looking to make genuine progress, whilst recognising that we need to build and nurture trusting relationships, including, importantly, with those families in order for that to succeed. And I'm keen to try and strike that balance in the discussion today.

The Member makes a series of points in relation to escalation. He asks me whether I think the escalation arrangements are appropriate. Well, I'm making some amendments to those escalation arrangements in the announcement I've made today to reflect that I think they need to be refined. So, some of the categories, for example, are being merged because it's slightly artificial to distinguish between them. I'm introducing a new category in relation to population health and prevention, reflecting our priorities as a Government, which Members across the Chamber also share, to make sure that that is front and centre in how we assess the performance of health boards in the future. And I'm making some provisions in relation to a clearer set of arrangements around de-escalation, so that where there are requirements that are capable of being quantified—so not ones that are qualitative judgments that are inevitably more complex, but where, for example, a health board in escalation around cancer services has met its target for a fixed number of months—then there would be an automatic de-escalation in relation to that service. So, it's to provide clarity and transparency in relation to those.

I think it is important, as he says, to make sure—. And we don't rely on the escalation arrangements to be able to improve the service. What we want to make sure is that improvement becomes an ongoing part of the culture of the NHS at all its levels. So, you will know, from our response to the ministerial advisory group recommendations on how we can evolve the NHS executive, that in its new guise as NHS Wales Performance and Improvement, it's there to do exactly that—to work proactively on improving services with health boards and health organisations generally.

He made an important point about the role of staff and the ability of staff to feel that they can speak openly in relation to their experience in the workplace, and that where service failings are perceived they feel supported in being able to raise those questions. There has been some evidence that that has not been the case in relation to Swansea bay, as the Member will be aware, and I'm very alive to the fact that the health board is doing a lot of work in this space. When I discussed this very point with the chair of the independent review yesterday, she was saying to me it's an indicator of the general commitment to improvement and evidence of improvement to see staff feeling more able to speak openly about that, and obviously we want to see more of that. I've committed today to implementing the recommendations around earlier psychological support and developing ways of working that are less defensive, which I think is helpful for families when they face these difficult circumstances.

He asked me finally about the near events in relation to Cardiff and the Vale. I don't have the record in front of me here, but they are matters in the public domain because they will have been reported to their board meetings.

This week is Birth Trauma Awareness Week, so I'd like to start my contribution by paying tribute to the Channons, the Borlands, the Barretts, and the rest of the Swansea bay maternity family support group, who have campaigned tirelessly on this issue. What they experienced in terms of gross failings and clinical negligence in the provision of care at Singleton Hospital is something that no new parent should ever have to endure, and yet in many cases here in Wales, childbirth continues to present unacceptable risks.

The Cabinet Secretary will be aware that I recently wrote to him outlining my serious concerns as to the current state of Welsh maternity services, because across a range of metrics, Wales is lagging badly behind, and in this respect, the tragic incidents at Singleton are far from an isolated aberration. For example, Wales has had the highest stillbirth rates in the UK since 2014, and while both England and Scotland experienced a decline in neonatal mortality rates between 2010 and 2022, they increased in Wales over this period. Pressures on workforce capacity are also starkly illustrated by the 35 per cent decrease in applications for midwifery courses in Wales since 2021. I welcome that the Cabinet Secretary is now undertaking an assessment of the safety and quality of all maternity units in Wales and that he has accepted all the recommendations of the health board's internal report.

In the meantime, the case for further escalation measures at Swansea bay is also clearly warranted. But as I've already alluded to, the problems at Singleton are far from unique, particularly when it comes to workforce capacity. So, this is a clear example of where there is a need for a new NHS workforce plan to underpin the actions that the Government has agreed to undertake, and for more robust national leadership in encouraging systematic collaboration between health boards on resourcing and best practice. The fact that the family support group felt like they had no option but to undertake their own inquiry, based on understandable reservations as to the conduct of the health board, also speaks to serious issues with institutional accountability. I'm grateful for the Cabinet Secretary's appreciation of their work in his statement, and I'd like to call on him, in the interest of restoring the broken bonds of public trust, to engage as constructively and as proactively with their recommendations, as he has done with those of the health board's report. Because this report, informed by truly harrowing personal testimonies, paints a sobering picture of a system in dire need of urgent reform.

One of the most damning findings is the clear evidence of how slowly the health board reacted on four persistent maternity-related risks, namely insufficient foetal growth assessment, cardiotocography misinterpretation, delays in induction of labour, and critical midwifery staffing, which, in some cases, remained outstanding on their risk register for over a decade. We also know that Healthcare Inspectorate Wales was insufficiently responsive in following up on these outstanding actions, which meant that no reinspection of four initial investigations into maternity services at Swansea bay took place until the end of November 2023. Can you therefore provide assurances that the capacity of HIW to monitor progress on recommended actions has been strengthened in light of this acknowledged failure, and could you confirm whether the timeliness of health boards in acting on risks, as they are identified, is being considered within the scope of your upcoming national review?

Is there also a case for introducing national minimum performance standards on risk management, setting out clear expectations for health boards to resolve issues within strictly enforced timescales? Now, positive reports are one thing, but we need assurances that lessons are being learnt. Is the Cabinet Secretary aware of any other incidents since the publishing of the various reports, and is he therefore assured that those lessons are being learnt in Singleton and by Swansea bay?

I've already mentioned the issue of chronic understaffing, and I acknowledge that the Welsh Government committed, in 2023, to substantially upscale the hiring of maternity staff. Can I therefore ask for an update as to the number of health boards in Wales that currently meet the recommended safe staffing levels for midwifery, as set out by the Birthrate Plus workforce tool? The inadequacy of mental health and bereavement support was cited as a recurring issue throughout the report, with 85 per cent of mothers stating that the support in this area that they received was inadequate. So, how are you working with the Minister for mental health to ensure effective collaboration between the new mental health strategy and the new maternity and neonatal quality statement? And can you confirm whether you intend to keep funding the national bereavement care pathway for pregnancy and baby loss in Wales from September 2025 onwards? 

Cabinet Secretary, avoidable errors and institutional neglect meant that affected families at Swansea bay were cruelly denied the joy that every parent should have at childbirth. The very least they now deserve is the certainty that their campaigning will pave the way to real, lasting change. Diolch.

Yes, and I can give that assurance on behalf of the Government that we are committed to making sure that the contents of this report not only inform improvement of services in Swansea bay, but will be taken into account by all maternity units right across Wales. The point of the assessment that I announced back in May is to do two things. Firstly, to assess in each maternity unit progress against implementing recommendations that are already expectations in the system, and also to identify good practice, of which there will be much right across Wales, in order that we can share that, so that we have a system that learns not just from where it is falling behind, but also where it is improving and doing well. I think it's important for us to establish that principle as part of that assessment. He asked me to provide a little bit more information about that. It will be independently chaired, which I hope will give assurance within the Government and beyond; it will take into account the lived experience of mothers and families; it will involve visits; it will involve an analysis of data around quality and safety; and it will take into account the approach of different units to implementation of specific recommendations, in the way that his question was asking about. 

In relation to the family-led review, which was published yesterday, I made a commitment in my statement earlier to responding fully to that when I've had the opportunity of engaging with the other bodies, which are referred to in those recommendations. I will be making a full response to the family accordingly. 

He asked me about HIW, and I think it's important in this context to recognise that, in this space, there are bodies operating at arm's length from the Government, and it's not appropriate for the Government to be intervening in the work that they do. That independence, that arm's-length relationship, is there precisely to give assurance that agencies are operating independently. But I'm confident that the organisations that you referred to are sufficiently resourced to do the work that they're asked to do.

He made an important point at the end in relation to mental health support. One of the recommendations in the report from the independent review is for the Welsh Government to make provision for earlier psychological support for mothers and families who have these tragic experiences, and I have committed to implementing that recommendation. He will know of the work under way in Cardiff already in this space, and we will evaluate that programme as we then roll it out to other parts of Wales in order to meet the terms of that recommendation. The report also makes an important point about developing a less defensive response to concerns raised by mothers and families in these circumstances, and I accept that recommendation also.

He asked me about the future funding arrangements for bereavement support, and I'm aware that my colleague the Minister for Mental Health and Well-being intends to make a statement very shortly in relation to just that point. 

Thank you for your statement today, Cabinet Secretary. It is disappointing that Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board remains at the highest level of escalation, but I do understand your concerns around wanting to see an improvement with planned care and urgent and emergency care. As you're aware, I meet regularly with the chair and officers from the health board, and it is good to see progress across some areas. I note you're allowing for partial de-escalation from special measures. So, Cabinet Secretary, what assessment have you made regarding the prospects of this happening for the health board? 

Thank you to Lesley Griffiths for those questions. I think it's probably useful to give some context because of the similar principle at play in relation to Betsi Cadwaladr and Cardiff and Vale, for different reasons. So, in both those health boards, there are reasons, across the piece, for a general level of support. So, one is at level 5, and one is at level 4. But, again, in both those health boards, there are either signs of progress or very good performance. So, this is not an indication that all aspects of both health boards are under challenge. So, for example, in Betsi, as I mentioned in the statement, we've seen real progress in relation to the financial position and in delivering a balanced plan, which I think is the first time that has been possible. So, I think that is a genuine step forward. I see a clear strengthening of governance and leadership in the organisation, and improvement in terms of quality. So, all those things are showing positive progress.

The current arrangements that we have for special measures don't allow sufficient nuance to recognise that, and so one of the changes I've introduced as a consequence of the review is to be able to be more flexible, so we can recognise progress, even for organisations in special measures. So, that's not appropriate at this point in time, because I have only just brought in the changes, but we will keep matters under review in the future, as you would expect.

Similarly, in relation to Cardiff, we see very good progress in relation to cancer performance and in terms of urgent and emergency care, but the overall approach that I've taken is intended to support the organisation generally. It's not an indication that every aspect of it is under challenge or under pressure.

So, I just wanted to say, in relation to planned care, which the Member specifically asked about in her question, as she will obviously know, the highest numbers of waits are currently in Betsi. It's a large health board, but it's still taking up a disproportionate amount of that list, as it were. The health board are engaging very closely and well with us in relation to arrangements they need to make over the course of the next year, so they can play their full part in the planned care programme that we are funding across Wales, and I'm confident that we will see progress over the months ahead in relation to those longest waits in Betsi.

Can I start by commending the bravery of the women and families that contributed to both reports? I also wanted to say a word as well for the staff, who I took the time last year to visit at the maternity unit in Singleton Hospital, many of whom are utterly depressed, frankly, that the health board is in this situation, and who are really committed to turning the thing around. I think it's important, when we see damning reports like this, that they are not always a reflection, or often not a reflection, on every member of staff that works in that service, and I just think it's important that we take the time to reflect that. I am sure you will in your response, Minister.

You will have seen the e-mail that was sent last night by the Swansea bay maternity support group, which included their report in it, and, in the very last line, which I will just read to you now, it says, 'Tomorrow, the Health Minister will stand up in the Senedd and address the situation. He has only one option: remove control of the maternity service from the failed leadership of Swansea University Health Board.' Why haven't you done that?

I think Tom Giffard makes an important point in relation to staff. I was able to visit staff myself in the unit a few weeks ago and have discussions with them, and it's clear their commitment, obviously, to providing a safe, respectful service. I think one of the striking features is the level of turnover of staff, and the large numbers of new staff in that department as well, which is acknowledged in the report. And I think that shows signs of progress, obviously, which we need to build on.

The reason I have not taken that action that he referred to in his question is that I don't think that is the right way of making sure the service is strengthened. What we want to see, and what we do see, is an organisation with new leadership at a board level, and a very significantly refreshed executive team, who have taken the concerns of families and the recommendations of the independent review very seriously and are committed to continuing to do that. What we want to see is that organisation continuing on that improvement journey. Elements of it are already under way, as the report itself acknowledges, and it is much better for us to be able to strengthen services in the health board delivered by that leadership than the alternative that his question recommends. And I'm confident that the report that has been published today provides that comprehensive route-map to improving those services.

Good afternoon, Cabinet Secretary. I just wanted to say a few words about maternity care. Maternity care should be about safe and personalised care. It's very clear from the report that, in Swansea bay, it fell well short of that.

But I just really wanted to talk a little bit about midwives and the real, important role that they play, and to actually pay tribute to them, particularly in Swansea bay, and all over Wales as well. It's a hard job—hard emotionally in particular. In Powys, we have the highest number of home births, which puts a significant strain on the midwifery service there. They are an incredible team across the whole of Powys. However, it is a real pressure on them to service the need for home births, which is the only choice we have in such a rural area. However, it should be a choice that everyone should have. Every family should have the choice of having a home birth.

I just really wanted to concentrate on recruitment for the brief time I've got left, to say that the Royal College of Midwives are very clear that we need more midwives in order to meet those standards. So, could you just say a little bit about how you intend to recruit and target that workforce? Diolch yn fawr iawn.

I think it is right to say that, clearly, we need to get the right staffing levels. What I would say is that there are health boards that have a full complement of midwifery staff, and we still want to make sure, as part of the assessment right across Wales, that all the steps are being taken to implement the recommendations that we've required health boards to put in place. So, in relation to Swansea bay health board in particular, I think they've made good progress in ensuring safe staffing levels—that's acknowledged in the report—and on strong clinical leadership, which is really important, and they've recruited into several senior leadership posts to strengthen clinical leadership. They've invested around £0.75 million to recruit 23 midwives and 14 maternity care assistants to the maternity service, and that's then created greater resilience in the team, stronger rostering, and has reduced reliance on agency staff, which I think is obviously very important. I should have answered Mabon ap Gwynfor's point about this earlier. As a result of the successful recruitment, the obstetric unit is able to meet the midwifery staffing requirements of Birthrate Plus, and staffing levels are monitored daily and adjusted to reflect acuity and demand.

Thank you very much, and I agree absolutely with Jane Dodds on the need to give a shout out to midwives and the important role they play in supporting women on this challenging journey. I welcome your measured action that you are taking to listen and learn from the report, from the families, because it's a very important report and really quite an outstanding piece of work from laypeople. But it does really uncover some of the things that (a) need to be done, and some of the things that need to never happen.

Continuity of care is essential for women, particularly those who have had traumatic events in their lives previously, and they shouldn't have to repeat traumatic information. It should be available in the notes that the previous person who was attending to that woman had, rather than them constantly having to relive that. Clearly, it is a never event for staff to be altering contemporaneous notes or records in order to cover up poor practice, but they may need to alter contemporaneous notes, because in the event that a midwife—

Jenny, you need to ask a question, please.

—on their own, delivering labour—. I need to finish this point.

You need to ask the question as well, please.

In the second and third stage of labour, they may erroneously write down the wrong figure. They must be able to correct that as soon as possible afterwards. But we need to really rethink the numbers of people who are required to provide the humane service that we need, to have the outcome that we want. And I want to focus on the—

You need to ask the question, Jenny, please.

The question is on the role of maternity support workers, who can assist midwives, working to midwives as part of that multidisciplinary team, and I want to know what your plans are for increasing that workforce to ensure that we have that prudent healthcare.

Thank you for those questions. I think the points that the Member makes are germane to that delivery of a compassionate, safe, respectful service, which all women and families are entitled to. I think it is important as we understandably, today, list the challenges that the service faces to recall that, in the report itself, it acknowledges that many, many women will have reported a largely positive experience of pregnancy and birth. I think it is important that we bear that in mind as well, as we look at some of the challenges. I think the point she makes about continuity of care is important, and so I was pleased to see a reduction in the level of agency staffing at Swansea bay and elsewhere. One of the ways in which that's been achieved is by increasing the recruitment not only of midwives but also of midwifery assistants, and I think getting that ratio of support in the right place is very important for the system to be able to provide the care that women are entitled to.

I'm pleased to present the Infrastructure Consent (Fees) (Wales) Regulations 2025 and the Infrastructure Consent (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Wales) Regulations 2025 for approval. These regulations form part of a suite of regulations that will implement the process set out in the Infrastructure (Wales) Act 2024 to deliver a new consenting regime for significant infrastructure projects in Wales. I'd like to thank all of the stakeholders, communities and individuals who have contributed, supported and taken an active role in developing this important legislation. The combined effect of these regulations is to introduce a modern and simplified regime for the consenting of significant infrastructure projects in Wales, both on the land and in the territorial sea.

I'm committed to having an efficient and effective consenting regime that makes a positive contribution towards our social, economic and environmental prosperity and our net-zero ambitions. The infrastructure consenting regime will improve the competitiveness of Wales as an attractive place for investment and jobs. The regime will accelerate development and enable the consenting of renewable energy projects in a robust but efficient manner. This will play an important part in delivering our ambitious target to generate renewable energy to meet the equivalent of 100 per cent of our annual electricity consumption from renewable sources by 2035. The regulations provide certainty for all stakeholders throughout the whole process. They ensure effective engagement from the outset, first by the developer and then by ourselves. They specify the information that must be submitted with an application and set timescales for decisions and to reduce delays and ensure robust decisions are taken. By doing this, the consenting regime improves transparency and the ability of stakeholders to scrutinize significant infrastructure projects.

The suite of subordinate legislation ensures that our communities, and particularly those hosting new infrastructure, have an important role in the infrastructure consent process. The regulations introduce requirements for robust pre-application consultation, open-floor hearings, and they specify that hearings and inquiries undertaken as part of an examination will be broadcast online. This will aid meaningful community involvement and increase accessibility to the decision-making process. Importantly, the regulations provide flexibility to ensure that the system can reflect any policy and technology changes that might occur in the future. 

So, turning to the specific effect of the regulations that are the subject of the debate today, the Infrastructure Consent (Fees) (Wales) Regulations 2025 provide the framework for the charging of fees associated with determining infrastructure consent applications. Critically, the regulations ensure full cost recovery for public authorities, meaning a developer will pay for the processing and determination of the consent.

Developers have confirmed that they are willing to pay for an efficient and effective service, and this income will help resource organisations and ensure efficient delivery of the system. To achieve this, the regulations ensure that the specified public authorities can charge a fee for the provision of infrastructure consent services. These are Planning and Environment Decisions Wales for processing and examination of the application, Welsh Government for determination, as well as statutory consultees, including NRW and local planning authorities, for their input into the process.

In terms of detail, the fee regulations make provision for fees to be published online by or on behalf of the body charging the fee. To ensure that the system is fair, this information must be published no less than one month before the fee comes into force. This ensures that the system is flexible, and it will allow public authorities to amend fees to reflect costs accurately.

The Infrastructure Consent (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Wales) Regulations 2025 specify certain provisions required to implement the new infrastructure consent regime that do not fit neatly with other regulations. For example, these regulations set out the procedural requirements for the provision of pre-application services, and a list of types of projects that might be directed to be significant infrastructure projects, and the procedure for making a request for it to be directed. In terms of the types of development that can be subject to a direction requiring infrastructure consent under the Act, we have listened to feedback from the consultation and expanded the list of development proposals that might be subject to such a direction, and the regulations now include proposals such as hydrogen and flood defence works over 0.5 km.

I'd like to express my gratitude to the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee for their consideration of this suite of legislation. I've responded to their reports and I've set out the amendments that will be made to the regulations in response to these reporting points before they are formally made. I can give the Senedd my assurance that all of the amendments that will be made are minor in nature and they do not change either the meaning or the legal effect of the provisions being amended.

The new infrastructure consent process will come into force in December 2025, and guidance will be published prior to this to ensure that all stakeholders are prepared for the new regime. In addition, we will offer support and training to stakeholders to ensure a smooth transition from the existing regimes to the new consenting process. So, in conclusion, this legislation introduces a modern and simplified regime for the consenting of significant infrastructure projects in Wales, both on the land and in the territorial sea, and I ask the Senedd to approve the regulations that are the subject of this debate.

Diolch, Deputy Presiding Officer. The Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee considered these draft regulations on 7 July, along with a suite of other regulations that are subject to the negative procedure and have therefore already been made. Yesterday afternoon, we considered the Welsh Government response to our reports. In total, across the five related instruments, the committee has reported 66 technical reporting points. The committee reports on the regulations being discussed this afternoon contain 18 of those 66 technical points.

Seven of those points relate to inconsistencies between the English and Welsh texts, and four highlight potential defective drafting. To address the issues identified by the committee, the Cabinet Secretary will make 23 corrections across both instruments prior to them being signed into law, should the Senedd approve the regulations this afternoon. The Cabinet Secretary has also told the committee that 23 of the issues the committee identified in the related negative procedure instruments will also require a correction instrument to be made by the end of the year.

Last week, I spoke on behalf of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee when the Senedd was invited to approve the Senedd Cymru (Representation of the People) Order 2025. That Order also contained a significant number of errors, requiring the Cabinet Secretary for Housing and Local Government to confirm that the Government would be making more than 20 corrections to that Order before it was signed into law. I don't hold the Cabinet Secretary responsible for not checking that the Welsh and English say exactly the same thing. What I do think is that there are people in that department who ought to be putting it right, and that's something the Cabinet Secretary, I would urge, needs to take some action on, because this is not unusual.

The committee is becoming increasingly concerned by the quality of subordinate legislation being made by the Welsh Government and being laid before the Senedd for approval, and it will continue to hold the Government to account on this issue. Diolch.

Thank you very much. And just again to put on record my thanks to the committee, and particularly the Chair, for the very detailed scrutiny of the draft Infrastructure Consent (Fees) (Wales) Regulations 2025 and also the miscellaneous provisions regulations. It is our view that the regulations as laid do work effectively, however, thanks to the points raised by the committee, I am proposing to make a few minor technical amendments prior to making. 

So, on fees, the minor amendments ensure consistent use of the defined term, 'relevant pre-application services', and that references to the sections of the 2024 Act are clear. These changes will aid accessibility and they don't amount to substantive changes. In addition, I have corrected the cross-references in regulations 11(2)(a) and (b) and regulation 13(5) as, again, raised by the committee.

Finally, I have ensured that the preamble reflects the regulations and they are made following the approval of the Senedd under sections 141(3) and 141(4)(h) of the 2024 Act, and these all relate to the particular regulations in respect of fees.

And although there do appear to be quite a number of changes—18 in total, as we heard from the Chair—there is a lot of repetition within the minor corrections that will be made on making. Six changes relate to clarifying the term 'pre-application services', six relate to ensuring that it is clear that the sections correctly cite the 2024 Act, and two relate to ensuring consistency between the English and the Welsh texts. There are three updates to cross-references, and the preamble has also been updated to add detail, so you can see that the nature of those corrections are very minor, but I’m very, very grateful to the committee for drawing our attention to them.

And then, just briefly, in relation to the miscellaneous provisions regulations, the minor amendments ensure consistency across the Welsh and English texts and ensure that the definition of the 'applicant' doesn't apply to regulation 7. So, these changes, again, will provide clarity and they don't amount to substantive changes. But, again, thank you very much to the committee.

Diolch, Deputy Llywydd. I welcome the opportunity to bring forward the Welsh Elections Financial Assistance Scheme (Disabled Candidates) Regulations 2025. These regulations fulfil the duty placed on the Welsh Ministers from the Elections and Elected Bodies (Wales) Act 2024 to provide a financial assistance scheme for disabled candidates. I want to take a moment to reflect on why establishing financial support for disabled people is so important in how we shape a fairer society, not just in principle, but in practice.

We know that many disabled people face extra costs, whether it's for accessible transport, specialist equipment or personal support. These are not optional extras, they're often the key to independence, opportunity and feeling included. The social model of disability reminds us that it is not someone's condition that holds them back, it's the barriers in the world around them, including in the arrangements for candidates seeking elected office. Financial support helps to remove these barriers. It gives people more choice, more control and more confidence to participate fully in democracy. These regulations are about fairness, about recognising that everyone deserves the chance to participate fully, without being held back by the systems that weren't designed with them in mind. And it's about showing that our commitment to inclusion is real—not just words, but deeds. I ask Members to demonstrate, once again, your commitment to support disabled people to bring their skills, knowledge and experience to help shape democracy. 

I am grateful to the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee for their consideration of the regulations. I have responded to their helpful report, and have set out the amendment that will be made in response to the one reporting point before the regulations are formally made. I can give the Senedd my assurance that the amendment is minor in nature and does not change either the meaning or legal effect of the provision being amended. I ask Members to support the regulations this afternoon.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. The Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee considered the draft regulations on 7 July, and we considered the Welsh Government's response to our report yesterday afternoon. The committee’s report on the draft regulations contains just a single reporting point on a matter that we consider requires further explanation.

Regulation 12 deals with the payment of financial assistance for approved support or adjustments under the financial assistance scheme. Regulation 12(4)(a) places a duty on the scheme operator to ensure that no payments are made unless it is satisfied that the person claiming has properly incurred or will properly incur the cost of the approved support. However, it does not make reference to approved adjustments, which are also permitted under the financial assistance scheme.

The committee asked the Welsh Government to explain why approved adjustments are not included in regulation 12(4)(a). In response, the Welsh Government agrees with the committee that it would be preferable if there were consistency between this and other similar provisions, and has confirmed it will correct the anomaly prior to the making of the regulations, should they be approved this afternoon, and the Minister has further confirmed that.

Diolch, Deputy Llywydd. I'm grateful to the Chair for the points made today and in the past, and to all Members for their contributions, perseverance and shared commitment during the journey we've been on to reach today's important debate. I'm really grateful to the Chair of the committee, and for the committee's work in terms of identifying that amendment, and we have put that right here.

This legislation is a powerful statement that disabled people belong and contribute, and deserve to be seen, heard and valued in every aspect of our society. This goes to the heart of democracy. Underpinning these regulations is our shared vision that barriers must be broken, opportunities must be equal and every individual, whatever their circumstances or support needs, should have the chance to thrive. It's an important step, not only for disabled people, but for all of us, as we build a more inclusive society. I ask Members to support these regulations.  

Formally.

Diolch, Deputy Llywydd. Members will be aware of the recent conflict between Israel and Iran. In June, the UK Government arranged assisted departure to evacuate British nationals residing in Israel, the West Bank, the Gaza strip or east Jerusalem via chartered flights. I'm sure all Members would agree that we need to ensure that those fleeing the conflict arrive to a place of safety and security.

The UK Government has decided to disapply the habitual residence test to those arriving in the UK from affected areas for six months, with effect from 17 July. This exemption will allow access to welfare benefits and housing support immediately upon arrival. This temporary exemption is not yet reflected in the Allocation of Housing and Homelessness (Eligibility) (Wales) Regulations 2014. Therefore, we have laid draft regulations before the Senedd to align housing eligibility rules with welfare provisions, ensuring consistency in support for those affected. This is necessary in order to provide support to the people fleeing the violence and conflict and afford them an opportunity to seek housing or homelessness assistance in Wales without undue delay.

The amendments made by these regulations will give clarity and certainty to those evacuated from Israel, the West Bank, the Gaza Strip or East Jerusalem, and who come to Wales, as to how they access housing or get homelessness assistance when they are here. Without an amendment, individuals arriving in Wales would remain ineligible for housing or homelessness assistance despite qualifying for welfare benefits. You'll note, Deputy Llywydd, that, as in previous similar circumstances, we have acted promptly and introduced the regulations more quickly than normal due to the extreme urgency that the situation necessitates.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank the committee and Members of the Senedd for their support on this urgent issue. Whilst we do not expect many people arriving in Wales in need of support, we must be prepared for those that do. As you will be aware, people are fleeing a difficult and distressing situation, and any support we can offer to those in need should be given. I do hope, Deputy Llywydd, that everyone across the Senedd shares this sentiment and will welcome the changes to the legislation. Diolch.

Do you want to say anything else, Jayne?

No.

Diolch yn fawr, Dirprwy Lywydd. I move the motion and, in doing so, I refer Members to my declarations of interest, in particular my trade union membership.

I would like to thank the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee and the Equality and Social Justice Committee for the consideration they have given to the Welsh Government's legislative consent memoranda on the Employment Rights Bill and for the reports that they have produced. The Welsh Government has agreed with many of the committee's recommendations, and I also acknowledge the consideration the members of the Health and Social Care Committee have also given, including at the evidence session my colleague the Minister for Children and Social Care attended on 5 June.

The Employment Rights Bill has the full support of the Welsh Government. Building on our Welsh way of social partnership, this legislation is the single biggest upgrade to workers' rights in a generation. It enhances employment rights, it strengthens enforcement and it removes unnecessary restrictions on trade unions. The Bill will deliver real benefits to workers and employers in Wales.

It will boost productivity, help to make work pay and improve job security and working conditions. It goes a long way to creating a more level playing field in our economy. It's essential to tackling unscrupulous working practices and protecting the position of good, responsible employers. The Welsh Government has worked closely with the UK Government in the development of this legislation, and I am pleased the UK Government agreed to the requests to amend the Bill to provide Welsh Ministers with new powers in relation to the development of fair pay agreements in social care and the protection of workers during the outsourcing of services.

Earlier this month, the UK Government published its road map on the implementation of the Employment Rights Bill. We will continue to work closely with the UK Government in relation to this Bill and the broader plan to make work pay. Recognising the Employment Rights Bill's landmark importance and the positive impact it will have on workers, employers and communities across Wales, I recommend that the Senedd supports this Bill and gives it consent. Diolch.

Thank you Deputy Presiding Officer. First of all, can I declare my interest as being a member of several trade unions?

The Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee has laid three reports on the four legislative consent memoranda for this Bill. The committee broadly agrees with the Welsh Government’s assessment of the clauses of the Bill that require consent. However, as set out in our first report, we disagree with the need for consent for some clauses in relation to trade unions. Our first report also covers the fact that the Bill imposes a duty on the Senedd Commission to develop an equality action plan, and we recently noted the Welsh Government’s response to that report.

I will focus my comments on our second report, which is on memorandum No. 3, to which the Welsh Government responded this morning. This memorandum raises constitutional issues as it covers an agreed amendment that gives the Welsh Ministers the power to establish a social care negotiating body for Wales through regulations. The provision enabling the establishment of this body is significant. In the committee’s view, should such provisions, or broadly similar provisions, be within the legislative competence of the Senedd, we believe that as a matter of principle they should be included in a Bill introduced to the Senedd.

The Minister for Children and Social Care told the Health and Social Care Committee that including the provision in this Bill will ensure it is underpinned by employment law, which would not be possible in a Bill introduced to the Senedd. However, she also spoke of being pragmatic about what is achievable in the time remaining in this Senedd term.

It is unclear to the committee whether the Senedd would have the legislative competence to introduce a Bill focused on social care that makes provision for a social care negotiating body for Wales, either as provision similar to that proposed by this Bill, or as provision for a body with a broadly similar purpose. For this reason, the committee recommended that the Welsh Government should provide an assessment of whether the Senedd would have the legislative competence to introduce a Bill into the Senedd containing a provision to create a social care negotiating body for Wales, or a body with similar purposes.

The Welsh Government response says that it would not be possible to provide a definitive legal position on this topic without first developing relevant draft provisions and undertaking a full legislative competence analysis of them. It says that this would require very considerable resource, which would be disproportionate in the circumstances and could not be completed before the Employment Rights Bill completes its passage through Parliament. The committee also felt that it was particularly unsatisfactory that, under the Bill, regulations may be used to create a devolved statutory body. We recommended that the Minister for social partnership explain why he considers it appropriate for the Bill to make provision in this way. In response to this point, the Welsh Government states that we are entering uncharted territory and so

‘it is essential that we retain the flexibility as to the timing of the establishment of the Social Care Negotiating Body.’

Under the Bill, the Welsh Ministers will need to obtain the consent of the UK Government before using their power to create this body. We understand that the Welsh Government is not content with this position, and has not been able to persuade the UK Government that this requirement should be removed from the Bill. The committee agrees with the need for this issue to be resolved, and so we recommended in our report that the Welsh Government should explain if it was considering sharing draft amendments with Members of the House of Lords for this purpose. The Welsh Government has told the committee that it is not pursuing an amendment in the House of Lords to remove the consent requirement as it feels that it has

‘exhausted all reasonable avenues to challenge it.’

Given that this consent requirement will stand part of the Bill, I would be grateful if the Minister could confirm if the Welsh Government has been able to secure any carve-outs from the Government of Wales Act 2006 in respect of this provision.

Finally, Deputy Llywydd, in memorandum No. 3 the Minister states that the Welsh Government will consider the financial implications of establishing a social care negotiating body for Wales before seeking to use the Welsh Ministers’ powers to establish the body. The Minister for Children and Social Care told the Health and Social Care Committee that the Welsh Government expects the UK Government to provide financial support for the Bill’s implementation. She also said that the Welsh Government had not made any assessments yet of the likely costs that would fall to it. This is unsatisfactory, and so the committee recommended that the Welsh Government should explain why it has not made an initial assessment of the potential financial implications of this provision in the Bill. The Welsh Government response does not refer to an initial assessment, but says that given the speed at which the Bill has progressed, there was no opportunity to carry out a full impact assessment before needing to decide whether to seek the extension of the relevant provisions to Wales. Diolch.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. As Chair of the Health and Social Care Committee, my contribution today relates to memorandum No. 3 for the Employment Rights Bill. Memorandum No. 3 refers to amendments agreed at Report Stage in the House of Commons. A substantive amendment inserts new clause 36 into the Bill, which gives the Welsh Ministers a regulation-making power to establish a new social care negotiating body for Wales. The new negotiating body is intended to develop and agree fair pay agreements in social care, which would shape the terms and conditions of workers in the social care sector. As part of our consideration of the memorandum, we heard evidence from the Minister for Children and Social Care. Following that session, we made seven recommendations to the Welsh Government that are set out in full in our report. 

I would like to focus on part of that report, and in particular our views on the Welsh Government's approach to this policy. As a committee, we recognised the long-standing recruitment and retention difficulties within the social care workforce, and the need to improve the pay, terms and conditions of that workforce. The Bill provides a mechanism to negotiate to improve these matters, and will make any new agreements legally enforceable. It will also apply across adult and children social care in Wales.

However, as a committee, we were concerned about the use of a UK Bill for the delivery of this significant area of policy. The Welsh Government has a long-standing commitment to promote fair pay in the social care workforce, yet has not brought forward its own Bill. The effect of this choice is to severely limit the opportunities for stakeholders in Wales to be involved in the legislative process, and for the Senedd to examine the policy in detail. It will also mean that the future delivery of this significant policy will be by means of regulations. We have asked the Minister for Children and Social Care to explain why she believes it is appropriate for the social care negotiating body to be set up by regulations, rather than by a Welsh Bill.

We have serious concerns about the consent requirements in the Bill. Before using its regulation-making powers to set up a negotiating body, the Welsh Government must obtain the consent of the Secretary of State. We see no reason why the legitimate exercise of powers conferred on Welsh Ministers should be restricted in this way. We support the Welsh Government's position that consent is unnecessary, and we believe the Minister should pursue all available options to ensure this requirement is removed from the Bill.

Finally, the financial implications. Funding will be key to the successful implementation of new section 36, so we were concerned to hear so little preparatory work has been undertaken, and so little seems to be known about the funding that will come from the UK Government. We have asked the Minister to keep us updated on progress with discussions with the UK Government.

As a committee, we feel that memorandum No. 3 and the arrangements in the Bill to establish a social care negotiating body for Wales are far from satisfactory. We fully support the principle of strengthening the social care workforce in Wales, and improving the pay, terms and conditions of that workforce. A majority of the committee supported this memorandum as a way of achieving that. A minority, however, felt that the lack of financial planning and the wider constitutional issues meant they could not support this memorandum. Thank you. 

The Welsh Conservative group will be voting against this LCM. We cannot and do not support the Employment Rights Bill. Although the intentions behind this legislation appear commendable, I am concerned about the significant burden it will impose on businesses across the UK. For example, it will result in over £5 billion in additional costs for businesses, lead to job losses and reduce workers' flexibility. Additionally, mandatory discussions about unionisation will grant unions extensive access to employees, and enable them to organise more strikes due to shorter notice periods and lower turnout thresholds. The country is facing its biggest financial crisis in decades and an unprecedented tax burden. We need economic growth, not barriers. We therefore cannot support the UK Government's legislation, nor give it consent to legislate on our behalf. Diolch yn fawr.

It's no surprise that the Conservatives will be opposing this LCM today. I think there is a lot to welcome in the Employment Rights Bill: day-one rights for workers, zero-hours contracts being revised, removing restrictions on unions, ending fire and rehire. There are a lot of things to be positive about here, though I will say in some of the wording around some of these things, it's not as strong as I would have liked it to have been. But again, as I said, there's a lot to welcome and it's a massive step change from the previous Government. Of course, we would've also liked to have seen more on parental leave and an end to pay discrimination, but I did note that the UK Government will be doing further work on this in the coming years. So, we'll be interested in seeing how that work pans out.

In terms of the LCM today, we'll be abstaining on the LCM. Despite these positive steps, there are, I think, serious concerns, particularly the powers this Bill affords the UK Secretaries of State to override decisions by the Welsh Government. This is evident in clause 151, which provides the Secretary of State with the power to make consequential provisions in relation to the Bill. This includes a Henry VIII power, which enables a Secretary of State to amend, to repeal or revoke legislation that includes an Act or Measure of the Senedd. Now, similar to how things were under the previous Government, in this LCM we are seeing provisions that encroach on the ability of this Government and this place to legislate on behalf of the people in Wales.

Now, in the same way that the Welsh Government would've opposed such a power grab back in the days of a Tory Government, I would hope they would do exactly the same now in the days of a UK Labour Government. So, on that basis, we will be abstaining on today's LCM.

I want to start by declaring I'm a proud trade unionist; I'm a member of both Unison and Unite, as set out in my register of interests.

This is the first time I've sought to speak on an LCM from the back benches, and whilst I do so as a passionate defender of devolution, I personally would like to see further exploration of how we can extend what we can do in respect of a better deal at work within a Wales context. So, I would very much like to make the case today for Members to back this LCM.

Whether we like it or not, employment rights are reserved and not enforceable at a Wales-specific level. If workers in the social care sector in Wales are not in scope of a UK social care negotiation body, employers would only be expected to provide the statutory minimum with regards to pay, terms and conditions, potentially disadvantaging more than 85,000 workers in Wales. If employment rights for care workers in Wales do not improve in line with the rest of the UK, there will be a cost. Yes, a cost to those individual workers, a cost to the sector as a whole, but a cost to our country. As someone who serves a constituency close to the border, I have very real concerns that, somewhat understandably, care workers may seek to work down the road in England for better rewards, if that was the case. So, I would say the fair pay agreement is breaking new ground. There is currently no sectoral collective bargaining for care workers anywhere in the UK. In fact, Luke mentioned all the positive things about the employment rights legislation, and being somebody that's advocated for fair work and a better deal at work for most of my working life, I think the fair pay agreement is something that really stood out for me. It's something really specific and concrete that could make a difference in practical terms to people.

Just over a decade ago now, maybe slightly more than that, I produced a trade union policy paper advocating for sectoral reform as a means of both uplifting the workforce and securing the sustainability of a range of diverse sectors here in Wales. Much of this case, this approach still stands, and I would urge the Welsh Government along with, obviously, social partners, to seriously explore what further levers we do have here in this respect. Because, as you said, we've led the way in the UK with our social partnership approach, but this work is far, far from done, and it needs to be meaningfully built on with deeds, not just words. With that in mind, the Welsh Government should also have an ongoing constitutional say and stake in those fair pay agreements that cover devolved sectors, something that I've advocated for from the outset of the employment rights legislation that's currently going through the UK  Parliament.

What I would say in closing today, Dirprwy Lywydd, is to not pass this LCM does risk leaving workers in the care sector in Wales behind, many of whom are predominantly lower paid women workers. I think we need to see this as a way of progressing worker rights in a sector that radically needs reform, a sector that society depends upon, and a workforce, at different times in life, to whom we entrust our nearest and most dearest. So, I would say to everyone in this Siambr today: if you support Welsh workers in a sector that plays such a vital part for our people, our places, that provides dignity, that underpins society, then you should support this LCM today. Diolch.

Diolch yn fawr, Deputy Presiding Officer. Can I thank all Members for their contributions, particularly the Chair of the two committees that spoke in this debate? Lots of the discussion, Presiding Officer, was around the social care negotiation body, and I believe the Minister has already set out in quite some detail in writing and in oral evidence the points there, and I will ask the Minister for Children and Social Care to keep Members updated on the implementation phase.

Presiding Officer, we share the objectives of the Employment Rights Bill, and I do note some of the concerns from some Members in the contributions today, but we do believe it's very much in the best interests of the social care sector and social care workers in Wales in particular that we establish a social care negotiation body and fair pay agreements in social care, for all of the reasons that Hannah Blythyn pointed out. Unison Cymru are absolutely right when they say there is a solid and ethical rationale for supporting this motion.

Presiding Officer, in the time that I do have, I do welcome Luke Fletcher setting out his party's position. There is a lot to welcome in this Employment rights Bill and these subsequent legislative consent memorandums. It's the single biggest upgrade to workers' rights in a generation, and I appreciate Members' comments. Where I don't agree at all, but I'm not surprised, Presiding Officer, is on the position of the Conservatives. I'm pretty sure I heard them say that they cannot and do not support the Employment Rights Bill. Well, that's no surprise at all. Their party, when they were in power in Westminster, consistently tried to undermine workers' rights for 14 years. And they are the same now, aren't they? Both the Tories and Reform, at every single stage in this legislation—every single stage—voted against this Bill. They don't care about working people, Presiding Officer, and their voting record is very, very clear on that matter.

Presiding Officer, this is the single biggest upgrade to workers' rights in a generation, and I do ask Members to vote in support of the motion today, where our continued journey voting for workers' rights goes on, in that long, historic struggle that many of us in this Chamber support, but, unsurprisingly, not some. Diolch.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I have it in command from His Majesty the King and the Duke of Cornwall to acquaint the Senedd that His Majesty and the Duke, having been informed of the purport of the Disused Mine and Quarry Tips (Wales) Bill, have given their consent to this Bill.

Since the Bill was introduced, it has progressed successfully through the Senedd's legislative process, and I want to thank the Chairs and the individual members and staff of the Climate Change, Environment and Infrastructure Committee, the Finance Committee and the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee for their detailed consideration and the very high quality of their scrutiny and their reports in relation to the Bill and the supporting explanatory memorandum and regulatory impact assessment. I also want to put on record my thanks for my small but perfectly formed team of officials in policy, drafting, legislation, impact assessment, private office, advisers and others. They are the unseen and often unsung people who guide and navigate the ship safely into harbour. I'm extremely grateful to the stakeholders and the delivery partners for their contributions to the development of our policy and this legislative process.

Dirprwy Lywydd, from the outset I've been pleased to see the strong cross-party support for the aims and objectives of this Bill. I think it's fair to say that all parties have recognised the absolute need for robust legislation to protect our communities in Wales who live in the vicinity of disused tips. Really positive engagement with cross-party Members of the Senedd has enabled us to work constructively together to bring forward considered amendments to this Bill. These amendments have undoubtedly strengthened the Bill, particularly in relation to transparency, as key documents now must be published on the authority's website.

If I can turn now to why this Bill is so important and why I believe it will deliver for communities throughout Wales. It has been commonly accepted that the current legislative framework under the Mines And Quarries (Tips) Act 1969 is simply not fit for purpose today. In addition, climate change, with ever-increasing and erratic levels of rainfall, poses increasing challenges for the management of disused tips. And for thousands of people in all our communities across Wales—yes, in the south Wales Valleys, but in other parts of Wales as well—these tips are an ever-present reminder of what can go tragically wrong. As a nation, we will never and should never forget the tragedy of Aberfan. More recently, there have been landslides on disused tips at Tylerstown and Cwmtillery. So, as a Government, we are keenly conscious of the worry and the anxiety that so many families living in the shadow of disused tips feel, right across Wales.

So, in recognition of these factors, our programme for government 2021-26 includes that commitment to introduce legislation to deal with the legacy of centuries of mining and to ensure coal tip safety during this Senedd term. This Bill delivers on that commitment. And the Bill's overarching aim is to reduce the likelihood of landslides on disused coal and non-coal tips through the establishment of a new, dedicated public body. To achieve this, the Bill establishes the disused tips authority for Wales, which must exercise its functions under the Bill to ensure that disused tips do not threaten human welfare by reason of their instability. And it makes provision for the assessment, the registration and the monitoring of disused tips across Wales, and contains provisions that enable the authority to deal with tip instability and threats to tip instability. This includes powers for the authority to require an owner of land to carry out operations, and for the authority to carry out operations itself, and related provisions in respect of payments in connection with such operations. The Bill also contains supplementary provisions, including powers of entry for the authority, information sharing provisions, and powers to require information, and it creates related offences to support the enforcement of this regime.

we are keenly conscious of the worry and the anxiety that so many families living in the shadow of disused tips feel, right across Wales. So, in recognition of these factors, our programme for government 2021 to 2026 includes that commitment to introduce legislation to deal with the legacy of centuries of mining, and to ensure coal tip safety during this Senedd term. This Bill delivers on that commitment. And the Bill's overarching aim is to reduce the likelihood of landslides on disused coal and non-coal tips, through the establishment of a new, dedicated public body. To achieve this, the Bill establishes the disused tips authority for Wales, which must exercise its functions under the Bill to ensure that disused tips do not threaten human welfare by reason of their instability. And it makes provision for the assessment, the registration and the monitoring of disused tips across Wales, and contains provisions that enable the authority to deal with tip instability and threats to tip instability. This includes powers for the authority to require an owner of land to carry out operations, and for the authority to carry out operations itself, and related provisions in respect of payments in connection with such operations. The Bill also contains supplementary provisions, including powers of entry for the authority, information sharing provisions, and powers to require information, and it creates related offences to support the enforcement of this regime.

Before I call the other speakers, Cabinet Secretary, I should remind you that you've used all your time in your opening contribution, so I'll give you a minute to respond to the debate. And that's generous. Janet Finch-Saunders.

Diolch, Dirprwy Llywydd, and can I congratulate the Cabinet Secretary on his work and the driving through of this very important Bill? At the heart of this legislation is the memory of those 116 children and 28 adults who were killed when a coal waste tip came crashing down onto a school and surrounding homes on 21 October 1966, and we've seen other tip slides since. Never again do we want to see such a tragedy in our country. The current legislative framework in the Mines And Quarries (Tips)—as the Cabinet Secretary has stated—Act 1969, no longer provides the effective management framework for disused coal tips in the twenty-first century, and I really do welcome the foundation of the authority.

We raised some amendments, and it was good, Cabinet Secretary, that you worked with us on this. I think it's great, the news we've had today from the palace as well, in terms of the Royal Assent coming forward. I just think that it's a really good week for us, as Senedd Members, when we've all worked together, productively—all parties—to ensure that the safety of these tips is first and foremost.

I do have concerns about how the estimated remedial cost of coal tip safety in Wales is £600 million. We do have 20,000 other types of tips, and we do have to realise too that tip safety is 100 per cent a devolved responsibility. Let's get on now. We're getting that authority in place, and really I'm sure that everybody will be voting in support of this. And thank you, Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary.

I'd also like to thank again Lewis Owen, Niamh Salkeld, Tomos Rowley, Daniel and Anthony from the Coal Action Network, Hâf from Friends of the Earth Cymru and Bethan and David from Climate Cymru. 

According to Tacitus, the Brythonic chieftain Calgacus poignantly described the devastation wrought on his homeland by the invading Roman legions by saying, 

'They created a desolation and called it peace.'

It's been the sad fate of those communities living in the shadow of Wales's coal tips that these words so strongly resonate with their history—our history—because for years, our surroundings were ravaged by the rapaciousness of industry and capital devouring the wealth of our earth while sowing nothing in return. And for decades afterwards, these communities were told to make peace with the desolation left as successive Governments shied away from tending to the open wounds of the abandoned mines, allowing them to fester so visibly, painful reminders of exploitation. This has not just imposed a terrible environmental toll, the unexorcised spectre of the coal mining industry has weighed heavily on the collective consciousness of these communities. How can we fully move on from our loss whilst those wounds are open still?

Now, I won't pretend, Dirprwy Lywydd, that the Bill achieves everything that we wanted. I wanted to see far more ambition in regulating the use of coal in the process of remediation to prevent coal mines of yesteryear becoming these harmful new sites of mining. Now, I also believe that far more pressure needs to be brought to bear on those who contributed to the state of these tips to make them fully and permanently accountable for the cost of restoration. Nevertheless, the Bill does represent an important milestone in confronting the legacy of coal mining in our nation, and it should be acknowledged as such. It will finally start to lift a dark shroud that has loomed far too long over our Valleys, and from the desolation of those scarred landscapes to breathe new life at last. 

You've one minute. 

I just want to, again, thank all Members, including Delyth and Janet, today for the work that they've done in a very collaborative space on this Bill to improve this Bill. It was like a moment from University Challenge a moment ago, on the front desk here, where my colleague sitting next to me gave me the Latin,

'atque ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant',

'they made a desert and called it peace',

from the original. Diolch yn fawr iawn. But thank you. This is an important moment, I think, and this is the way that the Senedd should work together to bring forward good legislation, and I think that we've all done a service to our communities. Diolch yn fawr iawn.  

I'm proud to open this debate, because despite the global and economically unstable environment in which we live, the Welsh Labour Government is delivering. Now, when I became First Minister last August, and after a summer listening exercise, I was clear with my Cabinet, the civil service and the people of Wales that we listen to the people's priorities and we deliver on those priorities. I wanted to deliver real change—change that people can feel in their daily lives. Now, let's not sugar-coat it, the last few years have been quite difficult. We're still dealing with the fallout of the pandemic, we've faced a cost-of-living crisis driven by war in Europe and soaring global inflation, all while grappling with the lasting damage of over a decade of Tory cuts that left our finances stretched to breaking point. 

Now, we in Wales have done our best to protect our services and communities in the face of these challenges, but we had to pick up the pieces with one hand tied behind our back because of the fallout

because of the fallout from events like the Truss budget. And yet, we haven't just held the line, we've gone way beyond it and we've delivered. We've cut the longest NHS waits by 86 per cent since the pandemic peak, and we're seeing real progress in diagnostics and in reducing care delays. And now, with additional funding from the UK Labour government, we've got an ambitious plan to cut the overall waiting list by 200,000 and eliminate two-year waits altogether, and we're backing this with investment, with innovation and, most importantly, with real political will.

Now, we're also transforming the rail, bus and road. For years, we were denied fair rail funding by a Tory Government that just simply didn't care. Now with the Labour Government in Westminster, we're finally seeing some movement and we're making the most out of it. We've delivered more new trains than ever before and we know people are feeling the benefits of that work already, because passenger journeys have increased by 19 per cent. Planned services have increased by 12.5 per cent, and our trains cover nearly 22 per cent more ground; more reliable, more modern public transport with more people using these services more often to go further.

But we're also changing the face of our bus services in Wales, and this year we've increased annual revenue funding to over £140 million by the end of this term and that investment will have reached altogether £600 million. And in March we introduced the Bus Services (Wales) Bill to the Senedd, delivering on our commitment to create a modern legislative basis for transport in Wales, and this will allow us to deliver and to realise that vision of one timetable and one ticket service for Wales. And yes, from this autumn, we'll be introducing £1 bus fares for young people because we listened and understood that cost should not be a barrier to opportunity. And we also delivered the transformative Heads of the Valleys project, one of the most ambitious road networks anywhere in Europe, which will bring new jobs and growth to some of our most deprived communities. We've invested £25 million to directly improve our strategic road network and a further £6 million to enable our local authorities to unlock up to £120 million to fix our local roads. And the result? Around 700 kilometres of improved roads and around 200,000 potholes fixed or prevented across Wales. These are things that matter to the people of Wales, and we are delivering for them.

We're creating the jobs of the future, not with gimmicks, but with real investment in clean technology, advanced manufacturing, semiconductors and tech. And on top of that, over 42,000 jobs have been backed directly by this Welsh Labour Government. And with the Wales investment summit coming up, we're putting Wales on the global map, open for business, bursting with opportunity, and ready to attract investment like never before. We're ready to fight for every job in every community across our nation.

And we're also putting women's health front and centre, with every health board set to deliver new specialist hubs by 2026, ensuring women get the care that they deserve. None of this has been easy, but we've made it happen. We haven't just weathered the storms of recent years, we've come through them stronger, ready to build a better future for everyone,

a better future for everyone, and now, with Labour in power across the UK, we're ready to push further and move faster than ever before. We've passed landmark legislation that doesn't tick boxes, it actually changes lives.

This isn't about empty announcements or political posturing. This is bold. This is decisive action that delivers clear, real change right now. This Government isn't just standing still, we're charging ahead. So, while others shout from the sidelines, we're rolling up our sleeves, getting stuck in, and delivering on what really matters: better health, better transport, more homes, and more jobs. And with less than a year left in the Senedd term, I've got one message: we're not slowing down. We're absolutely stepping up. Diolch.

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Llywydd. Ever since she took office, the First Minister has made delivery a watchword of her premiership. Hers was to be a Government focused on delivery, not warm words, not fancy strategies, we were told, but on action, to quote her from the start of this year. But, clearly, based on the motion in front of us today, the First Minister and I have very different understandings of what 'delivery' actually means.

Surely delivery should mean translating promises into tangible results. That was certainly the approach we took on free school meals, which we wanted to see delivered through the co-operation agreement. Spell out the plan, get it done. But for the First Minister, delivery appears to mean producing a litany of missed targets, indulging in false dawns, and leaving a trail of broken promises. How else to explain citing better health as evidence of where the Government has made progress when the latest figures show it going backwards on the target of hitting 8,000 two-year waits by spring, which was, of course, already a substantial climbdown from the original target she set herself to eliminate all such waits by March 2023?

Or more jobs, when the latest statistics show a decrease of 5,300 paid Welsh employees in the month up to May, an increase in unemployment up to April, and Wales ranked amongst the worst performing of all UK nations and regions for gross pay. Or better transport, when the Welsh Government's influence within the so-called partnership of power has failed to secure a single penny of HS2 consequentials and not a single penny from the latest spending review on projects west of Cardiff. Or more homes, when the Government has achieved less than half of its target for new social homes within the current Senedd term with less than a year remaining. These are just a few examples from a very long list, which I think categorically refute the notion that progress is being made under this Labour Government.

Last week, the Cabinet Secretary for delivery, delivering a speech that could’ve been written by 10 Downing Street, accused us of wrapping ourselves in a shroud, in misery and disappointment, as if yearning for improved outcomes on health, on the economy and on education, as if wanting better than this for Wales is somehow unreasonable. Now, based on the yawning gulf between Labour’s rhetoric and the reality, which is plain to see, I would politely suggest that perhaps this Government is wrapping itself in a blanket of delusion. And you don’t need me to tell you this; the polls loudly speak for themselves when it comes to the Welsh public’s view of how things are going under Labour.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. I rise today in disbelief that the Welsh Government would deign to present before this Senedd a so-called congratulatory motion suggesting that it's making progress on its agenda and progress on delivering for the people of Wales. And that's why we have tabled two very simple amendments with some very profound, short, yet important words. We want to insert the words 'lack of' in front of the word 'progress' in two points of the motion before us today because we haven't seen any progress whatsoever. We've had 26 years so far of failing Labour-led Governments in Wales, propped up by Plaid at times and the Liberal Democrats at times too. And the past 12 months haven't shaken off that failure either—[Interruption.] Yes, happy to take the intervention.

I mentioned during the course of my comments the free school meals that I'm very proud to have been able to deliver from the opposition benches. Would the Conservatives mention one thing that they've been able to deliver from their benches in 26 years?

Some real opposition to the failing Labour Government. That's what we deliver. You say that you're in opposition, yet you've actually been joined at the hip to this failing Labour Party. I know you don't like to talk about that, but their failures on the NHS, their failures on the economy, their failures on the education system, their failures on the transport system are as much Plaid Cymru's failures as they are the Labour Party's failures. And we note on these benches, and so does the public at large, that you still fail to rule out propping up a future Labour Government, or going into partnership with a future Labour administration in the future at the next election. We'd love to hear your thoughts on that.

So let's get back to this lack of progress that we have seen here in Wales. The only thing that you've been delivering is more decline, I'm afraid, and failing to actually get to grips with the challenges here that people face. We've talked about the NHS in the past, but it's worth reminding ourselves that every single target you set for yourself, you seem to miss. Every single target on the NHS in terms of reducing those two-year waits, you've missed, in terms of improving the ambulance performance, you've missed, in terms of delivering on cancer performance, you've missed. The emergency departments are still chaotic, unfortunately, in spite of the hard work of members of staff in those hospitals, and unfortunately, patients are coming to harm. We see coroner's report after coroner's report, which say that you're not getting to grips with these problems, you're not dealing with these problems, and that's why we had the unprecedented situation where the coroner actually wrote to you, as the First Minister of Wales, saying that you need to get to grips with this issue. That's why we've said that in order to make the progress that we need on the health service, let's declare a health emergency. Let's target the resources of the Government 

the resources of the Government at finally getting to grips with this mess that you are responsible for, so that we can make sure that people get access to the care that they need and an ambulance turns when they're in a life-or-death emergency situation. 

And let's talk about the economy. The Labour Party is nothing more than a boa constrictor around the economy here in Wales, not letting it breathe and squeezing every bit of life out of it. We have a situation where Welsh workers take home the lowest pay in the United Kingdom—that's completely unacceptable—and it's all the responsibility of the Labour Party, and Plaid Cymru and the Liberal Democrats for propping them up for 26 years. That's what we've got here in Wales, and we need to make sure that the shackles that you have placed upon businesses—upon the wealth creators—are taken off so that we can release them to do what they do best, and that's create the jobs, create the good pay and create the higher pay that we can then raise the taxation on in order to put that into our public services.

So, we want to see an economy that thrives. We want to make sure that you build roads, not just the one road that you seem to be celebrating, which was over budget and long overdue, in terms of its completion—massively over budget and took you 20-odd years to deliver. We want to see roads built in all parts of our country. We want to see the investment in north Wales, in west Wales and in mid Wales. We want to see the investment in our roads because roads are the lifeblood of the economy. So, instead of slowing our country down, literally, with default 20 mph speed limits, we want to see you investing in that road network and making it work.

When it comes to rail investment, astonishingly you're still claiming that there's greater investment under your Labour UK partners down the road in London, who have given us a paltry 440-odd million pounds over a 10-year period, when it was, actually, less than half of the investment—it was double that, in terms of the funding that was coming to Wales from the previous UK Government.

So, you have the audacity to present us with this motion today. We'll be voting against it, and we encourage everybody to support the two words that we're inserting into the two points in this motion: 'lack of'. The lack of progress is dire—it's not good enough. You need to move on, because you've broken Wales. We will fix it.

Llywydd, I intend to try to adopt a high moral ground in this debate by actually talking about the motion and actually talking about some of the important issues that arise from it. Can I first of all just raise one issue? Of course, in any legislative programme, review of laws is important, and, of course, Darren Millar mentioned the issue of low pay. Well, of course, we introduced the Agriculture (Wales) Act because of the conditions we're concerned about—of agricultural workers.

Can I just say how concerned I am that, of course, the Tories opposed it at the time, but that the National Farmers Union, which opposed it at the time, is now calling for its repeal? Can I ask what consideration might be given to a review of this legislation, because I think it is important that we protect the conditions of agricultural workers in Wales? Certainly, there are things that are not right. Unite the Union have made representations, which represent many agricultural workers, and there is a need for a review, but there's certainly not a case for repeal, when the NFU think that the issue of farm workers is to reduce them solely to the issue of the national minimum wage.

Can I talk about one of the, I think, great success stories that no-one has mentioned so far, and that is our twenty-first century schools programme? You look around Wales now to look at all of the new state-of-the-art schools that we are building, and you compare that, for example, with what's happened in England. Over the past decade in Wales, we've invested £2.8 billion using the consequential formula. If that had been the policy in England, it would have amounted to an investment of £56 billion in our education system.

Can I just also say that when you look at the English system at the moment, they have a £14 billion backlog of—[Inaudible.]—of schools in England and 700,000 pupils—?

Yes.

I’m very grateful to you for taking the intervention. You talk about spending money on buildings. Why is it that Wales still has the poorest educational standards in the whole of the United Kingdom? Why is Wales constantly at the bottom of those Programme for International Student Assessment tables and in the bottom half of the PISA rankings worldwide?

Well, can I say that those statistics—? It is a nonsense to try to compare data from a country of three million with a country of 55 million. But, if you don't have decent schools, then kids will never be educated, and you look around the schools that are being developed and see the raised morale of pupils

the raised morale of pupils in some of those incredibly fantastic schools—700,000 pupils in England are now living in unsafe schools as a result of investment. And we remember of course that Boris Johnson's commitment to school building was to put forward a package of £1 billion for the whole of England. So, that is a fantastic success story.

The Heads of the Valleys investment—I see it being talked down. It is a fantastic investment, one that I remember when I was a trustee of the Bevan Foundation, where we talked about how it potentially opened up the prosperity of our Valleys areas. I remember the response from Rhodri Morgan at the time, which was constructive, but I wouldn't mind some updating now on how we are developing the economic plan to maximise the benefit and use of that.

Can I also thank the investment we are getting now in Llantrisant, that we are getting for this state-of-the-art diagnostic centre, £200 million—operating theatre, state-of-the-art diagnostic opportunities—that will serve large chunks of Wales, a transformation into the twenty-first century?

And can we talk about the metro—the metro development, certainly in south Wales, which would not be taking place were it not for this Welsh Labour Government—and the transformational impact it has actually had? Lesley Griffiths, as Minister at the time, will remember how we actually talked about getting money from Welsh Government to buy the freehold to develop the Taff precinct, in conjunction with Andrew Morgan, which has led to a £40 million development in Pontypridd, which—together with the metro, when you look at Taff's Well as well—has actually begun to transform that town. It's a town that will have, potentially, a train every five minutes—state-of-the-art, modern, twenty-first century trains. None of that would have happened otherwise. We look at the failures and the betrayals we had from the Tories, year after year: electrification, Valleys lines, and so on.

And can I then just raise one further point? And that is this:—[Interruption.] no, I've given you time, I'm just coming to a conclusion now—tribunal legislation. I would really like an update on that in terms of the legislation and the progress being made, because that is also transformative of that part of the justice system we have, but also leads to the further development of the justice system. Hopefully, there will be a draft Bill that's there. It shows—in terms of looking at a justice system that, across the UK, has been collapsed, really, over the past 14 years, disastrously on a precipice—the opportunities we have in beginning to restore the part of the justice system we control, but also creating the first ever appellate structure for Wales, ever in its history, and also the opportunities for the development of a modern justice system that is geared towards justice. I understand the delays that are taking place, but at least we're moving in that direction, and it will happen. But, it will only happen because we have a Welsh Labour Government in the Senedd here, and because we have a Labour Government in Westminster as well. Diolch yn fawr.

Politics for all of us should be about making changes and making a difference in people's lives. I want to talk briefly about three areas where I feel this Government has made changes, perhaps not going far enough, and then just look at three areas where I think changes have been made, but there are still questions.

I want to touch firstly on social care. I welcomed wholeheartedly the Health and Social Care (Wales) Bill, where we took the profit out of children's care. We led the way here in Wales, and I'm proud of that and that legislation. But, we're still in a place where nearly one in four older people wait more than 30 days for a care assessment. There are over 5,000 vacancies in the workforce, and, worryingly, one in four care workers say they intend to leave the profession within a year. Even more concerning is less than 1 per cent of unpaid carers received a carers' needs assessment in the last year, a shocking statistic given how vital unpaid carers are to the well-being of thousands across Wales. And the lack of commitment to social care means that our health service suffers. So, if we get social care right, then we can begin to fix our health service.

Secondly, on the environment, I welcome the efforts to phase out single-use plastic wipes and, as we've heard today, the investment in coal tip safety. Yet, trade bodies have made it clear that Wales is lagging behind other UK nations in realising its green energy potential. The green skills review

The green skills review planned for September is a good first step, but businesses say that they need skilled workers right now. So, in areas like renewable energy and green construction, we need to see more in order for our employers to deliver the economy we need to see here in Wales.

And finally, on childcare—childcare is another key area—I'm pleased to have secured additional funding for the Flying Start programme for two-year-olds, but we need more. We need affordable, accessible childcare. It's not a luxury, it's fundamental to economic growth, gender equality and to tackling child poverty. The First Minister has spoken of giving every family an opportunity, and I believe that starts with meaningful investment in childcare.

So, just to move on, I want to talk about three areas in the legislative programme where I will certainly be keeping the Government in the hot seat. Firstly, one of my proudest achievements has been helping to secure the Welsh Government's commitment to ban greyhound racing here in Wales. This is a landmark step forward for animal welfare and I thank those experts who are guiding the process. We expect legislation in the autumn, but significant work has to happen in order to ensure that—. In a minute, James, if I may. If legislation is to happen in the autumn, significant work has to happen before that to ensure the transition is responsible and compassionate. Thanks, James.

Thank you for giving way.  You raise here about the ban on greyhound racing. I still have severe concerns about this. It wasn't in the Government's programme for government. It wasn't a manifesto commitment from the Labour Party. And it is a shame that we are going to see people down there losing their jobs and the impact on the local economy. Do you not realise that decisions like this actually are the thin edge of the wedge? What we'll now see is some of those organisations moving on to other areas that we don't want to see being banned. But, yet again, it's the Liberal Democrats working with their chums in Plaid Cymru and Labour to ban things that people have got no interest in banning in the first place.

I believe that people in your party, James, actually support a greyhound racing ban. You can turn around and look around you, but I'm not even going to respond at all to the points you've made. They don't even legitimise a civilised response. [Interruption.] Of course I will. Thank you.

I'll just wait for the microphone now. That's a silly argument, James, I've got to say, but one of the things—[Interruption.] Well, no, hear me out. One of the things I'm concerned about with the greyhound racing proposed ban is the impact on the track that is on a floodplain in my constituency. Can you make sure that, when you're having dialogue with the Deputy First Minister, the floodplain, which is remediated by the people who are currently there, that that issue is addressed and that the people of Ystrad Mynch won't suffer as a result of that track closing? I have to say that every time it's mentioned.

Yes, of course. I believe that Caerphilly County Borough Council have been invited onto the implementation group. I believe they didn't attend the first one. So, it's essential they attend the implementation groups in order to make sure that they raise that point. I think that's one of the things that is really important.

I just want to move on, if I may. I want to return to a commitment I've long championed: tackling deliberate deception in politics. I welcomed the Welsh Government's plan to include this within the forthcoming Member accountability Bill, but we need to make sure we include the offence. And I know, along with Adam Price, we've had some really constructive discussions with the Counsel General. We need to make sure that we actually include that, and I just welcome assurances from the First Minister, if I may, to make sure that we have the opportunity to bring forward, if we can, those proposals.

Finally, I wish to raise once again the delay in the publication of the independent advisory group's report on the future energy grid for Wales. This really is critical for many areas in Wales, but particularly in mid Wales. The report was due in March. It is now July, and we are still waiting. It's not just a delay about a technical inconvenience. Without the advisory group's recommendations, we are asking communities to accept decisions without clarity, without transparency and without trust. I've already written to the Cabinet Secretary for clarity on the costs of this group, given that they haven't delivered yet, and timelines. But today, again, I ask the First Minister: when will this long-awaited report be published, and will you ensure communities are genuinely involved in shaping Wales's energy future?

Finally, to finish, Llywydd, I return to an issue that I started the afternoon with. That's child poverty. This Government has failed on child poverty.

This Government has failed on child poverty. It has failed to set targets. It has failed to persuade your colleagues in Westminster to abolish the two-child benefit cap. You have failed, really sadly, to demonstrate a true commitment to one of the most shameful elements of us living here in Wales. We need to really see a tackling of child poverty that is genuine, that is about timescales and that is not about failing our children here in Wales. Diolch yn fawr iawn. 

Well, despite the Welsh Government being restricted with 15 years of debilitating austerity, COVID four to five years ago, cuts in European funding due to Brexit, and then a massive inflation rise thanks to Liz Truss, despite that, so much has been achieved. Recently many of us attended the opening of Theatr Clwyd, which was in the programme for government and a manifesto commitment, and it's more than just a theatre. It will be an amazing community hub for young and old of all abilities, with a mother and toddler area, a youth area, a sensory garden, a toilet with a hoist, and a carer who was pleased to tell me all about it as well. It's doing outreach work and providing a lifeline and a home to the county music service. There’s a new medical school in north Wales, popular allied health and nurse training places at Wrexham, a new orthopaedic hub is being built in Llandudno, investment in community care at Denbigh and Bangor, and a new care home being opened in Flint, bringing waiting lists down.

In every community there are new energy-efficient schools and social housing, council houses being retrofitted with new roofs, doors, windows and solar, private homes being made warmer with the Nest scheme, all bringing energy bills down, making sure that people don't get left behind.

What I really care about as well, and Welsh Government really cares about, is animal welfare: banning snares and traps, banning greyhound racing, and Hefin, well somebody actually said that they need an athletics track there for young people, so why not that? Also, caring about nature as in biodiversity. The Local Places for Nature funding has created thousands of spaces—sensory gardens, allotments—bringing communities together, spaces for biodiversity and nature.

Rail travel has really improved significantly, with more carriages on the line and passenger numbers significantly increasing as well by, I think, about 25 per cent. So next we need to apply that positivity to the bus Bill, but in the meantime we have a trial of the £1 bus fare for young people to encourage them to use public transport. Operators and passenger groups as well as young people have called for this. And last week we heard that Trydan Gwyrdd Cymru will be investing in three wind farms. They will be Welsh nationally owned, with money staying in Wales being reinvested. They'll be using wooden poles instead of pylons in the area; Adam's been raising that. But they are also working in partnership with the Urdd to ensure that every child gets a summer outdoor activity break and learns about career pathways and renewable energy, so it's proper partnership working.

I get asked a bit sceptically, ‘Why all these announcements now in an election year?’ and I know the finance Minister is being cautious with a one-year budget, and showing there is funding for whoever comes next, not just chucking it all in. But I know that there has been extra money from a change of UK Government, making a difference, as well as plans that take a while to develop coming to fruition, such as with Theatr Clwyd, the football museum in Wrexham, and the slate museum as well. That return to public funding with a change of UK Government has been so important.

We are rapidly passing legislation with not long left of the Senedd. The bus Bill and the environment Bill are still going through the inquiry process at committee, they hopefully will make a really big difference. It's good to see the First Minister and Government are making rapid progress focusing on her priorities, with targets driving delivery. It feels there are new announcements every week.

Would you take an intervention?

Yes.

Thank you for taking the intervention. Would you accept Jane Dodds's point in terms of child poverty? Surely, with child poverty rates getting worse, there are no targets linked to that plan. I think it's really, really crucial that we focus. Do the people of Wales feel that things are better? No, they don't. Food banking is increasing. Is that really a measure of success in Wales in 2025?

I'd just like to respond to that. So, welfare—under the previous Tory UK Government, welfare cuts really impacted on families. The bedroom tax, yes, the two-child limit, and I know that the First Minister and Jane Hutt, our social justice Minister, have been making representations 

have been making representations regarding the two-child cap. So, the welfare cuts—. The change to universal credit was horrendous by the previous UK Government and austerity has impacted on all public services, but slowly things are changing and the Welsh Government has made sure that there are people not being left behind with what they can do—uniform grants, the summer Fit and Fed schemes, all this work goes in to make sure that people aren't left behind.

So, I'm saying it is good to see the First Minister and the Government making rapid progress. It feels there are new announcements every week. Some schemes may take the next few years to see fruition, as we have just had funding, but we need to ensure a return of a Welsh Labour Government to ensure that that happens.

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. We've heard plenty of criticism today, but very few ideas or solutions. This Government is delivering real change, and it's clear to me that very few of the opposition Members have read the programme for government report, where progress is clear. That's why we're opposing the Conservative amendments because, frankly, to talk about lack of progress is absurd. It ignores the facts and it ignores the lived experience of people across Wales who are seeing waiting times fall, social homes being built, new trains on their local lines and new jobs being created in their community. Darren Millar talks about failure. Let's talk about Tory failure. Not one single Member of Parliament in Wales. That's what I would call failure.

And we're opposing Plaid Cymru's amendment. They may claim we failed on our priorities, but again, the facts tell a different story.

Will you take an intervention? Thank you for taking the intervention. It says something that tackling child poverty isn't a priority, but do you accept that child poverty has been getting worse? We don't have targets and it is predicted to get worse still. That is a sign of a failing Labour Government, surely.