Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru

Prynhawn da. As we begin our Senedd Plenary today, and as I sit here behind the mace given to us by the Parliament of New South Wales, we think of the members of our sister parliament in New South Wales, the people of Sydney, and Australian and Jewish communities across the world. At this time of Hanukkah, as we near Christmas, adeg y Nadolig, we have been reminded once again that our work for peace and goodwill across the world's religions and communities is not yet complete. I have written to the Speakers of the Parliament of New South Wales to express our Senedd's sympathy and solidarity. 

Some children have a really tough start in life, and it's our responsibility as a Government to make sure that we step in to support those children to find them loving and caring families when their own families find they can't cope. It's in all of our interests that our children succeed, and we're proud of the fact that we have invested significant extra sums of money to drive improvements and modernise adoption practices, and Wales continues to lead in creating positive outcomes for adopted children.

As the First Minister says, adoption is a crucial way of providing stability for children who, in many cases, have been through very traumatic experiences in their early years, which means that post-adoptive support is absolutely crucial. I've been approached by families in Cardiff North who feel that there should be much greater awareness and preparations for the difficulties they will inevitably face, usually in the teenage years. I applaud the work of the National Adoption Service. What more can be done to recognise these issues and to support parents and children as they go through what are often very turbulent years?

Diolch yn fawr, Julie. Can I start by thanking you for your outstanding contribution to an issue that I know is very close to your heart? The first time I met you was when you were working in Barnardo's in Ely. This is a lifelong passion of yours and your commitment is very much noted. I know you have stepped away from your ministerial role, but your impact on adoption in Wales continues to be felt every single day. So, thank you very much for that.

I think it's probably worth noting that adoption disruptions in Wales remain very low. They are currently at around 2 per cent. Now, 2 per cent is too high, but we have put a lot of mechanisms in place to try and support people. Adolescence, as you suggest, is a time of particular challenge. It's a significant change, and identity development, which can be particularly complex for adopted young people, really shows that people really need that support at that time. Evidence shows that challenges often intensify during teenage years, making timely, tailored support essential. As you say, what we have done is to commit £13 million to the National Adoption Service and £2.3 million each year to improve services to ensure families are able to access the help and support whenever they need it. Significant work is under way to strengthen support for adopted adolescents and young adults. That's now a new strategic priority for the National Adoption Service, and we're committed to delivering meaningful, lasting support for families.

Before I ask James Evans to ask his supplementary question, I saw some lovely photos of you and your new wife on the social media of the weekend. Congratulations to you both on behalf of us all. How good it is of you to spend your honeymoon week with us here in our Plenary [Laughter.] James Evans.   

Diolch, Llywydd. What other salubrious surroundings would I want to be in for my honeymoon? Thank you. Thank you for that.

First Minister, many adoptive parents who I speak to sometimes feel that they're not supported when they've adopted a child. Now, some of the children that they have sometimes have really complex needs, some have had very traumatic adverse childhood experiences as well. You've said that you've got £2.5 million that you have provided each year for support for those parents. I'm just interested in what further work on top of that funding does the Welsh Government provide to support those parents through their adoptive journey with their new child.

Diolch yn fawr, James. Llongyfarchiadau from me as well. That's wonderful news, just before Christmas. That's lifted us all.

In terms of what we're doing specifically, one of the things we have to do is to make sure that what we have is a proactive approach that responds to emerging needs early. So, early intervention is always critical when it comes to adoption, and pre-adoption. That's the important thing—so, helping prevent family breakdown and de-escalating challenges before they become a crisis. That's the most important intervention, to get in there, give the support, because we know that the support afterwards, particularly when it comes to fostering and adoption, is much more intensive. So, get in there early, give people the support. We have, actually, really transformed the way we deal with children and people—children in particular—who are on the brink of care. It's absolutely key that we get in there early. That's part of the radical reform, and the National Adoption Service approach really plugs into that.

Labour is the party of workers' rights, so of course we have had extensive engagement with the UK Government on a cause that is central to who we are as a party and what is important to workers in Wales. Now, this Bill promises to be the biggest boost to workers' rights in a generation. It's worth noting that Reform and the Tories are working hard to block moves that will give extensive additional rights to thousands of workers in Wales.

Thank you. For too long, workers in Rhondda have been fearful: fearful of turning up for a shift only for it to have been cancelled at the last minute; fearful they will be dismissed and brought back on a lower wage and conditions through fire and rehire; fearful that getting sick means losing out on pay; and fearful to challenge unfair practice in case they're dropped from the rota. The UK Government's Employment Rights Bill, with day one sick pay, tighter rules on zero-hour contracts, fairer parental and flexible working rights, and unfair dismissal protection after six months, gives them real hope. How will the Welsh Government ensure these rights genuinely reach workers in communities like Rhondda, especially off the back of the many job creation announcements in south Wales recently?

Diolch yn fawr, Buffy. You're absolutely right—no worker in the Rhondda or elsewhere in Wales should be living in fear of a shift disappearing, or fire and rehire tactics, or of losing pay when they're ill. That's exactly why this Bill matters. What Labour is doing at a UK level finally gives workers the protections that they've been denied for so long: day one sick pay, fairer rules on zero-hours contracts, and unfair dismissal rights after six months. These are the rights that actually go to the heart of what it is to have dignity at work. But rights are only changed and are only available to us if they're enforced. So, we'll be working closely with the new Fair Work Agency to make sure these protections reach workers on the ground, including in the new jobs created through the recent investment that you cited.  So, the Welsh Labour Government will be pushing for secure hours, the real living wage, and strong trade union access, because that's the difference: we don't just talk about fair work, we build it into every part of the Welsh economy.

Nobody wants to see workers treated badly, wherever they are, but, once again, we are seeing another UK Labour Government policy being argued as good for Britain. Ministers at the other end of the M4 will argue the Employment Rights Bill is pro-growth, but it has been viewed by many as another nail in the coffin of businesses. Now, a Conservative Government will repeal every job-destroying, anti-business, anti-growth measure in the Bill by restoring common sense, sending a very clear message that Britain is open for business again. The Bill—[Interruption.] The Bill is just a political project. It generates no revenue, creates no jobs, and adds no productivity, which sounds exactly like Labour's economic policies in general. That is why the House of Lords have quite rightly rejected the legislation. First Minister, you've said in this Chamber week after week how you support driving growth and strengthening Wales's economy. I want to know how you believe this can actually deliver that. If you really believe it can't deliver economic growth, what are you doing to convince your colleagues in Westminster that they're tackling this in totally the wrong way?

I'm really proud to belong to a party that was established in order to ensure that workers in this country had rights. Those are rights that we've been fighting for for a century. Every time Labour gets into power, those rights are tightened up and given more protection. Then your party comes in and undoes it, like you did in the past with the trade union Bill. That is something that we reject, that workers in this country of Wales reject. And, let me be clear, I think employers, as we learned in our social partnership committee, are actually in a position where what they want is for people to feel secure. They want people who will be invested in their companies, who are there for the long term, who are worth training up, because they will make that commitment. That's what you won't get with the fire-and-rehire practices that so many companies in this country, under the Tories, actually took part in.

Diolch, Llywydd. Can I thank you for your statement at the start of Plenary today? We, too, on the Conservative benches, were horrified by the images coming from Bondi beach over the weekend, and we stand with the Jewish community here in Wales and around the world against such hate and racism. I very much hope that you, Llywydd, the First Minister, and everybody else in this Chamber, will be able to join me with the Jewish community this evening on the steps of the Senedd to mark what should be a happy Hanukkah that people are able to celebrate this year.

First Minister, for the past 27 years, Wales has been lumbered with a Labour-led Government. That Government, of course, has at times been supported by your fellow left-wing travellers in Plaid Cymru. Your parties together have imposed high tax, low growth and woke policies, which have resulted in Wales having the longest waiting lists, the lowest educational standards, the lowest wages, and the highest unemployment rate, which is up again today, in the whole of the United Kingdom. Just last week, we saw the same tired old coalition coming together yet again, with the predictable news that Plaid Cymru is rushing once again to rescue you and this failing Labour Government by backing your dreadful budget. Their budget discussions were not a negotiation, they were a capitulation. That's what they were. So, do you agree with me, First Minister, that Plaid Cymru's support for your budget serves to remind everybody in Wales that, next May, a vote for Plaid Cymru is a vote for the Labour party and more of the same failing policies that have done so much damage to Wales over these 20-odd years?

Look, this is supposed to be the season of goodwill, but you're behaving a little bit like a Grinch there. I think we've got to, actually, look at the positives of what has been delivered and what this budget will do to defend. An extra £1.5 billion in the past year has gone into public services, and there'll be more as a result of this budget. I'm not ashamed of the fact that we've managed to come to an agreement. You came to the table, and we were very pleased that you offered to do that. But, we have got an agreement, and I hope now what we'll be able to do is to bring those waiting lists down further. They're down 80 per cent from their peak already. We've secured 65 inward investment projects over the past year and a 30 per cent increase in jobs as a result of that. We've provided free school meals to all children in primary schools in Wales. That's what happens when you're able to get a budget through. I am really pleased that, over 26 years, despite the fact that we've never had a majority in this place, we have negotiated an agreement. This is grown-up politics. This is what it looks like. It's responsible politics, because what people are looking to us for is security. The world is feeling really unstable at the moment, and they want to know that those services that they have relied on for so many decades will still be there. Let me give you this assurance: under Labour, those services will still be there. Can you say that? Can you promise that? Because, from what I hear, you are determined to cut the public sector in Wales, and that is not a promise that you can make to the people of Wales.

First Minister, as you know, I did reach out in good faith to have discussions with you about your budget, but you know full well that a budget agreement with my party would have looked very different to the budget deal that is before this Senedd today, because we wanted to cut taxes and cut waste while still investing in our public services. We would have scrapped millions that is being spent on Welsh mini-embassies overseas in those exotic locations. We would have axed those overseas projects like the gender-neutral tree planting in Uganda, the solar-powered canoes for the Wampis tribe in the Amazon, and we would have reversed the huge increase in the spending on your bloated Welsh Government civil service. We would have used the savings that were made, and those unallocated resources that were in the pot, to make those tax savings, make those tax cuts, and invest in our public services. So, tell us, First Minister, given that there is an alternative to the ridiculous budget that is before us today, which is going to deliver more of the same, why does every Labour-Plaid budget deal have to result in high taxes and more waste?

Let's just be clear that the additional £112 million that'll go into local government will be providing services. It’ll be providing services in our schools, it’ll be providing the kind of care support that your constituents are crying out for, it'll make sure that councils are able to clean the streets—all of those things. It'll help us to fill potholes. All of these things are things that really matter to the people in Wales. And that's before we start on health—a 3.6 per cent increase. We've got an ageing population, a poorer population. Are you suggesting we shouldn’t have put money into health? Is that actually what you’re suggesting? Or were we meant to actually follow what you were suggesting, which was to give breaks to the richer members of our society? That is not the kind of Government that I'm prepared to lead.

First Minister, it’s laughable. You had the audacity today to make the ridiculous claim that you are part of a so-called new generation of Labour politicians in Wales, and yet you've been on the front lines of the Labour Party in Wales for three decades. For almost 27 years of those three decades, you've been backing and part of this left-wing failing socialist alliance that has been running Wales and holding our country back. The truth is this: Labour and Plaid, effectively, make up a single left-wing party here in Wales. You may well wear different coloured rosettes, but in practice you behave like a pantomime horse walking in the same direction—left, left, left. You’re always walking left, and you leave behind an absolute uncontrollable mess of higher taxes, more waste and broken public services. So, isn’t it true, First Minister, that with the new year there is a new opportunity for the people of Wales? Because, in May, people will face a choice: they can either have more of the same by voting for Labour or Plaid Cymru, or they can have positive change with a credible team and a credible Welsh Conservative plan to fix Wales.

We're going to have a new-look Senedd and a new generation of Senedd Members. Fourteen out of 29 Labour Members will not be standing again. They have made a huge contribution, many of them, some of them since the very start of devolution. But we will be turning a new page, starting a new chapter, and that is something that I think we should look to the future and celebrate, because we have had three phases of devolution. The first one was to establish this place. Just remember how this place was established with a whisker, a fraction, of a majority of the people of Wales agreeing for it to be set up. We established that. Labour is the party of devolution. Let’s never forget that. Then we had to establish that. Rhodri Morgan did an incredible job making sure that the people of Wales bought into the devolution project. Then came years of Tory austerity. And the job then—the job then—under Carwyn Jones and under Mark Drakeford, was to defend, to defend the devolution settlement to make sure that, whilst they were cutting and cutting and cutting local services in England, they were defended here in Wales.

But now we're turning a new page, a new chapter, where austerity has ended and we can look to the future. I'm determined as the leader of the party in Wales to make sure that we look to a future where we can work towards eliminating poverty in our country, because that is why so many of us came into this movement. We want to do that through making sure that we equip people with quality jobs. We're already equipping them: 100,000 apprenticeships delivered this Senedd term. Not quite there, but I'm very confident that we will be getting there very soon. So, we've now got the skills available, but now we need the investment so that they can get the jobs and stay in Wales. That's how we address the issue of poverty in Wales. I'm very proud of what our party has done for this nation over 26 years, and I will make every effort to make sure that they continue to support us.

Diolch, Llywydd. Last week, I gave the First Minister several opportunities to join her own backbenchers in directly criticising the UK Labour Government for its actions in overriding devolution. She refused to do so, but, because it's the season of goodwill, I feel generous, so I'm going to give her another opportunity today. The UK Government has decided that it will have direct control of how Pride in Place funding is spent in Welsh communities, yet, in Northern Ireland, responsibility for spending the money has, quite rightly, been devolved to the Northern Ireland Executive to invest as it sees fit. Now, does the First Minister agree with me that Keir Starmer has a two-tier approach to devolution, and that from rail to policing to the Crown Estate, and now this, whilst Northern Ireland and Scotland are empowered, he seems as determined as the Tories were to stop Wales deciding on its own future?

Look, I notice he still hasn't welcomed the investment into Wylfa and an AI growth zone in his constituency as well.

Look, I've always made it clear, as have people in my Senedd group, that actually we will always defend the devolution settlement and we will always make the case for devolution. I think it's important to underline the fact that, actually, what we have had is £557 million—that's over £0.5 billion—returned to the Welsh Government to be able to determine where that money is spent. That makes the Northern Ireland settlement pale into insignificance, compared to that £0.5 billion that we've agreed on. That is not something that's been offered to Northern Ireland. It is not something that's been offered to Scotland. But will we continue to make the case? Of course we will, because we are the party of devolution.

The question hasn't been answered—or has it? The First Minister really has to pick a side here. If she is on the side of the people of Wales, she has to call this out, and, if she has any control over her party in Wales, she has to pull the Secretary of State for Wales into line for sitting around that Cabinet table in Downing Street, allowing Welsh Government to be bypassed with such contempt time and time again.

Now, I note that the Cabinet Secretary for finance agrees with the Plaid Cymru benches that the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020 is not fit for purpose. Yet, as I said last week, Labour MPs from Wales refused to back Plaid Cymru amendments in the House of Commons that would have stopped this raid on devolved powers. Now, the finance Secretary implied on Sunday that the UK Government was bypassing Wales because it was a quicker way of getting things done. It may well be that Keir Starmer doesn't trust this Labour Welsh Government to get things done, and, goodness me, we need a change of Government in May next year, but isn't the fundamental concern here that this Labour Prime Minister is ready to undermine devolution at every turn, and that this Labour First Minister represents a generation that's unwilling to even try to stop him?

I don't know how many times I've got to tell you that I will defend the devolution settlement. I can say it and I can say it and I can say it again, and I do it every time I meet with the Prime Minister. Let's be absolutely clear about that. So, you can try and create and make out that I'm not in that position. The fact is I am. I've said it time and time again. But the fact is that you are absolutely determined to make sure that all we talk about is the constitution. And let me make it clear that I think the people in Wales—[Interruption.] I think the people in Wales actually are far more interested in making sure that the children in their schools have free school meals. That is something that we've delivered under the Welsh Labour Government. The fact is we've directly supported 12,000 jobs since September 2024. We've delivered a new women’s health plan. We've actually secured and delivered 150,000 potholes—we've fixed them. That's what the people of this county are interested in and, frankly, if they vote for you in the elections, what we can be absolutely sure of is that all we'll get is a constant criticism and whining and, 'Oh, why can't we have some more?' You will not be focused on the day-to-day things that matter to the people of Wales. Of course, I'll stand up for the constitution of this place, of course I will fight for devolution, but I think that the people in Wales are, frankly, more interested in the bread-and-butter issues that affect their daily lives.

What, those bread-and-butter issues that I was referring to? Now, as 2025 draws to a close, we reflect on a year of robust exchanges between us. But, in my final question of the year, I'd like to focus on the need for all of us to show real unity. The horrific terror attacks on Bondi beach over the weekend shocked and saddened us all. We send our deepest condolences to the people of New South Wales, and we stand in solidarity with the Jewish community, wherever they are. This evening, members of the Cardiff Jewish community will gather in the Senedd to light the menorah. Tomorrow, there will be a Christmas concert here. Groups of all faiths and none are welcomed here because plurality enriches our society, and the appreciation of others, the promotion of understanding and tolerance, are powerful tools against the rot of extremism. So, will the First Minister join me in restating this Senedd's unstinting commitment to tackling the scourge of antisemitism, Islamophobia and racism in all its forms? And will she join me also in pledging that all of us must work together for a society more unified, more tolerant and more peaceful for all its citizens?

Diolch yn fawr, Rhun, and my heart goes out to the victims and their families and the Jewish community, obviously not just in Australia, but the real fear that many of those communities are feeling here in Wales. There is absolutely no place for antisemitism within our communities. I think this was a calculated assault on our shared values and our freedoms, and I think it is worth reflecting on what a difficult year it's been when it comes to the kinds of splits we're seeing within our communities. We've seen global instability, with wars in Ukraine and the middle east. We've seen Russian threats to our security. We've seen lots of people in our communities facing real trouble with paying their bills and a cost-of-living crisis, partly brought on as a result of that invasion of Ukraine. And I do agree with you—I think, as we enter the new year, as we have this season of goodwill, I hope we can all come together. We can heal the divisions within our communities. I think we should tone down the rhetoric of hate, and we need to offer hope, in particular to those who are struggling across Wales. So, can I take this opportunity to wish you all—

We know how frustrating it is for drivers when there are unplanned and emergency closures, and we're aware that this has been an issue on the A55, as it is on other roads across the whole of the United Kingdom. Improving road safety remains a priority for the Welsh Government. Officials work with the police and our partners to identify if there is a need for road safety engineering measures to reduce the number and severity of collisions.

You know I've raised the need for improvements to the A55 before, recognising the importance of this route as the gateway into and out of north Wales. I want to focus in particular today on junction 32 in my constituency. Last week, along with Councillor Simon Jones, I met with members of Halkyn Community Council on the back of a series of serious incidents and accidents over the summer months and into the autumn. First and foremost, our thoughts go out to those who were injured and have been impacted by them, but it has a knock-on impact on the local community, but also the economy too, whether that's haulage vehicles stuck in traffic. And I think junction 32 in particular has challenges around its layout, poor visibility, and if your sat nav is sending you down that route and you're not familiar with it, then that exacerbates that issue. So, First Minister, can I just ask today if you're able to confirm the Welsh Government's commitment to look at this issue and to take the steps that are needed to address ongoing safety issues, and potentially make improvements, as part of the ongoing work of the resilience study into the A55, to make that route fit for the future? Diolch.

Thanks very much. Officials are aware of these issues at this location, and this junction in particular, and that will be a part of the A55, A494 and A483 transport needs and resilience study, and that was commissioned last week. So, the interim report will be due in the spring, and the final report will be due in the autumn, and the Government will then consider upgrades and renewals on the key arterial roads. I think it's probably worth saying that this is going to be an evidence-led and multimodal report, understanding transport challenges and opportunities along that corridor, together with recommending potential interventions to address them.

Cross-border travel for traffic passing through Delyn relies on the route between Flintshire and Cheshire, where the A55 converges with the A494 just after Ewloe, which is notorious for delays, queues and accidents. Only yesterday morning, a three-vehicle crash near Queensferry, Deeside, caused chaos on the A494 and the A55. Traffic was reported backed up to junction 33 on the A55, and Pinfold Lane on the A494. I personally witnessed the tail end of this. The resulting congestion also affected routes as far as Halkyn, Delyn, on the A55. This has been going on for decades, with successive failed scheme proposals. How, therefore, do you now propose to finally address this, ensuring that, this time, local communities are genuinely involved early in co-producing solutions, rather than merely being consulted after designs have been produced?

The road safety partnership group and the road safety partnership board have been established, and the road safety partnership plan has been approved by the road safety partnership board, and preparations are being made to publish that in early 2026. I think it's probably worth noting also that to minimise delays when we have accidents and breakdowns, we operate a Welsh Government traffic officer service, particularly on the A55, for 365 days of the year, so we can quickly remove vehicles and obstructions from the roadside to improve traffic flows.

But one of the issues that comes up consistently from road users is the fact that they are determined to see those potholes filled, and I'm very pleased to say that in Flintshire there has been a £2.5 million spend on resurfacing the 4.6 miles of road in Flintshire, and that's going to fix and prevent 2,200 potholes. Those, again, will make a contribution to road safety.

Obviously, it's not just offices, but it's the buy-in of society as a whole that needs to promote the language and, in particular, the million target that the previous First Minister, Carwyn Jones, set in his tenure. Through the education system, there has been progress here in Cardiff and, indeed, across the whole of Wales, but there is a blockage on the number of new teachers coming forward and that ability to have the teachers in front of classes using the medium of Welsh. Also, the Estyn report points out the quality of teaching when new teachers come into school through the medium of Welsh leaves a lot to be desired, with schools having to train teachers up to get them to the required standard. What action is the Welsh Government taking, along with Estyn and other interested parties, in driving up standards of Welsh language teaching so that that million target set for 2050 can be achieved through the education system?

We have been very ambitious in terms of where we'd like to see the number of pupils increase, in terms of those who are accepting their education through the medium of Welsh, but as you've rightly identified, we need to make sure we've got enough teachers. I'm really pleased that we do have incentives to get more students to take up the opportunities to become teachers, and there are financial incentives to help them to do that.

The other thing that I think is changing is that there are significant numbers of young people now, around 29,000 of them, who are actually teaching assistants. That also provides a route in for people to have a taste and, hopefully, then to take on the opportunities to become a full-time teacher.

As a vicar's daughter and a priest's wife, I have seen first-hand the strength, compassion and resilience of our faith communities and what they bring to Wales. They support the vulnerable, they strengthen cohesion and they hold communities together. After the horrific attack in Bondi in Australia at the weekend, where faith-motivated targeting has caused such deep distress, we are reminded, I think, of how essential it is to be respectful, to ensure that we see tolerance and understanding for everyone.

The Welsh Labour Government works very closely with faith groups through our Faith in Communities forum, and we welcomed the recent 'Faith in Wales 2025' report, highlighting their huge social and economic contribution.

Thank you for your response, First Minister, especially as a minister's son myself. I also recognise the good work by the Welsh Government and recognise the important role of faith communities in Wales, as you say, not just supporting people's spiritual lives but also in fostering that important social cohesion, volunteering and community projects.

Across Wales, as you rightly know, people who gather in churches, mosques, synagogues and temples are doing incredible work to support those most in need, from foodbanks and youth work to care for the elderly and vulnerable, especially at this time of year.

You highlighted in your response, First Minister, the Evangelical Alliance launch of their report, 'Faith in Wales', and I am grateful for your engagement with that. That report highlights the enormous contribution of these faith communities in terms of social outreach, economic support and civic engagement. As we approach the festive season ahead of us, let me first of all wish you a merry Christmas, but also highlight the role of Christian celebrations, especially at Christmas, not just as a religious event, but in bringing families and communities together, and inspiring countless acts of generosity and kindness. So, I'm interested, First Minister, to understand how the Welsh Government will recognise and celebrate the importance of Christmas this year, and recognise again its contribution to strong, connected communities across Wales.

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Sam. I think this is an important time for us to reflect, to reflect on how it is important for us to come together to look out for our neighbours, to recognise that, whilst many of us have big families, other people may be lonely. What an opportunity for us to reach out to those people, and I know that faith communities do that, not just on Christmas Day, but all year round. I thought that the 'Faith in Wales' report was particularly informative. The extensive social action that it points to: 97 per cent of faith communities are involved in initiatives such as foodbanks, homelessness support, youth groups and family services. They've always been a forum where, actually, communities can come together, and the faith buildings allow them to do that.

I think it is important for us to recognise that Christmas is a time for coming together. There are opportunities, not just for the Christian faith, but, obviously, there are other faiths who also want to participate, to recognise that it is a time for everybody to recognise that what's important is to look to the future with hope, and that's what Christmas does for us.

In Wales, we help people with complex disabilities and their families to live well and independently. Support includes assistance with daily tasks, home life, well-being and safety. Local authorities tailor care to assessed needs, while regional partnership boards ensure that health, social care and third sector services collaborate to plan and deliver joined-up and truly person-centred support in the community, as set out in our social services and well-being legislation.

Thank you. Around 82,000 people are employed in the social care workforce in Wales. Fifty per cent of this workforce are care worker roles, 21.8 per cent of workers have NVQ level 3, and 1.9 per cent have NVQ level 5. For many carers, they enter this profession because they believe they can offer the support needed, they have the empathy and they wish to genuinely help look after people. This is a noble quality, and one that we should all champion.

However, in Wales, we're now at risk of skilled carers who provide an outstanding level of care considering leaving this profession due to the new requirement to obtain a level 2 or 3 qualification in health and social care, diploma, QCF or NVQ, or the City and Guilds level 2 or 3 health and social care practice qualification, to be completed within three years. This requirement is now causing skilled and passionate carers to consider leaving the profession due to financial and time constraints.

This was raised with me by a constituent who, for 10 years, has been receiving three carers supporting their very disabled child—well, they're 28 now, but three of his carers out of the four are now considering leaving. If that happens, it then puts the young man in a complex situation. But, also, other people now are telling me. Surely, it's important to do our best, First Minister, to try and ensure that those who want to work in this profession can perhaps have an easier training route than what is currently on offer. Diolch. Nadolig llawen a blwyddyn newydd dda.

Diolch yn fawr. Of course, Wales is one of the only parts of the United Kingdom where we pay the real living wage to our care workers. That's something we're particularly proud of and was one of the promises we made in the last election. A promise delivered.

We were, of course, denuded from a lot of care workers after Brexit. A lot of them went home, a lot of them came from eastern Europe, and I think that put extra pressure on the people who were left.

When it comes to qualifications, I do think we have to get the balance right. You're quite right, there are some people who are more comfortable in an academic environment, but, actually, some of these people have years of good-quality, hands-on experience, and that can and should be assessed in a very different way. That flexibility is something that I know our officials and our Ministers are very aware of. I don't think we should apologise for trying to professionalise the service, to give them the status that we're very keen for them to have, but that balance has got to be in the right place.

As you're hopefully aware, First Minister, many disabled people, including those with complex disabilities, rely on support workers for help with daily living. They provide both physical and emotional support, enabling disabled people to live fulfilling lives, often through services funded by local authorities or charities like Mencap Cymru. Many support workers in Wales are on sponsored work visas, and those needing to renew their visas will need to prove to the UK Government that their salaries will make them eligible. You referred, in your answer to Janet Finch-Saunders, to the importance of paying care workers the real living wage. Are you aware, First Minister, that many support workers in Wales on sponsored work visas will be awaiting confirmation that the Welsh Government's draft budget will commit to paying support workers the real living wage, which, next year, will be £13.45, to help ensure that they meet the UK Government's eligibility criteria for sponsorship? When will the Welsh Government make a formal commitment to funding the real living wage for these crucial social care staff?

We made that commitment in the last manifesto, and clearly it was delivered. It was delivered much sooner than we'd planned to, because we realised how important it was to make sure that we supported those people in particular after the pandemic. These people were heroes and are heroes and they're doing the very difficult unsung hero work within our communities.

I think it is also worth pointing out that, yesterday, the disabled people's rights plan was launched. I'd like to thank Jane Hutt for all her incredible work on that, not just in the past few weeks, but actually over many, many years. There's a huge number of short-term actions and long-term outcomes. What we want to see is positive and lasting change for disabled people, putting the social model of disability at the heart of our ambitions for them and for Wales. There is additional support for complex issues for people in Wales.

Good afternoon, First Minister. As we approach Christmas, for many of us, we will take Christmas Day off, maybe Boxing Day, maybe longer, but if you're a carer, either paid or unpaid, you don't get any time off. It's critical that we recognise particularly the need for support for our unpaid carers, who relentlessly, day in, day out, care for relatives and friends. If you've been a carer or you are a carer, or if you know of a carer, it is immense pressure, both physically and emotionally. We have a crisis, not just here in Wales, but across the UK, in social care. Our local authorities reckon they need around £200 million here in Wales to meet their social care requirements. As we approach Christmas, we have people stuck in hospital who can't get home and families desperate for those people to come home. Also, we mustn't forget the real contribution that our carers make to the whole of the community here in Wales. Will you join with me in paying tribute to those carers, unpaid and paid? Let's improve their lives in 2026. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Diolch iti, Jane. You're quite right. I think we have to acknowledge the immense debt that we have as a society, in particular to those unpaid carers. They save our communities vast amounts of money, but what they're doing is supporting and giving the kind of help that their loved ones need. They want to do it, but we've got to acknowledge that if they weren't doing it, that would be a huge additional cost on us as a society, which is why it's absolutely right for us to stand with them and why, for example, we put a significant amount of money into providing respite care so that they can get a break now and again. I'd like again to thank Julie Morgan and Dawn for the work that they've been doing in particular on unpaid carers and the support that they give, because there are armies of these peoples who are there day in, day out, 24 hours, for the people that they love. It's a huge ask of them, and it's a huge ask by us as a society, so the least we can do is to make sure we give them that appreciation through stepping in and giving them an opportunity to step out now and again, to be able to refresh and to have some time for themselves.

Lots of us love going to pubs. They truly are at the heart of many communities, particularly at this time of year. But we're also aware that lots of them are struggling financially. That's why we're proud to provide a wide range of support to the sector. Almost half of all business rate payers, including many pubs across Wales, benefit from full business rates relief. Sector representatives estimate that two thirds of hospitality properties in Wales attract full small business rates relief, so they pay no local rates.

First Minister, pubs are part of Wales's lifeblood. They are the employers, they are the community anchors and often the last remaining social spaces in our towns and rural villages. But the financial pressures that they now face are overwhelming and will signal the end of the road for many businesses across Wales. UKHospitality warns that excluding hospitality from your business rate reform will load an extra £131 million in extra costs on the sector in the next three years. For pubs, that means rates rising by 23 per cent next year, 51 per cent the year after and 80 per cent from 2028-29.

This, on top of soaring energy costs and rising wage bills, will drive business failures and job losses and hollow out our high streets across Wales. It's not theoretical, this is happening now, and it will add to the appalling employment figures that are out today. First Minister, will you at the very least commit today to maintaining the current business rates relief scheme to avoid the disastrous consequences that not doing so will have on our pubs, which are already being battered by Governments at both ends of the M4?

We know lots of people are struggling with cost-of-living issues, and so they’re not going out as much as they used to, and that puts an additional pressure on pubs. The fact is that many people are content now to sit at home and watch Netflix rather than go down their local. If you want the pubs to stay open, we’ve got to use them. It’s an easy lesson for us. We all talk about the importance of our high-street shops and things, and then people spend money online. There is a consequence to our action, so we all have a responsibility. If you want to keep these places open, we have to frequent them.

But let me just be clear: we are incredibly generous when it comes to support for local businesses. Non-domestic rates support in Wales is worth £335 million a year. We shouldn’t rubbish that. That is a lot of money. It’s the equivalent of about 6,000 nurses. That is a huge amount of money that we are already putting in, and that is why so few of them actually pay the full rate of tax. I just think it’s really important for us to recognise that, but also to recognise that we have allocated £1 billion of extra relief to the businesses most impacted by the pandemic. It was never meant to continue indefinitely. There is a massive amount of support already in place. But if you really want to turn the fortunes around of your local, you need to go there.

Trefnydd, I’d like to request a statement from the Welsh Government on support for small businesses. There have been huge concerns raised by businesses in Pembrokeshire recently, and I’m sure right across Wales, regarding the increase in the rateable value of some of these businesses. The latest business rates revaluation has meant that some businesses are now facing rises of several hundred per cent compared with previous assessments. These are the same businesses that have already been hit with some of the highest business rates in the UK. Whilst I appreciate that a transitional relief scheme will help some businesses manage these changes, the reality is that for many businesses it’s not enough, and some businesses will be forced into a position where they will have to close. Therefore, I’d be grateful if we could have an urgent statement from the Cabinet Secretary for Economy, Energy and Planning about the measures being taken to support small businesses across Wales, so that they can continue to create jobs, support communities and boost our local communities.

Diolch yn fawr, Paul Davies. You are right: support for business is crucial, and it’s a key priority of this Welsh Government. You have just heard from the First Minister about the level of non-domestic rates. It is important there is a transitional relief scheme. I’m sure many of us were out—I think this was raised only last week—on Small Business Saturday, of course, recognising that it is also about our habits, our custom: shop local, which I certainly do in my town of Barry. But it is very clear that we are already boosting our businesses, and indeed it’s not just the Welsh Government playing a part in that, but also local government as well.

And it is important. You've raised it in the Senedd today, you've raised it with the Minister for Mental Health and Well-being, Sarah Murphy, and also you've raised it, obviously, with Betsi Cadwaladr health board. And I hope now that this will result in the responses that you need. This is an issue, of course, in terms of appropriate support and recognising the fact that the support should be also available as close to home as possible, but in terms of the Welsh language as well. So, you have raised it, and I'm sure now responses will be received.

Could we have a statement from the Trefnydd in her role as Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice about the tree planting scheme in Uganda, which was referred to by the leader of the opposition earlier? I understand that this has had very positive impacts, not only in terms of climate change, but also has empowered and given opportunities for women. So, could we have a statement from her about this very important bit of policy?

In addition, could we have an oral statement from the Minister for Social Services and Children about the report published today, which is the evaluation, after three years, of the effects of the abolition of the defence of reasonable punishment? The concluding summary of this report begins by saying: 

'Wales has made a clear, rights-based shift away from physical punishment, supported by high public awareness, widely available parenting support, and growing professional confidence.'

We also know that Northern Ireland and the Westminster Government are waiting for this report in order to make a decision about where they go. And I must also add, just at the end, it's very great to have Lindsay Whittle here in the Chamber with us, who fought so hard with me to get this Bill through originally.

Diolch yn fawr, Julie Morgan. And thank you for raising the importance, so that I can talk more about the beneficial impact of the Mbale tree planting project, which we are very proud of—very proud of—in this Welsh Government, and I believe that that pride is shared by many in this Senedd. We've been supporting tree planting in Uganda over the last 15 years, but this came out of a community-to-community link between Wales, between Welsh communities and communities in Uganda, and it's delivered through a partnership between the Welsh Government, the Size of Wales charity, the Mount Elgon Tree Growing Enterprise. And it's created a network of community-run tree nurseries and distributed 25 million trees to rural farmers and schools, free of charge. Of course, what is important is that these trees have sequestered an estimated 1.4 million tonnes of carbon dioxide since the project began.

By supporting this Ugandan-led project, Wales is helping some of the very poorest people in the world. And isn't it important we have this message today, this week? We are helping some of the poorest people in the world adapt to climate change, improve their livelihoods, and protecting local people in the Mount Elgon region from the effects of soil erosion, which can cause, and has caused, deadly landslides. The trees help regulate the climate, provide local communities with shelter, shade for crops, fresh fruit, nuts and animal fodder.

But also, just very briefly, Llywydd, I do want to say that Size of Wales works with young people in Wales. Thousands of young people in our schools in Wales, in primary and secondary schools, learn about climate change and become responsible global citizens. The Size of Wales offers bilingual sessions, free of charge, to schools with a higher than average free-school-meal rate. This work is highly valued by pupils and teachers. So, I do regret the attacks on this important programme. I'm glad I've had the opportunity to say again that these are carbon, environmental and social gains, and it's creating lasting and valuable connections between Wales and Africa with our pupils.

Can we thank Julie Morgan for her leadership in terms of the removal of the defence of reasonable punishment? Thank you for raising it today. I hope we will have an oral statement on this. Just remember this: the law we introduced gives every child in Wales equal protection from assault—a fundamental right that should never depend on age. So, we've had this interim review, it shows the law is embedding well, largely as intended, and is also supporting children's rights, promoting that preventative approach, which avoids prosecuting parents. I thank all of those who played their part in this legislation. So, thank you for also acknowledging, way back, Lindsay, and others who played their part. Because this is something that we must be very proud of. And I think Northern Ireland wants to follow Wales because of what—. You led the way, Julie, in Westminster, way before you came to the Senedd.

Can I ask for some further information from you in your capacity as the Minister for social justice, if I may, in relation to the situation with regard to antisemitism? We all, of course, lament the terrible things that happened in Australia, on Bondi beach, over the weekend. I note, Minister, that you have issued a statement in relation to that, and I very much welcome it. But what you haven't referred to in the statement is any further action that you are going to take as a Welsh Government to address the problem of antisemitism, which, I'm afraid, is still persisting in parts of Wales, particularly in our universities.

Cardiff University still has not adopted the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism. And I'm afraid it's been brought to my attention, and I've raised it with the university, that there is an individual who is associated with the university—he's on the management board of the Centre for the Study of Islam in the UK at Cardiff University—who has been posting pro-Hamas social media things. He's been saying he supports Hamas in taking back their land, the taking of hostages and military resistance, comparing the Jews to Nazis. It's all the sort of stuff that is prohibited and falls into the IHRA definition of antisemitism.

Now, clearly the Welsh Government has the ability to put in place contractual requirements for that university, in return for the funding it makes available, to adopt the IHRA definition. I think it's important that you tell us in this Chamber today, on this day of all days, given what's happened over the weekend, whether you will take the necessary action to require them to do just that. Also, will you join with your Labour colleagues in other places in condemning Dale Vince, the Labour donor, for suggesting that it was Israel that was responsible for the Bondi beach massacre? That clearly is another example of the sort of antisemitism that we should not be tolerating.

Thank you very much for raising that again, and, indeed, raising it earlier on with the First Minister. I was able to put out a statement, as you know. But also, yesterday I met with the Jewish community. It was an opportunity, again, to say to them that our hearts—and I know this is reflected across the Senedd—go out to the victims, the families, the Jewish community, after the horrific terrorist attack at Bondi beach during a Hanukkah event in Sydney. I think it was important that I did say yesterday, when I met with the Jewish community, it was a calculated assault on values and freedoms and an act of targeted antisemitic terrorism on a public holiday gathering. 

It was interesting, because I'd already met with the Jewish community last week, on Thursday. I met with the Jewish community, and also the Minister for Further and Higher Education joined me at that meeting, because we'd had a meeting earlier on after the horrific Heaton Park synagogue attack. Particularly hearing about higher education, there were students at the meeting who came to the synagogue in Cyncoed, so it was really important that the Minister for Further and Higher Education joined me at that event last week. We have taken away a number of actions.

I won't have time to respond to all of them and to your points today, but I also do want to make the point that you will know, of course, of the report that was undertaken by Lord Mann on behalf of the Board of Deputies of British Jews. There are a whole range of recommendations—10, actually—which are directed to the Welsh Government, all of which we have agreed to follow up. It covers every aspect of life, from health to education, higher education and school education, schools and training, and all those points.

So, thank you for that, for your points and statements today, which I hope I can respond to more fully when we come back in the new year. I hope that we will be able to show support and solidarity as we come together to share Hanukkah in the Senedd later on this evening.

Can the Trefnydd request that the Minister for the economy makes a statement on what actions the Welsh Government is taking to engage with Norsk Hydro, which over the weekend announced the possible closure of its Bedwas plant, with 125 job losses, along with four other sites across Europe? This is a devastating blow before Christmas. If the decision following the consultation period is to close, then we need the support of the Welsh Government to take urgent steps to make sure that there is retraining and hopefully new employment opportunities as soon as possible for these highly skilled workers. I visited the plant myself yesterday. I spoke to one worker. This is his sixth redundancy in his working life. Speaking as a former aluminium worker who was also made redundant in the 1980s, it's a devastating blow. Thank you very much.

Thank you very much, Lindsay Whittle. The news, of course, is very worrying for the Norsk Hydro workforce, both for their families and the community, and we stand ready to support the workforce affected by this decision.

First of all, the Bondi beach tragedy highlights the need for all faith leaders to come together to prevent events taking place in other parts of the world being used to sow dissent and dissension in our own communities. We have to double down on our efforts on that. It is very important that we are lighting the menorah in the Senedd this evening.

On another matter, in light of the deplorable state of the 1960s main hospital building at the University Hospital of Wales at the Heath, with sewage coming up into a waiting room and leaking roofs hitting the headlines on countless occasions, could we have a statement early in the new year from the Cabinet Secretary for health on what capital budget might be available for urgent projects such as the Heath hospital, and how these could be funded, whether by the mutual investment model or any other means, so that the clinical excellence of Wales's only tertiary centre doesn't have to go on being delivered in such a sick building?

Thank you very much, Jenny Rathbone. Thank you for your support of the lighting of the menorah this evening. As you say, this is an opportunity to unite, not divide. We are fortunate in Wales that we have, as has already been expressed this afternoon, a strong faith communities forum, faith communities coming together, which I know will be represented, and that is a really important message.

As far as the University Hospital of Wales is concerned—the Heath hospital, as it's known—it's undergoing comprehensive surveys to inform future investment and also the long-term sustainability of the estate. So, there is planning for future site redevelopment, because this is crucial in terms of the condition, as you said, of the building and the impact it has on patients and staff. So, we're awaiting information from the health board about how best the clinical priorities can be supported in terms of a more resilient infrastructure. There will need to be ongoing investment across the University Hospital of Wales site to ensure that it is safe for patients, staff and visitors. 

Cabinet Secretary, can I please request an urgent statement from the Minister for Further and Higher Education? Last week, during spokespersons' questions, I raised the Cardiff University decision to open a campus in Kazakhstan and the shocking treatment that a member of staff received whilst working there. Staff sent out to Kazakhstan were faced with poor working conditions, a complete lack of organisation, shoddy accommodation and a lack of reimbursement for relocation expenses. I am doing what I can to help the affected staff member, but when I raised it with the Minister for Further and Higher Education, she categorically told me, and I quote from the Record, 

'The concerns that you raised in particular there have not been brought to my attention.'

However, it appears that that is simply not true. One of the poorly treated members of staff contacted the Minister directly on three separate occasions. Two e-mails outlining the concerns I have raised and so much more were sent to the Minister recently, on 25 November, and another was sent on 11 December. Something clearly doesn't quite add up here, Minister. So, a statement from the Minister clarifying the situation and outlining what support she can offer these members of staff would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

Thank you, Natasha Asghar, and thank you for raising this. It is important that it's now on the record and that you have raised the concerns, which, of course, are the responsibility of Cardiff University in terms of the impact of this new site and venue in Kazakhstan. But, thank you for raising it today. It obviously will be followed through. 

Good afternoon, Trefnydd. I just really wanted to raise the issue of banking, particularly in our rural areas, and access to cash. I attended the opening of the Ystradgynlais banking hub last Friday. This facility was opened as a result of sustained campaigning by businesses, by residents and also by the Welsh Liberal Democrats to ensure that the community still had access to banking services. We know that there has been a closure of banks across rural areas and, in the last two years, four banks have closed in Brecon, leaving just one branch to serve the town and its wider rural area. Around 200,000 people in Wales rely on cash, and almost 80 per cent of Welsh people use it at least once or twice a week. I would therefore welcome a statement from the Cabinet Secretary outlining what the Government is doing to protect access to cash and banking services, particularly in rural areas. Diolch yn fawr iawn. 

Diolch yn fawr, Jane Dodds, and congratulations to all of those who campaigned for the new banking hub in Ystradgynlais. In fact it is, as you know, reserved. The UK Government has pledged to establish at least 350 banking hubs across the UK. These are very community-based solutions, unique community-based solutions, and the number of hubs continues to expand across Wales. I'm very concerned about the impact of bank closures from a social justice perspective, and also it's for people who are digitally excluded, people who can't bank online. I welcome the roll-out of alternative local banking solutions and, of course, supporting our credit unions as well as third sector and voluntary organisations. I have been involved in a banking in Welsh communities event, and a further one is taking place early in the new year. I look forward to feeding back the outcomes of that event. 

Diolch yn fawr, Mabon ap Gwynfor. I think it's important that you have been able to—even though there are challenges for GP practices in rural areas—identify a good practice model, haven't you, in terms of the Llanfyllin surgery project. Looking at a vulnerability model I'm sure is something that would help in terms of prevention and resilience of the service as well. Clearly, this is an issue in terms of GP services, and I know the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care is very aware of these in terms of the delivery of primary care in our communities.

I'd like to call for a statement, please, from the Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs on the phasing out of the basic payment scheme in order to usher in the sustainable farming scheme. The Welsh Conservatives are opposed to the SFS, but given we know it will be introduced now, it's important that the transition is smooth for farmers. The phase-out of the BPS is more of a cliff edge, with a 40 per cent reduction from next year. I've heard from farmers who say that they feel bullied by the Welsh Government into adopting the SFS, and it's unfair to put them in this position with such a substantial reduction in BPS payments. There's also considerable anxiety given that there's no clear funding commitment for the SFS post 2026, which makes it very difficult for farmers to plan ahead. The Welsh Government said it would not use cliff-edge tactics to force farmers onto the new scheme, but this 40 per cent reduction is exactly that. So, can we have a statement from the Cabinet Secretary on the phasing out of the BPS and how the Welsh Government have consulted the agricultural sector on the impact of the 40 per cent cut?

Thank you very much for that question. The sustainable farming scheme was supported by this Senedd—supported after extensive consultation, which is certainly ongoing in terms of the transition to the new arrangements, which will be good for farmers, good for communities and good for Wales.

Trefnydd, can I have a statement from you, please, about the probation services in Wales and community safety? I am not sure if you saw a recent The Guardian article written by the chief inspector of probation, Martin Jones. He warned that it's inevitable that there will be more murders and rapes without improvements to the probation services. He said that a third of offenders are being released into the community without being properly assessed and that probation staff do not understand enough about the risk they are managing. This is after a decade-long campaign by our constituent, the incredible Nadine Marshall. There are still huge failures in the system.

His comments were reiterated by his recent serious further offences report, published on 9 December. That followed a week after an inspection report into the Cardiff and Vale probation services. The services were graded as inadequate, with the report describing the provision across the area as being uneven, with notable gaps for women, and that the quality of work to keep people safe, to keep our communities safe, required urgent action. We are told time and time again by Westminster Ministers and by colleagues to the left of me, or actually to the right of me, that probation doesn't need to be devolved and that everything's okay with the England and Wales justice system. But, clearly, that's not the case, Minister. I'm sure you agree with me that there are huge failings that need to be addressed. Diolch yn fawr.

Diolch yn fawr, Rhys ab Owen. Thank you for drawing attention to the inspection report that was recently published. I mean, clearly, this Government is fully in support of the devolution of probation services, and that's something where we're working with the justice unions and, indeed, His Majesty's Prison and Probation Service, and also with the Ministry of Justice. I'm very pleased that, last week, in fact, the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Welsh Language was able to attend a meeting that was chaired by Baroness Ilora Finlay, with a cross-party group of peers, in the House of Lords, to look at what a model probation service for Wales could look like, and there's quite a bit to follow up from that very interactive meeting.

Trefnydd, we have already heard calls today in this Chamber about the conditions and workplace culture at the University Hospital of Wales. We've heard of chronic sewage leaks, water outages and severely deteriorating facilities, including incidents where sewage has entered patient areas. Patients and staff alike have described pigeon infestations, leaking ceilings, flooded service tunnels, and wards left unheated during cold weather—conditions that no modern healthcare system should accept. Nearly 300 senior consultants have now written to warn of profound systematic failures. These front-line professionals describe widespread burn-out, staffing shortages, risks to patient safety, and a culture focused on constant crisis management rather than long-term planning. They also raise serious concerns about IT failures and the long-term sustainability of key services. An internal service review has further highlighted leadership breakdowns, poor adherence to procedures, and an unsafe working culture within operating theatres. As you know, media reports have added to these concerns, revealing incidents involving illegal substances in staff areas, repeated theft, and what has been described as an atmosphere of fear. With this in mind, can I ask that the Welsh Government finally brings forward a statement to this Chamber, setting out what action it is going to take to address these conditions, support the staff who keep this hospital running, and ensure that patients receive the safe, dignified care that they deserve? Thank you.

Thank you for that question, following up the question from Jenny Rathbone. Just as an added point, the health board has benefited from discretionary capital of £17 million this financial year and is also receiving targeted estates funding, covering a range of activity relevant to your question, including mental health, infection control, decarbonisation and decontamination.

I'd like to ask for two statements, please, Trefnydd. Firstly, the UK Prime Minister has reached a new low—who knew that was actually possible? Admitting to being fully aware that his inheritance tax policy is driving people to take their own lives, Starmer, devoid of any human feeling, it seems, stated that he will carry on regardless. Arguably, the man is not fit to govern. Both Labour Governments at both ends of the M4 seem absolutely laser focused on destroying farming in Wales and the UK. It is the Second Reading of the Finance Bill today in Westminster, and I think the farming communities of Wales deserve to have a statement on the floor of this Senedd, from this Government, outlining your reaction to it and stating any efforts you're making to put pressure on the Labour UK Government to reverse this catastrophic policy.

Also, when this place was an Assembly, nearly every primary school in the former Gwent area offered music lessons or an introduction to music with instruments. This is not the case any more, with most schools not offering it due to a lack of funding. Wales calls itself 'the land of song', yet music is disappearing from our classrooms. May I ask for a statement from the education Secretary, setting out how many schools in Wales now offer some form of live musical education, as a tablet, of course, is not the same, and how it is funded? What action is being taken to ensure no child in Wales loses out on this fantastic developmental opportunity? Diolch.

Well, I think we probably all in this Chamber look forward to hearing what your views are going to be on whether you are going to vote for a draft budget, which is going to result in a 4.5 per cent increase in funding to local government and a 3.6 per cent increase to the health service. The money to local government, as the First Minister has said, will be for our schools, for social care. And when did you ever vote for a budget, Laura Anne Jones, which actually supports our public services? We very much fear what the Reform agenda will be in terms of the importance of this budget, which we hope, of course, you will support. But we don't dare think what your view would be in terms of a Reform budget.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. It's been almost six months since I last updated the Senedd about the escalation status of each of the NHS organisations in Wales, and in that time a lot has changed. The NHS has delivered 77,000 extra out-patient appointments and 17,000 cataract operations as part of the work to reduce long waiting times and to cut the overall waiting list. Long waits are falling. The overall waiting list is coming down. More appointments are available, including at evenings and weekends. More tests are being provided and more operations performed, and more treatments provided too.

Since July, our concerted and determined focus on reducing ambulance handover delays at hospital emergency departments has led to a 43 per cent reduction in lost ambulance hours and better response times for 999 calls. The Welsh Ambulance Service has introduced changes to the way it responds to 999 calls to put more focus on patient outcomes. In the last few months, we have seen a steady improvement in outcomes for people who've experienced a cardiac arrest. As I outlined last week in the Senedd, the ambulance service has implemented the second phase of this work, introducing the new 'orange: now', 'yellow: soon' and 'green: planned' categories.

Dirprwy Lywydd, we will mark the first anniversary of the women's health plan this week, and there'll be a pathfinder women's health hub in every health board by March, just as we promised.

All this progress would not have been possible without the support and dedication of the many tens of thousands of NHS staff who are delivering these improvements and the best possible care for people all over Wales, and will continue do so throughout the winter. There are, of course, challenges. There are areas where health boards and NHS trusts are not delivering their own plans and the high standards and expectations that we set, and there is too much variation within and between health boards. In July, I updated Members of the Senedd about the escalation and intervention arrangements for each NHS organisation. Today, I am providing a further update after the quality, performance and financial management of every NHS organisation in Wales has been carefully assessed.

Earlier today, I issued a written statement setting out the revised escalation levels for all NHS organisations. Dirprwy Lywydd, I want to recognise the progress made by some health boards. Hywel Dda University Health Board has made considerable improvements in its governance and leadership. The appointment of a new chair, chief executive and deputy chief executive has brought stability and direction to the board. The implementation of a new organisational operational care group structure and its related governance has improved decision making and operational grip and control. The health board has reviewed and implemented refreshed board governance arrangements, completed a review of its quality and safety governance arrangements, and has made good progress in completing recommendations made by auditors, inspectorates and regulators. It has met the criteria, which enables me to de-escalate Hywel Dda University Health Board to routine arrangements for governance and leadership. All other domains will remain at the same level of escalation as in July. This is significant as an achievement for the health board, which was in level 4 escalation in January of last year.

Dirprwy Lywydd, at the public accountability meeting with Aneurin Bevan University Health Board at the start of the month, I raised challenges relating to finance, planning and performance with the chair and chief executive. Last year, it had made considerable improvements and had a financially balanced and approved three-year plan. It is extremely disappointing that not only has this progress not been maintained, but the health board's financial position has deteriorated rapidly over the course of this year. It is forecasting a £18.3 million deficit by the end of March. This is not acceptable. I'm placing Aneurin Bevan University Health Board in level 4 escalation for finance, strategy and planning, and I am revoking the approval of its three-year plan.

The health board has also been in level 3 escalation for performance and outcomes related to urgent and emergency care at the Grange University Hospital since January 2024. Despite considerable investment and staffing in the emergency department, the health board has failed to deliver the required improvements. I'm also raising the escalation level to level 4 for urgent and emergency care at the health board. This will result in direct intervention by the Welsh Government and NHS performance and improvement to improve the timeliness and quality of urgent and emergency care for people living in the Gwent region.

Dirprwy Lywydd, Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board remains at the highest level of escalation, level 5 or, effectively, in special measures. Members will, of course, by now, be aware that I've announced two significant interventions in the health board. A team of experts, led by Jane Farrell, will work with the senior leadership team at the health board to improve planned care, cancer, and urgent and emergency services. The second intervention is an immediate review of the management of waiting times data at the health board.

The Cardiff and Vale University Health Board was placed into level 4 escalation in July. Following the public accountability meeting on 13 November, I am appointing a senior turnaround director to provide direct support to the organisation.

There are no changes to the escalation levels at Cwm Taf Morgannwg, Swansea bay and Powys teaching health boards, nor at the other NHS trusts and special health authorities.

Dirprwy Lywydd, in closing, I want to put on record my thanks to all the NHS staff who work so hard to make a difference to people's health, often under difficult circumstances, every day. As colleagues will know, we are facing an early flu surge, which is putting pressure on all health and care services. We can all support the NHS this winter by making sure that we've had our flu jab and by choosing the right health service for our needs. This doesn't always mean going to the emergency department or calling the GP. NHS 111 can provide the help and advice that we often need. Diolch yn fawr.

I'd like to thank the Cabinet Secretary for your oral and written statements on escalation and intervention arrangements in the NHS this afternoon. Before I start, I'd just like to thank all the NHS working across all our front-line services across Wales.

Cabinet Secretary, while this statement tells us where health boards sit within the escalation framework, it does tell us far too little about why they are there, how long they're expected to remain there, and whether this system is delivering meaningful improvements for patients and staff. It is deeply concerning that, once again, we see multiple health boards at escalation levels 4 and 5, with Betsi Cadwaladr remaining at level 5, the most serious level of intervention. This health board has now spent the majority of the last decade under some form of enhanced monitoring or special measures, which raises a serious, fundamental question for the Government: if escalation and intervention are working as intended, why do some organisations remain trapped at the highest levels, year after year? Escalation cannot simply become a holding pattern or an administrative label that replaces genuine improvements across the system.

The statement also provides some clarity on the specific measures and thresholds that trigger challenges in escalation statuses, and I'd like to know exactly what precise performance indicators justified moving Aneurin Bevan University Health Board to level 4 for urgent and emergency care, and what data demonstrates improvement to sufficiently justify de-escalations in services elsewhere.

Members are asked to accept these decisions on trust, yet the underlying data is not published, nor is there any independent validation of the Welsh Government's assessments. Will the Government publish the performance metrics, risk assessments and evidence used to assign escalation levels so that Members and the public can properly scrutinise these decisions?

Escalation in itself, Cabinet Secretary, must deliver better outcomes for patients. Yet, despite years of intervention, emergency department performance remains consistently below target across Wales, long waits for planned care persist and cancer treatment targets continue to be missed. So, I'd like to know: where is the evidence that escalation and interventions are improving patient outcomes at pace and at scale? Has the Government conducted any analysis comparing health boards under escalation with those not under escalation to determine whether this framework genuinely improves recovery? And if not, how can we be confident that escalation is anything more than a reactive process?

The statement also confirms that seven health boards remain at level 4 for finance, planning and strategy. This reflects a system under sustained strain, rather than isolated organisational failure. Audit Wales has repeatedly warned about weak financial resilience and unrealistic assumptions in annual plans and a growing gap between demand and available resources. Yet escalation appears to be focused on individual organisations rather than addressing the huge pressures across the system created by policy and funding decisions. So, I'd like to know, Cabinet Secretary, how many of the financial escalations we see today are the result of local mismanagement within health boards, and how much of this stems from national policy decisions taken by the Government, and what specific financial recovery targets have been set for those health boards at level 4. When does the Government expect those targets to be met, and can you ensure, Cabinet Secretary, that those services are not cut on the front line to make sure that health boards can balance their books?

I think one of the most striking omissions from the statement is any meaningful reference to the workforce crisis. Vacancies remain high, agency spending continues to rise across the system, and staff morale is under increasing pressure. Yet escalation decisions are presented without any accompanying workforce data. How can escalation arrangements be credible if they do not explicitly account for staffing shortages, retention challenges and workforce burnout? And will the Government commit to publishing workforce indicators alongside the escalation status, so that Members have a full and honest picture about what's going on across our health boards across Wales?

Finally, Cabinet Secretary, escalation and intervention must command public confidence. At present, the process feels opaque and remote from the lived experiences of patients waiting years for care. People in north Wales have been let down for years. Hywel Dda and Powys are making huge decisions on the front line because of financial mismanagement. So, I would like to know what is this Welsh Government going to do to ensure that these organisations are brought under control, and we can finally get back into a situation where no health board across Wales is under any level of intervention. Diolch.

Well, I note that the Member's celebrations on the weekend haven't blunted his appetite for omnibus criticisms of the NHS. In the many, many allegations that he's made against the NHS, I'll try and identify some of the most pertinent questions, if I may.

The key thing to bear in mind in the context of this discussion is that escalation isn't a punishment. It's a framework for intervention and support. So, it's a recognition that performance for a particular activity in a particular health board is not where we expect it to be and therefore that additional support is required in order to get the health board into the place we want it to be. So, he is right to say that it's important, therefore, that the criteria that are used to escalate and de-escalate are understood, and that the nature of the support going into the health board is clear.

He asks me what the criteria are. In each case, they are published on both the Welsh Government's website and that of the health board, so that he and others are able to see what the steps are, what the requirements are and whether they've been met. So, generally speaking, a level of improvement, depending on the issue at hand, is generally quantified and needs to be met over a specified number of months before the health board is eligible for consideration to be de-escalated in that area.

I made it clear in the statement I made a number of weeks ago, having reformed some aspects of the escalation process, that, where a metric is quantifiable and it is met, then we would regard that as automatically leading to de-escalation in that area. So, that's been set out earlier this year. Some judgments, of course, are more qualitative, because they relate to different facets of the activities of the health board. So, for example, the de-escalation of Hywel Dda health board in relation to leadership and governance has both a quantified and a qualitative character, and my statement today sets out why I believe, based on advice, it is appropriate to de-escalate for that specific area.

He made the point that there is no evidence that this helps health boards improve. In my statement I set out that, at the start of last year, Hywel Dda health board was in escalation at level 4 across the board. We see a very different picture today. That tells me that what we are seeing is that in those specific areas there has been improvement in de-escalating, and we can see that translating into activity on the ground.

He asked me specifically what evidence is published that justifies the escalation of Aneurin Bevan in relation to urgent and emergency care. I would just say to him gently, this is one area of the NHS where a huge amount of data is published on a health board basis, routinely, many times a year. So, he will be able to find, if he looks at our website or that of the health board, indicators in relation to four-hour waits in ED, 12-hour waits in ED, ambulance handover times in each ED, the level of demand in each ED, the number of admissions. All of that is published and that provides both the evidence upon which the decision is made and the data that enables him to scrutinise that decision.

He made a point about the escalation system being reactive, and in a sense that is correct: it reacts to a situation on the ground. However, it is not the only thing that the Welsh Government does to improve performance in the NHS. Crucially, the work that is proactive obviously is more important in the longer term, for good reason. He will have seen from the planning framework last year, the new planning framework is about to come out, a very specific approach to our expectations of the health service, specific mandated actions that every health board is required to take. We've published performance against those actions.

He made the point about budgets, again an important point, recognising that, over time, the budget allocations to some health boards have been affected by population changes. Last year, we made a reallocation to reflect changes in population size to make sure that the fundamental allocation across health boards is fair and reflects the needs of local populations. It is for health boards to decide how those budgets are spent and every health board has to manage the twin obligations that anybody in receipt of public funding has to comply with, which is firstly to deliver excellent services and secondly to meet its financial obligations. There is no part of any public service in which this is an either/or. Both those conditions must be met and that's true for all health boards as well.

I hope those have been the specific points that the Member has asked for. I would say, finally, that some of the changes that we made earlier this year are designed specifically to provide that additional support that health boards need, so that when they have an issue that is emerging or a pattern or a trend that they are able to see, and their own performance is not where they want it to be and not where we want it to be, they're able to reach out for support to improve those areas. So, we've moved from the NHS Wales Executive, which we had at the start of this year, to NHS Wales Performance and Improvement. We've appointed a new managing director and there's work under way to reorganise the resources of that organisation so that it can provide that proactive support that health boards need, as well as support Ministers in providing the important scrutiny that we do.

At the outset of his contribution today, the Cabinet Secretary stated that a lot has changed since his last update on escalation and intervention arrangements in the NHS. Yet, despite that claim, there is something deeply familiar about the situation we are debating. What we're witnessing is not meaningful embedded change, but the continued normalisation of failure within the Welsh health system. 

Wales began this year with every major health board under some form of targeted intervention. We approach the end of the year with that position further entrenched. Measures that should be exceptional, temporary and used only as a last resort have instead become routine. It is the people of Wales who are paying the price for that failure. In 2024 alone, the Royal College of Emergency Medicine estimated that more than 900 excess deaths in Wales were associated with waits of over 12 hours in EDs.

At the same time, unsafe practices such as corridor care have become commonplace rather than exceptional. This points to a deeper and more systemic failure in the ability of the NHS in Wales to deliver safe and timely care. This record speaks volumes about Labour's stewardship of our health service. There are currently no fewer than six individuals on the Government benches who have, at some point, held the health portfolio, including two former First Ministers and the current First Minister. Despite that depth of experience, failure remains a constant feature of this Government's record. 

While improvements at Hywel Dda University Health Board are welcome, this is far from the first time that isolated good news has been outweighed by deterioration elsewhere. No health board in Wales is currently operating in a position of business as usual. That raises serious questions about the effectiveness of the current escalation framework in driving sustainable improvement. Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board in particular has come to embody the Welsh Government's failure to embed lasting performance improvement.

Last month, the Cabinet Secretary announced additional support for Betsi, including the recruitment of an improvement director and a team of operational experts to work alongside the existing executive team. But it's crucial to remember that Betsi is already in special measures and has been for over two thirds of its existence. This inevitably leads to a fundamental question: are we now beyond level 5 intervention? Is there a need for a new description of Betsi's status that reflects a seriousness beyond the term 'special measures'? This situation suggests one of two things, either the special measures system itself is not working, or there is no ceiling to Labour's mismanagement of the health service. Which is it? Can we have an honest assessment as to why Betsi is failing?

Fundamental to the Member's charge is that there is a uniquely challenging situation in Wales that has been avoided by Governments of different colours in other parts of the UK. I would just gently say to him that of the 134 acute trusts in England that have been under largely Conservative Government for the last 14 years, 120 are in escalation and 48 of the 61 non-acute trusts are in that situation. In Scotland, a country in which I'm sure he thinks the Government reflects his world view, 12 of the 14 health boards are in escalation as well. So, there are some challenges that I think it would be fair for the Member to reflect on in other parts of the UK as well.

He made a number of particular points that I think don't fairly reflect the situation on the ground in Wales. He asked me whether I felt that we had reached the point where we needed a new description for the situation in Betsi. I honestly say to him I don't think that descriptions, if that is part of his solution, will get us very far indeed. What we want are actions and interventions based on the needs of individual health boards. A move away from the rhetorical to understanding what's happening on the ground, I think, will help us in addressing the challenges—[Interruption.]—addressing the challenges that the NHS faces in all parts of the UK.

He asked me whether I thought that a lack of transparency was an issue in relation to escalation and de-escalation. I mentioned in my answer to James Evans, of course, that the criteria for escalation and de-escalation are published and the evidence upon which we make the judgments is largely rooted in the data that is published, together with the qualitative judgment that I've sought to outline in my statement today. I accept that there has been an element of uncertainty around some aspects of the escalation framework, which is why, he'll remember, I did the review earlier in this year that has led to some changes in that. I do think it is important that people have a clear understanding of what the criteria are when they're met, that they are, essentially, certain that they will be de-escalated in those areas, and that is now the arrangement that we have in place and I hope that it will make a difference.

He mentioned the work of the ministerial advisory group and their recommendations about the importance of streamlining accountability. I do think that is important. It's one of the reasons why, in the planning framework last year, in advance of the recommendations, we focused in on a smaller number of key measures for the health service, and that has remained the case, and also a very specific approach to particular actions that we wanted the health service to take in order to improve the effectiveness with which it delivers services, and I want to take that same approach in the planning framework for the years ahead. I think it is important that we are very specific about our expectations, and mindful, of course, that the health service delivers a whole range of services, for which there is a limit to simply listing in those kinds of planning frameworks.

I hope he will have appreciated the level of public access that we've sought to bring to some of the accountability arrangements. I think it is important. I know that he is also interested in transparency, as I am. And providing an opportunity for the public to see the scrutiny and challenge that Ministers are able to provide health boards in relation to particular challenges—many of them I've referred to in the statement today—is part of that commitment that we make in order to improve transparency and public understanding of some of the challenges that the health service is currently grappling with.

The Procurement Act 2023, which came into force on 24 February this year, has brought significant change in the way we approach public procurement throughout Wales, shifting it from a process that is simply cost driven to one that actively supports inclusive economic growth, fair work and environmental responsibility.

The regulations before the Senedd today update Schedule 9 to the Procurement Act, giving effect to new international agreements that the UK has signed with Iraq and Kazakhstan. Amending Schedule 9 ensures that suppliers from Iraq and Kazakhstan are formally recognised as treaty state suppliers. In practical terms, this means that they must be treated in accordance with the procurement obligations set out in these new agreements. Welsh contracting authorities will now be required to offer suppliers from both Iraq and Kazakhstan the same opportunities as those provided to UK suppliers for procurements covered by the agreement.

These procurement obligations are reciprocal; Welsh exporting businesses will have easier access to those markets elsewhere. The change strengthens our compliance with international commitments and serves to reinforce our commitments to fair and open competition in public procurement.

I'm grateful to the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee for their continued consideration of these regulations and I ask Members to approve the regulations today.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. The Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee considered the draft regulations on 1 December and subsequently considered the Welsh Government's response to the committee's report last week.

The committee's report contained one technical reporting point. The reporting point highlights that although the term 'below-threshold contract' is defined in the parent Act, it is not defined in the regulations themselves. In its response to the committee's report, the Welsh Government set out that it believed that a definition was not needed because the meaning of the term is clear from the regulations as a whole. However, the response also recognised that a direct reference might be helpful to readers. Therefore, the Welsh Government intend to insert the definition into an amending provision to be included in a further set of regulations, which are due to be laid in February 2026.

No further remarks.

These regulations provide transitional relief to ratepayers with increased liabilities following the 2026 non-domestic rates revaluation. In providing this transitional relief scheme, we are closely replicating the scheme of relief we provided following the 2023 revaluation, supporting all areas of the tax base in a consistent and straightforward manner. Transitional relief will be fully funded by the Welsh Government at a total cost of £116 million over the next two years. That is in addition to our permanent reliefs, which are currently worth £250 million annually. As a consequence, ratepayers for two thirds of properties will either pay no rates bill at all or receive some level of relief.

Diolch, Deputy Presiding Officer. The Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee considered the draft regulations yesterday. The committee's report contains two merits scrutiny reporting points, neither of which require a response from the Welsh Government. The first highlights the phased introduction of the increase in the Welsh Government's non-domestic rates liability from 1 April 2026 onwards. The Welsh Government estimates the cost of the phased introduction to be £77 million in 2026-27 and £39 million in 2027-28.

The second reporting point highlights that the regulations have not been subject to any consultation. The explanatory memorandum to the regulations states that the regulations were not the subject of a consultation due to the timing constraints arising from the UK Government's autumn statement on 26 November. The explanatory memorandum adds that the regulations benefit ratepayers and are based on the transitional relief provided following the 2023 revaluation. Consequently, the Welsh Government states that it is confident the regulations will achieve their policy end.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for laying these regulations before us today, and also for the early engagement on these regulations. The Welsh Conservatives will be supporting these today, as we recognise that this transitional relief will provide real help to ratepayers facing sharp increases after the 2026 revaluation.

We are grateful that the Welsh Government has at least brought forward a scheme that will soften the immediate impact for thousands of Welsh businesses. We also understand that if these regulations are not approved or supported here today, this relief scheme will not be in existence. Many businesses across Wales would face steep increases with no protection at all, and that is certainly not an outcome we would want to see here today.

Our support, though, does also recognise that there are many businesses up and down Wales worried about the increase in the rates that they are liable to pay. We've heard first-hand from many of those in the hospitality and leisure sector, some of whom are facing increases of over 100 per cent in the tax rates that they are expected to pay. We do have concerns about some of the long-term structural issues our non-domestic rates system presents itself with. 

We know that businesses, now more than ever, need certainty and reasons to be confident about their future. We need a system that encourages investment, growth and confidence, not piecemeal interventions from time to time. As part of any plan to support businesses, we believe that eliminating business rates for all small businesses in Wales would enable them to invest back into those establishments and help to grow jobs, which would benefit the local communities that they serve.

We'd urge the Welsh Government to continue looking to see how businesses up and down our high streets, and small businesses more broadly, can be supported in the future, and how they can deliver a system that supports the backbone of our economy, which are these businesses. But again, Deputy Presiding Officer, I recognise that what we have in front of us is helpful for those businesses going through that transition at the moment. Thank you.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I'm grateful to the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee for their rapid review of these regulations. Mike Hedges is right to say that we've had a very short period of time in order to bring these proposals before the Senedd, because we had to wait for the UK Government's budget before we knew what position we would be in to fund a transition scheme. While there was no formal consultation exercise on the regulations, there was an exercise earlier in the year in which we did take views from the sector on the advisability of a transitional relief scheme and the shape that that scheme might take. That's reflected in the proposals in front of the Senedd this afternoon.

I hear the wider points that Sam Rowlands makes; the Government accepts some and wouldn't agree with others. But Mr Rowlands is also correct, Dirprwy Lywydd, to say that the impact of voting against these regulations would not be to improve non-domestic rates support, but would be to eliminate the transitional relief package that is in front of the Senedd this afternoon. In that context, I'm grateful to Sam Rowlands for his indication that the regulations will be supported by his party.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. When I introduced the Planning (Wales) Bill and the Planning (Consequential Provisions) (Wales) Bill in September, I highlighted the benefits of accessible, modern, bilingual legislation. Our aim is not simply to tidy the statute book, it is to create a coherent, clear framework that works for everyone. Since then, the Bills have progressed through the Senedd's scrutiny, with the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee publishing their report on 28 November. I want to put on record my sincere thanks to the Chair and committee members. I also thank the committee staff and everyone who gave evidence for their time and thorough scrutiny throughout this process.

Dirprwy Lywydd, I'm particularly grateful for the committee's unequivocal and positive endorsement of these Bills. I am delighted that, in recommendation 5 of their report, the committee agreed the Bills should proceed as consolidation Bills. They also conclude that the scope and content of the consolidation is appropriate and that the Bills consolidate the law clearly and consistently. They have welcomed our methodical and diligent approach, and, most importantly, they recognise the significant benefits of these Bills for both professionals and the public.

I'm also pleased to note the strong support from stakeholders. They described the Bills as a huge simplification. They also called them a unique step forward for planning legislation in comparison to the rest of the UK. This consensus shows the value of our collaborative approach and the importance of making Welsh law more accessible and effective for all. I would also like to draw attention to the Law Commission's confirmation that these Bills have accurately implemented their recommendations. The committee recognised the collaborative approach taken between the Government and the commission and the benefits this brings to such a technical project.

The committee's report sets out seven recommendations and four conclusions, providing a helpful framework for the next steps in this process. I have written to the Chair, providing a response to each of the recommendations in advance of today's debate.

Turning to recommendation 1, I am able to confirm that the Secretary of State for Wales provided the necessary consent on 20 November to bring the Planning (Wales) Bill within the legislative competence of the Senedd. Subject to agreeing the motions today, I intend to bring forward one minor and technical amendment to the Planning (Consequential Provisions) (Wales) Bill, to reflect the final form of the UK Government's Planning and Infrastructure Bill, which is due to receive Royal Assent shortly.

I also intend to bring forward an amendment to the Planning (Consequential Provisions) (Wales) Bill in response to recommendation 4. This will provide the clarification sought by addressing the application of the provision around the expiration date of local development plans. In response to recommendation 3, I confirmed in my letter to the committee that section 9 of the Planning (Wales) Bill does not alter the effect of the provision it consolidates. The changes of wording in section 9 simply reflect the drafting practice of the Office of the Legislative Counsel.

Dirprwy Lywydd, moving on to the implementation of the Bill and future consolidation of planning subordinate legislation, I note the committee welcomed the additional clarity and reassurance to stakeholders that my officials and I provided. In recommendation 6, they are seeking this positive engagement to continue, with a road map to guide the making of subordinate legislation. As the committee rightly notes, if the Senedd passes these Bills, responsibility for implementation will rest with the next Government. I trust the next Government will prioritise implementation and the restatement of subordinate legislation, building on the strong support from the committee and its stakeholders. Once directed by the incoming Government, and following Royal Assent of the Bills, the final implementation programme will be published.

I've already set out the anticipated Welsh statutory instruments that will need to be made during the implementation phase in order to commence the Bills. This information is detailed in the explanatory memorandum, my evidence to the committee, and my written response to this recommendation. It includes quite a substantial instrument that will make consequential amendments to existing subordinate legislation. There will also need to be new regulations relating to the protection of trees.

It is also my hope that a small number of existing instruments can be restated with the commencement of the Bills, for example the use class Order and the development management procedure Order. This would effectively see the start of the second stage of work, a phased programme of consolidating and restating the main body of planning subordinate legislation. This is anticipated to be undertaken after the commencement of the Bills. Engagement will also remain a priority as we enter this second stage of work. It will occur throughout the broader planning directorate work programme or specific Bill implementation discussions.

Dirprwy Lywydd, I pause at this point and invite Members to share any views they have. Once again, I want to express my appreciation to the committee for their scrutiny of the Bill, which marks a truly significant milestone for planning law in Wales. Diolch.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. As highlighted by those who gave evidence to the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, these Bills are anticipated to make primary legislation on planning in Wales significantly more coherent and accessible, and will enable people to access that legislation in both Welsh and English for the first time.

The committee took evidence from a range of stakeholders representing planning authorities and practitioners, who provided us with both written and oral evidence. Their evidence informed our consideration of whether the Bills should proceed as consolidation Bills, and I would like to thank all of those who devoted time and effort to assisting the committee in undertaking its work.

As part of the committee’s consideration, we asked ourselves three key questions: is the scope of the consolidation appropriate; have the relevant pieces of legislation been included in the consolidation; and do the Bills consolidate the law clearly and consistently?

Consolidation Bills may also make minor changes to the existing law to achieve a satisfactory consolidation, or make changes recommended by the Law Commission. The committee has accordingly carefully considered the extent to which the Bills make changes to existing law, and whether those changes are within the limits set out in the Senedd’s Standing Orders on consolidation Bills.

Several matters were brought to the committee’s attention in relation to these key questions, and there were differing views expressed to us in relation to some matters. We are, however, satisfied with the Welsh Government’s approach to the consolidation of planning law through these Bills, and for that reason we have recommended in our report that both Bills should proceed as consolidation Bills. The committee is grateful to the Counsel General, the Office of the Legislative Counsel and the planning directorate of the Welsh Government for their detailed evidence to the committee, and for issuing a response to our report last week.

I will now turn briefly to some of the recommendations made in the committee’s report. Two of those recommendations are around the clarity of provisions in the planning Bill on the role of national park authorities in relation to their planning functions, and in respect of the status of local development plans. We made these recommendations following the consideration of matters brought to our attention by two national park authorities. I am grateful to the Counsel General for providing some additional clarity on these matters, and for committing to table an amendment to the Planning (Consequential Provisions) (Wales) Bill to help ensure there is no remaining uncertainty.

The effective operation of the planning system depends upon a large body of subordinate legislation. I therefore also thank the Counsel General for setting out the proposed approach of making subordinate legislation under the planning Bill, if it is enacted. The implementation of the Bills will be a matter for the next Welsh Government. However, we welcome the intention of Government officials to maintain the involvement of stakeholders through this phase.

Our report also considered the fact that the planning Bill, if enacted, is anticipated to form part of a code of Welsh law on planning. As a committee, we acknowledge the benefits such a code is likely to bring to the accessibility of planning law in Wales.

The Business Committee has determined that it is too soon to consider any changes to the Senedd’s Standing Orders in relation to codes of Welsh law, to ensure that future changes to the law do not unnecessarily undermine previous decisions taken by the Senedd to create such codes. However, we believe that there is an urgent need for structures to be put in place by the Senedd to support codes of Welsh law once they are created, in order to protect their integrity, and to ensure that their status is not diminished in any way. The arrangements for publishing these codes could also be made clearer. These are matters that we believe require further consideration that is broader than we have been able to consider in our report.

I will conclude by highlighting that proposals to consolidate planning law in Wales date back to around 15 years ago. The Bills' introduction in itself, therefore, represented the culmination of a significant amount of work by the Welsh Government, the Law Commission and by professional bodies that have taken an interest in the process of consolidation. As we heard during our evidence, if the planning Bill is enacted, Wales would be in a unique position in the UK in having all the primary legislation on planning accessible in a coherent way in one place. The consolidation will also form a sound basis for any future reforms to planning law in Wales, which several of those who gave evidence to us raised the need for.

Deputy Presiding Officer, should the Senedd agree that these Bills proceed as consolidation Bills, we look forward to continuing with our scrutiny of the Bills at detailed committee consideration.

I have read the letters submitted by various stakeholders in response to the consultation on the planning consolidation Bill and the Planning (Consequential Provisions) (Wales) Bill. It is clear that these Bills are welcomed by the community who would be affected and, in principle, they welcome this consolidation of bringing complex and fragmented planning law into a single, more accessible Bill. We all recognise that the use of clearer language, updated terminology and being bilingually accessible are practical, positive steps forward, and there are clear benefits for practitioners, decision makers, developers and communities alike, and so we welcome this Bill. I would like to highlight, however, that the explanatory memorandum to the Bill appears to lack some clarity in certain areas, particularly regarding interaction with UK-wide legislation in relation to the Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023.

While the explanatory memorandum to the Bill refers to the exclusion of provisions relating to the environmental outcomes report, it's not clear whether other parts of the Act that apply to both England and Wales have been incorporated, excluded or deferred. This uncertainty risks confusion for practitioners operating across jurisdictions and undermines one of the core aims of the consolidation, which is, of course, legal clarity. Also, the UK Planning and Infrastructure Bill is not addressed at all in the explanatory memorandum. This is a significant omission, given that the Bill applies to both England and Wales and is expected to receive Royal Assent imminently. Without an explanation of whether or how its provisions have been taken into account, there is a real risk that the Welsh consolidation exercise could quickly become outdated or misaligned with the wider legislative framework, and this could mean that the Bill risks requiring early amendment. So, any clarity that could be given on this by the Cabinet Secretary would be highly welcomed. However, as already highlighted, the Bill does exactly what it says on the tin, which is to consolidate planning laws, so we have no reason not to support it. Thank you.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Thank you to all of those who've participated for their contributions to the debate. I'll try and deal with a couple of the points that were made.

In terms of the consequential amendments and the explanatory memorandum, I did say in my opening remarks that we are keeping the second Bill, the name of which always escapes me, the Planning (Consequential Provisions) (Wales) Bill, under review to make sure that we have all of the provisions in that. I said that I would be bringing forward some amendments to make sure we kept that up-to-date. We will continue that process right through this so that when the Senedd finally gives its permission for these Bills, we have the most up-to-date position in terms of consequential provisions necessary for any matters raised, such as the matters raised by Joel, or some of the things you just raised, Adam, and then actually, also, because we're monitoring UK legislation, to make sure that that's not doing anything that impacts on us. So, we'll be doing that. A couple of Members mentioned things like the infrastructure Bill. We've just put through the statutory instruments on that, and so they'll be included in those consequential provisions as well.

So, I think that by the time we get to the end of this process, I'm really confident that this is our chance to turn complexity into clarity and build confidence in the planning system for the future. Adam Price is quite right: planning is fundamental to almost everything that we do in the built environment and in the national environment, so actually having a clear, concise statement of the law is essential. I completely agree with Adam Price's proposition that we should continue to consolidate and codify other areas of Welsh law. I believe Mike Hedges, as Chair of the LJC committee, made a similar point. I hope the next Government will indeed have a broader, systematic process for doing this. This is the second consolidation Bill to make its way through the Senedd, so I think the principle is now set. So, now there's no real reason why we shouldn't continue to do that, and a number of Members have mentioned several areas of law that would benefit from consolidation—agricultural law being one of the ones that springs to mind, but much environmental law as well.

So, Dirprwy Lywydd, I am really pleased that everyone is agreeing that these can proceed together as consolidation Bills, and I obviously urge Members to support the motions. Diolch. 

I also acknowledge the valuable oral and written evidence provided by organisations and individuals during scrutiny. These contributions reflected the wide range of views on this emotive issue. At the heart of all discussions, however, was a shared understanding that regardless of differing opinions on the Bill, the welfare of greyhounds must remain paramount.

Before we proceed any further today I want to reflect briefly on the central purpose of this Bill. It is about protecting the lives and the welfare of greyhounds in Wales. Now, greyhound racing around a track poses an inherent risk of high-speed collisions, falls and injuries. Bringing this to an end in Wales will keep animals safer. This Bill shows we are a progressive nation committed to ethical standards, animal welfare and forward-thinking legislation. It strengthens Wales’s reputation as leading in animal welfare standards. This topic has been a campaigning focus for many Members of this Senedd across all parties for many years, and I want to thank colleagues for their contributions to this cause over time. I hope today we can keep building on that collaborative cross-party support.

And I hope the committees’ reports will assist Members in reaching an informed decision on the general principles of the Bill. I will take Members through those during this debate and I will also write to each Chair with my full response. I can confirm that the majority of the recommendations will be accepted either in full, in principle or in part.

Today I want to focus on the key areas highlighted by the committees, and to address the conclusions reached. If I turn first of all to the Culture, Communications, Welsh Language, Sport and International Relations Committee report, I welcome the committee's satisfaction with the key provisions in the Bill. They agree that the proposed lead-in period is sensible, allowing time for necessary preparation and for managing impacts on industry, communities and animal welfare charities. I also appreciate their recognition that the Bill should be brought into force at the earliest practicable opportunity within that specified time frame. I welcome the committee highlighting the establishment of the implementation group as a positive step, as its role is critical. Its role in advising on rehoming capacity, economic impacts and best practice for transition will be essential to ensuring a fully informed and considered implementation, and I brought that group together to support just that.

I note the committee's satisfaction that the definitions in the Bill are clear and that the scope of offences and enforcement powers are proportionate, broadly fit for purpose and consistent with the approach taken in similar legislation. The committee also agreed that unlimited fines provide sufficient deterrence. Now, this is encouraging, and it reinforces confidence that the Bill is both enforceable and practicable.

I am content to accept recommendations 1, 2, 4 and 7 in full and to accept recommendations 3 and 6 in principle. Recommendation 5 on amending the Bill to allow guidance is rejected for reasons that I will outline very shortly, and detailed responses to the committees on all the recommendations will follow.

So, turning to the first recommendation, regarding concerns about the social and economic impact, including the effect on Valley Greyhound Stadium and its employees, I'm pleased to accept that recommendation in full. We have published a regulatory impact assessment in accordance with Standing Orders, and an integrated impact assessment. These assessments examine the costs, the benefits and the economic and social impacts. Officials will continue to monitor these impacts through the implementation group and with the industry, ensuring that our approach remains proportionate and responsive. We will review any new information provided to Welsh Government, including through the implementation group and our ongoing engagement with the racing industry, ensuring that implementation proceeds within the agreed time frame.

In relation to recommendation 2, on support for workers, steps are already under way to identify the needs of those affected and to ensure targeted support before the Bill comes into force. On my visit, indeed, to Valley stadium last month, I took the opportunity to listen to the concerns from trainers and track managers and other industry representatives. The Welsh Government will lead a co-ordinated, multi-agency response, drawing on existing initiatives, such as ReAct and Communities for Work, to support employees of Valley stadium and others connected to it. We will work with industry and the implementation group to ensure that these needs are met.

I note concerns around unintended consequences, and I welcome the committee's agreement that the likelihood of greyhound racing being driven underground is low. That said, I do recognise potential welfare issues arising from the displacement of racing activity across borders, and I'm pleased therefore to accept in principle recommendation 3. We already are monitoring and will continue to monitor any emerging issues through the implementation group and wider stakeholders, ensuring that we remain alert and ready to respond where needed.

I'm accepting in full recommendation 4, on engaging with the Sentencing Council. Before the Bill's provisions commence, the Welsh Government will write to them highlighting the new legislation so that they can consider whether sentencing guidelines are, indeed, required.

Turning to recommendation 5, I'm rejecting the recommendation to table an amendment to the Bill enabling Welsh Ministers to issue statutory guidance to inspectors in relation to enforcement of offences, but I'll explain why. I note the committee welcomed the view that enforcement powers are proportionate and broadly fit for purpose. So, my officials will work with the implementation group and stakeholders to consider whether specific guidance is needed and, if it is, powers already exist that would enable such guidance to be issued without the need for an amendment to the Bill. So, I remain open to recommendations on minimum standards or best practice. So, Dirprwy Lywydd, I'm content that we have achieved the right balance between what's on the face of the Bill and what can be set out in guidance. The Bill will not require inspectors to have regard to guidance issued by Welsh Ministers. We have discussed this with local authority representatives, and this approach offers flexibility while avoiding additional burden.

On recommendation 6, I want to thank the committee for highlighting an important area where agencies work together successfully across Wales on investigations and enforcement. Now, I accept this recommendation in principle simply because those networks are already in place. We will use those existing agreements, which provide leadership and co-ordination between enforcement agencies and the police on animal welfare, to build on the strong foundations that we already have.

And I accept recommendation 7, on assessing the enforcement capacity in full. We anticipate enforcement actions will be minimal. Where a multi-agency approach is required, we will work with partners to embed the Bill's provisions into existing systems, thus avoiding duplication, strengthening enforcement and ensuring that we take a cost-effective approach. We are very fortunate to have Animal Licensing Wales already delivering high-standard training for local authority officers, and we'll engage early to identify any additional needs. We're working also with the Welsh Local Government Association and local authorities through the implementation group to assess whether further funding or guidance is required.

If I move on to the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee report, I've considered the committee's recommendations very carefully, and I note that they align very closely with our approach. I've partially accepted recommendation 2, accepted 3 and 4 in full, and I'm rejecting 1 and 5, and I'll explain why.

On recommendation 1, I've not issued a written statement. Bill provisions are always subject to a thorough assessment of legislative competence, including compatibility with convention rights, before introduction. The outcome of that assessment is included already in the explanatory memorandum accompanying the Bill. As I set out in my letter of 4 November to the committee, I'm committed to updating the equality, diversity, inclusion and human rights assessment, and this will be reflected in the assessment that will be prepared ahead of Stage 3.

On accepting recommendation 2 in part, I will write to committee Chairs to provide updates when the impact assessments are revised and confirm whether any changes affect the provisions of the Bill, rather than publishing a written statement. Impact assessments will continue to be updated as new information becomes available.

Turning to recommendation 3, on those persons liable, I accept it in full, and I will update the explanatory memorandum ahead of Stage 3.

Recommendation 4 asks for an amendment to a term in Schedule 2, which I accept. I will table a Government amendment to correct the reference.

Finally, on recommendation 5, I'm of the view that the Bill does not introduce new systems or reporting duties that would require a statutory post-implementation review. The Welsh Government remains firmly committed to good practice in policy evaluation, as set out in the explanatory memorandum. And as I've set out in my response to the committee, a review will be undertaken within five years of commencement. This post-implementation review will assess the effects and the impacts of the ban, focusing on the effectiveness of enforcement and the wider impact of the legislation.

And finally, I thank the Finance Committee for its requests for information about the costs in the regulatory impact assessment. My response outlined how the anticipated costs for enforcement and stakeholder support are considered modest but proportionate, with the need for effective implementation without excessive burden.

I'm very grateful, Dirprwy Lywydd, for the carefully considered recommendations and, as I've said, I will write to the Chair of each committee to provide further clarification on our proposed way forward. I look forward now to any views that Senedd Members may have. Diolch yn fawr.

This Bill seeks to prohibit the organisation of greyhound racing in Wales and to make an offence for venue operators to permit racing, and, indeed, individuals to organise it. From the outset, our committee recognised views on this issue are held strongly by welfare organisations, those in the sport and the public. Despite a compressed timetable, we weighed the contested evidence carefully, keeping the welfare of greyhounds at the heart of our work.

Now, we must acknowledge our concerns about the legislative timetable. Whilst we do recognise the Government's decision to prioritise this Bill, the accelerated timetable has presented us with challenges, not least because of questions surrounding the evidence base. As a committee, we hope the reduced timetable followed for this Bill will not set precedents for the future.

Across oral and written evidence, we heard two broad perspectives. Opponents to a ban accepted that injuries to greyhounds occur, but they argued that welfare has improved under regulation and warned of unintended consequences, such as racing moving underground or across borders. Now, supporters of the Bill contended that these measures cannot address the inherent dangers of racing dogs around an oval track, where high-speed collisions and catastrophic injuries are, at times, unavoidable. They argued that no amount of regulation can make the activity safe enough to protect greyhounds from predictable harm.

We emphasise that the available data on welfare measures and injury reporting is highly contested. Moreover, these uncertainties extend beyond the race track. Evidence on lifetime welfare, from breeding practices and early socialisation to kennelling, retirement and rehoming is fragmented, often anecdotal. These deficiencies underline the need for comprehensive, evidence-led approaches to policy development. In light of these uncertainties, the committee did not take a definitive position on the general principles of the Bill. That is not because welfare concerns lack weight. Indeed, they were central to our deliberations. But the evidence base was too contested and incomplete to support a collective conclusion. Rather than offering a single view, we have set out detailed 'our view' sections throughout the report, to assist Members in reaching an informed decision.

There are several key findings we wish to put on record. Firstly, welfare harms are genuine and serious. We heard compelling veterinary testimony about injuries. These range from minor abrasions to catastrophic fractures and chronic pain, as well as behavioural and health issues linked to kennelling and diet. The precise scale of harm, and the extent to which regulation could mitigate it, remains unclear because data is incomplete and contested.

Secondly, the matter of regulation versus prohibition remains unresolved for some Members. Some argued that no amount of regulation can make racing safe; others proposed tighter licensing and track redesign. But, without robust data and agreed thresholds for 'acceptable' injury or fatality rates, we could not determine collectively whether regulation could ever meet a defensible standard.

Thirdly, public engagement was limited. The Welsh Government relied in part on a question within its 2023 consultation on licensing animal welfare establishments. This was criticised as being based on self-selected responses.

Fourthly, economic and social effects are uncertain. We received information relating to investment, revenue and employment at Wales's only commercial track, but we found gaps and inconsistencies in the data. Without verified granular information, it is impossible to assess the true scale of the effect or the support required for workers and communities.

Fifthly, implementation will be critical. The lead-in period is sensible, as is the implementation group. Success will depend on detailed planning to ensure sufficient rehoming capacity, enforcement readiness and targeted support for affected workers. That preparatory work must begin now.

We therefore recommend a full assessment of economic and social effects before commencement—I welcome the fact that that has been accepted—targeted support for affected workers—again, I welcome that being accepted—and monitoring of cross-border racing and welfare effects, which I understand from the Cabinet Secretary has been accepted in principle; and engagement with the Sentencing Council for clear guidance on unlimited fines, which has, again, been accepted. We recommended an amendment to enable statutory guidance for inspectors—I note the Cabinet Secretary's reasons for why he does not think that will be necessary—national agreements for intelligence-led enforcement and police collaboration—again, that has been accepted in principle, we've just heard—and assessment of enforcement capacity and funding for local authorities, which, again, has been accepted by the Government, and I welcome the Cabinet Secretary's response.

Now, there will inevitably be differences among us as Members in terms of how much weight to attach to ethical arguments versus contested data and welfare outcomes. The committee's role has been to test the evidence and to highlight gaps. When voting on the general principles, Members must exercise judgment grounded in the welfare of dogs and in the proportionality and effectiveness of law.

Dirprwy Lywydd, having listened to every witness and read every submission, I want to end by sharing my personal view that the Bill should pass at Stage 1. Yes, we identified shortcomings as a committee in process and some of how the evidence is presented, and there is indeed a need to treat affected workers fairly, but nobody in giving evidence contested the fact that there will always be predictable and unavoidable harms that are inherent in greyhound racing. The extent of the injuries and deaths of dogs was contested, but the fact that they happen was not. That is reason enough for me as an individual to believe that a ban is justified. Regulation might well lessen harm, but it could never eliminate it. Personally, I do not believe that risk of foreseeable harm to any animal can be justified in the name of sport. It is my belief that, for those of us living in a civilised society, our duty is not to manage that harm at the margins, but to prevent it altogether. Compassion should be our compass, and the law should reflect that.

The proposed lead-in period and my committee's recommendations provide a fair and practical pathway to transition that would support workers, strengthen enforcement, and ensure that rehoming capacity is ready. I would like to thank everyone who has contributed their views to assist us in this important work. I look forward to receiving the formal response to our recommendations. And on a personal level, Dirprwy Lywydd, I hope that this passes. Diolch.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. The Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee's report on the Bill drew two conclusions and made five recommendations. The committee's report acknowledges the Cabinet Secretary's rationale for bringing forward this Bill. Nonetheless, there has been no consultation undertaken on a White Paper or a draft Bill and neither have all relevant impact assessments been completed.

The committee recognises there will be occasions where it may become appropriate to introduce legislation that was not originally planned at the outset of a Senedd, or as a matter of urgency. However, in the interest of transparency and public trust in the democratic process, a full explanation of the reasons for introducing a Bill should be provided in the explanatory memorandum.

Some of the preparatory steps the Senedd would ordinarily expect a Welsh Government to undertake prior to introducing a Bill have either not been completed in advance or have been undertaken in parallel with the Bill's introduction. In the committee's view, this represents a departure from good practice and increases the risk of unintended consequences arising because of the reduced opportunity for a rigorous and sequential approach to policy development and scrutiny.

On the issue of impact assessments, the committee was told that the Welsh Government would still require the information to be collected, and so the impact assessments will need to be kept under review and updated. The committee has therefore recommended that, if the general principles of the Bill are agreed today, the Cabinet Secretary should issue statements in good time before the tabling deadlines for Stage 2 and Stage 3 proceedings, detailing any updates to impact assessments and clearly identifying any effect on the provisions in the Bill.

The committee has also highlighted a potential discrepancy between the Bill and the explanatory memorandum regarding who will be liable for offences under the Bill. In the explanatory memorandum, the Cabinet Secretary says,

'Only operators and organisers will be liable for offences under the Bill.'

The committee believes this statement should state that only operators and organisers will be liable for offences under section 1 of the Bill, because it appears to us that anyone could be guilty of an offence under paragraph 12 of Schedule 2. The committee has recommended that the Cabinet Secretary should confirm which persons are liable for offences committed under section 1 of the Bill and paragraph 12 of Schedule 2 to the Bill, and, if appropriate, update the explanatory memorandum accordingly.

Finally, I wish to highlight the committee's fifth recommendation. The Cabinet Secretary told us that a review will be undertaken within five years of commencement, with evaluation activity beginning from 12 months after the Bill comes into force. The committee noted the Cabinet Secretary's comment that a post-implementation review will play a key role in monitoring the effects and impacts of the ban. However, the Cabinet Secretary acknowledges the Bill does not include a statutory requirement for a post-implementation review. There is therefore no guarantee that a future Welsh Government would carry out such a review. As such, the committee recommends that the Cabinet Secretary should table an amendment to the Bill to provide for a post-implementation review of the legislation. Diolch.

Before I call other Members, I have lots of people who have put in a request to speak. It is unlikely I'll be able to call everybody within the timescale we have allocated for the debate. I will do my best, but please bear with me in that sense. Gareth Davies.

Thank you very much, Deputy Llywydd. I would like to begin by making something very clear, which is that I'm a strong supporter of good law making, and I believe in legislation that is clear, accessible, proportionate and evidence based. When laws have grown fragmented over decades, consolidation and streamlining are sensible and necessary, and that's why I support the consolidation of this Bill.

I also want to acknowledge from the outset that there are genuine and sincerely held concerns about greyhound welfare, which I think are shared by everyone. It's been very useful for me to hear that evidence on the Senedd's culture committee. These concerns have been raised by campaigners, by members of the public, and by colleagues in the Senedd, acting in good faith, and should be taken very seriously.

Following scrutiny of the Bill, it doesn't require us to accept that a ban is automatically the most proportionate response, and it is on that point that I plan to vote against this Bill. Whilst acknowledging the welfare concerns, I am not, in theory, opposed to banning the sport if that's where the evidence leads, but I would have liked to have spent more time fully exploring the evidence, and I feel unhappy with the quality of the Bill placed in front of us.

Last week, I visited Wales's only greyhound racing track in Ystrad Mynach in Caerphilly, and I saw first-hand the kennels the dogs were kept in, which were of a very high quality, and I was satisfied that the industry is rightly more than willing to comply with the very high standards of animal welfare regulation. I also have concerns that were raised by both the culture committee and the LJC committee that there has been a lack of an evidence-led approach to this legislation. The culture committee also noted that the Bill was prioritising the legislative timetable as part of the Welsh Government's 2025-26 budget agreement.

Will you take an intervention?

Yes, certainly.

I would just like to say that it's all very well to do an organised, managed visit, but have you spoken to the so-called

'do gooders...scrambling...to get on the right side of history'—

that's a quote from your Facebook page—many of whom are volunteers, stepping in to save these defenceless animals who have been suffering life-altering or life-ending injuries in the name of gambling and entertainment? The council actually visited—[Interruption.] Sorry, I will stop at that. Thank you.

I am utterly charmed, Carolyn, that you follow my social media posts. I'm absolutely flattered, but, yes—

It's been shared by rescue centres.

Yes. No, I'm very pleased. Those are my personal thoughts, but I didn't think those remarks would be suitable for the floor of the Senedd, which is why I share those personal comments in a different capacity. But, like I say, I am truly honoured, Carolyn, that you're taking so much interest in my work.

Accelerating the process and compromising the quality of legislative development—in other words, it was rushed. There has been no consultation on a draft Bill, no publication of impact assessments, and inadequate time for meaningful consultation. Many, such as myself, would have liked a more in-depth analysis of the economic and cultural impact of banning the sport.

As members of the culture committee, we took evidence not just campaigners, but from regulators, from those working in the industry and from communities directly affected. What became increasingly clear to me is that much of the case for this Bill rests on outdated assumptions, selective evidence and a failure to properly engage with the current regulatory reality in Wales.

We have heard repeated claims that tens of thousands of people in Wales are calling for a ban, but when we look closely at the data, that claim simply does not stand up. Just over half of the petition signatures cited were actually from people living within Wales, and the petition itself predated the licensing and regulation of the Valley stadium. It cannot credibly be described as a verdict on today's regulated sport.

We're also told that the consultation evidence demonstrates overwhelmingly public support for a ban, yet the consultation involved around 1,100 responses, which is a tiny fraction of the Welsh population, and the Welsh Government's own analysis acknowledged that a significant proportion of responses supporting a ban were duplicates of the same campaign text. Once those were stripped out, opinion was far more evenly divided.

I'm also concerned about how welfare data has been presented in support of this Bill. Claims of widespread wastage and high injury rates continue to be repeated, despite the fact that all British-bred greyhounds are now registered and tracked, and despite clear evidence that injury rates have fallen to historic lows under the current regulatory framework.

The regulator's data shows an injury rate of just over 1 per cent of the total runs, with the vast majority being minor injuries from which dogs return to racing within weeks. That does not mean welfare concerns vanish, but it does mean the picture is far more nuanced than what has been suggested. Crucially, many of the most serious welfare examples cited relate to a period before licensing and regulation were introduced in Wales. Since then, standards, inspections, veterinary oversight and transparency have all been improved significantly. That improvement is precisely what regulation is meant to achieve, and compliance has been very high.

Yet, instead of recognising the progress and asking how the regulation could be strengthened further, this Bill leaps to the most extreme legislative tool at our disposal: prohibition. I realise I'm running out of time; I don't want to test your patience—

A last sentence would be appreciated.

Great. So, just to summarise, while I respect the intentions behind this Bill, and while I recognise the strength of feeling on all sides, I cannot support legislation that relies on unreliable consultation evidence; fails to properly account for improved regulation; has not explored the economic and cultural impact; and chooses prohibition over more proportionate regulation. For those reasons, Deputy Llywydd, I oppose this Bill.

Like some of the other parties in this Chamber, Plaid Cymru members will have a free vote on this issue today, and whilst the vast majority of my Plaid Cymru colleagues, I know, will be supporting the Bill, I want to explain why I cannot support it.

Let me start, first of all, by acknowledging the importance of animal welfare. Every Member here cares deeply about the well-being of animals. That isn't in question. But a strong ethical basis alone doesn't necessarily make good law. Legislation has to be evidence based, proportionate and effective. On this occasion, as the committee has outlined, that evidence base for this Bill is highly contested and insufficiently robust. That uncertainty undermines confidence in the rationale for this proposal.

On the data, the committee received extensive and conflicting evidence on welfare standards within the greyhound racing industry. Industry representatives on the one hand, and animal welfare charities on the other, repeatedly challenged each other's figures, and the Welsh Government was somewhat caught in the crossfire.

Will you take an intervention?

No, I won't, because I need the time, actually; maybe at the end, Carolyn.

The Government admitted that it should have done more on this, and that more work would be done, but the Government should have undertaken a thorough evaluation of the data before deciding to legislate. Instead, of course, the Bill was introduced without that solid evidential foundation, and that's not how good law is made.

The 2023 consultation, which is used to justify this Bill, was wholly inadequate. The consultation itself wasn't focused on a ban; it was a consultation on licensing animal welfare establishments, cat sanctuaries and the like. It relied on a single question about banning greyhound racing within that broader exercise, and the whole consultation used a self-selecting methodology, which, as the committee says, is vulnerable to bias. Headline figures from that process did suggest strong public support for a ban, yet the committee, as part of our scrutiny, undertook our own engagement and survey work, again using a self-selecting methodology, but that exercise with similar numbers of participants as well showed a near 50:50 split in views, which of course highlights the complexity and the nuance of these exercises.

Good practice demands that strong evidence and rigorous consultation should precede legislation, yet this Bill—according to the committee—was introduced without an agreed evidence base, without comprehensive public engagement and without complete impact assessments. Now, I know LJC are concerned about the lack of key impact assessments. There was no White Paper, no draft Bill, which would have helped with that consultation process, and all of this increases, of course, the risk of unintended consequences, doesn't it? And committee, as we heard from the Chair, was only given eight weeks for Stage 1 scrutiny of the Bill instead of the usual 13 weeks, so, again, these issues weren't tested fully before coming to a conclusion on the general principles of the Bill today.

Speaking of unintended consequences, as we've heard, the ban doesn't stop the breeding of greyhounds, doesn't stop the training of greyhounds in Wales for racing. Dogs could still be kept in Wales and raced in England, increasing travel distances and welfare risks, if you think about it. Stakeholders including some of the animal welfare organisations warned that that could undermine some of the Bill's objectives and the Cabinet Secretary himself in evidence acknowledged that as a risk. If dogs travel further, then welfare obviously could suffer, not improve, and that is a serious concern and that reminds us that this Bill addresses only part of the welfare picture.

Concerns here span a greyhound's entire life, from breeding right through to retirement, and a ban on racing alone will not resolve some of those systemic issues. My personal preference is that enhanced regulation or licensing should have been introduced first, as they have done in England. That was the view of Animal Licensing Wales; the Kennel Club expressed a similar view and a number of other stakeholders too. That phased approach could have tested compliance and improved welfare without the risks that this Bill creates. And yes, if after time we saw that that didn't work, then the option of an outright ban would still be there, and probably more justified at that point.

So, in conclusion, we all share the goal of improving animal welfare, but good intentions don't always deliver good legislation. Legislation needs to be evidence based, proportionate and effective and this Bill falls short on those counts. It lacks a robust evidence base, proper consultation and comprehensive impact assessments. It risks unintended consequences and economic and social harm too for those workers and communities that would be affected by this ban. But importantly as well, it does not address the wider welfare challenges that exist throughout a greyhound's life. Now, for those reasons, I cannot support this Bill and I urge Members to vote against it, not because we oppose animal welfare, but because we believe in making law the right way, the effective way, based on evidence, consultation and sound policy.

I very much welcome this debate and I'm pleased to contribute. Wales has a long-standing history of strong and progressive animal health and welfare legislation, strategies and policies. If this Bill is passed into law, hundreds of greyhounds will be protected from injury and death. Also, currently a significant number of greyhounds are abandoned when they can no longer race, often due to the injuries they have sustained on the racetrack. We owe a great debt of gratitude to the charities and individuals who provide homes for these dogs when they are no longer any use to their racing owners.

Greyhound racing is an outdated practice that has no place in Wales in 2025. We should not tolerate the suffering of animals in the name of entertainment. As Members of the Senedd, we receive a great number of representations in relation to animal welfare, and the Welsh Government has introduced this Bill following strong public support calling for this ban. The Welsh Government has also undertaken a great deal of policy work over the past few years in consultation with stakeholders, with third sector organisations and the greyhound racing industry itself. A consultation was held on the licensing of animal activities and establishments, and the responses to this have strengthened the evidence needed when new laws are being introduced.

I read that the Greyhound Board of Great Britain believes the quality of legislative development was compromised. I profoundly disagree with this, for the reasons I've just stated. As Members, we only want to see the Welsh Government bringing forward good laws, and I very much welcome the scrutiny around this Bill to make it the very best legislation possible, because good scrutiny enhances law making.

As is often the case, there is a wide range of views on this topic, and, of course, it's a very emotive issue. I've listened to both sides of the argument. I've not received any pressure from the extreme animal rights movement, as GBGB have been quoted as stating, but I passionately believe that greyhound racing should be banned in Wales.

I also recognise that it's vital that, even though there is only one greyhound racing track here, any unintended consequences are looked at and taken into consideration. There will be an economic impact, and this is recognised in the length of time it will take to bring this legislation in, currently by April 2030. This is where the implementation group will help you, Cabinet Secretary, to ensure that all aspects of the legislation are assessed for their impact. I urge you to look at that start date again to see if it can be brought forward to save so many more dogs from harm.

There is robust data, mostly from the industry itself, around the number of dogs who've been injured or died whilst racing, and that data is very stark. I would urge Gareth Davies to have another look, because I do not recognise the data that you've quoted. There are now only a few countries in the world that allow greyhound racing. Do we in Wales really want to be one of them? We're better than that in the care of our animals, and I urge Members across this Chamber to support these principles.

I just want to thank the committees first. I appreciate the pressure you're under and the reflections that you gave, so thank you very much. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

You've heard me before on this topic, so I'm not going to speak for very long. I think I'm the only owner, both past and present, of a rescue greyhound in this Siambr. This is why, for me, it's about the welfare of dogs—not just the greyhounds that I own and have owned, but all dogs, because my dogs did not have the start that many of your dogs had in life. They came to me really damaged. My second dog, Wanda, who I have now, on her first day with us, actually slept on the kitchen floor because she thought that's where she should sleep. These are animals that have been raced. They have been cruelly treated, and I'm not going to milk that word. It is cruel what happens to our greyhounds.

I'm pleased that here in Wales we will be the first nation in the UK, I hope, to introduce this ban, and we know that other nations follow suit. So, the arguments about dogs going to perhaps England or Scotland or Northern Ireland to race will, hopefully, stop, because we know that there is lobbying going on in those countries as well to stop greyhound racing.

I want to finish by reminding us that the Cut the Chase coalition consists of reputable animal welfare organisations. I want to finish by thanking those organisations, because they are the ones who have brought us to where we are today: the RSPCA, Blue Cross, Greyhound Rescue Wales, Dogs Trust, Hope Rescue, and a special shout-out for Joan Whittaker from Almost Home in north Wales, who is passionate about her dog rescue centre. She is absolutely up to the gills in terms of animals that need rescuing, and, on top of that, greyhounds are brought to her week after week, and that shouldn't be happening. So, I'd like to pay tribute to those organisations. I'm finishing by asking you to vote for this Bill because I want Wales to be the first nation to be clear that we put animals first. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

It gives me great pleasure to support the Prohibition of Greyhound Racing (Wales) Bill. Like many colleagues, I have consistently fought for a ban on greyhound racing, despite intense lobbying and misinformation spread by those with vested interests in maintaining this cruel, inhumane practice. Let us be clear that dogs are being subjected to horrendous injury and death in order to maximise profits for the multibillion pound betting industry. Dogs are forced to race on waterlogged tracks to sate the greed of online gambling. Dogs die so that betting company directors and shareholders can cash in. Enough is enough. I urge Members to reject the Greyhound Board of Great Britain's position and back the Bill. Is the legislation perfect? No, it is not. But that is not a reason to abandon greyhounds to suffer at the hands of a greedy industry. Diolch yn fawr.

As with many other Members here, I'm often struck by the strength of public feeling in support of animal welfare and wanting the Senedd and Welsh Government to legislate effectively to protect our animals and the welfare of those animals here in Wales. It's one of the most often raised issues with me in all sorts of forums, whether it's my e-mail inbox or bumping into people in the constituency or otherwise. And when I walk in the local parks, I'm very much struck by the number of greyhounds and greyhound owners who have taken those dogs as rescue dogs, as we heard from Jane Dodds earlier. It's really striking just how many rescue dogs are greyhounds and are being looked after by committed and caring individuals and families here in Wales.

When we had that Cut the Chase coalition—again, that Jane Dodds referenced earlier—coming here to the Senedd and laying out those 300 collars on the Senedd steps, representing dogs who were killed in a single year racing at licensed tracks in England and Wales, I thought that was a very powerful statement and evidence of the harm that racing greyhounds suffer.

I think it is quite clear, as we've heard from many Members, that these greyhounds are harmed. They're being killed, they're being injured. There are collisions, there are falls on those licensed tracks throughout the year, and much evidence around to detail that. That's why I think there is that strength of public feeling, which certainly I discern in the contacts that I've had from constituents, to support a ban on greyhound racing in Wales, as proposed in this legislation.

I do believe, Dirprwy Lywydd, that the Welsh Government and the Senedd do have a very good record on animal welfare and animal rights. I think we should be proud of that, and it is widely recognised not just in the UK, but, actually, right across the globe. I think it's a very good reality and image for the devolved Government in Wales to have, being so progressive and being recognised as being so progressive on these issues, which are so important to animals, but also to people who are so committed and understanding of the fact that dumb animals, as we often say, do require humans not to be dumb, to understand the issues and to act upon them, because, obviously, animals haven't got the power themselves to achieve what needs to be achieved.

I do believe that this legislation, despite what we've heard in terms of some of the views on its progress through the Senedd and alleged shortcomings, will achieve what needs to be achieved. That's the acid test, I think, Dirprwy Lywydd, isn't it: will this Bill, if enacted as proposed, lessen that harm, lessen those deaths to greyhounds in England and Wales in terms of the track that we have here in our country. So, I'm very pleased to support it, and to support the general principles today. I think we've heard some very powerful contributions. Altaf Hussain, for example, really set the context for the reality of what licensed greyhound racing involves in its wider aspects, and I'm so pleased to support the general principles here today.

I'm sure it will surprise nobody in this Chamber today that I'll be speaking against the general principles of the prohibition of greyhound racing Bill. Let me begin by saying this: this debate is not about whether Members of this Chamber care about animal welfare—of course, we all do, and I own a dog myself. The real question is whether this Bill represents good law, whether it's grounded in evidence and whether it has been developed through a process worthy of this Senedd. On each of those tests, it falls massively short.

The concerns raised are not speculative, they are not partisan, they come directly from our own scrutiny committees. The culture committee and the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, both cross-party bodies, have been remarkably consistent in their criticism of how this Bill has been brought forward. The culture committee was clear that the accelerated timetable, driven by the 2025-26 budget agreement with the Liberal Democrats, has compromised the quality of the legislative development of this Bill. It explicitly warned that important questions remain unresolved, that Members lacked sufficient information to assess the impact of this Bill at Stage 1, and that meaningful consultation has simply not taken place. The Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee went further, raising fundamental concerns about whether this Bill actually sits within the legislative competence of the Senedd, its evidence base, and the absence of an impact assessment. That committee exists to safeguard the quality, clarity and constitutional integrity of our law making here in Wales. When it raises red flags, we should all pay attention and take their concerns extremely seriously.

I would gently suggest that no-one in this Chamber should be more alarmed at the state of this legislation than the Deputy First Minister himself, given that he previously chaired the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, having once been responsible for holding others to account on legislative standards. I can imagine he had been looking at this Bill and thinking, 'I would have been quite robust with myself on this one.' Perhaps the first thing that he would have seen as a former Chair of the committee is his time marking his own homework. And I would today say this tongue in cheek to the Deputy First Minister: from the comments from his former committee colleagues, I would not suggest that his legislation would get a glowing report.

Deputy Presiding Officer, the procedural failings here are serious. There was no White Paper, there was no draft Bill, there was no published impact assessment prior to introduction, stakeholders were not properly consulted before decisions had effectively already been made for legislation that proposed a total prohibition on lawful, regulated activity. That is simply not good enough, and the Deputy First Minister should have known better.

This lack of due process risks undermining the public confidence in our work here in this Siambr. It also places Members in an impossible position, being asked to endorse the general principles of a Bill without the evidence needed to properly scrutinise it, and implement law on contradicted data and anecdotal claims from those who want to ban, and most of those turned out to be lies.

The committee have also been clear about the absence of a comprehensive and social impact assessment. The culture committee has explicitly recommended that such an assessment should be carried out before the Bill progresses further. This is not a minor detail and is central to understanding the consequences of what is being proposed. I am glad that you've accepted this recommendation, but it is a shame it wasn't brought forward in the first place.

We're also talking about jobs, about businesses and communities, many of them in areas where employment is not readily available. Yet we're being asked to legislate first and assess the damage later. That turns the entire legislative process on its head.

There is also a glaring contradiction in the Bill's stated purpose. We are told about animal welfare, yet there is no convincing evidence that has been produced to demonstrate that a blanket ban will improve welfare outcomes. On the contrary, licensed greyhound racing currently operates within a regulated framework with oversight and inspection, accountability and a vet on the track. If the Welsh Government had genuine concerns about animal welfare, one would have expected a serious review of that regulation enforcement to be a starting point. That option appears to have been dismissed without proper exploration in favour of the most extreme measure available: a complete ban.

Our committees have done their job, they've scrutinised, questioned and warned. As members of the Senedd, it is now our responsibility to listen to them.

Will you give way?

No, I'm not giving way. I’m almost out of time, Lee. I have listened, and I'll encourage other Senedd Members to do the same.

When I visited the Valley track not that long ago, one person who was there asked me to read this out, and I will do: ‘It seems that many of the politicians in Cardiff Bay do not care about me, my life or my job. I love my greyhound, he sleeps on my bed every night, and I love him dearly. It seems that those politicians in Cardiff Bay have lost track with reality. They've lost track with working people who represent my community. Shame on them, and shame on anybody with this ban. May cannot come soon enough as you've all lost all grip on reality.’

For those reasons, Deputy Presiding Officer, I cannot support the general principles of this Bill, and I suggest that all Members reject it for the sake of our parliamentary integrity.

If there was one set of breeds that I would recommend to anyone to own, it's sighthounds, where greyhounds sit. They are as a dog should be, one of the few breeds to be mentioned in the Bible, a breed that hasn't been tampered with. And, yes, Siân Gwenllian was right, they like to run, they love to run, but that wasn't the original purpose of the breed. The purpose of the breed was, like many other breeds, all about hunting and all about being a companion animal.

I think, actually, it's quite telling that there are only a small number of countries in the world that still allow commercial greyhound racing. Right now the UK, and as a result of that, Wales, is one of them. Now, Members already know my view on it. I've spoken a number of times on this particular topic. Delyth, in her contribution, mentioned that every single witness accepted that there would be injuries and deaths of greyhounds if racing were to continue in its current form, even if it was to be regulated as well. So, I think the question that Members really do ask themselves is how many injuries or deaths is acceptable? Now, I know the answer from my perspective on that question. I don't think any injuries or deaths are acceptable. And let's be clear here: those injuries and deaths would be acceptable in the name of profit and entertainment, even in a regulated space. That's something I am profoundly uncomfortable with and a reason why I'll be supporting the general principles of this Bill. But I do think it is important to recognise some of those concerns.

I really welcome the acceptance of recommendations 1 and 2 within the culture committee's report for that economic impact assessment, and support for those people who work at the track to ensure that they're able to find work elsewhere, because we are talking about people's lives here. We are talking about people who, despite those differing views, do love their dogs very dearly, do enjoy and love the work that they do, and this will impact on them.

The other concern that I do have, and it's been raised by a number of Members, is the accelerated timetable of this Bill and I think a number of people have pointed out as to why that has caused problems. I don't think there is any point in ignoring the fact that the administrative court has granted permission for a legal challenge of this Bill. So, what I would like to understand from the Cabinet Secretary is, if that legal challenge was to progress, how that would affect the progression of this Bill. Any further delay will, of course, result in more of those injuries and deaths within the industry. So, some clarity on that would be very welcome, I think, not just from the perspective of Members who are in support of this Bill, but also those animal welfare charities and organisations, as well as those in the industry who are vested in this Bill.

So, just to conclude very quickly, Dirprwy Lywydd, I will be supporting the general principles of this Bill, but there are a number of concerns that need to be addressed, and I hope that the Cabinet Secretary will be able to address those in his answers to us today.

Before I call the last speaker, since it's been mentioned by Luke Fletcher, Members will be aware that this matter is the subject of active judicial review proceedings, and so Standing Order 13.15 applies. It is not in order to make any comments that speculate about what the outcome of the case will be, or ought to be. It is for the court to determine those issues. So, the Cabinet Secretary may not answer specifically, but may look at a generic picture if he wishes to. But be careful in your response, Cabinet Secretary. The last speaker is Carolyn Thomas.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. This journey was started by Vanessa from Hope Rescue when she submitted her petition calling for a ban on greyhound racing at the beginning of this Senedd term. The petition received an incredible 35,000 signatures, securing an evidence inquiry by the Petitions Committee and subsequently a debate in the Chamber that received support from members of all parties across this Chamber. Vanessa and her team have first-hand experience of the horrendous cruelty that has taken place at the Valley track in south Wales, with dogs losing their lives and suffering life-altering injuries on that track on a regular basis, and so have other rescue charities.

It's extremely naive to think that attending an organised, managed visit for a photo-op will give you a true understanding of the conditions dogs are kept in. Caerphilly County Borough Council have inspected the site on two different occasions since it became licensed. Concerns regarding cleanliness were identified on their first visit to the track's training and racing kennels in 2024, with trainer standards found to be seriously lacking.

During the council's second visit earlier this year, which came after their officers were either asked to leave or refused entry on two occasions prior, the council raised serious concerns about the maintenance and cleanliness of the kennel blocks and the husbandry of the dogs, with some kennels having a strong smell of urine and faeces. The council also noted concerns about the kennel sizes and whether they are adequate and suitable to meet the needs of the dogs when housed for considerable lengths of time.

The RSPCA has reported that these dogs spend as much as 95 per cent of their time in these unacceptable conditions. It's cruelty, plain and simple, and must be stopped. The numbers speak for themselves. GBGB's data from 2024 shows that 346 dogs involved in racing died from non-natural causes. Of these, 123 were euthanised at the racetrack, marking an increase for the second year in a row. Meanwhile, 51 dogs were euthanised for being unsuitable for rehoming.

I'd like to tell you the story of Last Hope, a racing greyhound who raced at all three independent racetracks that were operating in Wales at the time. He was left dead on a mountainside, with a hole in his forehead and both ears cut off to hide his identity. Dogs used for racing have their ears tattooed. He was still alive. His tail was wagging, but he couldn't move. He'd been left for two days on the mountainside. His killer had been paid £10 to dispose of him. A dog's racing life ends at between three to five years of age, that's all. But that is if they make the grade. There is a lot of wastage in the industry. Some rescue dogs are extremely nervous as well. It takes a long time to support them into their forever home, as Jane Dodds knows. Sometimes they've been scatter fed or they drink from a trough, and they're very nervous about going into a home.

We have had many debates on this topic and we must keep the welfare of greyhounds at the centre of this debate. A ban on this cruel sport has received cross-party support throughout, and I implore Members not to turn their backs on these innocent animals at this crucial stage. And I, for one, take pride in being on the right side of history in this. Diolch.

Thank you to Members who've spoken in the debate today, with different views—I welcome that—but also my thanks to the committee again, and as I said in my opening remarks, I'll write in detail on the points.

I just want to take a few minutes, Dirprwy Lywydd, just to cover some points in response, and I'll try not to reiterate points that I made in my opening remarks. First of all, just to be clear, the decision to implement a ban follows several years of sustained stakeholder campaigning, a 2022 petition, evidence gathering, including the consultation on animal activities and, indeed, Senedd debate. It's a response to clear public and cross-party support for positive change driven by animal welfare concerns, ethical considerations and growing recognition that using animals for entertainment is increasingly seen as unacceptable. In line with the prevention-focused approach outlined in the animal welfare plan for Wales, a ban on greyhound racing presents a proactive measure to protect greyhounds from potential harm, addressing welfare concerns before they arise, rather than relying on reactive enforcement.

If I can turn to the issue of lifetime welfare. Although the Bill focuses on racing and training, this does not preclude, to be clear, further action outside of the Bill. We accept the Petition Committee's recommendation that improving welfare must consider the whole life of the dog. We remain committed to that broader ambition. Indeed, as outlined in my June 2025 statement, Welsh Government has taken a phased approach to developing a national model for animal welfare regulation. We remain committed to improving welfare across the whole life of animals and will continue to monitor and gather evidence to inform future decisions under this broader framework. Just to say, the move towards a ban aligns with our broader strategy to introduce a national model for regulating animal welfare establishments and activities, ensuring consistent, proportionate and enforceable standards across Wales.

On the timeliness of taking this legislation forward, let me say: the decision to ban greyhound racing, which is now in front of this Senedd, has been taken as a measure to prevent further harm. It's driven by those strong welfare and ethical concerns, and it reflects the Welsh Government's commitment, ongoing, to prioritising animal welfare.

Let me turn to the issue of the committee's scrutiny and the points that have been made on legislation. We're absolutely committed, I am absolutely committed, to delivering legislation that meets the highest standard of practice. I just want to be clear that all relevant impact assessments were completed and the key findings were included in the explanatory memorandum.

This legislation is proposed to come into force between April 2027 and April 2030. This window gives time to consider how the industry in Wales will wind down its activities, allows the implementation group to advise on whether any key areas need to be addressed during that period, in readiness for a ban. It's the implementation group that will be instrumental in advising and providing practical guidance, so that the ban can be introduced in a way that minimises the impact on greyhounds and the local community and the local economy as well.

Dirprwy Lywydd, I can't, in the minutes I've got available, cover every single point, and, as I've said, I will write to the committee Chairs as well. But I wanted to just deal with one other issue raised by Luke there. Just to be clear, the view of Welsh Government is that the grant of permission by the High Court is not an impediment to the timetable of the Bill. The Bill will continue to proceed through the Senedd's legislative process.

In conclusion, Dirprwy Lywydd, I therefore urge Members to please support the motion: vote in favour of the general principles of the Prohibition of Greyhound Racing (Wales) Bill. 

As Members here will by now all know, that pattern has been sustained into next year, with a path to the final budget having been agreed for 2026-27. Llywydd, I think this is very good news: good news for this Senedd in demonstrating our ability to discharge the responsibilities that fall to us; good news for our public services and all those who work in them; and most of all, of course, good news for Welsh citizens, because the catastrophe of a failed budget has now been avoided and those in the health service and our colleagues in local government have the certainty they need to plan and to invest in services next year. I know from my conversations with those who lead those services how glad they are that we've been able to come to that agreement before Christmas, giving them the certainty they need to plan ahead rather than the anxiety that otherwise would have characterised our recess period.

All of this means, Llywydd, that we have secured that more ambitious set of outcomes, which I remember advocating for on the floor of the Senedd from the very start of the budget process: £180 million more for health and social care; a 4.5 per cent uplift in the revenue support grant so that councils can invest in education, in social services and all those vital differences that our local authorities make in people's lives. I'm particularly grateful to those colleagues in Plaid Cymru for the discussions that we were able to hold a week or so ago and which have led to that outcome. The result, inevitably, is that some of the key points made in the Finance Committee report, as published over the weekend, have now to be seen in that new context.

Of course, subject committee reports were published yesterday. I've had the chance to read a summary of each and the recommendations, and, of course, I look forward to having the benefit of listening to the Chairs of those committees this afternoon and to being able to read the reports fully after today's debate.

Llywydd, before we hear from those involved in the scrutiny process, I do just want to put today's discussions in their wider context. Next year's budget will be the largest ever available to the Senedd in terms of both revenue and capital. Not only does it provide more than £1 billion in new funding, but it does so over and above the £1.6 billion uplift embedded in the current year's budget, with the enduring impact it demonstrates of the agreement reached this time last year with Jane Dodds. Those uplifts are largely the result of a Labour Government in Westminster. Now, it's convenient, I know, for some here to suggest that the election of that Government has made no difference. Well, Llywydd, I've been this Senedd's finance Minister under the last Conservative Government, dedicated as it was to the economics of austerity and public service retrenchment. And I'm Finance Minister again now under a Labour Government, with its commitment to economic growth and investment in our public services. The difference is absolutely real, and it makes a real difference here in Wales.

But the draft budget, of course, is not entirely made up of consequentials from decisions made elsewhere. Increasingly, the decisions made here on the floor of the Senedd also make a difference. The fiscal framework agreed in 2016 has produced more than £1 billion in additional funding for this Senedd, and over £500 million to next year's budget. It's how we have been able to sustain spending per person on education at 7 per higher than England and 13 per cent higher on health and social care, where spending in Wales is also higher per person than in Scotland and Northern Ireland, while the growth in health spending between 2023-24 and 2024-25 in Wales, at 8 per cent, was higher than any other UK country or region.

And how we have managed our fiscal responsibilities here has added materially to the funding available in next year's budget: a positive impact of the Welsh rates of income tax of £484 million; £42 million additional from land transaction tax; and £20 million from landfill disposals tax—over £500 million more to spend on public services here in Wales because of the decisions that we have made in this Senedd.

And now, next year, with unfettered access once again to the Wales reserve and updated figures for the fiscal framework, there will be a further positive impact on next year's budget. These are the different streams that, together, make up the global sum available for 2026-27. It is all of this that allows us to respond to the many calls for funding that we know are there in Wales. It means we can go on investing in the homes we need for the future, to respond to climate change through our programme of flood prevention at the coast and inland. And, Llywydd, I note the welcome provided by the Climate Change, Environment and Infrastructure Committee to the review of the coastal risk management programme and the 11.7 per cent increase in flood risk capital allocation. And at the same time, and beyond all that, we'll take forward the outstanding success of our twenty-first century schools and colleges programme.

Llywydd, there are so many more parts of the draft budget that I could commend to the Senedd this afternoon. I'm going to leave my opening remarks there, however, Llywydd, because I hope to have time to respond at the end of the debate to the issues that I know will be raised by Members as a result of their involvement in the scrutiny process.

We acknowledge the Cabinet Secretary's pragmatic approach of restating the current year's budget for 2026-27 and the space this has provided for political discussion to agree a budget deal. While this is understandable, framing a budget as neutral risks obscuring the real choices made by the Welsh Government. We believe that stakeholders need more clarity on how departmental allocations are determined, and call on the Cabinet Secretary to make those choices clear in the narrative supporting the final budget.

The committee is concerned about the inflationary assumptions underpinning the budget. While health and local government receive uplifts, these are based on Office for Budgetary Responsibility forecasts from March and are already outdated, meaning that some areas face real-terms cuts unless funding increases. We call on the Cabinet Secretary to conduct an assessment of inflationary pressures across public services and the impact of higher-than-forecast wage growth, and to publish mitigation options alongside the final budget.

Turning now to the thematic areas covered as part of our work, productivity is the engine of economic growth, and we heard that it is fundamental to improving living standards and sustaining public services. Our evidence shows that Wales faces a persistent productivity gap, compared to the UK average. We urge the Cabinet Secretary to include a high-level commitment to productivity growth and to develop a national productivity plan to drive long-term improvement, underpinned by skills, infrastructure and commitment to public sector efficiency. This plan should draw on the six core recommendations from the Productivity Institute's insight paper, which we have published in our report and sets clear targets and evaluation mechanisms. The committee also recognises the potential role of emerging technologies to improve productivity. However, there is a gap between the potential benefits and the practical realities, especially the limitations of IT infrastructure in parts of the public sector. This is why we call on the Cabinet Secretary to set out how the budget supports public sector adoption of artificial intelligence and automation to improve productivity.

As Members are aware, retail, leisure and hospitality rate relief ends in March 2026. While we welcome powers to apply a differential non-domestic rates multiplier and proposals for a lower multiplier to support high-street retail, uncertainty remains about its impact, particularly as it excludes hospitality and leisure businesses. Given the strength of feeling expressed to us, we call on the Cabinet Secretary to provide details of measures in the draft budget to support these sectors. We also ask the Welsh Government to assess the effectiveness of these latest proposals and whether they could be extended to leisure and hospitality sectors too.

The committee also heard that cost-of-living pressures persist, and welcomes measures in the draft budget to support those hardest hit, which include the childcare offer and Flying Start. But our evidence suggests that the Welsh Government could provide further clarity on their implementation and accessibility, and we call on these issues to be addressed. We also share concerns about social housing shortages and urge the Welsh Government to maximise all capital sources available to boost housing supply.

Diolch, Llywydd, and may I echo your words to the Chair of the Finance Committee, a committee that I sit on, and wish Peredur Owen Griffiths all the best? I also thank the Welsh Labour Government and their friends in Plaid Cymru for bringing forward today's draft budget as a debate and move our amendment as well.

I'd like to start my contribution by outlining that, on these benches, as Conservatives, we will not be supporting the budget as drafted in front of us. It fails to deliver on the priorities of the people of Wales, it does not deliver on tackling waste or provide the tax cuts that people in Wales need. Put simply, we want to get our economy moving. The most pressing issue of the day is our economy, and the fact that more and more people are not working under Labour, driven by the decisions of this Labour Government and by the Labour Government at the other end of the M4. Our economy is faltering, and this budget does nothing to address such a pressing need. 

The labour market statistics released today highlight once again that Labour and Plaid's unemployment crisis is deepening. The Welsh Government must get a grip. Unemployment is increasing. It remains the highest of all the nations of the UK, and economic inactivity is the highest in Britain also. That's why, as a responsible opposition, we reached out to the First Minister to outline that we were prepared to do something to see if we could help.

We wanted to deliver on our Conservative aims, support our economy and the priorities of the people of Wales. Because we know, all together, that there's around £600 million of unallocated money left for next year's budget, and that's why, for a start, we wanted to see if some of that could be used to scrap stamp duty here in Wales on primary residences. This unnecessary tax needs to be scrapped. It would get our economy moving and deliver positive change for people in Wales, supporting them with a place that they can call their own.

But, of course, this isn't the only thing that we need. Whether it's the Welsh Labour Government in Cardiff Bay or the UK Labour Government in Westminster, workers, pensioners, savers, businesses and investors are all being hit, and we want a budget that sees tax cuts for family firms and family farms to give them a fighting chance to carry on. We want a budget that gets our economy growing, so that families have more money in their pockets, because on these benches we trust people to spend and manage their own money. There’s nothing new in this budget that seriously tackles the cost-of-living pressures that families are facing.

We want a budget that supports our farmers who work tirelessly to feed the nation while facing mounting costs and growing uncertainty, and we are certainly disappointed to see that Plaid Cymru did not negotiate specifically for farmers in this budget agreement. We want a budget that sees our high streets boosted, protects local jobs and ensures our town centres can once again thrive rather than merely survive. There are far too many barriers to growth for businesses in Wales due to an anti-business, anti-growth agenda being pursued by both Labour Governments, and we saw this in UK Labour's autumn budget and we're seeing it now in the Labour and Plaid draft budget here in Wales. It's clear that businesses do not trust these parties with the economy.

Labour and Plaid simply do not understand the needs of business and fail to realise that sustainable, long-term prosperity comes from businesses, businesses that invest, expand and employ people. [Interruption.] They don't like to hear it. They don't like to hear the importance of businesses here in Wales. They don't believe that a strong society is built on a strong economy. The schools that we cherish, the roads we drive on, and of course our NHS, none of these can be funded by good intentions alone. They’re funded by the tax receipts generated by profitable, thriving private enterprises and this budget does nothing new to secure their future.

As a party, of course, we're committed to financial responsibility. We cannot ignore the vast sums—[Interruption.]—we cannot ignore the vast sums of money that this Government alongside their friends in Plaid Cymru continue to happily waste. We believe that Welsh taxpayers' money should be spent on devolved issues, things that are the clear responsibility of this Senedd. We don't think that Welsh taxpayers' money should be spent on things that have nothing to do with the responsibilities of this place, such as overseas embassies, planting those trees in Uganda or solar-panelled canoes in South America. This Welsh Government should instead be focusing its resources on the priorities of the people of Wales.

The people of Wales want and deserve a Welsh Government budget that gets our economy working—[Interruption.]—one that drives growth, backs job creation, and puts more money back in people's pockets, because without a growing economy, there can be no sustainable public services, no rising living standards, and no real opportunities for families to get ahead.

Also, people in Wales want a budget that allows us to get to grip with the scandalous situation we continue to see in our Welsh NHS: the longest NHS waiting lists in the UK. You’re nearly 500 times more likely to wait two years or more for treatment in Wales than if you live over the border in England. That is a national disgrace. The Welsh Government must begin addressing the systemic problems within the NHS. Investment needs to be properly targeted because, at present, money handed to health boards without the right support or oversight is not delivering the improvements that patients need.

But of course, we're not going to see this improvement if we continue with more of the same. Yet again, as we've seen numerous times over the last 26 years, Plaid Cymru and Labour get together and are continuing to fail the people of Wales. Twenty-six years of socialist policies under Welsh Labour and Plaid Cymru have resulted in Wales having the highest unemployment, the longest NHS waiting lists—[Interruption.]—are you going to deny this?—the highest unemployment, the longest NHS waiting lists, and the worst educational outcomes in the UK. It's an absolute disgrace.

The issue here is that Plaid Cymru could have negotiated for actual real change that benefits the people of Wales, but instead of negotiating, they've completely capitulated. But as we know, Plaid and Labour are like two ends of a pantomime horse, leaving the people of Wales to decide which is the rear end. Labour's failures are Plaid's failures, and a vote for Labour is a vote for Plaid, and a vote for Plaid is a vote for Labour.

But there is hope—there is hope. Welsh Conservatives recognise that this budget fails to deliver those tax cuts, fails to cut waste and fails to get our economy moving. The people of Wales have a chance to get rid of Labour and Plaid's failed socialism and back our Welsh Conservative plan to deliver tax cuts, cut waste and get our economy moving. Only the Welsh Conservatives have a budget that can fix Wales, and I urge all Members to support our amendment here today.

It looks like someone's getting ready to play a pantomime villain over there. This is supposed to be a serious debate, and I will engage with the subject seriously, because when the Cabinet Secretary first introduced this budget in July of this year, he claimed it would provide stability and certainty for our public services and for our constituents. However, as the scrutiny process has highlighted, this has not been the case.

As was highlighted by the Welsh Local Government Association within a few days of its publication, the Cabinet Secretary's initial spending plans represented a high-risk scenario for local government, threatening thousands of job losses, eye-watering council tax rises of over 22 per cent, and the very real prospect of bankruptcy for some of our councils. It would also have represented a historically low real-terms uplift for the health budget, at a time when the health system is buckling under the pressure of ever-increasing demand and Labour's perennial mismanagement.

In short, therefore, this was a budget that, if it was left unamended, would have proved catastrophic for Wales. It is also deeply unfortunate, as the likes of the Wales Governance Centre alluded to, that the Cabinet Secretary initially portrayed the unallocated headroom as some kind of start-up fund for the next Government to spend as it saw fit. The reality is, as I suspect that he knew all along, given the strain on our public services, the remaining revenue funding had to be allocated. Not doing so would have created real harm.

But the Cabinet Secretary was right about one thing, that the responsibility for ensuring the successful passage of a budget lies with the Senedd as a whole. We have all agreed over the past few months that we needed to find a way to pass the budget, and that's precisely what we have done. Let's be clear here: Plaid Cymru will not be supporting the budget; we will be abstaining to allow it to pass.

I listened very carefully to Sam Rowlands's comments just now and his misinterpretation, purposefully, of the agreement that has been reached in order to pass the budget, just as I listened to Darren Millar's comments earlier, which were also a misinterpretation. In characteristic fashion, the Tories have once again exposed themselves as thoroughly unserious players. Instead of actually bringing credible plans to the table, we heard about all the things the Conservatives would like to see in the budget, but they weren't on your list. You've resorted to your favourite habit of indulging in fantasy economics, of uncosted spending cuts lifted straight from Liz Truss's playbook. No wonder Tory voters in Wales are a rare breed these days and why so many of your former colleagues are now trying to rebrand themselves so that they have a job after next May as Reform Members.

So, let me be clear. The draft budget, even post agreement with Plaid Cymru on the previously unallocated funds, remains a Labour budget, and it is not the budget a Plaid Cymru Government would have laid. We do not agree with the approach taken, and we've been struck more than anything by the lack of ambition and vision demonstrated by the Labour Government in proposing nothing more than a business-as-usual budget before going to the electorate in only a few months' time. The situation we were put in as a Senedd, and the instability created by the draft budget, really do give the impression that Labour, after 26 years in charge, are very much out of ideas and are tired of governing. In fact, the budget has the hallmarks of Labour's legacy of managed decline, superficial quick fixes prioritised over sustainable long-term solutions, insufficient emphasis on a preventative approach to public spending, and a distinct lack of radicalism to address the deep-rooted problems affecting our health system, our economy and our schools.

Had there been no agreement, who would have suffered? The people who have elected us to represent them and the services that they care about, which is why Plaid Cymru took the decision to accept the offer to discuss the budget. So, what did we secure through those discussions in return for abstaining on the budget? A 4.5 per cent average uplift for local authorities, with nobody receiving less than 4.1 per cent, which will save thousands of jobs, as well as ensure that the average Welsh household is at least £260 better off next year. Our precious health system has also been boosted by an additional £180 million, giving it much-needed breathing space ahead of what is likely to be another challenging year. And £120 million of capital funding unallocated and ready for the next Government, which, of course, I hope will be a Plaid Cymru Government, to spend on its priorities, as outlined to the Welsh electorate over the next few months.

This is not Plaid Cymru propping up Labour. This is Plaid Cymru preparing to govern and making sure that our public services have the stability they need in the run-up to the election. It's about putting people and our communities at the forefront of our work here in the Senedd and being mature and responsible in our politics. If we have the privilege of leading the next Government, I promise this today: we will present a far more ambitious budget within the first 100 days of the next Senedd term, charting a bold, new future for our nation. We will also always stand up for this Senedd to have the resources and the control over the resources needed to better serve the people of Wales in every corner of Wales. Unlike the First Minister, we will not be content to have even a penny less than the people of Wales are owed from Westminster, and that, too, is a promise I make to the people of Wales today.

I am pleased that the funding that was held back for negotiating in the interim budget has gone to uplifting public services, provided through local authorities and health, representing an additional £290 million in funding. I could not have voted for an austerity budget and seen the everyday services that matter to everyone collapse, or to have seen mass redundancies.

I believe that it is because of those cuts over the years that we've actually seen a rise in dissatisfaction within our communities and votes for Reform, who, along with the Conservatives, want to see more cuts to welfare and public services, so we continue the cycle of deprivation and dissatisfaction. In many areas, public services are the biggest employer, whether through the councils or through health. Betsi Cadwaladr employs approximately 19,000 people in north Wales and councils employ between 5,500 and 8,000 people, depending on the size of the population. We also need to invest in the foundational economy. If we want childcare, we need to invest in decent, well-paid jobs in care, with career pathways. To build homes, we need to ensure that we have planners, we need drainage experts. Many of these have already been lost to private companies who can pay more, but we need to retain them in our public services.

My journey into politics started because I wanted to improve the local community I lived in. I wanted to improve the play area—I'm looking to Rhys, because he's got a debate on this tomorrow. We wanted a village notice board, a pedestrian crossing, a bus and a 40 mph speed limit down the road. But these all require little pots of funding; they really matter to communities, for strong communities. Two years after becoming a county councillor, austerity started. We then had year upon year, upon year, upon year, upon year, upon year—14 times 'upon year'—of austerity. There was restructuring, reorganising, job posts were deleted when they became vacant—not just front-line services, but directors went and they were replaced by a few chief officers. We lost expertise as people took early redundancy or went to more lucrative employment.

We were proud that we were the first council in a generation to build council houses, but to do that, yes, we did have to sell off the council silver, such as tenant farms and smallholdings. It was horrible. It was devastating. I used to fight for money to repair roads, but there was a call on that budget. So, since becoming a Member of the Senedd, I keep lobbying for funding for highways. I'm glad that the local road network—. And I'm pleased that the Government has been able to continue with the revenue to cover the cost of borrowing in next year's budget, so that we can continue to fix potholes, which the First Minister keeps mentioning, and do proper repairs and infrastructure improvements.

I joined the Labour Party to fight against austerity. I'm glad that my party has once again found a partner to pass a budget that protects public services and makes sure that people are not left behind. Last year, it was Jane Dodds, and I'm pleased that all the excellent requests that she made last year, such as the funding for play, the £1 bus fare and money for other public services, are already in this budget and will continue next year. Your legacy continues, Jane.

We have just passed the bus Bill, and £800 million has been invested in new trains, which saw a 25 per cent increase in passengers, but we need to see investment in buses going forward. We need that public money to do that.

The Conservatives and Reform are wrong to believe that there are more savings to be made. It's been done over those 14 years of austerity. Since becoming a Senedd Member, I have often been astounded by the questions and the hypocrisy calling for more money to address health, housing, education and poverty issues, yet they want to further cut welfare and public service funding. It just doesn't add up. You can't do both. This budget agreement will benefit everyone who relies on public services, and the hundreds of thousands of people working in them as well. Thank you.

Diolch, Llywydd. I want to start by saying that the Health and Social Care Committee’s report on the draft budget relates to the budget documents published in October and November of this year. As part of the draft settlement, the health service was facing uplifts of only around 2 per cent for inflation and public sector pay respectively. This would have amounted to a real-terms increase of around just 0.5 per cent, once inflation was accounted for, which would have been historically low in terms of funding for the NHS.

The Cabinet Secretary for health described this position as 'exceptionally challenging' for health and social care, and told us that it would be essential for the health and social care main expenditure group to secure further funding as part of the final budget in order for the health service to deliver its functions—a stark position, we felt. This was the reason we felt it necessary to make a recommendation that the Welsh Government prioritises securing additional funding for the health and social care MEG in the final budget.

However, as already referred to, on 9 December, the Welsh Government announced details of a budget agreement with Plaid Cymru to provide the additional funding of £180 million for health and social care, and £112.8 million for local government. Although we have not had the opportunity as a committee to consider the announcement, I’m sure this additional funding will be a welcome uplift to the health and social care budget.

In this budget, as with previous years, the committee has been keen to understand how the Welsh Government is demonstrating a significant shift in future spending towards prevention as a means of promoting population health and reducing inequalities. We recognise the challenges facing the health service, particularly in relation to waiting times, workforce pressures and an ageing estate, but it's essential to balance these short-term demands with longer term transformation, and to make sure that longer term investment in prevention is not lost in short-term decision making. Our report makes a number of recommendations to the Cabinet Secretary for health about preventative spending, particularly around accountability and impact measurement, and we look forward to considering his response. 

In relation to mental health, this is an area that the committee has considered previously, and so we were pleased to welcome the continued protection of funding via the ring fence, as well as the Minister’s evidence that she expected the £840 million allocation to increase. We did, however, feel that the ring-fenced funding in this area should come with a set of clearly defined, measurable outcomes, particularly in light of the Welsh Government’s focus on early intervention to reduce reliance on acute and crisis services. Recommendation 7 in our report relates to this.   

The cost of running an ageing NHS estate and infrastructure continues to rise, and NHS organisations face difficult decisions when it comes to balancing the costs of ongoing maintenance and repairs against the need to invest in improved facilities and digital provision. We have asked the Cabinet Secretary to update us on the findings of the resilience survey into the NHS estate, due to be published shortly, and to provide details of any actions the Welsh Government intends to take as a result of those findings. More broadly, the scale of the estate maintenance backlog requires a clear, long-term capital strategy, but given the proximity to the next Senedd election, this will be a matter for the future Welsh Government.  

Finally, I want to touch briefly on two other very important areas in our report: financial support for unpaid carers and additional funding for end-of-life and palliative care. Unpaid carers play a vital role in caring for and supporting friends and family members. They act out of love for those they care for. As we all know, without their dedication, health and social care services would be overwhelmed. It is so important, therefore, that carers themselves receive the support they need to continue their caring role. As part of our current inquiry, we have been hearing directly from unpaid carers about their roles and responsibilities. They are calling desperately for more support, and we already know that demand for the two schemes in place to support unpaid carers—the carers support fund and the short break scheme—continue to exceed supply. We believe there is a strong case for increased sustainable investment in respite care, and we recommend that the Minister seeks additional funding for this in the final budget.

There are very real and ongoing concerns from the hospice and palliative care sector about financial pressures and long-term sustainability. We know that work is under way on a new commissioning approach to provide a more stable funding environment for palliative and end-of-life care, but this is some way off completion. We believe there is a compelling case for additional funding for this vital service, and we urge the Cabinet Secretary to make the case for this in his negotiations on the final budget. Diolch, Llywydd.

Diolch, Llywydd. The CYPE committee’s scrutiny, like all other Senedd committees, was finished before the announcement of the budget agreement last week. Therefore, our comments and observations are restricted to the draft budget, as published in November.

In what has, unfortunately, become a tradition in this debate, I will start by highlighting that the majority of the committee remain disappointed that the Welsh Government has not produced a children’s rights impact assessment as part of the budget process. This is now the twelfth successive year that the Welsh Government has not done this. Yet the Welsh Government’s own children’s rights scheme says that such an assessment is the way in which they demonstrate compliance with their legislative duty to give due regard to children’s rights.

The Welsh Government point to the strategic integrated impact assessment tool. We cannot comment on the wider effectiveness of this tool, but we do know that it does not demonstrate to us on what basis spending on children has been decided. This year, the SIIA promises further targeting on certain areas, including children’s rights. However, it is unclear whether these findings will be shared with the wider Senedd. And crucially, it comes too late to inform our scrutiny of the draft budget. We have therefore recommended that the outcomes are shared with the Senedd as soon as possible, and no later than before the publication of the final budget.

We also recommend that the next Welsh Government does produce and publish a children's rights impact assessment for the next draft budget. I really hope that any successor committee will not be making the same recommendations that both we and our predecessor committee have been making for over a decade. We urge the next Welsh Government to break this cycle.

The challenges we face scrutinising the health and social care portion of the budget are compounded because we don’t have a children's rights impact assessment. As the bulk of spend in the health and social care main expenditure group is not broken down, we struggle to understand what is being spent on children and young people. We cannot track progress, outcomes or value for money. We cannot understand how budget decisions prioritise children and young people’s rights to good health and social care.

Turning now to education, we heard clearly from the Cabinet Secretary for Education that additional core funding for schools should be prioritised. We are acutely aware of the issues facing schools and local authorities across Wales. We hope that the final budget takes account of these pressures on local authority and school budgets. Schools need to be funded so that they can continue to unlock the potential of all children and young people across Wales.

Finally, I would like to highlight concerns about post-16 funding. The rising number of learners going to college must be matched by investment. We don’t want young people to be turned away from or placed on waiting lists for potentially life-changing courses because of insufficient capacity.

because of insignificant capacity. We have written to Medr separately on this important issue, and we'll continue to monitor it in the final Senedd term. Diolch.

I'll keep my contribution quite short, sweet and snappy. Cabinet Secretary, I want to focus my short remarks this afternoon on the challenges within higher education here in Wales. The combined deficit of our higher education institutions here in Wales is of the sum of £77 million. I'd like to know why this has not been reflected in the budget negotiations, because, in my view, by not dealing with the serious challenge now, are you not delaying more difficult decisions further down the line for the next Government that forms in 2026? Thank you.

increased investment, the budget now standing at £146 million. Cardiff Met has four degree apprenticeships, Swansea University, three and Cardiff University, one. Clarity as to how the budget will be used, if at all, to increase the number of degree apprenticeships at universities would be welcome.

Finally, the 'Cymraeg 2050'. The resource budget is receiving an inflationary uplift of £0.8 million, which is considerably less than the £4.6 million increase this financial year and therefore causes me further concern to the viability of reaching the million. Dirprwy Lywydd, I could go on and on, but the time has beaten me. I hope I've highlighted a key message that work needs to be done, not just on the budget lines, but on how the money is actually raised. Diolch yn fawr.

I will be speaking in my capacity as Chair of the Local Government and Housing Committee, and I'd like to start by setting out some of the context for the committee's scrutiny of the local government aspect of the draft budget.

Firstly, we were disappointed that our evidence session with representatives of the Welsh Local Government Association had to take place before the provisional local government settlement had been published, which limited our ability to undertake proper scrutiny of it. Secondly, following completion of our scrutiny sessions, the Welsh Government published its budget agreement with Plaid Cymru, which allocated an additional £112.8 million to local authorities across Wales, the detail of which is not yet available. We do, in any event, welcome the additional funding allocated to local government from the budgeting agreement, which ensures a minimum uplift of 4 per cent. This is the minimum increase we would have recommended as a committee to ease some of the budgetary pressures on local authorities. We do know, however, that a 4 per cent uplift only addresses around half of identified budget pressures for next year. We remain concerned that local authorities are still in a vulnerable position and continue to face the prospect of council tax rises, service cuts and job losses. We are also concerned that the revised settlement and indicative figures have not been published. These should be made publicly available as quickly as possible to provide certainty to local authorities and enable them to plan their budgets accordingly.

On the funding formula used to determine local authority distribution, it is clear that frustrations continue to exist. We were particularly concerned at the use of outdated data and indicators, with 20 per cent of the data underpinning the formula linked to sources as old as the 1991 census. While it is encouraging that a review of the data is under way, this is long overdue.

Dirprwy Lywydd, in terms of prevention, we have highlighted again this year the need for a fundamental shift towards preventative services. We know that preventative work is cut when there is pressure on budgets. However, investing in youth services, leisure and schools is fundamental to improving health and reducing pressure on wider public services. Despite the Welsh Government's stated commitment to preventative services, we do not believe that the current draft budget and settlement adequately reflect this. We call on the Welsh Government to embed prevention in the budget-setting process, otherwise services will remain reactive and opportunities for innovation will be lost. In addition, we want to see the Welsh Government provide strategic leadership and set a clear pathway for adopting good practice and innovation across local authorities. As far as housing is concerned, housing as well, of course, is a preventative service. We understand the competing pressures and demands on the overall budget, but as I've already stated, prevention should be embedded in that budget-setting process, not only to meet the needs of future generations but also to realise the preventative benefits for health and other public services. It is disappointing, then, that the allocation for housing and regeneration stands at just 4.85 per cent of the total budget—