Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru

The question does indeed come at an opportune time. A review has been commissioned, looking at how to deliver the best outcome at the Nant Helen site. We are keen now to develop a clear direction of travel with GCRE Ltd.

Thank you for that update, First Minister. The Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee in the last session visited the site and looked into the proposals that were presented to us. When this concept was first thought through, there was the potential for 1,000 jobs coming to the site, and the Government of the day was told that there was huge demand for this testing facility. Regrettably, to date, not £1 of private money has gone into it. It is a huge site. I saw a media report saying it's the size of Gibraltar. There's a lot of remediation work to go into it. The one thing we were told as a committee was that the incoming Government, whoever that Government would be, needed to make a quick decision about future investment. The site has burned through £70 million of public money to date. When will you be in the position to formulate what the Government is going to do, bearing in mind £70 million of public money has already gone in and £350 to £400 million is required to build this Global Centre of Rail Excellence?

Llywydd, the Member makes very important points. Significant amounts of public funding have gone into the site already. I'm not going to criticise the concept that came from the current leader of the Labour Party, but we have to understand what has happened as those tens of millions of pounds have been spent on the site, and what maybe hasn't happened to enable us to be at a place where there is private funding willing and able and keen to come in. As I say, my Minister has commissioned that work now because I agree that we need to come to a decision soon in order to make the most of the opportunities for what is still a very important site.

First Minister, it's good to hear that you are commissioning a review, but this Chamber would like to understand that the confidence of your Government in this site must rest on a credible commercial case, which the public actually needs to understand. The additional proposed data centre and energy park may promise local jobs, but these benefits cannot justify an indefinite dependence on taxpayer-funded grants. After more than four months in office, your Government should be able to demonstrate how and when the development will attract private capital and generate a sufficient income to support itself. How will you make any further development conditional on a financially self-supporting business plan that delivers measurable local benefits without further taxpayer-funded grants to GCRE or participating companies? Thank you.

Again, perfectly appropriate questions to ask. It is not just about making it a credible commercial proposition, it's making sure that the public money that has gone into it has been put to good use, and, as we consider the future, that we look at that balance of where Government works potentially with the private sector on what could be a whole host of different propositions. As I say, the fact that we understand the need to move quickly on this is why that review has been commissioned. Whatever the project, you cannot continue to move forward in an aimless way. This started from a point where there was a real belief in a particular project. Time has moved on. We need to make sure that, in 2026, we understand what the best project is now for that site.

The Global Centre of Rail Excellence is seen as a promising development for many across my constituency, showing the potential of green travel, a path towards net zero, and supporting the development of stronger, greener and more affordable transport systems right across the world. What other opportunities are there alongside this project that will help people in my constituency? Diolch.

The Member again points to that original concept around rail. A lot has happened in rail since those times, not least the changes in direction around HS2 and so on. We need to understand where we are now, rather than where we were. We need to understand the significance of decisions that have been made to date. The Member will want to ensure that what we achieve there is something that is of value to the locality, to the constituency that she and others represent, and to the Welsh economy. And those are the principles that will be guiding my Cabinet Minister for enterprise as he now works with the review and looks forward to seeing the results of that review pretty soon. 

Welsh Labour invested £2 billion in the Heads of the Valleys road precisely for a reason like this, to connect communities, including along the M4 corridor but also in the old Valleys communities, with projects like this. If we are serious about bringing well-paid jobs and re-industrialising the former coalfields, this is exactly the kind of investment that Wales should secure, recognising that this will take public money as well as private money. So, I've heard a bit of equivocation from you today, which will raise concerns for people wanting to see a rail solution brought forward. We want to see more trains brought forward into Wales, and this would help unlock that. Can you give a reason why your Government would not support the GCRE project specifically? And if you can't give a reason, will you perhaps today commit to supporting it? Diolch yn fawr.

Improving health outcomes, ensuring timely access to care, supporting sustainable NHS services for communities across Ceredigion Penfro are clearly major priorities for this new Government. As part of our vision to strengthen healthcare in rural and coastal areas in particular, we will engage closely with the local health board and partners to ensure high-quality, patient-centred services that genuinely do meet the needs of local people. We want to make sure they're delivered now and into the future.

First Minister, I believe that the Welsh Government's healthcare priorities for Ceredigion Penfro must be to protect essential health services at its hospitals so that patients do not have to travel further afield for treatment. Now, over the years, my constituents have seen health services centralised and moved further away by the local health board, despite clear public opposition to these changes. And there has been little, if any, intervention or challenge from a Welsh Government over the last 27 years. Now, following the change of Government in May, there was a sense of hope for my constituents that their views would be heard and the health board stopped, and, so far, that has not been the case. So, First Minister, what threshold must be crossed before the Welsh Government is prepared to intervene and prevent Hywel Dda University Health Board from further downgrading services in west Wales? And what message do you have for the people of Ceredigion Penfro who voted for a Government they believed would stand up for local communities and ensure that no further services are removed from their hospitals?

Llywydd, the Member is absolutely right that we want to protect essential services, and most of us at one time or another have been involved in various campaigns around particular services in different places. I think the principles that we need to bear in mind always are that we provide timely services in the appropriate location. There will be different stories in different parts of Wales, but those are the principles that tie us together.

Decisions on clinical services are taken by the health boards themselves. I know that the health board in this particular instance has looked at eight out of nine of the services that it provides and consulted on them, and put in place changes that it believes would provide better services to be delivered over the best part of a decade. These aren't overnight changes. And it's important to remember that these are changes that can take time. But my appeal always is for health boards, when they make those changes, when they consult, and afterwards, to ensure that people feel that they are engaged properly on those decisions. But there will be, clearly, different applications of different services in different parts of Wales. It's about getting that balance of appropriate services that will always put the patient first.

Thank you to Paul Davies for the question. First Minister, 35 per cent of Ceredigion households and 23 per cent in Pembrokeshire rely on oil heating, among the highest rates in Wales. Public Health Wales warns that cold homes increase cardiovascular and respiratory risks, particular for older and vulnerable people. As your Government moves towards net zero, how will you ensure that rural households are not forced to ration heating because of the cost of that transition, and will you guarantee that keeping people warm and healthy comes before hitting arbitrary deadlines? Diolch. 

I will accept that there is a healthcare link there, Llywydd, and I'm being very, very generous. We know that a healthy home, a healthy environment, is important for people's health, so the Member is absolutely right in that respect.

On oil heating in particular, of course, these are measures that are reserved. We have consistently appealed to the UK Government to make the right decisions when it comes to the options that it has at its disposal, but that we haven't as a Welsh Government, to relieve the pressure on households in rural Wales in particular that are particularly dependent on off-grid oil. It is a principle that ties this Government together, that we think cross-departmentally, and the Member is right: we need to think housing, we need to think energy, we need to think health when it comes to the well-being of the people that we represent.

First Minister, I'd like to agree that protecting services at Bronglais and Withybush hospitals remains vital for communities across Ceredigion Penfro. However, in rural areas, we also need innovative ways of bringing healthcare closer to people's homes. Integrated care centres in Cardigan and Aberaeron show what can be achieved when we bring services together, and, again, bring them closer to people, taking the pressure off hospitals. Having recently visited GP services in Fishguard, I know that there is strong local support for a similar approach there. Indeed, my colleague Elin Jones has previously worked with local councillors to make the case for an integrated care centre for Fishguard. So, will the Welsh Government commit to working with Hywel Dda University Health Board and local communities to explore how towns such as Fishguard could benefit from integrated care facilities, ensuring rural communities are not left behind as healthcare services evolve?

Many of us represent rural areas here, and the health of somebody in a rural part of Wales is as important as somebody in an urban part of Wales. We need to make sure that we have equitable healthcare, but it does mean that a different approach is needed. I'm really interested in the work that is developing—already has begun—into creating a centre of excellence on the delivery of rural healthcare in Bronglais Hospital, which could benefit all parts of Wales, not just Ceredigion Penfro.

The programme for government commitment is clear. We want to ensure that integrated care is delivered closer to home, with prevention in particular at its core, to support earlier diagnosis, reduce admissions and delays in discharge. We have many ideas on how, in general, the delivery can be improved in rural areas, but health officials, I know, are engaging with the health board and Pembrokeshire County Council specifically on the development of that integrated centre in Fishguard.

Diolch, Lywydd. First Minister, you so often stand on your soapbox and arrogantly claim that you and your party are the ones fighting injustice and standing up for Wales. Yet, you and your party had the chance last week to tackle rape gangs and to stand up for Wales by backing our Reform motion to help bring closure for women and girls by uncovering the extent of rape gang activity in Wales. But, instead, you voted, shamefully, against it. How on earth can women and girls expect you to have their best interests and safety at heart?

Let me take this opportunity to congratulate the new leader of Reform in Wales on her election to the role. She is certainly a bold politician. Anybody who says she came into politics because she was impressed by the principles of Nigel Farage certainly has to be seen as bold.

There is nothing that is more important to any of us, hopefully, than safeguarding people that we have a duty of care for. That is why my Government at this moment is working on strengthening safeguarding and how it protects vulnerable people, including women and girls, potentially trafficked people, in all parts of Wales. That is something my Government is actively getting on with.

You had the opportunity for a Wales focus there. Ironically, normally, we like to stand out, don't we, from the rest of the United Kingdom, but, in this case, you are happy to be absorbed into the UK inquiry. First Minister, the evidence suggests that rape gang activity may have been covered up by authorities to avoid racial tensions, and if we don't get to the bottom of what is among the most sickening organised criminal activities of our time, we cannot expect to prevent the risk of many more crimes of this nature. Last year, the Welsh Government said there was no current widespread issue with grooming gangs in Wales, and one of your current Ministers was accused by a grooming gang victim of downplaying her experience. Let's just have a look at the last 11 weeks alone: we've had two men imprisoned in Cardiff, five people convicted in Rhyl, and eight men across south Wales charged as part of Operation Oak, all relating to grooming gang-type activity. First Minister, can you really look me in the eye and say that you didn't let down victims last week by voting against wanting a grooming gang investigation in Wales?

I can look you in the eye every single day of the week and tell you that we have a Government that isn't interested in scoring political points about what is a very, very sensitive issue, and is interested in getting on with finding solutions. Now, we said that we needed to understand the scale of the problem in Wales. Work was done to understand the scale of the problem in Wales, and it is apparent, obviously, that we have issues here that we need to get to grips with in order to safeguard people, which is why my Government is giving all support to the inquiry that is currently looking at the lessons that can be learnt. She may want to make this a constitutional issue; I make this about the safety of people in Wales, and that is the difference between her and me.

First Minister, making sure victims' voices are heard—that is not political point scoring.

Speaking of uncovering the truth, First Minister, I've got a couple of quotes to read to you today:

'Reform would look at the nation of sanctuary and say Welsh people come first when prioritising council housing, and that is really, really important to me.'

Let me read you my second quote:

'Millions are being wasted on the tree-planting project, which is absolutely incredible, that we are sending money in Wales to Uganda.'

First Minister, these were things said by a Senedd Member that now sits on your benches. Do you agree with these comments, 'yes' or 'no'?

What I admire is that somebody would have the bravery to stand up to this Reform group in the Senedd and say, 'I now can see you for what you are.' That is precisely what Sarah Cooper-Lesadd did last week. I firmly believe that, in politics, it is up to all of us to show that we are able to change, that we are able to see the light, politically, if you like, and so many other people are doing the same. We have now a scandal-ridden Reform party that is collapsing in chaos around the new Reform leader in Wales. The Member said yesterday that she is all for unity and continuity, but her party is incapable of showing either. Perhaps she can tell us how much of the £72 million arising from the latest Reform scandal she hopes will come to Wales. Maybe she hopes it will be Barnettised.

'Yes' or 'no'? Okay. Diolch yn fawr.

First Minister, today we remember the deaths of hundreds of people in the Gresford mining disaster. It was a horrific disaster that devastated the community, and I'm sure you, First Minister, will also remember those who died. More than 260 bodies were recovered, but 253 remain entombed. Unfortunately, it wasn't just men that died; boys died in that disaster as well. It clearly was one of Wales's darkest days.

Research by Wrexham.com shows that, whilst the Plaid Government was questioning the need and rationale for an extra £100 million to be spent on additional learning needs, it was at the very same time asking councils how much more they'd be spending on additional learning needs this year. Now, the data was published just before the supplementary budget vote on your own website. And that figure, in total, for all councils and all schools in Wales was an extra £96.3 million—almost exactly the £100 million that Welsh Labour was saying was required to stabilise the system across Wales, and for which you received a major UK Labour Government windfall. Now, does this revelation, uncovered as I say by Wrexham.com, demonstrate that disadvantaged children risk coming second to this Plaid Cymru Government, behind free childcare for millionaires?

Let me, firstly, associate myself very much with the comments as we remember the Gresford disaster, and we send our thoughts to the community, for whom the pain of that day is still felt in many ways. 

On additional learning needs, I remind the Labour leader that he was intending to spend £9 million, had they won the election. My party's manifesto made it a pledge to put ALN on a sustainable footing. We had a discussion, running up to the supplementary budget, where we were putting £100 million plus on the table, including £40 million for this year—for this year—which is what we gauged, working with officials and others, could actually be spent to take the pressure. That money is still on the table, and I appeal to the Member again: help us to get it out of the door to help those families and the schools and local authorities who need that money spent. 

First Minister, the £9 million that you refer to was before the UK Government budget. Once the UK Government budget had taken place and confirmation that more than £300 million was made available, the then education Minister, Lynne Neagle, was planning to spend an extra £100 million on additional learning needs, had we been re-elected.

Now, I can provide clear, irrefutable evidence of how disadvantaged and disabled children will pay the price for your uncosted pledges. Clwb Cwtsh, which is the only provider of school holiday play for children with complex needs in north Wales, has just been told by the Plaid Government that funding for its services will end. The previous Labour Government here funded that provision, which is, as I say, for children with complex needs. I'm afraid, unless your Government makes a u-turn on this, changes its mind and provides the funding to Clwb Cwtsh, it will be lost. So, can I urge you to reconsider the decision to end funding for this provision? Otherwise, I'm afraid disabled children will be paying the price for free childcare for millionaires.

I ask the Member to look again at when they were promising £9 million, and it was very much after that money was made available. And there are principles here about the ability for us to set directions here in Wales. I am familiar with Clwb Cwtsh. I don't know why the previous Labour administration didn't put its funding on a permanent basis. The Member might be able to shed some light on that. I do understand also that it fills an ALN gap. The Member is asking for £30,000 for that; I have £40 million on the table that I have sought, and continue to seek, agreement with the Member on. That money includes money that would directly go to Flintshire council, so I'm imagining that the leader of Flintshire council would be keen for the Labour leader here to help us get that money out of the door. 

Diolch, Llywydd. First Minister, last week, the UK Government published the inflation figures. They showed that inflation was up, with prices rising by 3.1 per cent in the year to August, and of course economists forecast that that increase in inflation will continue to rise to above 4 per cent around the end of this year, in the coming months. And that's going to be as a result of the energy price cap going up, the increase in fuel prices eventually coming through. Now, many households in Wales are facing the pinch in their pockets, and they desperately need help. One thing that your Government could do to help people here in Wales is to take action on council tax. Can I ask you, First Minister, instead of making yet more demands for more power, why don't you help people with their council tax demands? Why don't you initiate a cap on council tax and legislate, with the powers that you already have, so that people require a referendum in order to give local residents a say for any increase above that cap?

I understand that the leader of the Conservatives wants to replicate policy in England. I'm interested in what works for Wales and it's about what works for council tax payers, Llywydd, and it's what works within the bounds of the finances of Welsh Government. And I remind the Senedd that we will be facing a real-terms cut in the day-to-day spending that we have available in the next financial year.

Council tax is set, of course, by local authorities and it's important that it is. I would remind the Member that, in a recent budget deal before we came into power, we made sure that there was a baseline for an increase in funding for councils, and a big part of that was to protect council tax payers, which I agree is something that's very, very important indeed.

You know, I was listening to the radio this morning and I heard one of the commentators talking about it being a bad week for NATS; I thought they were talking about the Welsh nats, but actually, they were talking about the National Air Traffic Services, as it happens, and the chaos at our airports. [Laughter.]

One of the things that I want to see is fairness for council tax payers in Wales. You often talk about the need for fair funding between the England and Wales settlement—I get that, I completely get that and we support you on fair funding—but we need fair funding in Wales and we need fairness in council tax bills for people who have to struggle to pay them each and every year. The average band D council tax bill in Wales has risen by more than £600 over the past five years, and some residents have faced hikes of over 50 per cent over that period. It's totally unacceptable. We need urgent action to protect people from the sorts of excessive rises that some people have been having. So, can I urge you again: introduce a cap, legislate so that people have to have referendums for anything above that cap and do one more thing too—let's have a review, an independent review, truly independent of the local government funding formula, to make sure that there's fair funding to all parts of Wales, not just places favoured by the previous Labour Government.

Let's be positive and concentrate on the things that we agree on. Absolutely, we want to review, and looking at my local government Cabinet Minister, that is something that is happening under this Government, because it's important that people understand and feel that the decisions taken by Wales are equitable.

The other element that I agree with him on is that we need fair funding for Wales. We have lived under successive Conservative Governments and now Labour Governments that are still not engaging on that need to get the fundamentals right when it comes to fair funding for Wales. And you can't separate the two. It is an absolute truism that a lack of fair funding at the top will come down in the end to the money in the pockets of people the length and breadth of Wales, including through pressures on council tax. We want to be able to help in many ways that we can.

And on the rather glib start, if you're going to say it's a bad week for nats, actually choose a week that is a bad week for this Government. We're about to publish our programme for government, which is about transforming Wales, putting the health service on a firmer footing, raising education standards, halving that productivity gap with the rest of the UK, creating great job opportunities, the most generous childcare offer anywhere in the UK in dealing with child poverty, and standing up for Wales, always, which is something I'm not hearing from any other party in this Chamber.

I know the Member agrees with me that the evidence is clear: climate change is increasing the frequency and intensity of extreme weather. We are committed to building stronger, more resilient communities across Wales in that changing context. We're working closely with partners, including through the Wales resilience forum and local resilience forums to prepare for winter risks, to strengthen response arrangements and learn from recent extreme weather events. We're also making communities more resilient to flooding through continued investment in infrastructure and nature-based solutions.

Thank you. Last week, First Minister, you issued a statement saying that you will convene a resilience summit focusing on wildfires—very much welcomed. Yet, we must be ready for all of the escalating risks of a changing climate. This includes extreme cold, winter flooding and severe storms this coming winter. The Met Office has warned of a heightened risk on the horizon due to an unprecedented El Niño event this year, only highlighted in shocking headlines yesterday, recording the record breaking of 150 years of records. Weaknesses in our infrastructure and our resilience, such as recently witnessed in Gwaelod-y-garth, will only become more apparent in the coming months.

Wales is dangerously unprepared for the predicted onslaught of extreme weather conditions. Climate response must be integrated as our first line of defence. Welsh Government allocated in its supplementary budget just £1 million for emergency preparedness. Establishing a climate shock fund would be a vital step forward in demonstrating that the Welsh Government is serious about protecting communities this winter, with or without UK Government support. What discussions has the First Minister had with the UK Government on funding these emergency measures? Diolch.

Thank you for the question. I think the world is largely unprepared for the challenges that we face. The question is how can we accelerate our preparedness. You will see in the programme for government today that climate change isn't seen as a priority in and of itself; it's one of the priorities that binds us all together as Government Ministers, because this has to be addressed across all portfolios.

Resilience—I talked about this last week—is an issue that I have tried to focus a great deal on since I came into the role of First Minister, understanding the various elements that contribute to the resilience, or lack of, in some ways, that we have as a society. Wildfires happen to be the one that has grabbed our attention, which is why we need to make sure that we're tightening up those resilience elements around that in the summit on 22 October. But the Member is right; flooding is something that many communities will be concerned about. There are other concerns too—the effects of heat, the effects of cold and so on.

It is something that we work across the UK on. I want to ensure (a) that Wales gets its fair share of resilience funding, civil contingency funding, across the UK, and that's something I'm eager to pursue. But the Member has my word that I will absolutely be looking at how we work between Welsh Government and UK Government to get the support that Wales needs to prepare for this wide range of threats that we face in future.

First Minister, I recognise that £85 million has been invested in flood risk management this year, but Rhondda Cynon Taf's investigation into storm Dennis has found that Blaenllechau was flooded from the steep hillside above it, that felling on Welsh Government-owned Natural Resources Wales-managed woodland may have contributed to surface water run-off, and that modelling suggested three of the four culvert networks lacked adequate capacity. This August, a major wildfire burned around 150 hectares of Llanwonno mountain, above Blaenllechau and Ferndale. So, before the winter rain arrives, will you ensure that Natural Resources Wales and RCT carry out a co-ordinated inspection of that hillside, its drainage and culverts, with the Mining Remediation Authority checking any relevant higher category coal tips within or below that affected area, and report the findings and any remedial work required to the Senedd by the end of October? Diolch.

There is, of course, an ongoing programme of works that need to happen, some of them under the auspices of Welsh Government or its agencies, Natural Resources Wales, some that are the responsibility of local authorities. I have no doubt that, as we face the challenges of the winter, there needs to be just a double-checking of the robustness of those measures being put in place. I would say that, as well as making sure that your culverts are able to deal with run-off, there are other questions and innovations that we need to be looking at in how you slow down that run-off. Clearly, hot weather—hard ground—makes the situation more difficult. I'm really interested in how we manage the land, working with farmers to try to limit run-off, and so on.

We have to be aware that there are no silver bullets, there are no single measures that can be taken as we face these threats. They are multiple, and the need to be strategic in the way that we approach this is important, which is why the wildfire summit, in particular, looking at that threat, brings in so many different partners who will be able to contribute to making our resilience that much stronger. But I'm sure that your message will have been heard by the local authorities and others today.

First Minister, Monmouthshire has faced catastrophic flooding in recent years, and I was pleased that you were able to visit Monmouth and Abergavenny before the Senedd elections to speak to some of the local people affected, as well as to those finding solutions—long-lasting solutions—upstream. The scenes from last year’s flooding, especially those from Monmouth, will be etched in the memory of everyone who saw them for a long time. These once in 100 years events are getting more and more frequent, and we must now assume that they could happen at any time. As we've heard, the approaching El Niño event is on the horizon, with extreme weather events already anticipated, so, with this in mind, how is the Government improving flood preparedness for this winter? And in the longer term, how can we learn from the experiences of Monmouthshire residents to improve flood management for their community and for all of Wales? Diolch.

I was pleased, along with the Member, to speak with some of the individuals who were affected by the pretty devasting flooding that they experienced in Monmouth. The Member's right that it is about learning lessons. It's not just about cleaning up; that's the first step. It's about trying to make sure that lessons are learnt for those localities in order to avoid and avert flooding, but lessons for elsewhere too, and I know that Monmouthshire County Council is preparing its section 19 flood investigation report following the devastation of storm Claudia, and the flood investigation report is almost complete, I understand, and will be published in October. But, wherever those floods are, the learnings are ones that we can try to make sure that they are applicable in other parts of Wales too.

First Minister, my colleague Jayne Bryant, asked you, during your oral statement last week, whether the Welsh Government would consider bringing in a climate resilience fund to help us mitigate the impacts of extreme weather. You didn't really answer her directly, and nor did you answer Anthony Slaughter when he raised a very similar point in his opening question. Now, there's widespread support for this from stakeholders that we on the Welsh Labour benches have engaged with over the summer recess. And with resources for agencies involved in climate mitigation measures being really stretched, this is one way to safeguard those funds and make sure they're channelled in the right way. So, is this something that your Government can explore setting up ahead of your wildfire summit next month?

No attempt to avoid the question. There are, in effect, a number of funds, aren't there, on which a Government can draw to deal with emergencies. What you want to make sure is that those funds themselves are resilient. I absolutely am ready to consider whether we can bring together funds in one place, in the same way as the Government is looking at how we can put preventative health funds under one banner, so that we can measure better what the various elements of those funding capacities are. So, absolutely willing to consider that. At the end of the day, it's making sure that we have the tools to do the job that we need. There's more than one way of doing that, but let's put that in the mix too.

Diolch. Alun, you extended the question a little bit from what was on the order paper, just to be aware, because this isn't an Afan Ogwr Rhondda-specific question. So, can I bring in now Claire Johnson-Wood, to explain why?

Diolch. First Minister, what Welsh farmers need is a Government that understands and prioritises, not yet another 'expert panel' kicking the can down the road. Given that under the previous Labour-Plaid administration the sustainable farming scheme significantly increased regulatory complexity, can the Welsh Government please give assurances that the national food strategy will not place additional bureaucratic burdens on farmers and producers that they do not need at this time?

I haven't heard anybody accusing this agriculture Minister, this rural resilience Minister, of kicking any can down the road when it comes to supporting the agriculture sector. I heard nothing but a sigh of relief from a sector that believe that they have a Government that's willing to engage with it in a positive way, that security of that over £1 billion over the course of this Senedd in order to give assurances and confidence to the sector. And on where they fit into the food strategy, they are members of the working group that is bringing together this food strategy, and as I said, rural development and the economy, which includes agriculture, is one of the core pillars of this work that we're undertaking.

Diolch, Lywydd. First Minister, I welcome the food strategy, and I was pleased to read the published terms of reference for it last week, and I look forward to the expert panel being put in place. I am frustrated in many ways that we've lost four months because, actually, most of the evidence that is needed around that area has been in place, because there are huge similarities between what you're putting forward and what I was considering a couple of years ago. Within my proposals back then, there were clear, measurable targets against food goals. Can we expect to see really robust, measurable targets against your food pillars, and can I ask you: would you consider anchoring your food strategy into legislation, recognising the importance this will have for our future generations?

Can I pay tribute, Llywydd, to the work that the Member has done in this field in trying to bring in a piece of legislation that would underpin a robust food sector and protect issues relating to food production and nutrition and so on in Wales? We haven't lost four months, of course, because this work is already under way. This was one of the early actions of the Minister, to appoint a chair. The work is ongoing.

I'm not going to be prescriptive in telling a chair who is much more of an expert in this field than I am of the approach that he should take. You know me: I tend to take the approach of, 'Let's see what the evidence tells us.' If there's a suggestion that legislation could be a part of the approach on one particular element of what we're trying to do, well, let's have a sit down and see how we could formulate that legislation. But it's also true, we know, that you can act without legislation. I'm about outcomes, at the end of the day: let's progress in the way that gives us the best result.

Supporting people with the cost of living, as we know, is a real priority for this Government. We're ensuring that measures to tackle poverty reflect older people's needs and make support for older people simpler, fairer and also more accessible. Through our £4.84 million tackling poverty support fund, local authorities will provide crisis support, including emergency food aid, alongside preventative help also tailored to local communities, to stop people, including older people, from falling into poverty where we can avoid that.

Thanks for the answer, First Minister. So, while I recognise there are a number of schemes available, and I knew you'd refer to some, of course you would, but the Older People's Commissioner for Wales tells us that one in six older people in Wales are living in relative income poverty, with one in five going without heating and a quarter skipping meals or eating less. How can we imagine that situation? It's happening in Wales. These figures suggest that despite the support available, too many older people are still struggling, particularly those living on fixed incomes and those who may fall just outside eligibility for means-tested assistance. So, what further action will your Government take to ensure that support actually reaches older people, and how will you measure whether it is succeeding?

The Member is quite right. I have the results here of Age Cymru's 2026 annual survey, and more than half of respondents identified cost-of-living pressures as being the biggest challenge that they face—and for some, it will be a significant challenge.

There are things that we can do. The nearly £5 million that was announced in the past few days can really help people who are particularly vulnerable. There are a host of issues around travel and the continuation of bus travel and so on that we can wrap together as support for older people. But also we have to, when it comes to the main pressures, recognise that there is a need for all of us to put pressure on the UK Government here, especially on fuel. We've had a question already on the pressure of the cost of fuel in rural areas in particular. There has to be a coming together of all the potential levers—some of which are in our hands, but not all of them. And, at the end of the day, we also need a fresh approach on the question of public service funding because it is the most vulnerable people, including older people, who bear the brunt of it.

Can I support the Member in his questions on this topic, First Minister? We know that many older people at the moment are struggling with the cost of living, and particularly with the impact of a fixed income on many older people in our communities. We also know that, historically, people have been able to access advice services in their communities through organisations such as Citizens Advice and other fantastic organisations like that, who can support our older people to ensure that they are making the best use of any welfare support available to them and other types of support as well. So, I wonder, First Minister, if you're able to outline how you see those types of services in the future and what support the Welsh Government can give to organisations like the citizens advice bureaux to ensure that that advice is available to them in a timely way, and in an accessible way as well? Diolch yn fawr iawn.

We all have worked with Citizens Advice, with CAB, haven't we, and appreciate the work that they do on the ground in all parts of Wales in helping vulnerable people? I advise people to turn to your friends in CAB. Part of the funding that was announced in the past few days was specifically around advice; I think that's important to note. There is £36 million grant funding in place for the single advice fund for the period from April last year and for three years from then. That's about providing integrated advice services. I would hope that those providing services under that grant are able to reach as many people as they can. But the Member's right: reaching out with advice to people is key. We've made some funding available now and we are so lucky in Wales that we have those partners, and in local government too, who work so hard on this front.

In line with the polluter-pays principle, those responsible for illegal activity should bear the costs of the clean-up. That's true for illegal dumping today, as it should be for historic contamination, if I could add, too. We are committed, as a Government, to reducing the burden of illegal dumping on taxpayers and on landowners, and landfill disposals tax ensures that those responsible for unauthorised disposals pay 150 per cent of the standard tax rate.

Diolch, Brif Weinidog. In Fflint Wrecsam, you may be aware that communities continue to deal with both the historic legacy of illegal waste dumping and the current active sites that are causing ongoing problems for residents in my constituency. Time and again, we see the companies responsible for these environmental crimes avoid accountability by entering liquidation and walking away from the costs of remediation. This leaves local communities to deal with the consequences and risks shifting the burden of cleaning up onto the public purse. How will Welsh Government work with the UK Government, local authorities and relevant public bodies to address this ongoing issue?

It is an issue that blights many communities and, as I say, communities should not have to bear the consequences of waste crime, and neither should the taxpayer, and we're committed to supporting regulators to pursue those who are responsible: funding Natural Resources Wales's waste crime work is important; supporting multi-agency work to tackle organised criminality, because this is criminality; sharing intelligence where we can; and co-ordinating enforcement action. This is also an issue on which we are eager to work with UK Government and, indeed, Governments across the UK. The Welsh Revenue Authority wants to build those links with His Majesty's Revenue and Customs and so on, to strengthen the system, to close loopholes and ensure waste crime does not pay. Of course, when it comes to historic contamination, something that has received significant publicity recently, we have to make sure that every avenue is pursued to deal with this, as one of our lasting post-industrial legacies.

My Government's determined to improve the health of our rivers. We're funding the west Wales nutrient management boards, which deliver targeted action across the Tywi, Teifi and Cleddau catchments. We're also establishing a new nutrient efficiency and resilience group to strengthen national leadership on nutrient pollution and co-ordinate action across sectors. Together, we believe these measures will support river restoration, improve water quality and build long-term environmental resilience.

Diolch, First Minister. People whose livelihoods depend on Carmarthenshire's rivers, including members of Carmarthen Coracle and Netsmen's Association, tell us they have never seen such a poor season, with the return of only six sewin from May to June this year. Their experience makes clear that river pollution must be treated with a far greater urgency. I urge you to read the Royal Society's recent report on chemical mixtures in British waterways. Quote: 'Regulators are flying blind.' Unquote.

In Carmarthenshire, Natural Resources Wales seem to be flying blind. Our rivers are being contaminated by harmful chemical mixtures, including organics, ammonia, microplastics, cadmium and mercury, with no understanding of their interactions or the harm done. Will you acknowledge that the Welsh Government lacks a credible plan to clean up our rivers, and set out how it will meet its political duty to protect our waters and rivers and special areas of conservation?

This is work that is under way, and it's very important that it is. We know that river pollution, sea pollution, is something that is of real concern to people the length and breadth of Wales, and it certainly is to me. The vision for a reformed Welsh water sector will be published later this autumn, so we're nearing that point where we have a point to move forward from. We know that river pollution has multiple causes. It requires action across all sectors. It involves industry, it involves agriculture, it involves the water companies themselves. It's about making sure that we have good, solid regulation, made in Wales—that's what I want. It's by having that attitude that we can move forward to having cleaner rivers in Wales.

The Welsh Government is investing £145 million to help health boards reduce waiting times and improve access to treatment. This supports delivery of our planned care plan, which sets out a clinically led approach to eliminating the longest waits, increasing capacity and improving outcomes. An expert group is also advising on the development of up to 10 surgical and diagnostic hubs to provide faster, more efficient care for patients, including those in Blaenau Gwent Caerffili Rhymni. 

First Minister, a constituent has come to me who is now unable to work because he has a hernia. He's been waiting close to 36 weeks for his surgery. He's living in pain. He feels it affects his family life, his relationship with his children, all because he's waiting to be seen. During the election, you looked down a camera and told the people of Wales that these waiting lists will see an impact within months. We learnt during recess from your health Minister that months could take up to, now, years. [Interruption.] So, the Minister was wrong when he said that waiting lists will take years to address, was he? That's what he said. So, what can you tell the people of Wales? Do you regret saying it's going to be months, because from reports last week, waiting lists are going up and not down? So, will you apologise to the people of Wales for your statement at the election?

That's exactly what I've said throughout. This is an issue of seriousness that means we put it at No.1 on the list of our priorities coming into Government. It was somewhat missing in Reform's pledges for Government, were they to be in this position. I have said about the most extreme over-two-year waits that they have to go. They have to be eliminated. I said they'll go in months. That goes, a year from coming into Government they are gone. That's months. Well, months is not more than a year. So, a year after we come into Government, I expect them to have gone. I stick to what I have said throughout, okay?

I consider us right now to be beginning the work. We came into Government in May. We've had two months of figures. It's during that time that we have started putting money in that will, in months, bring us the benefits, not for us as Senedd Members, but for the people that we serve: people who are on long waiting lists who shouldn't be, staff across the health boards who want to be able to care and not have to have those that they're concerned about waiting two years or more. We stick to what we said. I've said it throughout. I say it again today.

Our productivity mission, as a Government, is about unlocking the talents of the whole workforce, and ensuring economic opportunity is everywhere and open to everyone. We aim to work with employers, education and training providers, and others, to ensure women can enter and progress in sectors such as advanced manufacturing, clean energy and digital technology where, of course, many women are already having a huge impact.

First Minister, thank you for that answer. I welcome the Welsh Government's focus on growth sectors and its commitment to fairness in the workplace. But to ensure, in the Valleys that I represent, that women directly benefit from these opportunities, could you expand any further on how you will agree to work alongside local authorities and industry partners to explore the targeted apprenticeship pathways for women in our former coalfield Valleys, please?

It absolutely is about partnership working, and we will continue absolutely to work with employers, local authorities, training providers and others to make sure that those opportunities are there for women in these sectors. We want more women to access apprenticeships, to develop higher level skills and progress into well-paid careers that many women thought were closed to them not that long ago. Well, they are not closed to any women, and through apprenticeships, Careers Wales, Working Wales, we're helping women in communities like Blaenau Gwent Caerffili Rhymni to identify those opportunities and ambition to increase female participation in advanced manufacturing, digital and clean energy. That's the kind of Wales we want, where opportunity genuinely is open to all. There have been some positive signs, but we've got more to do.

The Welsh Government is working closely with the Standards of Conduct Committee and the Business Committee to ensure that Members whose conduct falls far below that which is expected of elected representatives can be robustly held to account.

Diolch, Brif Weinidog. Part of this Act places a duty on your Government to bring in rules banning false or misleading statements of fact, made before or during an election, to affect who is elected. It also lets your Government set out what does and does not count as a statement of fact. If it is, in fact, true that a candidate misrepresents their own beliefs to win votes, and that becomes clear after polling day, will your Government treat that as a false statement of fact?

This is a sour grapes question, Llywydd, I believe. I think it references a decision taken by a Member of this Senedd who has seen a new approach to politics. This is a party that misled people in the Brexit vote. It knows all about misleading people. I and my Government stand by the determination to make sure that we have in Wales an honest politics, the kind that seems alien to many on his benches.

—as we wait in high expectation for the Counsel General to appear on the benches. If Members will just bear with us for a moment, as soon as we are ready, we will commence.

I thank the Member for that question. I am aware of her concerns with regard to reconfiguration in the area she represents, but it is up to local health boards, as they are responsible for service reconfiguration decisions and for engaging with communities and stakeholders, including Llais. Welsh Ministers are not the routine decision maker in such matters. Intervention generally would be considered only where there is evidence of significant concerns regarding decision-making processes, governance, statutory compliance or, crucially, patient safety.

Sections 26 to 28 of the National Health Service (Wales) Act 2006 clearly give Welsh Ministers the power to intervene where a health board is failing to perform its functions adequately, and to remove board members, which we saw in the Senedd last term. Section 12 of the same Act allows Ministers to direct health boards on their functions more generally. While there appears to be some confusion over the 2006 Act, and the social care Bill in 2020, Vaughan Gething at the time was relatively clear that the Bill did not affect Ministers' powers under sections 26 to 28. That is a bit of a mouthful, I'm aware, of lots of sections. I ask for a clear answer, and I'm very happy to take a response in writing to this: is there anything in law that prevents Welsh Ministers from intervening under sections 26 to 28 where a board has lost public confidence in this way, or is the truth that Ministers could act and are choosing not to? Diolch yn fawr iawn.

I thank her for that further question, but the truth is that the Cabinet Minister for Health and Care has been very clear that any proposals for service change must be informed by evidence and with full regard to quality, safety and patient experience. In addition, it's expected that health boards engage with people openly and transparently about these service changes. As she probably knows, Llais also has a statutory role in representing the views and interests of people who use health services and may raise concerns regarding service change proposals. I do repeat that Ministers do retain statutory powers, to which she has referred, to direct local health boards and formally intervene where there's a failure in governance, performance and exercise of local functions by local health boards.

Those powers, clearly, are to safeguard patients and are intended to address significant patient safety concerns, failures in consultation or decision making, breaches of statutory duties or wider governance concerns. Therefore, with respect, political opposition, public concern or the controversial nature of a proposal would not, of itself, ordinarily justify intervention. These powers are safeguards for addressing failures by local health boards in discharge of functions and they are not a mechanism for reconsidering the merits or demerits of any clinical service decision. That is clearly the position as far as the law is concerned. But I would add that during a consultation, surely it's better to wait for the conclusion of the consultation before coming to any thoughts about any possible legal avenue.

I'd like to thank Jane Dodds for bringing this matter up. Powys is a large and sparsely populated rural county, where removing in-patient provision from community hospitals can mean substantially longer journeys for patients and their families. When a health board considers a major service reconfiguration, what legal duties must it take into account regarding rurality, equality and access to services? And what remedies are available if those duties have not been properly discharged?

I can only repeat what I've just said, and no doubt the Member has heard what I've said. That's clearly what the law says. I would, again, suggest to him that it might be better to wait for the outcome of the consultation and then to decide was it a fair consultation, was it a consultation that people would expect at law, and, whatever the conclusions are, are the conclusions safe as far as patients are concerned and other considerations. But I think it's rather early now to say, 'Let's look for a challenge', until the consultation has been completed and conclusions have been reached.

Diolch, Gwnsler Cyffredinol. Many have called for youth justice to be devolved to Wales, including the Brown commission, and I'm glad that this Plaid Cymru Government also wants to see that happen. Currently, a child in the justice system in Wales has one foot in each world. Their school, healthcare and social workers are devolved, yet their court and their custody are not. That jagged edge means different systems, different governments, and it's the child who tends to slip through the gaps. The UK Government is proposing, like you mentioned, reforms to the youth justice system. From April 2027, Wales is due to take on some funding for remand and early intervention. That's a start. It's funding, but it's not powers. Decisions on how the system works will still be made in Westminster, even though Wales delivers the majority of it. Does the Counsel General agree that the UK Government has a duty to work with Wales, not around it, on reforms to a system that Wales largely delivers? Diolch. 

I thank the Member for this important question. The case for devolving justice and policing to Wales is open and shut, in my view. She referred to the various commissions. They've all said the same thing. They were arm's-length commissions, they decided what is best for Wales, how we could deliver better for Wales, and that is their conclusion. The commission found that devolving justice would enable more responsive, joined-up and effective services, as the Member alluded to, better aligned to the needs of people and communities in Wales and more closely integrated with devolved responsibilities such as health, social care, education and housing. In particular, the most recent commission found that youth justice should be among the starting points for fuller devolution. This Government's priorities are clear: where there are opportunities to improve the delivery of those priorities by securing further powers, then we will take them, to ensure the right foundations are laid for a system that is joined up—which the Member refers to—preventative, and fit for Wales.

I will conclude by saying that I agree entirely with her question. The Welsh Government position has been communicated to the Minister for youth justice, Jake Richards. The reforms being progressed by the UK Government potentially offer the opportunity to provide greater Welsh Government responsibility and influence in relation the strategic oversight and funding of local youth justice services. But it is important that the result is that Wales has sufficient powers and responsibilities to simplify and create strategy, governance and oversight arrangements. Our priorities are clear: where there are opportunities to enable more responsive, joined-up and effective services to be aligned, then of course we will go for them. I thank her for the question; it is an important one. There is a lot of ongoing work.

Counsel General, there is a fundamental difference between improving youth justice and simply devolving it. Wales already has strong pre-court diversion and comparatively low levels of youth custody. Yet the Government's own advisory work identifies inconsistent police management, staffing pressures, funding uncertainty and rising school exclusions. Indeed, its own youth justice advisory panel asked the questions Ministers must answer: how will devolution improve outcomes for children rather than simply change who is responsible? Because transferring responsibility across the border does not solve a problem. Changing the nameplate on the door is not reform. Counsel General, what objective test has the Government been advised must be met before further youth justice powers are devolved? If Ministers cannot demonstrate better outcomes for children, victims and the public, what is the legal or constitutional justification for transferring those powers at all?

The Member asks about legal tests. I would surmise that those legal tests were uppermost in the minds of all there commissions when they decided wholeheartedly to suggest that there should be devolution of justice. One of the problems that we have, which was alluded to in my answer to the previous question, is that we need joined-up responsibility in the whole area. It's not simply one function. It's not one service. It's an amalgam of the services. By having piecemeal devolution in these areas, it does nothing for the services and, arguably, we are letting our young people and families down. It's not a constitutional nicety. That is why we want to prioritise moving forward on this. And that is why, presumably, all three commissions, together, decided in that way as well.

Here we are again, Counsel General. You and I have to walk a narrow line in our exchanges. We're here in our legal capacity in this instance in an immensely political Chamber. So, no trick questions.

Constitutional change can have long-term consequences, of course. When the Government considers seeking additional powers for Wales, what tests do you believe should be applied before a proposal is taken forward? Should those tests include a clearly identifiable difficulty, evidence that transferring powers is the best way to address it, a workable delivery plan and sustainable funding, and clear accountability? Where services operate across the England and Wales border, should the effect on those cross-border links also be addressed and made clear before any changes take place?

I think the overall priority of this Government is to improve the lot of the people of Wales. If that means prioritising further devolution in some areas, so be it. It's not devolution for devolution's sake. That would be unfortunate, and probably prone to several problems. 

There is, for example, an argument, occasionally, for cross-border understandings. These are exceptions to which we refer in our approach to UK legislation. That's only sensible, because we are looking at services for people on both sides of the border, actually, but our priority is people here in Wales.

If the test we apply shows that we can improve services for the people of Wales by going for further devolution, then that is the driving force, that is the reason why we are doing it. There's no other reason, because, as I said earlier on, change for change's sake—and the Member said this, and he's right—change for the sake of change takes you nowhere. Change for the sake of improving services does.

Thank you. I want to move to the tribunal system. I know it's high in your priorities, Counsel General. So, the proposed new Welsh tribunal structure is intended not only to bring existing devolved tribunals into a more coherent system, but also be capable of taking on additional jurisdictions in the future. Before any additional jurisdiction is transferred into the Welsh tribunal system, what safeguards do you believe should be in place? In particular, how would we protect judicial independence, access to specialist expertise, consistent rights of appeal, and the handling of cases across the England-Wales border? And would you expect the costs and practical impact of each proposed transfer to be fully assessed before it takes place?

Well, there are some figures being looked at at the moment, but, clearly, as with any new major change, it cannot be known fully at the very beginning. But as regards cross-border function, I don't see that that is an issue in this case. It was, because I know of several cases where people in the tribunal system wished to appeal, and they happened to have their cases dealt with in Welsh, and they had to go over the border and could not obtain Welsh translation facilities, so they had to speak in their second language very often. So, that was one thing that needs putting right, and it will be put right in this case. All these tribunals, bar one or two, are existing. They are currently being run as best we can ensure that they are, but it will be far better to have the six of them designated properly, with a fully professional clerical service and administration, and then topped by a limited-form court of appeal within Wales for tribunal appeals. It's a logical step forward. The senior judiciary—not known for radical constitutional change—are all in favour of it, and we do have their full support in going forward, which makes me think it's the right thing to do.

Let's move now to the rail network—another one that is coming down the line, excuse the pun. Counsel General, the Government has set out a pathway towards full devolution of rail services and infrastructure, while also accepting that the Welsh network must remain integrated within the wider United Kingdom, of course. From a legal and constitutional point of view, what would need to be settled before such a transfer could take place? In particular, how would responsibility for long-term infrastructure liabilities, cross-border routes, for example, funding and dispute resolution be divided between Welsh Ministers, the Welsh Government and Great British Railways? And should funding and liability be settled as an integral part of any transfer rather than being left to subsequent negotiations?

Well, the transfer to which the Member refers does not apply to the tribunals Bill scenario. That's the first thing to say. As for further devolution, that clearly is a political matter. I am not part of the political machine as such. I am engaged by the Welsh Government on legal matters. If and when we come to a position where I'm asked my advice about the points that he very properly raises, then I will give my clear advice at that stage. At this moment in time, I can't assist any further.

Diolch. What discussion has the Counsel General had with the Law Society regarding securing fully funded level 7 solicitor apprenticeships in Wales? Level 7 solicitor apprenticeships are a well-established route to qualifications in England, allowing aspiring solicitors to earn while they learn and avoid taking on significant tuition debt. In Wales, however, aspiring solicitors still cannot access an equivalent funded route. The uptake of level 7 solicitor apprenticeships in England has grown, with more than 5,000 people starting an apprenticeship between 2018 and 2025. We cannot allow Wales to be left behind, can we?

That is a very good question, and I fully agree with the Member on what he says. What I can tell him, which may cheer him up slightly, is that level 7 apprenticeships at the bar and also solicitors are uppermost in this Government's mind. We are pushing forward on them and, indeed, I shall be making a speech on them in about a fortnight's time, during the Legal Wales conference. So, as he is interested, I'll send him a copy of the speech, and he can see that we are doing what we can.

Thank you very much for that answer. Let's see if I can keep being on a roll. Access to justice is a core component of the rule of law and yet many areas of Wales are facing a growing crisis in access to legal services. Described as legal deserts, these are areas where the presence of solicitors is so limited that people cannot easily obtain legal advice or representation when they need it. The Law Society has produced a report that draws on the latest data available, including solicitor distribution, demographic trends and the impact of legal aid funding pressures. The findings include severe geographic inequality in solicitor density, rising solicitor retirements without adequate replacements, the attrition of legal aid providers, and increasing numbers of unrepresented litigants in civil, criminal and welfare cases. What are the Counsel General's views on this report?

I've read the report, obviously. It's an important report, and it's been a fairly long-standing problem in many areas in Wales. In fact, it's been described, in terms of north and mid Wales, as an advice desert, and I do know of pockets of deserts, if you like, within urban areas as well. It's partly because solicitors have left the legal aid work, it's partly because there are fewer of them, it's partly because they are drifting away to larger firms who are privately funded. That is the picture. It is something that is creating a huge amount of difficulty for people who wish to access legal advice who are unable to obtain legal aid and who, therefore—and by the way, the qualification for legal aid has been cut back drastically as well in many areas—are left with private funding that they cannot afford. So, it is a big issue. What I can say is that I have no doubt that, during the forthcoming conference to which I referred, it will be a live issue and there will be further discussions. Something needs to be done, I fully accept that. It's been going on for far too long and it's reaching a situation now where it's becoming critical.

Diolch, Lywydd. Counsel General, I want to return to the issue raised by the Member for Brycheiniog Tawe Nedd and ask some further questions around what the Welsh Government can do to intervene and stop service reconfiguration decisions taken by local health boards. I listened very carefully to your earlier answers. Now, I'm sure you'll agree that health board service reconfiguration is a contentious issue in most parts of Wales, including, of course, in west Wales, which has a long history of service reductions, relocations and reconfigurations that have led many residents to feel that healthcare provision is increasingly being moved further away from their communities. In my view, when there is such strong public opposition to the health board's decisions, the Welsh Government has a moral responsibility to get involved and put a hold on controversial plans that do not carry the will of the people. So, Counsel General, you've confirmed here today that Ministers can intervene under the National Health Service (Wales) Act 2006, but can you tell us what role you have as the Welsh Government's legal adviser in any process that would involve intervention? And can you confirm that a Government can legally intervene on any health board decision under this Act?

Well, the first thing to say—. The Member referred to a moral case. I'm not an arbiter of morality. My job is law—simply law—and the legislation is quite clear. I know that it will disappoint the Member. I fully appreciate that this is a very emotional subject. I fully appreciate that; I don't live in a bubble—I understand. Nevertheless, the law is clear and it relates to failure of governance, failure of performance and the exercise of functions by local health boards. If one or other of those are engaged, then there would be a case for intervention by Welsh Ministers. Currently, I do not see it. It has not been reported that there is any problem in any of those three cases. But I would suggest to him, as well, that he should allow the consultation to take its course, and then a step back can be taken to consider what kind of consultation it was, what the conclusions are, and whether the conclusions deliver a service fit for his constituents. That's the acid test. And then, if there's a problem with that, clearly something could be done. But up until at that point, there is nothing that Welsh Ministers can do under any legislation that I have seen, and I say that with respect, not to be pejorative. 

You see, many people across Wales will find it difficult to understand why Ministers appear powerless to act when there is overwhelming public concern about major service changes that could significantly affect access to healthcare. Therefore, Counsel General, can you outline the legal thresholds, then, you believe must be met before the Welsh Government will intervene in a service reconfiguration decision taken by a health board? Furthermore, do you believe the current legal set-up provides the Welsh Government with sufficient powers to protect communities from reconfiguration decisions that lack public confidence?

Again, I'm not trying to be unhelpful, but I'm not going to speculate about thresholds, and I cannot, because I do not have the information in front of me. And I'm not going to speculate about the law, either. But what I will say to the gentleman is this: if he feels the law needs amending, strengthening or whatever, why doesn't he prepare a Bill and then present it to the Senedd and see how far it goes?

I'm asking your opinion.

Well, I cannot give you my opinion on anything other than the law. The law is plain, and I told you and I've explained where Ministers would be engaged, and currently they're not. But it is a prerequisite for that consultation to take its course, in my view, and then people may look again objectively at what the findings are.

Well, of course, the role of Welsh Government is to defend the devolution settlement, but also to ensure that things such as the Sewel convention are observed, and to defend and extend the relationship, one hopes. In July of this year, I published the Welsh Government's principles on UK legislation in devolved areas, and this includes a commitment that the UK legislation in devolved areas will only be used where the legislation protects or strengthens the devolution settlement and does not introduce new constraints on devolved competence. I am very clear, as is this Government, that we are focused on enhancing the devolution settlement and, with that, the Senedd’s legislative competence, rather than simply maintaining it. However, where there are attempts to limit or constrain the Senedd’s legislative competence, these will be firmly resisted, and this includes opposing the imposition of any further reservations or restrictions in the Government of Wales Act 2006, as well as securing relevant consents and carve-outs to ensure that devolved provisions conferred by UK parliamentary Acts can be removed by the Senedd at a later date. And I think key to all of this is the principle of legislative consent as set out clearly in the Sewel convention. This is essential to our devolution settlement and safeguards the Senedd’s role as the Welsh national legislature. As Counsel General, I am clear that the Sewel convention must be respected, particularly where there are any attempts to reduce or restrict the Senedd’s legislative competence via UK legislation.

Now, the Government's view is we would like it to have statutory underpinning. That is not forthcoming at the moment. There are discussions going on. Meantime, what is currently happening is there's a detailed discussion about a firm, proper solid memorandum of understanding on Sewel. It's probably second-best to having it on a statutory footing, but it is being undertaken and discussed as we speak now. So, something is happening. I fully appreciate the force of the question. It is vital that we ensure that Sewel is respected, as it has been disrespected so often of late.

I'm sure that, as a former Member of Parliament, the Counsel General is well acquainted with the concept of parliamentary sovereignty. Will the Counsel General acknowledge that the Senedd's legislative competence is defined by the Parliament of the United Kingdom and that the Senedd lacks the legal capacity to legislate on matters explicitly reserved to Westminster? Schedule 7A reserves the union. Does the Welsh Government accept that a Senedd Bill for independence or for an independence referendum would be outside the competency of the Senedd?

I've already said that I'm not a political animal, quite different from some of my colleagues. It's not a question I can answer, with respect. 

I thank the Member for this question, which is a current hot potato, if I could describe it that way. Ofcom regulates certain online services under the UK Government’s Online Safety Act 2023, including standards to minimise disinformation. The Welsh Government will continue to work closely with partners to protect the integrity of devolved elections and the safety of candidates, and support access to reliable information, through vote.wales. We are very much alert to the threats to democracy from online disinformation and malinformation.

Seven years ago, the BBC's The Capture imagined footage of a public figure fabricated convincingly enough to destroy them. It was dystopian and it was fiction then, but today all it takes is a free app and 90 seconds. A councillor in Kent told LBC this week she is thinking of quitting politics altogether due to sexualised images of her being flyposted all around lamp posts around her home and the council building she works in. It makes her feel watched, she said, and unsafe in the town she represents. Other women have said they are now considering whether they should stand at all. This is a real cost, not for one councillor, but for every single woman who decides the abuse is not worth it. Wales goes to the polls in May 2027, and I know the Government really does take this seriously. So, does the Counsel General consider that the existing Welsh electoral law reaches artificially generated material of this kind, and what steps is the Government considering before those elections?

Well, again, I thank the Member for this important question. I do know, actually, that women and people from ethnic minority backgrounds are unfortunately particularly targeted by harassment and abuse. This misogyny is appalling and should be condemned by all decent campaigners. I know that the police welcome reports of any potentially unlawful material or behaviour in political campaigns. Whilst this does not take away the very real problem of abuse, anyone considering standing for election should know there is support out there. Now, that's the crucial point, I think. Ahead of next year's local elections, we are funding Elect Her to support female candidates in Wales. The programme includes a digital self-defence and self-care toolkit, including resources to support candidates to create their own digital self-care plan and strategies for dealing with online abuse. The Deputy First Minister is considering how the Welsh Government's diversity and inclusion guidance for political parties can be strengthened. So, it is an issue very much on the table at the moment. I would say that politicians and candidates should always report any harmful online material to Ofcom and also the police as appropriate. All digital campaign material must clearly show who it is being promoted by. These digital imprints ensure that there is accountability for all official campaign material. Thank you.

Counsel General, under Wales's electoral law voting system, voters get one vote for a political party and its list of candidates, so there's a very clear statement of accountability. What happens when a candidate asks voters to back one party, gets elected on that party's manifesto and then walks away from those commitments? The voter doesn't have to change their vote—[Interruption.]

We're trying to listen—

They can't choose another candidate—[Interruption.]

Colleagues, we're trying to listen to the question. I think the Counsel General is trying to listen.

Diolch, Lywydd. Yet, the Member keeps their seat, alongside their very generous salary. Now, some learned legal minds, such as yourself, could consider that to be fraud by misrepresentation. So, Counsel General, does Welsh electoral law provide any legal protection for voters where a candidate's conduct after election departs from the political representation they were elected under? Does Plaid Cymru still consider that politicians who mislead constituents should be criminalised? And have you considered that, in order to protect Welsh democracy, the Member should do the right thing and resign? Diolch.

I regret, Llywydd, that I haven't got my wellingtons with me. [Laughter.] I've never heard such a load of muck in a long time. And I'm not getting involved in the politics of it, but is the Member seriously saying that nobody within Reform has ever switched sides during the currency of an election?

We've all been elected.

No, I'm not—. I'm the legal officer. I thank him for that question, but it's not for me. Thank you very much.

Right. Now, we're going to try and move ahead and get some more questions in further down the list, if we can, with everybody's help.

My question has some crossover with the question that Mike Hedges asked earlier.

Pressures on legal aid provision in Wales are a very serious concern. Reduced provision means many communities cannot access the legal help they need. Although legal aid is reserved to the UK Government, we will always look for opportunities to bring these problems to the attention of the Ministry of Justice.

Diolch yn fawr iawn. We know how vital legal aid is to helping those in need and ensuring that everybody has the right to adequate legal representation. A report by the House of Lords select committee last year concluded that there are people who are both unable to access legal aid and unable to afford to pay for legal services privately. As the Law Society have noted, proposals put forward by the UK Government have not addressed the distinct issues facing the legal sector in Wales and that the part or full devolution of justice, if implemented and funded appropriately, offers significant potential opportunities to the people of Wales. What advice has the Counsel General given the Welsh Government on the adequacy of legal aid in Wales?

Well, it is a matter that the Welsh Government are acutely aware of, and it's partly because of the narrowing of the scope of legal aid alongside tighter eligibility criteria. That's had a very significant impact over many years on the justice system across England and Wales. I'm particularly concerned that people in many parts of Wales are unable to access local legal advice because legal aid fees are no longer sufficient to support sustainable provision. In Wales, reduced provision has contributed to legal advice deserts, leaving some communities without local access to specialist legal help. For example, the Law Society's heat maps show that 82 per cent of the people of Wales have no access to a legal aid-funded local welfare provider, and no less than 88 per cent have no education law provider.

These pressures are acute everywhere, but particularly so in rural, post-industrial and lower income communities, similar to the area that the Member represents. Where alternative sources of advice may be very limited, and without early legal advice, problems can escalate, increasing pressures on devolved services including health, housing and social care. Through the regional advice networks, we are supporting closer collaboration between private law firms and not-for-profit advice providers so that people across Wales can access the advice they need. Although, as I've said before, legal aid is reserved, we will work closely with the Ministry of Justice, the UK Government and legal professions in Wales to ensure Wales's needs are clearly understood and are reflected in the response to these pressures.

While criminal justice, as the Member knows, is largely reserved, the Welsh Government works with policing, the Crown Prosecution Service, courts and specialist services to improve access to justice for rape survivors. Through the violence against women, domestic abuse and sexual violence agenda, we fund advocacy, counselling and support services, including independent sexual violence advisers, helping survivors access information, support and justice.

I would further say that the Government has invested in specialist support services throughout the piece. More needs to be done, I hasten to add, and we recognise that access to justice is about more than court outcomes. Survivors must be able to access timely support, information and advocacy so they can make informed decisions and recover from the impact of abuse.

And with regard to the university sector, all learners, including university students, should be able to study in safe environments free from violence, abuse, harassment and intimidation. Whilst universities in Wales are autonomous, we expect them to take robust action to ensure safe and supportive teaching environments. Medr's new staff and learner welfare condition has introduced clearer expectations on well-being, safety and protection from harassment and misconduct, including sexual violence. Officials are working closely with Medr and universities and sector partners to strengthen prevention, reporting and support, improve consistency and transparency and support providers to create safe cultures where concerns are taken seriously. I would suggest to the Member that she writes to my colleague the Deputy First Minister on this matter, and I am sure that she will get a full and substantive response on the current steps being taken.

Thank you for that. I was pleased to see the UK Government announcement that specialist courts to deal with rape and sexual offences are to be introduced across England and Wales, and, hopefully, this begins to tackle the shamefully low prosecution rates of rape in the UK, which has, effectively, been decriminalised.

However, we also must look at prevention, not just justice. I met with a group of young women at Cardiff University, so I was glad to hear you talk about the university sector. They're called Time to Act, and they've been campaigning to eliminate sexual assault and sexual harassment from campuses, alongside supporting survivors. In England, as you'll know, there are currently regulatory consequences for institutions that fail to prevent and to tackle harassment and sexual misconduct. Students in Wales don't have this equivalent protection, so I was wondering if you would, potentially, look at what avenues are available for the Welsh Government to legislate and prevent sexual harassment and violence on university campus.

Well, I hear what the Member says, and I appreciate the work that she's doing in the area. It's certainly very important, and I can speak from my own personal knowledge of work I do at the university in Aberystwyth. It's high on the agenda at that university and, I have no doubt, in every university in Wales, and so it should be. So, things are moving, albeit slower than all of us would want, but they are moving in the right direction. And our job, it seems to me, is to pressurise and ensure that the continued improvement in this area is to be seen by all.

If I add one final thing, on the issue of rape generally—horrific as it is—there has been an announcement that there will be, from 1 October, designated courts dealing with rape. That will lessen the backlog, and that will include specialists available to help and back up individuals but also things like separate entrances and waiting rooms, basic protections of that kind. This is something, I believe, to be welcomed. I would also say, on a more positive note, that the backlogs in Wales are considerably better than they are elsewhere in the UK, and we need to maintain that, but this, again, will assist, I believe.

Trefnydd, I'd be grateful if I could have a statement on local train overcrowding. Transport for Wales's service for Bridgend to Rhymney is currently the third most overcrowded service between peak hours in the UK. That service now is affecting commuters, affecting their transport into work. It's not very easy for elderly people to get a seat, and it's something that my constituents are raising with me quite often. So, I'd be grateful, Trefnydd, if the Minister sitting here could come forward with something so that we can address the overcrowding on Welsh trains. Diolch.

Last week, I was glad to be joined by my Welsh Labour colleague Ken Skates at Llanwern steelworks in my constituency. Llanwern is strategically important to Wales and the whole of the UK, and it must not be lost in the wider debate on the steel industry. Steel making is in Newport's DNA, and it should have a proud future, but the workers that I spoke to last week were concerned about that future and that it's under threat from cheap galvanised steel imports. The Welsh Government must work with the UK Government to protect steel jobs in Wales and engage with the unions to support the workforce. So, Trefnydd, can we have a statement from the Welsh Government confirming that you will do everything in your power to ensure a sustainable future for the steel industry in Wales?

Trefnydd, continuing on the theme of trains, I'd like to request a statement from the Deputy Minister for Transport on the delivery of rail services in west Wales. I'm regularly contacted by constituents from across Ceredigion Penfro who express concerns about the frequency, reliability and overall availability of rail services in the region. They want to see more regular and dependable train services operating across all rail lines in west Wales throughout the week, because for too long west Wales has not received the level of attention it deserves when it comes to rail connectivity and service delivery, and I believe there should be a review of rail provision in the region to assess whether current services are meeting the needs of local communities, and indeed to identify where improvements are required. Therefore, I'd be grateful if the Welsh Government could provide a statement outlining what steps it intends to take to improve the delivery, frequency and reliability of rail services in west Wales so that we can understand how it plans to address the long-standing concerns of passengers in Ceredigion Penfro.

Trefnydd, we just heard questions to the Counsel General about the legal position surrounding health service reconfiguration. Last week, Powys Teaching Health Board decided to press ahead with consultation on proposals that could remove in-patient beds from a number of our community hospitals. There is considerable concern across Powys and many of us are far from convinced that the voices of local people or their elected representatives are being heard. Will you therefore arrange for an urgent statement from the Cabinet Minister for Health and Care setting out the Government's position, what discussions he has had with the health board, and, crucially, whether he is prepared to intervene?

Trefnydd, we know that many people were preparing for surgery when they heard, by word of mouth or by social media, that their surgeries under the Welsh Gender Service had been paused during the Senedd's summer recess. One of my constituents was actually in hospital for surgery when they were told that their operation was cancelled, with no further support provided since then. You'll know that I've written, with other Members, to the NHS Wales Joint Commissioning Committee, who were responsible for this decision, asking about the evidence that informed this decision, the lack of communication with patients, and how patients' voices were not heard.

I know that this decision was made by a medical body, rather than a political one, but I'd like to request a statement outlining how the Government will ensure that this community will be listened to, how their concerns will be central to any further decisions made about trans healthcare, and how they will be supported. Diolch.

Please be assured that this Government stands with the trans community and will continue to protect and promote trans rights in line with our commitment to a welcoming and inclusive Wales. Members will be aware that a debate is tabled tomorrow by Anthony Slaughter. There will be an opportunity then to ask questions of the Cabinet Minister for health, and he will also be responding in full then.

To be fair, you, like me, Trefnydd, have been an advocate for ensuring children and young people get to school safely and happy, and I'm sure that you'll agree with me that the first priority of governments at every level should be to protect children's and young people's well-being and not leave them anxious and worried. This policy of getting as many pupils as possible onto public buses rather than school buses is majorly flawed. It may work in urban areas, but it certainly doesn't work in rural areas, where routes like the Usk to Monmouth are long and winding, with national speed limit roads. Children packed in like sardines, standing for 40 minutes, is just not acceptable, and I'm sure you'll agree with that. But, sadly, this was the case in Monmouthshire on the first day of term, with multiple parents and pupils contacting me, with issues—similar issues, actually—flagged all over Monmouthshire and Torfaen. How can we possibly be in a situation where children have to have their own seat and even wear a seat belt for school trips, but this is acceptable?

Cost-cutting exercises by councils—and we all know they're strapped for cash—should never come at the expense of children's safety and well-being. Trefnydd, on that note, I would like to request an urgent statement from the Cabinet Minister responsible as to when this policy will be reviewed to ensure all children and young people get to school safely, on time and ready to learn. Diolch.

Trefnydd, can I call for a statement from the Cabinet Minister for Enterprise, Connectivity and Energy on access to banking services in Wales? I appreciate that banking is not a devolved matter, but banking services really do matter to people across the country, particularly in communities that don't have access to a bank. I've been blessed in my own constituency to have two banking hubs, which are serving the communities of Abergele and Prestatyn, but there are other communities, places like Llangollen that lost its last bank a couple of years ago, that don't have a bank present. At the moment, the FCA, the Financial Conduct Authority, simply do assessments of access to cash, rather than access to banking services.

Shortly after the election, the UK Government did announce a review of access to banking services. That consultation finished over the summer. I wonder whether the Welsh Government has made a submission to that about the particular circumstances in Wales, particularly given our rurality, to make sure that people have access to these vital services. If it hasn't, is there any way we can work together to make sure that we make a call and a demand for legislation in this area, to ensure that banking services are available?

I'm raising this as an MS for Carmarthenshire, but I need to declare that I am also the Chair of the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee. Trefnydd, can I ask for a statement from the Welsh Government on nutrient neutrality and its impact on housing delivery in west Wales?

Following Natural Resources Wales's marine assessment and subsequent planning advice to councils last year, social and affordable housing schemes across Carmarthenshire and Pembrokeshire face significant delays. I have been contacted by one contractor who builds almost exclusively for affordable social housing, and he has an order book of £30 million-worth of secured work that has now stalled. Its turnover has halved, it supports approximately 80 staff and 320 subcontractors, from groundworkers and bricklayers through to merchants, plant hire firms and delivery drivers. Everyone accepts in this Chamber the need to protect our rivers and estuaries, but nutrient pollution comes from a wide range of sources across whole catchment areas. These delays are affecting both families waiting for homes and the firms ready to build them.

So, can we have a statement on what has replaced the marine nitrates development taskforce, what further mitigation measures are being considered, and when these housing schemes can realistically move forward? Thank you.

I'd like to request two statements, one from the Cabinet Minister for Social Justice and Equality on how they are working with councils and the UK Government to prevent rogue builders and their ability to phoenix, which is starting up again after you've left people with incomplete builds and in lots of debt, and also on identity fraud, quishing and other scams that are taking place in north Wales, where it has emerged that there is a higher degree of scams now affecting our older constituents. I'm working with trading standards and the BBC, as north Wales does seem to be this key place where it's happening. The Federation of Master Builders Cymru have called on the Welsh Government to work alongside the UK Government to produce a mandatory licensing scheme for building companies. Will your Government support that?

And a second one from the Cabinet Minister for Health and Care on the parking provision at Ysbyty Gwynedd—and Ysbyty Glan Clwyd is just as bad. Patients and visitors are continuously struggling to find appropriate parking, despite driving around continuously for almost an hour sometimes, and sometimes they will actually accept that they're going to get a fine because otherwise they would miss that appointment. This has been going on for too long now, so we need something from the health Minister to say that he's accepting that this isn't adequate. Please help. 

I want to ask about speed limit guidance, and it's great to have the Deputy Minister here. I've raised this repeatedly in the Senedd, because communities across Brycheiniog Tawe Nedd— Rhayader, Llanspyddid, Libanus, Cwmdu and others—have been waiting for many months and years for revised guidance on the speed limits. And we've had correspondence, and I understand it will be some time in 2027. But I just wonder if we could just be clearer and more specific, given that we represent communities—and it's not just me—who really need this speed guidance in order to ensure they're safe. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Trefnydd, I would like to call for a Welsh Government statement from the Minister for Finance regarding the Welsh rates of income tax during the Senedd term, in particular whether she has made any request to any civil servant on assessing the impact of an increase in taxes and what impact that would have on her finances.

Trefnydd, can I request a statement from the Cabinet Minister for Local Government, Housing and Planning on the extent of houses in multiple occupancy in Bangor Aberconwy Môn being used by Government-contracted organisations to house people via Home Office schemes? And what assessment has been made of the effect on local housing costs and supply for constituents on waiting lists, some of whom have been waiting for over a year?

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I'd like to call for a statement from the Cabinet Minister for Health and Care on the increasing prevalence of antisemitism in the healthcare sector. The Campaign Against Antisemitism is today publishing a groundbreaking documentary featuring patients and practitioners describing experiences, including Nazi salutes, antisemitic death threats and patients refusing treatment from Jewish doctors. There has been a meteoric increase in antisemitism over the last three years, and British Jews have been taking steps to conceal their Jewish identity. Whilst most evidence focuses on England, I'd be surprised if Wales were immune from this problem. So, can we have a statement outlining how the Welsh Government is monitoring antisemitism in our healthcare services, and what action is being taken to root it out?

Thank you. Can I be very clear that antisemitism is something that we should all condemn? We should all work proactively to ensure that no-one is targeted in such a way and feels unsafe. The growth of antisemitism and hatred is something that should unite all of us in condemning and working hard within our communities to ensure that there is community cohesion and that nobody is targeted in such a way. The Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Minister for Social Justice and Equality leads on this work on behalf of the Welsh Government, though it's of course owned collectively by each of us, and the 'Anti-racist Wales Action Plan' is being reviewed to ensure that it's fit for purpose in light of the rise that we're seeing in antisemitism and hate crimes. Therefore, any Member here who is concerned about such issues, please engage with this work, because it's crucial that we work together.

There's a long-established formula for the distribution of such funding, and well-established processes for making changes to this formula. Your Government has torn that up via a press release, and I'm told councils are still waiting for details nearly a week after the announcement was made. I find it deeply concerning, without debate or scrutiny, that the Plaid Government would divert potential funding away from communities such as Ely, Caerau, south Riverside, Pentrebane, Grangetown, Butetown and Splott, despite the significant challenges of poverty faced by residents there. Surely there's consensus across this Chamber that the most effective way to target funding intended to alleviate poverty is to allocate it according to the levels of poverty and need. The Minister needs to urgently explain why she believes differently. Diolch yn fawr.

In May, the people of Wales said clearly that they wanted a new level of ambition for our nation. Acting on the mandate to set our sights higher than previous Governments have done and forge a more hopeful future for Wales, I am today proud to publish our programme for government. 'New Ambition for Wales' builds on the foundations established during the Government’s first 100 days and sets out how we will deliver the priorities identified in our manifesto over the Senedd term.

This programme is built around the issues that matter most to people’s everyday lives: the sustainability of the health and care service; the cost of living; high-skilled, well-paid jobs; driving up standards in education; tackling child poverty and opening doors for young people; and standing up for Wales at every turn.

Dirprwy Lywydd, for too long, silo working has stood in the way of progress. This new Government will work across traditional boundaries to address the greatest challenges facing our society. That is why prevention, productivity, the climate and nature emergency and the Welsh Language—Cymraeg—are embedded throughout every aspect of our programme. They are not separate priorities, they underpin every aspect of how we will deliver change and improve outcomes across Wales. They will shape the work of every Minister and every part of Government.

We'll rebalance resources towards the prevention of ill health, better access to services and improved social care. We want a future where preventing ill health is given the same priority as treating illness, where services are designed around people and communities, and where every part of Government works together to improve health and well-being. And as the cost-of-living crisis continues to bite and global headwinds threaten further volatility in coming months, my Government will help households make ends meet.

At a time when many families are facing significant financial pressures, we will take action to make everyday life more affordable. Central to that effort is our transformative new childcare offer, which will help families with the cost of living, support parents into work and training and make a significant contribution to tackling child poverty. We will also tackle one of the biggest pressures on household budgets by improving access to affordable and secure housing, including through our commitment to deliver at least 20,000 additional social homes by 2030.

Our ambition for Wales rests on a flourishing economy that fuels our public services, creates fulfilling and rewarding jobs, and provides the foundation for a stronger future. Through our productivity mission, we'll work to halve the productivity gap with the rest of the UK within 10 years. We'll also establish a new national development agency to help Welsh businesses to grow, innovate and create good jobs. Every part of the Government has a role to play in growing the Welsh economy.

Dirprwy Lywydd, every child and young person deserves the opportunity to fulfil their potential and succeed in the future. But they've been failed by previous administrations whose lack of ambition has left Wales languishing at the bottom of league tables. 

We cannot and will not accept that this is as good as it gets for our education system. We owe it to the next generation to match their hopes and aspirations for the future with a new level of ambition never before determined by any Welsh Government. That commitment to improving the lives of our young people is just as relevant to their formative years. Years of flawed strategies and unfocused spending by previous administrations, compounded by destructive austerity policies pursued by Westminster, have left child poverty levels stubbornly high. Getting to grips with this is both a moral imperative and a defining mission of this Government.

Finally, my Government will be unwavering and unapologetic in standing up for Wales and demanding fairness from Westminster at every turn.

Underpinning all of this is our determination to deliver through better Government. Better Government means focusing on what matters most, working across traditional boundaries and ensuring that our efforts make a real difference. We're also committed to being open and transparent about our progress. We will strengthen our use of evidence and data, learning always from what works. Dirprwy Lywydd, after years of missed opportunities and stagnation, we are getting Wales moving.

Prif Weinidog, can I begin by thanking you for delivering your programme for government today? There's plenty in this programme that Reform can agree with. We want waiting lists down, we want standards in our schools to improve, we want better paid jobs, stronger businesses, and a health service that people can access when they need it. Where there is common ground, I will say so.

Reform went into the election supporting greater surgical and diagnostic capacity, stronger literacy and numeracy in schools, reform of the additional learning needs system, more vocational opportunities for young people and a stronger future for family farms up and down the country. But the real test of this programme is not how many promises are made today, it's whether we can come back to this Chamber in a year, two years and four years from now and measure whether anything has actually improved. 

Holding you to account is our responsibility as an effective opposition. Take the NHS. You're promising up to 10 surgical hubs, more diagnostic capacity, stronger clinical pathways and up to 100 more general practitioners. Those are ambitious commitments and people will expect this Government to deliver them. So, my first question is this: by the end of this Senedd term, how much lower should the overall waiting lists be, when will those surgical hubs be operating at full capacity and how many additional patients will they treat? Give us the baseline. Give us the target. Give us the date. Then, this Senedd can hold you to it. 

The same applies to education. Your programme says that raising literacy and numeracy is one of the most urgent challenges facing our schools. I would agree. It also accepts the problems around persistent absence, behaviour and the pressure on the additional learning needs system. I welcome the fact that the Government recognises those problems, but recognition is the easy part. Schools cannot employ additional support with warm words, and local authorities cannot satisfy the growing demand for support with another review.

So, my second question is this: what improvement in attendance, literacy and numeracy should we expect to see by 2030, and what additional resource will actually reach the schools and councils to make the ALN system sustainable? Again, put the numbers against it. Parents and teachers need to know what success looks like. We on these opposition benches need to know what your idea of success looks like.

There is a much clearer political difference between us on the economy. This Government wants new agencies, commissions and programmes. Reform went into the election offering a different approach. We want lower taxes, better roads, stronger infrastructure and a Government that makes it easier for businesses to invest and grow here in Cymru. Your programme talks about productivity and good jobs. Fine. Productivity can be measured. Pay can be measured. Economic inactivity can be measured. Business creation can be measured. So, my third question is this: which economic measure does the First Minister want us to judge him by in 2030, and what target is he setting himself? Because if the answer is that Wales will be more prosperous, that is not enough. We need to know what progress looks like in hard figures.

I will now move on to the areas on which Reform fundamentally disagrees. First Minister, your Government remains committed to a pathway to net zero by 2040. Reform does not support that devolved target. We put greater weight on affordability, energy security and nuclear power, including the economic opportunity through small modular reactors at Wylfa in north Wales, which did not feature at all in Plaid Cymru's election manifesto. In fact, there's not much talk of north Wales at all in your programme for government, which is extremely disappointing.

On farming, you intend to continue and refine the sustainable farming scheme. We campaigned for much more substantial reform, with food production taking precedence and bureaucracy taking a back seat, rather than form filling and farming by calendar, which risks driving livestock numbers down in Wales. Those are fair and genuine differences, and people can judge the outcomes for themselves.

I also want to address the constitutional section of this programme, because it goes well beyond asking Westminster for a fair funding settlement. You are establishing a new national commission for Wales. You want justice and policing devolved, welfare devolved, further powers over energy, broadcasting, water and the Crown Estate. And Government is formally asking for the power to determine the timing, question and process of an independence referendum. Plaid Cymru is entitled to argue for those things. Reform is equally entitled to oppose them. I will never accept the notion that you have to support independence and constitutional chaos to prove you believe in Wales.

First Minister, I'm interested in what works, not what fits an ideology. Being Welsh does not require supporting independence, and standing up for Wales does not require wanting to leave the United Kingdom. So, my fourth question is this: how much public money and civil service resource will be committed to this constitutional programme during this Senedd term, and what practical outcome will you use to show that the expenditure has improved people's day-to-day lives?

Your own well-being statement says that the programme for government will be reviewed every year, and that progress will be reported annually. Good. And those reports must contain enough hard information for this Senedd and the public to judge whether you are delivering. By 2030, will people be waiting less time for treatment? Will children be attending school more regularly and achieving better results? Will wages and productivity be higher? Will businesses have confidence and invest in Wales? Will Welsh farmers be unshackled from burdensome red tape and incentivised to increase food production? I'm asking you to tell us what success looks like in numbers and time frames. Set the measures now, publish them every year, and then we will see whether this Government delivers what it has promised. Diolch yn fawr. 

I'm grateful to the leader of Reform for agreeing that we are getting our priorities right in this programme for government and pledging to work in a co-operative way to help us deliver. That's exactly how I think we should operate here.

The Member is quite right that we need a Government that is willing and wants to be held to account. Scrutiny is important. That is why we have already published the first iteration of our digital dashboard. It will develop, it will grow, enabling you, and the Welsh public, to see how we are performing against a range of targets. Yes, and of course we have elements of targets throughout our programme for government.

There are some things that we have done already. We don't need a target to say that we will deliver that £1 billion that shows Welsh agriculture that this is a Government that believes in them and wants to support them. These are actions already taken. We don't need to set a target for how much funding we think needs to go into the health service. We've already taken those actions.

But the Member is quite right, so let's have a look at a number of the really key targets. We couldn't be clearer about what the childcare offer means. We have already been able to get to a point where the outcome at the end of this financial year is the roll-out of 12.5 hours of funded childcare for every two-year-old in every part of Wales. That's something the previous administration singularly failed to do. They got up to three. We're getting up to 22.

On education, interestingly, the work that we need to do—you have a background in education—is find a baseline from which we then are able to build. There will be targets around elements such as the Programme for International Student Assessment, which is only one measure, but we absolutely are putting those baselines in place so that we can build exactly that framework around which schools and parents and pupils know what they're aiming for.

There's a question about productivity. What are our targets on productivity? The Cabinet Minister for enterprise has literally published the first proper target for economic growth in Wales for a quarter of a century. It’s pretty ambitious, but I know that we have got the means to get there. It is, as it happens, not within the life of this Senedd, because we have to think long term about the economy. This is halving the productivity gap with the rest of the UK within 10 years. Now, that is a significant target, and throughout the term of this Senedd and beyond, as a nation, we need to be working towards those kinds of ambitious targets.

So, the targets are there. The differences that the Member emphasised are ones that are clear for everybody to see: that Reform do not believe in Wales as a nation, that we are a nation that builds our own future. That is my belief. I believed in devolution in 1997, when we had the chance to vote. I believed in strengthening it when we had the referendum in 2011. I believe we need to strengthen it further. What we have from the leader of Reform is a blanket ‘no’: ‘We do not want Wales to have the tools. We do not want Wales to be able to succeed by having the powers or the finances in order to build a better future for Wales.’ That is fine, that is a fundamental difference between us. I'll be the one here standing up for Wales. She can do as she pleases.

First Minister, can I also thank you for your statement today and congratulate you on publishing your programme for government? This, of course, is the first non-Welsh Labour-led programme for government this Senedd has seen, and we aim to respond to it in a dignified manner, putting the people that we serve and represent first, and of course working in common cause where and when we can. I look forward to working constructively on legislation in particular.

Now, governing, as I believe you recognise, is hard, and we do not intend to make your task unnecessarily harder, but we do represent in our party a great Welsh tradition with deep bonds of solidarity across Britain on the basis that we achieve more together than we can achieve alone. And our role in this Chamber is to stand up for the most vulnerable and to be a voice for those who don't have inherited wealth and privilege, but who graft and work for a better tomorrow. We were therefore disappointed that one of the first things this Plaid Cymru Government did was to water down its offer on free school meals. Plaid Cymru promised in its first 100 days document to commit to expanding free school meals to all secondary school pupils in households claiming universal benefit from September of this year. But by June, of course, just weeks after the election, you stated that this year it would only be available to parents of children in years 7 and 8. No date, indeed, has been given for extending this to years 9, 10 and 11.

Now, Bevan said that socialism is the language of priorities, and one of your first decisions was that you decided that keeping an election promise to some of our poorest children was not a priority. When over £300 million of ALN consequentials came to Wales, again you decided that the most vulnerable children were not a priority and not a penny was allocated to them. Welsh Labour had published plans in Government and in our manifesto for a negotiating body for school support staff, and despite the Senedd voting in favour of it, your Government has refused to commit to supporting school support staff on this.

Now, First Minister, you told traditional Labour voters in your election campaign that you were a safe pair of hands for progressive voters, and yet your group is now welcoming right-wing Reformers. And in your first decisions on education and opportunity for everyone, you've prioritised expanding Welsh Labour's childcare offer to millionaires. First Minister, can I ask you today to commit that your policies in this programme for government will not result in the removal or reduction in support aimed at working class or vulnerable children, such as Flying Start?

Turning to healthcare, under this Plaid Cymru Government, both overall waiting lists and two-year waiting lists are rising again, having fallen for 10 months in a row under Welsh Labour. Before the election, you promised that, within months, the number of people waiting for more than two years would be zero. Can you confirm that the priorities that you set out in this programme for government will not see you renege on another promise—a promise, not just an ambition, that we will see two-year waits reduced to zero within months? And can you confirm how many months that will be?

Weeks before the election—in an attempt, obviously, to get Wales's trade union movement on side—you also wrote to Cwm Taf health visitors supporting their call to upgrade all band 6 health visitors to band 7. Ministers, again, have reneged on this promise, and health visitors rightly feel betrayed. So, can I ask you, First Minister, will you now make good on your promise to these workers and to Unite the Union?

Others who will feel ignored and betrayed by this programme for government are the people of north Wales, as Helen Jenner has already identified, specifically those in Flintshire and Wrexham, because as Wrexham.com have observed, for north-east Wales, a notable feature is absence. It's as though parts of Wales are already being left behind. Standing up for Wales means uniting the people of Wales, not seeking a course of action that will divide Wales, divide the nation, divide our families and divide our communities, as Brexit did. Standing up for Wales means taking action to improve Wales, not producing a plethora of plans.

It's not too late, though. It's not too late. I ask you, finally, First Minister, to work with us in the spirit that you campaigned, in the spirit not only of constructive politics, but also progressive politics, because when the people of Wales are prioritised, I can assure you that you will find in us a willing and constructive partner.

I thank the Labour leader for beginning his contribution in a positive way. Governing is hard, as he knows. There has never been a majority in the history of devolution, and we recognise that we need to work across this Chamber in many ways, including through the development of legislation, which he suggested he wants to work with us on.

Unpicking a bit more some of the points that were raised there—on the NHS, it was and is priority No. 1. This is a Government that has already made choices, including on a budget deal with the last Labour Government, to ensure that we have the resources to make sure that we build a more sustainable future for the NHS. We begin now from the point of the legacy that we inherited from the last Labour Government. Data is just coming through now from the time of the election and the weeks following that, and, yes, it confirms how dire the situation is that we are trying to resolve. But through the measures outlined in this programme for government, building towards the introduction of up to 10 hubs, a change in emphasis in terms of the work patterns of doctors—this is clinically led, remember, to free up time, to get more people through the system—the injection of £150 million, some of it clinical, some of it on the actual buildings themselves, which will be the home of a sustainable NHS for the future, we stand firm by the pledges that we have made and in making this a priority.

On this element of somehow north Wales not being mentioned in this programme for government, I come from even further north than he does, and this is a Government—and I have made it clear—that isn't about the tokenism of having a north Wales Minister; every single Minister in this Government is a north Wales Minister and a south Wales Minister and a west Wales Minister, because we believe in bringing Wales together and building a brighter future for people, wherever they are. And to attack the first north Wales First Minister for somehow not caring about the north isn't something that people are going to even believe makes sense, frankly.

I come back to additional learning needs and remind the Member again that he had £9 million that Labour were going to put into something that we consider to be very important; we're glad that he does too. We had £100 million on the table; we have £40 million that we can spend this year. That is what this party put on the table, seriously, in a way that isn't just money but is money that can be spent—money that can be spent to make a real difference to councils, to schools, to parents, to children. The offer is still very much available. This has to be about more than politics.

And I will end, if I may, on this attack, which I've heard mentioned and read about it in the paper—and I was thinking, 'Surely, he's not going to make this accusation here in the Senedd Chamber'—that the childcare offer is something that he objects to in its universality. So, suddenly, the Labour Party objects to the universality that provides bus passes for pensioners, so we can assume that Labour wants to take away bus passes for pensioners, we can assume that they're against the universality of free prescriptions. Can we start thinking that also they want the universality of the NHS, even, to be taken away from people? Is he happy to create a two-tier system where rich people are to be supported to go off into private healthcare, or does he, like me, believe that the more we can build together—yes, including that principle of universality—binds us together as a nation and gives us solutions for the long term that address the needs of people in all parts of Wales from all backgrounds?

We have here a programme for government that is about transforming Wales, and I guess the point to make on governing being difficult is that government is difficult, especially when you inherit a broad range of issues that don't put us off, that don't make us diminish our ambitions, but make us work harder to deliver them for the people of Wales.

It's always interesting watching a messy divorce—[Laughter.]—and, my goodness, has it been an untidy one.

Can I thank you, First Minister, for advance notice of your statement, although not quite as in advance as the Western Mail's notice of your statement today, which seemed to have more detail than any Member of this Senedd prior to the release of it at 9.34 a.m. this morning? I'm afraid to say, again, a bit of a sense of déjà vu, a lot of recutting and rehashing of your manifesto, recutting and rehashing of your 100-day plan, and there's only so much rehashing that you can do with the same sorry document so many times to try and polish what many people would describe as something that I won't refer to. Because that, I'm afraid, is what many people will see it as.

I have to say that I was listening carefully to the radio this morning, as you found out in First Minister's questions today, and Laura McAllister referred to your 100-day plan as a 'gimmick'—I agree with her, and it's not always that I agree with Laura McAllister, but I agree with her on that. And now, of course, the rubber needs to hit the road in terms of getting some delivery for the people of Wales. And it's not going very well so far, is it? Waiting times up, PISA scores down, your grandstanding on independence really not making much of a difference, no matter how loud you scream. Now, I will say that, look, there is a lot of ambition in this document that we on the Conservative benches share—we want to see a more prosperous Wales, we want to see a better educated Wales, we want to see a healthier Wales; we want to see all of those things—but I'm afraid that it's lighter on detail than I would like in terms of the availability to deliver on those things.

Let me just turn to the NHS for a second, because I'm very concerned about the NHS, as are you, and I know that it's something that is close to your heart. You referenced the climate emergency and the nature emergency; you didn't seem to reference a crisis in the NHS, which I'm afraid it is, and many people perceive it as such. One thing that we do know is that that crisis is largely caused, according to the clinicians themselves, and according to the royal colleges, including the Royal College of Nursing, which was here last week in the Senedd, as a result of the beds situation in our NHS. There simply aren't enough beds. The Labour Party was disastrous in terms of its management of the NHS; I agree with you on that. They cut the number of beds too far, too fast, and people now are paying the consequences.

Just over the last three years, I am told by the Royal College of Nursing, 21 per cent of acute surgical beds have gone in the Welsh NHS, a fifth of our capacity. Thirteen per cent of acute medical beds have gone. It's no wonder that our emergency departments can't find the beds in those hospitals when patients need them. You didn't reference that situation. I want to know what are you going to do to surge those beds in the short term to fix that issue. Because let me tell you: you create surgical hubs, you need beds for people to go into after they're recovering from surgery, particularly if something goes wrong. So, I want to know what are you doing on that front.

You also suggested that there's going to be a switch in the way that the NHS is funded, with more going to primary care. Now, I want more money to go into our primary care services, but I don't want it to be to the detriment of hospital care. What assurances can you give me today, First Minister, and the people of Wales, that you won't be cutting funding to our hospitals in Wales in order to compensate for that extra investment in primary care? Because we need to know.

You referenced the cost of living. I agree with you that we need action on that. That's why I raised the need to do something on council tax today in First Minister's questions. We need action to extend free childcare. We had a free childcare plan as well, and we'll support you to be able to try to deliver some more free childcare. Ours was slightly different; we wanted more parental choice so that grandparents could look after their children too, and that was better for the taxpayer in terms of cost. But I want to know what you're doing to cut taxes. Can you cut some taxes for us? A penny off income tax. Is it not possible to shave some money off the budget where we've got waste, where we've got largesse, so that we can put money back into people's pockets so that they can decide how to spend it in the economy themselves?

You referenced in your document—. By the way, when the statement came through, I clicked on the well-being link. It didn't work. I hope that's not an omen for the future in terms of whether you'll be able to deliver things. I eventually got around to finding the right link. You talked in there about the desire to allow people to buy their own community assets. I support that; we'll support you with that. I want people to be able to buy their own home. I want stamp duty gone. I want the right to buy back. I want to bring empty homes back into use. There's insufficient detail on those things in your plan.

I've got all sorts of other things that I'd like to discuss, but the clock's against me. Let me say this: if you're able to deliver on your ambitions, many of them which we support, we will try to work collaboratively with you. It might be difficult. There may be some stumbles along the way, but we're prepared to reach out on a cross-party basis, and it was good to hear the same message coming from Reform as well, to try to make Wales a better place. But be under no illusions: we want to see a Wales where there are lower taxes, where there's an end to wasteful spending, where there's less emphasis on the grandstanding and more emphasis on the day-to-day jobs and using those powers and resources that you already have in your armoury to deliver a better future for our country.

Diolch yn fawr iawn. Again, the common ground that we have, and I also take a real positive from the fact that we have three party leaders now who say that they want to work positively and constructively. It won't be on everything—there are differences between us, we know that—but there's that positive sense here that there are elements of the work that we do in this place, from legislation to budgets and all sorts of other things, where we need to work together.

I must say that the accusation that somehow this is a rehash of our manifesto, that you have a manifesto, you stand in an election, you get elected, you have a mandate, and somehow then you tear up the manifesto and start again—. That's not how it works. That's not how it works. If this feels like our manifesto, as in if this feels like that it reflects what we promised the people of Wales that we would do, with the priorities on health and education and job creation and childcare and child poverty and standing up for Wales, it's doing its job, so thank you very much for confirming that, Darren.

You also criticise—. I get it; scrutiny includes criticism. I honestly say, on health, we face an uphill struggle because we inherit some serious issues, not all of which are the fault of the last Government, but that is what we inherited.

On PISA, don't criticise us on PISA scores. Those PISA tests were taken in 2025, before we came into power. But it does, of course, reflect again the scale of the challenge that we face.

The Member focuses, in particular, on health, and, yes, it is something that is important to me, but it's important to all of us here, I think, getting the NHS right. The Member's party has often made the case that we should declare a crisis. I do certainly believe that there's a crisis in many parts of the NHS. I'm not convinced that a declaration of crisis in that kind of way is particularly useful. There are suggestions there that we should have more about beds here. I have made the case for making sure that we maximise the capacity of our health system in the past, but it's not quite that simple either. Our surgical hubs—most of the people that will go through surgical hubs will be going home the same day. Also, in my local district general hospital, it's not a lack of beds; it's the lack of throughput and the number of people. It's the same wherever we are. The numbers of people who are medically fit for discharge and who are still in our hospitals, those are the issues. Should we have an ambition to absolutely grow where we can, including bed capacity, with the staff to go with them? Yes, absolutely. But we're also working within constraints. Remember that the plans that we have put in place and that are reflected in this document are clinically led, and they're not telling us what we need is more beds—they're saying we need a number of steps to be taken. But I'm not dismissing the point that the Member is making.

On the shift of resource towards primary—and I include preventative, I guess, in that, though preventative is a little bit different too—the Member's right that you have to be careful. We're not suggesting going in one leap. We're talking about 0.5 percentage point per year of an increase. But it happens in a slow and sustainable way because you don't want a detrimental impact on secondary care, which, in many ways, is the expensive end of the health service. And getting those waiting lists down, the higher waiting times in particular, takes then the pressure, hopefully, off secondary care, which helps then that transition to primary care.

The leader of the Conservative group says that there's a lot of ambition in this document that we share. That's good. So, let's work on those areas. The same invitation goes to Members in other parties. This is about ambition, as it says, but, at the end of the day, we're going to be measured on whether we are able to realise, if not 100 per cent, the thrust of what we say we're going to try to achieve on behalf of the people of Wales here.

During the election campaign, the First Minister said that the election was not about independence and that it would not be a priority during this Senedd term. Then, last week, he signed a joint statement with Sinn Féin and the SNP saying that Westminster's time was at an end. And now, today, in the programme for government that was published, it lists in the section of devolved powers the desire to pursue the devolved power to hold an independence referendum in Wales. Given the First Minister's comments during the election and then his comments today about his determination for an honest politics, I'd like to ask: what's changed between now and then?

Well, nothing's changed. I believe in Wales being able to pursue its future as a normal country. I believe in independence for Wales. I think everybody knows that. Our manifesto stated clearly that we believe that the shape of our constitutional future should be in the hands of the people of Wales. I mean, I think that's a fundamental right, and that is precisely what we're saying, in that we should be the ones, as a Senedd, calling it, as the people of Wales, asking for it, who are able to set the timetable for this. Yes, I did say that the last election wasn't about independence, and I think I have had lots of opportunities to explain what I meant by that.

There's no referendum being pushed for by this Government now, but we absolutely believe that the people of Wales should be allowed to decide. I will use the influence that I have, hopefully, as Wales's leader, to try to persuade people to think about the challenges, the opportunities and what we might be able to do in future that we aren't able to do now. These paths are challenging and full of opportunity at the same time. The Commission on the Constitutional Future of Wales isn't an independence commission. It is about, 'How do we arm ourselves to make us, as a nation, fit for the future?'

Now, Reform, we know—we've heard it again today from your leader, and again, you're being honest about this—don't believe in giving us any more powers. You think we should settle as we are. You think that we should, at best, put what we have in aspic and just hope that somehow, through our actions as Governments, that we can make things better. I just don't see it in that way. I think, where there are things that all the evidence points to it making sense for us to have control over—policing, where we pay for most of it directly in Wales now, but have no accountability for it; justice, so that we can serve people better in constituencies all across Wales; so that we can make decisions about our natural resources—I just think that's common sense.

What the commission does is provide us a platform through which you can say you don't want it to happen, and I can say, and others, 'Do you know what? We should look at this and see how we can deliver this.'

More concerning, however, is the continued failure to prioritise funding to areas of genuine need. Many in Cardiff will have heard the Trefnydd's contemptuous dismissal of my question earlier today. We've heard claims from Plaid Cymru MSs in the past that the additional learning needs funding gap was less severe in Wales than elsewhere—comments that teaching unions quickly criticised as out of touch with the reality facing schools.

And last week, there was an appearance of going even further, with Government Ministers appearing to cast doubts on the future of Flying Start. Whether or not that suggestion proves accurate, it has caused significant concern among those people delivering and benefiting from the programme. Will the First Minister take the opportunity right now to provide clarity and guarantee that funding for Flying Start will continue, as well as the prioritisation of those most in need? Children in some of Wales's most deprived communities should not pay the price for the Government's failure to properly cost its election promises.

To be open here, I was listening to the Trefnydd giving what the Member called a 'contemptuous' answer. What the Trefnydd said earlier was that she believed there was poverty in all parts of Wales that needed addressing. And I absolutely get—I absolutely get—the fact that the Member is standing up for the people of his constituency, as I would expect him to, but we have to, as a Government, recognise that we have urban poverty that we desperately need to get to grips with and we have rural poverty that we desperately need to get to grips with. In some instances, they're the same answers; in some instances, they're different answers. So, there's no contempt whatsoever there.

There's a specific question on Flying Start, and I have heard Labour Members raise questions about the future of Flying Start. We're somehow being accused of wanting to take money away from fighting child poverty when this is the party that has been criticised by his too often for wanting to spend too much on tackling child poverty through the childcare offer. This phase of the childcare offer is literally being delivered through Flying Start. This is building on what Flying Start has done. More families living in poverty, incidentally, are not in Flying Start areas than the ones that are in Flying Start areas. Both are really, really important. We want to help them all. I hope that's clear enough.

I'm very proud to serve a diverse constituency in Caerdydd Ffynnon Taf, with people coming from all walks of life. For the first time, many individuals and families placed their trust in Plaid Cymru, and they did this because they believe it will make a positive, tangible difference in their communities. I have spoken to many constituents over the last few months who are concerned about the rise in hate crimes, poverty, housing issues and other matters that negatively impact on their lives and the lives of their families.

If we are to be a truly ambitious nation, we must place social justice at the heart of our agenda. An unequal Wales will continue to leave people disenfranchised and left behind. A more equitable Wales, where people can receive different levels of support to achieve a fairer outcome, could accelerate our ambitions for a more equal nation. First Minister, people have different starting points in life and face different barriers, so how will the Welsh Government ensure that equality and equity are at the heart of delivering its programme for government?

I'm grateful for the question and the sentiment, and I couldn't agree more. It was very humbling, back in May, to see different communities in their geographical location, in their diversity, turning to Plaid Cymru and putting their trust in us, and we have to repay that trust. That's what it's all about. On social justice, I say, 'Hear, hear.' I hope that speaking loud and clear from this programme for government is the sense that this is about equity, it is about fairness, it is about equal opportunity, it is about social justice. We don't want the national development agency to be there to make Wales rich for its own sake. We want it there to make us prosper in every sense, where everybody feels a part of a flourishing nation that I know we can be. The measures on education are very much geared to making sure that education opportunities are there for everybody.

The attack on universality that we had earlier today, our belief in universality and making sure that we bring all parents in to the support that can be given through childcare, whilst, at the same time, emphasising the need to tackle child poverty through the Cynnal payment, I think all of that reflects something that I'm very proud to stand by. We will be measured by the way that we adhere throughout to those values of ours and, yes, building a united, peaceful Wales that rejects division is something that means an awful lot to, I know, the benches that I sit on, but hopefully all of us here too.

First Minister, you call tackling child poverty the defining mission of this Government, but a defining mission surely requires something to be defined. In July, when I challenged your Deputy First Minister over Cynnal, I said that what she presented was a plan to plan, not a plan. She told me that she was baffled by my question. Well, I have now read your programme for government, and the bafflement should be on your benches. Four years of Government, and on your defining mission, you promise to develop another plan that will then set the targets, benchmarks and milestones. Cynnal itself remains something you merely seek to pilot. This is not a four-year delivery programme; it is a promise to work out later what success should look like.

First Minister, your new ambition already resembles Swiss cheese: impressive packages, but full of holes and left to ferment, increasingly difficult to disguise. So, please answer the question your programme does not: by 2030, precisely what measurable reduction in child poverty will your Government deliver?

I've heard a lot of this plan-for-a-plan business. Government works out solutions to the problems we face as a nation. That's what Government does. We have a manifesto that sets out things we have decided, and it's clear what we need to do because the evidence is there. There are things that we have done already. The rolling out of childcare has begun. It's not something that's going to happen in the future, it is happening already. The introduction of free school meals has already begun, and there has always been a phased approach to that. Our measures on health aren't being planned, they are being implemented right now. But at the same time, you use the tools at your disposal: you use the civil service, you use civic society in Wales. We come here in committees in the Senedd and recommendations will be made by the committees that you sit on for Government to do things that we haven't thought of doing yet. That is how it works. We always seek solutions to the problems that Wales has. If you thought fighting an election, 'There we are, we've done the thinking; let's just settle down and do it', that's not how it works.

On Cynnal, it's a really good example. We know what we're trying to do with Cynnal. There are practical difficulties with implementing it because we don't have the powers. Again, a good example of why we need the tools at our disposal. But we think we've found a way of doing it: we're going to pilot it. The working group has already met four times. It's not something that we're planning how we're going to address this. It is happening, guided by my Deputy First Minister. I'm not going to apologise for thinking out carefully how we make decisions that will improve the lives of people in Wales.

I've got two issues, and I genuinely really want to understand this. You keep using the phrase, 'I want the people of Wales to decide their future' in relation to the issue around independence, and I really would like some clarity on that. What does that mean? How will you measure it? How will you make sure you know what the decision is by the people of Wales? And just to put on record, I'm anti-independence, but, absolutely, we need more powers here in the Senedd.

Secondly, on child poverty, you have my absolute support for all the measures on child poverty that you're introducing, and the universality of it. That is essential, for Cynnal and, obviously, the roll-out of universal free childcare as well. Just to put on record as well, it was me as a Liberal Democrat who made the deal with Labour for the 12.5 additional hours from Flying Start to be rolled out. That was a deal two years ago, and we want to see more. And I do want to just come back to your Deputy First Minister and myself. When we were previously on the back benches, we were like a stuck record, saying, 'Give us targets on child poverty, give us targets.' So, I'm really interested: what are your targets and when will we hear about them? Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Diolch yn fawr. I remind the Member that she voted against a supplementary budget that was proposing to roll out matters like childcare that were really important to her.

On child poverty targets, this has been a major issue in that we had 27 years of Labour-led Governments that did have targets initially, then they withdrew them. We will bring targets. We are developing a strategy. One of the reasons that we have called for a strategy is that the sector—people working in this area—wants targets. I'd rather work out what targets are meaningful rather than pluck one from the air. The work is being done on that now. In early summer 2027, we will have that strategy, which must include targets. We need to know what we're aiming for.

On independence, I compare the situation in Wales to Ireland, where the Good Friday agreement specifically says that a referendum will be called—. I'm not interfering with what happens in Ireland; they can do what they want to do. But it specifically says when public opinion is clear that there is support for it, then you ask the question. In fact, the UK Prime Minister suggested in the House of Commons last week that the same should apply to Scotland too. It's opinion polling. It's sensing the view of the population. I want to influence people in a positive way, and you too, to engage positively with the possibilities that come from pursuing a particular kind of constitutional change.

But remember, we work with what we have now. We have real ambition for our nation. I want us to embrace all the possibilities of being a normal nation, but we're a Government that works right now with the powers that we have now, looking at the powers that we could have next, and next and next, because it's all about building a nation, which is something that all of us should be interested in.

However, public support for the sector cannot be unconditional. Where the Welsh Government provides support through grants, investment assistance, trade promotion or wider economic development activity, people in Wales rightly expect that support to reflect our values and responsibilities. It's important that we recognise legitimate ethical concerns while supporting a focus on high-quality jobs that the sector sustains in communities across all parts of Wales. It's therefore essential that Welsh Government support is guided by a clear and consistent ethical framework. While decisions on arms exports remain reserved to the UK Government, it is right that the Welsh Government is clear about the principles that guide our own engagement with the sector. We recognise the need for greater clarity in how these decisions are made. That is why we are developing an ethical defence investment framework for Wales.

The purpose of the framework is not to exclude the defence sector from engagement with the Welsh Government, nor to duplicate UK export controls or licensing arrangements. Rather, it is to provide a consistent basis for Welsh Government decision making where devolved support is being considered. In developing the framework, officials are engaging with stakeholders and learning from approaches being taken elsewhere in the UK. The framework will recognise the legitimate role of the defence sector in supporting national security, democratic resilience and economic prosperity, while ensuring Welsh Government decisions are informed by appropriate ethical considerations, including respect for human rights and international humanitarian law.

Our approach will be based on enhanced ethical due diligence. In practice, this means retaining the existing UK legal and regulatory framework while introducing additional ethical considerations to support Welsh Government decision making in the areas mentioned earlier. This will be a proportionate approach designed to provide greater transparency and assurance without creating unnecessary barriers for businesses operating responsibly, legally and in support of our economy and security. The framework will focus on activity taking place in Wales and on the specific projects, products, services or technologies seeking Welsh Government support. This will help ensure that decisions are informed by a clear understanding of the activity being supported, its intended purpose and, where appropriate, its known end users. 

We're also considering the introduction of a proportionate self-declaration process for businesses seeking particular forms of Welsh Government support. This will provide additional transparency and assurance while avoiding unnecessary burdens on businesses operating responsibly and within the law. This framework will also inform Welsh Government participation in defence-related trade missions, exhibitions and business-to-business events, helping ensure a consistent approach across relevant areas of activity. As part of this work, we will also consider how the framework can support innovation and dual-use technologies, recognising that many of the technologies driving economic growth, including cyber, artificial intelligence, semiconductors and advanced manufacturing, have both civilian and defence applications.

Given the significance of this work, and to ensure a consistent approach, I have asked that, where legally and practically possible, any decisions relating to new Welsh Government investment support for defence sector activity are not finalised until the framework is published and implementation arrangements have been fully considered. Should a decision on Welsh Government support be required before publication of the framework, it will be taken by the Prif Weinidog, taking account of relevant considerations. This is a temporary and precautionary measure to ensure that future decisions are considered against the framework from the outset. I want to be clear that this does not represent a withdrawal of support for the sector, nor does it affect existing contractual commitments or the day-to-day relationship between the Welsh Government and defence-related businesses operating in Wales. It does not prevent ongoing engagement, discussions, due diligence or exploratory work with businesses where no investment decision has been taken.

Thank you for your statement, Minister. At a time of rising geopolitical tensions and a fragile economic outlook, we should not be placing political ideology ahead of Welsh security, Welsh jobs and Welsh investment. What we should be doing is everything possible to bring defence investment into Wales and secure the skilled, well-paid jobs that come with it. This is a sector that employs thousands of Welsh men and women and contributes £1.5 billion to the Welsh economy, and there could be so much more. My concern is that this framework risks doing precisely the opposite and rejecting those opportunities that are presented. It risks discouraging investment, creating uncertainty and giving defence companies another reason to take their investment elsewhere.

And as usual, it will be the Welsh people who pay the price. They will lose out on jobs, Welsh businesses will lose out on investment, and communities will lose out on the economic benefits that come with both. If we look at a case in Marshall Land Systems, they are moving into Merthyr, creating hundreds of jobs and supporting Welsh families. That's exactly the kind of investment that we should be fighting for. It's also a clear example of the positive impact that defence investment can have on a community, and yet it's exactly the kind of opportunity that this framework could put at risk, through uncertainty and additional barriers.

There's also a serious question about what you've told the Senedd. In your statement today, you said that interim decisions on defence will be taken by the First Minister. Yet, in an earlier statement, you said that all decisions would be deferred until the framework has been finalised, so we need clarity on this point. Because businesses considering investing millions of pounds into Wales deserve clarity from this Government. And let's be absolutely clear about what's being proposed here today. The United Kingdom already has a national system governing defence exports. Companies exporting controlled military and dual-use goods are already subject to the UK's strategic export control regime, with applications assessed against national criteria and strict ethical requirements. Yet, your Government now wants to introduce an additional test that defence companies elsewhere in the United Kingdom will not have to face, creating a distinct competitive barrier for those seeking to set up in Wales.

So, what exactly does this additional test achieve and what happens when a company fails it? Defence investment is not trapped within the border of Wales; companies can expand in England, Scotland or elsewhere with ease. Investment can move, and when investment moves, the jobs, the supply chain and everything else go with it. So, before you introduce this framework, what assessment have you carried out of the economic consequences for Wales? What assessment have you made of the jobs that could be lost as a result? And how can you seriously ask this Senedd to support a framework when you've not released the criteria by which companies will be judged? That appears to be becoming a pattern with this Government—big on announcements, but remarkably short on detail. So, Minister, what exactly are the criteria? What will cause a Welsh defence company to pass or fail this test? Who will make that decision, and on what basis will they make it?

There's another issue that simply cannot be ignored. Your party has a long record of opposition to significant parts of the defence sector. Now, your Deputy Minister, Mark Hooper, once said that attending an arms fair is indefensible. Your culture Minister described an arms fair as 'a contemptible event', yet thousands of Welsh men and women attend these events to support those industries every year. And Plaid Cymru has explicitly opposed the renewal of defence systems such as Trident in years past. Now, those aren't my words, those are the recorded positions of Members of your own party and your front bench. And now that same party is introducing a framework that could determine which defence companies receive Welsh Government support and investment. So, Welsh businesses are entitled to ask a very serious question: how can they have confidence that this will be an evidence-based framework, rather than an ideological test shaped by Plaid Cymru's long-standing hostility towards the defence industry?

Minister, national security is one of the first responsibilities of any Government, and securing good jobs, investment and prosperity for the people of Wales should be one of the first responsibilities of this Government. Neither should be sacrificed for ideology. So, we call upon you today, for the sake of the industry, to scrap this framework, remove the uncertainty, back Welsh worker, welcome defence investments into Wales. And we can all get on with the job we were elected to do, to grow the economy, put Welsh jobs, Welsh prosperity and our national security first. Diolch.

I thank the spokesperson for his contribution and his questions. First of all, I'd just like to point out that it is normal, given the specifics and nature of this sector; most democratic Governments around the world recognise that through having a specific legal and, often, ethical framework as well governing this sector. Scotland, the Scottish Government, has an ethical framework governing this sector. The Northern Irish Government has an ethical framework. Effectively, the UK Government has an ethical framework in its export arms licensing policy. So, what we are simply seeking to do is to bring the Welsh Government in line with all of those other responsible democratic Governments across the world that recognise, when it comes to this sector, because of its sensitive nature, you need to have a proper framework in place. Indeed, I have to say, the representatives of the defence sector that I've engaged with have indicated a willingness to engage positively with the development of this framework, because they regard themselves, as individual businesses and a sector, as being ethical. They see nothing to fear here, they want to engage with us in the process of its development. 

The framework is not finalised yet, so I can't give all the detail. I'm trying to update Members as much as I can through an interim written statement that I gave, through an oral statement, and I will return to the Senedd once we have the framework in place, because I think, in this area, because of the legitimate interest that Members have, it's important that you are involved at every stage in the development of the process. In terms of the interim decisions, in my interim written statement, I made it absolutely clear that we would defer where it was practically and legally possible, and I've reiterated that today in the statement that I've made.

I'm sorry. Shav Taj.

I think it was a shock to both of us then. We were both looking at each other wondering what was going on. Llywydd, I really welcome the fact that we're having this debate and discussion, because the TUC congress just happened and there was a big debate about defence and the future of jobs versus, I guess, peace, security and resilience and so forth.

You've talked about what happens in Scotland and in Ireland. I guess my question is: have you talked to the UK Government to see whether what we're going to be producing here is going to be that much different to what they already have? What I'm really concerned about is that if the framework comes out in the autumn period, we then have a debate and discussion, I'm assuming, about what that framework then looks like, we have a back and forward—. In the meantime, there are contracts on the table, jobs coming to Wales. Could those defence companies, other manufacturers et cetera—AI you've mentioned—then say, 'Actually, you know what, this is taking way too long. We're going to go and have a chat with Stephen Kinnock, the Secretary of State for Wales'? And then, while you're trying to work through this new relationship with him as well, could we then end up in a position where we're going around the houses, everyone's looking at each other and somebody's looking for an answer?

For me, this is about the jobs that are already here, protecting those. I completely agree in terms of having an ethical framework, as a trade unionist. I get all of that, I totally understand that. But, for me, this is about the companies that we already have here. Wales has more than 200 companies serving aerospace, defence, more than 50 organisations in maintenance, let alone all the colleges and all of the training et cetera, and the really good apprenticeship jobs that are here as well.

You've talked about the global situation. You've talked about what is happening as far as NATO is concerned. Lots of discussions. Everyone talks about, 'How much money are we going to chuck in the pot? Why is this more important than actually building homes for people?' I don't think that it's one or the other. I totally appreciate and understand where you're trying to go with this. My biggest worry in and amongst all of this is that we slow things down. Because like you're saying—you're not saying that this is about telling people, 'Don't come and invest in Wales.' You're not saying that defence manufacturing jobs are something that your Government would be against. Although defence, I don't think, was mentioned in your programme for government. I don't think that word was there. So, I was a bit confused, really, because I was looking through it and I was like, 'The word isn't there.' Based on what you've said today, there seem to be a lot of contradictions.

So, for me, can you guarantee that, whatever you do, you'll do in social partnership, the trade unions will be fully involved and engaged, and that this is about job security in the wider sense as well? We're talking about good jobs across the whole of Wales. 

Yes, I'm really—

Sorry, that's—

I'm really grateful—. If the Member has concluded—

Yes.

I'm really grateful for those comments, questions and suggestions, and also the spirit in which they were made as well.

The last point that you were making—I think it’s absolutely important that we will involve trade union partners in the development of the framework. The defence sector, actually, is a highly unionised sector, and I think that ensuring that we have trade union and worker voice in the development of the framework—. And we have to be mindful, absolutely, of our responsibilities to the workforce in this sector. The defence sector and the related sectors employ, already, over 16,000. There's been substantial employment growth, even in the last 12 months, and these are, by and large, high-paid, higher than average, jobs in the advanced manufacturing sector, which is a sector that we want Wales to build even further on its strengths. We have a higher manufacturing base than other parts of the UK. We've managed to maintain that in the UK. We don't want to stay there. We want Wales to re-industrialise even further, and those advanced manufacturing skills are highly relevant to the context that we're describing here. And there are further opportunities that we want to explore.

In terms of timing—. And, yes, what we're trying to do with the framework is get the balance right between these two really important and legitimate aims of public policy and of society. We want to see the economy thrive and generate the high-paid jobs, good jobs, everywhere, to coin a phrase. We want that, and we want it to be done in a way that's consistent with our values. I think it's really important, not just in this context, but in every context. It's not business over here and ethics over there. Many successful businesses and founders will say, actually, the most successful businesses in the world are the ones that marry those two together, so that, actually, you're in a situation then where you can be proud to go to work. You can be proud of the work that you do. If you know the ethical framework is there for what you do, then that is the way to actually motivate, not just yourself, but the workforce et cetera, and the communities that depend on these businesses. That's true in every sector, and that's why, as I said, nobody that I've spoken to in the defence sector has said, 'We don't want an ethical framework.' Many of them said, 'Look, we want to behave in the most responsible way that we can, and we want to engage on that basis.'

The issue of timing—yes, I think that you're right. Obviously, we want, for the reasons that I think will be well understood as we're developing the framework, where we can, to defer decisions until after the framework has been published, and after you, as a Senedd, and civil society and everyone else, and the sector have been able to see it. We will. But, obviously, there may be some time-critical situations where it is not practically possible or legally possible for us to defer, and that's why I set out again in the statement today that there are exceptional circumstances that every Government has to allow some flexibility in relation to, and it's true in this case as well. But I've set out in this oral statement how we will deal with those, if they arise.

Thank you for the statement, but I have to say, I'm really disappointed. This is not an ethical defence framework. It is nothing more than an ideological blacklist that risks Welsh jobs, investment and national security. Defence and aerospace employ 16,000 people in Wales, they generate £3.7 billion in turnover and they contribute around £1.5 billion in gross value added. These are highly skilled, well-paid jobs supporting communities across Wales, and I thank each and every one of those working in our defence industry and, indeed, in our defence forces.

Yet, just when defence investment is increasing, this Plaid Government has ordered investment decisions involving the sector to now be put on hold. There has rarely been a more dangerous time to send such a hostile message. Russia is waging war in Europe, hostile states are targeting our infrastructure, NATO allies are strengthening their defences. It is almost, with making statements like this, that old saying, isn't it, 'Nero fiddles whilst Rome burns.'

Our freedom and democracy exist, Wales exists, because brave men and women, previously and now, in our British armed forces are willing to put their lives on the line to defend them. But courage alone is not enough. They need aircraft, they need vehicles, communication systems, protective equipment and ammunition. And we need those jobs for Welsh people here in Wales. If Members support our armed forces, they must also support the people who design and manufacture the equipment that they have to go to war with and fight with, that keeps them safe. There is nothing grubby or unethical about that work. It is honourable, and it is vital to our security.

Wales should be competing for a greater share of rising UK defence spend and encouraging responsible defence companies to invest here. Instead, this Government—Plaid Cymru Government—is creating uncertainty as businesses decide where to place new contracts and jobs. Mind you, that attitude is unsurprising from a party that has refused to commit an independent Wales to full NATO membership. Your hypocrisy—not yours personally, but your group, your Government—is breathtaking. Defence workers are treated as morally suspect while an Opera Cymru production is advertised as a 'celebration' of nationhood, honouring as three giants the men responsible for a terrorist attack on an RAF bombing school less than three years before the second world war. One of those, of course, was Plaid's then leader, Saunders Lewis. Plaid subsequently adopted neutrality in the war against Nazi Germany. Lewis used explicitly antisemitic language, and wrote that Hitler had 'fulfilled his promise' to remove Jewish financial power from German economic life.

Instead of subjecting the people who equip our armed forces to an 'ethical' test, Plaid Cymru should apply one to publicly supported arts organisations that celebrate or platform those who have committed or glorified violence against the British state, whether it is an opera hailing Saunders Lewis and his fellow arsonists as national heroes, or public funding connected with Green Man while the festival gave Kneecap a stage. And in its first week back, it is absolutely disgusting that this Plaid Cymru Government shared a platform with Sinn Féin leaders, despite that party's long association with the IRA's campaign of terrorism.

So, Minister, how many investment decisions have been suspended? How many jobs, do you believe, are at risk? I agree with you, Jason—not often, but today, on your comments today. Were employers and trade unions consulted? Will lawful Welsh firms be blacklisted simply because Plaid Cymru disapproves—and you do disapprove—of their industry?

An ethical defence policy distinguishes between aggressors and those who protect us from them. Wales should stand firmly with our armed forces, with the workers who equip them and with our NATO allies. We should also stand firmly with the ethical framework that the UK Government has in place. This framework should be withdrawn, and I will be more than happy to vote against this later today.

I'm always disappointed when you're disappointed, Janet, and there were so many strands to that, I could be tempted to disappear down a few rabbit holes. But, look, let me just say this: surely there should be some agreement between us that there should be an ethical framework for business in general that should be applied.

I'll give you an example: when the UN guiding principles on global business and human rights was agreed at the UN, who was the first Government in the world not just to endorse it, but actually to produce a national implementation plan that created an ethical framework for every sector of business? Well, I'll give you the answer: it was the UK Conservative Government in 2013. So, look, you can judge us on the framework when it's published, okay. I'm giving you an update on where we are in the process. So, by all means, hold us to account in terms of the content of that when that is ready. 

I think you do mischaracterise our position in so many different ways. I don't have time to respond to all of them. But I was absolutely clear in my statement that we're creating an ethical framework that we believe is a solid foundation for the sector because it gives transparency. There is nothing to fear here for the sector. It's not a prohibition of the defence sector. I recognised in my statement that there is an important and legitimate role for the defence sector in the defence of democracy, not least in the uncertain times that we're living in, but it needs to be done in an ethical way. And I would have hoped that that would have been the basis for consensus across the Chamber, because, ultimately, the way we defend democracy in all ways is ensuring that we can actually point to the values that we are, ultimately, trying to defend.

Whilst foreign affairs and arms export licences are reserved to Westminster, decisions about how Welsh public money is spent are made here in Cymru. Plaid Cymru demonstrated leadership, acting on a long legacy of peace, leading the Senedd's endorsement for ceasefire in Gaza in 2023, the first nation to do so. This small act led to huge hope for a nation who, I assure you, felt all hope was lost. Now, in Government, Plaid Cymru can go even further by showing leadership on international human rights law.

A freedom of information request by Amnesty International found that the previous Labour Welsh Government had given £500,000 to a company supplying military components to Israel, despite assurance otherwise from the then First Minister. This shows a clear need for accountability and a more responsible way of investing in our communities, so it's reassuring to hear that this Welsh Government is committed to taking a different approach, developing this defence ethical framework, which no previous administration has done, establishing a clear and ethical approach to defence and security in Wales grounded in human rights, international law and our commitment to peace.

Recognising the genocide in Gaza was a starting point, and concrete action is now what we need to follow. So, will the Minister please confirm what difference this ethical framework will make in the manufacture and export of arms in Wales, and what are the expectations on companies once that framework has been launched?

I'm grateful to the Member for her contribution and for reminding us, in the world that we live in, why this is so important, of course. When we have—. We have, in the case of Israel, of course, and in the case of Myanmar, two states where United Nations commissions have found that they have been guilty of being in breach of the genocide convention, the most serious and egregious breach of international humanitarian law that is imaginable.

The framework will help ensure, first of all, that our decisions as a Government—. Because the UN principles that I referred to place a responsibility on us, as a state actor, as a Government, to ensure that, in our engagement with business, we are doing so in a way that is consistent with those principles and with the wider framework of international humanitarian law. So it gives us the framework whereby we can hold ourselves accountable in relation to the decisions that we make, basing them, in an accountable and transparent way, on ethical principles, and in a consistent way.

In terms of companies themselves, as I said, the framework is still in development, but in essence, of course, we will expect the companies involved to confirm that their operations in Wales that we are supporting are in line with the framework that we have agreed. So, at both levels, it gives us that transparency, that consistency and that assurance that what we are doing is consistent with our values, which is what you would want in any context.

Minister, you say you don't want to delay or add uncertainty, but forcing businesses through new self-declaration processes risks doing exactly that. We have businesses like IrvinGQ in Llangeinor, working on parachute systems and naval decoys; we have Raplas Technologies in the Vale of Glamorgan, developing innovative 3D printing technology for defence. These are precisely the businesses that we should be helping to grow, not burying under paperwork. So, Cabinet Minister, what guarantee will you give Welsh small and medium-sized enterprises that the self-declaration process will be simple, proportionate and workable, and that small defence companies won't need a team of lawyers just to comply?

We will, obviously, in developing the detail of the framework, be engaging with companies of all sizes within the sector in order to ensure that, as I said in my statement, the process that we design is proportionate. We recognise the reasonable point that the Member makes, that we cannot apply the same expectations to large multinational corporations to small and medium-sized businesses, and that will be a factor in the design of the process in this case, as it is, of course, in already current frameworks. In any situation currently where we give money in relation to projects, there is a process to go through in terms of fair work and other considerations. But the point in terms of SMEs is well made and it certainly will be a matter that we will give due consideration to.

Diolch, Lywydd. I must, firstly, declare an interest as a former Ministry of Defence supply chain specialist. Many Welsh defence companies operate several tiers down complex and dual-use supply chains and may have little control over or even knowledge of the eventual end use of the components they produce. I'm happy that you spoke about Ireland earlier. They've already been through something, and Invest NI has already recognised that neither it nor its client companies can fully track the final destination of goods once they enter into complex global supply chains. While military and dual-use exports are already subject to UK export control regimes, this new framework will add additional uncertainty and compliance costs to Welsh companies. How will the Minister ensure that Welsh companies are not expected to undertake due diligence that they cannot practically perform or duplicate functions already being carried out by the UK export control authorities?

Thanks to the Member for his question and for the knowledge that he was able to bring to it. As I said, I think, in the statement, where possible we will seek to build on the existing UK framework, where that has a tier of knowledge and information that is relevant. I think it is fair to say, absolutely, that the global context in terms of supply chains is complex here. We have to be mindful of our ability to fully audit, and some of this will be context specific. So, in designing the framework, we will have to focus very much on the activity in Wales of the entities in question, being mindful of our own resources and the information available to us.

Now, the appointment of Exchange for Change followed a robust process to identify an organisation capable of delivering the scheme here in Wales. As the deposit management organisation, Exchange for Change will now work with producers, retailers, local authorities and other stakeholders to establish the return network, collection and processing infrastructure, producer registration arrangements and operational arrangements and systems needed before launch. As a producer-led scheme, of course, they will now play a crucial role in delivering a DRS that works for Wales.

As Exchange for Change, of course, has previously been appointed to deliver the schemes in the other UK nations, it means now that we will have a common administrator across the UK. This provides the strongest possible foundation for interoperability between the UK schemes and for businesses operating across borders.

As Wales continues to lead the UK on recycling and resource efficiency, it remains vital that the introduction of the scheme delivers clear benefits in Wales whilst ensuring the scheme is interoperable, as I say, with other schemes across the UK.

The scheme will include metal and plastic drinks containers from day 1. Glass containers will also be in scope from day 1, but reflecting our manifesto commitment, we will work closely with Exchange for Change, and the wider drinks industry, on a pragmatic approach to glass. This includes the four-year transition period, during which no deposit will apply and in which no DRS-specific labelling will be required, as well as the phased introduction of reuse.  

Working with Exchange for Change, our focus is now on the scheme’s implementation by October next year, and on supporting businesses, delivery partners and consumers to be ready for launch. In doing so, we will work to ensure Wales secures the benefits of the scheme, including reduced litter, the capture of high-quality materials for recycling back into the economy, and a clear pathway towards the roll-out of reuse. The coverage of all materials ensures that the scheme can tackle the litter seen on our streets and in our communities, of all drinks container types, from the outset. It also means that we can not only retain more valuable materials within the economy, but it also puts in place a pathway to the roll-out of reusable drinks containers, and the benefits the best schemes in the world are already delivering internationally.

Litter is not only a blight on our communities, it also imposes costs on local authorities, on taxpayers and on land managers as well. As DRS has been proven to do in other countries, by preventing litter and capturing drinks containers of all material types, it'll not only keep the materials from polluting the environment, or posing a hazard to people and wildlife, but it'll also reduce the burden of litter management and clean-up activities.

With Wales having experienced significant wildfire incidents this summer, as climate change increases, it is important as well to avoid preventable sources of ignition. With the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service having identified discarded glass bottles as one potential cause of wildfires—as sunlight passing through glass can, of course, focus heat onto dry vegetation and ignite fires—it is a reminder of the risks that littered glass in particular can present.

A successful deposit-return scheme will therefore help deliver cleaner communities and public spaces in our town centres, parks, beaches and countryside. As a Government, supporting businesses, particularly our small and medium-sized enterprises, to successfully transition and benefit from the scheme is a priority. We will therefore work with Exchange for Change to ensure that small and medium-sized businesses are fully engaged as we progress to implementation.

The success of the scheme depends on the participation of businesses of all sizes, and the regulations therefore include low-volume producer exemptions, exemptions as well for smaller retailers where that's appropriate, and flexible return arrangements. Together, these measures provide certainty and reduce compliance costs, and the four-year transition period, of course, for the deposit on glass also gives businesses more time to adapt.

Following on from the passing of the legislation by the Senedd earlier this year, the appointment of the deposit management organisation is a significant step forward to the delivery of DRS here in Wales.

Thank you, Minister, for your statement. We're clearly driving forward with the deposit-return scheme, but I simply don't think this Chamber or the general public, certainly Welsh families and Welsh businesses, truly understand what is coming next October, whether the scheme includes plastic, aluminium or glass containers. The fact that we're virtually empty here in the Chamber just shows that people don't understand it. So, I really thank you for allowing me to do this very briefly.

Let me begin. This is the current system of recycling in Wales. We have the highest recycling rates in Wales. Yes, shop, containers, home, Trolibocs, council, they sort it out, they make the money. Okay. This is what's going to happen now. We're going to go to the shop, we're going to buy containers, they're going to have a 20p flat rate on them, they're going to go to homes, and we've got to return them to retail. We've got to take them to these vending machines to get our 20 pences back. Meanwhile, the council have still got to pick up all the low-value recycling. Think about this here, I'm going to talk about this in a minute. Okay, that's the new system. I'll show you this outside if you want more detail.

Obviously, DRS was introduced by the Conservatives in the Environment Act 2021, and I do not understand—[Interruption.] I know, that's why I left. [Laughter.] We are going to have a second parallel system that requires people to drive, transport and return these containers separately. Why are we moving material around twice? Think of the emissions. Why are we building a system around thousands of reverse vending machines? The shops have got to buy these machines. We're locking ourselves into technology that belongs to the past. When you get to the machine and you put your bottle in, you get a paper ticket. It's not the 1980s. It's ridiculous.

And then there's the cost. This is the most serious point for me. Cost of living—every family in Wales is feeling the cost of living. Now we're being told that every drinks container will carry an extra charge. Say you're buying a 24-pack of water bottles, that's £4.80 to the bill upfront. Yes, we're told we can get it back, but we all know not every deposit will be redeemed. You'll lose your paper ticket. Some families just won't get round to doing it. And what about online food delivery? For people that don't want to or can't go to supermarkets—the elderly, the vulnerable, people with health conditions, disabilities—how do they get back their 20p? So, Minister, here's your first question: how will people that use online delivery and don't go to supermarkets get their 20p back?

And where does all this unredeemed money go? It goes into a private scheme administrator, sitting in a bank account earning lots of interest. A private, not-for-profit organisation, chief execs paid very nicely, and there's very little public understanding of who controls that money and how it will be spent. So, second question, Minister: how long will those unredeemed 20 pences be kept in that private bank account earning interest, and who decides how and when that money is spent?

Oh, perhaps the biggest issue of all is one that's not been discussed today at all in the statement: council revenues. This scheme quietly removes some of the most valuable recyclable materials, like aluminium, from local authority recycling streams—the materials that help councils generate revenue and offset collection costs. For years, councils have built recycling services around those materials, and now we're proposing to remove them and hand control elsewhere.

I've got letters and statements here from companies and member organisations in England—the Association of Directors of Environment, Economy, Planning and Transport and the National Association of Waste Disposal Officers—lots of different companies that recycle for local authorities, basically saying, and I quote from one of them, 'DRS would duplicate a system that is already costing local authorities hundreds of thousands of pounds each year', and they want it to be paused. This is in England. So, my third question to the Minister is: what impact assessments has the Welsh Government done on local council revenues in this new system?

Now, let's look at our friends in Ireland. They're about two years ahead of us. I noticed the statement said that it was working well in other countries. Well, I've spoken to our counterparts over the Irish sea. There are constant problems with the machines. They either break down or they fill up quickly. People hate them. It creates litter. Listen to this: Dublin City Council has spent hundreds of thousands of pounds—I think it's about £800,000—cleaning up after scavenging for bottles and cans from litter bins. They pull all the litter out, they find the valuable product, they don't put the litter back in.

Control, like the plan for Wales, is with a non-government organisation. That organisation now sits on €98 million of unredeemed deposits, because that's what happens when you devise a system that hasn't been thought through on the impact to everyday life, what we're asking people to do, to take their containers back to the vending machines. My goodness, there's enough to do in life already. And by removing those valuable recyclable products from household waste management in Ireland, bin collection charges—it’s a slightly different system to us here—have gone up by 30 per cent.

If litter was the issue, there are simpler and cheaper ways to tackle it. For me, I would scrap this scheme and we should be improving and modernising our world-leading kerbside recycling system. Part of the extended producer responsibility tax could be ring-fenced by UK Government with Barnet consequentials to invest in the latest technology, so these high-value materials can still be picked up kerbside, and we can start building processing plants here in Wales.

Minister, DRS is a reform too far. It will have a massive impact on Welsh recycling records, Welsh communities and Welsh pockets. Please: pause, wait.

Well, what I would say initially is if we pause, if we wait, then I have no doubt that you would be on your feet then complaining about the risk of fraud. Because the rest of the UK is moving in this direction, okay? And everybody who was up in arms saying, 'Oh, if Wales isn’t moving in this direction then there will be fraud, there will be all sorts of problems and all sorts of concerns'—[Interruption.] The other parts of the UK would be the first to complain. So, we are all on a journey here, but what we have to recognise is that Wales is starting from a very different place.

We are asking producers, local authorities, consumers as well, to do something different. But if we are asking them to do something different, then we have to see a benefit from that, and including glass in the scheme is one benefit that we want to realise, because we need to keep that glass in the system. The one element that you have neglected, I think, in your analysis, is that this takes us closer to reuse. It's not about recycling. We need to move further up the waste hierarchy. Reuse would allow the same bottle to stay in use a number of times, reducing costs in terms of businesses that have to source those materials regularly. So, there are other benefits.

Littering, I mentioned in my statement. We have good records for recycling in the domestic space. We have regulations around improved recycling in business and in the workplace. On-the-go littering is a big problem, but this can be a big part of the answer, as we've seen from some of the international examples, where we can really bear down on on-the-go littering. A Keep Wales Tidy survey showed that drinks-related litter is on 43.6 per cent of our streets—nearly half of our streets are littered just by drinks-related litter. This can take us a step along that journey, reducing costs then, of course, for local authorities, for the work in terms of collecting some of that. And I mentioned the dangers from broken glass as well—well rehearsed. We know that there's more that we can and we need to do.

It's a deposit. It's a deposit; it's not an additional cost. Yes, those return points need to be accessible, of course they do, but there is no deposit payable in the first four years. This is a process of education, a process of working now with Exchange for Change to make those points as accessible and as easy to reach as possible. They won't only be in retail. I can imagine there'll be public spaces where those return points will be available as well. Where people tend to go or gather, we can provide them. And that as well is something that I think we need to keep in mind.

And council revenues, there are new waste streams coming online. Plastic film is one that's being trialled and developed now. There will be an additional stream of revenue coming for that. So, it's about striking that right balance.

The key thing for me coming from this statement today is that we now have a DMO here in Wales that brings us that partnership. That UK-wide partnership is embedded, really, because it's the same DMO that's delivering these services in all parts of the UK. And of course it's business led, it’s industry led; Exchange for Change is industry led.

Exchange for Change is industry led. So, they can work with businesses, and we and others can make sure that we speak up for the communities as well in that process, as we work to delivering the operational model.

Some people want to scaremonger. There are legitimate issues that will need to be addressed over the next 12 months, but that's the point: we work up to October and the start date. I can't wait for us to get a point where, in five years' time, potentially, when the deposits actually kick in in terms of people paying, we will see a real material difference on the ground.

Thank you, Minister, for your statement. I really welcome this update, building on the work of successive Welsh Governments, and, of course, the appointment of a deposit management organisation for Wales is a vital step forward. Exchange for Change's new role as that common UK administrator makes sense in terms of joined-up working and providing clarity for businesses. I'd like to start by thanking everyone in Wales who recycles. It's due to them that Wales ranks so highly in terms of worldwide recycling rates.

In terms of today's statement then, firstly, that four-year phased approach for glass is critical in ensuring the success of the wider deposit-return scheme. It's important that businesses and consumers are given that feed in, and we should remember too it's estimated that a phased approach will be more cost-effective. I'd expect lots of work to be going on in the background, so could you perhaps set out what the next key milestones are that we can expect as work progresses.

Secondly, the examples for low-volume producers and smaller retailers are important. I'd be grateful if you could set out a little more of the Welsh Government's current thinking around this. We know the key determinant of the scheme's viability is linked to things like how the scheme works, the level of fees or wider infrastructure, not necessarily just business size. So, what will constitute low volume and what will be done to ensure there are no unintended consequences?

My last question: Members may have seen the briefing produced by the last Senedd's cross-party group on littering, which was chaired by Mick Antoniw, on a deposit-return scheme. That document really powerfully makes the case that in addition to the scheme's immediate benefits for reducing litter, the greatest long-term carbon savings will come from well-designed reuse models built on that infrastructure—a once-in-a-generation opportunity indeed. So, Minister, you hinted at that and the importance of reusing in your statement, but could you say a little more about how this will be embedded across Government so we don't let this opportunity slip?

Thank you very much for welcoming this. Clearly, we're building on work that was done previously by our predecessor Government. It's something we inherited, but it's something we're embracing and working hard to make sure that it works for everyone.

The biggest milestone is October next year, of course. That is when the scheme goes live across the UK. I know people have been concerned that we have been a little bit behind the curve in terms of appointing the DMO, so work is now on an official level happening to identify exactly how that is going to be achieved. So, I'm happy for a briefing actually to be held for Members—it's something I think we should do more of—just to sit down with Members, to respond to some of those concerns that some people are still raising, but also maybe to talk through the process in finer detail.

With the exemptions, of course, you will be aware that some of the exemptions were outlined in regulations from export shops to drinks supplied before the relevant commencement of the scheme—small product lines are defined in the regulations—but also drink-now sales as well, hospitality. You will have situations where something is bought on premises, drunk on premises, so obviously there are clear exemptions there. Again, I'm happy to write to you with that list in totality.

And the final point you made was about—. The benefits of reuse I think are clear to us all. I touched earlier on the fact that it reduces costs in terms of having to source bottle after bottle and raw materials to produce those containers. But also there's a benefit in environmental terms, of course, in not having to keep creating those materials as well.