Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru

Good afternoon, everybody. We will move on to the items on our agenda this afternoon.

The first item is questions to the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government, and question 1 this afternoon is Mark Reckless.

Llywydd, diolch. I regret any uncontested seat at a democratic election. On Thursday this week, some 7 per cent of the principal authority places will be filled without a contest. The percentage in 2012 was 12 per cent.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary for his answer and congratulate the 92 councillors who have been elected unopposed, many of whom may be well known in tight-knit communities. He said 12 per cent were elected unopposed in 2012. The only figures I have are actually 8 per cent in 2012 and 2008, so I’m not sure what explains that discrepancy. I wonder, in light of the experience in Scotland, whether the Cabinet Secretary thinks the electoral system and the change they made in Scotland is a factor, and would he encourage councillors elected tomorrow to consider what system is appropriate for their council?

Well, Llywydd, I’m aware of the system in Scotland. I don’t think it’s possible to attribute directly to the system the fact that they have had contested elections there, because, of course, they have larger areas, with larger numbers of councillors as a result. Our White Paper, published in January of this year, proposes to allow a choice in the way that elections are conducted—the method of election to local authorities. That consultation has now closed, and I will hope to make a statement to the Assembly before the end of this summer term on the outcome of that consultation.

Regarding uncontested seats, all seats in Swansea East are being contested, although my feet probably wished they weren’t all being contested. This includes Conservative candidates from Maesteg, Llandeilo, Cimla and Neath, and a UKIP candidate from Ammanford. Obviously, not as good as Swansea West, where they have a Conservative candidate from London. Will the Cabinet Secretary consider bringing in legislation so that you must actually live in the council area that you are standing in?

Well, Llywydd, I think it is always preferable when candidates in local elections have an identity with that area and that they are known to local people. There are already a series of qualification tests that people have to pass, including living, or working, or having a business in the area, and it’s for returning officers to make sure that any candidates meet those qualifying criteria. But Mike Hedges makes an interesting point, and I’m quite sure it will be one that will be known to people when they come to cast their ballots on Thursday.

I think some of us may feel it’s a scandal that you stand for election in one party’s name, change to another party and then go uncontested. And some of us may also feel that, at the local level, in the case of independents who don’t stand on any manifesto, then go into cabinet and enact policies for the whole of those counties, it’s far better to stand for the colours you want to represent the people, and to stand for that, and be prepared to stand for election for that.

But the point about Scotland is well made. Since the introduction of the single transferrable vote, there has not been one uncontested local election in Scotland. And, clearly, widening the wards, allowing people to think, ‘Well, I’m not up against a councillor who’s been there for 35 years, and is a well-known farmer’, allows you to put together a collection, a coalition, of people. It gets different people elected, younger people, more women, and a greater range of people. I welcome the fact that there is a choice being proposed for STV for local councils, but wouldn’t it be better if the Welsh Government led and said that it is better for local democracy in Wales that STV is for all of Wales?

Well, Llywydd, the way in which the White Paper has been constructed is to allow a series of choices to be made by local authorities themselves—people who know their areas, and are able to design systems that fit best with their needs and circumstances. And that principle runs right through the White Paper, and I think it rightly applies to the choice of election method, as it will to other aspects.

Turning to the first point that Simon Thomas made, he will know that the White Paper also includes a proposal that anybody who stands for election who is a member of a political party must make that affiliation known to local electorates, even when they choose to stand as an independent, and I think that is right and proper for the very reasons that he outlined earlier.

Dirprwy Lywydd, as part of the £210 million provided in Wales to help businesses with their tax bills, £10 million has been provided in a dedicated scheme to assist those on the high street. The calling of a general election will not delay the provision of that help in Wales.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. Since being elected last year, I’ve regularly been in contact with small businesses and communities across my constituency, and small business representatives, such as the Mold business forum, to take on board their concerns and to bring that to people’s attention to take action where needed. Most recently, I’ve been working closely with representatives in Holywell, whose town centre has been left reeling by bank closures on the back of one another. But, despite this, I think there’s an energy and enthusiasm there to turn the town’s fortunes around, with exciting initiatives such as a teenage market to encourage young entrepreneurs. And just down the road in Flint, I’ve recently met with business owners along with my MP counterpart. A lot of these have been hit by business tax revaluation. I know that’s being addressed, and they’ve repealed that, but they’re also feeling the pinch of the temporary drop in footfall as a consequence of the regeneration work that is taking place and is well under way in the town centre. It’s brought to my attention that we need to think outside the box about how we can create healthy high streets for the future. So, Cabinet Secretary, can I ask if you’ll give consideration to how the Welsh Government’s taxation and other new powers could be used to more innovative ends, in order to better sustain our high streets and encourage and allow them to prosper in the future?

Well, Dirprwy Lywydd, one of the ways in which I hope we will use our new fiscal responsibilities is to be able to look at the interaction between different forms of taxation in Wales. So, we have non-domestic rates, which fall on local businesses, but we have other forms of taxation, and the Finance Committee looked very carefully during its consideration of land transaction tax, for example, on the way that land transaction tax falls on the commercial sector as well. Historically, these different streams of taxation have rather been treated by Governments as though they had little interaction with one another. We will have a narrower suite of fiscal responsibilities in Wales, but one of the opportunities that that affords us is to be able to look more closely at the way that they interact with one another, and particularly to see how they then impact upon businesses and upon the high street.

Yes, of course, Cabinet Secretary, we acknowledge the targeted high-street relief scheme, although some of those high-street businesses are still surprised that they are ineligible for it. And those that may be eligible are still finding some difficulty in as much as the Welsh Government’s link to that information on the website is still not working. For those who are perhaps a bit disappointed by the slightly narrow range of support offered, would you be prepared to consider the Welsh Conservative manifesto commitment to reduce income tax in Wales, not just to enhance the income tax cuts introduced by the Conservative Prime Minister in Westminster, which has benefited so many Welsh workers of course, but also to offer material help to those who are high-street employers, very often in partnerships or as sole traders and, of course, who cannot take advantage of the other low Conservative corporation tax rate?

Well, the party that’s in Government in Wales has a manifesto commitment not to raise income tax rates during the lifetime of this Assembly. Voters will be listening very carefully to what the Conservative Party has or has not been willing to say in relation to taxation and I think will be much more worried about the prospects of tax rises under a Conservative Government than they will be by the prospect that has just been outlined by the Member.

There are some specific risks to Wales as a result of our withdrawal from the European Union, but there are also some opportunities, not least the ability, for instance, to set regional or sub-national rates for VAT, for example on hotel accommodation, to boost our tourism sector, or for house renovation to boost our construction sector. Will the Cabinet Secretary be making an application to have those powers devolved to Wales so that we can have tax levers that will be able to boost our economy?

Adam Price is quite right when he refers, I think indirectly, to the fact that the Silk commission ruled out devolution of VAT on the grounds that it wasn’t a workable variable tax within the European Union. Once we are no longer members of the European Union, then VAT, I think, does come back onto the table for debate as a possible devolved tax for Wales because we would be potentially able to use it differentially. Although I’m certainly not at the point that he alluded to in his supplementary question, I do agree with him that this is now a topic that ought properly to be considered both by Government and by others who have an interest in this area.

We’ll now turn to spokespeople’s questions and first up this afternoon is the Welsh Conservatives’ spokesperson, Janet Finch-Saunders.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I’d like to thank my colleague, Mark Reckless, actually—[Interruption.] I thought that would bring a smile—for raising the issue of uncontested seats, because, actually, as voters go to the polls tomorrow, it is quite a serious issue when one considers that 92 councillors, already elected, will face no contest whatsoever. Eight per cent of Welsh local authority seats are uncontested. In Gwynedd, it’s 30 per cent, with 21 of the 74 seats depriving the electorate of a vote. Of course, in Machynlleth in Powys, a seat has gone uncontested for 37 years.

Now, I realise that all political parties have their own part to play, but, as the local government Cabinet Secretary, do you, like me, endorse Professor Roger Scully’s comments that this simply makes a mockery of democracy? How do you intend to address this for the remainder of the Assembly term and allow our electorate to fully engage in the democratic process?

Well, Dirprwy Lywydd, I began my answer to Mark Reckless’s question by expressing my regret that any democratic election doesn’t have a contest and doesn’t offer a choice to the electorate. There are things that Governments are able to do in making elections more attractive, in opening opportunities to people who might be willing to stand, through our diversity in democracy project, and so on, but, in the end, Dirprwy Lywydd, it is political parties that put people up for election. Her own party will put up fewer than half the number of candidates needed to fill the number of councillors that are needed by principal authorities in Wales. So, all political parties in Wales have a responsibility to try to recruit people who are willing to do these difficult jobs, to make them attractive to people. Government has a part to play, but Government is only one part of this jigsaw, and, actually, I believe that political parties themselves are more powerful players.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, and, of course, I hasten to mention the number of uncontested community council seats, which run into the hundreds.

Cabinet Secretary, over the past few months and leading up to the local government elections, political parties of all colours—and, as my colleague over there has said, except the independents—have been outlining their manifesto pledges and promises to which the electorate can then hold them to account in the future. The Welsh Conservatives are very proud of the manifesto on which they stand and the pledges therein, but why is it that the party of national Government here in Wales, with responsibility for local government in Wales, has failed to even produce a national manifesto for local government elections?

The Labour Party goes into local elections with manifestos right across Wales, explaining to local electorates exactly what a Labour-controlled authority would offer to them. They do that against the background of a White Paper in which this Government has set out our national policies for local authorities in the future.

I agree with what the Member says—that it is a very important contribution to democracy that all parties make when they put proposals in front of electors and allow those people to make up their minds between the different prospectuses that are there in front of them, and we will do well, I think, to allow people to make those decisions when they go to the ballot box tomorrow.

And finally, Cabinet Secretary, across Wales, local authorities are signed up to private finance initiative schemes with a capital value of £308 million but a total overall cost of over £1.5 billion. A £53 million waste management scheme in Wrexham will cost the taxpayers £450 million, a £28 million lifelong learning centre in Rhondda Cynon Taf will cost over £112 million and the £40 million school project in Conwy will cost my taxpayers over £175 million, a cost that will be reluctantly inherited by the new administration from the previous Plaid and Labour-run council. As we enter a new local government municipal term, what input will you have to ensure that local authorities do not simply get carried away signing up to costly PFI schemes, which then not only place a burden of debt on future administrations, but more so on our tax-paying and hard-working families?

Dirprwy Lywydd, an uninstructed listener would find it difficult to have discerned from that the fact that it was the Member’s party that introduced PFI schemes and enthusiastically put them in front of local authorities to persuade them to do it. There are Conservative local authorities in Wales that have PFI schemes as well. What this Government has done, particularly under the leadership of my predecessor, Jane Hutt, is to provide revenue support to local authorities to support them in conventional borrowing to help them with their twenty-first century schools programme and to help them with some of their housing responsibilities. We will do more during this Assembly term in the field of the flood risk management and, in that way, we will assist local authorities to borrow responsibly, to use the powers that are available to them, and to carry out very important work on behalf of their local communities.

Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Sian Gwenllian.

Thank you. Yesterday, during First Minister’s questions, Steffan Lewis urged for an update on the First Minister’s fair work commission and the leader of Plaid Cymru asked for a sign of support to the principle of scrapping zero-hours contracts in the public sector in Wales. Now, I want to follow that issue up further with you this afternoon. Do you agree with me and with the leaders of your party in England that there is no room for zero-hours contracts in the current public employment sector?

Well, Dirprwy Lywydd, this Government has taken a series of actions within the law as it currently stands to bear down on the exploitation of zero-hours contracts, but we have to do that within the powers that are available to us and within the competence that this National Assembly possesses. When a Labour Government is elected in June of this year, we will be able to do more. I look forward to that very much.

You’ve referred today, and the First Minister yesterday referred, to these issues that there are in Wales in terms of scrapping zero-hours contracts, and you’ve argued in the past that including amendments to abolish zero-hours contracts in the social services Bill could have undermined the Bill, making it open to challenge in the High Court.

But it would have been possible for you to introduce a separate Bill specifically on zero-hours contracts within the care sector—because public services are devolved—but, instead, you have voted against scrapping zero-hours contracts on a number of occasions. So, why haven’t you sought ways and means that would enable you to scrap zero-hours contracts in the care sector, providing respect to these crucial workers?

Well, Dirprwy Lywydd, in the previous Assembly, the Government was not prepared to see a whole Bill put at risk by the directly attention-seeking amendments put down by opposition parties on this matter, and it's completely untrue—completely untrue—to say that no further action has been taken. The Regulation and Inspection of Social Care Bill that I took through the National Assembly provides specific powers to Welsh Ministers to respond to the use of zero-hours contracts in the social care field, and I know that my colleague Rebecca Evans has very active intentions of bringing forward proposals very shortly.

It appears to me that there is a huge gulf between what Labour says and what Labour does. There is a gap between the Labour Government in Cardiff and Labour’s leaders in London, and also a gap between what Ministers in Cardiff Bay say and what Labour councils on the ground are actually doing. I’m talking specifically here about plans to encourage people to shop on their local high streets and the funding allocated to county councils to support parking initiatives—£3 million in total—in light of the agreement between Plaid Cymru and yourself. Unfortunately, Neath Port Talbot council have chosen to use the £133,000 that was to assist the high street to offset overspend on parking, against the specific guidance provided by your Government. Do you agree that this is entirely contrary to the intention and is an entirely ineffective use of this specific pot of funding?

Dirprwy Lywydd, we will keep a very close watch on the way in which the money that has been provided for this purpose and on this experimental pilot basis—the way that it is used right across Wales. I’m comfortable with the fact that different local authorities will choose to use the money in different ways, but I say very clearly to them that I expect every local authority to use that money in a way that has a direct connection with the purpose for which it was provided. We will pursue that matter with all local authorities in Wales over this 12 months.

And the UKIP spokesperson, Gareth Bennett.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Minister, I have been encouraged by some of your proposed local government reforms. You appear to want more transparency, and perhaps you also accept the idea that more plurality of opinion is sometimes needed. Local residents don’t really benefit from councils being run like one-party states. Would you welcome it if councils were able to scrap the cabinet system and return to the old committee system, which enabled members of all parties to participate in the running of the council?

Well, Dirprwy Lywydd, our White Paper puts the committee system back on the table as something that local authorities can choose should they wish to do so. It’s part of that menu approach that I outlined earlier. I am very comfortable with the idea that what we would seek to do as a National Assembly is to make choices available to local authorities that they can then draw down. I’m very comfortable that the committee system—a modernised, reformed committee system—should be on the list as one of the ways in which those local authorities who would like to do so could choose to organise the running of their business.

Thanks for that answer. The choice does sound like a welcome development. However, I wonder if entrenched parties that have been running their council for some time would be minded to introduce voluntarily such a change of system, but we will see. Localism is a principle that is sometimes championed by your Government. UKIP is also a fan of localism. We want to allow local residents to decide on major planning developments in their area. In other words, we want legally binding local referenda. Is this an example of localism that you would favour?

It’s not. I don’t believe in Government by referendum. I don’t believe that its track record is one that bears examination. I don’t think that it gives rise to effective, holistic decision making. I don’t think it contributes to speed of decision making. It does not form part of the White Paper, and I have no current plans that it should do so.

Okay, thanks for your very clear answer there. We are concerned in UKIP at the recycling targets of your Government. We feel that reduced black bag collections could be harmful to residents. Do you agree that fortnightly collections should be the minimum service provided to residents?

Well, Dirprwy Lywydd, it is for local authorities themselves to decide the systems that best suit their local needs and circumstances. You can’t advocate the advantages of localism in one question and then ask me to set from here in Cardiff the way in which bins are collected in different parts of Wales; it really is not a consistent way of approaching local government. Nor, by the way, do I think the evidence is that different patterns of bin collection have a deleterious impact on recycling.

Thank you very much. We turn to the questions on the order paper. Question 3—Joyce Watson.

I thank the Member for the question. In the budget approved in January, we set out plans for delivering nearly £7 billion-worth of capital investment over the next four years, with particular emphasis on continued investment in housing, transport, schools and hospitals.

I thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for the answer. The commitment from Welsh Government to £1 billion of innovative investment in infrastructure for three major capital investment projects through the mutual investment model in March was, indeed, very welcome news. And it does indeed demonstrate that, in these financially challenging times, the Labour Welsh Government rises to that challenge of finding innovative ways to invest in public infrastructure. Cabinet Secretary, when and how will businesses be able to tender for the projects being delivered through this particular model?

Can I thank Joyce Watson for that important question? She may be aware that we held a very successful market testing day on 23 March. It was attended by my colleagues Vaughan Gething and the Cabinet Secretary for Education. We had over 250 attendees from a whole range of Welsh businesses come on that day to hear more about the opportunities that there will be through the mutual investment model. We’re now able to provide information directly to those who are interested in it. The business cases will be further developed and we’ve planned further events over the summer to make sure that these new opportunities for capital investment are as well-known as possible to businesses in all parts of Wales.

Cabinet Secretary, you made reference, in your response to Joyce Watson there, to transport infrastructure improvements, and, indeed, there have been lots of announcements in relation to investment that the Welsh Government wants to make, either on its own or in partnership with others in south Wales—the M4 relief road, new terminals at Cardiff Airport, the south Wales metro system et cetera. And you’ve made an announcement in respect of north-east Wales, but what about the rest of Wales and constituencies like mine? We have an A55 in north Wales that is a constant bottleneck and is causing pressure on the tourism industry and other businesses in north Wales, as well as residents who use that road frequently. There’s no hard shoulder for large lengths of that road, and our transport infrastructure also needs improvement. What benefit will north-west Wales and north-central Wales receive as a result of the Welsh Government’s transport infrastructure improvements?

Well, Dirprwy Lywydd, I’m very happy to draw the specifics of the Member’s question to the attention of the Minister with direct responsibility for implementing the programme. Our ambition is to make sure that we invest in all parts of Wales, attending to those issues that are most urgent and that deliver the greatest benefits for local population. The Member makes the point on behalf of his constituents in the way that you would expect him to do.

Cabinet Secretary, the investment plan you have in the Welsh Government is huge, but procurement is an opportunity to be used as a tool to support Welsh businesses, particularly in my area with the steel industry. What’s the Government doing to actually support those industries, through procurement, and what strategies are you taking forward in that?

Dirprwy Lywydd, as Adam Price earlier pointed out on opportunities that there may be in the field of VAT post Brexit, then we have to say that ways in which procurement policy can be developed outside the European Union is another very important area that we need to work on here in Wales, and work has already begun on that topic. That has not precluded us from already having done significant work in relation to procurement as far as the steel industry is concerned. A particular group has come together, a report has been produced and it identifies opportunities for using Welsh-made steel in Welsh investment decisions. We do everything we can to make sure that the money that is spent by the public purse in Welsh infrastructure is aligned with opportunities for Welsh businesses, in particular the steel industry, to benefit from that very significant level of investment.

Thank you for the question. Direct ministerial intervention in Ynys Môn has provided a platform from which progress has since been made in the provision of services. While important improvements have been seen, real concerns remain, as demonstrated in the recent Care and Social Services Inspectorate Wales report into children’s services on the island.

I wanted to ask about a specific service, a service that’s important to Ynys Môn council, and other councils across Wales, and that is roads. There’s a tendency to see roadworks increasing substantially during the first months of the year, as the end of the financial year approaches. But, this isn’t the best way of ensuring the quality of the work or value for money, because the winter months aren’t necessarily the best time to resurface roads. The surface lasts less time if done in cold weather, the working day is shorter and maintenance work all done at one time means that the capacity isn’t available, perhaps, among local companies to carry out that work. The solution, perhaps, is to ensure that the work is spread across the year, and to allow more work to be done during the summer months. The same is true about the Government’s highways department. Now, I understand that the Minister here isn’t responsible for transport and roads, but as Minister for finance and local government, what work has been undertaken or what work are you considering to do to seek models and new funding structures to help to allocate the road maintenance budget more equitably across the year?

Well, Deputy Presiding Officer, I accept the point that the Member makes and that’s one of the reasons why we were eager to announce the capital funding available for the ensuing four years, in order to assist local authorities and other public services to plan better in order to use the capital funding available to them. After tomorrow, when the new county councils are in place, I intend over the summer to meet with every local authority and I’m completely happy to raise the point that Rhun ap Iorwerth has raised this afternoon and to discuss it with the local people to see whether things can be done better in the future.

Four days ago I joined the Assembly outreach service on a visit to the youth pod in Holyhead, which I commend to you. I promised young people there who are trained as peer educators for Project Lydia—a young people’s sex and relationship education project—that I would raise their concerns here. They gave me a copy of the project co-ordinator’s end-of-year report, to April 2017, showing that they had given 584 face-to-face support to young people, delivering evidenced better physical and social health, but given the conclusion of the report, it’s obvious young people need comprehensive sex and relationship education and ongoing support as much, if not more, than ever. However, it’s disappointing that neither Ynys Môn council nor Betsi Cadwaladr health board appear to have made any effort to raise funds to maintain this valued project, or indeed given staff the opportunity to do so. This is a multi-agency issue, which I therefore trust falls within your broader portfolio, and I wonder what action you might be able to take to support these excellent young people.

Can I thank the Member for raising the matter? I know that, in general, my colleague Kirsty Williams has a group looking at the way in which relationship education for people at that point in their lives can be improved in Wales. If the Member was willing to share a copy of the end-of-year report with me, I’d be very happy to look at it and see whether there are any steps that we might take to support that group.

5. Will the Cabinet Secretary outline what contribution the Welsh Government will make to the Cardiff Capital Region City Deal? OAQ(5)0120(FLG)

Thank you for the question. Financially, the Welsh Government will provide a contribution of £503 million to the £1.2 billion Cardiff capital city deal. More generally, we remain committed to working with all 10 local authorities in their collaborative effort to deliver the benefits of the deal across the whole region.

Looking at the transport interchange that’s been identified for the Central Square, which is a crucial part of the sustainable transport strategy for the Cardiff capital region, I wondered if you can put to bed some of the nonsense that the Lib Dems are putting about around demolishing the bus station with gay abandon without any plan to rebuild it, and telling us that there is no money to put in place the new bus/light rail interchange, which of course is absolutely crucial to achieving modal shift, to tackle air pollution and enable people arriving by train to complete their journey, whether it’s by bike, by bus or by light rail. So, I wondered if you can put to bed the scurrilous rumours that have been peddled, that there’s no money for rebuilding the bus station, and tell us what contribution the Welsh Government will make to ensure this crucial piece of sustainable transport jigsaw can be completed by the incoming Labour council.

I thank Jenny Rathbone for that supplementary question. It’s always seemed to me, Dirprwy Lywydd, that Cardiff is very fortunate as a city in having a bus interchange and its main railway station so very closely co-located and to allow exactly the sort of transport nexus to be created to which she referred. The Cardiff capital city deal has, as an integral part of it, a regional transport authority to make sure that the way in which transport runs across the whole of the Cardiff capital region can be co-ordinated and properly put together. I have every confidence that the new bus station in Cardiff is properly planned, properly financed and will provide an excellent service, both to the citizens of Cardiff and to those people from the rest of Wales who come to our capital city.

Obviously, with the local government elections tomorrow, Cabinet Secretary, I very much hope that people will vote Conservative. You will say you very much hope people will vote Labour. But what we do know is what is on the table is a city deal that does need, obviously, all partners working to make sure it is delivered, and, in particular, around the transport solutions that, hopefully, will free up this part of Wales, across the whole of the south-east of Wales. How will the Welsh Government engage and help construct a partnership after the local government elections, irrespective of whatever the make-up is of local authorities, so that there can be real progress on the transport solutions that do sit within the city deal that has been delivered by a partnership of the UK Government, Welsh Government, local authorities and businesses?

Can I agree with the Member that it’s been a real strength of the Cardiff capital city deal that councils of different political persuasions have been able to come together, have been able to agree on a form of decision making that means that they are able to speak with a single voice on matters that are of a more than local significance and matter to people right across the region? That is especially true in relation to transport. The south Wales metro is one of those genuinely transformative projects. It relies on local authorities taking action, it relies on the Welsh Government playing its part, it has £105 million-worth of central Government money dedicated to it, and in order to make sure that we make the very best use of that opportunity, we have to be able to demonstrate an ability to work across local authority boundaries and across levels of Government as well. The Welsh Government will do everything we can, after tomorrow, when we know the new landscape of local government across Wales, to work with those partners to make sure that, together, we can make something very significant happen for the population of this part of Wales.

I thank Gareth Bennett for the question. The Welsh Government has provided financial support to enable local authorities to broadcast their meetings. Currently, 18 local authorities broadcast their full council meetings, and some local authorities go beyond that and broadcast other meetings as well. The reforming local government White Paper proposes making broadcasting of council meetings a statutory requirement.

Yes, thanks for that. I think, although the Government here did provide money, it hasn’t been an across-the-board, consistent system, so it would be welcome if we could at least have the full council meetings broadcast by each council. Hopefully, you will stick to this, and I’m sure you will. It’s good that some of the councils are also broadcasting the cabinet meetings, which is welcome. So, can you just guarantee that you will push through with this once the local elections are over?

Well, I entirely agree with what the Member has said. I think local populations have a right to see what goes on in their name in their council chambers. That’s why the White Paper proposes that broadcasting council meetings should be a statutory requirement, rather than simply a request of local authorities, and the vast majority of local authorities in Wales are already well on that road. I hope that our White Paper will give a further impetus to doing that right across Wales.

I thank David Melding for that. I have regular meetings with the local authority leaders across Wales, at which I discuss a wide range of financial matters. The Minister for Lifelong Learning and Welsh Language recently made a statement here in the Assembly on the future of youth work delivery in Wales.

Do you agree with me that the key point here is to be innovative? Obviously, under circumstances when budgets are under stress, we have to look at other sources of funding or partnerships, and given the level of salaries for chief executives and senior executives in local governments—very much larger than the Welsh Government Ministers and the First Minister are paid—they are in a position to give that sort of leadership and innovation, and that’s the high level we should be expecting.

Well, I agree with David Melding that in tough times innovative ways of providing very important local services have to be sought by local authorities themselves. Dirprwy Lywydd, if you don’t mind, I’ll just take the opportunity for a moment to give a small amount of publicity to our new innovate-to-save fund: £5 million-worth of funding, which comes as a result of reports produced in this Assembly, which will allow youth services and others to make applications for new and innovative ways of providing services. The closing date for the new fund is 23 May, and we hope very much to receive some applications in the area of children and youth services in Wales.

Thank you very much. And finally, question 8—Sian Gwenllian.

Thank you very much for the question. A range of schemes exist to help small businesses with their non-domestic rates. More than £210 million of relief is being provided in 2017-18. These schemes are open to all eligible businesses that meet the criteria, including community energy projects.

You’ll be aware that the community hydro sector has been very badly affected as business rates are revaluated. Over 92 per cent of hydro schemes in Wales face a huge increase, up to 900 per cent. Your manifesto for 2016 noted your party’s support to community energy schemes. Can you commit to offer a generous rate relief scheme to support community energy projects in Wales as happens in Scotland? This would be of great assistance and an opportunity for your Government to support the sector in actions as well as in words.

Well, thank you very much for that supplementary question, and of course, I am aware of the things that people in the sector are saying. My colleague Lesley Griffiths has met with the task and finish group on hydro energy to discuss the report on measures to support the hydro energy industry in Wales, and I know that she will be holding a further meeting with that group. In the interim, both her officers and my officers will continue to collaborate with representatives of the community hydro power schemes to assess the effects of the 2017 revaluation by the Valuation Office Agency. Of course, I’ve already said, Deputy Presiding Officer, that we are going to prepare a new scheme for rate relief for small business from the year 2018 onwards. I am happy, as part of this continued scheme, to consider the case for specific assistance and support for some projects, including the community energy projects and community hydro projects. This will also include an assessment of the situation in Scotland.

Thank you very much, Cabinet Secretary.

Item 2 on the agenda are questions to the Assembly Commission. We have three this afternoon. The first two are to be answered by the Llywydd as chair of the Commission, and the Commissioner for communications and engagement, and the third one will be answered by Commissioner Joyce Watson, who’s the Commissioner for equalities and the Commission as the employer of Assembly staff. So, the first question is Dawn Bowden.

We are working to show live proceedings of the Assembly on as many platforms as possible, including Senedd.tv, Facebook Live and YouTube. We launched live Plenary meetings on YouTube yesterday. We are on YouTube now. [Laughter.]

Thank you very much, Llywydd. At the time of tabling my question, this hadn’t been done, so I’m hoping that, in some small way, my question being tabled may well have prompted the decision or brought about the change. But, however it came about, I am delighted this change has now been made, and I very much welcome the development. There is no doubt that Senedd.tv has played an important part in making the Assembly accessible to members of the public. In an age when social media plays such a large part in how Assembly Members communicate with their constituents, making the Assembly’s proceedings available on more accessible media, which is also more readily compatible with social media platforms, has to be a positive move in raising awareness of the work of the Assembly. In applauding the switchover, Llywydd, can I ask the Commission that early arrangements be put in place to provide appropriate training to enable Assembly Members and their staff to maximise the potential to publicise proceedings through social media, which in itself will help Members to publicise their work in the Assembly to their constituents?

Thank you for your supplementary and for the excellent timing of your question to the Commission. For clarity, Senedd.tv continues as one of the platforms that we have available to us, but YouTube is now being started as of this week, as are Facebook Live opportunities as well. Various committees, especially, have taken up the opportunity to use Facebook Live, and we will be developing that further.

The Commission has set up, as you know, the digital taskforce to provide us with expert recommendations on how we take forward the need to address the lack of coverage by traditional media of what we do in this place, and how we can use new media and new technology to take the work that we do here on behalf of the people of Wales directly to the people of Wales—to their homes and to their phones at the same time. You raise the very important point that some of us—some of you—are very able to use social media very well, and your staff are; but, others haven’t quite kept up to speed with everything that is going on. It’s an issue that I will take back to the Commission as to how we ensure that Members in this place and support staff are trained to enable us to avail ourselves of all the opportunities available to us now from social and new media.

The Commission is committed to engaging with all the people of Wales, and championing the Assembly is one of our key priorities. We approved a new public engagement strategy in January, which includes two key initiatives, namely the establishment of a new youth parliament for Wales and the delivery of the recommendations of the digital news and information taskforce, due to report this term.

Thank you, Llywydd, for that answer. It may be too late for some of the people I met in the Nefyn show on Monday who still didn’t understand the difference between the Assembly and the Government, but with the younger generation and with young people, it’s extremely important that they see the work that we do here as an Assembly. Therefore, I welcome the fact that Commission staff were at the show on Monday, promoting the consultation that is open now on the youth parliament for Wales. So, will the Llywydd outline more of the objectives of the establishment of such a parliament, and particularly how such a parliament can represent young people in our various different areas and constituencies in Wales?

May I thank the Member for the question, which is also timely as it so happens, as we as a Commission and an Assembly have started the consultation with the people of Wales—specifically the young people of Wales—on how we establish and what kind of youth parliament we wish to establish here, to run concurrently with our Assembly? We started that consultation at Ysgol Bro Pedr last week. I’m very pleased that the Nefyn show was also an opportunity to engage directly with young people. That consultation will continue until the end of June. Therefore, I urge every Assembly Member present to ensure that young people in your constituencies and in your regions participate, sharing their views on what kind of youth senedd or parliament we wish to see here in Wales. It’s the young people of Wales who asked us as Assembly Members to establish a youth parliament here in the first place. We want them to feel ownership of that youth parliament from the very beginning, and I hope that, as we move forward listening to their views, and in establishing that youth parliament, we will be able to do that through the autumn, and that our youth parliament here in Wales will be established for the first time at the beginning of 2018.

Thank you very much. Diolch.

I thank you very much for your question. The Assembly Commission is committed to being family friendly and, in the Senedd, we do have family-friendly and accessible facilities that include baby-changing facilities, an accessible coffee shop, and a regular programme of events aimed at families. We will consult with those visiting families for their thoughts on further improvement to that environment.

I thank Joyce Watson for that response. My reason for asking this question is prompted by the apparent change of use of the parent and child suite to a meeting room. And when I’m talking, I'm talking about small children now, because I think the school-age children who come here in groups have a fantastic service in this Assembly. But the parent and child suite never really was a parent and child suite, because there never was anything in there for children, so it was a bit of a misnomer. But I think we do have an issue if families come here; if mothers want to breastfeed and want privacy, they do need somewhere comfortable and private where they can do that, and I do not think that what is available at the moment, which I assume is the child-changing facility, is suitable. And there isn’t a proper chair for mothers to breastfeed, which can be obtained very easily. So, I’m really asking if we could reassess all this and see how we can make this a child-friendly place, because we unfortunately don’t have a crèche for visiting parents, which is a big blow, really, because, you know, when people come to give evidence to committees, or when they make visits, it would be good if we could have a room, even if we can’t manage a crèche, where there are some playthings for children, some games. I’m sad to say I think a lot of that is sadly lacking in this Assembly building, so I would ask you if you could very seriously look at a proper chair for breastfeeding, somewhere private and comfortable, facilities with games for small children, and something to make it much more of a family-friendly place.

I actually agree with everything that you have just outlined. To that end, I have met with staff here to look at the way that we can improve the facilities. You’re absolutely right to say that the parent and child room had nothing in it, that it was pointless in that regard, but what I can tell the Member is that we have recognised those weaknesses and we are setting about making some of those changes. And one of the changes that has happened at the moment is the suite of gender-neutral toilet facilities that are available, and they will include baby-changing facilities as well, which clearly changes the emphasis as to who should be changing the nappies. Also, the cafe is at the moment child friendly and sells child-friendly produce, and it does offer seating options that include highchairs.

I couldn’t agree more with you about the breastfeeding facilities for mothers, and that we need to make it crystal clear that we are a very welcoming place for mothers, and particularly that we welcome those mothers who want to feed their babies while they’re here. And there are a number of things that we can do towards that, and I think signage plays a big part, and we’re looking at that now. We’re also looking at including privacy areas around the cafe area for mothers and families who would prefer a more private space, and we’re looking at ways that we can achieve that, maybe putting plants, exhibition screens or positioning the seats. I take very much on board what you’re saying about the breastfeeding chairs, and I give you my promise that I will move that forward as a Commissioner.

I think that you raise another point that hadn’t previously been raised, and that’s about witnesses coming here who might need help and might need support for their children, and I think that we can examine that. It is fair though also to point out that—and I used those facilities when I came here when I was re-elected in May—there are toys, soft toys and other games that are available for children, because I brought my grandchildren here and they played with them. It is the case also that the staff do all that they can to make those children welcome. The shortage, actually, is in the areas that you’ve outlined. I think that, in consultation with Members who are interested, but also those people who want to come here and think their needs aren’t met through what we currently have, we can only move towards improving that.

Thank you very much.

We move to item 3 on the agenda, which is topical questions. This is the first time we’ve had topical questions under a topical questions session, and the first question is to be answered by the Cabinet Secretary for Health, Well-being and Sport, and it’s from Jeremy Miles, and Jeremy had the first 90-second statement, I believe, so, he’s trailblazing.

Thank you, Deputy Llywydd. The Llywydd has shown great wisdom in selecting questions, as usual.

Will the Cabinet Secretary make a statement about his decision to approve the use of pre-exposure prophylaxis in Wales as part of a study? TAQ(5)0155(HWS)

Thank you for the question. I have discussed the framework for the study with both Public Health Wales and the Terrence Higgins Trust, as well as officials within the Welsh Government. I issued a Welsh Government statement following a meeting that took place yesterday with both Public Health Wales and the Terrence Higgins Trust. I do welcome the support from the Terrence Higgins Trust to help promote access to Truvada, the branded PrEP medicine that is available, and the wider care package that will be available throughout the course of the study.

Can I thank the Cabinet Secretary for his reply and thank him also for the decision that he has taken in the last few days, and thank him for the time that he and his officials have made available to myself and others to discuss this important matter?

The health, emotional relationship and social consequences of an HIV diagnosis can be very, very serious, and although many, many people are living into later life with HIV medication, it’s incumbent on us to make available to people in Wales the tools that they need to manage their health prudently and to reduce HIV transmission. The clinical effectiveness of Truvada is well established—between 86 and 100 per cent effective at reducing HIV transmission as part of a range of safe sex measures. So, I welcome the decision that he has taken.

He has mentioned that this will be rolled out across Wales. Can he confirm that it will be available across Wales from the outset, mindful of the fact that there is an uneven distribution, if you like, of genitourinary medicine clinics across Wales? Secondly, from the perspective of the patient, will participating in the study alter that experience for the patient? Will there be additional expectations from the patient, above and beyond the clinical expectations? Thirdly, what measures does he envisage being taken to raise awareness amongst communities that are particularly at risk of HIV transmission of the availability of PrEP on the NHS in Wales?

Thank you for that series of questions. I think you’re right in terms of awareness raising, to start off with, that there is a real challenge in continuing the message about the reality of HIV and reducing the number of people with HIV in Wales. We still have people every year who contract HIV in Wales, so there’s a real need to improve our ability to reduce the numbers of people who have HIV and then the treatment and care for them as well.

There is something here about both the decision and the awareness around this, because we recognise there are groups of people who are likely to be at risk of HIV, or indeed who may have it and are reticent about coming forward. So, actually having a study, and the way that’s undertaken should help us to understand the levels of people who are at risk and actually the economic benefits of PrEP itself as well. That’s part of the reason behind the study, but I also see it within that wider context of care provided, too. I expect the study to start by the end of July this summer, so it will start in a matter of months. I can assure you that it will be available across all of Wales; it won’t be in particular parts first or afterwards, so it is a genuine all-Wales approach. Every single person where this is clinically appropriate will have PrEP made available to them—no extra hurdles or barriers to get over.

I think it’s also important to make clear that this will be primarily undertaken through GUM clinics. I know there’s a challenge through mid Wales in particular about the availability and access to them, and that’s part of the challenge in designing this, and in getting people access to an appropriate place to have that care and follow-up support undertaken. But it’s where most people access their support and advice on these areas. People are less likely to go to their general practitioner for this particular form of support and advice. So, that’s why we’re making sure, in the design of the study, that GUM clinics will be the primary place both for the prescribing, but also the follow-up treatment, care and testing and understanding about adherence to as well.

I’m looking forward to receiving back from Public Health Wales clear parameters about the study, how it will be undertaken, and the assessment of the value and the impact of the study, and the learning on the behaviour of individuals who are at most risk as well. Obviously, there’s a lot of learning we can get from this, and I look forward to being able to update Members, hopefully before recess, about where we are on the start of this particular study—that will be another part of awareness raising—but, in particular, what we will do with third sector organisations like the Terrence Higgins Trust and others to raise awareness from those most at risk as well. So, very pertinent questions, which are absolutely in my mind as we take this work forward.

The results of the UK-based 2015 PROUD study, evaluating the effectiveness of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis, or PrEP, amongst a high-risk group of gay and bisexual men, showed that daily use reduced the number of HIV infections by 86 per cent in this group, and that, when taken properly, the effectiveness was nearly 100 per cent. Noting that, how do you respond, given your comment about your engagement with the Terrence Higgins Trust, to their call for this to be provided alongside other prevention interventions, such as condom use, behaviour change, and regular HIV testing?

Well, I’m happy to confirm my response. That’s exactly what Jeremy Miles has called for, it’s exactly what the Terrence Higgins Trust has called for, and it’s part of what the study will be looking at. It won’t just be PrEP in an isolated way—it’s seeing it in its context, as part of the work that we want to do to try and ensure that as many people as possible do not acquire HIV. So, it’s an important part of where we are. And it’s also about understanding the real level of incidence rates that exist in Wales, because we do think we probably undercount and underestimate what they are. So, there are real challenges that we understand from the advice we’ve had from the All Wales Medicines Strategy Group. But we are looking to resolve those by having this study and making sure that PrEP is genuinely available across the whole country for everyone where it’s clinically appropriate. And that’s a really important step forward for us here in Wales.

Thank you very much. And the second topical question this afternoon, again to be answered by the Cabinet Secretary for Health, Well-being and Sport, is from Darren Millar.

Will the Cabinet Secretary make a statement on the investigation being undertaken by Betsi Cadwaladr Health Board into reports that the quality of care for dementia patients on the Tawel Fan ward at Glan Clwyd Hospital may have contributed to at least seven deaths? TAQ(5)0156(HWS)

As the Member, and other Assembly Members, will be aware, I established an independent panel to oversee the HASCAS—that’s the Health and Social Care Advisory Service—investigation and the Donna Ockenden review into the care of patients on Tawel Fan. Whether the quality of care provided could have been a contributing factor to the death of some patients will, of course, be what we’re looking to establish as part of that HASCAS investigation.

Thank you for that answer, Cabinet Secretary. These are very concerning remarks, which have been made in letters to patients’ families in north Wales. And, given that we are now two years into special measures, almost, and around two and a half years since the publication of the report by Donna Ockenden into the institutional abuse on the Tawel Fan ward, it will come as a serious concern that there may be individuals who are still employed by the NHS, paid for by the taxpayer in terms of their salaries, who are yet to lose their employment, and are yet to have to face resignation, and may still be working somewhere in the health service in spite of the potential harm that they may have caused to individuals in this particular ward.

I am concerned that some of the cultural issues that were identified in Donna Ockenden’s report are still prevalent in mental health services in north Wales, and that there’s still significant pressure on in-patient bed capacity. Just this week, I had an e-mail from a family whose loved one needed to be sectioned because of their poor mental health, and had to be sent to Bristol, because there were insufficient numbers of beds in north Wales. That is unacceptable. And it’s also unacceptable that some patients are having to sleep on sofas in lounges in mental health wards because of insufficient numbers of beds, and that some female patients are also having to sleep on male mental health wards in north Wales.

Clearly, there are still huge challenges. There are still issues that people in north Wales are facing, and we must ensure that we learn lessons from what went wrong. I appreciate that the investigations are continuing, and that those are in-depth investigations, and we have to get to the truth in terms of what has been going on in north Wales, but I would appreciate it, Cabinet Secretary, if you could give some assurances that, should those investigations find that harm has been caused, you will discuss with the police and the Crown Prosecution Service the possibility of bringing prosecutions for those responsible for causing harm, particularly where that harm may have led to deaths, because these are very serious issues, which people are very concerned about in north Wales, and we’re not confident that sufficient progress is being made to address those concerns.

Thank you for that series of slightly different questions, and I’ll try to answer them in the different parts in which they were put. I want to start by saying that, of course, I understand the significant and continuing public interest and concern into the events reported around Tawel Fan, and it’s been actually very difficult to meet the understandable demand for the process to be concluded as quickly as possible, which is entirely understandable, from the families affected and the wider concerned community within north Wales and beyond, but having a process that is properly robust, because part of my concern has always been, despite my personal desire to see this concluded quickly, that, if you don’t have a properly robust process, you potentially open up not just the health service, but individual families, to a wholly unsatisfactory position where the process itself collapses and you don’t actually deliver the sort of justice that I understand people want to see. And I do appreciate the fact that you indicated that the most important thing is to get to the truth, and, indeed, thousands of different documents have been reviewed, and, because of the rigour undertaken, there have been further fields and avenues of investigation undertaken that go beyond the number of people identified in the Ockenden report. And that’s important for you to understand, I think—there is real rigour that’s been undertaken in what is now a review with real, genuine independent oversight. So, the health board don’t control and have oversight of the HASCAS review, so there should be no misunderstanding that the health board are somehow going to re-interpret or alter the findings of this genuinely independent review.

I’ve not had sight of the letters that I understand have been reported, but, in terms of the challenge around harm caused and understanding what comes after that, there’ll be a number of different processes to go through, in which the Government won’t have a role to undertake. For example, the professional issues—that will be for the professional bodies to undertake. We expect them to do their job. I am concerned though about the length of time it takes for fitness-to-practice proceedings to be undertaken—that’s not a party political issue; it’s an issue of genuine concern across the Chamber—regardless of which professional body people are answerable to and responsible for.

On the point of prosecutions, I think it’s really important that Government politicians don’t get into the business where we are saying that we expect or require the police and the Crown Prosecution Service to prosecute. There is such a level of public interest that I expect the police to be properly aware that when the investigation reports they will need to review it and they will need to respond and indicate. And, at the time the report is available, I see no reason for me not to ask the police to confirm their position, but I think going beyond that would not be appropriate for me to do. Those are independent decisions to be made by both the police and the Crown Prosecution Service about matters that they think they could, should, and have a duty to investigate and then conclusions they actually reach. But I’m happy at the end of this process to ask the police for their view on whether they expect to take any further action.

On the broader cultural issues that you identify, I think this is an area where people should look again at the process of special measures with the oversight provided by regulators. This isn’t a Government politician deciding, ‘This is what I want the conclusion to be’. And I’ve always, as I know that Mark Drakeford has before me, tried to be really clear that this won’t be undertaken for the convenience of a Government politician in this particular role. It must be about independent advice from regulators about progress that has and has not been made through special measures, and about whether the organisation comes up, whether sufficient progress has been made in each of the areas. And mental health services are, I think, the most significant area of concern that caused the health board to be put into special measures. The new director has made a real difference, I think, but there is an understanding that there is a real and significant challenge in reconfiguring and improving that service. What should give me and other Members confidence is not just the process undertaken with independent regulators, but they recognise that real progress has been made to date. But it is about the further progress that is still needed. And I would not pretend to you or any concerned citizen that everything is perfect and that progress is smooth and easy. But we will have a properly transparent review from those regulators when they undertake their regular review of special measures, and, again, I will receive that and that will be publicly available, as have previous reports.

Clearly, we have to await the full investigation before we can make any decisions, or before any of the professional bodies can make any decisions about what consequences might flow on from that, so I agree with what the Cabinet Secretary has said and note his strong words in that regard. However, there have been administrative consequences from Tawel Fan: the chief executive was suspended and then, in turn, as the Minister has just outlined, the health board itself was taken into special measures. So, I want to understand what he’s done, as the Cabinet Secretary, around the administration now of Besti Cadwaladr, and two things in particular: can he just confirm that not a penny has been paid to the members of Betsi Cadwaladr health board after it was taken into special measures, because it would be wrong, wouldn’t it, for failure to be rewarded in that way? Secondly, can he also confirm that no money has been paid to Professor Trevor Purt after he began working in England?

On Professor Purt, we were completely clear about the secondment arrangement for him to leave the health service in Wales. He is now no longer part of the service. We are absolutely transparent about the arrangement for him to leave, including the financial measures that took place with that.

In terms of your comment that members of Betsi Cadwaladr health board have not been paid a single penny, I assume that you don’t mean the members of staff who work for Betsi Cadwaladr, but that you’re talking about the independent members who are appointed. Well, they are still undertaking a role—they’re still acting—and if I took the decision that they should not be paid, I should actually just simply remove them rather than simply saying, ‘I’m going to punish you by effectively taking a disciplinary measure to remove the moneys that you’re entitled to in undertaking this public appointment’. I think it’s really important that, in properly holding people to account, we don’t look for easy or headline-grabbing measures to try and say, ‘This is what we should or must do’.

For me, the most important thing is that the health board improves. You do need members there who are committed to providing the scrutiny that wasn’t undertaken to the level that we’d want it to in the past. We’ve seen a review of people; we’ve seen actually a renewal of people as independent members on that health board. We’ve seen new executive members come in, so there are new leadership arrangements in place within the health board: a new executive nurse director, a new medical director and a new chief executive officer as well. So, it’s really important to understand that the leadership has moved on from the time when the organisation went into special measures. For me, it must always be: are we seeing progress being made? Are we getting the independent reassurance from regulators that real progress is being made, and what are the continuing channels that we need to see resolved within Betsi Cadwladr? Because that, for me, is the most important thing, because I want people living in north Wales to have the same high-quality health service that I believe that every citizen in any part of Wales in entitled to.

The health board website states that:

‘The Board was made aware by families of serious concerns about the care of patients in December 2013.

‘Immediate action was taken to close the ward and patients…transferred to alternative care.’

However, I wrote to the chief executive of the then north Wales NHS trust in April 2009 on behalf of a constituent, stating that the treatment received by her husband in the unit nearly killed him, that three other patients, admitted around the same time as her husband, had similar experiences, and she was now worried about the treatment that others may receive in the unit. Her husband had Alzheimer’s disease and terminal cancer. Through that, I was copied on the complaint of another patient who had vascular dementia, which included distressing ‘before’ and ‘after’ photographs. The chief executive responded that it was being treated as a formal complaint and that she’d copied my e-mail to the chief of staff for mental health and learning disabilities. How, therefore, will you ensure that this inquiry not only considers the impact on the patients and the families, but considers why matters were raised with them several years—four and a half years—before they acknowledged that they were made aware of this, having been raised with them at the highest level?

I think it’s difficult to understand how the matters raised directly relate to the investigation that’s being undertaken. You raise matters that are historic, going back to 2009, as you indicate, and others. I’m not aware of how the independent HASCAS investigation has actually resolved all those issues, because that’s the whole point about being independent. It’s not for me to set parameters on the timescales for them to look at or to understand; it is for me, though, to understand that there is a properly rigorous, robust and independent investigation into what took place in the care provided around Tawel Fan, the lessons to be learnt from that particular part of the service, but also if there are wider lessons to learn about the future of the service not just in north Wales but beyond. So, if the Member believes that there are matters that he wishes to draw to the attention of the independent group overseeing the HASCAS investigation, then I think that’s perfectly proper for him to do. It must be for them to undertake that investigation as they see fit, rather than me deciding for them what they must do, because that then means it is not an independent investigation and inquiry. I think it’s really important to protect the independence, the robustness, the high quality and searching level of detail that that inquiry is undertaking. I look forward to receiving the outcome of that investigation report. We’ll then need to understand what we can do collectively to move healthcare in north Wales forward afterwards.

Any investigation needs to be undertaken thoroughly and fairly, of course, but how will the Cabinet Secretary ensure that the investigation is conducted in a timely manner? How will the Cabinet Secretary make sure that any findings are not simply written off by the stock line that seems to be used when a public body is found to be failing our people, which is ‘lessons will be learned’? Finally, will the Cabinet Secretary ensure that the results of this investigation are brought back to the full Assembly, not just the scrutiny committee, for a debate on next steps?

I’m happy to respond to the middle point first in terms of what will happen. In terms of what will happen, we need to see what the report says first, to then understand what an appropriate response is, what response the health board should undertake and are there points for the Government to respond to as well.

I’m robustly confident there will be questions as a result of the report when it’s provided, and, of course, we’ll need to consider with the leader of the house about how Government business is used in terms of responding to that report when it’s provided and having a proper response that actually informs rather than simply adds more heat to public debate around this matter. It’s really important we take a step forward rather than have an exercise in launching more criticism onto individuals who are not here, but actually look at what happens, for the people who need the service at the highest level of quality within north Wales.

Finally, o the point about the timely manner of providing this report, for me, the most important point is that it is a robust and independent report. I personally would have much preferred it if this report was available several months ago. It would be much more convenient for me if that were the case. I cannot—well, I could, but I will not interfere with the timescale for this report. Otherwise, as I said earlier, it is no longer an independent report. It must not be a report that is done for the convenience of a Government politician. It must be a report that carries real independence, real rigour and real robustness with it. That means, unfortunately, it’s taken longer than any one of us in this room or the families affected would have wanted it to have done. But, the robustness and the independence of that report should not be compromised, and I will not do that.

Thank you very much, Cabinet Secretary.

There were no requests under item 4.

Therefore, we move to item 5 on the agenda, which is a debate on the Children, Young People and Education Committee’s inquiry into the education improvement grant: Gypsy, Roma and Traveller, and minority ethnic children. I call on Lynne Neagle to move the motion.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. As I outlined in my statement to the Chamber on 25 January, the Children, Young People and Education Committee is engaging with stakeholders on what the main issues that we should be looking at are, and we are designing our work programme accordingly. The report we are debating today is another example of the committee undertaking an inquiry identified in our consultation on stakeholder priorities last summer.

Gypsy, Roma and Traveller children have the lowest rates of attainment of any ethnic group in Wales. Just 16 per cent achieved the level 2 threshold inclusive—i.e. five or more GCSEs at grades A* to C including maths and English or Welsh—between 2013 and 2015. Statistics published during the committee’s inquiry showed some welcome improvement, to 24 per cent between 2014 and 2016, although the gap with all pupils is still too wide at 35 percentage points. The gap with pupils eligible for free school meals, themselves a disadvantaged group, is 7 percentage points.

Black and minority ethnic learners are less of a homogenous group and the attainment picture varies considerably. Many minority groups outperform their peers, but some groups, such as black Caribbean, black African and mixed race Caribbean, attain lower than the average. These groups of learners were previously supported under two ring-fenced grants paid to local authorities—the Gypsy and Traveller children grant and the minority ethnic achievement grant. These were two of 11 ring-fenced grants that were amalgamated into a new education improvement grant, introduced in financial year 2015-16.

The EIG, as it is known, is administered by the four regional consortia. The Welsh Government’s intention at the time was to be welcomed. It wanted to create greater flexibility and realise administrative savings. However, there is clear concern about whether there is now the same level of support for Gypsy, Roma, Traveller and minority ethnic learners, and particular concerns about how the impact of the funding change is being monitored and evaluated.

A lack of proper monitoring and evaluation was the biggest concern that came up repeatedly through the evidence the committee received. The previous grants were both subject to robust monitoring and accountability systems. These have been lost with the introduction of the EIG. The Cabinet Secretary has placed considerable emphasis on the role of the regional consortia and local authorities themselves in monitoring and evaluating impact. However, the committee saw little evidence that this is happening. In fact, we were disappointed with the evidence offered by the consortia on how they monitor use and impact of the EIG, something the Cabinet Secretary acknowledged herself in oral evidence. I will come back to monitoring and evaluation shortly.

I very much welcome the positive approach the Cabinet Secretary has taken to our inquiry in her response to our 14 recommendations. I am really pleased she accepted all of our recommendations, either in full or in principle, except one, which called for an updated impact assessment on the decision to amalgamate the grants. I am disappointed that this recommendation has been rejected, as there was considerable criticism levelled at the robustness of the original impact assessment.

What concerns me and the committee, Llywydd, is the fact that no clear assessment can be made of whether the move to a single grant has had any positive or negative impact. The total value of the EIG in 2017-18 is around 13 per cent less than the last year of ring-fenced grants in 2014-15. We just don't know exactly how much of the EIG is spent on Gypsy, Roma, Traveller and minority ethnic children because expenditure is no longer tracked or monitored in this way. Our overarching recommendation is, therefore, that the Welsh Government keeps under review the funding model it uses to support these learners and reports back before the end of this Assembly.

In the meantime, the committee has recommended a number of improvements to how the EIG is monitored and evaluated. We believe the Welsh Government should issue more detailed guidance on how the grant can be used to benefit Gypsy, Roma, Traveller and minority ethnic learners beyond that which exists at present, which is not much more than high-level objectives in reference to the ‘Qualified for life’ improvement plan.

We are concerned that there has not been enough progress on producing an outcomes framework, which was intended to inform how the EIG is spent, and we urge the Welsh Government to get a much firmer grip on monitoring and evaluation to ensure that consortia and local authorities know exactly what is expected.

I am pleased that the Cabinet Secretary has committed to putting in place a more robust outcomes framework in 2017-18. I also welcome that the Welsh Government has taken on board our recommendation for Estyn to undertake a thematic review of this subject. However, the committee does have reservations about the Welsh Government’s emphasis on meeting the needs of specific groups of learners through an all-pupil approach to school improvement. As witnesses told us, inclusion doesn't mean treating everyone the same. You have to recognise that people are different and have different needs.

We believe the Welsh Government must fundamentally strengthen its focus and target funding more specifically on Gypsy, Roma and Traveller learners and ethnic groups that have lower-than-average attainment. We have made two recommendations on this, and expect to see more reference to these groups in the updated ‘Qualified for life’ plan and the ‘Rewriting the future’ strategy that is due to be published soon. In closing, Llywydd, I want to emphasise to Members that this is not an issue that can be addressed by a one-size-fits-all approach to educational improvement. Support and interventions must be tailored to the learner if we are to support every child and young person in achieving their full potential. Thank you.

Can I thank the Chair for her opening speech and commend her for the way in which she led this inquiry, and also thank on the record the clerks and the witnesses who provided evidence to the committee? I think it was important that we undertook this piece of work, and that's why the committee agreed that this should be an early priority in terms of the committee's work programme. I know all too well, and I've often criticised, the large number of grants that have been available, particularly when I was Chair of the Public Accounts Committee, and used by the Government in order to direct and deliver on their policy objectives. So, I can completely understand why the Government sought to amalgamate these grants in order to reduce the administrative burden on local education authorities and, indeed, on the Welsh Government in terms of taking things forward. But I am concerned that there’s been a lack of follow-up in terms of the Welsh Government trying to determine whether the outcomes that it wanted to achiever are still actually being delivered on the ground. That’s why we undertook this piece of work as a committee, and I was very happy to support it.

We know that educational attainment, particularly for Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities, are not as good as they should be. They have improved recently, which is a positive thing, but there’s still this huge attainment gap with their peers in schools, and that’s not good enough. We’ve got to address that. And that’s the purpose of part of this grant, as is the need to close the gap in terms of some of the different ethnic minority groups and the educational attainment and achievement of them too.

I think what really struck me was the fact that we have a patchwork of provision in Wales that is very inconsistent. I was very taken with some of the evidence that we received from Gwent, where, quite clearly, they have pretty much a gold standard in terms of what they’re able to provide in terms of support particularly for those from ethnic minorities who are moving into the locality. And I was really taken with the fact that that is adding significant value and supporting individual schools, particularly where they have no expertise available to them. But the situation was very different in other parts of Wales, and I think it’s fair to say that some of the regional consortia just do not have a grip on what’s going on in their areas and that this has been a very low priority for them. That was very concerning indeed.

I was also particularly concerned about the evidence that we received from Estyn. Estyn were very helpful in providing evidence to us; they’ve obviously done some work in the past, particularly on the Gypsy/Traveller community and their attainment levels. But what was abundantly clear was that they had produced a couple of reports with some clear recommendations in them but they had not followed those reports up. Now, frankly, for the education inspectorate not to have followed up their recommendations is completely unacceptable. They said that it was a resource issue and that’s why they hadn’t followed it up, but, frankly, I think there can be no excuse for the inspectorate not taking up this issue more vigorously both with the Welsh Government and local education authorities. So, I’d be grateful if the Cabinet Secretary could just outline what role she expects Estyn to play in the future in terms of making sure that some of the policy direction of the Government is actually being delivered on the ground and that they’re taking their responsibility as an inspectorate to do just that.

Some of the other things that are referenced in the report are the lack of support for young people post 16 who want to continue with their education. We know that having older peers is often a very important factor in supporting young people in taking an interest in their learning, and, again, particularly Gypsy/Traveller community-background young people are not going on to further education or higher education, and yet there’s no specific support for them at the moment. I’d be very interested, Cabinet Secretary—and I know I raised this during the committee proceedings with you—but I’d be very interested to know whether there’s anything that can be done within the review of student support that is under way at the moment to specifically target these groups in order to encourage active participation in post-16 learning by young people from black backgrounds in particular, Afro-Caribbean backgrounds, and the Gypsy/Traveller communities—those ones that fall well behind in terms of some of these particular outcomes.

And I think all the recommendations in the report, if they’re taken as a whole, will actually deliver some sea change in improvement in this area in the future, and no doubt the committee will want to continue to look at this in terms of outcomes in the future to see whether our recommendations have been implemented in full. I acknowledge that one of them has been resisted, as it were, but I know that the Minister’s heart is in absolutely the right place in terms of wanting to deliver some sea change. So, I would be grateful if particularly you could talk about the post-16 issue and the role of Estyn in response to the committee’s report today. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Julie Morgan.

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer, for calling me to speak in this debate on the impact on Gypsy, Roma and Traveller and minority ethnic children of merging former specialist grants into the education improvement grant. I am a member of the committee, so I’ve been able to take part in this inquiry. I’m going to concentrate my remarks on Gypsy, Roma and Traveller education, as I chair the cross-party group here in the Assembly.

Incidentally, we’ve just had a cross-party group here this lunchtime where we had children from the Gypsy and Traveller community from all over Wales, including Pembrokeshire and Torfaen, questioning the Cabinet Secretary for children and social cohesion, Carl Sargeant, about the availability of sites, about why Gypsies and Travellers are moved on and lots of very challenging questions. I think any of you who would’ve heard those young people doing those questions would know what huge potential those children have. It’s obviously our duty to ensure that they reach their potential.

At the time the grants were merged to become education improvement grants, members of that group did lobby strongly against this move, as I did myself, and my view, after taking part in this inquiry, is that it was the wrong way to go. I’m glad the Government has accepted the proposal that it should be reviewed, although of course, it has rejected, as the previous two speakers have said, the way this came about—by looking at the way the equality impact assessments were carried out—that has been rejected. Because there was strong evidence given to us that they didn’t feel that equality impact assessments had been properly carried out and we do learn a lot by looking back and seeing how things happen. So, I know that that has been rejected, but I wondered if the Cabinet Secretary could take that on board—that maybe a mistake was made here.

I was actually shocked by some of the evidence that was brought forward and I was mainly shocked by the lack of knowledge of what was actually happening in this particular area. Individuals who worked at the grass roots were passionate and they were knowledgeable about their work; people who had direct experience of working with the groups of children we were looking at—they felt very strongly that things were not going in the right direction. But the wider bodies I felt had much less knowledge and much less commitment to knowing what was actually happening. I know the wider bodies—I think the consortia, which the chair of the committee referred to—I know this is one tiny bit of their work, but if we’re going to be a fair society and if this Assembly is going to deliver for all, we have just got to look at this bit. I have to say, as I say, I was shocked that their knowledge was so poor.

It also appeared that there were no monitoring mechanisms in place to see what had been the effect of the change, and I know that the Government has said that it will agree to review the monitoring arrangements, but I think we absolutely need reassurance that this will be a meaningful review. What does it mean: ‘Yes, we will look at it again—look and see what the monitoring arrangements are like’? There has to be a specific commitment to see that that actually happens, so how will they review and how much of a priority will that be?

The last point I want to make, really, is that recommendation 14 proposes that the Travelling Ahead project, ‘Good Practice in Education: Peer Research Project’—that the Government should take forward its recommendation. The Government does agree in principle and does say it will publish it on certain websites. I really feel that there is evidence in this peer review that people need to know about. I’ve been looking at some of the recommendations in the peer review and some of these are very important. The children said, ‘We need a Gypsy teacher’. So, we need role models and we know that Gypsies do achieve very highly in many roles and the public don’t often know about that. And then, ‘I won’t be going to camp next year, because mum and dad say the school is too far away and they don’t want me to go on the bus on my own; Mum thinks I will see and learn bad things’. So, I think it’s important to understand the community background of the children that is as a result of care for the children.

And on the final three points, they said they have three top tips for schools on how to work with Gypsy and Traveller pupils. Number one is: ‘be aware of our culture’, and I think that’s got a long way to go, but that’s very important. ‘Be aware of our differences with the settled community’, and as our Chair said, one size does not fit all. We’ve got to be aware of the differences that are there. And thirdly: ‘flexible education and part-time attendance options for all pupils around Wales’, which, again, I think is something that perhaps the Cabinet Secretary could respond on.

I’m contributing instead of Llyr Huws Gruffydd, although I appreciate that Llyr would have been much more involved in the discussions than myself—I’ve actually just read the report today. I do appreciate many of the comments that have been made here today, but I think, having read the report, I may come from a different perspective on many of the issues. I agreed with what the Cabinet Secretary said about the fact that the groups are not homogeneous, and I think sometimes some of the recommendations may look upon ethnic minorities and black and other groupings in a more negative light than you anticipated. For example, it says in the report from which the Minister quoted that Indian families and similar families—. I’ve got a strong connection to Indian communities in Cardiff and I think that if we potentially nurture the fact that they are very hardworking, they’re driven, they often go into very highly driven careers—I think, perhaps, we can turn it around and say, ‘Well, how can we use the ethnic minority pupils in a positive way to share those experiences with those who may not be as successful?’, as opposed to saying, ‘Well, yes, they’re not doing as well as other pupils’ and that we need a specific thing to target them alone.

I’m conscious of wanting everybody to have fair play within the classroom, coming from a family of teachers, and I’d want to be able to allow those teachers to teach in a way that they feel that the collective in the classroom can be part of the same type of educational proposals. So, yes, I think teachers should be aware of Gypsies and Travellers and their communities; yes, I think, of course, we should be aware of different cultures, but I don’t think that we should be saying they should be taught in a different way or that they should have potentially—well, I don’t know what the specific is because I couldn’t see what the specific recommendations were in the committee report to say, ‘Well, actually X, Y and Z needs to be done for those particular groupings’.

So, for example, I’ve worked quite a lot with refugee children in Neath Port Talbot, and I’ve said to the headteachers there, ‘Well, little Johnny can’t get to school because the parents can’t afford to get there’ and they said to me ‘Well, yes, I’d like to put in extra provision for them to get here, but if I do that I have to do that for everybody.’ And I think that if we’re going to be making changes, I think we have to look at it in a wider way so that we don’t exclude anybody from any changes. I totally acknowledge that there may be very fundamental issues with different groupings of people, but I don’t know if we want to facilitate difference. I think we want to facilitate trying to collectively work together. Perhaps I’m wrong, perhaps Llyr will be annoyed with what I’m saying here today, but I think sometimes we can focus on negatives. We have to see the wealth of experience and the family backgrounds that people come from, from other countries, where, actually their work ethics, dare I say it—controversially—are better than ours. They want to get out and work, and they want to engage positively with society.

Like with any grant, I think, in a general way we need to be able to ensure that we track how positive it is and we track where the money is going. And I think if I agree with anything in the report, I agree with that. We have to understand, now that change has been made, that we are able to say, ‘Well, actually, this will lead to improvements for our young people’. But we have to acknowledge that teachers are under massive strain, and if we’re going to be putting specific proposals in as a result of this report, then it has to be done with that work pressure in mind.

Can I commend the children’s committee—the Chair in particular, but also the other Members—for producing such a lucid and apposite report? I think this is very high-quality scrutiny, and just the sort of thing that Assembly committees should be doing. The key issue, obviously, is what happens when you approach questions to increase the mainstreaming as above ring fencing. This is something that we often face in the choices we make here. In an ideal world, you do want as mainstream a system as possible, which, I think, the previous speaker, Bethan, was hinting at.

But we also know that you need very specific actions, sometimes. I have done a lot of work, over the years, on the issue of looked-after children, and there are many echoes here, particularly about the gap in achievement at GCSE and then for the future opportunities that these young people have. But I think what this committee report has really nailed is that if you do move to mainstreaming approaches, you do need very clear and effective monitoring and evaluation. Otherwise, you can lose the whole purpose of the intervention—the intervention is still desired. We may be moving from a very specific grant to a more general approach, but the need for intervention is clearly accepted. I have to say I agree with the Members—both Darren and Julie’s very eloquent contributions—that it is very worrying that the approach has been quite so slipshod amongst those who are responsible for ensuring this change occurs effectively, which, at the moment, we just don’t have the evidence to conclude that it has. So, I think it’s very, very important that we can demonstrate effective monitoring and evaluation.

There is a danger, I think, that the specific needs of minority children can be overlooked, even when there’s a clear political priority for special attention. This is something we need to be very aware of. Can I just repeat the point about the gap in achievement? I think it’s always appropriate, when we look at specific groups, to compare them to the peer population, because—and, again, reflecting earlier contributions—I think our expectations should be the same. Why on earth should we stand in front of people and say, ‘Well, those with particular needs and special circumstances—we start by just lowering the bar and the expectations that those people can be expected to achieve’? I think that’s really, really poor. The gap at the moment, with 24.5 per cent achieving the basic level at GCSE, compared with 59 per cent in the peer population, is too wide. It has closed, and it may be because the consortia are, in their own way, which we cannot demonstrate, working productively. But we’ve got to have evidence, and, anyway, I think we would all agree we want that gap closed much more considerably than that.

I do think that, in measuring the effectiveness of public policy, there is always that moment when we hear from those who have the executive responsibility to implement change that we sometimes need to move to an approach that aims at general improvement, rather than being tied down to very specific, targeted outcomes. There are times when that is the appropriate way—to be more expansive. But I do think that there’s a lot of evidence that we’re at the stage here where we need to be more targeted, and, frankly, when you’re more targeted, I think you need very good evidence to move away from a more ring-fenced funding system. But I do congratulate the work that’s been done here; I think it’s a very important contribution.

Thank you very much. I now call on the Cabinet Secretary for Education, Kirsty Williams.

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. Could I begin where David Melding left off, in thanking, most sincerely, Lynne Neagle and the members of the committee for their report? As stated by the Chair, the committee focused this inquiry on the impact of the new grant funding arrangements that were introduced in 2015-16, following the rationalisation of a number of education grants. Now, much of the evidence provided to the committee covers, in my view, long-standing issues, a number of which predate the new funding arrangements through the education improvement grant. The diverse range of opinions provided in the evidence to the committee perfectly highlights that this is a complex area where one single, consensual approach to how the challenges should be taken forward and managed does not prevail. There is validity in the various points of view expressed, and I am grateful to the committee for their hard work in drawing together the issues in such a coherent fashion for debate here today. In seeking to understand the challenges that some minority ethnic and Gypsy, Roma and Traveller learners can face in achieving their educational potential, the committee has embraced a difficult but very important area of work.

It is no surprise to Members, I hope, that I am committed to equality of opportunity and equity of provision, ensuring that all children and young people are supported to achieve their potential, regardless of their background or their personal circumstances. In opposition, as now in my role as Cabinet Secretary for Education, I have always prioritised action to ensure all children and young people have the opportunities they need and deserve to achieve that potential, and much has been achieved. But the challenge remains, as we have heard from David Melding, for some groups, significant, and there is much more to be done. It’s no exaggeration, Deputy Presiding Officer, to say that we are embarking on the single greatest educational reform since the 1960s. We’re delivering a new curriculum and assessment arrangements, and a clear strategic focus on the supporting factors that will help all our learners achieve.

In ensuring our most disadvantaged learners are supported to achieve their potential, I will be releasing a revised plan of action for education in due course, which will demonstrate my commitment to an inclusive education system, with equity of opportunity for each and every learner at its heart. I welcome the committee’s recognition of the recent improvements in performance for the vast majority of these learner groups, and that is something to be celebrated. And I thank Darren Millar for highlighting some of the good practice that exists in our education system. Yes, in Gwent, I recently had the pleasure of visiting Lliswerry school. I saw for myself the hard work that they do, but it extends beyond Gwent into, for instance, some of the work done at Monkton in Pembrokeshire, who are exemplars in how they support their children.

And a number of ethnic minority learner groups, as we’ve heard from Bethan Jenkins, already outperform the national averages, and that is to be welcomed and celebrated, as Bethan has done today. As I have said, it’s important that we recognise this complex picture. Gypsy, Roma, Traveller and minority ethnic learners do not form one homogenous group. The individual needs and attainment levels of these learners vary significantly from some of our most able and talented children to those who are achieving well under the national average. The committee recognises this in the report, and, as I said, it’s an issue I am also very aware of. But as I’ve said, the challenge is significant, and in particular in relation to those groups who stubbornly remain below the national average, and that’s why I’m pleased to see the report recognises the positive contribution of our services and schools over the years.

Our schools, our local authority support services and our regional school improvement services should have, and do in many cases, extensive knowledge and expertise in supporting these learners. I firmly believe that our strength and future success is not grounded in my office in Tŷ Hywel, but it is in the sector, working as a whole, in partnership within a self-improving system that values our teaching profession and the diversity of our society.

Moving to the committee’s recommendations—it provided 14 recommendations in its report, which provide, I believe, a clear focus for action. I have responded formally and, I believe, positively, to the committee, outlining my agreement to all but one of the recommendations. I have rejected the committee’s recommendation to revisit the equality impact assessments undertaken some years ago. I understand why the committee is disappointed at this, but as the committee makes no explicit recommendation to change the funding mechanism, I feel a separate impact assessment at this stage would not be beneficial and our efforts and those of my officials and the service are better directed in supporting and delivering on all the other committee’s recommendations, which I believe will take us forward into the future.

One of the recommendations I am particularly very strongly in agreement with, and that is that the current education performance framework is not sufficiently robust. It simply is not, and there was no hiding from that during the committee sessions. And that is why, prior to the publication of the committee’s report, I have asked my officials to strengthen the framework for the education improvement grant for schools. Over the past few months, I am pleased to say that they have worked with the regional consortia to establish an improved and much more robust outcomes framework, which will provide a focus to challenge and support local authorities and consortia on efforts to improve educational outcomes for these learners from 2017-18. The education improvement grant outcomes framework articulates what our national outcomes are, and demonstrates how, through the EIG, regional consortia strategies contribute to the delivery of these outcomes, and ensures that the EIG is having a positive impact on learner outcomes. The intention through the framework is to move away from activity-led prescription to being outcome-focused, whilst remaining sophisticated enough to draw on the activity if required. The revised framework will be published alongside the regional consortia business plans for 2017-18. I’m also pleased that Estyn has agreed to revisit the subject through a short review in 2018-19. The review will focus on progress since 2011, and its report at that time, and will consider the impact of the current services and support for these learners. That review of that report is well overdue.

What this evidence has crystallised for me, Deputy Presiding Officer, is that there is a delicate balance between supporting all learners to access the opportunities to achieve their potential and respecting and valuing the diverse nature of our communities, which helps make today’s Wales the modern and progressive society in which I—and, I hope, the majority in this Chamber—want to live. Over time, attendance has improved, educational attainment has improvement, and expectations, which are absolutely crucial, have rightly increased. And we have listened to our communities. I will indeed publish the Save the Children Travelling Ahead project peer research report on Learning Wales, and I will make it available to every school, to every local authority and every regional consortia, so that our educational professionals and service providers can consider the views put forward by the young people in their provision.

In many cases, our services have done a good job, and I want to thank them for their determination. But I now ask them to increase their efforts to ensure that more of these learners and their families feel comfortable registering their characteristics on the annual school census returns, so that I can be assured that the support available for them through school budgets and our grant funding reflects their numbers.

Darren Millar, I am hopeful that our Diamond review, our continuation of EMA and support for FE learners to address barriers will continue to provide a financial framework to encourage people into FE and HE, but expectations of those communities are key. A valuable point was made with regard to the diversity of our teaching profession. Our teaching profession is not as diverse as I would want it to be, and I will be considering, with the Education Workforce Council, what more we can do to encourage diversity in our teaching profession.

Deputy Presiding Officer, can I thank Members for their contributions this afternoon, and thank the committee once again for this valuable report? It has strengthened my arm in being able to galvanise action within the department, especially with regard to monitoring. I look forward to working alongside committee members in future work in this area.

Thank you very much. I call on Lynne Neagle, as Chair of the committee, to reply to the debate.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Can I thank all the Members who have contributed this afternoon? I think it’s been an excellent debate. Darren Millar, thank you for your contribution and for your work on the inquiry. You quite rightly highlighted the quite alarming patchwork nature, really, of the provision and the fact that we were, as a committee, unable to actually identify what was happening on the ground, which was, in itself, very worrying. I, too, am grateful for the tribute that you paid to the Gwent ethnic minority support service, who I think made a big impression on the whole committee and who are doing an absolutely excellent job. But the problem that we have got is that, as far as we know, those cases of good practice are not being spread. And as you say, the evidence from the consortia was disappointing. I do share your concerns about the session that we had with Estyn. It was worrying that they came to us and said that they had done this review back in 2011 and hadn’t actually followed up on the recommendations. I think if the Welsh Government was doing that, we would have something very strong to say about it. I think, with the inspectorates, we have to expect that there will be that rigour in following up where they have invested the time in actually inspecting something.

Can I thank Julie Morgan for her contribution? Julie is a very passionate advocate of the Gypsy, Roma and Traveller community, and especially of the children, and I was really pleased that Julie, as a member of the committee, played such a key role in the inquiry. I share the concern that the equality impact assessment that was undertaken was not sufficient, and I know that the stakeholders felt that, and I hope that, although mindful of what the Welsh Government have just said, going forward, the Welsh Government will learn lessons from this in taking similar decisions in the future.

Julie made very important points about role models, and that was something that came out in the inquiry—that we're trying to encourage these young people to be in school, but yet they haven't actually got many role models, and that goes for Gypsy, Roma and Traveller children, but also for minority ethnic children. That was also an issue that came out in the inquiry. And thank you for highlighting the peer-review project. I think it's vitally important that we all keep the views of children at the centre of what we are trying to achieve.

Can I thank Bethan Jenkins for her contribution, for stepping up to the plate for Llyr today? It's much appreciated. Thank you for your comments. I don't think the committee was saying that these are a homogenous group. Particularly with minority ethnic learners, that is certainly not the case, but we have to make sure that where we have minority ethnic groups that are not performing, we ensure that the right interventions are in place, and that certainly wasn't clear from the evidence that we took. Similarly, we weren't in a position to recommend specifically what local authorities or consortia should be doing, because we just didn't have sufficient information on what was happening on the ground, which is why the key focus, really, of our recommendations has been on the need for there to be proper, rigorous monitoring and evaluation.

Can I thank David Melding for his contribution today, for highlighting the very important tensions between mainstream provision and ring-fenced targeting provision? I certainly agree with you that while we would all hope that everything can be achieved through a mainstream setting, there are clearly circumstances where that is not going to happen, and that's why we need this targeted approach. And I thank you, too, for your emphasis on the need for proper monitoring and evaluation, and also for your kind words about the committee's work in this area.

Can I thank the Cabinet Secretary for her contribution as well today, and for her very constructive engagement with the committee on this topic? I particularly welcome what you've said today about the need to strengthen the performance management framework; that is most welcome, and we will look forward to following up with you on that. And to thank Members generally for their participation today and just repeat what I've said in the previous committee debates that we've had: this isn't just a one-off that we're going to put aside and leave; we are intending to follow this up very rigorously going forward and to continue to shine a spotlight on this very important area of work. So, thank you very much, everyone.

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

We now moved to item 6 on our agenda this afternoon, which is the Plaid Cymru debate on local authorities, and I call on Sian Gwenllian to move the motion—Sian.

Thank you. It’s a pleasure for me, on behalf of Plaid Cymru, to focus all our attention this afternoon on the importance of maintaining and developing strong local government in Wales. By strengthening our communities, we will also strengthen our nation.

With the announcement made by the UK Prime Minister of an election on 8 June taking all of the attention of the press and politicians of all hues, I am pleased that there’s an opportunity for us to pause for a moment in the Senedd this afternoon to discuss the importance of our public services. Of course, the local government elections are an opportunity for people to express their views tomorrow.

Plaid Cymru believes that local public services of quality are crucial to the prosperity and well-being of our nation, but these public services are under threat. Funding has been reduced and cuts are being made as a result of that. The Conservatives are on an ideological crusade to dismantle our public services. Unfortunately, there is worse to come over the next few years. We need strong councils in all corners of our nation, councils that act responsibly to protect our most vulnerable and the weakest in our society; to protect those people who are most affected by these cuts. Gwynedd Council was praised by the auditor general for its financial planning, which was effective and robust despite the cuts.

We need strong councils to safeguard our public services, to be a shield against the worst of these cuts and the austerity policies imposed by the Tories. For far too long, we have made do with a second-class service for many of our councils. Plaid Cymru wants to build a new Wales, and, in our view, the best starting place is at our feet. Where Plaid Cymru leads councils—in Carmarthenshire, Ceredigion, Conwy and Gwynedd—we are providing excellent services, despite the financial limitations that we face. These councils are in the vanguard in Wales, in areas as varied as social housing, education, clean streets and recycling. With education, Ceredigion County Council is leading the way as the only council judged by Estyn to be performing excellently in Wales in the last full cycle of inspections.

Very often in this Chamber, we discuss the shortage of social housing in Wales. In order to tackle this problem, Carmarthenshire County Council, which is Plaid Cymru led, has taken action, committing to building 60 additional council houses over the next two years, as part of a commitment to a broader affordable housing programme, which pledges to provide over 1,000 affordable houses over the next five years. This is the first council in Wales to build new council houses since the 1980s. We need housing for our people, but new estates must be in the right place, and they must be supported by the necessary infrastructure—roads, schools, hospitals. Unfortunately, the Cardiff council local development plan is an example of a scheme that won’t work for the benefit of the people, with a focus on building homes without taking into account the repercussions of that.

Annually, our councils spend millions of pounds on purchasing goods and services, but, far too often, this money flows out of Wales. Small local suppliers aren’t always in a position to compete with the larger competitors for council contracts. Since 2012, the total procurement expenditure of local government in Wales has remained static at just 58 per cent. During a period of austerity, when funding is short, it’s increasingly important that local authorities, and the public sector more broadly, do secure the best local value for money in terms of public expenditure. Gwynedd Council has already started to tackle this problem, establishing a new procurement system to keep the benefits locally. Not only has this contributed millions to the local economy, but it’s also saved £2.3 million for the council over five years.

Maintaining public services of a high quality does require the highest quality staff to run those services. People deserve fair pay for their work, but there shouldn’t be a huge gap between the salaries of those at the top and the salaries of the front-line workers, who are so crucial to success. We want to close this gap, and we believe in working towards a fair deal for all council employees, including those on zero-hours contracts. I very much hope that the Government today can commit to the principle of scrapping zero-hours contracts in the social care sector by supporting clause 8 of our motion. Otherwise, your party will be accused of hypocrisy, with your leaders at the UK level saying one thing, whilst you choose not to take action here when you have the opportunity to do so in Wales. But, more importantly, supporting clause 8 would be a clear sign that you are on the side of some of our most valuable but least respected workers in Wales at the moment.

To conclude, public services of quality are central to the prosperity of our nation. They are the glue that holds our society together, and the safety net that supports the most vulnerable in our society. Plaid Cymru councillors will be champions for their communities, and will use all of the powers available to them to improve the lives of people, to strengthen Welsh communities, and to put power back in the hands of the people.

Thank you very much.

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

Formally.

Thank you very much. I call on Janet Finch-Saunders to move amendments 2, 3, 4 and 5 tabled in the name of Paul Davies.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and I do move amendments 2 to 5 in the name of Paul Davies AM. Tomorrow, on 4 May, voters will go to the polls to elect their members in our local authorities, town and community councils. Legislation, policy and settlement distribution, of course, have been the responsibility of Welsh Labour for the past 18 years. Over this time, our residents have seen council tax increased in Wales by 187 per cent. They’ve also felt severe cuts to our bin collections, and the closure of public toilets, our libraries and our local community centres. Those living in our rural communities are blighted by the many cuts imposed by this Welsh Labour Government, especially the swingeing cuts to community transport, leaving many feeling isolated and in despair. So, it is clear that voters will be looking for change and for representatives who will fight their corner, speaking up against such imposing cuts and a lack of efficiency in the delivery of their services.

Our first amendment highlights the disproportionate cuts to rural authorities: 10 per cent, Monmouthshire; 9 per cent, Vale of Glamorgan; and nearly 8 per cent in Conwy. Council tax remains Wales’s biggest debt burden according to the citizens advice bureau, with residents now facing an increase of 187 per cent since Labour came to power. In Conwy though it’s 230 per cent, yet this hasn’t prevented Plaid Cymru, Labour, Lib Dems and the independents from supporting and voting in further increases. Street cleaning and bin collections, noted in Plaid’s motion as important functions of local government, have been slashed like never before. Yes, by Plaid Cymru and Labour. In Conwy, four-weekly bin collections and fly-tipping—now at its highest level in five years—are causing huge misery to my constituents, impacting the most on our families, our pensioners and our most vulnerable.

The Welsh Conservatives are working to protect and safeguard these vital services, pledging to restore bin collections to at least fortnightly, fundamentally opposing further and unnecessary council tax increases.

Will the Member give way on that point?

Okay.

She just pledged to restore bin collections fortnightly, which, as has been pointed out already, is a bit of a nonsense really when you should be taking a local approach to this. But this was a promise by the Conservatives in England, by Eric Pickles, and they had to abandon that promise. What guarantees can she give to the people who vote tomorrow that she won’t abandon her promise?

I definitely won’t abandon it, and the fundamental point here is that there haven’t been any cost savings to date since the four-weekly collections came in

Social services and the care sector in Wales are in crisis. The Health Foundation states that demography, chronic conditions and rising costs will require the budget to almost double to £2.3 billion by 2030-31 to match demand, yet the lack of vision and investment under Plaid Cymru and Labour has been astounding. The Wales Public Services 2025 programme found that local authority spending per person was slashed by 13 per cent over the last seven years for our older residents. This is a national disgrace and it would take £134 million more per year, by 2020, to get back to 2009 per capita levels. Monmouthshire council, however, are leading the way with the Raglan project, remodelling the way in which social services are delivered to older people, cutting out waste, improving efficiency, and enabling better and easier access. Our amendment recognises the value of those working in our care industry, across the social care and health sector, and highlights the ineffective, day-to-day lack of joined-up services on the continuum.

School closures. Since 2006, we’ve seen 157 school closures under a Welsh Labour Government—60 per cent of these rural. Plaid Cymru-led Ceredigion has seen 20 rural school closures; eight in Gwynedd and six in Conwy. And under the independents in Powys, 18. Many of these overlooking the consultation process returns, just going ahead mobhanded. As a final point, our amendment calls for the direct funding for schools, cutting out the waste, the inefficiency and the bureaucracy of another tier that simply absorbs more in administration, taking away from our children in their own classrooms. The Welsh Conservatives will continue to fight to ensure that all children have the opportunity to realise their own full potential.

So, tomorrow, our voters will not be thanking Labour or Plaid Cymru for continuing service cuts, tax hikes and the destruction of our—

Will you take an intervention?

I can’t, I’ve already—. They will be looking for those who will stand up for change, to support our children, older people and our family households; those who will stand up for transparency, democratic accountability and financial probity and those who will seek protection for our vital services, whilst keeping council tax in proportion. Tomorrow the message is clear: ‘Ymgeisydd Plaid Geidwadol Cymru’—Welsh Conservative Party candidate. You know it makes sense.

I’m not so sure about the sense part there in voting Conservative. This is a timely debate with the elections tomorrow. I will declare an interest: I am standing for election. I’d like to highlight the 6.5 per cent cuts in local government funding since 2011 and 2012 because it has not been necessary. It has been a very lazy, easy cut for—

Will you take an intervention?

No. —for this Labour Government. All we hear about from the Labour side are the awful Conservative cuts from London. Granted—I agree. But, what about scandals like the Lisvane land deal where you’ve wasted £38 million in one single deal or the sale of two shops at a loss of £1 million to the taxpayer?

We need to keep our streets clean in Wales, but, again, if you look at Cardiff, what have they done? They’ve cut services. You see rubbish strewn around our capital city and in an attempt to increase recycling, they’ve closed recycling centres. Now, there is a bit of an irony there: we had a referendum in one part of Cardiff and 1,869 people voted to reopen the most popular recycling centre in Cardiff at Waungron Road. There were four against. So, in terms of figures, it was 100 per cent, when you round it up, who wanted to reopen the centre. But all those views were completely ignored by a Labour council.

We move on to salaries: there’s a £22,000 difference in chief executive salaries in Plaid councils and in Labour councils. If I think of my experience as deputy leader across the road in 2008-12, the first thing that we did was freeze councillor allowances. We also attacked the unproductive bureaucracy and cut many salaries over £100,000 a year, and we were saving in the region of £5 million a year after that process. In 2012, what did Labour do? They brought back the huge, heavy, expensive tier of management. They brought all of those salaries back, over £120,000 a year, which equated to a massive wage bill, paid for by the workers at the lower end of the scale because, again, Labour do a very good line in irony in Cardiff: they introduce a living wage and then they cut the hours of the lowest paid people in the organisation who are then worse off as a result.

Let’s talk about local development plans in Wales because they simply do not work. There are 22 of them or there will be 22 of them and none of them are joined up—none of them. If we look at the local development plan in Cardiff, we’re going to lose virtually every greenfield site in the west of the city, if Labour are re-elected tomorrow. We’re going to lose ancient woodlands, species of animals, insects and amphibians. It will all go under concrete, put there by developers making billions of pounds from this region.

The traffic chaos that we have already is something to behold. When I leave my house, if I’m in the Canton office in the morning, I don’t get the bus; I walk from Fairwater to Ely bridge because it’s quicker—I walk quicker than the bus at peak time—and I catch a bus from Ely bridge into Canton, and that says it all, really, that the roads are already jammed. What Labour is proposing in Cardiff is 10,000 extra cars every single day on the roads of the west of the city. No new roads, no infrastructure, no plan for investment in public transport—absolute madness, which Cardiff Plaid aims to stop tomorrow if we win the election, or perhaps when we win the election, and begin to revoke the local development plan.

We want to solve the housing crisis in Wales. We want to solve the housing crisis all over this central region, and in Cardiff, by renovating empty properties—thousands of empty properties across South Wales Central. We can employ local builders to do so and we could house people very quickly. There are plenty of brownfield sites to build on. Instead, this developer-led madness—absolute madness—will ruin our countryside and bring ‘carmageddon’ to the streets of this region.

Tomorrow the people will be voting on these issues up and down Wales, and I’m pretty sure that Labour will get its answer and the good people of Wales will stand up and get it done. Diolch yn fawr—thank you.

I declare an interest as a member of Caerphilly County Borough Council, although until tomorrow—I’ll be standing down. My dad is standing again, Councillor Wynne David in St Cattwg ward in Caerphilly. Indeed, he bumped into Steffan Lewis on the campaign trail—how dare Steffan Lewis campaign in Gelligaer—and my father said, ‘What a nice guy that Steffan Lewis is’, and I said, ‘Well, he’s campaigning for the opposition’. He said, ‘Ah, yes, but speak as you find’. So, there we are.

I’ve seen first hand the challenges as a councillor, and I’ve said in this Chamber before that you don’t get elected to make cuts. You don’t get elected to find savings, and it has been very difficult in the past 10 years that I’ve served as a county borough councillor. I’ve found the meetings where you go through the budget and look for discretionary savings incredibly difficult meetings, and they’ve been as a result—as Sian Gwenllian and Neil McEvoy have noted—of UK Government policy. The Welsh Government has protected funding for local government and the first few years were not anywhere near as bad as they could have been, as they were in England. Indeed, this year, spending on local government has been better than in England. We’ve seen the settlement—more than half of the 22 local authorities received an increase in core funding compared to 2016-17, and this is better than local government expected. And, as a councillor, I have to say it was good news.

Personally, I feel a degree of regret, though, in spite of the things I’ve said, that I will be leaving local government. I’m not going to make any judgment about Neil McEvoy or other Members of this Chamber who are also councillors, but I feel that it is very difficult to do the job of the Assembly Member and as a local councillor, and therefore I feel I have to stand down. Incidentally, I’ve been the cheapest local councillor in Wales, claiming £0 allowance and zero expenses. So, this cheap councillor now is standing down.

In Caerphilly we’ve managed to make the most of our situation, though—we’ve managed to keep our housing stock and spent £210 million on the Welsh housing quality standard. We’ve used, as far as we can, local suppliers to do that work. We’ve also invested in library services, and, in spite of those pressures, we’ve worked in areas of greatest need.

One of the things I’d say to Neil McEvoy is it is this Welsh Government, this Welsh Parliament, that has passed the Planning (Wales) Act 2015 that has introduced strategic development plans, and, whatever happens after the election, if housing need is going to be met, then parties of all persuasions need to work together to agree strategic plans if they’re going to be successful. I think the rhetoric of the campaign, whatever happens after the election, whatever parties win, must be put aside and parties must work together—work together in a way that didn’t happen, by the way, in 2013. In 2013, I put forward a motion to Caerphilly council to cut the pay. Bearing in mind the wording of Plaid Cymru’s motion today,

‘that the average salary for Chief Executives running Plaid Cymru-led Councils is nearly £22,000 less than those run by Labour Councils’,

well, I put a motion to Caerphilly council to cut the chief executive’s pay by £21,000 and the motion was successful, but every Plaid Cymru member on the council—or 14 members voted against and two abstained. It was Labour members who passed that motion.

If we look at authorities across Wales, if we look at the level of pay, the only way you can deal with senior pay in my view is to look at multipliers—what is the level of senior pay compared to the lowest paid in the organisation? If you’re going to tackle the issue of senior pay—as I’ve said before in this Chamber, if you’re going to tackle the issue of senior pay, you’ve got to consider how the chief executive is paid both in relation to other local authorities, because you’re fishing in the same pool for talent, but also compared to the lowest paid, and I’m delighted to say Caerphilly was the first local authority in Wales after the 2012 elections to introduce the living wage.

With regard to zero-hours contracts, we want to see an end to them. However, I feel that the motion today is designed for Twitter rather than designed to produce a legally defendable position that protects family-friendly working. I feel that the Welsh Government has consistently acted to deter the unfair and inappropriate use of zero-hours contracts in the public sector in Wales and has made it a priority to ensure staff are treated in a fair and equitable way, consistent with our Labour values. Whatever the positioning of Plaid Cymru in the light of the election, I will continue to believe that. Therefore, I feel that we have good Labour local authorities in Wales and I hope that we will see more Labour local authorities in Wales after this election.

It’s a pleasure to participate in this debate. I might as well say also that, when I was younger, I too was a county councillor in Swansea, and it was a pleasant experience, I have to say, over a number of years. I learnt a lot and, specifically, I learnt the importance of social services. Because, at heart, without social care and services, the health service would fail. So, I’m going to focus on that in my contribution now with regard to the importance of social services.

I’ve said many times in the Chamber that the number of older people in the population is increasing. That’s a positive sign of the success of our care services and healthcare services. In 1950, only 250 people in the UK were 100 years of age. Two years ago, there were 13,700 people in the UK 100 years and over. The figures have increased significantly. Of course, as doctors, we do have to keep people at home in their own homes now, whereas 10 or 20 years ago we would have sent those people to hospital because they were so vulnerable.

But, of course, the number of beds has decreased and, of course, we’re in the situation where we have to keep people at home now. Sometimes they live alone and are entirely dependent on those people who come around to care for them. The entire system, therefore, depends on social care. Also, people are more vulnerable very often, and they have conditions that are far more complex now than they did back in the day. People who have different tubes and wires attached to them are cared for at home as well by social care workers these days. So, there is a significant challenge facing those who do provide that care.

Now, the social care services do care for all sorts of different issues with regard to childcare and safeguarding and so on, and with regard to mental health services, but I will focus on carers, because that’s the system that we have that ensures that our health service can run as smoothly as it does. But, with regard to how we think about care, I’ve said before in this Chamber that I think, over the years, we’ve tended to downgrade that principle of caring for another person.

Back in the day, before perhaps we had a health service, we did care very well for people. Our nurses cared very well and there were quality carers caring very well. But, over the years, as medicine has become more technical, that element of care has been downgraded. We tend to forget about it; we tend to devolve care to those people who perhaps haven’t received the kind of training that we would like to see them receive, and they don’t receive the wages that they deserve, and they have to live, as we’ve already heard, on zero-hours contracts. Now, it’s part of societal attitudes towards this entire principle of caring for another person. As a society, we tend to downgrade that. Mike.

Do you regret the fact that we've moved away from local authorities directly employing staff in carrying out care, and it's gone out to the private sector?

Mi fuaswn i’n cytuno efo hynny, ond hefyd, wrth gwrs, mae ein siroedd ni hefyd yn gallu comisiynu gofal o’r elusennau ac ati ac nid oes yna byth—fel yr ydym ni wedi’i glywed eisoes yng nghyfraniad bendigedig Sian Gwenllian, nid oes yna byth digon o arian ar gael i wneud yn siŵr ein bod ni’n gallu cael y cytundebau iawn i bobl sy’n gofalu. Rydw i’n gwybod bod yna bwysau ar ofalwyr cyflogedig i gwblhau eu hymweliad, weithiau, o fewn chwarter awr—o fewn 30 munud yn arferol iawn. Wel, os ydych chi’n mynd i ddarparu gofal o’r radd flaenaf, mae o’n cymryd amser a hefyd yr un un person tymor hir i edrych ar ôl y person yna hefyd yn ei gartref. Wrth gwrs, nid ydych chi’n mynd i gael yr un person o hyd os ydych chi’n mynd i ddibynnu ar gytundebau dim oriau. Felly, i gloi, buaswn i yn pwysleisio—tra, wrth gwrs, yr ydym ni i gyd yn meddwl am etholiadau llywodraeth leol ac am lywodraeth leol yn benodol y prynhawn yma yn y ddadl yma—ond buaswn i’n pwysleisio trwy hynny i gyd, ie, mae’r llywodraeth leol yn edrych ar ôl addysg a phob math o bethau, ond, trwy hynny i gyd, mae eisiau cofio pwysigrwydd gofal cymdeithasol. Diolch yn fawr iawn i chi.

Thanks to Plaid Cymru for bringing today's debate. We, in UKIP Wales, agree with the broad thrust of the Plaid motion. Of course, local public services are a key component in the well-being of the public they serve.

Cuts in public funding are always to be regretted if they threaten well-used local services and facilities. Unfortunately, the reality of politics is such that the reasons for cuts are invariably disputed by different parties. Traditionally in Wales, we have had Labour-run councils who complain that budget cuts are always caused by Conservative Governments in Westminster. Of course, when we had a Labour Government in Westminster, they had to think of a different excuse. But that situation looks unlikely to recur, at least not for a considerable time. Since 1999, we have a third player in the blame game, namely the Assembly, and now we have Brexit as well. For the public, it's all very confusing. I think, from the public's point of view, it's better to forget who is to blame for cuts, at least once the elections are over, and to concentrate on providing the highest quality public services that we can.

Local economies can be helped by local council decisions. Procurement should favour local firms. Councils can also help with issues like parking provision and charges. The Assembly itself is also a major player here with its powers over business rates, and UKIP certainly favours policies that benefit local businesses. Traditional high streets are something we should fight to preserve. Well-run local pubs deserve whatever support councils, and the Assembly, can offer. We still await an announcement from the Assembly Government on its proposals to support pubs in Wales.

There have been some interesting issues raised in today's debate. Neil McEvoy was talking at length about the problems we've had in Cardiff. Now, I don't want to particularly focus on Cardiff itself but, when he talked about the confusing decisions regarding recycling made by the Labour-run council, allied to their decision to close down two of the four recycling sites in Cardiff, it does raise questions, but I will refrain from comment on that particular decision, except to mention that you had a local referendum on that, but the result was completely ignored. This does raise UKIP Wales's position that we need legally-binding local referendums on major planning decisions. Unfortunately, I don't think Plaid are yet in support of this measure. Perhaps you need to think about that in greater depth.

Hefin David made an interesting contribution talking about his own role on Caerphilly council. Now, his decision is to leave the council; he believes that you can't combine the job of being an Assembly Member with being a councillor. Neil McEvoy has come to a different decision, and I think, if I'm correct, we also have a Conservative member, Russell George, who, since he was elected, is still a member of Montgomery council. I think he is. So, in his case–sorry, it’s Powys County Council isn’t it—it seems to be possible to combine different roles. It’s interesting that if we turn the clock back only a few years, there were many MPs who, on election to Westminster, continued to sit on their local councils, and it was thought that the link between national Government and local government was worth preserving and that local councillors should, where possible, continue to sit on the council after they became MPs. So, it’s interesting how that viewpoint seems to have changed. I think in the Labour Government after 1945, we actually had a Home Secretary in Chuter Ede who remained a member of his local council.

Can I make an intervention?

Sure.

I wasn’t—as I commonly don’t—expressing Labour Party policy; I was expressing my personal view. And I wasn’t making a judgment about anybody else.

I wasn’t implying that you were, Hefin; that wasn’t my point. I just said that there are differences of opinion, that’s all; I was just ventilating the issue. [Interruption.] Okay, it’s been ventilated.

We need to curb excessive officer salaries. There do need to be tough statutory guidelines here, and we are also mindful of the need to address zero-hours contracts. Now, Hefin spoke on this as well, and I think one of the Ministers yesterday mentioned zero-hours contracts. I’m slightly confused now by Labour’s position, because you all seem to be saying that you’re against them, but you don’t seem to be doing anything about it. We certainly do need to look at their use in the public sector. We need to look closely at this. In general, in UKIP Wales we believe that zero-hours contracts do drive down pay and working conditions, and so we believe that action over the use of these contracts in the public sector is sorely needed. Thank you.

I had intended to speak more broadly in this debate about the role of innovation in local government, of which there are some examples from Plaid Cymru-led authorities, as set out in our motion. But I’ve been prompted to talk about a different kind of innovation—innovation in politics, which is doing what we say. You know, actually putting into action the principles that we say are at the heart of our politics. And I can honestly say I’m at a loss to understand why there is opposition from a Labour Government—a Government that at least in name is meant to be socialist—to actually banning the use of zero-hours contracts. As we’ve just heard in the contribution by the UKIP Member, a party that I’m sure most of you would believe to be to the right of you is actually to the left of you on this issue, it seems. It’s completely unconscionable. You’ve put it at the heart of your British manifesto, and we’re the only nation in the UK where you’re actually in Government—and probably any hope of being in Government for the next few years—and yet you’re not prepared to actually implement it. This is the kind of thing that gives democratic politics a bad name. You should be ashamed of yourselves. How can we restore people’s faith and trust in politics when you say one thing and you do another?

Just to ask the question, I think you should provide more detail than ‘ban zero-hours contracts’. What exactly do you mean and how would you legally defend that?

We say it quite clearly. We’ve set out amendments to a whole series of Bills. I know that the honourable Member and I myself were elected last year, but Plaid Cymru put in a whole series of amendments on six separate occasions to two different Bills. They were set out in amendments to those Bills, and you voted against. It’s not as if we’ve just done this to play politics, right? We actually tried to legislate in this place and your Government opposed it. [Interruption.] Well, I’ll tell you the pathetic arguments that you gave against it. Actually, on one of those occasions on the Regulation and Inspection of Social Care Bill, your Minister in your Government said this:

‘But, let’s be clear about the proposition that is in front of the National Assembly. This amendment seeks an outright ban—an outright ban—on the use of zero-hours contracts…. I don’t think that that is a position that we ought to support.’

That’s what you were saying then. You say a different thing now in your British Labour Party manifesto. Yes, you introduced it in January 2016 after research that showed that there are quite clear disadvantages in terms of workers’ rights. Yes, you agreed to look at limiting the use of zero-hours contracts, and you consulted up on that, and presumably, that’s what the Cabinet Secretary was referring to earlier—‘We’re expecting an announcement about limiting the use’. Well, limiting the use of something that is quite clearly wrong in every sense, both in terms of the workers, but also, as we’ve heard, in terms of service users as well—you don’t limit the use, you ban it, you get rid of it, you root it out. That’s what people expect from a party that purports to be socialist, so why isn’t the Cabinet Secretary able to get up at that dispatch box in a few minutes and say that that is what you’re going to do?

And this argument, as well, that we’ve heard: ‘You could have imperilled the Bill’. Well, we have a system for dealing with that—it’s section 111 of the Government of Wales Act 2006, which allows a Member in this place, if there is a legal challenge at the Supreme Court, to remove that section of the Bill to allow the Bill to proceed without the danger of the whole Bill being lost. It’s a completely vacuous argument. And we were told as well the idea that, ‘Oh, there’s a lack of clarity whether we can actually do anything that is related to employment, and therefore, it might raise questions about the Bill’. That’s the argument that you—. The argument that you’re using with the trade union Bill is that, actually, public sector employment is a legitimate area for this place to legislate. And that’s what we’re talking about, certainly, in terms of what we have in this motion—at least banning the use of zero-hours contracts in local authorities in Wales. Why don’t you do it and put your principles into practice?

Of course, some of us have been talking about getting rid of all exploitative contracts, not just zero-hours contracts, for some time.

I see that Plaid Cymru, in their introduction to their debate, recognise the important role played by local authorities in developing local economies in partnership with the business community; ensuring that our streets are clean and safe; delivering quality education; and delivering social service care that looks after the most vulnerable people in communities across Wales. Can I say that I agree entirely with that? But I also say: what about leisure facilities to keep people fit? What about environmental health services? What about trading standards? What about support for the arts? Do they not recognise the importance of these and other services provided by local government? I could continue for another four and a half minutes, but I’m sure all of you will be pleased to know that I won’t. But do you recognise the importance of these and other services provided by local government?

I also see that they regret that, since 2011-12, funding for local authorities in Wales has decreased by 6.5 per cent, disproportionately affecting some of the weakest and most vulnerable people in communities across Wales. Speaking as someone who is often probably just in a minority of one speaking up in favour of local government having more money in the last Assembly, I am very pleased to see other people joining in. Can I remind Members who were here in the last Assembly of the budget we had? The Conservatives asked for more money for health, meaning hospitals. The Liberal Democrats wanted more money for education. Plaid Cymru wanted more money for apprenticeships. No party asked for more money for local government. If all those requests had been accepted, then there would have been even less money for local government. I believe more of the Assembly money should be spent on local government. It would mean less spent on other services.

I also hold what is a novel view here—that health is not only about hospitals, but it is about promoting a healthy lifestyle, which local authorities do, and that local government plays a hugely important role in this. As an Assembly, we have a health committee, but not a dedicated local government committee. Our committee that covers local government covers other areas—local government services are covered by a number of different committees.

I see, also, that you note that the average salary for chief executives running Plaid Cymru-led councils is nearly £22,000 less than those run by Labour in Wales. The councils that Plaid Cymru run are small and medium sized, whilst Labour controls the larger authorities. On the Conservative amendment, we could also note that Monmouth is one of the smallest authorities in Wales. Larger authorities tend to pay higher salaries. I am disappointed that the call I keep on making—and will make again—that the setting of chief executive salaries should be based on advisory bands based on council size, or, like it used to be before the last Tory Government of 1979 to 1997—. It worked, and other chief officers were paid a percentage of the chief executive’s salary.

One of the things that also concerns me, and concerns me greatly, is that we have a situation where a number of people are now being paid between the chief officer’s salary and the principal officer’s salary. They get the POF in the purple book and then they top it up. And that again causes me concern.

To the Conservatives I ask, if funding goes directly to schools, who and how are services such as the following to be addressed: school transport; education otherwise than at school; school improvement? Again, I could give a very long list, but I won’t. The Conservatives continually talk about changes in council support from the Welsh Government. If we look at absolute amount paid per resident, you get an entirely different result. The formula takes into account things like population; number of children; number of older adults; road lengths; deprivation; rurality and sparsity. Unless the absolute amount spent on local government increases, if you change the formula, some people will win and some people will lose. You can’t have everybody winning with a change of formula. Powys and Conwy have more funding per head than Swansea and Cardiff. I would argue that the large authorities in south Wales are doing disproportionately badly—a view probably held by other people who live in an area with a large authority. I’m sure the rural people are saying something very different. But if funding is based purely on a population, it would help Swansea and Cardiff and Monmouth, but devastate Merthyr and Blaenau Gwent and a whole series of rural authorities.

Finally, local government services are important every day, not just in the run-up to council elections. I keep on saying how important they are. I was trying to remind people, just before the Ynys Môn set of elections a few years ago, when they had them a year later, that we were inundated with debates on local government, and Ynys Môn in particular, which have not been copied since. So, local government is important, how people treat it is important—and that we support local government all the time, not just in the week before the election.

Can I say at the outset that I welcome this debate at a very timely period in the electoral cycle, given that we’ve got local government elections tomorrow? I wanted to acknowledge the vital role that local authorities actually play against, as others have already acknowledged, a backdrop of huge cuts from the Westminster Government, and the breathtaking hypocrisy of Tories standing up here and lamenting cuts to local authorities. It is, as I say, quite breathtaking. As noted by Hefin David, the Welsh Labour Government has protected councils in Wales to a far greater extent than any local authority was protected by the Tories in Wales.

Before I move on to the main body of my contribution, Llywydd, I just wanted to reflect on the earlier discussion about the theme of democracy in local government. Just reflecting on what’s happening in Merthyr Tydfil, we don’t have one single UKIP candidate standing, which sounds very strange to me for a party that’s purporting to be taking over from Labour in the Valleys. We have one sultry Tory standing, and we have two Lib Dems, and the rest is a plethora of independents who stand for goodness knows what, with politics from the far left to the far right. Who knows what people are going to get if they elect independents tomorrow.

But, from my perspective, I want to use this opportunity to refer to two particular areas highlighted in the Plaid motion in relation to Merthyr Tydfil council, those being education and developing local economies. Between 2008 and 2012, Merthyr council was run with no cohesive plan by the independents, and year on year, during that period, school results placed the council either twenty-first or twenty-second out of 22 local authorities in Wales and the authority’s education service was taken into special measures. In 2012, Labour took control of that council and since 2013 schools performance in Merthyr Tydfil improved at a much faster rate than the rest of Wales. The council’s results have improved year on year, and the council is now placed tenth out of 22 and rising, and the education authority has come out of special measures. A clear example of Labour delivering in office.

It’s not just education that has seen improvement. Labour-run Merthyr Tydfil council is also leading the way on bringing new jobs to the county borough and is outstripping other Valleys authorities in supporting businesses to create new jobs for local people. Five-hundred jobs came to Merthyr following the council’s success in attracting General Dynamics to the town, and supported by a Welsh Government grant of almost £13 million under its Vibrant an Viable Places programme, Merthyr Tydfil is well on target to revitalise and promote the sustainability of the town centre and deliver housing and other strategic projects of a significant scale within the area. As a consequence, we’ve seen Merthyr Tydfil become the business growth capital of Wales in this last year.

On infrastructure, the £8.5 million Riverside development at Merthyr Vale was completed and opened during 2016. The scheme, which included a new highway, bridges and footpaths, also unlocked land for future housing developments on the former colliery site. On tourism, Bike Park Wales opened its doors in August 2013, and has since attracted over 1 million visitors to the site at Gethin woodlands in Abercanaid. Merthyr council can rightly be proud of its achievements.

But, as it’s election time, it’s probably no great surprise that a Plaid motion seeks to criticise Labour councils over chief executive salaries. Llywydd, I will not defend excessive salaries in our public services, but I would question the comparison that Plaid seek to make between Plaid-led and Labour-controlled councils when it comes to chief executives’ pay. Plaid only have control of one council, in Gwynedd, but even if you include Ceredigion and Carmarthenshire, where they are in coalition, as Mike Hedges has already pointed out, you are talking about small councils compared with most of the Labour-controlled councils, which include Cardiff, Swansea, Neath Port Talbot, Newport, Bridgend and Caerphilly. The relative size of these local authorities in respect of population served would itself generally account for higher levels of salary.

Yesterday, one of those Labour-controlled councils, Caerphilly, which also covers part of my constituency in the Rhymney valley, reached an agreement with its staff trade unions to boost the holiday pay of some of its lowest paid workers. This is in addition to paying all its staff the foundation living wage, like many Labour-controlled authorities in Wales, including Cardiff, Newport, RCT, Torfaen and, I’m delighted to say, Merthyr Tydfil. So, if Plaid want to bandy around the issue of salaries in local government in this debate, rather than making flawed comparisons between local authorities that take no account of size, perhaps they can take some time to explain why they don’t pay the foundation living wage in the authorities that they control.

In conclusion, Llywydd, I’ll be supporting the motion as amended by the Welsh Government and the last amendment from the Conservatives, and, in doing so, would emphasise and praise the work done by local authorities across Wales, against the backdrop of continuing Tory austerity.

Before I call the Cabinet Secretary, some of you may have realised that we have a technical problem, and it is such a significant problem, unfortunately, I’m going to have to suspend proceedings. The bell will ring when proceedings are about to restart. Diolch yn fawr.

I call the Assembly to order, therefore. Apologies for that break. I now call on the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government, Mark Drakeford.

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. Thank you for the chance to take part in a well-timed debate, as others have said, with people across Wales going to the polls tomorrow. This has been a very proper opportunity for parties here to put forward policies on which electorates will make their decisions. Maybe I’ll begin by agreeing with the last speaker in the debate, Dawn Bowden, as I agreed with Simon Thomas earlier this afternoon, in saying that it is one of the great advantages of political parties that there are manifestos that people can see and that informed decisions can be made. Where people belong to political parties, I think it’s right and proper that that should be known to electors under whatever flag people then choose to put themselves up for election.

The Government amendment this afternoon seeks to align the National Assembly with a proposition on which all parties here, from what I’ve heard this afternoon, can agree—the importance of quality local services to the population, served by local authorities right across Wales.

Llywydd, I first came to work in the National Assembly in the year 2000. I thought then and I continue to think now that it’s been one of the strengths of the National Assembly that it’s had people represented here who know local government, having cut their own political teeth through election to local authorities. It’s partly why I think that I’ve always said, since I became Minister with responsibility for local government, that my approach to the sector is one that’s based on its importance—its importance as a provider of key services, as a key player in creating local economies and as an essential link in the democratic chain.

The decisions that local authorities take reach deep into the lives of their citizens and throughout those lives too, from the earliest days in education to the care of older people in their own homes and communities. The range of things that local authorities do go from those very significant services from the parking, the pubs and the pay, which Gareth Bennett mentioned, to the arts, the sports and the trading standards, mentioned by Mike Hedges. Every day, hundreds of services, provided by thousands of organisations—and over a year, reaching into the lives of millions of people—are provided by local authorities here in Wales. The elections to them tomorrow are a sign of their significance.

Of course, the impact of the failed, self-defeating policies of austerity have made an impact on local government here in Wales, as Hefin David so vividly illustrated. But ever since the year 2008, a sustained effort has been made to protect those services wherever possible here in Wales. That’s why, since the year 2000, while spending on local authority services in England has seen a cash fall of 11 per cent, spending on local services in Wales has seen a cash rise of 3 per cent. Or, to put it in a different way, the National Audit Office reported recently that in the five years after 2010, the real-term spending power of local authorities in Wales has fallen by 4 per cent. In England, it has fallen by 25 per cent—six times the level of cuts that have had to have been accommodated here by local authorities in Wales.

We heard from Janet Finch-Saunders, with the Conservative manifesto for local authorities—I think a crocodile would have been ashamed to have shed the sort of tears we’ve heard from the Conservatives this afternoon. The effect on local authorities in Wales is a real result of the cuts that have been made by their party at national level, which you see their party having to impose in England and which we are determined not to see happen here in Wales.

Now, as well as the cash that local authorities have available to them, there is the question of how that cash should be spent. And the Institute for Fiscal Studies reported last month that local authority spending on social care in Wales is 20 per cent higher than it is in England, with average spend in Wales higher than in any English region.

A gaf i ddweud gair o ddiolch i Dai Lloyd am beth ddywedodd yn ei gyfraniad e y prynhawn yma, yn canolbwyntio ar bwysigrwydd gwasanaethau cymdeithasol ond yn enwedig pobl sy’n gweithio yn y maes gofal? Un o’r pethau y mae awdurdodau lleol yng Nghymru wedi llwyddo i’w wneud dros y degawd diwethaf yw dod lawr, bob blwyddyn, â nifer y bobl sy’n byw mewn cartrefi preswyl yng Nghymru. Maen nhw wedi gwneud hynny achos maen nhw’n rhoi gofal yn y gymuned i bobl fregus, pobl sy’n dibynnu ar y gofal y maen nhw’n ei gael yn y gymuned. Ac roedd Dai Lloyd yn tynnu sylw at y ffaith mai’r bobl sy’n rhoi gofal ac ansawdd y gofal sydd mor bwysig i bobl sy’n dibynnu ar y gwasanaethau yna.

The choices that local authorities make in Wales in putting that extra proportion of their spend into social care is a sign, not only that Welsh Government has made choices in funding the sector, but that choices have been made by local authorities themselves in Wales in protecting the most vulnerable.

Now, we know that if the present Government is returned in June's general election, the outlook for all our public services is bleak. It's why change is not a choice but a necessity if we are to achieve additional resilience in local government here in Wales. The Government’s proposals have been set out in the White Paper we published in January. I'm very grateful to the 164 individuals and organisations from all parts of Wales who have responded to that consultation, and for the constructive spirit in which those responses have been formulated. We will, as a result, move to greater regional working in Wales. We will have more shared services, we will have greater openness and accountability, and we will provide the local authority system in Wales with the tools it needs to respond to local needs and circumstances. Because, Llywydd, for all the partisan claims that have absolutely understandably been made here this afternoon, the real action is about to move beyond this Chamber, beyond those who are elected to this Chamber, to those thousands of candidates, from all political parties and none, who put themselves forward for election and, most importantly of all, to those hundreds of thousands of Welsh residents who tomorrow will play their part at the ballot box.

Whatever differences we may have, I think most people in this Chamber would come together to agree on the contribution that every candidate makes to our democracy, to the contribution that every elector makes when she or he casts their vote, and that it is the combined effort that is worth while, because without it, there would be no local democracy capable of making its contribution to what the motion rightly identifies as the key to the prosperity and well-being of our nation. Sian Gwenllian began, Llywydd, by saying that strong local authorities bring together strong communities and make a strong Wales. I entirely agree with that, and I think it's not a bad message for us to send to all those people who will be engaging in the practical business of democracy right across Wales tomorrow.

I call on Sian Gwenllian to reply to the debate.

Thank you very much, and thank you for an interesting debate, despite the break in the middle. Janet Finch-Saunders, at the beginning of this debate, mentioned the impact of cuts on public services, but those are the cuts imposed by the Conservatives. They are your cuts, so it makes no sense, Janet, to vote Tory. It doesn’t make any sense whatsoever for anyone who wants to safeguard our public services. The cuts are part of your very deliberate campaign to destroy public services. People are aware of that, and people have had enough of that. You also claim that you are the party of low taxation, but, in Monmouth, the average tax is the highest in Wales: £1,649 per annum. I am pleased that the Cabinet Secretary mentioned the regionalisation of local government, and it is crucial that we do keep a close eye on this and on the issue of accountability as the proposals move forward. That direct link between the constituent and his or her elected representative is crucial, and I am concerned that that may be lost in the reform that is currently in the pipeline.

Neil McEvoy spoke passionately about his vision for Cardiff. He mentioned the LDP, which will lead to the loss of a lot of greenfield sites and a sea of concrete—’absolute madness’, as he described it. The emphasis should be put on bringing empty homes back into use; I agree entirely with that.

Dai Lloyd mentioned the importance of effective social services to keep pressure from the health service, and I agree entirely with that too. Very often, social services are forgotten in the wider debate on the reform of the care system in its entirety in Wales.

Adam Price mentioned zero-hours contracts, discussing Plaid Cymru’s amendments to the social services Bill and the way that they were rejected by the Government, and the way in which Plaid Cymru’s efforts to scrap zero-hours contracts have been rejected a number of times in this place. So, I am going to focus on clause eight in our motion, which calls on the Welsh Government to scrap zero-hours contracts, in concluding this debate.

Hefin David, no, this isn’t a motion for Twitter. This is motion for real people, people who are struggling to make ends meet on zero-hours contracts. You on this side of the Chamber agree that those contracts are unfair. Zero-hours contracts lead to uncertainty. Zero-hours contracts lead to inconsistencies in terms of working hours and income for workers. It’s difficult for anyone on a zero-hours contract to control the flow of income.

Will you take an intervention?

No.

Mae hyn yn ei dro yn creu dyledion, yn achosi straen ac yn effeithio ar ansawdd bywyd y gweithwyr a’u teuluoedd. Nid yw cytundebau dim oriau yn gytundebau teg, ac mae’n hollol amlwg bod angen i ni symud tuag at sefyllfa o ddileu’r math yma o gytundebau yng Nghymru, ac mae’r grym gennych chi yn y Llywodraeth.

Yn ôl Gwasanaeth Ymchwil y Cynulliad, mae hyd at 48,000 o bobl yn dweud eu bod yn cael eu cyflogi ar gytundebau dim oriau yng Nghymru—yn dweud eu bod nhw ar gytundebau o’r math yma; mae’n siŵr fod y ffigur yn llawer iawn uwch na hynny. Yng Nghyngor Gwynedd pan roeddwn i yn gynghorydd sir, fe wnaed ymdrech gwbl fwriadol i ddileu’r cytundebau yma a bellach dim ond llond llaw o gytundebau dim oriau sydd ar ôl yn y cyngor, ac mae yna drafod yn parhau efo’r rheini sydd yn dal i fod ar y cytundebau yma. Mae’r cymal yma—cymal 8 yn ein cynnig ni—yn ‘non-binding’. Datganiad o egwyddor ydy o, felly nid oes bosibl na fedrwch chi gefnogi datganiad o egwyddor—datganiad bod y Llywodraeth yma yn mynd i symud i’r cyfeiriad yma.

Mi fyddai hefyd yn ddatganiad o ffydd mewn rhai o weithwyr mwyaf gwerthfawr ein cymdeithas, y rhai sy’n gofalu am bobl mwyaf bregus ein cymdeithas ni heddiw. Dyma garfan o weithwyr sydd angen ein cefnogaeth lwyraf. Maen nhw angen parch. Maen nhw angen eu trin efo urddas. Mi fyddai cefnogi’r egwyddor o gontractau dim oriau mewn ffordd ‘non-binding’, fel rwy’n egluro, yn ein cychwyn ni ar y daith o wella statws gweithwyr yn y sector gofal. Mae’n hen bryd i hynny ddigwydd, ac mae modd i chi gychwyn ar hynny heddiw pe baech yn dymuno gwneud hynny.

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

The next item is the United Kingdom Independence Party debate, and I call on David Rowlands to move the motion. David Rowlands.

Diolch, Llywydd. The Welsh Government has an outwardly laudable aim of reducing Wales’s carbon footprint by 80 per cent by the year 2050. UKIP broadly agrees with this objective; however, the strategies it employs to achieve these aims must be called into question. At the heart of this carbon-free initiative is the use of so-called clean electricity generation. To a very large extent, it seems this is to be achieved through the use of wind turbines and solar panels.

Could I—?

Of course.

Thank you. I thank David for giving way so very early in the debate, but I just wanted to clarify, at the outset of this debate, whether it is still UKIP’s national position to repeal the Climate Change Act 2008 entirely and to ditch decarbonisation targets. Because that’s not in the spirit of what you just said, David.

Absolutely. It’s not, but we don’t come under the whip as do all other parties, as you know, and we can have our own policies within the Welsh Government if that’s what we feel we have to do—

Oh my goodness.

[Continues.]—as indeed do you on many other aspects when you disagree with your Government in—. No, I’m sorry, Huw; I have to carry on with this. I’m here to debate how we go about reducing carbon.

It is envisaged that this form of power generation will replace all forms of fossil fuel generation over the coming years. However, herein lies the fundamental flaw in the Welsh Government’s plan, because in order to achieve its objectives, this Government has to acknowledge that there will need to be a huge proliferation of windfarms and solar installations across the whole of the Welsh countryside. Large areas of stunningly beautiful Welsh landscape must be sacrificed to achieve this largely political objective, because we have to remember that Wales produces just 0.04 per cent of the total global carbon dioxide output.

It is true that in order to mitigate against the potential negative impact of these installations on the countryside, the Welsh Government has instigated a set of guidelines for local government planning departments. But one phrase in these guidelines seems paramount if these guidelines are to be effective. It says that the planning authority should take note as to whether any development contributes to a significant cumulative impact on the surrounding environment. The video you’re about to see is, to a large extent, an aerial view of the developments around the previously rural village of Manmoel—a settlement that comes under the authority of Caerphilly County Borough Council. We’re running the video, please.

I believe the video you’ve just seen begs the question: what exactly does constitute significant cumulative impact if this array of installations does not? I fear it shows that planning laws offer no protection to residents or communities such as Manmoel, and that any and every community in Wales is in danger of being enveloped by such projects. Further to this, there are many other aspects to this development that cast doubt on whether existing planning regulations are adequate in protecting not just Manmoel, but any similar community.

Over the Christmas period this year, and much to the horror of the local community, 200 trees—80 of which were mature oak and beech, each taking around about 50 to 100 years to reach full maturity—were illegally cut down. This, it would seem, to facilitate the installation of the solar array and aid its sun capture. Caerphilly council’s response to this outrageous act was not to attempt to identify and prosecute the perpetrators, but to consult with a development company where it was agreed the trees would be replaced by newly planted saplings. No doubt it is a great comfort to the residents of Manmoel and the surrounding area that they will only have to wait upwards of 100 years to have their environment restored.

Will the Member give way?

Of course.

I thank the Member for giving way. As a resident of the local community myself, I was outraged at the illegal felling that has taken place and is being investigated. But doesn’t he believe that the fact that it is illegal demonstrates that it isn’t the law that is the problem; it’s what we do once the law is broken that’s the problem, and just replacing 150 to 200-year-old beech trees and oak trees with saplings is unacceptable? There should be consequences for developers who are allegedly doing illegal acts like this.

I fully agree with Steffan on that matter, absolutely.

It would seem that it’s not only environmental regulations that offer no protection to such developments; those surrounding wildlife and archaeological impacts, as well as outdoor leisure facilities, do not either. We understand that only a cursory one-day-long study on the impact on the wildlife habitat of the area was carried out and, surprise, surprise, it concluded that there would be no significant impact on local wildlife. This, despite the local area being a breeding site for such endangered species as the skylark. The erection of a wind turbine close to a site that an archaeological expert called ‘of significant interest’ again shows there is little protection when these projects are considered. We can add to this environmental disaster the fact that the wind turbines and the solar arrays encroach within yards of the local amenity and beauty spot of Pen-y-fan pond. Little wonder then that the inhabitants of Manmoel and nearby Oakdale believe there is an ‘anything goes’ attitude to these developments.

If an environment can be despoiled by the illegal felling of trees, if wildlife habitat can be ignored, if sites of archaeological interest can be dismissed, and local outdoor amenities have no significance, it indicates a wild-west attitude to planning regulation where projects of this scale are being considered. What price to the people of Wales for this elimination of our carbon footprint, which, again, let us remind ourselves, amounts to just 0.04 per cent of the global total?

Thank you very much. I have selected the seven amendments to the motion. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendments 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 will be deselected. I call on Jane Hutt to move formally amendment 1 tabled in her name.

Formally.

Thank you. I now call on Simon Thomas to move amendments 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth.

I do so, Deputy Presiding Officer. And, though I’m always delighted to debate energy in the Assembly, as I believe that one of the most important things we can do as a nation is to chart our energy and low-carbon future, I have to say that I do not believe a word of what UKIP says on energy. I don’t believe they’re working towards a low-carbon or a zero-carbon future at all. The only UKIP Member who said anything remotely approaching a scientific approach to this has left the group and joined the sort of midway between the Conservatives and the not Conservatives, and they are left with people who simply don’t believe in science. David Rowlands, who’s just given us a passionate defence of his local environment, but only talks—when he last talked about energy, referred to a 1920s ‘The New York Times’ story about the weather in New York as a way of justifying what’s happening with climate change. So, let’s put it on the record: climate change is happening, it’s affecting our environment, it’s affecting scarce species, it will destroy the Welsh environment if we don’t do something about it, and the task is to do something about it in a way that’s responsible for ourselves as a nation, responsible globally—the fact that we produce a small amount of carbon dioxide emissions does not somehow excuse us from not playing a full global role as a modern technological nation, which, by the way, if we do it right, can also be at the forefront of creating jobs from this.

I’m not going to defend anything that cuts down mature beech trees illegally, and, as Steffan Lewis has already pointed out, that is already an illegal act and there should be consequences to that. But there’s a real conflict here—

I’ll just finish this point, if I may, and I will give way.

There’s a real conflict here. We’ve heard all day from UKIP today, because we’ve been debating local authorities, that there must be local referenda, local people must decide, and then they bring a motion to the Assembly that says you can’t build any solar panels whatsoever if it cuts down a mature tree. Well, that doesn’t actually allow local decision-making, and our amendments say very clearly we have in Wales a set of Acts—the well-being of future generations Act, which I know Steffan Lewis is a great fan of, but, more importantly, the environment Act—that give the context in which local decisions and local communities can come to a conclusion at a national level and implement them at a local level. Now, I think the proposer of the motion is seeking to intervene.

Yes, fine. First of all, obviously, the whole thrust of this debate is that there’s overdevelopment of a particular area. I noticed something you say that you’re so given to in Plaid that you want to look after the environment, et cetera, but I note you want to take point 3, subsection a), which is that we should not be denuding our forests in order to build these—you want to take that out.

We take that out because we’re putting something much better in. That’s what an amendment is. The thing that we’re putting that’s much better in is the reference to the well-being of future generations Act and the environment Act, because that’s the legal concept, that we now approach our community development and our whole-nation development. There’s no point making orders around individual trees and complaining about that if you’re not looking at the big picture—if I may put it, you can’t see the wood for the trees.

David Rowlands, in the past, has advocated; I’ve heard him advocate—he didn’t today, I’m afraid to say, but he’s advocated tidal lagoons. I’m a very strong supporter of moving ahead with the tidal lagoon in Swansea bay. I think that should be a feature of this general election in Wales, and I think any party that doesn’t commit to moving ahead with that tidal lagoon does not deserve the vote of people in Wales. But let’s think about what the tidal lagoon in Swansea bay would be. It would be a pathfinder; that’s what the Hendry report says very clearly. It would then roll out to another tidal lagoon in Cardiff and, possibly, a third in the Severn estuary. That is cumulative development and needs to be handled with great care, of course it does. But why is it that windfarms are always singled out as being bad cumulative developments, a few solar panels are always bad as cumulative developments, and yet we can look at two new nuclear power stations, and, somehow, one at each end of Wales isn’t a cumulative development? I think there’s a little bit of a reality check that needs to happen here.

Plaid Cymru’s very clear, and our amendments set out very clearly, that we have a path that we can take that takes us towards, first of all, self-sufficiency in electricity generated through renewables by 2035, and, secondly, towards a zero-carbon future. I don’t think the Government’s amendments to this debate are ambitious enough. I’ll support them in as far as they go, but I want to see us go further, and that means we have to have a very clear plan that allows us to cut emissions by 40 per cent by 2020 and the 80 per cent cut that the Government refers to by 2050. In delivering that, we also have to do it with social justice at heart, and that, for Plaid Cymru, also means establishing our own energy company in Wales that enables us to create the opportunity for distributed, individual grid developments, more attention to fuel poverty, and seeing more benefit for the people of Caerphilly or wherever they have an energy development on their doorstep—that that brings direct benefits to that community. The history in Wales is this: we developed the coal mines and we developed our industry in a way that completely trashed our communities. In meeting the challenge of climate change, we must ensure we don’t repeat the mistakes of the past, but we must, at the same time, also ensure that the past energy of Wales does not hold back our energy development solution.

I’m very pleased to speak in this debate, and welcome the debate, as well, I have to say, and I’m going to try and respond to some very particular parts of the motion in front of us, but, before I start, I think I heard—. And I do understand that this is a debate on a UKIP motion, and I assume, as a UKIP motion, it represents UKIP policy. If I am unclear, I’m happy to take an intervention, but I am now assuming that UKIP Wales’s policy is to support decarbonisation. And I see Neil shaking his head vigorously. If that is the case, then what on earth is this motion about? Because it says it

‘Notes that there is an aim of achieving a zero-carbon economy in Wales.’

Ah, ‘notes’. Not ‘welcomes’, not ‘supports’, not ‘urges’; it ‘notes’. Contrary to the spirit of what we heard in David’s opening remarks—which I would welcome if that was what the UKIP policy seemed to suggest—it ‘notes’. It has clearly been worked through very carefully there. It doesn’t welcome but, in fact, the party policy is still that it opposes decarbonisation. And I’m looking for the nodding head from the party leader. Okay, and it seeks the repeal of the Climate Change Act 2008 introduced by Labour. Okay, so I think I’m clear on that now.

It says in here,

‘communities should have the final say over whether to approve solar farms’

They definitely should have a say, without a doubt, and they should have that say within the town and country planning process. They should have that say within the context of the environment Act and also the future generations and well-being Act as well. They should have a say, and, in fact, I’d like to see them have more of a say, not least in community ownership, as well, of renewables projects, whether they are wind or whether they are solar, and I think there is more to be done on that.

It mentions in the motion that mature woodland should not be cut down to build solar farms. I agree. Ideally that should be avoided, and particularly not just mature, but veteran woodland—very, very old woodland—should be avoided, and illegal felling, of course, should carry consequences. But this has to be within the context of decision making locally as well, and those local communities have to have their say within it. But I notice it isn’t just about—. Even though No. 1 says it

‘Directs the Welsh Government to review its energy generation policies’,

it’s not just about energy generation. In fact, it talks about fuel-efficient boilers, installation of triple glazing, and all I would say is: those are worthy things to look at, but they’re by far short of anything like the right shopping list for what should be done within energy efficiency measures within retrofitting. And what we do need to do is avoid that style of picking ones that actually was one of the great downfalls of the Green Deal, the big UK flagship programme of the Green Deal, where, in effect, what we did have was salesmen going into houses and saying, ‘I’ll do this for you; I’ll do that for you’, not what’s right for the property and actually working through it as to what would give the greatest gain for the least output. So, there are some good ideas, but it’s not extensive enough.

Now, in the amendment brought forward, amendment No. 1, by my friend, the Assembly Member for the Vale of Glamorgan, it notes the Welsh Government’s energy policy strategy, ‘Energy Wales’, which David would like to see, I suspect, reviewed. I think it will be reviewed, because it’s been there for a few years now. It will be reviewed, and it will be reviewed, I suspect, in line with the smarter energy Wales policy brought forward by the predecessor committee of the Climate Change, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee. And so it should be, because, within that, it actually talked about localisation of energy generation. It talked about more community involvement and ownership of energy generation. So, at a point, it will be reviewed, but it will not be reviewed in order to walk away from decarbonisation targets or to walk away from renewables. And some of the renewables that are opposed by UKIP are, of course, the most cost-effective renewables as well. And it notes the target that we have of greenhouse gas emissions in Wales—a reduction by at least 80 per cent by 2050—and we know we have to do more. The outcome of the Paris agreement is that that is where we are now; we actually have to go further and we have to ratchet it up every single year, as we go forward.

So, contrary to what I understand is the UKIP position, we need to do more, go faster, and do it with urgency. As the climate change committee has said, there is a now a desperate urgency to actually go further. That does means that we need to turbo-charge energy efficiency, retrofitting, and I’ve argued before that it should be as part of national infrastructure, and I think the Government is listening to that here in Wales. We do need to ramp up energy efficiency standards in new homes and so much more as well. There is a lot more that we can do. So, I welcome this debate today, but the motion as it’s structured is only a partial motion. I will be supporting the Welsh Government’s amendment, while, at the same time, urging them to be even more ambitious. We are the party that delivered the Climate Change Act 2008. We here in Wales can do even more.

I’m pleased to shed a little light on things that have been said already in this debate today. I didn’t want this debate to be turned into an argument about global warming in itself. It was supposed to be about how you respond to that, regardless of what you believe is happening in the wider world. But I will say this in response to something that Simon Thomas said earlier on: if we just look at the facts that we know, as opposed to projections, which are speculative, the temperature rose by 0.5 degrees between 1975 and 1998. There’s been virtually no change in global temperatures since 1998. And yet the change between 1975 and 1998 was less than occurred between 1910 and 1940, before theories of global warming had ever been thought about, and in the years when carbon emissions were far greater than they are today. So, the argument is far from settled as to whether the scientific base of these arguments—

Will the Member give way?

Well, I would rather not, because I want to develop this argument on another point, and there will be plenty of other opportunities, I’m sure, for us to spar on this point. But, regardless of what one believes is happening in climate change, our argument is that the costs imposed by the Climate Change Act are disproportionately great for this country to bear in the context of what’s happening in the rest of the world. Now, our policy on global warming was written by Mark Reckless. He wrote our manifesto, on which we all stood last May. So, I don’t know whether we’re going to have a Damascene conversion revealed to us this afternoon, but we’ll wait and see. But the whole point is—[Interruption.] Well, the honourable Member can make his speech in due course. Because we only have four minutes, I just want to make—[Interruption.] I want to make—[Inaudible.]—simple point that this country, and I mean Wales in particular, is paying a disproportionate price for the policies that are being imposed on us.

Wales actually produces not 0.5 per cent of global emissions, but 0.05 per cent of global emissions of carbon dioxide. The United Kingdom, altogether, produces about 1.16 per cent. China produces 30 per cent; the United States 15 per cent; India 7 per cent. Far from what Huw Irranca-Davies was saying about world agreements to reduce carbon emissions, China and India propose massive increases in their output of carbon dioxide over the next 30 years. China is going to double the amount of carbon dioxide that is emitted, and India is going to treble what they currently emit, because their economies are going to grow, and, under the Paris climate accord, there is a specific let-out clause for them to permit that. So, even though this is legally binding, what is legally binding permits them actually to increase their global emissions by many, many times what we would save if we closed down the entire British economy. [Interruption.] I just want to make one quotation, and then I will give way to Rhianon Passmore. Article 4.7 of the Paris accord says:

‘The extent to which developing country parties will effectively implement their commitments under the Convention will…take fully into account that economic and social development and poverty eradication are the first and overriding priorities of the developing country parties’

and quite rightly too. Of course, these countries, very often desperately poor, if they are to develop, are inevitably going to increase emissions of carbon dioxide. As the world population expands, that is bound to produce this effect. I give way to the Member.

Thank you very much. Just a small intervention, I think: in regard to the apparent conflict and confusion that there is on your policy around decarbonisation, can you clarify if UKIP is in favour of fracking and if that is your party policy in Wales?

I personally have no objection to fracking in principle. It is actually a low-carbon way of producing power. But, of course, there are fears in local communities about the disruption caused, and those must be taken fully into account, in the same way as we are saying in this motion about the objections of people in communities like Manmoel—an area that I know, because, in my very early years, my grandparents lived nearby and I lived with them. These vast arrays of solar panels—we see them all around the country as we travel around on motorways—they are springing up as the most profitable crop that farmers can grow.

We had a debate from Plaid Cymru not long ago about pylons and power lines being buried underground, and I put the point there that is there not a contradiction between their policy on pylons and power lines, which we fully support in UKIP on the one hand—and yet they are not worried about desecrating the hills of mid Wales and elsewhere with great forests of windmills? So, what I’m suggesting here is that, for almost no diminution in global emissions of carbon dioxide, we’re being asked to pay a vast price. Even in the climate change Act cost assessment in 2008, it was stated to be £720 billion—that’s six years’ expenditure on the national health service. And so, to expect an 80 per cent reduction in carbon emissions by 2050 is going to impose a massive cost on particularly the poor and the disadvantaged in countries like Wales—and we are one of the poorest parts of Western Europe. So, it's on that basis alone that we say this policy is not in the interests of the Welsh people.

I think, like many Members in the Assembly today, I’ve found UKIP’s position here a rather strange one. It is a sort of mix of damning with faint praise or distorting the picture rather dramatically. They can’t quite agree as to whether the Welsh contribution to emissions is 0.04 per cent or 0.005 per cent. But, of course, the real issue is that, in terms of what our emissions are, they are higher than the UK average because of our steel industry. They are higher than the European average, and we have to do our bit here as part of a co-ordinated international response, which of course we signed up to. We do our bit, expecting our partners around the world to do their bit. But, obviously, this is not the approach that UKIP takes. And I have to say that the amount of carbon that’s gone into the atmosphere since the second world war and the age of oil and, it has to be said, through globalisation spreading economic prosperity, is far vaster than in the period between 1910 and 1940. So, you know, I think we do need to root ourselves in some fairly solid facts.

But, you know, there's a whole issue here—which is important—about the visual effect on our environment of any new development. But I have to say, you know, the age of heavy industry in terms of the disfigurement that created is out-of-mind greater than what we now have with renewable sources of energy. That doesn't mean to say we should be casual about where they are deployed and that we should not take into account their impact on the environment.

David, will give way on that? Thank you for giving way. I note as well—and I’m looking towards Neil as well for clarification on this, perhaps visually, as he nods or shakes his head—but it is my understanding as well that it is still UKIP’s national UK policy to support coal as part of the solution going forward. And I’m really interested, in the opposition that there is to wind and to solar, as to which pits in my constituency will be reopened. Coegnant pit or Wyndham colliery in the middle of Maesteg? Which ones? Or, which opencasts are going to be opened or extended in my constituency? Because if coal is part of the solution, that's what’s going to happen.

I do agree with the point that the Member makes in terms of the likely impact on the environment of a return to coal being really massive.

It is important that we have a general consensus in this Assembly—which I’m pleased to say the Welsh Government has put into effect in terms of public policy—of developing a low carbon economy. This is the right thing to do, and we don’t want a mixed message.

And, you know, Wales was probably the greatest energy economy of the nineteenth century. We still in many ways are paying the price of that, because of the very narrow range of our economic base. But we now have the opportunity to be a world leader in terms of its replacement with renewable technologies that take us away from the massive infrastructure and centralisation of carbon-based energy forms to offering empowerment to local communities when they’re properly involved. That’s the message that we should be sending out—that it is a route to localism and empowerment in terms of developing local economies.

I have to say that there are some things that are hinted at, at least, in UKIP’s flawed motion that we agree with. We do believe in localism and the right, in most cases, for local authorities to make decisions that have an impact on their local communities and don’t overspill into obviously national matters. Then I do think it’s the local authority that should lead, and here I have to say that the Welsh Government has moved in the opposite direction to that that we now see in England in terms of the ability of local authorities here to dispose of energy applications. In England they have much more scope to deal with schemes up to 50 MW whereas here it is only up to 10 MW, and that is not a good development in our view.

I also have to say we need to define what mature woodland is. I don’t want to get too pedantic, but the current wording would capture, in my view, commercial woodland. A mature pine forest that is farmed—under the current wording, that would be deemed not permissible. However, there is an underlying point, which is something I do want to emphasise, and that is that ancient woodlands in particular should not be removed, and that, I think, is very important, really, for future generations.

There are a couple of other things. Simply praising the use of triple glazing in quite such a sweeping way—there are some that have urged caution in this area, though it is useful in many cases. The Energy Saving Trust does not take the sort of view that UKIP is proposing this afternoon.

But I do think it’s important for us to see the opportunities for Wales here. If I can end on a point of agreement with UKIP, the involvement of local communities is important, but we want that to be a full and proper and empowered involvement, and chasing after some particular stories is perhaps not the way to proceed.

I do rise in this debate to speak on one particular matter, but an important one that has been referenced by others. The UKIP motion states, and I quote, that

‘mature woodland should not be cut down to build solar farms’

and I for one am very pleased that this time they have discovered an environmental mandate and an eco-soul. I welcome that.

But, Llywydd, it is self-evident, as UKIP knows, that our mature and protected woodland should not be cut down to build solar farms. This would be a clear breach of regulation protections, and it is absolutely appalling that, in my constituency, 200 very mature trees were illegally felled near Blackwood at Pen-y-fan pond. This illegal action has rightly outraged our communities and environmentalists, and a petition of over 1,000 has already been collated. I urge those who do care to sign that. Indeed, Jim Hepburn, the national regulatory woodland manager at Natural Resources Wales stated in the strongest possible terms, and I quote:

‘this is a devastating case which will have a terrible impact on the local environment and no doubt be very upsetting for local people’.

I’ve both met with the local authority and with Mr Hepburn at the National Assembly, and I’ve also been on site to view for myself the dreadful devastation wrought by the illegal felling of these trees in breach of all permissions and regulation. It is an illegal action. Natural Resources Wales are currently investigating this illegal tree felling where over 200 very mature hedgerow beech trees have been illegally cut down. It is a crime, so I call for the strongest possible actions to be taken to prosecute.

However, it is equally important that Natural Resources Wales are allowed to fully investigate and then present their findings with their recommendations for appropriate courses of actions to follow. All serious parties know that actions of this kind witnessed at Pen-y-fan pond require a licence, but Natural Resources Wales say that none has been given. Natural Resources Wales has also made it explicitly clear that it would take, and I quote,

‘the necessary action against those responsible’.

So, sadly I predict that it must be election time; rather than wait for Natural Resources Wales to report, David Rowlands has taken to grandstanding and political stunts, something that his party is actually very good at. David Rowlands has arranged for a drone, as we have just seen, to record this aerial view way after the event—a drone—despite full investigation and recording of such a breach.

So, maybe it would have been wiser to have sent this drone to locate the UKIP local election candidates. Out of 1,254 county council seats tomorrow, UKIP are fielding candidates to contest a mere 80 of them. On the BBC Wales website on 5 April, David Rowlands was quoted as explaining this by saying UKIP was planning to appoint a regional organiser but added that changes were still up in the air and that’s why they weren’t as well organised as they might have been for the council elections. ‘Up in the air’ and ‘disorganised’ are apt words to describe UKIP.

Let nobody be in any doubt that those responsible for this highly illegal felling will be identified and action will be taken by the appropriate authorities. On the Welsh Government’s woodland estate, no mature woodland has been cleared for solar farm development, because this is illegal felling. It now needs appropriate agencies to do their job on Islwyn’s Pen-y-fan pond. We await that report and the findings of the Natural Resources Wales report.

The directly elected constituency Assembly Member is myself and I have made explicit my desire to see those responsible named, shamed and compensatory action sought. So, yes, I am grounded and resolute in the prosecution of these events. It is a very serious eco crime and I look forward to working usefully to pursue a constructive way forward.

Thank you very much. I now call on the leader of the house, Jane Hutt, to reply.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I want to thank Members for their contributions in today’s debate. Last December, the Cabinet Secretary for Environment and Rural Affairs gave a statement setting out her priorities for the future of energy in Wales. She explained how this Government was committed to the ambitions set out in our energy policy document, ‘Energy Wales’. She also outlined her three priorities for this Assembly term: to increase the efficiency of energy use in Wales, to reduce our reliance on energy generated from fossil fuels, and to actively manage the transition to a low-carbon economy.

These priorities have not changed. Energy efficiency is key to our approach to decarbonisation and will feature strongly in our plan to deliver our carbon targets. The transition to a low-carbon economy brings with it opportunities around clean growth, quality jobs and global market advantages. It also has wider benefits for enhanced places to live and work, with clean air and water and improved health outcomes.

The Environment (Wales) Act 2016 puts in place legislation to enable Wales’s resources to be managed in a more proactive, sustainable and joined-up way. It recognises the vital role natural resources and their benefits provide to Wales’s well-being and prosperity. It places a duty on Welsh Ministers to ensure our net emissions are at least 80 per cent lower by 2050 than the baseline set in legislation. The Act sets the statutory framework for achieving this long-term goal through interim targets and carbon budgets between now and 2050. These interim targets and budgets will allow us to focus action, review progress and ensure we’re on track to meet our objectives.

In response to a Plaid Cymru debate last December, the Cabinet Secretary for Environment and Rural Affairs explained how our aim for at least an 80 per cent target reduction by 2050 is in line with wider UK and EU obligations. She also explained how Wales, along with the UK, is part of a leading group of countries taking legislative action to tackle climate change.

In practical terms, the Welsh Government is playing its part. The National Procurement Service is buying 100 per cent of renewable energy for its public sector partners, with approximately 50 per cent coming from Welsh sources, and has a goal to increase this to 100 per cent.

In terms of the support we provide, we’ll be continuing to develop our skills base here in Wales through practical and financial support. We’ve supported energy efficiency projects through our environmental protection scheme, which has helped carbon intensive businesses reduce their energy consumption patterns. One of those businesses is Celsa Manufacturing UK, the UK’s largest manufacturer of steel reinforcement products.

We need a mix of different technologies and sizes, from community scale to major projects. We have opportunities to host significant projects, as Simon Thomas referred to, such as the proposed Swansea bay tidal lagoon. We should seek to use Wales’s natural resources to decarbonise our electricity supply at lowest cost, whilst also stimulating significant investment in Welsh businesses and communities. Onshore wind and solar photovoltaics are already the lowest cost large-scale form of renewable energy, and are on course to be commercially viable without subsidy within just a few years. By investing in these technologies, we can limit the impact on energy bills from new generation. In fact, almost 70 per cent of Wales’s renewable energy comes from wind, and over 10 per cent from solar photovoltaics. We recently awarded Monmouthshire County Council £4.5 million funding through our green growth fund for the Oak Grove solar farm in Crick. This project could generate enough electricity to power around 1,400 homes, save over 2,000 tonnes per year of carbon dioxide and generate income of over £0.5 million for the local authority.

The UK Government’s feed-in tariff provides a real incentive for individuals, communities and businesses to benefit from renewable energy sources. However, the reduction in tariffs does mean that new projects now only stack up on the very best sites. We are therefore looking at how we can use our public sector buying power to de-risk investment and stimulate new projects. We’re supporting the development of three large onshore windfarms on the Welsh Government estate at Pen y Cymoedd, Brechfa Forest West and Clocaenog forest, and one of the key objectives of these developments is that there will be no net loss of woodland as a result of development, which is achieved by compensating planning.

As Simon Thomas and Huw Irranca-Davies have stated today in this debate, our planning regimes for these projects provide opportunities to protect both our unique landscape here in Wales, as well as promote opportunities for renewable energy generation. The cost of clearance is likely to mean that mature woodland would not be economic for solar photovoltaics. In fact, as Rhianon Passmore has said today, no mature woodland has been cleared for solar farm development, certainly in terms of the Welsh Government woodland estate, and the independent planning process would determine such a scenario. In terms of the Planning (Wales) Act 2015 and the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015, this is acknowledged and we support amendment 5. It does set the framework for the statutory planning consultation process, which allows members of the public the opportunity to present their views on any proposed renewable energy project.

In terms of energy usage in our homes and other properties, we’re strengthening our building regulations through our proposed part L review this year, as well as our energy efficiency policies. We’re already implementing a large-scale retrofitting programme of residential homes through our Warm Homes, Arbed and Nest programmes.

In her energy statement, the Cabinet Secretary for Environment and Rural Affairs set out our commitment to encouraging the deployment of low-carbon technologies to help in our transition to a low-carbon economy.

As far as amendments are concerned, we will be accepting amendments 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7, but are unable to accept amendment 2, because we are engaging with stakeholders over the summer to inform the process of developing targets to meet these important objectives and, clearly, engaging with Members on those developments.

But the final point that Neil Hamilton made—and perhaps he’ll expand on it, or David Rowlands in response to this debate—about the scientific evidence as regards climate change. Let’s make this very clear: climate change is happening and greenhouse gas emissions from man are extremely likely to be the dominant cause. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is the leading international body for the assessment of climate change, and this is one of the most peer-reviewed processes in science. Human influence on the climate system is clear, and recent anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gasses are the highest in history, and I’m glad that we’ve had the opportunity to make that clear as well. [Interruption.] Yes, we can listen from the sidelines to him more in a minute, I’m sure, but let’s also recognise, as David Melding said, the importance of international action. Wales and other state and regional Governments have made a commitment to ambitious mitigation in the memorandum of understanding on subnational global climate leadership, which covers 33 countries and six continents, and collectively represents more than $27.5 trillion in gross domestic product, equivalent to 37 per cent of the global economy. We are proud in Wales that we’re actively working with international partners through networks like the Climate Group to raise the profile of the important role we can play and that can be played by state and regional Governments that are taking collective action around climate change, and I’m glad that, once again, we can outline our priorities, increase the efficiency of energy use in Wales, reduce our reliance on energy generated from fossil fuels and actively manage the transition to a low-carbon economy.

Thank you very much. I call on David Rowlands to reply to the debate.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. When I opened this debate, I said the Welsh Government’s aim for an 80 per cent carbon footprint reduction was a laudable objective. But I believe there are far better ways of achieving this objective. In a previous debate, Huw Irranca-Davies talked of cutting energy use as part of the strategy to reduce our carbon footprint. I believe this is a much more sustainable and cost-effective way to achieve the Government’s goal.

If every house in Wales were fitted with a modern, highly efficient gas boiler, and if triple glazing were installed in every house and instead of a huge arrays of solar panels blighting our countryside, they were placed on every dwelling, the effect on our energy consumption would be dramatic. All this should be funded by Government for every householder, not just those who qualify under the benefit schemes.

The public sector could play a huge part in this reduction by installing solar panels on every public building, estimated, if we include schools, to be in their thousands. The far more efficient micro-hydro schemes should be encouraged. Every Welsh river and many of their contributories are capable of sustaining these installations with little or no damage to the environment. We should take inspiration from the past where, prior to the advent of electricity, water mills powered most of the industrial revolution. I’m sad to hear, earlier in another debate, that these developments are going to be subject to a huge hike in their costs.

I want to return to Manmoel to end my contribution to this debate. The efficacy of the entire development at Manmoel is seriously put into question when we have evidence that a planning application has been submitted to Caerphilly council for the installation of 32 diesel generators to act as back-up to the wind turbines when they fail to produce the required amount of electricity to supply the grid, or, if you prefer, as they described in their application, for the provision of a flexible generation facility to provide energy balancing services via the capacity market for the National Grid. Each generator measures 15 m by 2.5 m and stands 6 m high. These are no small diesel units. These are significant diesel engines. It is estimated that if they run for just 200 hours, as estimated, they will consume 1 million litres of diesel each and every year they are in operation. The irony of the use of these diesel generators is that they are less than a mile from the acknowledged worst polluted town outside London—that of Crumlin. I urge the Welsh Government to radically change its policy, not to climate change objectives, but the strategies it employs to achieve them.

I want to just take up the points made by Rhianon Passmore as to whether I am bandstanding here this afternoon. Well, the truth of the matter is that that is not what I’m doing—[Interruption.] That is not what I’m doing. The people of Manmoel approached me because they could get no other local representative to take any note of what they were saying. So, that’s exactly why I’m here today.

Simon Thomas seems to have missed the whole ethos of this debate—that there is no protection against the size or locality of such developments. And Huw Irranca’s point about the local community being able to make some difference to this is obviously and patently not the case with regard to Manmoel. David Melding said something about a return to the disfigurement of the countryside. Well, that’s exactly what I’m saying we should not do in this debate. So, again, I urge the Welsh Government to radically change its policy, not to climate change objectives, but the strategy it employs to achieve them.

Thank you very much. The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? [Objection]. Therefore, we’ll defer this voting until voting time.

Unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, I intend to turn to the vote. No. Okay, thank you.

We’ll vote first on the Plaid Cymru debate on local authorities, and I’ll call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. If the proposal is not agreed, we will vote on the amendments tabled to the motion. Open the vote. [Interruption.] Is it all right? It’s right. Close the vote. For the motion 12, no abstentions, against the motion 35. Therefore, the motion is not agreed, and we proceed to amendment 1.

If amendment 1 is agreed, amendments 2, 3, 4 and 5 will be deselected. I call for a vote on amendment 1 tabled in the name of Jane Hutt. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the amendment 26, no abstentions, 21 against the amendment. Therefore, amendment 1 is agreed.

We’ll now move to vote on the motion as amended.

Open the vote. Close the vote. For the amended motion 41, no abstentions, 6 against. Therefore, the amended motion is passed.

We now move to vote on the UKIP debate on energy and environment policy. I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of David Rowlands. If the proposal is not agreed, we’ll vote on the amendments tabled to the motion. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion five, eight abstentions, 34 against. Therefore, the motion is not agreed.

We’ll now proceed to vote on amendment 1. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendments 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 will be deselected. I call for a vote on amendment 1 tabled in the name of Jane Hutt. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the amendment 27, no abstentions, 20 against. Therefore, amendment 1 is agreed.

We now move to vote on the motion as amended.

Open the vote. Close the vote. For the amended motion 34, eight abstentions, five against. Therefore, the amended motion is agreed.

Thank you. Can I ask Members if they’re leaving the Chamber to do so quietly and quickly, please?

We now move to the short debate, and I call on Hannah Blythyn to speak to the topic she has chosen. Hannah Blythyn.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I welcome the opportunity to have this short debate today: School of Politics—Empowering the Next Generation of Active Citizens in Wales. It’s perhaps a shame that the debate has actually fallen on today’s debate, on the eve of poll of the local elections, but given today’s short debate is focusing on enabling more active participation in politics, then I think we’ll have to suck that up and let people go off and campaign.

Making sure that younger people in particular have the knowledge and confidence to feel able to actively participate in democratic politics in Wales is something that I am personally and politically passionate about. I’d like to see a greater number of the next generation in a position not only to question and better hold people like me to account, but also feel that political life could be something for them, too. Since being elected for the first time almost one year ago now, going into schools and colleges to speak to students is something that I have been heavily committed to, and also making sure that I meet with every school group from my constituency that visits the Senedd through the Assembly’s excellent outreach and education service—although, I must confess to missing one group because it was on a constituency Friday, and the outreach service were really accommodating and recorded a message for the children to explain why I wasn’t there. Then, just by coincidence, a week later, it appears the glass in my office was relatively thin and I could hear some youngsters outside saying, ‘Oh, that’s her who recorded the message for us.’ So, I surprised them by opening the office door and popping my head out and we had a good chat about their visit to the Senedd, which they thoroughly enjoyed.

When I speak to groups of younger people, I often open with words, ‘My name is Hannah Blythyn, and I’m a politician.’ That’s not some kind of bizarre confession I’m about to make, but the point that I make by opening like that is when I was their age, sitting there, they’re words that I would never have expected to have come out of my mouth, not least because the National Assembly didn’t exist then, but because public speaking wasn’t for me and politics didn’t seem like—. Whilst I was politicised by the town and the community in which I grew up, I didn’t necessarily feel that politics was for me. Politicians didn’t look, sound or even act like me, and I didn’t know where to begin, where you’d get involved or what could be a route you could get involved in. So, my message is that: if I can do it, then so can anybody else in the future. But the mystery, barriers and misconception over politics, what it is, who it’s for and who is a politician remain, and we all, in this place and outside of it, have a democratic duty to change this.

But the question really is that: where do we start? I’m pleased to see the Llywydd’s consultation on establishing a new youth parliament for Wales, launched just last week. It’s important that young people across Wales are given a national opportunity to have their voice heard and to contribute to our growing devolved democracy. But, as an Assembly Member in north-east Wales, it is of particular importance to me that any youth parliament is made accessible and participation is a realistic option for young people throughout Wales, regardless of location, background or education. As the consultation continues, I’ll be encouraging as many organisations and individuals across north Wales to have their say and to influence the potential youth parliament at an early stage. I trust colleagues will be doing the same.

A little closer to home, and a timely mention as we head to the polls in local authority elections, it was music to my ears to learn that the establishment of a youth council for Flintshire was a key election pledge of the Flintshire Labour group. This is something that will have my full and active support, and it would be interesting to see how already established youth councils across Wales and the UK work in practice, what can be learned and what can be built on, because I believe that it’s important that with youth councils and parliaments they’re not just tick-box exercises and that young people have the adequate resources and support to enable them to see actual outcomes from them.

But what really should be at the heart of this is to go back to school and begin, at a young age, to equip young people not only with the tools to actively participate in political life in Wales, but to realise the value and importance of doing so. Active citizenship in schools can encourage and empower children to see their decisions result in real change, help develop a culture of participation at an early stage by working with others in a school council environment or similar, and create the future leaders and those who hold politicians to account.

Eighteen years since the advent of our Welsh Assembly, too many people—young, old and somewhere in between—are still not clear on what exactly the Assembly does, what specific responsibilities lie here in Wales and how it works for them. So, it’s therefore more important than ever that we take steps to better educate the next generation whilst they’re still at school. As we’re aware, the Welsh Government is in the process of developing a new curriculum for schools in Wales that will put a greater emphasis on equipping young people for life. This is a real opportunity that needs to be grasped to embed programmes and action that will enable and empower our young people to become confident and more active citizens.

The third purpose outlined in the curriculum for life underlines the importance of developing ethical and informed citizens who are fully aware of their rights and responsibilities. Politics and active citizenship go hand in hand and must be an integral part of all Welsh children’s education. The question is: how can this be achieved? I know much of the role of teaching politics in schools has traditionally fallen within the PSE curriculum, which is always heavily crowded with things that need to be covered. Whilst I welcome the coverage that does happen within PSE, it’s often in a condensed period of time and I’m sure most of us would be loath to add to the workload expectations of already heavily burdened and hard-working teachers. I think, in addition to the teaching of citizenship and about devolution needing to be a standard and statutory part of the curriculum, it’s important that it’s delivered by people who not only have the expertise and experience, but also a passion for it, because it won’t work if it’s just something that is, again, a tick-box exercise to be done. It has to be delivered with a real enthusiasm and passion for the children and the young people hearing it to really embrace that and get involved and do something following it.

It is my view and that of many other people that I’ve spoken to that it does need to be a statutory part of the school curriculum in some way, but I think we need a bigger discussion, going forward, on how this can actually best work in practice. Perhaps with some aspects of this, could there be a greater and more formal role for the Assembly’s education and outreach service? And what part do school councils play? While the establishment of school councils is currently a statutory requirement, how school councils operate is not on a statutory footing. Anecdotal experience of my own tells me that when it comes to school councils, what works for one might not necessarily work for another. So, some flexibility in the range of ideas and options for encouraging active citizenship and the value of voting and participation could perhaps be needed.

Schools play a key role in creating a culture and instilling the norms of democratic society. It is in schools where active citizenship must start. In my own constituency alone, I have come across a number of innovative examples of how children and students are given the space to allow them a taste of different aspects of active citizenship. There is an inspiring group of students at Mold’s Alun School who are volunteering as part of the United Nations Foundation’s ‘Girl Up’ campaign—a campaign that engages young women to take action to support girls and young women in the developing world and places where it is often hardest to be a girl. These students are not simply a shining example of active citizenship within the walls of their own school by changing perceptions and doing their bit to break down barriers, but also beyond that by championing the cause of young women across the world.

Cornist Park County Primary School in Flint has a school ambassador scheme, with three types of ambassadors: eco ambassadors work with teachers to find new ways to be an eco-friendly school; healthy lifestyle ambassadors aim to make the school a healthier place; and entrepreneurial ambassadors carry out charity work and fundraising. All ambassadors work closely with staff to develop changes in the school, and they come together every half term to talk about progress. Children who have previously been ambassadors are involved in the selection process of new ambassadors, and the children present their ideas and visions about other prospective ambassador roles.

Last but not least is Ysgol Merllyn’s school parliament. I know that the Cabinet Secretary has met members of the current parliament during their visit to the Senedd. While much of the media and political focus is on tomorrow’s local elections and the general election on 8 June, the focus of this primary school in Bagillt will be the big day on 14 July, when pupils go to the polls in the school’s third general election. In the previous two polls, the eligibility to vote was that you had to be over the age of four and in full-time education. After a successful campaign, the nursery has been emancipated and will vote for the first time in the 2017 election. Ahead of polling day, pupils who are candidates will deliver speeches, campaign and hold hustings. On election day itself, pupils go to the ballot box, exit polls are announced, and the whole process is overseen by independent scrutineers. I look forward to playing my own part in the democratic process, and I have signed up to do an early shift in the polling station on the day. Following the election, the prime minister and deputy prime minister are announced, and the PM visits the queen—headteacher Tracy Jones—and she asks them to form a government. Ministers are then appointed, who oversee portfolios, which include sports, the environment and education. I have managed to get my hands on a copy of the minutes from a recent cabinet meeting at Ysgol Merllyn. Elected representatives recently discussed proposals for mirrors in the girls’ toilets, an art event in the autumn term and the continuation of sports during morning activities. This is an outstanding example of how teachers can facilitate the opportunity for pupils to take the lead within their schools in an innovative, fun and effective way. Ultimately, what this is doing is embedding within the children the importance of voting at an early age, at a young age, and being an active citizen. When they visited here, I did ask them why it was important to vote, expecting them to turn around and say to me, ‘Because it gives us a voice. We can have our voice heard. We can have our say.’ But one little boy did put his hand up and said, ‘Because if we don’t vote, people like Donald Trump get elected.’

Through examples and initiatives like this, pupils are being grounded in the principles of democracy and empowered from a young age. This is achieved through a fun, interactive and realistic model of real-life politics. It is important that the best examples give the children and young people the means to actually take action and see for themselves the outcomes from that. Where there are opportunities facilitated for young people to engage in citizenship and politics, the understanding of the importance of being an active citizen invariably follows. The hope is that in the future it will be these pupils who are inspired and equipped to become the leaders of tomorrow here in Wales, across the UK, and internationally. Perhaps one day the prime minister of a primary school will find themselves here as the First Minister of Wales.

Thank you very much. I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Education to reply to the debate. Kirsty Williams.

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. I would like to thank Hannah Blythyn very much for raising this important issue for debate here this afternoon and for taking the time to highlight the excellent practice in her own constituency, and her personal commitment in showing leadership in this issue in the schools from her constituency that visit the Senedd here. And can I add, in my capacity as the Assembly Member for Brecon and Radnorshire, that I, too, very much appreciate the education service that is provided by the Commission, both in schools in my own constituency and in the education programme that goes on here? I, too, over the many years I've been here, have been hugely impressed by the quality of provision.

It also, Deputy Presiding Officer, gives me the opportunity to indulge myself just for a moment to reflect on my own journey into politics and to contrast the differing attitudes that I found in my own school. If it was not for the passion that Hannah talked about of my late history and politics teacher, Mr Nick Burree, I would not be here today. He saw something in me, and it ignited in me a passion for public service and politics. This is sharply contrasted with, of course, the head of sixth form who told my poor father when he attended a parents evening, by said teacher, ‘Well, if Kirsty does not stop this politics nonsense, she will amount to nothing in life.’ When I was first elected to the Chamber in 1999, within a matter of days, when I saw an envelope with that handwriting, I knew instantly what it was—I'd seen it in red ink in enough English essays to know—and I was very glad to know that, despite her scepticism, Miss Charles, my English teacher, had sent a note to congratulate me on my election.

Involving young people in the democratic process is important for them and for the whole of society. This is essential for the future of a vibrant democracy. Our commitment to children and young people is enshrined in legislation, and listening to, and investing in, children and young people is central to the Welsh Government’s approach. Children and young people are and must be enabled to continue to be full and active citizens of Wales who have a valuable contribution to make to all of our communities. The current national curriculum supports the teaching of citizenship and provides opportunities that prepare learners for life as global citizens. Specifically, citizenship lies within personal and social education, as we’ve just heard, and education for sustainable development and global citizenship—something, perhaps, that some of our UKIP colleagues could enjoy, having listened to the debate recently about our ability to contribute to climate change remission. It’s also a key component of the new and more rigorous Welsh baccalaureate that was introduced in 2015.

Personal and social education forms part of the statutory basic curriculum for all pupils aged seven to 16 at maintained schools, and issues regarding citizenship are delivered by schools through the active citizenship theme of the PSE framework. It gives learners the opportunity to develop their knowledge of politics, employment and their rights in a democratic society, which reflects the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Learners are encouraged to be members of their community and can be helped to play a meaningful and active part in them. Furthermore, education for sustainable development and global citizenship gives learners at all stages of their education an understanding of the impact of their choices on other people, the economy and the environment, and aims to challenge learners to see how they can contribute to the lives of others. Not only is it embedded in the school curriculum, it is an integral component of the foundation phase for our youngest pupils.

The Global Citizenship Challenge of the reformed Welsh bacc also contributes to developing the skills, attributes and knowledge that will create global citizens with an understanding of the world and the place of Wales within it. Along with the knowledge and values that they gain from learning about global issues and political factors, learners develop skills that will give them the ability and confidence to be proactive in making a positive difference in the world.

Looking ahead to the future, in his ‘Successful Futures’ report, Professor Donaldson set out what a successful young person leaving statutory education would look like. His report identifies four purposes of the curriculum in Wales, one of which is ensuring that learners are, and I quote,

‘ethical, informed citizens…who understand and exercise their human and democratic responsibilities and rights’.

This places citizenship right at the heart of the curriculum.

The design of the new curriculum is being taken forward by a network of pioneer schools and other experts. They are working together as a national network of schools to co-design, consult, inform, support and build capacities in schools across Wales, working in an all-Wales partnership with Welsh Government, Estyn, higher education, business and other key partners. The working groups were established in January of this year, and work has begun to develop the six high-level areas of learning and experience, otherwise known as the AOLEs. These groups are working on the more detailed development of each AOLE, including humanities, which is where politics will sit. During the development process, the pioneer schools will check and review emerging models to test and share ideas and gather feedback. There will also be more formal opportunities for key stakeholders to comment on proposals in relation to the new curriculum by way of surveys or consultation at strategic points during the development.

We’re clear that the participation of children and young people will continue to be key in the development and the delivery of our legislation and our policies and programmes. It is only right that we continue to ensure that children and young people have an active voice in the workings of this Government. Article 12 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child states that all children and young people have the right to a voice in decisions that affect them, and the Welsh Government remains staunchly committed to protecting that right.

We also fund a national model, Young Wales, to enable these voices to be heard. Young Wales is a collaborative enterprise bringing together six children and youth organisations across Wales, the main partner being an umbrella body for children’s organisations within the voluntary sector and a centre of excellence for children’s rights. Young Wales reaches out to thousands of children and young people across Wales to enable them to have their voices heard and influence the work of the Welsh Government. We will continue to support the development of these innovative participation models and national opportunities for children and young people to participate in decisions affecting them in line with article 12 of the UNCRC, the right to express their views.

This Assembly, unfortunately, does not currently have legislative competence in relation to the electoral franchise, and cannot make changes to the voting age. However, I am pleased that the recent White Paper on reforming local government proposes reforms to elections, including the extension of the voting franchise to 16 and 17-year-olds. This, along with other reforms to improve electoral registration and voting processes, I hope will encourage young people to participate in elections and democracy more widely.

The draft Local Government (Wales) Bill 2015 included proposals to charge local authorities with a duty to develop public participation strategies, enabling local people to engage with the decision-making processes and to have their views taken into account. Our intention is to continue to pursue this policy, and to include within it the need to enable young people to play a full part in that process. The majority of councils in Wales have youth councils or youth cabinets, and some also have youth mayors. Youth cabinets are a valuable tool that can be used to connect with young people locally, and encourage and empower them to actively participate in democratic processes. It is essential to a healthy, democratic nation that everyone is aware of and is able to exercise their legal rights. Hannah also made mention of the important role of school councils, allowing children’s voices to be heard within the institution where they are being educated, and, again, they provide a valuable opportunity for children and young people to have a grounding in the ability to shape their futures, influence and persuade and campaign, and the examples that Hannah gave are some of the best that I’m aware of in the country.

Also, in our charter for youth work, we have said that youth services across Wales must provide opportunities for young people to participate in decision making. Again, we have some fantastic examples of youth organisations giving young people the skills, knowledge and experience to be able to influence decision making within the organisation and within their local area. Again, this supports our commitment to the UNCRC and the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child in their recommendation that all Governments should have a forum for children’s participation.

Deputy Presiding Officer, again can I thank Hannah for bringing this subject forward? I’m sure you would want to join me in urging all schools to participate in the opportunities that are available to them, either from the National Assembly for Wales or from the Welsh Government. Hannah, thank you very much for bringing this debate forward.

Thank you very much for replying to the debate as well. That brings today’s proceedings to a close. Thank you.