Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru

I call the National Assembly to order.

The first item on our agenda this afternoon is questions to the Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Infrastructure. And the first question, Caroline Jones.

We continue to provide a wide range of support to all high-street businesses in Wales to ensure that they go on thriving.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. Unfortunately, due to the activities of some of the larger retail chains, who can afford to absorb losses, many of our small independent retailers are going out of business, destroying the diversity of our high streets. What economic incentives can your Government offer to small independent retailers to ensure their continued survival and avoid a future in which our high streets are just clones of one another, dominated by corporate chains? And will you discuss with the UK Government possibly lowering the VAT threshold, and graduated thresholds of VAT, for smaller businesses?

Well, can I thank the Member for her question and say that this is an issue that’s close to the heart of many Members in this Chamber? Just because a small business is struggling to operate doesn’t mean that it doesn’t have a future in an environment that sees an increasing amount of activity take place online. I think the important factor that will determine the success or failure of a small retailer is whether it’s distinct—distinct from competition. And, in some town centres, such as Narberth, we see a good number, and a high concentration, of small boutique businesses and retailers in particular.

Now, Government can act as an enabler, supporting small businesses on the high street, through programmes such as the business exploitation programme, operated in tandem with Superfast Cymru. We can also assist in terms of offering support through Business Wales, offering one-to-one advice for business growth and how to adapt to modern retail tastes and trends. Also, we can support businesses through the development of business improvement districts and town-centre champions. And we’re doing just this. But I think what’s crucially important is that, if a small business is struggling to carve out a niche, or to survive in a fiercely competitive environment, call Business Wales, seek advice and, potentially, seek support. Seek support in the form of a loan or other financial resource. It’s essential that that’s done as soon as possible. We can also offer advice and support in terms of skills training and management too.

Cabinet Secretary, one way to ensure that we have thriving high-street businesses in Wales is to make our high streets as accessible as possible, by developing car parking strategies that factor in local nuances around individual town-centre layouts. Now, I appreciate that the Welsh Government last year announced a package worth £3 million to help local authorities pilot town-centre free parking. So, in the circumstances, can you tell us how many town centres and high-street businesses, and high streets individually, have already benefited from this support?

I don’t have that data to hand. This is a responsibility of my colleague, the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government. But, if the data are already available, then I shall ask him to liaise with you specifically on that. I think it’s also important to recognise it’s not just car parks that can have an influence over the success or failure of a high street; it’s also whether a high street is populated with vibrant businesses. And there’s a lot of work taking place at the moment, looking at whether high streets can be shrunk, whether businesses, or business activity, can be consolidated into smaller, tighter areas, to generate a greater degree of activity that’s concentrated around a central hub.

This is something I’m very keen to explore as part of the place building element of the new prosperous and secure strategy. I think place building is absolutely essential in determining the prospects of a local economy. And, within an urban setting, it’s essential that a place feels of the highest quality, is accessible and is vibrant, not just during the daytime, but also at night time. And, for that reason, I think it’s essential that we go on supporting businesses in their diversification and ensure that town-centre economies are not just vibrant during the daytime, but also at night.

The Member also raised car parks as a means of accessibility into town centres. I think it’s essential as well that we go on investing in active travel and in local scheduled bus services, which, for many people, are an essential—indeed, crucial—means of accessing high streets and town centres. And I’m pleased that we are maintaining the £25 million for bus services across Wales, to ensure that those that wouldn’t operate on a commercial basis can still reach out to rural communities and connect them with urban centres.

Yes. We are incredibly proud of our rich industrial heritage in Wales. Over 1,000 industrial structures have statutory protection as listed buildings or as scheduled monuments. Industrial heritage also features prominently in our pan-Wales heritage interpretation plan focusing on ‘Wales: the first industrial nation’.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. A sense and celebration of our history is important, not just to our sense of place today, but to build the foundations for our future as well. We have a particular rich industrial heritage across the Dee coast in north-east Wales, from the steelworks in the east, going across to where Courtalds was in Flint, and then to the Point of Ayr Colliery. Earlier this year, the Point of Ayr community heritage project received £40,500 from the Heritage Lottery Fund in a grant, and this will enable Point of Ayr to build a miners trail and a circular walk, which will meet with the coastal path and the site of the colliery, and will also link the town to Ffynnongroyw and Talacre. I was lucky enough to meet with the Chair, John Wiltshire, at an event down in the Senedd, and, last month, I was at the opening of the start of the trail. It was a privilege to be there as the Assembly Member representing the area, but also a particularly proud moment for me, as my ‘taid’ and uncle, and many members of my family, worked at the Point of Ayr. Now, the 23 July will be the grand opening of this trail, where one of the old pithead wheels will actually be reconditioned and opened. Cabinet Secretary, will you join me in congratulating the Point of Ayr heritage project, and John Wiltshire and his team, on all that they’ve done, and also urge others across Wales to learn from the group? And, of course, if you were free on 23 July, I’m sure the invitation is open for you to attend.

Well, I’d be more than delighted to attend that special occasion, and I, too, would like to congratulate those volunteers who are investing so much time and energy in promoting their local heritage. I was delighted to meet some of the volunteers with the Member recently, and, in addition, we know that this particular facility, this site, the Point of Ayr Colliery, is of enormous significance for the community of Talacre, but also for the communities of Mostyn and Ffynnongroyw, Llanasa, Pen-y-ffordd, Flint and Holywell—Indeed, a crucial tourist attraction for that part of north-east Wales. In addition nearby, we have the Brymbo ironworks, which has received, in recent times, £110,000 in grants from Welsh Government—again, a crucially important facility to attract tourists and to bring the community together. I was pleased also to recently attend the opening of the Rhydymwyn tunnels, again in my friend Hannah Blythyn’s constituency, in Rhydymwyn, where it was quite apparent how much value the local community place on that facility. And I’d like to pay tribute in particular to David Hanson. He was honoured for the work that he’s done over many years in ensuring that it can be open to the public, and indeed to Mark Isherwood, as an Assembly Member, who remains steadfast in support, as does Hannah Blythyn, for the community group that made this happen.

Coincidental, but thank you for your comments. In the context of the Pontcysyllte aqueduct world heritage site, it’s now, I think, eight years since that was awarded, and I think eight years since the then Welsh Government first established a regional partnership body to drive forward the regional industrial heritage offer, incorporating potentially Llangollen railway, the canals, the Ceiriog valley, Brymbo, as you’ve referred to, but stretching across to Flintshire’s heritage trails, Rhydymwyn valley, Greenfield Valley Trust, and so very much more. But we still haven’t got that joined-up approach now. We haven’t got the through-ticketing, which bodies such as Llangollen railway are proposing. And a concern raised with me has been that the bodies have had insufficient representation from tourism and heritage bodies in the region themselves. It’s good that Glandŵr Cymru are on board, but where are all the others? Do you agree with me that we therefore need to incorporate better those wider voices, so that, together, they can bring forward the proposals that can at last achieve, I think, the objectives that we both share?

I’d agree entirely with the Member. I’ve been keen to encourage movement speedily, and with dynamism, in the direction that he outlines. I’d like to see more through-ticketing for sure. I’d like to see greater co-ordination between and amongst the various organisations that are involved in the culture and heritage sector in industrial north-east Wales. And, for that reason, I think it would perhaps be very sensible to convene a culture and heritage summit during the summer, to bring together those organisations, including Glandŵr Cymru, who the Member rightly identifies as a lead partner in the Pontcysyllte world heritage site activity, and I think, in drawing together those various interests, we may be able to make progress.

Questions, now, from the party spokespeople to the Cabinet Secretary. The Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Adam Price.

Diolch, Llywydd. Cabinet Secretary, this week in a written reply to me, you accused the company behind the Circuit of Wales of,

many material gaps and inaccuracies in the information’

they have provided to you. Now, that’s a fairly extraordinary claim for anyone to make, let alone a Government, about a counterparty with which you are just weeks away from making a decision about a £425 million-project, which you’ve been discussing for over six years. Isn’t it the case, Cabinet Secretary, that it’s your Government that’s been inaccurate? You promised, at that dispatch box in February, a four to six-week process, which is the standard timeline for confirmatory due diligence. What you’ve done is conduct a forensic audit with the express purpose, it seems to me, of finding some excuse—any excuse at all—to justify saying ‘no’. And isn’t it also the case, Cabinet Secretary, that having first delayed the decision until after the May local elections, you’re now delaying it beyond 8 June? Not because of any gaps in information, but because you don’t want to be open and honest with the people of Blaenau Gwent, who you’ve strung along with false hope and empty promises for six years.

Not at all. The Member is completely and utterly wrong. He asked a series of questions; I gave a series of honest answers. Never before have I seen an opposition spokesperson criticise a Minister for giving honest answers. My duty is to ensure that projects that can create jobs, that are sustainable, get the support of this Government. My job is to make sure we invest our resources where there are employment opportunities. I am excited by this project, but I will not short-circuit the due diligence process, unlike the Member, who would have signed it off last year with, incidentally, another £18 million of public funding guarantees.

You accuse the company of misleading you, and you say you give honest answers. Well, isn’t it the case that if anyone has been guilty of misleading people, it’s your Government? In the auditor general’s report, he refers to a press release that your Government issued on the FTR acquisition, which he says, in terms, was both incorrect and misleading. That’s the auditor general’s verdict, not mine, on this Government. Now, in your response to the auditor general’s report, you said that you were shocked and disappointed at its release during the pre-election period. Yet, isn’t it true, Cabinet Secretary, that the deputy permanent secretary was informed of the intention to publish on 10 March, almost six weeks before? As the auditor general has said in a letter to me, and I quote:

Although I can understand why the Cabinet Secretary has expressed disappointment regarding the timing of my report, I find it hard to understand how officers could express shock in this respect.’

You’re blaming the company, blaming the auditor general, blaming everyone else, but isn’t it true, Cabinet Secretary, that it’s you and your Government that are to blame for the fact that, here we are, six years on, still waiting for a decision?

I’m astonished, again, that the Member used the term ‘misleading’. I am astonished—

The auditor general used the term ‘misleading’.

In the context that he did. The Member should retract that, because what I stated in those written answers was true and factual—true and factual. And I say it again: my job is to ensure that projects that can gain Government support, that are proven to be sustainable and to create the jobs that they purport to be creating for the communities that they must serve—. My interest is with the people of Ebbw Vale; yours seems to be with political self-interest. There is a big difference—a big difference—between ambition and recklessness. I will not short-circuit the due diligence process. Where do you think the auditor general would have you, if you were to propose short-circuiting the due diligence process, if you were in my position? Do you think the auditor general would support you in that?

Here we have a Cabinet Secretary who has delayed a decision not once but twice, beyond an election, for obvious reasons, and he accuses me of acting in self-interest. There’s a simple answer to the charge of prevarication that we make, and that’s to get on and make a decision. The Cabinet Secretary has said that he has now got all the information from the company that he requires and that he expects to receive the final due diligence reports very shortly. So, can he confirm there is now no impediment, no barrier, no excuse left that will prevent him from making a decision and an announcement before 8 June? Can I remind the Cabinet Secretary that Cabinet Office guidance on Westminster general elections states clearly that devolved functions should continue as normal? His predecessor, Edwina Hart, made a decision on the Circuit of Wales in the middle of the Assembly pre-election period. If she was honest enough to do so, then why should you and the First Minister be cowering behind this excuse of pre-election purdah instead of being honest with the people of Blaenau Gwent who put their trust in you?

I should just suggest you keep digging yourself in, because what you’re essentially saying is that we should, again, ignore the due diligence process. The reason that there have been delays is because the information has not been fully populated in the data bank. That is the reason why. That is the reason why. Do not blame the Government for failing to provide the information that the developer is required to provide. We remain excited by this project—

[Inaudible.]

Ah; well, there we are. There we are, and there’s the point. You’re here to scrutinise me, but you don’t wish to listen. You just wish to give lectures about how to dodge due diligence. That is not your role. [Interruption.] That is not your role. [Interruption.] Your role is to ensure that you scrutinise—[Interruption.]—the information that is presented to you, but you don’t wish to do that. [Interruption.] You don’t wish to do that. What you wish to do—

Can we hear the Cabinet Secretary’s reply, please?

Thank you, Presiding Officer. What you do is you wish to butterfly-move from one policy and project decision to another. For example, how would a £12 billion world expo help the people in the Valleys if it were to be based in Cardiff? That was another of your suggestions. It presumably would come with a huge debt burden—[Interruption.] There are many—[Interruption.] I think you’ve amounted to £1 billion of debt per month since this Assembly was elected. That is not responsible; that is reckless. That is not ambitious; it’s delusional. Our job is to create—[Interruption.] Our job is to create lasting work for all people in Wales, and right now we are doing that. We have record employment in Wales as a result of this Government—our interventions, our investments. We now have low unemployment that is below a level the previous Governments at Westminster could ever have dreamed of, as a result of our interventions and our investment. Our job now is to tackle those structural problems within the Welsh economy that have deprived too many people of work for too long, but we will do it by making sure that our investments go into work that is sustainable. I will not dodge any due diligence process in ensuring that taxpayers’ money is invested in the right and proper way on behalf of the people of Wales.

Welsh Conservative spokesperson, Russell George.

Diolch, Presiding Officer. Keeping on the theme of supporting the Welsh economy—[Interruption.]—I’m sure that you will welcome Theresa May’s pledge to—[Interruption.]

Can we move on to the next question? Russell George.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. Cabinet Secretary, I’m sure you will welcome Theresa May’s pledge to abolish the Severn bridge tolls once ownership has transferred to Highways England next year, bringing, of course, at least £100 million to the Welsh economy per year—a far more immediate time frame than the one—perhaps Joyce Watson will listen to this—in Labour’s manifesto, which merely promises:

We will work with the Welsh Government to scrap the tolls on the Severn Bridge.’

Given that a Conservative Government on 8 June would open up Wales to even more economic prosperity, when will the M4 relief road get started to support the significant increase in traffic this will bring?

Can I thank the Member for his questions? I’m delighted by the u-turn approach of the Conservatives at Westminster. Nonetheless, I do welcome their move in the direction that the First Minister, Carwyn Jones, has given a very clear and strong direction on. I am confident that the local public inquiry is proceeding to the time frame that was outlined. Subsequent to the outcome of the public local inquiry, a decision will be made, and I’ve outlined how I envisage and intend to ensure that work is carried out subject to the outcome of that inquiry without delay.

Well, of course, you’ll be aware there’s no u-turn on these benches. We’ve been very supportive of scrapping the Severn bridge tolls for some time. I can hear Joyce Watson shouting in the back row, ‘Where’s the money going to come from?’ I’ll perhaps answer that as well, Cabinet Secretary. The UK Government has provided substantial funding to boost the Welsh economy, from investing £1.2 billion in the Cardiff capital region, to a £400 million increase to capital budgets, as announced in the autumn statement, on top of the £500 million the Welsh Government will be able to borrow to invest from 2018.

Yet the creation of the national infrastructure commission, which will oversee the numerous infrastructure projects that we need in Wales, has been delayed until the end of this year. You will be aware, of course, of the economy and infrastructure committee’s recommendation in March, yet you didn’t accept the recommendation to establish it as a non-statutory body, with the presumption that legislation would follow, which I think was disappointing to committee members and many others. Do we take it that this will mean that the infrastructure commission will not be a permanent fixture in Wales?

No, we shouldn’t. The national infrastructure commission, the proposals for how it will be composed and the membership it will comprise has been clearly outlined. It’s our intention to ensure that there is, before the end of this Assembly term, an evaluation of the effectiveness of the commission, based on models that have operated elsewhere. We believe that it will be a very effective means of providing expert advice. I think it’s fair to say that one essential element of the work of the national infrastructure commission of Wales will be how it interacts with the UK commission, given the significance of many major infrastructure projects on both sides of the border, not least rail, in the coming 10 to 20 years. It’s my belief that, in terms of the presumption to put it on a statutory footing, we need to ensure that we first of all evaluate the effectiveness of the national infrastructure commission before we proceed with any further developments regarding its composition or how it stands.

Along with the substantial investment for infrastructure, the UK Government’s industrial strategy has provided key opportunities for regional economies. I note the Welsh Government has responded to the industrial strategy consultation, and so have the Welsh Conservatives. Can you commit to publishing your consultation response to Assembly Members immediately, and if not, why not?

This is something that I’m quite happy to do. I’ve said previously that I believe that the UK industrial strategy offers us opportunities in terms of where we can work together on regional economies and developing more place-based interventions. I think there are great opportunities likewise in terms of the sector deals, but what will be essential in the determination of the success or failure when the strategy is actually deployed as a set of actions is whether it’s backed up with the appropriate and necessary resource, not just across England, but also across the whole of the UK, including Wales. For that reason, I’m determined, if that strategy goes ahead—and of course it is dependent on the outcome of the UK general election—but if that strategy goes ahead then it’s essential that Wales benefits from its fair share of funding, especially with regard to research development and innovation.

UKIP spokesperson, David Rowlands.

Diolch, Llywydd. Could the Cabinet Secretary update us on the Heads of the Valleys road improvement scheme and the expected finishing date for the Clydach gorge section?

I’d be more than happy to update Members on the Heads of the Valleys dualling scheme. It’s a scheme that we’re immensely proud of in Government. I believe it was my colleague Carl Sargeant who initiated the scheme after a previous transport or economic development Minister from a different party, I believe, delayed it. So, I’ll be more than happy to update Members on the progress of this hugely important piece of infrastructure for the Heads of the Valleys.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for that answer. I asked the question, Cabinet Secretary, because I was wondering if it will be finished in time for the Circuit of Wales project.

That all depends on the delivery period of the Circuit of Wales. But the delivery period of the Heads of the Valleys road is progressing well, and there have been no major significant delays in recent weeks. I will update Members with detail about when it aims to be completed by.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. Can I move on to another matter? As the Cabinet Secretary is aware, Blaenavon is a world heritage site with many thousands of visitors each year enjoying not only the restored ironworks, but also Big Pit and Blaenavon railway. However, this does not seem to be having the desired effect on the town itself, with many shops on the high street closed. Does the Welsh Government have any plans to improve the connectivity of the attractions of the town to the town itself?

The Member raises a very good point that’s relevant, actually, to many more communities that have important heritage sites on their doorstep. As a consequence of the work that’s been taking place via the steering group looking into the Historic Wales policy pledge, there will now be far closer interaction between those who manage Big Pit and the Blaenavon ironworks. I think as a consequence of that, there will be a greater focus on accessibility and outreach programmes. If they are able to work in tandem together, to pool resources—that are very limited, granted—I do believe that there will be opportunities to better advertise those wonderful assets to people who live in the immediate area, but also to enable better transport links and accessibility to both sites. I think the potential for joint ticketing across the region is enormous, so that more people can access more heritage sites, more of the time.

Question 3 [OAQ(5)0170(EI)] has been withdrawn.

Transport for Wales provides support and advice to advance the Welsh Government’s vision for delivering a transformational integrated transport system in Wales, providing high-quality, safe, affordable and sustainable transport for all.

Well, we can certainly agree on that. But it’s now five years since Mark Barry’s report ‘A Metro for Wales’ Capital City Region’ and two years since the Cardiff capital region board agreed we needed an integrated transport system as a catalyst for economic change. Meanwhile, more and more people are piling in to Cardiff and Newport by car and massively increasing the congestion and the air pollution problem. The map of possible metro stations seems to have no more status than a piece of artwork. I just wondered if the Cabinet Secretary can tell us when the people of Cardiff and Newport are going to be able to shape the new metro map to deliver that modal shift that everybody seems to recognise is needed.

As has been regularly said, the metro is a dynamic piece of work with a timetable that we are sticking to and, by 2023, services will be begin. I’m pleased that recently we were able to give details of two stations to the east of Cardiff that will be taken forward with a view of securing the appropriate funding to upgrade them, those being Llanwern and St Mellons, but I’m also pleased to have recently met recently with incredible volunteers at Magor station who would like to see their particular facility upgraded and modernised as well. I recently wrote to that group and to Members with an update on how we will be supporting that particular community.

I think it’s essential that, as we develop metro phase 3—and right now we’re in phase 2, where we are procuring the operator and development partner—but in phase 3 we will see future rail extensions and further bus integration across the metro map area. I think it’s essential that we deliver a wide range of benefits by engaging with people across communities to determine where investment needs to go, and how that investment can link up to other forms of travel, primarily active travel, so that people can get to and from metro services on foot, or on bike.

Cabinet Secretary, a recent survey by INRIX Roadway Analytics found that business in Cardiff was particularly badly impacted by congestion. I think we think we need to take these UK-wide surveys very seriously. Now, one way of relieving traffic at peak times is to invest in a Cardiff parkway railway station at St Mellons, and associated park-and-ride facilities. I think your decision to examine the feasibility of this station was widely welcomed. I wonder how far advanced your scrutiny is now.

I will provide information in writing to Members on the stages at which all of the projects that we’re now taking forward are currently at. Certainly, with St Mellons, the creation of a significant park-and-ride facility will reduce congestion into Cardiff city centre, but it will also ensure that businesses can continue to grow, against a fiercely competitive environment just across the border.

We know that, between congestion on the M4 and the existence of tolls at the Severn bridge, there are significant factors working against our interests in driving economic growth. We wish to remove both of those. I’m pleased that political parties in London have now recognised the need to remove the Severn bridge tolls.

It’s now essential that we resolve the congestion problems on the M4. But that won’t just be delivered via an M4 relief road—it does require considerable investment in the infrastructure that will enable people to take public transport and indeed participate in active travel into and around the city centre.

To date, the Superfast Cymru project has invested over £48.6 million in providing 171,498 homes and businesses in Mid and West Wales with access to superfast broadband connectivity, delivering average speeds of over 73 Mbps.

I thank the Minister for that and I acknowledge the role that she’s played in rolling out this programme and improving the accessibility to broadband throughout Mid and West Wales, but she will be aware that we’ve still got quite a way to go. I spend quite a lot of time in the car traversing the region and we go in and out of signal so it’s very, very difficult to do any business by e-mail for any great length of time, and I still have constituents who complain that they’re being messed about by the providers who are installing the service—like one from Llansadwrn in Carmarthenshire, who writes to say that he’s had his date of installation of superfast broadband revised back. The first installation date was summer 2016, then revised to March 2017, then to July 2017. Another one, who says that it’s always ‘two months away’ whenever she’s given the date and then that’s revised to a further two months away. So, I wonder if the Minister can give any hope to my constituents who are writing to me in these terms that there will be some significant further improvement soon.

I acknowledge the issue around the moving timescales, which we’ve discussed many times in this Chamber, and we have worked very hard with BT to make them give much more realistic time frames. Sometimes, it’s just not possible for them to understand what the engineering difficulties might be on the ground, but we have a very regular meeting with them where I go through evidence provided by Assembly Members such as yourself, to say, ‘Can we improve this communication system?’ Whilst it’s very frustrating for those individuals who are still in that situation, the incidence has dropped off very significantly since we’ve been working very hard to do that, though I acknowledge the frustration for those who are caught in that.

We have done extremely well in terms of coverage. At the moment, we’ve got 80 per cent completion in Pembrokeshire, 75 per cent completion in Carmarthenshire, 63 per cent completion in Ceredigion, and Powys is over 71 per cent complete. Those figures will improve as we go towards the end of the project. So, just to reiterate, the Superfast Cymru project will end in June. All the work that will be done under the project must have commenced by June—it will be complete by December.

Very shortly, in June, I will be making some announcements about the future programme to get to the remaining numbers of people. We are looking at an enormous number of innovative ways of getting the last few per cent up into superfast speeds. We’ll be investing in excess of £80 million in doing that. That’s dependent on what the clawback is on the current contract. So, as usual, I encourage all AMs to make sure that, where superfast is available, people are buying the service, because, obviously, for everything over 21 per cent take-up we get a gain share for that and that enables us to invest that money further in improvement.

You did also mention mobile phone connectivity. It’s true that the technologies are merging to the point where they appear to be one and the same thing, but unfortunately they are not. We don’t have mobile phone technology devolved in Wales—I wish we did—but we are working very hard with the mobile phone operators on a series of measures that will help improve connectivity, and I will also be making a statement about the number of roundtables we’re having on improving that connectivity. We are acutely aware of it.

The last thing to say on this is that we will be looking to see what we can do about the roll-out of fifth generation, so that people don’t have to climb up the steps—they can leap from where they are now up into the best possible provision. That’s an ongoing conversation with all of the mobile phone operators as well.

Minister, I’ve got two letters from you here, one dated March and one dated April. The one in March says that officials have spoken with BT colleagues who have confirmed the roll-out of superfast broadband will take place in June, but then a month later, on the very same property, you write again to me saying, since the update, information has now changed and it’s no longer available and unfortunately this particular property is going to be too far from the cabinet. Now, the issue here, of course, I hope you will agree, is completely unacceptable because this particular property in this area had an opportunity to take part in another technology solution, and on your advice in March they turned the other solution down and said, ‘No, that’s fine, because we’ve got superfast broadband coming in June—we don’t need it, sorry’, and then only a month later to get yours—. Then it was too late, of course, to take part in the other technology solution. Do you agree that this is absolutely unacceptable? What are you going to do to make sure people get accurate information in the first place?

Yes, I accept the frustration of that. The letters do also say, of course, that dates are always subject to change, depending on engineering works and so on. We do try to give the most accurate information, and I absolutely acknowledge the frustration for those caught in a situation that changes in that way. So, we work very hard to make sure that information is accurate and the number of instances has declined very seriously, but I absolutely acknowledge the frustration of people who are caught up in that, and I’m very happy to work with you on an individual basis to make sure that those individuals do get the best solution.

In general, a lower value for sterling would be expected to help support exports by reducing the prices of exported goods in overseas markets. However, export levels are affected by a wide range of factors. Irrespective of the currency position, the Welsh Government engages vigorously in a range of programmes to promote Welsh exports and these efforts will be redoubled as the UK leaves the European Union.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary for that answer. I’d be very interested to hear what specifically ‘redoubling’ actually means. I think it’s fair to say that when negotiations begin between the UK and the EU on our withdrawal from the European Union there might be market volatility, there might be further currency fluctuations as every angle of the negotiations is analysed, and the potential for leaks.

When I asked the Welsh Government what specific support was being provided for the agriculture sector in terms of mitigating currency fluctuations, the response was that currency fluctuations were beyond the control of the Welsh Government, which was a very helpful answer. The Irish Government has established a €150 million agriculture cash flow support loan scheme, making funds available to farmers at low cost to help address impact of currency and exchange rate volatility. I wonder if the Welsh Government might consider an equivalent scheme in this country to support exporters more broadly for potential volatility in the financial and currency markets.

I think the Irish example is one that certainly demands scrutiny and appraisal, but it’s my view that as we leave the EU we will need to work even more closely with the Department for Trade and Investment at a UK level, and intensify our activities in terms of trade missions and in terms of attracting foreign direct investment. We’ve enjoyed, actually, very recently, figures that have come out showing that exports have risen by a record amount. We’re seeing an increase in exports faster than the UK as a whole, up by more than £700 million, but there’s no doubt that as we leave the EU we will need to intensify our efforts to find more new markets and ensure that more businesses export.

The degree to which a country exports is a determining factor in how productive the economy is, and it’s my view—and I’ve been pressing this message with the business community—that more businesses in Wales need to examine the potential to export to more territories. For that reason, we’re looking at more trade mission opportunities and at more engagement programmes to ensure that businesses, large and small, are given every bit of support from Welsh Government they can get to enable them to export.

But one final point that’s very important as well as we leave the EU—currency stability, of course, will be a crucially important factor that determines the damage or the benefits in the aggregate that leaving the EU will deliver to Wales and the UK. But we must go on working where we can with other parts of the UK, both internally and as the UK on an international stage, not least because huge opportunities are delivered to us by Governments outside of Wales, but within the UK, in terms of trade investments leads and also intelligence on new and emerging export territory. So, it’s important that this Government goes on working with other Governments across the UK.

Devaluation means that exports are cheaper in the purchasing currency, but the cost of imports increases in pounds. The pound has fallen from $1.5 from last June to between $1.2 and $1.3, a 14 to 20 per cent reduction. And whilst the cost of imports increases, supported exports are going to increase the cost of exports to be reliant on bringing in raw materials from abroad and producing goods to be exported. It also brings inflation into our economy, which has gone up by a factor of 9 since last year.

Does the Minister share my concern that Welsh exporters can get affected by the increased cost of the raw materials coming in, at the same time as they’ve already set fixed prices for their goods going out, and they’re getting squeezed by that, and does the Cabinet Secretary also agree that what we need is some form of currency stability, so that people know exactly where they are? We’ve had the devaluation—we now need to stay there. We can’t keep on having our currency bouncing around—everybody suffers.

We’ve not had a strong and stable exchange rate in recent months—it’s something that the business community and our economy most certainly need. Depreciation of sterling since the referendum result has been a double-edged sword, in terms of what it has delivered for some exporters in Wales. As Mike Hedges suggests, one effect is to push up the cost of imports, and this adversely affects exporters both directly, as it increases the cost of imported inputs, but also indirectly, as it increases prices across the whole economy, and therefore affects even domestically sourced inputs.

Now, I’m keen to make sure that we examine supply chain opportunities for, in particular, key manufacturing sub-sectors, where there are opportunities across Wales to grow small companies, and indeed to start up new companies. I can think of a number of opportunities in the automotive sector, where currently, considerable numbers of parts for cars produced in the UK are actually sourced from outside the UK, whereas as we leave the EU, it may well be possible to grow businesses within Wales that can act as supply chain manufacturers of goods for the automotive sector. For that reason, a summit is being convened that will bring together the likes of Bentley, Toyota, Vauxhall, Ford and Jaguar Land Rover to ensure that we examine fully and scrutinise the opportunities for a stronger supply chain in the automotive sector.

Small businesses play an important role in the Welsh economy and we continue to provide support for entrepreneurs and small and medium-sized enterprises to sustain and grow in Wales through the dedicated Business Wales service and, indeed, through infrastructure investment in our infrastructure.

Wrexham council spends some £200 million per annum on procuring goods and services through public procurement. Less than a quarter of that, as is far too common across Wales, is with companies within the county, and around half is issued to companies in England. That’s a loss of some £100 million per annum to the Welsh economy. Now, there are potatoes for school dinners coming from Rochdale, although there is a potato distributing company in the town. There is bread for school lunches coming from Liverpool, although companies such as Village Bakery are more than able to provide that produce. So, with new councils being formed across Wales over the next few weeks, what’s your message to Welsh councils in terms of improving the very disappointing record that we have at the moment in terms of public procurement in Wales?

I think it’s very important that councils scope out opportunities for the business community in their respective areas to ensure that businesses are registered on the Sell2Wales database. At the moment, it’s got something in the region of 34,000 registered suppliers. It’s essential that we go on building the database, and that local authority economic development units and procurement units work closely with business organisations—with Business Wales in particular—in disseminating information about the opportunities that are there at the moment, and which could emerge in the coming months. I think there’s a huge opportunity with the work that will take place on a regional footing in local government to better scope out and better disseminate the information that is required by businesses to win important procurement projects and to be part of a growing area of the economy in Wales.

Yes. Our tourism strategy, ‘Partnership for Growth’, sets out our priorities for each of the years leading to the turn of this decade to grow the tourism industry across Wales; to invest in the industry; and to ensure that, as a partnership, we go on enjoying world-class developments and events that are attracting many, many millions of people every year.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. Of course, the tourism industry in Wales brings in over £6.2 billion to our economy, 13 per cent compared to just 8 per cent in England, 10 per cent in Scotland and only 4 per cent in Northern Ireland, a direct contribution of £2.7 billion that equates to 6 per cent of our GDP. That’s predicted to grow to 7 per cent by 2020 and that accounts, of course, for 14 per cent in terms of employment. It is clear that as a Government you should be valuing, encouraging and supporting this much-valued industry. But much of it, of course, is achieved, by those working in the private sector with much personal investment and a lot of hard work. Given the huge burden now facing many small tourism operators—and I do know of hoteliers in Llandudno who are facing now recent increases of over 83 per cent—how are you working as a Government to look once again at the business rates multiplier in order to prevent our businesses, in effect, from going backwards and perhaps going out of business?

I think the Member raises a number of important points. First and foremost, the Government is here to help businesses that right now are struggling because of revaluation. The Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government has detailed the support and the increase in resources available to support small businesses, not just in the tourism sector, but in many other sectors. But I think it’s also important that we recognise the importance of growing the value of the visitor economy. It’s through growing the value that we grow profit levels, largely, and in North Wales, an area of the country that the Member represents, we’ve seen a pretty staggering growth in the number of high-quality restaurants, hotels and tourist attractions.

I was with Sean Taylor, the entrepreneur that put together the Zip World collection of world-class attractions, just last week to see the new forest coaster: a remarkable piece of infrastructure—a first-on-the-planet piece of infrastructure—and something that many would consider to be very eccentric, but it is of the highest quality. As the Member highlighted in her question, it’s being delivered by an entrepreneur with somewhat eccentric ideas, but ideas that are delivering the goods. Where people come forward with ideas that are workable, we will back them. As has been shown by Zip World, right across an area of North Wales that desperately needed investment in jobs and services, he’s created more than 200 jobs in that time. That’s an incredible achievement. So, I want to see the sector go on growing, not just in number—in terms of employment numbers—but also in terms of quality.

I’ll be making an announcement tomorrow regarding the recent thematic years, which I hope Members will discover is exciting. But I’m also intent on making sure that we use our resources through the tourism innovation fund and the tourism investment support scheme to continue to develop world-class reputation-changing attractions that bring more people into Wales, spending more money, driving up the value of the economy and making sure that those visitor-economy-related businesses are sustainable in the long term.

And finally, question 9, Eluned Morgan.

Yes. Rural Wales has specific opportunities and challenges, which have been brought into sharpened focus as a result of Brexit. We must look at the contribution of all the levers at our disposal, across all ministerial portfolios, which have a part to play in shaping and also influencing an agenda of prosperity for all.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. We heard during the referendum that Brexiteers like R.T. Davies and Neil Hamilton made promise after promise—[Interruption.]—yes, and you, Janet Finch-Saunders, fair enough; you made those promises as well. I think it’s worth saying that those promises were made to the farmers of Wales and the people of Wales, who were promised that they would not see a cut in the amount of money coming to Wales. Now, in rural Wales, that amounts to about €350 million a year. One thing is clear to me and that is, whichever way we leave the European Union, hard or soft, we’ll see the end of the common agricultural policy.

Does the Cabinet Secretary believe that rather than cross our fingers and hope for the best in terms of what comes next, actually we need to start focusing now on our rural economy, and we need to develop a specific rural economic development plan for Wales? That should include things like providing the right infrastructure, and I’d like to congratulate Julie James on the incredible work that has been done on superfast broadband in rural Wales, but other things like the foundational economy, the need to enhance tourism and the need to add value. But specifically, how are we going to deliver an economic development plan for rural Wales? What are the drivers? Who is going to deliver it? Because the massive pressure on local authorities means that it’s very, very difficult for them to deliver without support from the Welsh Government.

Can I thank the Member for her question, and also thank the Member for recently hosting me at one of her forums—the mid and west Wales economic forum—which I found incredibly interesting and which certainly has contributed to my thinking with regard to the new regional place-based economic development agenda, which I have talked of previously in this Chamber and at other venues? I think it’s absolutely essential that the agriculture sector, in particular, gets continued support from Welsh Government as we leave the EU, but there is also a need to recognise that challenges faced across rural Wales can be unique and require bespoke solutions. For that reason, I’m keen to go on working not just with the Member through her economic forum, but also with my colleagues across Government, and principally the Cabinet Secretary for environment and natural resources, to ensure that as we succeed in spite of or because of Brexit, regardless of which it is, that we do succeed and that all parts of Wales benefit from economic growth in the future. Not all parts of Wales have benefited equally from economic growth in recent years. It’s this Government’s intention to ensure that in the future there is prosperity for all.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary.

The next item is questions to the Cabinet Secretary for Health, Well-being and Sport, and the first question is from Caroline Jones.

Thank you for the question. I understand, Presiding Officer, that you’ve agreed for questions 1 and 5 to be grouped. The number of people waiting over eight weeks for diagnostics at the end of February 2017 was 41 per cent lower than February 2016. This is the lowest figure since June 2011. The latest median waiting time for diagnostic tests across Wales is 2.6 weeks.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. Regretfully, far too many people are still waiting far too long for diagnostic tests. We still have nearly 2,000 people waiting more than 24 weeks for diagnostic and therapy services. Diagnostics are the central pillar of our health service, and we must do more to improve access to testing and eliminate waits over 24 weeks. What is your Government doing to ensure that no-one in future has to wait half a year for diagnostic tests?

We’ve made real and significant progress, as I outlined in my earlier answer. I’m clear that the progress is significant and sustainable. In particular, a number of health boards—Hywel Dda, for instance—have no-one waiting over the relevant target time. The challenge will be for the numbers that are left, primarily in south-east Wales, and how they are resolved. I’ve been very clear with both executive officers, but also in particular chairs of health boards, that I expect people to meet to make further progress this year, because whilst I celebrate the progress that is made, I’m never complacent when in fact there is more progress still to be made and some people do wait too long, and I’m determined that NHS Wales will continue to deliver and improve.

Cabinet Secretary, access to diagnostic tests and treatment is particularly important in emergency situations, so I was wondering whether you could comment on the fact that, in a recent coroner’s report following a tragic case of a lady who waited seven hours in an ambulance outside Glan Clwyd Hospital, who passed away shortly afterwards in hospital, he actually said, and I quote his report here:

It is of grave concern to me that my statutory duty requires me to report these concerns by way of regulation 28 reports on a very regular basis.’

So, this isn’t a one-off. This is something that has happened on a regular basis—’a very regular basis’, according to the coroner—outside that particular hospital. This poor woman, this 56-year-old lady, was unable to get access to the tests and treatment quickly enough that she needed to get access to, and that may or may not have resulted in and contributed to her death. Given that this is a health board that is in special measures and that you’re ultimately responsible for that health board as Cabinet Secretary, what are you doing to heed the concerns of the coroner and to make sure that these events don’t happen on ‘a very regular basis’ in the future?

Well, I’ve described the improvements that have been made, but I should just start by recognising that a wait of seven hours outside any hospital department is not acceptable. We need to be clear about not just the level of improvement we’ve made, but equally what we don’t find acceptable within our healthcare system, so we’re clear about the improvement that is necessary. I’m confident that with the improvements that have been made—in fact, in Betsi Cadwaladr, for diagnostic tests, they’ve made significant and sustained improvements for diagnostic waits. The challenge about how our whole system joins up is one that is not complete. I know that in some of the sites across north Wales, the waits outside hospitals are much prompter than others. So, I expect this to be a continued focus of attention—not just the individual case that you highlight, but understanding the broader picture—so we do have a position that is generally acceptable and providing the high-quality healthcare that each citizen in Wales is entitled to expect.

Cabinet Secretary, I welcome the reduction in waiting time waits for the diagnostic tests that you’ve identified. It’s very important that we get people through as quickly as possible. I also welcome the investment in the hub at the Royal Glamorgan Hospital that’s been put into place to ensure that diagnostics work with clinicians on site to improve the service for people. Will you be doing more of these hubs across Wales, and if so, can I put a bid in for Neath Port Talbot Hospital, which is ideally situated for such a hub?

Well, I recognise that he is the local Member for Aberavon. Look, there’s been real progress made in every single health board. Again, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg health board have made real and significant progress in this area. The diagnostic hub to be based at Royal Glamorgan is part of the south Wales programme: the development of a more joined-up service, understanding where those tests could and should take place, as we recognise that whether it’s in unscheduled care or scheduled care, having diagnostic certainty is hugely important to then make proper treatment decisions. I’ll decline from indicating where I’m about to locate, or advance the case for a diagnostic hub to be based in anyone else’s particularly local hospital, but I expect the whole service—the planned for, the demand that we know exists now, that we know will exist in the future—to have a system that is properly geared up to meet those demands that are utterly predictable. We do though know that will require some reform in the way we organise our service. There’ll need to be a properly mature conversation about that in the future. Obviously, I hope that—[Inaudible.]—will help to advance their cause.

Cabinet Secretary, you know that the vast range of new diagnostic equipment is very expensive and very, very effective, leading to more investigations sometimes, and using the new equipment as efficiently as possible is a key to reducing waiting lists—I mean in the evenings, for instance, and over weekends, which often provides more convenient appointment times for people who are in work for instance.

I recognise some of the points that he’s made, as does the service. We invest significant amounts of capital in providing the latest diagnostic equipment. It is important we make best use of it and understand what it’s potentially useful for. For example, I visited equipment that was required for one purpose, but it was actually able to deal with different diagnostic tests. So, it’s well understood in the service, and that’s part of the broader point about what reform does mean. It doesn’t just mean reorganising the physical location of services in primary and secondary care. It also means making the best and most efficient use of the assets that we already have—those are the staff and the equipment that we have. So, your point is well made and well understood by the service.

Thank you for the question. As a direct result of the UK Government’s commitment to austerity, the Welsh Government budget will be 9 per cent lower in real terms by the end of the decade. Despite the cuts imposed upon us, the Welsh Government continues to invest in NHS Wales. That means that in the first two years of this Government, we will have invested over £0.5 billion of additional funding into NHS Wales.

That’s very good to hear, but it’s also worth, I think, underlining the point that it’s not just economic challenges that the NHS is facing; there are particular problems in terms of recruitment. And, as well as in parts of England, there are particular problems in rural Wales in terms of recruitment, where, for example, the Hywel Dda health board have committed to revert to 12-hour consultant coverage at the paediatric ambulatory care unit in Withybush, once they’ve managed to strengthen their clinical team. The problem is that the Royal College of Paediatricians have suggested that 41 per cent of neonatal clinics across the whole of the UK had to be temporarily closed in the past year because of recruitment difficulties, and Withybush is fishing in the same pool for those experts.

I just wondered how we’re going to address that issue, and can you confirm that, in an emergency, Withybush accident and emergency can deal with paediatric cases?

Thank you for the question. On the final point, it continues to be my understanding there is paediatric capability within the A&E to properly meet the needs of patients who do require treatment in an emergency.

Look, there’s a broader challenge here that you’re quite right to highlight about our ability to recruit and the particular shortages in some areas, where they are UK-wide problems and more than that—right across western Europe there are challenges in some areas of recruitment. So, that’s part of the honest challenge we have to take on board on actually improving but reforming the way our health service works in the future. That’s why having attractive models of care organised across the community, and, where necessary, in a hospital, really do matter. If we’re going to recruit the best people, if we’re going to recruit people into these shortage professions, we need to have an attractive place to work.

And, for all the significant success that we’ve had in the first phase of ‘Train. Work. Live.’ for recruiting doctors—a significant move forward for Wales—we recognise there is more for us to do and that campaign in itself won’t get us over some of these speciality areas. So, thinking very clearly and carefully about the future of the service, how it’s organised, who we want to attract, and the terms on which we ask people to work, who they actually work with, are really important for the future in a whole range of different areas.

In March, Cabinet Secretary, the community and children’s Secretary said that good, secure housing not only reduces the burden on other services, such as the NHS or social care, but it will also improve the quality of life for people, and I think none of us would disagree with that. However, I would go a little further and say that housing that’s designed to be easily adaptable, perhaps designed with the guidance of rehabilitation experts, is also important, as it allows older people to stay in their properties for longer without having to move out of an area that they’re familiar with, for example. So, can you tell me what kind of cross-portfolio conversations have you been having about preparing guidance for the construction industry, not least those who are building council properties, that will anticipate changes in people’s lives because of health and old age and that will actually make it cheaper for them to adapt and to receive rehabilitation in their homes in the future?

Thank you for the question. I’m pleased to confirm that the investment that the Welsh Government has made in improving the quality of people’s homes, in particular making them more energy efficient, has had a real benefit in both financial terms, but also in health outcomes as well. There’s developing evidence there are better health outcomes for those people as a direct result of that Welsh Government intervention.

And, in terms of the point about not just adaptation, but about the sort of housing that we commission in our use of capital, I’ve had direct conversations with the Cabinet Secretary for communities about the way in which capital is used. And it needs to be a part of a developing theme of this Government to make sure we don’t just meet our targets on house building, but that the sort of housing that we build, the way in which local authorities and health boards commission care, and what provision they’re looking for, is properly taken account of by house builders, and, in particular, the registered social landlords sector, but more widely as well. And I’m confident you will see more progress and a more joined-up approach from this Government. I’m sure I’ll have more to say on this in the coming months.

Questions now from the party spokespeople to the Cabinet Secretary. The Conservative spokesperson, Suzy Davies.

Thank you again, Llywydd.

Gweinidog, diolch yn fawr iawn am eich datganiad ar gyllid gofal cymdeithasol a gyhoeddwyd y bore yma. Yn wyneb y £2 biliwn ychwanegol a ddaeth gan Lywodraeth Geidwadol y DU ar gyfer hyn, rwy’n credu ei bod yn bwysig eich bod wedi gwneud datganiad cynnar yn nodi eich bod yn barod i ymrwymo arian rydym wedi’i gaffael drwy gyllid canlyniadol Barnett ar gyfer yr un pwrpas, ac felly rwy’n croesawu hynny. Rydych eisoes wedi cyhoeddi arian ychwanegol, wedi’i anelu, rwy’n credu—mae’n ymddangos i mi, beth bynnag—bron yn gyfan gwbl tuag at y gost ychwanegol o ddarparu’r cyflog byw cenedlaethol; yn amlwg, rwy’n cefnogi hynny. Ond mae’r £9 miliwn newydd o gyllid canlyniadol Barnett rydych wedi’i gyhoeddi heddiw i’w weld wedi’i anelu at yr un diben yn union. A yw hynny oherwydd bod eich dyraniad gwreiddiol yn annigonol, neu a oes gennych ffigurau newydd sydd wedi dangos bod y costau hyn yn uwch nag a ragwelwyd gennych?

I thank you very much for the question and for the warm welcome that you have given to our additional funding and additional investment in social care in Wales. And, just for the benefit of Members, the additional funding that I announced today did include that extra £9 million to help meet the pressures of the national living wage within the sector, but also a further £8 million to support work to prevent children from entering care and improve outcomes for those who are in care, and also £3 million to local authorities to support respite for carers, given the crucial role that we know that carers play as well. The domiciliary and residential care workforce has a crucial role in society and we have been concerned at the level of turnover within that sector, which is around 30 per cent in some areas at the moment. So, the aim of the funding is to allow local authorities to invest, and providers to invest, in their workforce—to raise the pay, obviously, that their workforce receives at the moment, but also to look at what more we can do to keep people in the sector as well. So, it’s investing in skills and investing in the individuals more widely as well, ensuring that people don’t have to pay for the clothes that they wear to undertake their role, and so on.

So, the additional funding was made because we’re able to do it because of the extra money that we had through the consequential funding, and it’s welcomed by local authorities. I’d add as well that we have written to local authorities because this is grant funding in this first year. So, we’ve set out quite clearly to local authorities what we will be expecting them to achieve for the sector through the additional funding that we’ve made available today.

I’m very grateful to you, particularly for the last part of your answer there. As I say, I’m more than happy to welcome everything that’s in the statement, but, obviously, I’m going to be scrutinising you on how well you are watching how that is spent. The £3 million given to local authorities for respite, obviously, and particularly in view of what we were talking about here yesterday, is very important. It’s an area where provision is particularly weak, and I’m very keen to know what you’re going to do to make sure that that is spent on front-line respite provision and that it doesn’t get eaten up in procurement or commissioning processes, which do have a tendency to eat up money, particularly when it comes to respite for social care, where we need every single penny.

I prioritised respite for carers because this is one of the areas that carers repeatedly tell us that they need more support in, and we need to look after our carers to ensure that they’re able to continue to look after the people who they care for in return. So, I will be working up the specific details in terms of what we will be requiring from local authorities with regard to the funding for respite care particularly, and, again, that will go out through grant funding, with specific requirements on local authorities as to what we would expect them to see for that money, and for support for carers locally as well, because we absolutely are clear that this has to make a difference for carers on the front line, who will be in receipt of respite, to, as I say, enable them to continue the important role that they do.

Well, for that very reason, I’m very pleased it hasn’t gone into the revenue support grant, so I do thank you for that. Could I ask you: do you welcome the Prime Minister’s announcement of a statutory right for leave for those with caring responsibilities?

When you initially see that there’s a right for carers to have statutory leave, fantastic, and then you see it’s an unpaid year off work, and then you realise that that is going to be completely out of the reach of most people who are carers, unfortunately. I don’t know many carers who can afford to take a year off work, and it just seems again that it’s a Conservative policy from the UK Government that is an empty promise, but which also benefits those who have, and so benefits the few, not the many, in the sense that only the highest-earning people and those who are in families that are already wealthy are going to realistically be able to take a full year off work completely unpaid. So, in that sense, I don’t think it will be taken up by huge amounts of people in Wales. So, what we do need to do is ensure that the respite care, and the things that are in our gift in the Assembly to deliver, really do meet the needs of carers right across Wales. And, actually, we know as well that carers find it very difficult to find employment anyway, so many carers are out of work because of the nature of the caring responsibilities they have. So, there’s a role for us as well to look at what we can do to make employers in Wales more carer-friendly, more flexible, to allow carers to return to work. And we’re also looking at interesting projects to see how we can perhaps look at whether or not carers are able to access some kind of accreditation for the caring work that they do. So, it might be that, at a point in the future, they’re able to use the experience and expertise that they’ve gained as carers to take that step, then, into paid employment in the caring field.

UKIP spokesperson, Caroline Jones.

Diolch, Llywydd. Cabinet Secretary, I welcome the nurse recruitment campaign and the news that the Welsh Government is to retain the student nursing bursaries for another year. We need to do all we can to encourage people from all walks of life in Wales to consider a career in nursing. What plans does your Government have to extend the nursing bursaries in the future to ensure that Welsh residents considering a career change can afford to train as nurses?

I welcome the support provided for the NHS bursary, provided not just for nurses, but a range of other allied health professionals, to help them through their training. We recognise, given that the average age of a nurse in training is in their late 20s, that they’re likely to have ties to a local area and they’re likely to have responsibilities. Taking away the financial support, as has been done by the United Kingdom Government across our border for those people training in England, has a serious and significant effect. We’ve seen a significant drop—24 per cent—in the people applying for nurse training across the border as a direct result. We made a choice, based on the evidence, to support people undertaking healthcare courses, including nurses, and it was very well received when I attended the Royal College of Nursing congress in Liverpool on Sunday and Monday. This Government will provide not just the direction of travel that we’ve been very clear about recently, but a fuller and more comprehensive long-term approach to supporting people undertaking healthcare education, when we announce our full and final response to the Diamond review in due course.

Thank you for that answer, Cabinet Secretary. While the nursing recruitment campaign can help address short-term staffing issues, we need to think about the longer term and how we can encourage more Welsh people, particularly Welsh speakers, into nursing. UKIP would like to see the reintroduction of the equivalent of the state enrolled nurse, which would allow healthcare assistants and others to train as nurses without requiring a degree. What consideration has your Government given to the reintroduction of some form of enrolled nurse into the Welsh NHS?

Well, I welcome the recognition that the ‘Train. Work. Live.’ campaign is a positive step forward for nursing in Wales. It’s had an incredibly positive response at the outset from the current nursing workforce, who are very proud to see themselves being highlighted and featured—the four individual named and photographed people are nurses with different career routes, and that’s been very much welcomed by the current nursing workforce. They recognise the focus of attention and, if you like, some hope for the future and a deliberately different approach here in Wales.

This Government does not support a return to a state enrolled nurse role, partly because we have spent significant time and effort working with the nursing family to develop a career path and a development path for healthcare support workers. In fact, the Member for Merthyr Tydfil and Rhymney behind you was part of the conversation in her previous role about developing that career path and development. We also see a number of healthcare support workers undertaking training from their current role into nursing, so they’re still undertaking work as well. That’s part of the flexibility we’ve provided, to make sure that that can take place so that those people who are in work with responsibilities can still carry on working whilst undertaking their nursing qualification. There is no support from representatives of the nursing workforce for us to remove the status and the requirement for nursing to be a graduate career, and I’m happy to listen to those people about how we develop the very best nursing care from the whole nursing family, and we do properly value and support the role of healthcare support workers.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. Finally, we not only have to recruit more nurses, but we also must ensure that we retain our existing nurses. According to the RCN, nurses in Wales often do not feel valued by the NHS or the Government. There has been a 14 per cent real-terms fall in nursing pay since 2010, and 69 per cent of nurses work overtime at least once a week. What plans does your Government have to improve nurses’ pay, terms and conditions and ensure that they have access to continuous professional development in order to reflect how we, as a nation, value the profession?

I recognise the points that are made about the feelings of a number of people within the nursing workforce. Part of what we’re doing to retain people, of course—those people that are training—is not just support with the bursary, but also the fact that that comes with the expectation that people will take up the offer of two years of employment here in Wales, so people will continue to work within Wales as well. We actually have pretty good retention rates, as well, for people who actually complete their courses.

On the broader point about the 14 per cent fall in the real terms of nurses’ pay since the Conservatives came in to lead the UK Government, the reality is that the direct imposition of a public sector pay cap is a real barrier not just for nurses, but a whole range of public sector workers. I would dearly love to be in a position where we had a different approach taken. You will recognise, of course, that there are different manifesto pledges being made outside of this place ahead of the general election, and my party on a UK level has to pledge to break the public sector pay cap if we return to the UK Government. That is good news for nurses. We would be able to properly value them and recognise in their pay the real support the public have for them.

But, in terms of your point about nurses not being valued by the Government, I can confirm there is a radically different approach and understanding for nurses here in Wales compared to across our border, and that point was made plain to me on a number of occasions forcefully, clearly and politely by nurses, both in Wales and in England, who I met at the recent Royal College of Nursing congress in Liverpool. So, a good story for us in Wales. There’s more that we could do if only we had a UK Government on the side of Wales.

The Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Rhun ap Iorwerth.

Diolch, Llywydd. Now, last week was Mental Health Awareness Week, and, though that’s been and gone, we’ve got to keep the issue’s prominence, of course, on our agenda.

Last week, I raised the issue of mental health services in the north of Wales with the First Minister, in particular the number of mental health patients who had been sent out of north Wales, hundreds of miles away from their families, including children. The First Minister’s response was that he didn’t accept the figures. Do you accept the figures?

We know that there are a number of people who are being sent out of area. We’ve seen a significant improvement in the number of people going out of area for treatment. Some of those people will go out of area because they require specialist support that is not available in Wales—we don’t have the number or the ability to commission and provide that care directly in Wales. Some people are still, though, going inappropriately out of area, but we’ve made significant progress on this issue over this year. So, for example, there are now single-digit numbers of children going out of area for placements. I accept that, for each person where there’s long travel to go to an appropriate placement, that would be a real issue for them, their family and their loved ones. The point is, though, there is real progress that has been made over this last year, and we expect further progress to be made in the years to come.

So you keep telling us. Some of the figures that the First Minister didn’t accept this week were that waiting times for CAMHS haven’t improved. He claimed things had moved on significantly. We all know that if you want to demonstrate improvement, you simply take the month where figures were at their worst as your starting point and compare with more recent ones and, unless the performance is worse, the maths will show an improvement. That’s what the First Minister did yesterday. In reality, an honest look at CAMHS waiting times shows that, prior to July 2013, the percentage of children waiting over 26 weeks never went above 10 per cent. Then, waiting times skyrocketed to 36 per cent waiting over 26 weeks in September 2015, before, yes, recovering to the current level of 20.5 per cent in February this year, which is when we have the most recent figures. An improvement in a period of time, but not overall. Do you accept that this is a more accurate reflection of the performance of CAMHS, and when will you accept that the First Minister or yourself simply standing there saying that targets are being met is a long way from the reality faced by desperate staff and desperate patients who share with us as Assembly Members their experiences?

Well, I would hope that we could have a searching but reflective conversation about this, and I’m disappointed by the tone that is struck. I don’t try to avoid scrutiny at all, but the reality is that, when looking at the period over the last few years, we’ve seen a significant rise in the number of referrals and the ability of our system to cope. There was a time when people were waiting significantly longer than they should have done, and some people do still wait too long—we have a backlog to clear—but we have made undeniable, real and significant progress. The investment decisions made over the last couple of years have made a real difference for families entering into the CAMHS system. There’s additional focus on the support that should be available outside of the CAMHS network, as well—the progress of Together for Children and Young People. There is real progress being made, and I don’t deny your right to scrutinise me, I don’t deny your right to ask difficult and awkward questions, but I do wish they could be a more reflective and a more accurate picture of the progress that really is being made. And when we see—. We’ll have figures out tomorrow across a whole range of NHS services, but NHS health boards have committed to meeting the waiting time standard for people who should be seen within 28 days of referral. They say they are confident that they will meet that standard, and I look forward to seeing the figures published, to see if they have done that. I will certainly hold them to account. There will be no lessening in scrutiny or expectation from Ministers in this Government, to make sure that people are seen appropriately and by the right service.

But people aren’t stupid; they know when people are being selective with figures. There’s clearly a shortage of staff in mental health, and I hope that you would agree with that. Another area of health workforce where we have shortages is among GPs. It’s a Wales-wide problem. It’s one of the reasons to support Plaid Cymru’s pledge to train and recruit 1,000 extra doctors. Now, patients in Burry Port are the latest to hear that they have to leave the area to see a GP, due to the closure of a surgery. The Member for Llanelli has been typically lively on the backbenches today. I do understand that local Labour politicians are protesting against this. Will you be joining them, I wonder, in their protest, as I seem to recall the former education Minister doing, against the closure of a school in his constituency? Or will you own up to the fact that it’s Labour’s, Welsh Government’s failings in workforce planning that has led to this shortage of GPs?

The honest and mature approach that I thought we would have to discussing healthcare in the future, which was taken by the parliamentary review, of course, doesn’t exist when it comes to ministerial questions. The reality is we are recruiting more GPs. We are training more GPs in Wales. We’ll have a more successful approach in the future. The Train, Work, Live campaign has been significantly successful in us actually having more GPs coming into Wales. I expect to see, as we make commissioning decisions in the future, that we will properly take account of the workforce planning that we need to do, in a much more joined-up way. There has been real improvement in this area.

Now, when you then talk about 1,000 extra doctors as the answer, well, that’s what we’d politely call an aspirational target—not a real or an achievable one. In this position, in the Government, you have to commit to things that will make a difference. That’s what I’m doing in this, and I’m proud of the fact that we are making a real difference for people right across the medical workforce here in Wales. And I say that every Member is entitled to stand up for their local community and ask awkward questions of health boards and me. That includes the Member for Llanelli, who is standing up for his community and asking what arrangements will be in place for the future of primary care. I don’t complain about that from any Member in this place, and nor should I. That’s people doing their job. I just wish we could have a much more honest and grown-up conversation between ourselves in this Chamber, as well as outside of it.

The Cabinet Secretary for Environment and Rural Affairs leads for the Welsh Government on air quality, and her officials continue to have significant engagement with their UK counterparts on matters such as UK-wide air quality modelling, EU legislation on trans-boundary air pollution, EU reporting, air quality research, and air pollution episodes.

Thank you for that response, Minister. I understand that the Cabinet Secretary leads on this, but this was a specific question on the impact on public health, because it’s been accepted that air pollution is the second greatest factor in terms of early deaths in Wales and has been described as a public health crisis in evidence to the Climate Change, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee by the head of Public Health Wales. So, specifically, what are you going to do to mitigate the impacts of air pollution on health and, specifically, are you going to commit today in the Chamber that the Government, in its clean air plans that were mentioned yesterday by the First Minister, will have a target to reduce air pollution in Wales and specific targets within the plans to demonstrate that we’re on the right track to reduce air pollution in Wales?

Well, I thank you very much for that question and would reiterate that the Welsh Government does recognise the seriousness of air pollution and the impact that it does have on public health, because we have recognised this through our public health outcomes framework indicators, in which we actually specifically include the average concentration of nitrogen dioxide at dwellings as one of those indicators.

We’ll be issuing guidance very shortly to support health and public health professionals in NHS Wales by providing key messages about the role that they can play in supporting local authorities on air quality and communicating the public health risks of poor air quality to the public and to other agencies as well. We will also be undertaking an awareness-raising campaign on air quality for health professionals and the general public.

Public Health Wales also is currently undertaking a research project to enhance the local air quality management regime in Wales to maximise the public health outcomes as well. So, we absolutely see air pollution within that important public health context.

With regard to the specific question on the clean air zone framework, of course this comes about as a result of the joint UK consultation on nitrogen dioxide. You are aware, of course, of our commitment to consult within the next 12 months on the details of the proposals for the clean air zone framework for Wales. This is something that the Cabinet Secretary will be developing. I wouldn’t want to pre-empt anything that the Cabinet Secretary decides to do in this regard.

I appreciate that it’s the primary responsibility of the Cabinet Secretary for climate change and the environment, but I hope we can see a whole-system approach by the whole Government. I’m sure that the Cabinet Secretary for Education would also have some responsibility for ensuring that our children in school are not being subjected to unnecessary levels of nitrogen dioxide. Therefore, what would the advice be to schools from public health experts as to whether it’s safe on particular days for children to be playing outside?

I completely agree that schools do have a crucially important role to play in terms of managing pollution when children are being dropped off at school, because we know that the start and the end of the day are particular points at which children are exposed to high levels of air pollution. That’s partly because of the school run, and that brings into focus all the important work that we are doing on active travel as well. But schools also have an important role in terms of educating children and their families about the dangers of air pollution. Now, there are simple things that people can do in their individual lives to reduce air pollution as well. The Welsh Government has committed to issuing new air quality policy guidance to local authorities next month, and I can confirm that that guidance will recognise schools and active travel routes, amongst others, as sensitive receptor locations. Local authorities really do have to take a risk-based approach in terms of siting their monitors, and that should be based on the evidence that they have in terms of areas that are likely to be exposed, or areas where people are likely to be exposed to the highest levels of air pollution.

We recognise that the health board are working hard to make the necessary improvements to mental health services across north Wales. A new mental health strategy for north Wales was agreed by the board on 20 April and has been endorsed by their six local authority partners.

Thank you. Thanks for your response, Cabinet Secretary. I’d like to acknowledge the work that the Welsh Government is doing and the commitment to raising awareness and tackling the stigma around mental health. The challenges facing us in north Wales have been and are well documented. I welcome the health board’s new multi-agency approach to developing the new mental health strategy, which you’ve just mentioned, and the commitment to work with service users as well as staff to improve our services. However, it’s clear, and I know that the health board also acknowledges, that there is so much more we can do to improve mental health services in our area. Hopefully, the new strategy and the health board’s engagement with service users are a step in the right direction, but, clearly, there is much more that needs to be done, and it’s something that I will be paying close attention to, holding them to account on behalf of my constituents in Delyn. Cabinet Secretary, can I ask that you continue to strongly monitor and make sure that improving mental health services and support is a priority in, and for the people of, north Wales?

Yes, I am happy to give that assurance. It’s been a real step forward, though, to actually get to the point where there is a proper mental health strategy to consult upon—not just to consult upon, but it’s been drawn up following work that the health board has done with local government, as I mentioned, but also with the third sector and with staff in the service, and with users of the service as well. To be fair, that wasn’t the case and wasn’t the position prior to special measures. It wasn’t an acceptable position, and this was a significant factor in the health board going into special measures. The reality is not just the provision of the service, but actually the forward strategy not being where it could and should be. So, there’s a real step forward, and the new leadership brought by Andy Roach, and also the significant progress made by both the interim chief executive and the current chief executive, should give us more confidence for the future.

But it’s certainly not an area to let go of or to be complacent and say everything is fixed because there is a new strategy. There are real challenges to overcome and this is a significant part of interest to the regulators when they meet to advise the Welsh Government on the progress that Betsi Cadwaladr has made and that progress that is still required to come. So, Healthcare Inspectorate Wales continue to take an active interest in the provision of mental health services, I continue to be concerned about the progress being made and I’ll maintain that concern and that interest until we are in a position not just where we can see the health board leaving special measures when the regulators advise us it is appropriate to do so, but even after that there needs to be a continued focus on the provision and improvement of mental health services right across north Wales.

Continuing gaps in north Wales in dual diagnostic treatment for people with mental health problems and substance misuse mean that the revolving door is tragically still alive and well. It’s a decade since a Welsh Government-commissioned report into tier 4 inpatient detoxification and rehabilitation services was leaked to me, having being buried, identifying people deliberately reoffending because of these gaps and the hospital admissions because of the absence of this treatment. The Welsh Government did come forward with a proposed model working with three third sector providers in north, central and south Wales. A decade later, where are we up to with that, so that those people desperately needing that dual diagnostic treatment can receive it in the region they live?

You ask about provision across a range of different areas and substance misuse, obviously, is a matter that the Minister leads on. I’m happy for us to write to you to give you an update on where we are with tier 4 services in north Wales and, more generally, for Members across the country as well.

You’re entirely right, of course, to say that we shouldn’t mislead ourselves in thinking that the situation has been resolved, because I had quite a shocking meeting with professionals in the sector in north Wales a week or two ago, and they mentioned that it was a lack of capacity, a shortage of beds and a shortage of staff that was one of the central problems, which creates a vicious circle where people are released from units too soon because the capacity isn’t there to take new patients into a community regime that doesn’t have the capacity to deal with the numbers, which, at the other end, is going to push more people into those units in order to deal with the burden. What they told me was that the situation is now worse than it has ever been before.

Now, I accept what you say in terms of a long-term strategy and looking to the future, but the reality is, of course, that there have been two years now since the Betsi Cadwaladr health board was put into special measures, and, as you said, one of the reasons for that was the deficiencies in mental health services. So, I’m sure you will acknowledge that the situation as it currently exists is not acceptable. But what people want to know is: what is the plan to deal with these difficulties now, today, whilst, of course, moving forward to longer term plans in the future?

I thank you for the question and I recognise that the challenges that are faced by the service in north Wales are about a proper understanding of capacity and demand and need, but also how the service is organised—that really does make a difference—and making sure that the resources available to it are properly used and organised. There is something about having a proper, clear strategy to understand what we’re trying to achieve and why, as well, and there’s a really significant step forward that has been made. But objectively, the provision of mental health services in the round is in a better place in north Wales than it was a couple of years ago.

But as in every other service, if you’re at the front line and you’re in a busy and a difficult and demanding job, you may not be able to take a step back and think ‘This is better than where we were a year ago, 24 months and 36 months ago.’ That’s part of the reason why we have an objective process with the regulators. They don’t take my word for it about the progress made. The regulators come up with a rounded assessment independent of Government and they then give us advice about the progress through special measures. Whatever happens with special measures, there will be a need to continue to look at, as I said in answer to Hannah Blythyn, the provision of mental health services, the quality and the outcomes delivered with and for people in north Wales. I am under no illusion whatsoever that the progress we describe must be honest, but it must also recognise there is more still to be done, both in the here and now, in the immediate period, as well as for the medium and longer term future. So, I certainly don’t try to deny the challenges and I’m sure I’ll get many more questions in this Chamber about where we really are.

The Welsh Government is committed to the continuous improvement of access to mental health services in Wales and to support this we have increased funding for mental health services to £629 million in this financial year.

There’s been a lot of concern already expressed about mental health services in north Wales and I can tell you that my postbag is just as bad now as it was before the Tawel Fan scandal emerged into the public domain. One of the concerns that has been raised with me is about capacity, and Llyr’s already picked up on this, but that capacity problem that we have in terms of inpatient beds is requiring some vulnerable people to sleep on sofas in open lounge areas; some vulnerable individuals are being put into inappropriate male wards—young women, for example—and others, of course, are having to be transferred hundreds of miles to other inpatient care settings, all of which, I am sure you will agree, is totally unacceptable. Given that this is a health board that has been in special measures for almost two years now, and that these things are happening on your watch, Cabinet Secretary, what are you personally doing to make sure that these sorts of bad and unacceptable practices are stamped out immediately in the health service in north Wales?

I thank the Member for his follow-up question. I understand you’ve directly engaged with the health board on a number of these issues. As I’ve said in response to previous questions, it’s important that we do see real improvement. The change in leadership has been a step forward. We recognise, though, that the way in which some of the services are currently organised is not as we wish it to be, and that does mean some people don’t receive the service that we would wish them to.

On the point about where vulnerable people are placed for a period of time, on the particular point about sofas, my understanding is that a conversation has taken place with that service user, that person, about what their preference is, because they’ve been offered on some occasions a transfer, and they’ve declined, and they’d like to stay in that particular place. It is a temporary measure until they move to an appropriate setting. But it is not an appropriate long-term position to be in, where that is happening to any of our patients. It should be an extreme measure rather than a regular one. So, I’ve made clear, and our officials are making clear with the health board, that the current practice isn’t appropriate, and they do need to move on and improve it, and have the appropriate capacity in the appropriate place to deliver on the needs that exist.

So, as I say in answer to other questions, I won’t try and dodge the reality that some parts of the service are not delivering as they should do, and I expect there to be improvement, and for that improvement to be sustained as well.

I’m very pleased to hear about the £500,000 that’s going into transition for eating disorders between CAMHS and adult services, via the Plaid Cymru and Labour Party negotiations on the budget deal. I’ve heard from people who came to the last cross-party group saying that that’s where they wanted the money to go, because they recognised the change in structure of treatment from a more family-type provision of service to the adult provision. So, I just wanted to clarify whether that funding would be recurrent, ongoing, and whether you are in discussion with specialists in the field of eating disorders about training up current levels of staff for that new provision. Also, with regard to the recruitment of new staff that would be able to come into the field of eating disorders in relation to this new funding, I think it will go a long way to making sure that these services are much more effective in future.

I’m pleased that there’s a general welcome for how that money’s being utilised within this year to improve the service. I think in terms of the recurrent position we really need to talk about not just the money for this year, but about the broader services around them. I think it would be helpful, rather than me trying to think on my feet about how much money has been spent in each area, again, if I write to you and copy that to Members about the current position and future developments. So, that may also be helpful for you and the cross-party group to see as well.

Major sporting events can provide a step on our journey toward a healthy and active nation. The UEFA Champions League final is one of the biggest and most prestigious sporting events worldwide. The FAW Trust is working with partners to use the event to inspire more people to play football and sport, thereby supporting active communities.

Thanks for your answer, Minister; that is encouraging. We did touch on this with the First Minister’s questions yesterday—there’s a broader issue of the connection between professional sports clubs, such as our professional football clubs, and their activities to promote grass-roots sport, to improve health targets and things like that. So, I wondered what reflections you’d had on the progress the Welsh Government is making in that area.

I thank you for that question. I do think there will be some really tangible benefits from hosting the UEFA Champions League final. For example, there’ll be a maxi-pitch, which is a gift from UEFA to the city of Cardiff for hosting the event, and that will be in Grangetown. It will be free to use for communities; I think that’s really important. We’ll also have the floating pitch out in Cardiff Bay and that’s going to be used to host a legends match. It will also be used by local community groups and teams including refugee teams, deaf squads, women and girls teams, teams for people with a learning disability, walking football and youth teams, amongst others as well. So, there’s the opportunity there to really support and promote grass-roots football as a result of this particular sporting event.

In addition, as well, it’s inspired the creation of a whole new set of specially designed cross-curriculum materials by the Football Association of Wales, which is being disseminated to 1,300 schools across Wales in the run-up to the event. That certainly will enhance the curriculum and engage over 136,000 children as well, using the power of sport to really engage with children and to help learning as well.

I’m also really looking forward to the women’s final as well. We have a festival for women on the same day, so 2,500 women and girls will be participating in that football festival on the day of the final as well. So, lots of opportunity there to engage people who perhaps haven’t tried football before, with that particular sport.

I’m also really encouraged by the work that’s going on through the UEFA champions as well as part of their volunteer programme, so using the power of sport and the enthusiasm of the final as well to help people develop skills that are transferrable beyond football as well in terms of volunteering in their local communities after the event has been and gone.

We continue to work with the health board and other partners in Wales to take a range of actions to improve access to healthcare services that are safe and sustainable and as close to people’s homes as possible and of the highest quality.

I’m very pleased to hear that answer, Cabinet Secretary. You’ll be aware of the work that’s going on in Shropshire in regard to where emergency services should be located, either in Shrewsbury or Telford. The overwhelming view of my own constituents is that those services should be located in Shrewsbury. That’s where emergency services should be located—I’ve not met any constituent that says otherwise.

The Welsh Government had previously been silent on its preference, but I was very pleased when the First Minister confirmed a few weeks back to me in the Chamber that his preference would be that emergency services should be located in Shrewsbury. Can I ask, have you made representations to the trust yourself and have you been directly involved in the consultation? I’m very keen that you respond yourself, as the Cabinet Secretary, rather than just through the Powys health board.

Thank you for the question and the invitation to get involved directly in the process. I don’t think it is appropriate for me to get directly involved in writing to or trying to take part in the process that is ongoing. There’s a very difficult process ongoing with the Future Fit programme. There are essentially diametrically opposed views between two different actors and clinical commissioning groups that are equally balanced in the decision-making process.

That’s bad news for residents in Shropshire and Telford and Wrekin, but also for Welsh residents who rely on the services that are provided there. I think there’s a real challenge here for the UK Government, acting as a Government for England, to resolve in how this process is actually resolved and the evidence base that is provided. But Powys health board have been engaged and they are directly making representations on behalf of Welsh residents who use those services.

What the English services need to consider in this is not just from an altruistic point of view—the impact upon Welsh residents using those services—but to understand their services are being commissioned and paid for by Welsh residents. If those services move then that financial flow may disappear as residents are directed elsewhere. To be fair, Powys have been upfront about the fact that they may have to make different decisions if a different choice is made about the location of services between Shrewsbury and Telford.

It is a difficult issue but it is primarily a difficult issue for NHS England to resolve, with the Secretary of State for Health in the UK Government. From our point of view, we will continue to make sure that Powys health board safeguards and represents the interests of Welsh residents, which you represent in this place.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary.

The next item is our topical questions. The first question is from Eluned Morgan.

What assurances can the Cabinet Secretary give that the IT infrastructure in Wales is protected, to ensure the continuity of care for Welsh patients following the cyber-attacks in the NHS in England? TAQ(5)0173(HWS)

I thank the Member for the question. As you know, the First Minister issued a written statement yesterday regarding the ransomware attack that affected organisations globally last week in the UK, primarily NHS England and NHS Scotland being the focus of attention. Whilst we have been unaffected on this occasion, we must continue to be vigilant to ensure that our systems are as resilient as possible against future attacks on the network, which are, sadly, inevitable.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. I think the incident last week has raised many questions, most importantly how we are going to protect our patients in the NHS. As you say, the reports have suggested that 47 trusts in England have been affected, and 13 in Scotland, because they’d failed to apply recent security updates that might have protected them. Now, I think it’s worth noting that the impact is not just one of disruption and inconvenience; this actually, potentially, has life-changing and life-threatening consequences. If you think about the impact on individuals waiting for scans for cancer treatments, I think the impact could be incalculable and such an attack by cyber terrorists is morally, I think, indefensible.

Now, the joined-up nature of the NHS in Wales and the £11 million computer investment meant that there were fewer vulnerabilities in Wales. I think of course we’ve got to point out that there’s no room for complacency, but I think it would be remiss of us not to acknowledge the efforts of the NHS Wales Informatics Service and the IT teams across the whole of the NHS in Wales for protecting us from this latest attack. That’s not to say that we should be complacent—it may happen again—but they protected us on this occasion and I think we should salute them.

I quite agree. I’m very happy to publicly acknowledge and thank staff in the NHS Wales Informatics Service, not only for the way in which they have made the case for, and then applied, the additional cyber security measures that we’ve provided across the service, and not only for the fact that they did actually uptake the security updates that apparently did not take place in NHS England, but the fact that over the course of the weekend and into the start of this week, they looked for vulnerability within the system, they detected areas where the virus had been intercepted by the measures we’ve put in place, and were able to actually resolve some of the risks that existed. That, for example, included closing off parts of the NHS to external e-mails: the right thing to do to make sure that our system was not compromised. But that professionalism is there to be vigilant constantly, because this is not an issue that will go away this week. We certainly can’t skip away and say, ‘There won’t be a problem next week, the week after or next year as well.’ There’s a challenge here about making capital investment decisions as well. It’s not always very popular investing in areas like this, but it is essential, it makes a real difference to patient care. So, we can thank our good fortune and the sense that we have made in being one step ahead by making investment choices in cyber security.

We welcome the First Minister’s written statement yesterday concerning the impact of the recent global cyber attacks on the NHS in England. It is positive to learn that the NHS in Wales was not significantly affected and services were largely uninterrupted. However, we note that 40 cancer patients had treatment interrupted at Velindre hospital in Cardiff, which, for them, must have been quite traumatic. It is clear from repeated events of this nature that we are living in a world where data held electronically are vulnerable and services can be brought to a halt within seconds of an attack. It is clearly unacceptable that the users of Wales’s public services should be affected in this way, but we also note that we do not want to overreact and throw the teddy out of the pram. Electronic data storage is, largely speaking, more efficient and more secure than paper-based systems. So, it is important we continue to develop our information infrastructure across Wales to maintain pace with technology. In light of this, would the First Minister give an undertaking to ask the new cyber security centre based at GCHQ to review cyber security across the public sector in Wales? Thank you.

Thank you for the question. As you know, I’m not the First Minister but I’m sure he’ll consider your request. There is already a review, as you’d expect, to take place within the service here to learn lessons from what worked and why and what more we need to do in the future, and it’s important that we do that—to understand the level of risk that we carry, to understand what we do within the system, and how we minimise the risk progressively in the future. That’s the right thing to do and that’s what we’re already doing of, and for, ourselves, as we should do. We’re lucky to have national architecture with the NHS Wales Informatics Service, where people are committed—committed to the once-for-Wales approach we’re trying to take on taking advantage of the developments in using digital technology to improve health care—not just the process but the experience and the outcomes for people as well—as well as understanding the risks that are attached to that. There is a meeting of the national informatics board—a nice snappy title within the healthcare world—and they’ll again be looking back at what’s happened as well as looking to the future as well. So, a properly balanced approach—not complacent, but not forgetting, as you say, the real advantages and the real potential for improving healthcare by unlocking the great digital potential that does exist.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary.

The next topical question is from Simon Thomas.

Will the Cabinet Secretary make a statement on the 1,761 Glastir applications that have still not been paid? TAQ(5)0142(ERA)[W]

Thank you. As of this morning, there are 1,198 Glastir area claims still to process. In 2016, basic payment scheme claims were prioritised, due to the significant value and number of farm businesses receiving those payments. As of today, over 99.2 per cent of farm businesses have been paid, a total of £220.6 million of BPS. From January, Rural Payments Wales’s focus switched to processing Glastir claims. RPW continues to work hard, and all of our probate and other legally complex cases will be paid by the end of next month.

Can I welcome the Cabinet Secretary back to her place, and hope that she recovers well. Can I just say to her, I’m grateful for the updated figures—the figures I had in my original question date from about three weeks ago, so clearly some progress has been made? However, when I looked at the profile of these figures, Gwynedd in particular—Meirion Dwyfor has been one area where farmers have particularly complained and has had a very bad profile within that, and I think it is important to put on record that, of course, these, though they’re called Glastir payments—in almost all circumstances, they are repayments for money the farmers have already spent on work already undertaken and often inspected on farms.

So, can you confirm what you’ve already told us—or rather, it wasn’t you, it was at the time somebody standing in for you—what the Government told us on 11 April, which was that you did expect all these payments, with the exception of very difficult ones, to be paid by the end of this month? I note that so far that doesn’t look completely likely. And can you also say whether you’re considering any further steps that you can take as a Government to help farmers who are facing a very difficult time, an uncertain time as well, with Brexit? For example, I understand the Scottish Government has allowed loans to be made, and then for the final details of payments to be done later on down the line. Are these also being actively considered as a way of helping farmers who really do need now these Glastir repayments to be made?

Thank you. You’re quite right—since I think it was a written question that was issued to the Leader of the Welsh Conservatives, there have been a further 563 claims paid, and I’ve given you the current position today. We did inform farmers that this would happen, because of the way that we were doing the BPS after the changes last year, so I don’t accept that the Glastir payments are late, because we didn’t actually say when they would be paid. However, I do appreciate the difficulties. We did actually say we would start paying Glastir payments in February—we actually started in January, so we were a bit earlier, and as I’ve said today, they will all be paid by the end of June.

You asked about loans, and I am aware that the Scottish Government are doing that. Any loan scheme would likely fail EU state aid rules, and I think that would then increase the risk of us being penalised financially. I also think it would take time to establish, and quite frankly I’d rather RPW’s staff be out there getting those claims processed as quickly as possible.

Cabinet Secretary, it’s absolutely crucial that all of the 1,198 outstanding Glastir applications are now paid as soon as possible in order to protect the viability of those farm businesses, and it’s simply unacceptable that it’s been 18 months since some farmers have received a Glastir payment, and I think this is further evidence that the Glastir scheme is still plagued with difficulties and that there is far too much bureaucracy in the system. So, in the circumstances, will you outline what additional support the Welsh Government will be providing for farmers affected by the delay in payments in order to protect their businesses in the interim? There is also a real concern that the system in its current format is inadequate. As you’ll know from my own correspondence with you on this matter, it’s my view that the Welsh Government should be making it easier for more applicants to carry out environmental practices, not putting obstacles in their path. Given the current concerns with the system, do you therefore agree that it is now time to review the management of the entire implementation of Glastir to ensure that the scheme is more co-ordinated and actually encourages landowners to carry out more environmentally friendly management practices rather than deter them?

I actually think Glastir has been incredibly successful. In fact, this year, we’ve had an increase in the number of Glastir contracts and claims to process. We’ve had, I think, an additional 543 successful Glastir applications. So, I actually think it’s been a very incredibly successful scheme. You also will appreciate that the EU common agricultural policy simplification meant we had to have additional checks introduced for Glastir—we needed to bring those in line with the BPS. We’ve also had complications with mapping 2016 integrated administrative control system inspections, and that, again, will have impacted on Glastir.

I’m always very keen to look at how we can simplify any process. You’ll be aware of the new farming business grants scheme that we’ve brought forward, and I’ve been very keen to make sure that’s as simple as possible. But I do assure everyone all payments will be made by the end of June.

I also welcome the Cabinet Secretary back to her place in this Assembly and hope that her health will continue to improve.

The Cabinet Secretary, I am sure, will share my disappointment that some farmers, as Paul Davies has just pointed out, have been waiting 18 months for their payments, given that by this time of the year many farmers experience cash flow difficulties at the end of the winter, and that we must certainly try to ensure that what are described as annual payments are just that and not payments made every 18 months in future. I appreciate that no administrative scheme is going to be perfect and foolproof but we should certainly do our best to ensure that what is described as an annual payment should be just that. When farmers ring the customer contact centre, they are given no idea about when their payments might be made. I wonder whether there might be some improvements made in the information that can be given to them, even if it’s only of an approximate nature through that, because it is a worrying time for many farmers—how they pay their bills and they’re beginning their business plans for the remaining part of the year.

The third point I’d like to make is that—unrelated to the previous point—some farmers have recently received letters in error from Rural Payments Wales with regard to Glastir non-completion of capital works, when, in fact, the work has been completed. Can you confirm that Rural Payments Wales will contact them directly as quickly as possible to confirm that the letter was sent in error?

Thank you. Yes, as far as I’m aware, all people have been contacted already, and probably a couple of months ago, to say they were sent in error.

In relation to being given information about when they will have their payment, I think that’s a very fair point. Certainly, I’ve had a meeting today with our RPW staff to say that at least they can be told by the end of June, for instance, which I don’t think they have been. But I have been given assurances by my officials that that will be the case and I hope that all farmers who are still waiting will hear this or will have been told by RPW staff that they will get their payment by the end of June.

Thank you to the Cabinet Secretary.

The next item is the 90-second statements and the first statement is from Hannah Blythyn.

Today is International Day Against Homophobia, Biphobia and Transphobia. Since 2004, 17 May has been recognised as a chance to shine a light on the violence and discrimination still experienced by LGBT people across the world. The date is significant as it marks the World Health Organization’s decision in 1990 to declassify homosexuality as a mental disorder. Since then, we’ve come a long way when it comes to LGBT rights and acceptance and in Wales and the UK we can be proud of the steps we’ve taken.

Today’s annual Rainbow Europe index published by ILGA Europe ranks the UK third. The UK position could improve by strengthening laws around gender recognition for trans people. So, there is still more we can do to tackle the barriers and prejudice that remain. We cannot, must not and should not be complacent. All LGBT people should be able to live our lives free from fear and everybody has a responsibility to speak up and call out hate. We in Wales can show leadership at home and abroad in the protection, advancement of LGBT rights. This includes offering sanctuary and support to LGBT asylum seekers. I hope that one day we will live in a world where drawing attention to the violence and discrimination experienced by LGBT people is no longer needed. Until that day, our work as a community and a country to break down barriers, and speak up against hate and discrimination, must continue.

Between November 2015 and 2016, the Nature of Our Village project set out to identify the state of biodiversity in Penparcau, which is populated by 3,000 people and covers 190 acres—hectares, I should say—and is where I live. Three hundred and sixty nine volunteers created wildlife records. Some highlights of these records include: three new bumble bees spotted, five other bee species were identified, a palmate newt was spotted on Pen Dinas for the very first time, and a feathered gothic moth was re-found, and identified, for the first time since 1937.

The project encouraged local people to gain the skills to recognise and record the wildlife on their own doorstep, increasing the public understanding about wildlife, and the threats it faces. The project used social media, particularly Facebook, to recruit volunteers and advertise surveys, and also to encourage the community, in turn, to share their own wildlife discoveries.

The national state of nature report highlighted the lack of base data we have for much of our environment, as indeed does the state of natural resources report. So, citizen science, such as this project in Penparcau, and the Capturing Our Coast project, can fill in important gaps and assist public bodies to respond to local needs.

My thanks and congratulations to Chloe Griffiths, who led the project, and Penparcau Community Forum, West Wales Biodiversity Information Centre, and the Wildlife Trust for South and West Wales for their hard work. I now look forward to the next Nature of Our Village report, in 2018

This Saturday marks International Clinical Trials Day. Around the world, people will be celebrating the anniversary of James Lind, carrying out the first randomised clinical trial, aboard a ship, on 20 May 1747. International Clinical Trials Day helps to raise awareness of clinical trials, and honours clinical research professionals and trial participants, by recognising their contribution to public health and medical progress.

Clinical trials are an important way for researchers to test new treatments, improve current treatments, and find different ways to control and prevent disease, such as cancer. Many people’s lives are the better as a consequence of the work undertaken through clinical trials. The experimental cancer medicine centre in Cardiff pioneers early-phase experimental treatments, giving Welsh patients access to novel therapies before they are available as standard care. And late-phase clinical trials into better, kinder treatments for cancers are being carried out at Velindre Cancer Centre. These trials may change clinical practice in the future. The Wales Cancer Partnership will also be highlighting our trial heroes in Wales, through an open afternoon this Friday at Velindre clinical trials unit, and at the concourse of the University Hospital of Wales.

I hope we can all pay tribute on Saturday to the amazing, groundbreaking work of Wales’s leading researchers and scientists, who play a vital role in bringing research out of the lab and into the lives of people, and celebrate the clinical participants in Wales who are changing the future for millions of people.

The next item on our agenda this afternoon is the debate on a Member’s legislative proposal, and I call on Dawn Bowden to move the motion. Dawn Bowden.

Diolch, Llywydd. Right. ‘Free room to spare for a woman willing to carry out household chores naked.’ ‘Free accommodation, willing to offer more intimate favours.’ Extracts from a sleazy magazine or novel? No. These are part of actual adverts placed by landlords on Craigslist or Gumtree, offering accommodation rent-free in return for sexual favours. And are these isolated incidents? Well, unfortunately, not.

If you search #sexforrent, you will find hundreds of adverts like this. Initially, this practice seems to have developed in major cities, such as London, Birmingham and Bristol, but it’s certainly spreading across the UK. And it now appears to have taken hold in Scotland, and, regrettably, we’re starting to see this happening in Wales.

For example, a recent Cardiff advert stated, ‘Flats to let. One- and two-bedroom apartments in Cardiff and the Valleys. Tenants with benefits must reply with a picture.’ In Bridgend: ‘Would welcome someone who enjoys a naturist lifestyle. If you’re looking for a room to rent and into the lifestyle, get in contact with some details about yourself. This is not a first-come, first-served basis, we’ll want to meet and get to know, and discuss the ground rules and services required.’

Research by Shelter in August 2016 revealed 288 adverts offering free accommodation on the Craigslist site, and a further 51 offering accommodation for under £10 a month, most of which made either direct or veiled references to sexual favours in return.

I thank the Member for giving way. When one of my constituents heard about this debate, they approached me to say that they wanted attention drawn to the fact that properties are rarely let for free in return for sex, but are often at a discount, which I think the Member has just referred to. And in her experience, this is what happened in London very often, that it was at a discount that properties were let. So, would she agree that that is a practice?

That is certainly the information that we have found, and even some of the advertisements that we’ve seen in Cardiff are actually offering rent for as little as a £1 for each month for accommodation, but to go along with sexual favours. So, why are we suddenly witnessing a spread of what can only be described as a vile and exploitative practice here? I think there can be little doubt that the homelessness problem, which affects many areas of the UK, but which is more prevalent in cities and deprived areas, has allowed unscrupulous and predatory landlords to exploit some of the most vulnerable in our society to satisfy their own sordid behaviours. We saw this happen in Paris during the height of its housing crisis in the previous decade, when the practice of accommodation for sexual favours became commonplace, and the Government there was forced to act with a major programme to deliver affordable housing, which they’d highlighted as the main contributory factor.

In this country, the issue has been picked up by some national media, including the BBC, ‘The Guardian’ and ‘The Times’, and was also raised recently in the Westminster Parliament by Hove MP, Peter Kyle, in relation to the problems in England. It was brought to my attention by Merthyr Valleys Homes, and I thank them very much for doing so.

If you are in any doubt about the motives of such landlords, and the basis upon which they believe they can behave in such a way, you only need to look at some of the justifications they gave to media when they were tackled about the adverts they had placed. One landlord defended it to BBC South East as being a ‘friend with benefits arrangement’, adding,

You can argue that high rent charged by landlords is taking advantage too. There’s no compulsion for them to do this…. Both sides have something the other person wants. I see it as a win-win situation.’

I bet he does. But there can be no doubt that these landlords are exploiting vulnerable people who cannot afford spiralling rents, by enticing them with the sex-for-rent deals. They would no doubt argue that tenants have chosen voluntarily to enter into these arrangements. The trouble is when you have a vulnerable person, who then becomes exploited, the concept of choice disappears, and this is tantamount to a form of modern-day slavery.

Through these adverts, these men—and in all cases identified, it is men—are intentionally targeting desperate women, and sometimes men, who feel that they have no other option—women and men who may already have experienced sexual or domestic violence. Research has shown that a large proportion of rough sleepers, a significant target for these landlords, have experienced some form of domestic violence, something that I can testify to from what I discovered during my time as a volunteer in the Merthyr night shelter over the winter of this year. But it’s not just the exploitation that occurs when the vulnerable person moves into the property under such an arrangement. Many of the adverts mirror the one in Bridgend, which I referred to earlier, and require a prospective tenant to meet up with the landlord beforehand to be checked out. This, in itself, exposes that vulnerable person to further risk.

So, my greatest concern is that this practice will become more prevalent unless action is taken to prevent it. And whilst the coverage of this issue by the national media is welcome, it does, of course, run the risk of making more unscrupulous landlords aware of the practice, and perhaps encouraging them to behave in the same vile manner. But neither can we ignore the fact that this is all set in the context of the impact of the Government’s programme of benefit cuts. The Tories’ local housing allowance cap for the under-35s, and other benefit caps for those under 22, will place many more people into vulnerable situations, making them the most likely targets and victims of these sexual predators. Llywydd, the astonishing thing about this whole sordid business is that this is actually legal. Why? Well, because in most cases no money is exchanged as part of any arrangement, and as such it is not even covered by legislation surrounding prostitution.

So, I welcome the opportunity to bring forward this legislative proposal today because this situation cannot be right, and I believe that we should be doing all we can to maintain our proud record here in Wales of being at the forefront of introducing legislation to protect the most vulnerable in our society. I’m sure that every Member of this Assembly will share my disgust at the sort of practice I have detailed here this afternoon, and will join me in asking the Cabinet Secretary and Welsh Government to consider any amendments to the Housing (Wales) Act 2014 that would make Wales the first nation of the UK to outlaw the practice of advertising free or reduced rents in return for sexual favours. Surely, this National Assembly and this Welsh Government will not stand by and allow such dreadful exploitation to continue because of legal loopholes. Together, we must find a way of putting a stop to this in Wales.

I can say I’m in great sympathy with the Member’s proposal, and until I saw this on the order paper I didn’t know that it was as prevalent as we now learn. And I do congratulate her for bringing forward an idea that clearly speaks to a great need at the moment, and a way that we could change the law and make it much more fit for purpose and protective of the most vulnerable.

If this practice is evident—and I think we did hear evidence of that even in Wales, and it’s certainly evident in other parts of the United Kingdom—and, sorry to say, growing, it is obviously a morally repugnant practice. I don’t think anyone could look at the facts of this matter and feel otherwise. As Dawn said, the law may be ambiguous in this area and therefore should be clarified, but that such practices are exploitative is beyond question. I think it must put some people in a terrible position, where they are vulnerable from the start to any whim or change in that situation, where there is potential for abuse and violence, and it really is no situation for anyone to go into and, of course, they wouldn’t go in freely; I think that is quite obviously the case.

I think Dawn was right to talk about the wider issues, particularly the problem of the housing crisis. We do have a terrible shortage of affordable homes, and I was interested to hear about the approach taken in Paris—that they saw that as the root of the issue, and that’s what they sought to tackle. I’ve called in this Chamber for a long time for greater ambition in terms of house building, and I do think that is very, very important. I think our generation has lost sight of this—I don’t make a party point here; I think it’s true of all parties—about what an essential need housing is. After the second world war people realised that, obviously, in those shocking circumstances. I think I can begin to understand how some people could get so desperate that they would think of something as horrible as this as an alternative. We may understand their situation, but I don’t think we’re doing much for those people if we’re not tackling the root cause.

I thought Dawn was very apposite as well in looking at the way modern media and advertising platforms have made this sort of activity more feasible, I guess. And, again, I think we need to be very aware of the fact that there are, amongst all the people out there who are good landlords, a small proportion who may be tempted into this sort of vile behaviour. Now, unfortunately, the means to achieve these nefarious purposes are more readily available. If it was much more difficult to do this, then they may not be tempted in the first place, but at the moment I think we have to face the fact that modern media and advertising do open the door to this sort of exploitation.

Can I just finish by commending the Presiding Office on this initiative? Because it’s a new thing that we allow Members who unfortunately didn’t win the ballot—I’ve always thought it strange that you win a ballot, but there we are, that’s, I suppose, the way we have to term it. Of course, it’s just serendipity if you do win and are able to take your idea forward. I think debates like this allow Members who’ve come up with key ideas to talk about them. And, you know, the Government is listening and other parties are listening in terms of forming their next manifestos. I do hope that we will see at some point a change in law that did start from this sort of debate. Thank you very much.

Plaid Cymru supports this proposal. Clearly, it is entirely unacceptable that landlords provide accommodation free of charge, but expecting to be ‘paid’ with sexual favours, and I truly hope that there is a way of preventing this. Unfortunately, as we have heard, there is evidence that this is happening in London, Bristol, Birmingham, in Scotland, and, unfortunately, now here in Wales too. There is some evidence that it is happening across the world, and there were reports recently of people in a number of countries advertising accommodation free of charge for sexual favours, be it a house or flat share or a spare room. People are forced into these unacceptable situations due to a combination of reasons, including high rents and high house prices in cities, and the fact that most young people have to live in these cities in order to start their careers.

I do hope that this amendment to the housing Act can prevent this from happening, if the motion is approved. But, even if the practice is prohibited, it will be difficult to take action against those who break the law because of the hidden nature of the crime. First of all, people who rent a room out in their own house don’t get captured under the landlord licensing system, and, secondly, victims could decide not to report the offences to police because they fear that they will be evicted by the landlord and thereby made homeless. The Metropolitan Support Trust report states that reporting on the offences will create additional concerns and anxieties for some victims. So, there is no assurance that including this amendment in legislation and changing the legislation would lead to the change that we all want to see.

Therefore, what would make a real difference ultimately? Well, as David Melding has mentioned, part of the solution certainly is to provide more affordable housing. If there are more appropriate houses available at affordable rents, then fewer people will be forced into these unacceptable situations. We also need to ensure that there are homeless prevention services and shelters of an acceptable standard so that people feel confident in leaving a situation where they are facing abuse. But perhaps there is a social, moral question at play here too in terms of gender equality and the use of sex as a weapon by one person against another, and, more often, it’s a male using that weapon on a woman. But that’s perhaps a broader issue for discussion on another day.

To conclude, therefore, improving legislation could help. Discussing the issue here today and raising the profile of the issue is sure to help too. But I also believe that we need to address those long-term issues if we are to see real change and the scrapping of this practice once and for all.

Can I thank Dawn Bowden for tabling this very important motion today? I think it’s really positive that this has been brought to the floor of the Senedd and that we’re all having the opportunity to discuss it. It is a very serious issue and my fear is that it will become a much higher risk here in Wales as some of the changes that we are seeing start to bite. We know that we’ve got more welfare reform that is hitting us and that we’re likely to see large groups of people, particularly those aged 18 to 21, excluded from claiming housing benefit and also restrictions on those under 35, who will only be able to claim housing benefit on a room in a shared house. I believe that this could well lead to a rise in unregistered landlords allowing vulnerable women and men to stay with them in accommodation owned by them, rent free, in exchange for sex. Because some of these people are so marginalised and vulnerable, and because this group of landlords will not be registered under Rent Smart Wales, they’re possibly going to be very difficult to find and to protect from this practice.

I think it’s also important to bear in mind that, at a time of shrinking budgets in local authorities, there’s likely to be a decline in enforcement action in this area, making it harder to seek out and find such landlords. So, we do need to be very vigilant about that as well. So, I do hope that the Welsh Government will give very serious consideration, and I, too, welcome the fact that the Presiding Office is giving us this opportunity to have an early debate on this issue. I did speak to Llamau—which, as the Cabinet Secretary will know, has a very strong track record of working with vulnerable young people and women—before this debate. I know that they’ve expressed support for this kind of measure, and I hope that the Welsh Government will go out, now, to consult with organisations working in the field to get their views on how such an initiative could work in practice. And I hope too that Dawn’s very valuable action in bringing this to the floor of the Senedd will raise the profile of this issue and warn people of the risks that are out there. Thank you very much.

Like David Melding, I wasn’t really aware of this issue until I saw what appeared on the agenda for today’s Plenary session. So, I’ve looked at the adverts on Craigslist and they were a bit of an eye-opener. I was somewhat surprised to see discounted rent being offered fairly openly for sexual favours, and, clearly, this is a regrettable development that we have, caused by issues that other Members have raised, such as lack of housing, shortage of housing. So, clearly, it’s happened in London first, where they have the biggest demand for housing, but Dawn has pointed out that it is in danger of becoming a widespread practice in Wales. So, if we can take action to prevent this development, then I think that would be a good step to take.

Of course, in reality, there have always been a certain number of landlords—a small proportion of landlords—who have taken a keen interest in doing viewings and in personally screening prospective tenants, and offers have been made of this kind of nature, perhaps in a slightly more veiled way, but, of course, these offers are often declined. This is anecdotal evidence—you know, this has been a practice, but only affecting a small number of tenants and landlords. So, obviously, we don’t really want the development of social media advertising, as David Melding pointed out, to actually make this practice more widespread. So, in UKIP, we do believe that openly encouraging mainly young people—mainly young women, although some men, as well—to become involved in a form of prostitution just because of their housing needs—. It is obviously very reprehensible and we do support the proposal.

Thank you very much. I now call the Cabinet Secretary for Communities and Children, Carl Sargeant.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I’d like to begin by thanking Dawn for giving us the opportunity to express our concern at this practice that landlords, or, more commonly, those taking in lodgers, should be advertising accommodation rent-free in return for sexual favours. That is abhorrent to us all. I condemn this devious practice, which takes advantage of the poverty and social inequality of the people it preys on, and I absolutely agree that we should do all that we can to expose and deter the exploiters.

In preparation, Llywydd, for this debate, I asked my officials to explore all the potential avenues for action on this, and I must admit I was slightly surprised by some of their findings. For example, as Dawn Bowden alluded to, the Home Office officials’ advice is that advertising for buying and selling of sex in itself is not illegal in England or Wales, and, whilst many of the associated activities, such as exploitation, could well be a criminal offence, they claim to have very little evidence that actual exploitation is taking place in these specific cases. Of course, this may well reflect a level of underreporting, rather than the absence of exploitation. I pick up on Sian Gwenllian’s point on that issue around that the individuals who are entrapped into this scenario should never be afraid to report, and, while the issue may not be unlawful, exploitation is, and I would encourage all who find themselves in this space to use the Live Fear Free helpline that we have in place. Let me be clear, Llywydd: this Government is committed to tackling violence against women, sexual violence and exploitation in all forms in Wales, and we continue to work closely with the Home Office and criminal justice agencies in Wales to ensure effective co-operation.

This is a complex issue, and this goes far beyond how we regulate housing and exposes some worrying social trends. What strikes me here is that sex for rent is a symptom of a more fundamental problem: the increasing difficulties young people generally face in securing affordable, safe accommodation. And, whilst we may not have the powers to tackle unpleasant specific symptoms, we are already working to address the underlying difficulties faced by young people seeking to secure good-quality, secure accommodation. The answer lies in our approach to preventative measures in reducing homelessness, the provision of affordable housing, mitigating the economic pressures from zero-hours contracts and benefits changes, our anti-slavery policies, and initiatives around our support services for vulnerable people with multiple needs.

I listened to David Melding’s contribution, and I’m hoping that now he may have had a change of view in terms of our position on ending the right to buy. The Member has been very keen and clear in his contributions both in the Chamber here and in committee about his concerns about removing the right and the ending of right to buy, but what we do know about the right to buy is that many of the properties that have been sold under the right to buy end up in the private landlord sector, and this is where most of this activity takes place. So, I’m really concerned that the Member is saying we should gain more housing, and also that we should protect the opportunities for people to live safely—I hope the Member’s had a change of view; he may be able to declare that today.

I haven’t had a change of view, and I’m slightly surprised that you’ve made this connection. What we need to agree on is that we need to build more homes, and many of those homes need to be in the social sector. There is no disagreement, it seems to me, in this Chamber about that, and that’s what we should focus on.

Well, I’m sure the Member will have much time to consider his contribution again, and maybe he will come round to our way of thinking, but I’m grateful for his views. These are not quick and easy issues to address, and my colleague is right in terms of that we need to look at the specific issues for rent for sex. Our opinions are, however, limited. An amendment to the registration and licensing system under Part 1 of the housing Act, which Dawn refers to, will simply not tackle the issue on its own, but what it does mean is that we shouldn’t not do anything to seek to curb this awful practice.

I quite understand why this is perceived as a matter of housing law. Legally, however, the roles of landlords and tenants do not apply where sex rather than money is exchanged for accommodation, and this is simply not a legal contract that can be governed by housing law. That is even clearer when we’re talking about an owner allowing someone to share their home. The landlord and agent registration scheme and licensing system, Rent Smart Wales, means that landlords and agents who carry out letting and management activities need to be a fit-and-proper person who are well trained and abide by the code. I’m happy to explore ways we might use the fit-and-proper-person test in this case to render exploiters who are landlords unfit to hold a licence as a landlord. I will continue to update Members on that issue.

We can also seek to stop the advertising of this, as well, but the legality of these advertisements rests on ambiguity and lack of specific detail. I am aware that the Scottish Government has written to Craigslist, and we will look at the response of that very carefully on that detail. I intend to write to the Home Office to flag our concerns of this debate today and what should be done to assess, what can be done to address, the issues in a more proactive manner. I simply do not believe that the cases raised in the press, and others like them, do not amount to exploitation or any other criminal activity. I will follow that up also.

I’ve already started discussions with the police to see where that will lead us, and I, of course, have listened very carefully to the contributions of Members today. I remain open to suggestions of any further action that we should take. We are united in our disgust about those exploiting others and the needs of the vulnerable in our communities. The question is one of finding an effective way of tackling this, and I’m sure we can work together to resolve this issue.

Thank you. I call on Dawn Bowden to reply to the debate.

Thank you, Llywydd, and can I thank all of those who contributed to the debate? I think the responses were fairly consistent in the debate in terms of looking at some of the issues that are responsible for the spread of this type of exploitation. David Melding, quite rightly, acknowledged the vulnerability of people that allows this kind of exploitation to take place, and actually, the Cabinet Secretary took the words out of my mouth in terms of the housing crisis that we are now facing, and I do welcome the initiatives that Welsh Government have put in place to try to deal with that—the affordable new homes and so on. I think it would be too simplistic just to talk about the housing crisis in the wider sense without looking at the historical reasons for that. I think you were absolutely right, Cabinet Secretary, to raise the history behind the right to buy, and what that legacy has left, meaning that we are left with the limited social housing that we have, and the inability to provide affordable housing.

I think we also have to acknowledge, as was acknowledged by David Melding and by Sian Gwenllian, and indeed Lynne Neagle, that we are also seeing the effects of changes to the benefits system, and that is not going to change any time soon, as long as we end up with a Conservative Government in Westminster. I’m afraid that just happens to be a matter of fact. And can I also thank Gareth Bennett for the support of UKIP in terms of the proposal as well? In relation to the Government’s position on this, can I thank, again, the Cabinet Secretary, for his offer to work with any organisations that can find a way to try to deal with this issue? I’m not a lawyer; I don’t understand the legislative constraints, but I know that you are advised by legal experts. But I think I would be safe to say that there seems to be a fair amount of cross-party support for what we’re trying to achieve here, which is somehow shutting down this legislative loophole that allows people to put adverts like this on internet sites, or elsewhere, that are perfectly legal. And whether we can access or change the way in which we can address this by using laws around exploitation—I think I would welcome the Cabinet Secretary doing that, either by writing to the Home Office, having discussions with the Scottish Government, who clearly seem to be trying to deal with this, or looking at any other way in which the Welsh Government can legislate to try to stamp out this exploitation. Thank you.

Thank you. The proposal is to note this proposal. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Therefore we’ll defer voting on this item until voting time.

We now move on to the Welsh Conservative debate: child safety online. I call on Darren Millar to move the motion.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I’m pleased to have the opportunity to open this important debate this afternoon, and I move the motion in the name of Paul Davies on the order paper today, recognising the multitude of risks that children face using the internet, noting the importance of taking action to ensure children’s safety online, and calling upon the Welsh Government to respond to concerns from the NSPCC and other organisations, so that we can get things right in terms of having this as a priority going forward.

Now, before I get into my speech, I just want to say that we will be supporting both of the amendments today that have been tabled by Plaid Cymru. We think that they do complement our motion, and they recognise the need for a joined-up approach here, by all Governments across the United Kingdom and, in fact, around the world, in order to address some of the very real issues.

The cyber-attack incidents that took place over the weekend showed, in very stark terms, I think, just how reliant we have become, as a society, on the internet and digital technology. There is no doubt in my mind that, very often, we’re over-reliant on these things. And of course, we particularly bring these things into focus when something goes wrong, and, as we have seen, they can go spectacularly wrong. But as policy makers and lawmakers here in the Senedd today, many of us are old enough to remember a time without personal computers, without smartphones; some may be able to remember the very first tablets—and I’m not talking about the ones that Moses brought down from the top of Sinai—but chalk tablets, even, in the classroom to be used as learning aids. If you talk about those things to a young person now, they’re just bewildered by the fact that there was an absence of technology in times before. Because the reality is that they are so used to, and so familiar with the technology that is all around us—in school and in the home—that when I talk about the fact that I was a youngster and my mum and dad bought me for Christmas a ZX Spectrum and it was the bees knees, and it used to take half an hour to load a programme, with a little cassette tape, they’re absolutely astonished. So, we’ve got a new generation who are more familiar with technology, very often, than those who are teaching them in our schools and their parents at home. In fact, we’re very often more illiterate than they are when it comes to technology.

Now, of course, the fact that we have all this technology presents huge opportunities for the future—opportunities in education, in employment, in social networking—all on this huge, big global scale. But as much as technology is a blessing, it also can be a curse. We’ve seen that having this wealth of information, particularly over the internet, doesn’t come risk free, and it can expose people—vulnerable people and children—to some very real harms. Pornography, gambling, inappropriate sharing of personalised sexual information and content, fraud, cyber bullying, online grooming, blackmail, exploitation and radicalisation are all things that the internet has brought into people’s homes and onto people’s laps. And they’re real threats. They’re threats to the physical and mental health and well-being of young people here in Wales today. That’s why we’ve got to ensure that online safety is a top priority for us now and in terms of how we go forward.

To be fair to the Welsh Government, I think it’s already done some very good work on this front. They’ve already taken some measures to protect students in Welsh schools and to raise e-safety standards in those places of learning. I know, for example, that the South West Grid for Learning has been working in partnership with the Welsh Government since 2014 on these e-safety issues. I also know that around 78 per cent of schools in Wales, so far, have used the 360 Degree Safe Cymru self-review tool, which evaluates how safe their online practices actually are. Of course, they’re also providing opportunities through Safer Internet Day campaigns as well to raise the profile and the importance of these issues.

I’m very pleased also to see the Welsh Government strongly supporting Operation Net Safe, which is a programme in conjunction with the police and the Lucy Faithfull Foundation that aims to stop the creation, viewing and sharing of indecent images of children online. I’m very pleased to see the recent report of the Internet Watch Foundation—and I should have declared the fact that I’m actually an internet watch champion on behalf of that association at the start of my speech—but I was very pleased to see that the UK now hosts less than 0.1 per cent of child sexual abuse images worldwide. That’s because of this zero tolerance approach that has been taken by the UK Government and by all of the devolved administrations on that particular issue. It’s great that we’re making that progress, but we’ve got to do more. The only way we can do that is by having more of a cross-sectoral approach within the Government and without the Government, but with the leadership of the Government to bring individuals together. We need the education sector working together with parents, with industry, with experts in civil society and, of course, with children themselves in order to educate our young people about how best they can protect themselves, so that we can develop the tools that we all need to respond to a constantly evolving internet and the threats and harms that can be associated with it.

Clearly, the obvious starting place to teach and empower children and young people on internet safety is by entrenching some key measures and principles into our education system where digital literacy is actually taught, and we have a great opportunity with the new curriculum that is being shaped in Wales to embed these things more permanently, if you like, within that new curriculum. But it requires, in my view, a more comprehensive strategy as well going forward in order to nail this thing—a strategy that can be regularly under review. We know that NSPCC Cymru have been calling for measures to be introduced by the Welsh Government to protect children online, including the publication of a comprehensive online safety action plan that is underpinned by an advisory group that can ensure that Wales is really at the forefront of keeping children safe online in the UK and around the world. The Welsh Government hasn’t yet responded to that particular recommendation from the NSPCC, and I hope very much that the Cabinet Secretary in her response to the debate today will be able to tell us whether that is something that the Welsh Government is prepared to take up, so that we can embed this plan into our schools, into our public sector and across Government, so that we can have this standardised approach.

I am concerned, I have to say, that whilst there has been some progress, we’ve still got 22 per cent of Welsh schools who have not yet evaluated, using that self-evaluation tool, the safety of their online practice. I think that the inspectorate, Estyn, for example, does have a role in making sure that that is one of the things that features highly on the radar of schools in terms of protecting those children. We’ve got some very good child protection policies across Wales, lots of paperwork about child protection, but very often the one thing that is missing from all of those bits of paper is this issue of internet safety.

There’s also been some very good work, as I said earlier on, over the border in England. The UK Government has been leading on this, really, worldwide in terms of internet safety. They adopted an all-sector approach from the outset. In 2013, the then Prime Minister worked with the internet industry to get the service providers to offer internet filters to parents so that they could select what their children can and cannot view online. In 2014, the House of Commons culture and media select committee did a report into online safety and it set out some of the challenges and made some clear recommendations that the UK Government has been taking forward. Of course, internet safety has been a compulsory part of the curriculum in England now since 2014, and some key work has been done, particularly to stop the spectre of bullying and cyberbullying that has been taking place online and has been so costly, and devastatingly costly, to some young people who, as a result of that bullying, unfortunately have taken their own lives.

In 2015, we found that schools in England are now required to filter all inappropriate online content and to teach pupils about being safe. I know that that filtering takes place in our schools as well, which can only be a good thing. But of course, pupils aren’t just accessing inappropriate internet content on their computers in the school. They’re also taking mobile phones into school. They’re taking their own tablets into school, and of course that also has inherent risks. So, we’ve got a lot more that we need to do in order to get this situation right, and I think that, as a country, Wales needs to be leading, we need to be on the front foot, and we need to be working with the other administrations across the UK if we’re ever to deal with this problem.

Just one practical thing before I pass the baton on to the next speaker in the debate, and that is this: there are family-friendly internet policies that have been adopted by some businesses in Britain, but not all of those businesses have taken the opportunity to have family-friendly internet on their premises. There are many hotel groups, restaurants and parts of the public sector that haven’t got family-friendly filters in place on their internet servers, and it’s essential, I think, that we get these things in place if we’re ever going to have the proper protections in place for our children going forward.

So, I encourage people to accept the motion in the spirit in which it’s put forward today, in a non-partisan way, and to work with us in order to shape the future so that we can keep our young people safe. Thank you.

Thank you very much. I have selected the two amendments to the motion. I call on Llyr Gruffydd to move amendments 1 and 2 tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I’m very pleased to be able to contribute to this debate this afternoon. As one who’s a father of children coming to an age where they do have an online presence and use social media, I can identify with some of the opening remarks made in this debate. Of course, I’m from a generation that didn’t grow up with social media, and it’s difficult for someone like me, I think, to identify with my children, who not only have the experience of learning about and understanding these social media, but do that while simultaneously facing all the pressures and challenges of growing up. So, it’s no surprise that that can lead to a confusion of emotional experience, which can lead to outcomes that are very often less than favourable.

We know from the work carried out by the NSPCC that some 20 per cent of children aged between eight and 11 have a profile on social media, and that increases to some 70 per cent for those aged between 12 and 15. A quarter of children have had an experience that has caused them concern on a social media site and a third have suffered online bullying. So, that gives us a flavour of how grave the situation is, and that, of course, is reflected in the figures that Childline regularly release, which demonstrate the increasing demand for their services.

Under the new national curriculum—and we’ve heard reference to that already—digital competence will be one of the three cross-curricular responsibilities, and that is entirely appropriate and entirely necessary. It is something that we would all welcome, and it is crucial that that framework should empower children and young people to make safe use of the internet as a fundamental part of their education. Only today I was reading a report from the World Health Organization that demonstrated that young people in Wales were in the fourth position out of 42 nations around the world on use of social media and computers. Over three quarters of girls aged between 11 and 15, and almost 85 per cent of boys, were using a computer, tablet or phone for two hours or more on school nights for reasons other than gaming.

Now, you don’t need an expert—although they do endorse that message, of course—to tell us that that presents a grave health risk, in terms of mental health and, without a doubt, because of the threats of cyber bullying, but also the impacts on physical health, in terms of obesity, type 2 diabetes in the longer term, and so on. And recent survey from February last year for Safer Internet Day identified that a quarter of teenagers had suffered online hatred in the past year. Now, on social media, that’s where young people were most likely to suffer that kind of abuse, and, in some cases, those would be seen as a hate crime, which again underlines the gravity of the situation.

Over the past week, as we’ve just heard, cyber crime has been in the headlines with that cyber attack on the health service in England and Scotland, which had a major impact on services there. But we must, of course, take just as seriously crimes against individuals online, although those can be hidden, very often, whereas the attacks that we’ve seen on the health service are not.

Just last year the ONS started to publish experimental figures on cyber crime, and those figures were far higher than anyone had expected, with 5.8 million crimes in England and Wales in the year up to July of last year. That is enough to almost double the crime rate here in Wales and England. Harassment crimes increased, including new crimes such as malicious correspondence online and misuse of social media and so on—an increase of 90 per cent, from 82,000 to 156,000. And therefore, the scale of the problem is becoming more and more apparent, and the scale of the response needed is also a crucial issue that needs to be increased.

Girls suffered twice as many threats to kill or attack them physically than men. According to one study, there were 66 cases on social media, but only 10 per cent of the girls who had suffered abuse or harassment online reported that to police. Therefore, there is a very serious challenge facing us there, too.

The fact that there is so much abuse happening on social media does require that young people are given the necessary education to empower them to protect themselves and their interests, and also highlights, as the Plaid Cymru amendments outline, the need for the UK Government to take action with relevant companies and others to tackle this, and to do so as soon as possible.

I’m pleased to have the opportunity to take part in this debate this afternoon. Safeguarding children and young people online continues to be a genuine challenge for society, and we all have a duty to ensure that children are protected better from the risks of using the internet. As Darren Millar said, the internet is an extremely useful tool, too, for educating children online, and previous generations could only dream of that. Not only is it an excellent academic tool that can support teaching and learning, it also provides access to the latest entertainment at the touch of a button, and it encourages children to develop relationships through social media. And although each of these areas helps to educate our children and young people, it can also be a very dangerous place for them.

The internet has demonstrated that, although it can strengthen relationships, it can put children at risk of cyber bullying, exploitation and abuse, both sexual and emotional. You don’t need to look too far to find some heartbreaking stories of children across the world who have taken their own lives because of the bullying and threats that they received online. Just recently, in my own constituency, a 14-year-old girl died at home following a hidden battle against cyber bullies, an issue that she had kept hidden from her family. Unfortunately, this young girl is one of a host of young people who suffer in silence at the hands of bullies who have used the internet as a platform to spread hatred and to abuse. We owe a great debt to these victims and their families, and therefore we must do more to ensure that the internet is safer for our children. I believe that this starts by having a far more open dialogue across society on how we use the internet more safely and more responsibly. We have a duty to ensure that that dialogue happens in classrooms, at home and in communities across Wales. I would encourage the Cabinet Secretary—and we will do everything we can on this side of the house to support her—to consider the establishment of a broad-ranging campaign in Wales, encouraging people to discuss the advantages and risks of using the internet.

It’s also crucial that the Welsh Government takes the reins by taking action on the NSPCC’s demand for a comprehensive strategy that would be supported by a digital support group to ensure that Wales is in the vanguard in keeping children safe when they are online. A public debate on online safety, as well as an online action plan led by Government, would hopefully send a strong message that the safety of children online is a priority for the Welsh Government, and that this is something that has been considered in earnest.

Now, schools, of course, have an important part to play in terms of safeguarding children and young people, and it’s important that teachers and classroom assistants are given full and up-to-date training on issues related to online safety, so that they can better identify those who are at risk of abuse online.

So, in responding to the debate today, perhaps the Cabinet Secretary could provide us with an update on the level and frequency of training provided to teachers in relation to online safety. Naturally, schools across Wales should look to adopt policies for preventing and tackling cyber bullying, and promoting online safety, which are appropriate to their own communities and their own local cultures. I accept that some good work has been done across Wales. As Darren Millar said, the South West Grid for Learning has been working in partnership with the Welsh Government since 2014 in order to raise awareness of issues of cyber safety in Welsh schools, and I note that they launched their own tool to assist schools in Wales to assess and improve their policies and safety practices. But as has already been said, only 78 per cent of schools in Wales have registered and use that particular tool, which means that 22 per cent of schools are evaluating things in a different way.

Now, while schools have to be proactive in drawing up policies that best reflect their own needs and the challenges that they face, certainly there is some scope for some basic standards in terms of how schools should measure their efficiency in tackling the issue of cyber security and safety. Now, the South West Grid for Learning has called on Estyn to establish clear expectations for cyber safety and to support and lead schools and other agencies in reaching those targets and standards. So, in responding to this debate, perhaps the Cabinet Secretary could give us an update on how far Estyn have got in developing those standards.

So, in conclusion, Deputy Presiding Officer, the internet is changing the way that we are communicating, and though I accept that the internet can be a great educational, social and cultural tool, it can be a very dangerous place for people who are vulnerable, particularly children and young people. It’s crucial that we speak openly about the benefits and risks of using the internet, and encourage children to be positive digital citizens who use the internet confidently and safety. So, I encourage Members to support the motion this afternoon. Thank you.

I’m grateful for the opportunity to speak in this important debate today. As the chair of the cross-party group for preventing child sexual abuse, we have worked closely with the NSPCC, Stop It Now! Cymru and the Survivors Trust. These organisations are dedicated to putting an end to the online abuse and exploitation of children through a preventative and early intervention approach. Child sexual abuse has to be called out for what it is, and we must not shy away from the reality of it. Speaking up on this is a must. Sexual abuse thrives on secrecy, and while we’ve spent years teaching children about stranger danger, and how to be safe when they’re out and about, the anonymity of the internet requires different measures to safeguard children. As it is the responsibility of all of us to look out for the dangers in our communities, keeping children safe online must be a collective effort.

Children are some of the most prolific consumers of online content. According to the latest National Survey for Wales statistics, 95 per cent of children in Wales aged 7 to 15 use the internet at home. Ofcom estimates that children and young people spend an average of 15 hours online per week, which is greater than the time they spend watching tv. Social media sites, online games and apps that children use are constantly changing, and it can be difficult for parents and teachers to keep up. In particular, parents and carers often don’t know about the different rules and risks that come with each site. The NSPCC’s Net Aware campaign is tackling this directly, by giving parents the resources to find out about the sites their children use, providing them with a guide to these sites and the associated risks. This is a great example of the charity working in partnership with businesses to safeguard and protect children.

Worryingly, from the numbers of children who contact Childline, viewing sexually explicit images saw the greatest year-on-year increase, up by 60 per cent from 2014-15. Young people reported that online groomers used a number of different forums to contact them. However, manipulative tactics used by offenders mean many child victims are unaware that they are being groomed or exploited, and often adults are unable to identify the signs. I know that the Welsh Government is currently working closely with the UK Council for Child Internet Safety Board on how to deal with difficult online safety issues, such as sexting. But more work needs to be done with internet providers, and I would like to see the UK Government taking a stronger lead on this.

Police forces around Wales are working with schools to educate pupils on issues such as grooming, sexual exploitation, sharing images and staying safe online. Gwent Police, for example, has provided 1,874 lessons to almost 50,000 pupils in 2014-15. The Welsh Government is supporting Operation NetSafe, a pan-Wales campaign led by South Wales Police in partnership with the Lucy Faithfull Foundation, which aims to prevent viewing and sharing of indecent images of children online. This work is important, and all good practice must be shared.

Healthy relationships are essential in helping children understand boundaries, and how to behave online, and I’m pleased that the expert panel are providing advice and support on issues relating to this in the curriculum. In addition, today’s news from the education Secretary is very welcome. A new national online safety action plan for children and young people will build on the extensive programme already under way in schools to support young people to stay safe online. Finally, the cross-party group has an online safety event in the Pierhead in October, and I hope many Members will attend to show support and determination to do all that we can to tackle child sexual exploitation online.

I am grateful for the opportunity to speak this afternoon on the motion, which I believe deserves cross-party support. This debate is about how we can protect children from the dangers presented by the internet. We are all aware how the internet has brought enormous benefits to our society. Whether in the fields of business, trade, education, or simply in the way we seek information, the internet has transformed the way we live our lives. There is a view held by some that nothing can or should be done to regulate the internet. But the fact is that internet access has a dark side also.

Our children need to be protected from the damaging effect of online pornography, which has been mentioned by a lot of our colleagues just now, and illegal images. Our schools, Minister, should have some sort of comprehensive policy for e-safety for our children and also for the children who use the internet without parental supervision at home. Earlier, my colleague mentioned that our children are using the internet for more than 15 hours or more than 44 hours a week, which is totally unacceptable. They should be taught and regulated properly. The internet is a marketplace and like all other marketplaces it must be regulated.

Progress has already been made in improving internet safety. In 2013, the Conservative-led Government announced an agreement with the four major internet service providers to offer internet filters to parents. This enabled parents to select what their children can and cannot view online. A year later, the House of Commons culture and media select committee, looking at online safety, set out some of the key challenges that the UK Government needed to address. It recommended that a robust age-verification process be put in place for legal adult sites. In addition, the committee recommended introducing measures that could make it easier for filters to operate and for search engines not to return the material when operating in safe search mode. The UK Government welcomed the recommendations and made internet safety a compulsory part of the new curriculum. Schools in England can also teach e-safety in personal, social, health and economic education and they’re required by law to have measures in place to prevent bullying and cyber bullying.

There are certain other areas, Deputy Presiding Officer, in which the internet actually gives so much advantage. But for our very young children there are suicidal attitudes, race hate, anorexia, gambling and other things that have already been mentioned. Across England, schools are now required to filter inappropriate online content and teach pupils about staying safe. They are also required to put in place and strengthen measures to protect children from harm online, including cyber bullying, pornography and the risk of radicalisation, which is virtually a disease globally we’ve got to tackle. Professionals such as nurses, doctors and teachers who work with children and young people will receive new online training to equip them with the tools they need to handle online risks and support young people in today’s digital world. But there is more to do, Deputy Presiding Officer.

The Prime Minister has pledged that her Government will introduce new digital entitlements and protection should it be re-elected next month. Measures have been taken to protect students in Welsh schools and to raise e-safety standards. However, Wales needs to entrench each measure into the education system. NSPCC Cymru has called for new measures to be introduced by the Welsh Government to help protect children online. They called on the Welsh Government to produce a comprehensive online safety action plan. This would be underpinned by a digital advisory group to ensure that Wales is at the forefront of keeping children safe online. I hope the Welsh Government takes steps to act upon the recommendation of NSPCC Cymru.

Deputy Presiding Officer, protecting our children from internet danger is a cause that should unite this Chamber rather than divide it. We can all agree that Welsh Government should prioritise online safety to keep our children safe. I support the motion; I hope everybody does the same. Thank you.

Thanks to the Conservatives for bringing today’s motion. As the motion states, there are a multitude of risks that children face using the internet these days, many of which have been outlined in the various contributions today, including cyber-bullying, addictions to gambling, sexual grooming, the encouragement of self-harming and also, as Llyr mentioned, the overall health problems that could develop as a result of young people simply spending too much time on the internet. So, all of these things do need to be taken into account, and as the contributors have generally agreed on today, we do need a joined-up approach. It probably does require a comprehensive response that would be timely, as the NSPCC have asked for. I’m aware that schools and local authorities have put measures in place in some areas, and I’m sure the Minister will give us more information and an update on that.

Of course, the problem with this issue is that it is developing quickly, and there are new threats emerging even as politicians like us debate these issues. So, it’s difficult to keep track of it all. And as Darren pointed out in his opening statement, often the kids themselves are more aware of what’s going on online than the adults, such as people in schools and parents.

The focus, almost inevitably from a Government, is likely to be on a contribution from schools. The problem is that although this is to be welcomed, it’s not always going to be successful because, of course, many young people aren’t really going to tend to listen at all times to what they’re told at school. So, some of these problems won’t emerge from discussions at school and, of course, they can be missed by parents. But what I was going to focus on slightly was the role of parents in this area. Often, if problems from internet use arise, then they are likely to be spotted by parents first, rather than schools. So, it is crucial that we do have parents who are encouraged to spend quality time with their kids, such as shared meal times, because they need to understand what their children’s normal behaviour is before they’re able to spot any changes in behaviour. And quite often, if problems are going on online, they will become apparent to parents from their interaction with their children, but of course they need to have that close relationship with their children to start with.

So, although we do need to be looking at this kind of comprehensive response that we’ve all been talking about today, we do also need to focus on the role of parents, and perhaps there is still a role in whatever response we come up with, or whatever response the Government suggests, for educating the parents as to the need for this quality time with their children. Thank you.

A few months ago—and I think I might have mentioned this more than once already, so apologies—colleagues and I went to see the large hadron collider at CERN in Geneva. The facility is vast, but less than a speck in the story of the universe. The work, of course, to which thousands of our brightest people from all over the world are dedicated. It’s expensive work in which countries are eager to participate, and which has transcended war and claims on national purses at times of recession. It’s also, of course, the home of the development of the worldwide web, and that first iteration is still there. You can see it; it’s like the warehouse in the Indiana Jones movie where those top men are hiding the ark of the covenant, and that was just the baby internet. It is entirely understandable that when we consider the risks to children using the internet, we are completely daunted by the enormity of the task. It is not just the recognition that this will probably need a full global response, as Darren said, but the recognition that for every step that we can take at any level, from personal to international, there is someone who can outrun us or outfox us.

Well, I don’t think that is a good enough excuse. If the world can collaborate to find the god particle, it can collaborate to protect its children from online dangers. And article 4 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child demands it, with parties under a duty to undertake all appropriate legislative, administrative and other measures for the implementation of the rights recognised in the present convention. There is a growing body of worldwide research on how states might achieve this—far too much to go into today—but the Conservative Government’s ratification of the Convention on Cybercrime in 2011, on behalf of us all, incidentally, I think that was a declaration of intent to take action. The fact that we are just one state when UNICEF observes that many legal jurisdictions are not taking anything like adequate action shouldn’t stop us aiming to make Britain the safest country in the world for children and young people to be online. There’s a UK Green Paper due in the summer. It’s an area that, I think, commands our attention and certainly scrutiny from us all. Jayne Bryant, I agree with you that this is something we should all be looking at and something that the UK Government might still be able to do more on. I hope, actually, we find time to debate its principles here in the Assembly. Even though the legislation is coming from another place, this really is something for all of us.

But I have to say that with legislation, I find this quite a tricky one actually, because I get a bit queasy at the thought of the state coming into my home. But, I was researching this online last night, looking at some of the adverts that have been put out there by various charities warning young people against grooming and online abuse, and to be honest, that made me feel a lot, lot queasier. I actually found myself agreeing with Claire Perry, the MP whose parliamentary online child protection report came out fairly recently, which advocates default barring of adult content, opt-in filters rather than opt-out, and for households, the simplest one-click parental control. I think you can have some control over access to content in your home, but outside the home we seem to be relying very, very heavily on educating children and young people, and indeed adults, on how to recognise danger, to avoid it and how to report it. I’ve been in a class, a junior-age class, in Dyffryn Cellwen, in my region, to see what it looks like in that school and it was excellent—completely age-appropriate. But Gareth Bennett is right. For some teenagers who may, in fact, absolutely understand the dangers of texting and bullying and date apps and even those less obvious dangers of online gaming, in the moment, it all goes out of the window in the face of a compliment or a dare.

I think we might also need to face up to what’s becoming the addictive nature of social media. That idea that parents are all sitting down around a table to discuss things with their children is disappearing when we’re now looking at families, even if they’re all in the same room, all on their individual devices, all with their individual things in their ears and all in their individual worlds. Like all addictions, it has the propensity to alienate you, to distance you, from the people who can offer perspective and safety. So, I approve of all these soap operas and dramas that are running storylines on the dangers to raise awareness, but for every oversharer who posts a picture of, you know, children’s birthdays or sport’s days or school concerts, they’re opening up those children, potentially, to risks, simply from connection with those innocent posts. Of course, that runs alongside the type of things we’ve been talking about: the access to un-moderated extremist ideas, gambling, the unusual sexual content, if you like, and of course, the malignancy of the charming new cyber friend who makes you feel so very, very special.

That space between the screen and the young brain is small, it is intimate and it is secret, and I don’t think it’s one that’s necessarily reached by parental awareness. So, I certainly support what the UK Government is doing at the moment. I urge the Welsh Government, in the area where it has competence, to treat its powers as duties and maybe to look at its own emphasis on digital interaction as maybe a route into reaching the young people who are in that secret space. Thank you.

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

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. Could I begin by thanking Darren Miller and the Welsh Conservatives for bringing forward the debate this afternoon and the very thoughtful contributions that we’ve had from across the Chamber? I’m afraid, Deputy Presiding Officer, I have to admit that I am indeed old enough to remember what a ZX Spectrum was, although I have to admit I was more of a Commodore 64 person myself. Could I assure the Chamber that the Welsh Government is fully committed to keeping our children and young people safe online? There is nothing—nothing—more important than the safety of our young people and knowing how to stay safe online is fundamental in our world today. I say that as the Cabinet Secretary and I say that as a mother of three girls—two teenagers for whom the loss of the Wi-Fi connection at home is nothing short of a national tragedy.

Now, online safety has been, and will continue to be, a key priority for us. Although there are many benefits in embracing digital technology, there is also a range of potential risks that have been highlighted by Members here this afternoon. Paul Davies is right to remind us of the young people who have chosen to end their lives as a result of cyber bullying. If we’re honest, we all know that trolling from our opponents is one of the least satisfying aspects of this job, and, if it gets us down, imagine what that relentless cyber bullying must do to the young mind that Suzy Davies talked about.

When I was a child, at least when you went home you could escape from it, but it is now relentless and 24 hours a day. And then there is, of course, the access to sexually explicit material and the impact that that has on how both boys and girls view their body image and how they view what a healthy sexual relationship actually looks like. And, of course, there aren’t just consequences for those at the receiving end. Sometimes, those who perpetrate some of these issues have little concept of what it might mean for them. I’m aware of a young man who was caught up in a sexting incident. When asked by the police why he had done it, he said, ‘Well, everybody does it’. He didn’t realise that the caution that is now on his record will probably prevent him from ever travelling to Australia or the United States—because of something that he did without understanding the consequences, something that he did when he was just a 14-year-old boy.

So, it is our responsibility, as a society, to equip our young people with the skills to be able to think critically and navigate the digital world in a safe and responsible way. There is a significant amount of work that is going on in Wales to help young people stay safe online and I’m glad that that has been acknowledged here in the Chamber this afternoon. At the beginning of the school year, the digital competence framework, the DCF, was made available. This is the first element of the new curriculum to be introduced across Wales. The citizenship strand of the DCF focuses on developing and applying critical thinking skills and strategies. It will support our young people to become responsible and independent consumers, which is absolutely crucial now and inevitably more so into the future. It includes specific elements focused on online behaviour, cyber bullying, and health and well-being.

To promote safe and responsible use of digital technology, the Welsh Government, as we have heard on a number of occasions this afternoon, has been working with the South West Grid for Learning charitable trust since 2014. The online safety project has seen many successes to date. This includes the development of 360 Degree Safe Cymru, a bilingual online safety self-assessment tool, which, as we’ve heard, allows schools to benchmark their current online safety policies and provision against national standards. The tool also provides guidance and support, with practical suggestions to improve and enhance online safety. Over 85 per cent of schools in Wales have already registered and I am actively working with the regional consortia to ensure that all schools are aware of the benefits the tool can offer and our expectation that they should be engaging with it.

The Welsh Government has also developed and published the online safety resource for Wales. This is a collection of practical resources and lesson plans to support schools in the delivery of online safety in our classrooms. These resources are designed to empower learners to think critically, behave safely, and participate responsibly when they are online. At the beginning of this academic year, we published three safeguarding training modules on Hwb. These modules have already been accessed over 7,000 times and we will shortly publish two further modules specifically focusing on online safety.

Online safety training sessions have been delivered across all local authorities in Wales to upskill teachers and governors in preparing them to deal with issues that young people may encounter online. This year, the Welsh Government are building upon this by offering a range of additional training opportunities and these will focus on specific issues such as the safe use of social media and cyber bullying. I’m also aware that a number of schools have operated their own training sessions after school for parents, inviting parents into the school so that they can find out more on how better they can support their children.

On Safer Internet Day earlier this year, I launched the new online safety zone on the Hwb. This has been developed to support education stakeholders, including young people, in this critical area. The dedicated area hosts news, events, and a range of resources on online safety issues, and these resources include materials that have been developed with a range of third sector partners. The zone also signposts those dealing with the effects of cyber bullying towards appropriate support services, and I’m pleased to see that, since its launch, the zone has had over 40,000 page views. Of course, we need to do more, and I and the Cabinet Secretary for health are working collaboratively to see what more we can do to help schools and teachers build resilience around well-being and mental health issues, and we hope to make an announcement later on in this year.

I’m sure you will agree that the Welsh Government is already delivering an extensive programme of online safety activities. Additionally, I am pleased to announce today that I am indeed commissioning a national online safety action plan. This will provide a strategic overview of how we will continue to enhance online safety support in Wales, and further information will be provided as this work is developed.

Can I once again thank everybody for their contribution to this afternoon’s debate? The Government will support the amendments and the motion as amended. Thank you.

Thank you. And I call on Darren Millar to reply to the debate.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and can I thank everybody who’s contributed to this debate? I think it’s been an extremely good debate, and a very well-informed debate. Many Members have spoken about their own personal experiences of technology, and indeed have given us some of the very stark facts about online abuse, online exploitation, and indeed some of the problems that that has caused, including for individuals in circumstances like Paul’s constituent, who, unfortunately, took their own life. I should have paid tribute, actually, to the work of Jayne Bryant as chair of the cross-party group on preventing child sexual abuse, because she’s done an excellent job in highlighting this as an issue, along with the NSPCC and others, who have been working hard to get it onto our agenda more forcefully. You’ve done an excellent job, and I’m pleased you’ve been able to contribute to the debate today.

I think also—I was very taken, actually, with Gareth Bennett’s point about parents and the role of parents, because there is a lot of parental ignorance, frankly, about the potential abuse that’s taking place in the upstairs bedroom where their child is squirreled away while they’re downstairs watching the TV, and many parents aren’t aware of the fact that they can put filters in place, that they can put apps on people’s mobile phones, et cetera, in order to better protect their families. And, you know, I’m a dad—it was good to hear Kirsty as the Cabinet Secretary referring to her children too—I want the best possible protections in place for my children, and I’ve been really impressed, actually, with the resources that are out there if you seek them and if you look for them. So, I think the fact that many schools are quite rightly engaging with parents in order to encourage them to take up those opportunities is a good thing, and I was very pleased to hear that in your response, Minister, to the debate.

As Suzy Davies quite rightly said, this is an international issue, it’s not just something that Wales needs to tackle, or the UK needs to tackle, and I’m pleased that the UK is ahead of the pack, really, and is doing some world-leading stuff on tackling the dangers of the internet. I was very pleased, also, to hear you mention the ark of the covenant after I mentioned Moses’ stone tablets from the top of Sinai, which, of course, were put into the ark of the covenant afterwards, so it’s a nice link there. But most of all, Cabinet Secretary, I’m delighted with your response to the debate, because I think it shows that we’ve got consensus across the Chamber on this important issue—and not only that, but that you are prepared to take some action. So, I was delighted to hear you talk about the national online safety action plan that you’re now hoping to develop. We will want to work with you on that and support its implementation in whatever way that we can. But let’s not forget also that it’s not just about schools, it’s not just about working with parents, we need to work with wider society too, with businesses and other organizations, basically, wherever free Wi-Fi is available.

Just one final point here: I was very concerned—. I recently took out a mobile phone contract with Vodafone—I’m going to name them—and it was a great deal. However, one of the problems with the contract was that it came with automatic internet safety filtering, which was great, but, after a month, they told me I had to pay extra for that filtering to continue. These should be things that are automatic. Frankly, we should be paying more for taking those filters down, rather than actually having to pay for them to be put in place. So, let’s keep working together, on a corporate basis in the Assembly, to challenge these sorts of things and these sorts of attitudes from telephony providers, from businesses, who don’t pay the due regard that they need to to the dangers of internet safety, and, hopefully, we can make Wales a safer place to grow up. Thank you.

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

We now move to item 7, which is a Plaid Cymru debate on a medical school in Bangor, and I call on Sian Gwenllian to move the motion. Sian.

Thank you very much, and it’s a pleasure for me to move this motion. A lack of doctors in north Wales and rural areas in Wales creates a huge challenge for healthcare services. It would be possible to tackle the problem in the short term, but we also need to move forward to plan for permanent, long-term solutions. We need to train more doctors in north Wales, the area that has the greatest shortage. This is one way to tackle the crisis in a sensible and permanent way. Last year, half of consultant posts in north Wales weren’t filled—half those posts were unfilled—and the implications of that are far reaching.

There’s a problem with general practice, as well. The north Wales medical committee has concerns regarding the sustainability of over a third of surgeries in the region: one in three surgeries is currently at risk. The committee says that we need an additional 70 GPs as a matter of urgency in north Wales. Now, in addition to the impact on patients, there is a financial cost to that shortage too. Expenditure on agency staff increased by 64 per cent over the past two years, whilst the latest information suggests that Betsi Cadwaladr will have spent more than £21 million on agency medical staff in the 11 months up to the end of February 2017—£21 million. That’s their own figure. A figure such as that is not sustainable, neither is it sensible. However, one could open a new medical school and maintain that for a far lower figure.

Plaid Cymru has consistently argued that a new medical school for north Wales, serving rural parts of our nation, is part of the solution. Studies in various nations have demonstrated that there are three factors at the heart of attracting doctors to work in rural areas: first of all, a rural background, second, that the prospective medic has positive clinical and educational experiences in rural locations as part of their medical training as an undergraduate, and, third, that training for rural placements is targeted specifically at the postgraduate level.

Now, one of the most successful medical training programmes in a rural area is a scheme between five states in the USA, Washington, Wyoming, Alaska, Montana and Idaho—the WWAMI programme. Graduates from this programme return to practise in rural areas at far higher rates than graduates from most of the state-run medical schools in the United States. Eighty-three per cent of graduates in the WWAMI programme practise in a rural practice. At the Calgary medical school, graduates from rural backgrounds are two-and-a-half times more likely to practise in a rural practice as compared with those from an urban background. In Norway, 56 per cent of graduates from the Tromsø medical school in the north of the country remained in rural areas, and 82 per cent of graduates who were originally from northern Norway remained there to practice. Quite simply, prospective doctors from rural areas do tend to remain in the rural area where they have been trained.

Therefore, it is practically possible to have a medical school in Bangor? Yes, most certainly, it is. Ireland has seven; Scotland has five, suggesting that one medical school for every million of the population is possible. The population of the Betsi Cadwaladr health board is around a million people, if you take it in conjunction with the Powys health board, but you can also add a part of the rural area of Hywel Dda health board to that figure to bring us to that figure of a million. So, a third medical school for Wales would align with the structures in Scotland and in Ireland.

Plaid Cymru has consistently argued that the new medical school should be located in Bangor. A new medical school at Bangor University would build upon the expertise of the medical sciences school at the university and the clinical training, which is already provided in the three general hospitals of the region. Evidence suggests that a new medical school should initially work with an established medical school. There are a number of examples of new schools building on the expertise of medical science within universities, and therefore there is a clear way ahead, and with time, Bangor can develop into a medical school standing on its own two feet.

In summary, a new medical school is crucial if Wales is to tackle the significant shortage of doctors facing this nation. In north Wales and in rural areas of Wales a number of medics are approaching retirement age, and there aren’t enough people being trained in those areas. Governments across the world are responding to similar situations by increasing the training opportunities available. In rural areas, which face problems similar to Wales, new training institutions are established and medical schools are being located in those rural areas. Adapting structures already in existence simply doesn’t work. These new institutions, in turn, create new generations of doctors who stay to serve those areas where they have been trained, dealing with the shortage of doctors and enhancing the quality of care for people in those areas.

It’s time to move forward with long-term solutions, with planning, in order to establish a new medical school along, with the short-term measures currently being put in place. Thank you.

Rwyf wedi dethol y ddau welliant i’r cynnig. Galwaf ar Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros Iechyd, Llesiant a Chwaraeon i gynnig gwelliant 1, a gyflwynwyd yn enw Jane Hutt, yn ffurfiol.

Formally, Chair.

Galwaf ar Mark Isherwood i gynnig gwelliant 2 a gyflwynwyd yn enw Paul Davies.

Diolch. We support this motion’s call for the development of a medical school in Bangor as part of an all-Wales approach to increasing training, recruitment and retention of doctors in Wales. As the Royal College of Physicians states,

Recruitment problems are threatening the existence of many hospitals and general practices in Wales. We need to train more doctors and nurses in Wales with the aim of retaining them to work here.’

But, they said, a third of core medical training places in Wales were unfilled in 2016, with this figure rising to over 50 per cent in Betsi Cadwaladr university health board hospitals.

As the head of Bangor University’s School of Medical Sciences said last week, Wales must expand medical schools to deal with future shortages of doctors, particularly GPs. Relatively few extra academic staff would be needed and Bangor University is an ideal position to foster and recruit students from rural Wales and Welsh-speaking communities.

As the National Pensioners Convention Wales states, adequate access to GP services is essential to maintaining general health and mobility, and, as a consequence, to helping prevent isolation and loneliness, but respondents expressed concern that difficulties with getting appointments in a reasonable time is connected to GP numbers.

As I said here two weeks ago,

It’s many years since I first discussed the need for a Bangor medical school with its previous vice-chancellor…. It’s three years since the North Wales Local Medical Committee warned, at a meeting in the Assembly, that general practice in north Wales was…facing crisis, unable to fill vacancies, with GPs considering retirement.’

And they expressed concern that the previous supply of GPs from Liverpool medical school, where their generation of GPs had primarily come from, had largely been severed.

I therefore asked the First Minister to ensure that the business case for a new medical school in Bangor includes dialogue with Liverpool, to ensure that we keep local medics local. As he replied, what’s hugely important is that any medical school works closely with others

in order to ensure that sustainability is there in the future’.

I therefore move amendment 2, calling on the Welsh Government to work with health and education institutions on both sides of the border to build a more in-depth and wide-ranging north Wales medical programme.

Delivering sustainability will require the training, recruitment and retention of doctors locally, and this will require the universities, Betsi Cadwaladr university health board and Merseyside to work together and build a more in-depth and wide-ranging north Wales medical programme, with specialisms being delivered by the relevant major hospitals on both sides of the border.

For year after year after year, the Labour Welsh Government dismissed warnings that we faced a GP crisis in north Wales, given by professional bodies including BMA Wales, the Royal College of General Practitioners in Wales and by myself and my shadow cabinet colleagues on behalf of the NHS Wales staff and patients who raised their concerns with us. With these warnings ignored, we’ve seen GP practice after GP practice in north Wales giving notice that they will be terminating their contracts with the health board. Yet at the BMA Wales conference last year, on the same weekend that another north Wales GP surgery gave notice that they would be terminating their contact with the health board, First Minister Carwyn Jones claimed that there was no GP recruitment crisis.

Responding to the Royal College of General Practitioners Wales ‘Put Patients First: Back General Practice’ campaign during the last Assembly, I met a group of GPs in north Wales whose key concern, they told me, was recruitment. Although the average age of GPs in north Wales was over 50, they told me they couldn’t get medical students to come and train in north Wales. They told me there was a particular problem with the way—quote—’Cardiff recruits medical students’, and that medical students need to be incentivised to come to north Wales, especially Welsh speakers, developing home-grown doctors.

Action is also required to address the nonsensical situation in which nurses are being recruited overseas to fill a nurse shortage in Wales but Glyndŵr university is denied funding to train local nurses who can’t go away to university and are therefore going over the border to the English system in Chester. According to the BMA, 2014 figures show that Wales had the lowest number of GPs per 1,000 people in the UK. However, as usual, the Labour Welsh Government rejected all warnings until crisis was upon us and then—quote—’selected percentages to mask the reality that they were doing too little, too late’. This is part of the solution.

I’d like to call Lee Waters.

Diolch yn fawr, Gadeirydd. There’s no doubt that huge progress has been made with the intervention of the Welsh Government over the last year, with a 12 per cent increase in the number of GPs in Wales since the Assembly was established, and in just the last year, the number of GP training places being filled is at 84 per cent, whereas it was at 60 per cent a year ago. So, the intervention of the Welsh Government to offer incentives and pay exam fees for GPs is showing encouraging signs of progress, but clearly the workforce is changing, and we need to recognise that there is no simple solution to the need to recruit and train more GPs. It’s clear that the younger workforce want to work part time and flexibly, and no longer are attracted in the way that they were into rural areas and away from the cities. We need to recognise that, so we need to change, I think, the model that we have in primary care, and this requires a mature conversation.

I had a meeting last night in Burry Port where over 250 people attended—organised by myself and Nia Griffith, who’s been the MP for Llanelli—and there was huge public concern, exacerbated by the fact that the local health board are refusing to engage people in a conversation early enough when services need to change. In Burry Port, at the Harbour View practice, a single GP practice—one of the last remaining single GP practices in Hywel Dda—the GP there, Dr Lodha, has decided to retire. She notified the health board of this in February, and it’s only now that patients are being told—some being notified only by a scrappy bit of paper on the door of the surgery—that the surgery is to close. They fear being dispersed to ‘nearby’ GPs in Trimsaran, Kidwelly and Pontyates, where there is no easy public transport available and the existing GPs have closed lists. So, there’s understandable anxiety in the town and the health board have refused to engage with the public on this. I think here we have a problem, because we saw in the Minafon practice in Kidwelly, which I was pleased to invite the health Secretary along to earlier in the year—that when they did engage with the community, they were able to bring them along in finding more creative solutions to a different model of general practice that, now it’s beginning to bed in, patients are recognising offers advantages. Instead of relying simply on GPs, having pharmacists and nurse practitioners and physiotherapists on hand can offer a better service.

But, clearly, change causes anxieties, and that’s why it’s important to involve the public in the conversation from the get-go. But Hywel Dda, this time, as before, held a private process where a panel led by their deputy chair analysed data of changing populations and so on and decided, in their best judgment, that the surgery should close without any alternatives being publicly explored. Surely this is a mistake, because, as part of that initial checklist process they go through, there must be patient engagement. When you can treat patients like adults and show them what the options are and bring them along in that choice, you can end up with a better solution.

They’ve failed to do that in this case. They’ve failed to engage with me as the elected Assembly Member and with the other elected representatives in the area and, as a result, we now have great local concern. I’m hoping that they will rethink that and will properly engage with the community, because they rightly feel that they deserve a proper service, when the town of Burry Port is growing and when the needs of the population are changing. So, I would urge the Government to consider how, when these changes occur all across Wales, the need to engage with communities is hardwired in at the beginning of that process, so we don’t have the farce of a situation where the first patients hear of a change to their service is a scrappy bit of paper on a door.

I’d like to call Michelle Brown.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I’d like to thank Plaid Cymru for tabling this debate. UKIP fully supports this proposal, but the question that I asked the last time this idea was discussed in this place still stands. Do we not think that more needs to be done to improve and promote the life offer available to professionals in order to have them come to north Wales or not to leave in the first place?

We undoubtedly have a recruitment problem in Wales. Whilst a medical school in Wales may result in a number of medical graduates remaining in Wales—hopefully, they’ll realise what a wonderful place it is to live and work and remain here—it isn’t a cure-all. I would also like to add that a medical school in north Wales also has a greater chance of attracting and retaining Welsh speakers. So, I am fully in support of the proposal. But qualified doctors can pretty much choose anywhere in the world to live and work. So, the fact that they moved a couple of hundred miles down the road to train isn’t going to be a deal-breaker when deciding whether or not to return to their roots.

Labour’s amendment shows that they’re trying to deny there’s a problem. It is because of Labour’s refusal to accept the problems they have not fixed that the Welsh NHS is in the desperate state it is today. Labour make such a play of claiming to be the sole guardians of the NHS, but, for electoral reasons, they cannot admit that, after years of being in charge, they still haven’t got it right.

We need to be selling the lifestyle on offer here. Wales is a beautiful and peaceful place to live, you get more bang for your buck property wise, and commuting distances between your own little piece of heaven and work can be as long or short as you like. I’m sure, between us, we could come up with an extensive list of reasons why it’s such a great place to live and work.

But even if we can sell Wales as a desirable place to work and show off the beauty of north Wales, if you have a family and hold education in as high a regard as a medical graduate clearly does, would you want your children thrown onto the lottery that is the Welsh school system, undoubtedly the result of the Government’s failures? Something must be done.

Although I’m not convinced that a medical school in north Wales will solve the recruitment and retention problems, I support a plan like this that increases jobs and employment possibilities in north Wales, which the opening of such a facility would undoubtedly do. The medical school would also increase the number of training places on offer nationally. I therefore support Plaid’s motion and would urge the other Members of this Assembly to support it also. Thank you.

And the last speaker, Rhun ap Iorwerth.

Thank you very much, Chair. I will keep my comments brief. Earlier in the Chamber, we discussed Plaid Cymru’s aim of training and recruiting and extra 1,000 doctors in Wales. I was extremely disappointed with the response of the Minister.

‘Mae hyn yn uchelgeisiol, ond nid yw’n gyraeddadwy’

were the Cabinet Secretary’s words. Now, we’re talking here of a 10-year programme. This is something that is necessary—I hope we can agree on that: that we need more doctors in Wales. It is something that is an ambition—it certainly is one of mine. Hopefully, that ambition could be shared across the Chamber by other Members. But it is also realistic, but it can only be realistic if we actually increase how many people retrain as doctors in Wales. What’s also disappointing, in listening to the Cabinet Secretary, is that medical schools in Wales are telling me that they’re confident that they could train so many more doctors in Wales over the next 10 years, and it is clear, I think, that there is a growing consensus within the medical world in Wales that Bangor can play its part in contributing these additional doctors.

I’m also disappointed on a number of levels today that the Government in its amendment has withdrawn any reference to the development of medical education in Bangor. I understand why you want to highlight what you see your successes in terms of medical recruitment over the last few years—I’ll give you that—but why withdraw the reference or delete the reference to Bangor from our motion today? As Sian has explained, achieving a full-blown, if you like, medical school that is self-sufficient in Bangor could take some years. We acknowledge that fully, but that has to be the ultimate aim, and we must move as a matter of urgency now towards having medical students embedded in a medical education department in Bangor. I will refer to Keele University, which has a medical school now, but started as part of the Manchester school of medicine. There are those kinds of partnership that we can put in place from next year on, working with Cardiff University and Swansea University, for example. This is necessary. We need the doctors, we need to develop the expertise in rural medicine, and we need to develop expertise in developing Welsh-medium medical education also. Therefore, on a number of levels, I need to see us moving towards a consensus in terms of the direction of travel here.

Nawr, fe orffennaf drwy gyfeirio at un neu ddau o bwyntiau a wnaeth Michelle Brown. A yw hyn yn datrys y broblem recriwtio a hyfforddi sydd gennym yng Nghymru? Mawredd annwyl, nac ydy. Nid yw’n ei ddatrys, ond gallai fod yn andros o gyfraniad at yr hyn rydym yn ceisio’i gyflawni. A Lee Waters, fel chi, rwyf wedi treulio gyrfa mewn cyfathrebu felly rwy’n cytuno’n llwyr fod ymgysylltu’n bwysig. Gallwch ymgysylltu cymaint ag y dymunwch. Gallwch anfon y bwrdd iechyd lleol a’r prif weithredwyr i dŷ pob claf yn unigol i esbonio bod yna broblem gyda’r feddygfa leol, ond oni bai bod gennych feddygon yn dod drwy’r system, byddwch bob amser yn wynebu’r broblem hon sydd gennym, sy’n arwain at gau meddygfeydd ym Mhorth Tywyn, ac ym Mhorthcawl ac mewn llawer o leoedd eraill y clywn amdanynt yng Nghymru. Felly, cefnogwch hyn, ac anelwch yn uchel. Gadewch i ni gael ysgol feddygol yma ym Mangor. Mae ar Gymru ei hangen. Mae ei hangen ar gleifion Cymru.

I now call on the Cabinet Secretary for Health, Well-being and Sport—Vaughan Gething.

Thank you, Chair. I’m grateful to Plaid Cymru for tabling this debate today. As a Government, our amendment makes clear: since devolution, we’ve seen a significant increase in the numbers in our medical workforce, but this Government is far from complacent. Despite the successes that we highlight, we recognise there are still challenges for some medical specialities and some geographical areas of Wales, just as there are across the rest of the UK. That’s why we committed, in our programme for Government, to continue to take action to attract and train more GPs, nurses, and other health professionals to Wales. To deliver that commitment, we launched our campaign to encourage doctors, including GPs, to come to Wales to train, work and live. We have seen a significant early impact with GP trainee fill rates at the end of round 1 at 84 per cent, compared to 68 per cent at the same point last year. That includes a 100 per cent fill rate in Pembrokeshire, north-east Wales, and north-west Wales GP training schemes.

Members will be aware, of course, that I launched the second phase of Train, Work, Live for nurses last week. The initial impact in terms of social media activity has been very encouraging, with our promotional video being viewed 30,000 times, and our content reaching over 110,000 people.

Now, I know the motion calls for a medical school in Bangor, and Sian Gwenllian has been very consistent in her calls on this issue. As the First Minister made clear in this Chamber, in the coming weeks I will make a statement—as I indicated I always would do—on the conclusion of the work that I commissioned to consider the provision of medical education and training in north Wales, including the case for a new medical school. I’m not about to try and sign myself up to a commitment one way or another before that work concludes—that’s a simple explanation for the Government amendment in not making reference to the medical school. It’s part of a case that I’ve committed to deliver on, committed to respond and return to Members on, and I will do so.

But regardless of the outcome of this work, we know that we need to be flexible and explore all options in terms of education and training in north Wales. Cross-border working already exists in places such as speciality training for paediatrics, and sub-speciality training posts established for higher anaesthesia. So, despite the unremittingly negative contribution by Mark Isherwood, I’m happy to confirm that the Government will support the amendment in the name of Paul Davies.

I want to deal with the recasting of the 1,000 doctors—1,000 doctors over 10 years in terms of what’s additional, or in terms of what we currently train now. We already train—over 10 years, we’ll have trained that number of doctors. But the training of doctors is part of a long-term future for the health service—the amount of time, we understand, it takes to train doctors, so recruiting and retaining our current workforce is a big part of where we need to be, including those training rates, as I mentioned earlier. There is a long-term approach to all of this, and that must take in the models of work that we expect people to come to, and it also takes in how we’ll actually provide that training as well.

If we want, as Lee Waters indicated, to have that broader point of the differing model of general practice, where general practitioners work as part of a wider team, we need to train people to work in that way as well, because the way that general practice works now is very different to 10 and 20 years ago, and in the next 10 and 20 years, it will be different again. There is always a constant need to adapt—we’re having to understand what numbers of different medical professionals we need to provide the sort of service that people, quite rightly, expect. So, that’s why we continue to invest in the education and training of the wider healthcare workforce—that we already do within north Wales and at Bangor University. So, courses are commissioned in nursing, midwifery, radiography and pilot courses for physician associates, as well as the courses offered at Bangor’s clinical school. Now, physician associates are a good example of the development of the wider workforce within healthcare. They’re still in pilot phase, but we think they’re part of the future, so understanding what Swansea and Bangor provide in terms of that new cohort of physician associates is important to us, as well as the measures that we take to make sure that they’re part of our healthcare system in Wales, with a real career path in models of care that will make a difference.

I don’t think there was much to agree upon in terms of Michelle Brown’s contribution, but we’re really serious about protecting and standing up for the national health service—it’s not about electoral calculus, it’s about our commitment and our values, not just in creating the service, but in sustaining it for the future. And I recognise the challenges that Lee Waters outlined again—as the local Member, he’s absolutely right to highlight concerns within his community, and I do understand the point that is made about how change of any kind is discussed with the public, rather than simply being presented to the public about what must now happen. That is a good point that is well made, and I understand you’ll be taking direct representations to the health board in the coming days.

But here in this Government, we are committed to delivering an NHS workforce that continues to provide high-quality care, and on the medical front, it continues to grow in the face of continuing austerity from the UK Government. There are a number of challenges that we honestly and freely acknowledge, but they are challenges that we are confronting head on, and I look forward to reporting on more success that this Government will achieve with our partners in the national health service and beyond.

Thank you. And I Call on Sian Gwenllian to reply to the debate. Sian.

Thank you very much to you all for your comments. I thank Mark Isherwood for presenting a number of arguments, and I do agree—yes, we do need to work jointly across north Wales and with Liverpool and Manchester, and whoever wants to work with us to improve the situation. Lee Waters mentioned problems in the Hywel Dda board area, but don’t blame the health boards only. Workforce planning is the responsibility of your Government, and the lack of planning by you has created some of the problems that you face in your area. As you mentioned, I am talking as the Member for Arfon—yes, and of course I would be arguing for locating a new national institution in my constituency. But I’m also convinced that a third medical school, in Bangor, would improve care services for everyone across the north and across rural areas in Wales.

Last week, I published this—’Tackling the Crisis: a new medical school for Wales’, an independent report that brings the evidence from different countries and the arguments all together. I genuinely hope that you have an opportunity to read it. It does set out the case clearly and robustly that the medical school is needed here. So, I do hope, as the Cabinet Secretary has mentioned, that we will have an announcement soon about this, and I greatly hope that that announcement will be a positive one—the Cabinet Secretary has read it; thank you for that—but that we have a positive announcement soon, stating clearly that there is the need for the medical school and that you as a Government are going to plan, in a detailed way, for that very soon. Thank you very much.

Thank you very much. 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 Plaid Cymru debate is on economic development in the south Wales Valleys, and I call on Steffan Lewis to move the motion—Steffan.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I am pleased to move the motion in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth.

The former south Wales coalfields, the Valleys, have been in a state of economic crisis probably since at least the general strike of 1926. And since then, there have been a number of initiatives over the decades, often in response to social unrest, each one failing to achieve the objective of a just prosperity for the Valleys communities, based on diversification from the old industries to new ones. Indeed, we can go back to the Special Areas Act 1934 where all of south Wales was designated a special economic area, right through to the age of European structural funds that is about to come to an end.

Plaid Cymru’s motion today firstly notes the current economic state of play in the Valleys region, and proposes steps to re-industrialise, rejuvenate and restore the communities of that region. In point (c) in our motion, we draw attention to the importance of prioritising investment. This is a very important theme, because we can see at a state and sub-state level around the world the impact of a geographically unbalanced economy flowing and stemming from unequal investment. We see it here in the UK in relation to London and the south-east of England compared to all other areas, and even in smaller countries, too, like our neighbours in Ireland, who are intervening fiscally and economically now to spread opportunity and investment outside the capital region in Dublin and around the city.

My own view in this field is that we need a new economic and fiscal fairness Bill, and that such Bills should be introduced at both the national and state level, and that that can provide us now with an opportunity to implement a new bespoke regional aid policy for Wales in the context of our leaving the European Union.

Point (b) in our motion calls for a positive Government decision on the Circuit of Wales project, subject to normal due diligence, of course. This is a decision we were told would be made within four to six weeks back in February this year and my friend the Member for Carmarthen East and Dinefwr has articulated earlier in today’s proceedings the sad sequence of events relating to that issue. I just want to add to that that as someone, like others in the Chamber, who’s spent almost all my life in the Valleys communities, it is disappointing and sad that we still see the process of raising local expectations, only to leave them unfulfilled, and that this is in great part the reason why so many people, particularly in the Valleys but not exclusively in the Valleys, are so cynical about politics and politicians and have little hope for the future, and that they feel powerless and disengaged. [Interruption.]

Will you take an intervention?

If you want to toss a coin to decide who. I’ll give way to the Member for—.

Okay; Lee will go second. In regard to investment in infrastructure, would you agree that the Welsh Government initiatives in terms of infrastructural investment around the metro will make a considerable impact? And also in regard to the austerity programme, in regard to the huge impact that that has had on Valley communities, that this is a lever that we really, really need to be working hard to petition the UK Government around?

I think, the Member for Islwyn, I would agree that the austerity agenda has been self-defeating, that it is wrong and that the poorer communities of the UK, including the Valleys communities, have suffered more than any others as a result of it. Of course, the infrastructure project around the metro is something that we fully support. Where I have an issue with Welsh Government and others is, in terms of the transport infrastructure, it absolutely makes perfect sense that we plan that on a south-east capital region basis—in fact, I was big supporter of SEWTA, which was abolished under the previous Government, because that was a regional transport co-ordinating body that I think worked effectively—but, in terms of economic planning, I am yet to have the reassurance from the current Cabinet Secretary for the economy that we are going to have a proper place-based approach to economic development in order to maximise the potential of the metro system. I’m very much looking forward to seeing a pioneering economic development plan and industrial strategy, published before the summer, from the Welsh Government that is going to designate every part of this country a specific economic stake in the future success of this country, because that is the only way we are going to have a just prosperity for all.

Of course, the challenges of the Valleys, economically, are deep-rooted, long-standing and they require more than just one intervention to reverse that trend. That’s why we’re calling for the establishment of a Valleys development agency, suitably equipped and properly accountable. We have recently been taking evidence in the External Affairs and Additional Legislation Committee—some Members are here this afternoon—on future regional policy in Wales following our withdrawal from the EU. I would advise all Members to look at the evidence that we’ve amassed. We’ve had a great deal of useful insight and evidence, not just on what has worked in terms of regional policy in Wales in the past and maybe what hasn’t worked so well, but we’ve also exposed some interesting and exciting possibilities for the future. Among the pieces of evidence that we received was a report by the OECD. They described the shift that needs to occur and has occurred in many countries in terms of regional policy, and there’s one passage that I’d like to quote. They say that, in the past, regional policies

tended to focus on addressing disparities between regions through the provision of subsidies to compensate them for lower incomes. Policies were designed by central governments through departments of state that delivered narrowly defined economic development programs. This approach was seen as increasingly ineffective and not sustainable from a fiscal point of view. The new approach to regional policies emphasise a focus on competitiveness and working with regions to unlock growth potential. This approach has significant implications for how government works. Governments need to work in a more integrated way at a regional and local level.’

I.e. not doing things to people and not looking at regions specifically in terms of their competitive disadvantage, but unlocking the potential that already exists within regions and empowering those regions to get on and fulfil their potential. So, this amounts a place-based approach that I mentioned in my response to the Member for Islwyn earlier, effectively saying that the days of governments doing things to areas are over and that public policy must be used to empower regions to do things for themselves.

In studies carried out by the OECD among others, place-based approaches to regional policies are shown to be effective in improving regional performance in those regions where there is a tangible regional identity. The Valleys is a tangible region. We are linked culturally, socially, historically. The Valleys entity is among the strongest in this country, so there is an outstanding opportunity to draw on that shared cultural, historic and social basis to unlock the potential. So, there’s a basis for prosperity, let Government now give that region the means to realise that prosperity. Diolch yn fawr.

Thank you very much. I have selected the two amendments to the motion. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 will be deselected. So, I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Infrastructure to formally move amendment 1 tabled in the name of Jane Hutt.

Formally.

Formally, thank you. I call on Russell George to move amendment 2, tabled in the name of Paul Davies.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I move the amendment in the name of Paul Davies. I have to say, in principle, I and the Welsh Conservative group can support the Plaid Cymru motion today, which seeks to boost the investment in jobs and infrastructure in the Valleys after historic underinvestment, I think, from the Government here. Nobody could argue, I don’t think, either, with the assertion from Plaid Cymru that the economic performance of the Valleys has been consistently below the Welsh and UK average. The motion, of course, does fail to recognise the significant investment and supply-chain opportunities created by the UK Government through the Cardiff and Swansea city regions. Interestingly, despite significant funding from the EU, the west Wales and the Valleys region has seen very little in terms of tangible improvements to economic prosperity. Perhaps that’s why the Valleys voted to leave in such big numbers—people living in the Valleys felt that the EU and the Welsh Government had not delivered as promised.

The president of the South and Mid Wales Chambers of Commerce has said that the Swansea and Cardiff city deals have the potential to transform the economy of south Wales and I agree with that. So, I do—

Will the Member give way?

Yes, I will.

Would he acknowledge that the city deals rather than the city regions, which I think he mentioned, which, of course, the Welsh Government set up, are simply displacing cuts in public spending through austerity, and the failure of the UK Government to acknowledge the case for fair funding? So, when put in the whole context, this bit of funding that has been passed down through the city deals is much smaller than the amount of money that’s been sucked out of Wales by the Government.

Well, I was just making the point that the area has had significant investment from the EU, but there’s no tangible difference. That’s in the power of Welsh Government—in their hands—as to how that money is spent, and the Welsh Government hasn’t made any tangible improvements with that.

So, from my point of view, I do, of course, welcome the UK Government’s support for the region through the city deal, which aims to raise the area to 90 per cent of UK productivity levels. The Cardiff capital region city deal is also a major £1.2 billion investment, which, we are told, will deliver an extra 25,000 new jobs and lever in an extra £4 billion of private sector investment. So, such developments of the Cardiff city region, will, I think, improve the opportunities of the south Wales Valleys. So, I do find the Government’s amendment highly hypocritical on a number of levels. It calls for the Westminster Government to invest in Valleys communities while ignoring the levers that the Welsh Government has at its own disposal to stimulate economic developments in the region.

We’re yet to see, of course, an economic strategy over a year after it was first promised, and that’s in contrast to the UK Government, which has set out its ambitious industrial strategy, which focuses on regional economies that will provide stability and direction to British industry. Furthermore, not only does the Government’s amendment ignore the substantial investment proposed by the UK Government on large-scale infrastructure projects, including increases to the Welsh Government’s capital budget, but it also calls for the use of procurement levers to stimulate the creation of meaningful employment in areas of economic need such as the Valleys.

There was, of course, a review of Welsh public procurement in 2012, and procurement has not substantially changed in Wales on capital improvement. The Welsh Government awarded just 44 contracts worth more than £0.5 million in 2016, and only 36 per cent went to Wales-based businesses. So, I think that’s further hypocrisy of the Government here and it shows that they’ve failed to present a coherent plan on how it will improve the economy of the Valleys. So, I would urge Members to support our amendment, which aims to recognise, in fairness, the UK Government’s commitment to improving living standards, economic growth and a more prosperous south Wales Valleys. This is something that will only happen—and you would expect me to say this, of course—if we elect Theresa May and a strong Conservative Government on 8 June.

I welcome this debate and welcome Plaid Cymru’s interest in our south Wales Valleys communities. Indeed, I gather from the press that the Member for Carmarthen East and Dinefwr is holding a public meeting in Neath this evening, so I commend to him the Gwyn Hall as an outstanding performance venue. It has a lot to offer in terms of theatre, film and, of course, pantomime [Laughter.] I’m sure that the opportunity to excite local party members with his revivalist preaching will stand him in good stead in the future—perhaps the not-too-distant future. But people in our Valleys communities will judge Plaid Cymru on its actions, and not on the sermons and the slogans. They will recall that the last time Plaid Cymru held the economic development brief, when Lehman’s was collapsing, they were prioritising building bypasses in Porthmadog, so they will not forget those actions on their part—

Will you take an intervention?

And communities—. And communities in—[Interruption.] I won’t be taking interventions.

No, I don’t think—[Interruption.] Just a moment. I don’t think the Member is giving way. I don’t think the Member is giving way—

I don’t think he is either.

No, and so if the Member would like to start again, because I missed the last sentence because of all the shouting. So you can go back and start again. Thank you.

Communities in Neath Port Talbot, in Merthyr Tydfil and Rhymney, in Ogmore, in Rhondda Cynon Taf, in Blaenau Gwent, in Caerphilly, and in Torfaen know one fact, and that is that if Plaid Cymru had its way the money available to those local authorities would be less, not more—money taken away from Valleys councils to other parts of Wales. So, when they come to the Chamber and beat their chests and point their fingers, it rings all rather hollow.

Would you take an intervention?

I will, yes.

Does the Member think that, actually, those promises do ring rather hollow, in particular when it comes to the Circuit of Wales? Because they feign support, but their chief executive is on record as saying that the Circuit of Wales project is the most ridiculous and destructive project ever. That is the chief executive of Plaid Cymru. Where do we get that from? A blog post. A blog post that has now been taken down—

This is an intervention not a speech, please.

I think it’s worth pointing out that these hollow promises are, indeed, hollow.

Thank you for another example of a double standard. Thank you for that. At the end of last year I convened a conference—[Interruption.]

Sorry. Can we have some quiet? Can we have some quiet on the benches, please? Can we just settle down? This is important for the Members in south Wales and important for all of Wales, so can we listen, please?

At the end of last year, I convened a conference in Neath looking at the local economy, and I’m grateful to the Cabinet Secretary for the economy and the Minister with responsibility for the Valleys taskforce and for skills for making time available with their officials to discuss the findings of that event and the report that arose from it. As they will know, people in the Valleys communities in my constituency are looking now for a changed approach. What people of all ages want in our Valleys is work, and whilst I genuinely applaud the Welsh Government on our low unemployment figures in Wales, we all know that there are parts of our Valleys where jobs are hard to come by, especially if you haven’t worked for years or may never have worked. So, when the Cabinet Secretary publishes his new economic strategy, as he knows, my constituents will be looking for solutions particular to our communities, and not a one-size-fits-all solution, but measures that tackle the specific challenges of our Valleys.

We would love to see the return of large-scale employers at the tops of our Valleys, but we also know that we’ve tried to do that and we have struggled to deliver that. The challenges are immense, but we do know that much more can be done to use the power of public sector procurement to try to deliver better jobs closer to home. So, I welcome the Government’s pilot programme to see how it can use its purchasing power intelligently to create and nurture suppliers and employers in places where jobs are scarce, and I urge the Welsh Government to be as ambitious and as bold as it can be. But we also need our large private businesses to see themselves as stewards of our local economies and proactively help support other local employers to grow and take on local people.

Let’s also make it easier for people to start a small business in the Valleys. Let’s develop those live/work spaces, or shared business hubs, connected with good broadband and powered with low-cost green energy. Energy is an industry that is a part of the heritage of our Valleys and can be a part of their future too, not just as recipients of community benefits, but as a job creator and as a community asset. I know the Cabinet Secretary and the Minister understand the potential of this, and I hope the taskforce can bring forward concrete plans to deliver that sort of opportunity.

I hope I can pour a little consensual oil on the troubled waters of the relationship between Plaid Cymru and the Labour Party. Anybody would think, from the last few speeches and interventions, that there was an election campaign going on. UKIP can agree with Plaid Cymru’s motion today, and, indeed, with the Conservative amendment. The motion itself is a standing indictment of the failure of all Governments for the last couple of generations to do something about the situation that exists, and was so graphically illustrated by Steffan Lewis in his speech, and has existed for many, many decades. It’s something that should trouble us all, but the one thing that you can’t say credibly, I think, is that this is due to the present Government’s policy of so-called austerity. I mean—

Will you take an intervention?

Not yet; I’ve only been going for less than a minute. A Government that has had one of the largest budget deficits ever, apart from Napoleonic wars and the second world war, for the last 10 years—this includes the Labour Government that preceded this one—can hardly be described as carrying on a policy of austerity. Today, we have a Government deficit of £52 billion a year—3 per cent to 4 per cent of GDP—and it has been up as far as 10 per cent of GDP in 2010. A national debt that stood at £1 trillion in 2010 is £1.8 trillion today. Spending money of that order can certainly not be regarded as austerity. I think it’s an insult to the Greeks and the Spaniards and the Portuguese, who really are suffering an economic contraction unprecedented since the great depression of the 1930s, to call what has happened in Britain following the financial crisis of 2008 ‘a policy of austerity’. We can certainly criticise. We can certainly criticise the UK Government for the priorities that it has within its spending plans, but I don’t think we can criticise the overall scale of spending as anything to do with the cause of the problems that the Valleys of south Wales suffer from today.

That’s what brings me, I think, to the main point of my speech, which is that we’ve had endless Government intervention in the Valleys over my lifetime, and what has it achieved—the point that Russell George made a moment ago. Yes, we’ve improved the infrastructure, we’ve done lots of good things, but it has not actually transformed the life chances and hopes of the peoples of the Valleys. EU funding is about £300 million a year. It’s a drop in the ocean. It’s peanuts compared with the amount of money that the private sector should spend in order to create the kinds of jobs that we need in the numbers that we need. That’s exactly what the Circuit of Wales project, of course, would do—a transformative project if ever I saw one. And it is very disappointing that the Government has been so timid and so dilatory—

Will the Member give way?

[Continues.]—in coming to a decision on this. I give way.

I give you some credit: having been part of a Government that did have a transformative impact on the Valleys, you are in a position to judge. [Laughter.] But, on the Circuit of Wales, as members of the Public Accounts Committee, we’ve both read the auditor general’s report on that, and there are significant concerns in there about the way the project has been handled to date. Wouldn’t it be better to take the time to do this properly, to make sure we don’t have another white elephant?

The point is that, for all the delays, and the so-called ‘due diligence’ that has been undertaken by the Welsh Government, the auditor general made no disparaging remark about the private sector project itself, but made lots of disparaging remarks about the capacity of civil servants and advisers of the Cabinet Secretary to reach a decision on what is a minute portion of the total amount of money that will ultimately be spent if this project goes ahead. Yes, of course, we must do due diligence, but the limitations on the risks to the public that are evident in this project are out of all proportion to the proposed benefits that are likely to arise. After all, all that the Government is being asked to do is to provide a secondary contingent guarantee of a portion of the private sector funding—there’s no public money going into the project—which will only kick in when the assets are actually created. So, the contingent liability, which is less than 50 per cent, will be secured on 100 per cent of the assets, and it will only be a maximum of £8.5 million a year that the Welsh Government would be on the hook for, because it would guarantee the annual payments that are due to Aviva, the principal funder of the scheme, over a period of 20 years, so that although, technically, if the project fails completely, never makes any money and none of the assets can ever be sold, there is a potential loss of £8.5 million for 20-odd years, that, in the scale of the resources available to the Welsh Government, is nothing.

If this project were to go ahead and be successful, on the back of the transport infrastructure improvements that Rhianon Passmore introduced into the debate in her intervention earlier on, and many other good things that are happening as well, like the improvement to the Heads of the Valleys road, and, we hope, electrification of railway lines as well, then this would be the real catalyst of beneficial change to those northern Valleys communities who, throughout my lifetime, have been the Cinderella of the United Kingdom.

Thank you very much. I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Infrastructure, Ken Skates.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I’d like to begin by thanking Members for their contributions today, and also for giving me an opportunity to respond. I’d like to reiterate this Welsh Government’s absolute determination to spread prosperity to every part of Wales, including to the south Wales Valleys. It’s our aspiration to create prosperity for all.

Now, as Members will be aware, we are currently undertaking work to refresh our economic strategy to develop the economy of each region of Wales more fully, and so today’s debate is indeed very timely. In Steffan Lewis’s measured contribution, he essentially, I believe, presented the justification for the vision that I’ve already outlined for our new regionally-focused, place-based approach to economic development. I think it’s important in this debate to recognise both the challenges, but also, crucially, the strengths of the economy of the Valleys, in order for us to develop that strategy effectively, and, in looking at the data, to understand exactly where our collective efforts should be targeted.

Now, whilst gross value added per capita is below the Welsh average in both the central Valleys and the Gwent Valleys, productivity in the central Valleys is the highest in Wales, whilst, in the Gwent Valleys, productivity is the same as the Welsh average. So, it’s clear—absolutely clear—that the people of the Valleys work hard. But they don’t necessarily get the return they deserve for that hard work.

Economic inactivity and the work we are doing as a Welsh Government through our new employability programme is crucial to addressing the structural problems in Valleys communities, and in many more post-industrial communities across Wales. Unemployment in most south Wales Valleys local authorities has fallen faster than the Welsh average over the last year. In that time the unemployment rate fell in both Blaenau Gwent and Merthyr Tydfil, down by 2.8 per cent and 1.6 per cent respectively, but we all know that progression in work for those who have a job is still a major problem, as is the quantity of quality work available to people. All too often we’ve seen good, skilled, well-paid work replaced by poorer quality casual work, with little security and no certainty for the future. This casualised economy is not the future that any of us want for communities in the Valleys. We must be mindful, though, that the Valleys is not a single homogenous area blighted by the same problems across all communities. In some areas, we have seen economic renewal, encouraging employment figures and improvements in skills, educational attainment, health and well-being. Earnings in Rhondda Cynon Taf and Caerphilly are close to or above the Welsh average, and the employment rate of 16 to 64-year-olds in Wales is on the up, growing fastest in west Wales and the Valleys.

These very latest statistics are encouraging, showing an improving employment rate, particularly in west Wales and the Valleys. In the last Assembly term, the Government supported or created nearly 150,000 jobs across the supply chain. Many of these were of supply chains of many sectors, and, across Valleys communities, many thousands of people secured work as a consequence of our interventions. One only needs to look at the likes of General Dynamics to see the faith that employers now have in skilled workers across Valleys communities. But we also know that gains, as I said earlier, in economic growth in recent years have not fallen equally across Wales, the UK, or indeed the world. Many communities in the Heads of the Valleys do not feel part of the growth story that we have seen across the country and the world. So, as a Government, we are working relentlessly to ensure the right economic conditions to create and safeguard sustainable jobs throughout the Valleys and across Wales continues—better jobs closer to home in all parts of Wales.

Last year, we established the Valleys taskforce to help drive growth and economic prosperity across the area. The taskforce provides a real opportunity to support a strengths-based approach and to draw upon opportunities in a shifting climate to develop and grow the economy of the Valleys. The taskforce has a very clear mandate to engage with the communities it serves and to bring forward an ambitious plan, which it is doing in July. This will include setting a target of creating 10,000 jobs in the Valleys. But we also need to make sure that people living in Valleys communities have the skills required to compete for these jobs. This is why the employability programme is also crucially important. The taskforce will be working closely with city deal leaders to ensure that we maximise opportunities for people in the Valleys, and we will maintain our programme of investment, including the dualling of the A465, the biggest road project currently being delivered today—stopped by Plaid Cymru, but being delivered by Labour.

The south Wales metro, as Members have identified, will be a crucial catalyst for investment, and we’ll be working with our local partners to ensure the benefits from economic growth are tied closely to the development of the metro.

Are you coming to a conclusion?

It’s my belief that the work that we are bringing forward as a Government will deliver prosperity for all—prosperity for the Valleys, prosperity for all communities across the Valleys. Deputy Presiding Officer, we understand that the Valleys of south Wales need, require, and, indeed, deserve, to be at the heart of the focus of Government. Under this Government, they will be.

Thank you. I call Adam Price to reply to the debate, briefly. Thank you.

I have very limited time, so I’ll say just this. I think the Valleys—the economic history, the political history, of the Valleys, has been characterised by two forms of persistence, I think, over the last 80 years: the persistence of the problems that have been there right back to the crisis in the 1920s and 1930s and the creation of UK regional policy in the Special Areas Act 1934, which was born in the south Wales Valleys. We’re still talking about, in a different form, essentially the same underlying problems. The other form of persistence is the persistence of the promises made by politicians—promises made only to be dashed. Whether it’s the two Valleys initiatives that we had in the 1980s and 1990s—and here we are, 40 years later, talking about the same problems.

I wish the Cabinet Secretary well with his new economic strategy. The whole of Wales needs new economic ideas, because the ones that we have haven’t served us. But I have to say this: I worry, because strategy follows structure, and the structure that we have adopted, the city region approach, we’ve slavishly imported from over the border in England. These are the ideas of the former Chancellor, remember—the failed economic ideas. The distinctive economic problems—and, yes, opportunities, because there are opportunities there as well—cannot be fully addressed, will not be marshalled, if we simply import the failed ideas based on a city region model. You know, this idea that a rising tide lifts all boats—trickle-down economics, or trickle-up—doesn’t work, won’t work for the Valleys. It hasn’t worked over 70 years, and that’s why we need real new ideas. We don’t have them, unfortunately, in Government policy.

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

We now move on to the United Kingdom Independence Party debate on the foreign aid budget and I call on Neil Hamilton to move the motion—Neil Hamilton.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I move the motion in my name on the agenda. Of course, a lot of the foreign aid budget does a lot of good in the world, but only 16 per cent of the £13 billion, £14 billion, £15 billion that we spend on foreign aid goes on such projects. The overwhelming majority of it goes on what are called the Government’s other strategic long-term goals, whether that is on climate change policy or pacification or trying to ensure that corruption is rooted out. All these things, perhaps to a greater or lesser extent, may be good in themselves, but the capacity to monitor and to evaluate what they do is limited and sometimes non-existent, and so we’re effectively pouring money into a black hole, where it gets diverted to purposes of which we certainly would not approve.

I’m aided in the argument I’m going to put today by an article that was written by Grant Shapps just a short time ago. He was the Minister of State at the Department for International Development until about less than two years ago. He has had a Damascene conversion of the kind that our motion today adumbrates, because he described foreign aid spending as ‘out of control’. He’s called for the department over which he half presided to be abolished and has attacked its profoundly worrying tendency to shovel cash out of the door.

Now, if we’re talking about maybe £8 billion, which is the figure that our motion mentions, that we could spend on other things, whether it be the health service or anything else, this is something that we should certainly consider very seriously.

Grant Shapps described in his article how, in the Foreign Office, he would protest to African dictators about their denial of human rights and democratic values, but then, with his Department for International Development hat on, he says,

I would rifle through my red box (of ministerial papers) to find cheques for hundreds of millions of pounds payable to the same countries…. Unsurprisingly, they concluded that Britain did not really mind about these minor abuses of rights. Why else did all this British cash continue to pour in?’

So, foreign aid can often be counterproductive in what it does. It’s nearly half a century now since Professor Peter Bauer, the professor of international development and economics at the London School of Economics, said that foreign aid is something that is paid by poorer people in rich countries to rich people in poor countries. We all know of the many abuses that have occurred over a great many years.

Now, £250-odd million a year is spent, for example, in Nigeria. A lot of that goes in support of the Nigerian Government’s attempts to wipe out Boko Haram, now one of the greatest dangers in the world of Islamist extremism. But, western officials who operate within Nigeria are very concerned that the Government of Nigeria’s recently elected leader, President Muhammadu Buhari, is misusing that aid to persecute his own political opponents. Since he came to power in May 2015, a number of prominent members of the former ruling People’s Democratic Party have been arrested and imprisoned without charge, and amongst those detained are the party’s official spokespersons.

These kinds of abuses should cause us to wake up. Nigeria also has, you may be surprised to learn, a space programme. They have a space agency that hopes to send rockets up into space by 2028. It’s alleged—[Interruption.]

I shall, when I finish the point.

[Continues.]—that that is absorbing hundreds of millions of pounds of Nigeria’s public expenditure, but they don’t publish the figures, so we don’t know. I give way to Rhianon.

Thank you very much. In regard to the use of foreign aid, there are issues in terms of the way some countries are using it. This is acknowledged and this should be being correctly policed, but that absolutely does not undermine the purposes of foreign aid, and you’ve mentioned Boko Haram. Would you agree that 0.7 per cent of GDP is appropriate and that all Scandinavian countries spend far more than we do on foreign aid?

There are only five countries in the world that spend more than we do on foreign aid, and 0.7 as a percentage of GDP is a purely arbitrary figure plucked out of the air and has no more significance than 0.5 or 1 per cent. Taking the Member’s point in a more general sense, why should we not increase the foreign aid budget by four or five times on that basis? All these things are worth doing in the world. There are lots of problems that other countries have that are very severe, but we can’t go on simply taking on these burdens ourselves when we’ve got so many problems to solve in our own country. Until we get the systems in place whereby we can evaluate value for money properly, then this is just an exercise in, as Grant Shapps described, ‘shovelling money out the door.’ Mr Andrew Dickens, who was an official in the overseas aid department in the National Audit Office said that, when he was auditing overseas development, the only audit possible of multilateral aid was to check that the sums paid to international organisations matched the amounts pledged. Any real audit of the projects supported had to be done by the organisation’s own auditors. Well, self-auditing audits are not worth the paper they’re printed on.

There are lots of egregious abuses, which I won’t weary the Assembly by repeating today, which would be found in the archives of the ‘Daily Mail’ and easy consulted, but the kinds of projects that I mentioned in relation to Nigeria absorb very, very significant sums indeed, which, in our view, would be better spent at home on areas such as the health service. The Labour Party’s manifesto in the Westminster election that is currently going on says that they’re going to spend another £37 billion on the national health service—a figure plucked out of the air. It’s as good as any other figure, I suppose, but you could always add a few noughts to it, no doubt, on this principle that money grows on trees. The Labour Party today seems to think that the economic model we should be following is that of Venezuela, which should be one of the richest countries in the world, but which has been reduced to poverty, destitution and economic ruin by the policies of Hugo Chávez, who’s such a great hero of Jeremy Corbyn.

We could spend £40 billion extra on the health service if we wanted to over the course of the next parliament by taking £8 billion a year out of the foreign aid budget. Then we would know that it’s being spent on something worth while. So, it’s a choice that we have to make. It’s a binary choice. We can choose to spend money on people in our own country who deserve help, or we can spend the money on people abroad who may not necessarily need the help because the people to whom the foreign aid is going are not the recipients which we intend. So, there is no moral value, actually, in simply giving away other people’s money. The only moral value consists in giving away your own. Therefore, to take on a high moral tone about foreign aid spending, I think, is inappropriate in respect of the use of taxpayers’ money. Yes, you can make a case for foreign aid projects of the humanitarian kind, obviously, to help with crises such as the effects of earthquakes or typhoons or whatever. Nobody would deny the necessity of playing our part in the international community in helping desperate people in desperate situations. But, where we have political decisions taken, climate change policies, for example, which are controversial, and the recipients or the countries who receive these payments are actually going to be doubling, or trebling in the case of India and China, their carbon emissions in the course of the next 30 years, despite the Paris climate accords—they’re given, effectively, an exemption because they’re growing and developing economies—then we’re not even achieving the policy objectives that we think are desirable in the world generally if you believe in man-made climate change. So, there’s a conflict there of policy which cannot be resolved. So, I’m afraid that what my party says is that, in this respect at any rate, charity begins at home, and that’s what we should be fighting this election upon.

Thank you. I have selected the amendment to the motion, and I call on Steffan Lewis to move amendment 1, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I move amendment 1 in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. International aid makes a difference. It alleviates human suffering when humanitarian crisis strikes. It saves lives and strengthens communities. By working together, for example, we have halved extreme poverty in the last 40 years, and have halved child mortality since 1990. In developing countries, 91 per cent of children are now enrolled in primary school. Between 2000 and 2014, over 6.2 million malaria deaths were averted, primarily saving the lives—primarily saving the lives—of children under 5. And we can be extremely proud of Wales’s record. Our budget and the extent of our powers may be limited, as usual, and compared to the work undertaken at a UK level by the Department for International Development, but the work done by organisations and individuals to build links with those who need our help around the world shows remarkable generosity and great success. The Wales for Africa project has been running for the last 10 years and during that time has done incredible work with partners across Africa. Each health board in Wales has active links with Africa, helping to train doctors, nurses and midwives to deliver healthcare in their communities and, in turn, developing the skills of workers in the Welsh NHS too.

To take an example from the south-east, Midwives@Africa based in Abergavenny deliver effective, evidenced-based training courses to midwife tutors and midwives in southern Ethiopia. It is a partnership that helps both sides—it’s reciprocal—with health workers in Ethiopia receiving vital training, and the Welsh midwives involved developing their teaching, communication and leadership skills. They’re a credit to our nation and to Ethiopia too.

The next few years will see a fundamental change and reshaping of Wales’s relationship with the rest of the world, of course, as a result of our withdrawal from the European Union, and the rhetoric currently coming from some parts of the political establishment is worryingly adversarial. When the Prime Minister uses language that attacks our closest friends and neighbours, she risks damaging our nation’s standing on the global stage not just in terms of international aid, but in other matters too, and I don’t want to see Wales’s name tarnished at the same time. In that context, Dirprwy Lywydd, it is more important than ever that Wales has its own global brand, that we continue to be an outward-looking nation, to build links around the world, and we cannot let the growing narrow nationalism in parts of British politics diminish our global profile. We need a dedicated international policy for Wales, and it should include a commitment to international aid as well. I am of the firm view that this country requires a designated Cabinet Secretary for external affairs within the Welsh Government to lead that strategy, and I am at a loss to understand why this Government, yet again, refuses to do so.

It should also include in that international policy our intentions on how we wish to build on development links, and we can look to other countries in these islands, even. We can look to Scotland and see how an ambitious humanitarian aid strategy has been effective, even with the constraints they have there. Their £9 million development fund is predicated on a vision of Scotland as a good global citizen as part of a wider international strategy tied to trade and education exchanges as well. So, as we strive to enhance Wales’s standing on the global stage, I hope that international development forms an integral part of that strategy in the future, as it has done in recent years.

While I agree that it is our duty to help those facing disease, war or famine, the sad fact remains that much of the foreign aid budget is spent inappropriately. And we are not talking about trivial amounts of money here, as we spend £30 million a day on foreign aid, and only about 16 per cent of this budget is used as humanitarian aid or crisis relief. Diane Abbot MP says,

what has given me great concern recently is the emergence of so called “Lords of Poverty”. These are management consultants who are taking enormous salaries from the DFID (Department for International Development) budget in their role as management consultants.’

The UK target is to spend 0.7 per cent of gross national income on foreign aid, and, at the end of 2013, civil servants went on a £1 billion spending spree in order to hit this target. No person should be rushed to spend taxpayers’ money in order to meet a target. There has been much criticism over the way in which foreign aid money is spent, particularly at a time when we in Wales are facing a crisis in health and social care. As a result of austerity, our public services are struggling. Since 2010, spending across many Government departments has fallen by over a quarter. At a time when we should be investing in our health service in order to meet challenges, we see budgets frozen. In contrast—

Will you take an intervention?

No, I’m sorry, because I’ll be taking the four minutes in talking.

In contrast, according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies, the amount of money the UK spends on international development will increase by a further £1 billion a year over the next four years, and that will bring the budget to nearly £15 billion a year, almost as much as the entire Welsh budget.

The UK’s foreign aid approach needs a complete overhaul, and the British taxpayer is entitled to know where the money is being spent. As our national debt continues to skyrocket, how can we justify an aid programme that gives millions of pounds to nations with nuclear and space programmes, when our citizens are living in poverty? My region, Aberavon, is one of the poorest areas, and even whilst walking in the town there are several homeless people lying in the doorways, and this is shameful. So, how can we justify an aid programme that seeks to improve the energy efficiency of Brazilian industry when Welsh taxpayers are struggling to heat their homes? We need a root-and-branch reform of overseas aid that starts with dropping arbitrary targets of spending against national gross income. All this target has done is increase the budget, forcing DFID civil servants to entertain increasingly bizarre ways of spending British taxpayers’ money. Our nation is struggling, and our citizens deserve consideration.

However, we have evidence of moneys being well spent abroad in response to Africa, where we combated Ebola in Sierra Leona and Liberia. The UK Government committed £427 million of direct support to help contain, control, treat and ultimately defeat Ebola. UK direct support included deployment of medical experts from the NHS and the military, which supplied treatment centres—1,400 beds for treatment, including isolation beds, to combat the disease. There were also six Ebola treatment centres across the country built, training teams to train front-line workers. Four thousand healthcare workers were taught logistics and how to be hygienists in the medical profession, which included the Sierra Leone army and prison staff. People were also taught in teams across the country how to bury the dead safely. There were emergency supplies such as food and chlorine, and scientific research was carried out by building laboratories to understand how Ebola had spread. The operation was co-ordinated by the military. The operation worked because the Government and the countries were not simply handed money and told to get on with it. The people had great pride from learning and were left with a legacy of trained clinicians, healthcare centres, and scientific support and research. The people had pride in learning, and the British taxpayer could see tangible proof and evidence of where that money had been spent. And while the people of Britain are generous, accountability and transparency of taxpayers’ money is of paramount importance.

I’m very proud that Labour is committed to spending 0.7 per cent of our gross national income on international development. In 2013, the UK was the first G7 country to meet its UN spending target, and Labour committed to the 0.7 per cent spending on overseas aid both in its 2015 general election manifesto, and in our manifesto published yesterday. That commitment to 0.7 per cent—I think it’s important to tell the Members that are speaking that it’s a UN target; that is what the UN wants countries to spend.

I’m very grateful to the Member for taking the intervention. Will you acknowledge that that commitment was a commitment that was first made by a Conservative Prime Minister, David Cameron? Because, like you, I’m very proud of what has been achieved, and I know that the Labour Party has supported that ambition.

This is something that the Conservative Government has supported, and I’m glad we agree on that issue. I wish all the parties in this Senedd agreed.

Our manifesto yesterday said that we pledge to develop a targeted development agenda, based on the principles of redistribution, social justice, women’s rights and poverty reduction. And, in fact, the last Labour Government in the UK did earn Britain recognition as a world leader in the field of international development by setting up the dedicated Department for International Development. I think it’s very important to say that that international development department is scrutinised very carefully. It is scrutinised by the International Development Committee in the House of Commons, it’s scrutinised by the National Audit Office and it is scrutinised by the Independent Commission for Aid Impact. It is heavily scrutinised. The doubts and queries that come up about international aid are whipped up by the right-wing press, which has been referred to today, and I think we don’t need to take our thinking on this subject from papers like the ‘Daily Mail’ and ‘The Mail on Sunday’, who would be only too happy for us to spend 100 per cent of our money on ourselves and not thinking in any way about the fact that we are global citizens and we live in a global world.

I believe that everyone in every country has a right to clean water, enough food, basic healthcare and an education, and we have a commitment to ensure these human rights should become a reality for the world’s poor and the victims of tyranny and conflict. And of course, it is in our interest to promote this too, because where there’s poverty and lack of education, there’s much more likely to be political instability, conflict and forced migration. You’ve only got to look at what’s happened in the European migrant crisis to see this. No-one leaves their country if it’s a stable place to live in with enough food, with healthcare provision and a chance for an education, so it is in our interests to ensure that we make the world as stable a place as we can, and I believe that aid plays a major role in doing that. Think about what we’ve achieved. The UK is committed to global polio eradication and is the third largest donor to the Global Polio Eradication Initiative. There are now only three countries in the world where polio is endemic: Nigeria, Afghanistan and Pakistan. That is largely due to the aid that we have given.

During my time in Westminster, I was fortunate to visit a project in Africa that had benefitted from international aid from DFID, the international development department, in particular looking at the joint treatment of TB and HIV in Kenya, Rwanda and Malawi. Having seen first hand, as I know others in this Chamber have, the degree of poverty that was experienced by people in those countries, in particular the women and children, it absolutely reinforces my commitment that Wales and the UK should be an outward-looking country where we recognise our international obligations and operate in a generous spirit. I am distressed that there is a party within this Assembly that does not support an outward-looking—who are not generous in their thoughts and think that we must do all we can as united together to try to improve things for the people of the world. Because as far as I’m concerned, and I think most of us in this Chamber are concerned, the children in the world—the children internationally are all our children.

Can I say I was greatly moved—I was still at school, actually—when the Brandt commission reported? I know this will not recommend it any further to a certain party but, of course, Edward Heath was one of its prime members. It established the 0.7 per cent target of GNP that should be devoted to international aid. As part of that report, it also emphasised, to respond directly to Neil Hamilton, that it wasn’t aid that was the most important thing—though it was a vital thing in transforming people’s lives in the poorest countries—but it was trade that was at the heart of a more just international order. That had a big effect in the 1980s in the GATT rounds, which first broke through, really, the old protectionist systems that had largely held force since the second world war. That itself then led on to the World Trade Organization, which has opened up and transformed international trading, and that’s why the Christian Aid figures that Steffan quoted earlier about massive reductions in world poverty—. When you look at absolute poverty, the reductions are even more astonishing. I know that UKIP, to be fair, are very consistent on this. They deplore what’s happened in terms of the global economy, as well, but it has liberated hundreds of millions of people, because we have a more effective trading system now, internationally. So, it’s trade and aid—that’s what leads to a just international society.

I have to say, Deputy Presiding Officer, that, in the early 1990s, I was responsible for UNICEF’s education work in Wales, and, as part of that, I did visit some projects. I remember the technical assistance I saw in Brazil that was given to street children, particularly in Fortaleza, one of the poorer cities in Brazil then, as now—very close to the equator. I saw a street children project there where the children were helped by UNICEF to run a communal living arrangement, and then the children went out and performed a street circus. Fortaleza is very popular with North American tourists, and these children earned a decent living. Now, if they hadn’t earned a decent and legal living, they were vulnerable to vigilante gangs coming along and murdering them, and it was very important, in particular, that the adolescent children could show society that they were in productive employment. Because, you may give money—and Neil has talked about giving your own money and I’m sure that many people in this Chamber do that and keep that a private thing—to a street child of five or six years of age on a street corner, but let me tell you, you’re less likely to give a 14-year-old or 15-year-old youth on the corner, but perhaps in equal poverty, that assistance. So, the technical assistance I saw was just remarkable.

I also saw a project in Thailand that helped sex workers, and the liberation that that brought them was deeply moving. There was a conference attached to the work that we were viewing there and I was given a briefcase for the conference with a beautiful textile pattern on the front of it, and I used that briefcase for many years when I was first elected to the Assembly. It was very distinctive and I was very proud to tell people when they asked, ‘Where did you get that case?’ So, I think it’s very important that we set this in context.

I am proud that a British Government with cross-party support, if not all-party support, has implemented the 0.7 per cent target. It is something that we should be very, very proud of and that we want to see. We are a leader and other countries are following our example, albeit too slowly.

In the last five or six years, the Department for International Development budget has led to 69.5 million people gaining access to financial services to help them work their way out of poverty. That’s things like microloans to women in Bangladesh. You know, it’s not all about giving immediate aid; it’s about investing in the future: 11.3 million children are in primary and lower secondary schools, nearly half of them girls, because of our budget; we have helped support nearly 400,000 teachers; since 2010, over 67 million children have been immunised because of our people’s money, if I could put it that way, through Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance. Many of those children would not be alive today if that assistance had not been given. We stand proud of what we’ve achieved and we want to go further.

I think Julie Morgan made reference to the audit procedures. They’re even more robust than Julie had time, actually, to indicate. In the last audit, 0.3 per cent of DFID spending was reported as lost to fraud, of which two thirds was then recovered. So, we lost in the budget 0.01 per cent, and I think that’s what we’ve got to remember—that we have rigorous procedures.

Can I conclude, Deputy Presiding Officer? Britain has been part of the solution in this area. Let’s now not become part of the problem. Reject this shabby motion.

In 1964, a Labour Government under Harold Wilson was elected. It was a Government that immediately made departmental changes with five new Government ministries being set up. One of them, interestingly, was the Welsh Office. Another more pertinent to today’s debate was the Ministry of Overseas Development, headed by Barbara Castle. That was perhaps the start of the overseas aid industry. Now, in 2015, another newspaper—not the ‘Daily Mail’; it may not be any more well regarded by the people to the right of me, but it’s ‘The Times’—began a series of investigative pieces covering the subject of overseas aid. That newspaper has continued to closely monitor this sector since then. When ‘The Times’ began to explore this issue, the newspaper received an interesting letter from Gordon Bridger. He was the director of economics at the Ministry of Overseas Development when it was set up in 1964. Gordon Bridger pointed out that there were different types of overseas aid, one of which is budgetary aid. This is aid given directly by one Government to another Government, and this is what Gordon Bridger had to say about budgetary aid—by the way he was referring to a recent piece that had appeared in a newspaper in which it was alleged that British aid was bankrolling a legion of Ghanaian civil servants who didn’t actually exist.

Now, Gordon Bridger said: ‘The massive misuse of European and British budgetary aid in Ghana recently reported is no surprise, since almost all UK financial aid now takes that form. The Department for International Development is now giving almost £300 million a year to Ethiopia, and many millions to Nigeria, Pakistan, Kenya and numerous others. It is impossible, indeed dangerous, to audit budgetary aid. An assassination attempt on Malawi’s former budget director occurred last year after he planned to reveal Government corruption. There have also been huge scandals over the way the way the Governments of Uganda, Mozambique, Kenya, Rwanda and Nepal have misused this type of aid, and if anyone thinks that the £268 million going to Pakistan reaches poor people, they must be very naive. The DfID is being taken to court over claims about misuse of aid in Ethiopia, and it has been condemned by Amnesty International. Barbara Castle, who in 1964 was put in charge of the newly formed Ministry of Overseas Development, for which I worked as director of economics, instructed us to phase out budgetary aid as it undermined local effort, got diverted and was impossible to audit—[Interruption.] Certainly.

UK Government has phased out direct aid to Governments. It doesn’t happen anymore. We give aid to international partners like UNICEF, to organisations, to British charities that are working there, and to co-operatives and the like of other community bodies in these countries. We do not give money to foreign Governments as aid.

Do you also agree with the spending on consultants, though, which has doubled to more than £1 billion a year since 2012—[Interruption]—benefits experts, right. Benefitting many expert companies in accountancy, like PricewaterhouseCoopers, who are not particularly known for their ethical practices, but if you want to carry on giving these—[Interruption].

Simon Thomas.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I think in 10 years that I have worked in some shape of form around this Assembly, I haven’t seen a motion that made my skin crawl more than the one before us today. I don’t say that the purpose or amount of overseas aid is not a subject for considered and well-argued debate—it clearly is. But not even the fig leaf worn by Neil Hamilton to hide his modesty on the pages of ‘GQ’ magazine could hide the shameless way that UKIP are trying to take an issue not related to Assembly powers, barely tangentially related to our representative role as AMs, in order to feed right-wing red meat to their few remaining supporters.

This motion is misleading and inaccurate and I will demonstrate why. It refers to an arbitrary gross domestic product target of 0.7 per cent for overseas aid. There’s nothing arbitrary about it, as David Melding has just pointed out—it has a long and thoroughly worked out international history. Indeed, it’s such a recognised target that Neil Hamilton stood for election on a manifesto commitment to this target, because the 1997 Conservative manifesto said this:

We will continue to maintain a significant bilateral and multilateral aid programme reflecting the aspiration of meeting the UN’s target of 0.7% of GDP for aid as a long-term objective.’

So, Neil Hamilton stood for election on such a manifesto. He’s even—[Interruption] No, you’ve had your bile. You’ve had your opportunity to give your bile to this place. He’s even partly responsible for the fact that we have this 0.7 per cent, because after my old colleague Martin Bell defeated him in Tatton, the Conservatives of Tatton had to find a clean skin, and the clean skin they found was one George Osborne who then, when he was Chancellor in 2013, exactly introduced this commitment of 0.7 per cent, so Neil Hamilton is doubly to blame for the situation we’re in.

The next part of the motion complains about the UK national debt of £1.6 trillion. Well, again, who’s responsible for that UK debt? The long-term economic plan supported by the Conservatives, supported by, sadly, the Liberal Democrats, but also supported by Messrs Reckless and Carswell, who always consistently voted for the budget process that has led to us having a £1.6 trillion national debt. I’m delighted to see Mark Reckless in this place. I thought the submarine strategy of the Conservative group wasn’t going to let him up to breathe anymore, but he has met us with—

I won’t give way; I have too much to say, I’m sorry. I’m simply delighted to see him. We are then told about how much is wasted or diverted by corruption. Well, if you call 0.01 per cent, as David Melding has just pointed out, being wasted, then your maths bears too much similarity to that of Diane Abbott’s for my comfort, I have to say. But this corruption thing is interesting, isn’t it? What’s this corruption thing? Do UKIP have in mind HSBC paying US regulators nearly $2 billion in fines due to drug money laundering, or the £30 million settlement paid by BAE Systems to the Serious Fraud Office, over the Al-Yamamah jet deal with Saudi Arabia? I don’t think they do.

Let’s see how the proposer of the motion spent his time as a Member of Parliament. He worked for a lobbying company called Strategy Network International, linked to mining firms in apartheid South Africa, which campaigned to lift sanctions and paid for Tory MPs to visit South Africa. It took the cash-for-questions inquiry to reveal he had never declared this consultancy to the House of Commons. As an MP—

No, I’m not. You’ve had your chance. No. [Interruption.] Yes, well the truth is in the cash-for-questions inquiry, and everyone can read it. As an MP, I revealed that the BAE Systems had paid millions of pounds in secret commissions to sell Hawk jets to South Africa. I think both of us appeared on the front page of ‘The Guardian’ for our inquiries as Members of Parliament, but I know I’m prouder of what I did than what he did; I think I did it for the right reasons. I also think that I was talking about the sort of corruption that we should be concerned about today, and not the straw-men arguments that the Member has advanced.

Now, after the electors of Tatton came to the same conclusion as the voters of Carmarthen East and Dinefwr will soon come to, the Member spoke at the apartheid-supporting Springbok Club in 1998. The official notes to that meeting, written by a former National Front member, state:

Mr. Hamilton gave a riveting keynote speech, in which he recalled his own fond memories of South Africa during the era of civilised rule. He also expressed great pleasure at seeing the true South African flag proudly on display…and expressed the hope that one day it would be seen flying in Cape Town and Pretoria once again.’

That was the apartheid era flag, of course. Now, we also know that Mr Hamilton was active in the Young Conservatives when they merrily sold and wore ‘Hang Nelson Mandela’ T-shirts. The only reasonable conclusion we can draw—[Interruption.] The only reasonable conclusion we can draw is that this motion’s pious posturing, its pretence to be concerned about the burden of aid on the working people of Wales, really should read: ‘Black lives matter less’. What UKIP really hanker after is the time when colonials did what they were told, and stopped being uppity.

Well, if there’s any bile in this Chamber, it’s just come from the gentleman who just sat down in his appalling personal attacks on other AMs in this Chamber. Absolutely disgraceful. [Interruption.] Absolutely disgraceful.

Of the £250 million in aid we sent to Ethiopia last year, only a tiny proportion went to wealth creation. In other words, we’re not helping these countries to become self-sufficient, but rather tying them into a never-ending spiral of dependency on foreign aid. Our great efforts in providing better health, education and sanitation has caused a population explosion, doubling in Ethiopia from 74 million in 1990, to 134 million today. The tragedy is: almost all of them will have very little quality of life.

Will you take an intervention?

Yes, of course I will.

I’m pleased that you managed to take an intervention; I couldn’t bear to hear you much more. But I would like to invite you to meet the midwives from Betsi Cadwaladr University Local Health Board who volunteer in Lesotho. I would like to invite all the UKIP Members who speak here today to also visit Lampeter’s Community Carbon Link, helping to plant 0.5 million trees in Kenya, or the Tools for Self Reliance in Crickhowell, who have worked in Tanzania for 20 years. It would be actually more beneficial to you, as Members of this Welsh Assembly, if you actually spoke to the people from Wales and got a reality check about what’s happening on the ground instead of what you’re about to—

Thank you. Yes, yes, you’re talking about a tiny, tiny percentage of the population. That’s all you’re talking about—a tiny percentage of those people—[Interruption.] They will almost certainly live in abject poverty, with no prospect of meaningful work. It is not enough for us to save them from starvation; we have to give them hope and a possibility of them improving their lives in a sustainable way. Whatever aid we give must be targeted to help them create wealth. The more wealthy a nation becomes, the fewer the number of children who are born to each family, giving each and every child a much greater prospect of having a happy, fulfilling life. Britain’s current scattergun approach to foreign aid does not help eradicate poverty, it perpetuates it. By using a more defined and targeted approach to aid, we’ll be able to provide much-needed assistance and reduce the foreign aid budget. Our aim should be to drive down the need for aid—

Will you take an intervention?

[Continues.]—not continually expand its budget. No, thank you.

I find it quite appalling that many Members in this Chamber are quite happy to see the working classes of this country have their pockets picked in order to keep despots in power—[Interruption.]—such people as Mugabe et cetera, that you’re happy that huge amounts of money are wasted simply so that you can salve your own consciences and say, ‘We give 0.07 per cent of our GDP’. [Interruption.] It’s salving your consciences. [Interruption.] It doesn’t actually achieve anything as to what is needed. Thank you.

I have two other speakers. [Interruption.] I have two other speakers who wish to speak in this debate. If they will assure me they will not take the full five minutes, I can get them both in. They’re both two of my colleagues on the Labour benches, so I plead with you, if I call you, can you not take these full five minutes, and then we can get you all in? John Griffiths.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I think at the root of this debate today is the fact that all of us here live in a secure, stable and prosperous part of the world, but as we all know, and as we’ve heard already, and as the briefings from Oxfam Cymru, Save the Children and the Red Cross provided for this debate show with their tragic statistics, very many people in the world are not in that fortunate position and live with death as a daily reality—unnecessary death and suffering, poor sanitation, poor health standards, lack of educational opportunity, and lack of economic opportunity. And also, of course, great war and turmoil. So, we are very fortunate, and that does give us a moral responsibility to help people in that dire need.

I’m very proud, actually, Dirprwy Lywydd, that our Welsh Government has taken forward the programme for Africa, recognising our moral responsibility. I was very fortunate to go to Mbale in Uganda and see at first-hand the children, the women, the families that have benefited from the work—the health work, the educational work, the economic development and environmental work—that Welsh people are doing in partnership with people in Mbale, and it’s very heart-warming, when you walk around the orphanages, and you see at first-hand how much it matters to people, and I applaud that work.

I also very much applaud the last UK Labour Government for setting up the Department for International Development, for tripling the aid budget, and I very much applaud the UK Conservative Government for meeting the 0.7 per cent target. That is absolutely fantastic to see, when you look at the need around the world. In terms of the displacement and the mass movement of people across the world that that displacement of over 60 million people creates, with the war and turmoil behind it, and economic migration coming from impoverishment, we know that that not only creates those very obvious problems for the countries directly affected, but for the whole world, because mass movement of people does create issues and difficulties for everyone. Obviously, as has been said already, if we build up the economies of countries that are currently impoverished, then they are strong future trading partners. So, there is a direct benefit for us in the so-called developed world if we help the so-called developing world.

So, I think that is the true background to this debate today, Dirprwy Lywydd, which has, I think, seen some very strong statements. I join people in being absolutely appalled that UKIP has brought this motion to the Assembly today. I think it does reveal UKIP in its true light, and it will be very interesting to see what people outside this Chamber and organisations involved in the field of international development make of this debate and the contributions to it.

Can I just say in closing, Dirprwy Lywydd, that I completely and fundamentally oppose this UKIP motion and the values, attitudes and politics that lie behind it? I believe, as I think the vast majority here today do, in internationalism, in equality and fairness, in Wales, the UK and the world. Thank goodness that Welsh Government and UK Government recognise their international obligations and are sufficiently principled and courageous to put them into practice to save lives and to improve life in those places, those parts of the world, in greatest need.

Thank you very much. Finally, Joyce Watson.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I promise not to take my full five minutes.

I want to start first of all by saying that I’ve been in this Chamber for 10 years, and I have never heard the like of what I heard in this Chamber being espoused, like we’ve heard this afternoon from the UKIP benches. It actually would serve them well, I think, to go and visit, collectively, the Wales PEN Cymru project that has given a voice to refugees at events on the Llyn peninsula; Sector 39 from Powys, sharing their expertise in permaculture with partners in Uganda and Kenya; Dolen Ffermio in Powys; Märit Olsson and Get Set Wales, both in Machynlleth—[Interruption.] No; I’ve heard enough from you. And also, more crucially and importantly, for the mover and opener of this debate to go to Coleg Sir Gâr to meet the students from Carmarthenshire who’ve been involved in the Care for Uganda project, whose lives were changed—and I’ve spoken, by the way, to those young people whose lives were changed, who helped to build a hospital there, and who came back better people.

If we’d had this movement that they would like today in the name of UKIP to abandon everybody, not only would the people who really need the help be denied it, but those people who actually benefit from delivering it would also be denied opportunities. So, I suggest to the UKIP Members that it would be a very good lesson for them indeed if they actually did take any time whatsoever to educate themselves about what it actually means to help and support people, instead of coming here and quoting from things like the ‘Daily Mail’ or ‘The Times’ and actually choosing selective little bits and pieces of information. I know that they called themselves the guard dogs of Brexit, and I know that they are actually looking for a way forward, but let me just tell you, by behaving here this afternoon like rabid dogs, it isn’t going to help your cause.

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

Dirprwy Lywydd, I am glad to be able to respond to this debate this afternoon. Members have said this and I do believe this debate has exposed a very wide political divide in this Chamber, one that I have not witnessed before in 18 years of this Assembly. It is a divide, and it’s a divide that we have debated this afternoon; it is a divide and a fundamental difference in those values and principles that underpin our political commitments, priorities and motivations.

And of course, in responding to this debate, we have to look at what our political principles and priorities are and how we handle that, particularly as a Welsh Labour Government having to also manage the challenges that we have in terms of ongoing austerity, looking to ways in which we can not only progress in terms of investing in health and social care, housing and education, making difficult choices, looking to how we can serve the people of Wales, but we believe also very clearly in playing our part, playing the part we must play as global citizens and in supporting the wider world.

We support our spending on aid because it’s the right thing to do morally, and the right thing to do if we want a safer world in which everyone has a chance to prosper. We will vote against the UKIP motion and support the Plaid Cymru amendment, recognising the importance of international aid and the importance of the Wales for Africa programme, which has been spoken of and Steffan Lewis highlighted today. We must recognise, of course, that international aid is not devolved to Wales—it’s the responsibility of the UK Government—but this debate does provide us with the opportunity to report on that successful Wales for Africa programme and to look at ways in which we can meet those obligations, as John Griffiths described as being very clearly on an international basis.

Can I say that the Conservative group will also support the Plaid Cymru amendment because we do think that we need to have a unified expression, at least for the other parties? We interpret the call for a comprehensive international policy as one working through British institutions like the foreign office and the British Council, just in case people think that we’ve run away with Plaid Cymru’s perhaps greater vision of independence that they may have.

Thank you, David Melding, for drawing attention to the Brandt report in your contribution, which recommended the 0.7 per cent target. Thank you again for reminding us in terms of the robust and rigorous auditing and monitoring, that 0.01 per cent is minute in terms of the ways in which we deliver and indeed the UK Government delivers its international aid programme.

I do want to set out again a few facts on international aid. The UK is just one of eight countries in the world to meet the official development assistance spending target of 0.7 per cent of gross national income. Less than 2p in every £1 spent by Government goes on foreign aid. Africa receives the largest proportion of UK aid. Humanitarian aid is the single biggest area of spend, accounting for one sixth of total bilateral aid. A significant proportion of UK humanitarian aid was spent in Sierra Leone to help with the Ebola crisis, as well as in Syria, Yemen and South Sudan.

The UK’s aid spending plays an important economic and diplomatic role, a role that becomes all the more important after we leave the European Union. By providing aid to countries to support their ongoing development and growth, it helps to increase the wealth of their population. Aid has a role to play in ensuring and establishing international security. As Julie Morgan said, our party, the Labour Party, supports the 0.7 per cent target. An incoming Labour Government would continue to spend 0.7 per cent of gross national income on ODA. Of course, we recognise the fact that David Cameron brought this in in terms of clear Government priority and policy. And although, of course, responsibility for international development lies with the UK Department for International Development, there has been a demand—Steffan Lewis made this point—for an identifiably Welsh response to international development.

For more than a decade now, we’ve had strong and reciprocal relationships with countries throughout sub-Saharan Africa. The Welsh Government has supported and encouraged hundreds and thousands of people to get involved with links and projects though our Wales for Africa programme. I declare an interest as a trustee of the charity Vale For Africa, which works in partnership with a Ugandan NGO, inspiring and empowering people and organisations in the Tororo district with people and partners in the Vale of Glamorgan. The Wales for Africa programme is very special; principles of partnership underpinning the work, based on mutual respect and mutual benefit. Every single project supported by the programme has benefited Wales as much as it’s benefiting its African partner. That’s through health and community links; fair trade groups; diaspora; through professional development opportunities; making a profound difference to the lives of those in Wales and Africa. There’s no doubt that, as a country, Wales, we are far better off as a result of this programme in so many ways, and the achievements have far outstripped its modest budget and we’re justifiably proud of its success. Let’s just look at some of those achievements: 500 unique Welsh projects across 25 African countries; in 2015 alone, 80,000 people in Wales and 260,000 people in Africa benefiting from our small grants scheme. Every health board in Wales has at least one active link with a hospital in Africa. We planted a staggering 5.5 million trees in a highly deforested area in Mbale, which John visited, in Uganda, as part of the 10 million trees project. This is helping to improve the lives of more than 544,000 Ugandan farmers, offsetting the harmful effects of climate change. We are supporting more than 160 placements through our international learning opportunities programme, and sharing more than 47,000 hours of expertise with African partners.

So, Deputy Llywydd, as a Government, we’ve been clear that we want to be an outward- looking nation, open to good ideas, and engaged with the rest of the world. I believe that’s what the Welsh people want too: care and compassion for their neighbours here and across the world. We’ve had many representations of concern and evidence of how important international aid is here in Wales and to the world. From the British Red Cross, Save the Children and Oxfam, you’ve all had their representations in their evidence today. Carol Wardman, from Church in Wales, aptly reminded us that the parable of the good Samaritan, given in response to precisely the question of, ‘Who is my neighbour?’, specifically demonstrates that our neighbours are those in the greatest need, particularly when they are not from our own tribe, nationality or religion.

So, I spoke at the start of my response about the divide here today: a divide that UKIP has brought to this place. UKIP has tabled this motion to promote a mean-spirited election pledge, but fortunately, support for UKIP seems to be ebbing away. That’s why we will continue to play our part as global citizens, be an outward-looking country, ready and willing to forge new relationships, and to reach out the hand of help to those who need it, and restate our political and moral purpose here today. So, let’s oppose this ‘shabby motion’, as David Melding said, and which Simon Thomas says, ‘Makes our skin creep.’

Thank you. I call on Neil Hamilton to reply to the debate.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. We seem to have hit a target here, from the reaction of other Members. We’ve interrupted the cosy consensus that existed before we arrived. That’s what a democratic Assembly is for. I thank those who took part in the debate: Steffan Lewis, Julie Morgan, David Melding, Caroline Jones, Gareth Bennett, David Rowlands, John Griffiths and Joyce Watson. I have no thanks, of course, for Simon Thomas, for making his vile, crude, intemperate, personally abusive and misrepresentative speech, dredging up from the depths of the internet some of the lies and libels that have been told about me by his political confederates, no doubt, previously. But I don’t intend to dip my toes in the sump of his speech. I’ll leave him to wallow in his own filth quite happily.

But, in order to respond to the rest of the debate, I will just say I don’t think that honourable Members can have been listening to the way that I opened my speech, or can have read the motion. Because the many examples of good aid that have been mentioned in the course of the debate today—and some of which were mentioned in the speech, certainly, of Caroline Jones—would receive almost universal acclaim and, certainly, are supported by UKIP.

I started my speech by saying that only 16 per cent of the aid budget goes on projects of that kind; 84 per cent goes on long-term strategic political goal type of aid of the kinds that I mentioned in climate change, et cetera, et cetera. It’s this kind of Government-to-Government aid or Government-through international-agency aid, as David Melding would’ve put it, that ought to be questioned. Now, the 0.7 per cent of GDP figure is an arbitrary one; it doesn’t have any objective justification at all. It can’t have; it’s a subjective figure—it could be 0.6, it could be 1.6, it could be 10.6. And so the opportunity for virtue signalling—which has been seized by many Members around the Chamber today to advertise what they see as their moral superiority over us on these benches—in how to spend other people’s money is something that is not a question of principle, but only a question of degree. Because it only starts to be morally advantageous when it starts to hurt, and I don’t know whether the amount that individual Members contribute from their own resources every year to—[Interruption.] I don’t when—[Interruption.] Yes, plenty. No doubt the education Secretary, who lives a very comfortable life indeed—. I don’t think it makes a great deal of impact upon her lifestyle whatever she gives in charity to other causes. I’m not making any—[Interruption.] I’m not making any personal remark; I’m responding—[Interruption.] I’m responding—[Interruption.] I’m responding to the implicit—[Interruption.] I’m responding to the implicit argument in that—

Are you taking an intervention?

Will you take an intervention?

Yes.

I just wonder whether you’ll recognise that, actually, some of the most generous people in Wales are those from the most impoverished backgrounds.

Yes, of course. Of course I do.

Those people tend to be the ones who give the most, because they’ve often had a helping hand themselves in the past. Will you accept that?

Yes, of course I do. Of course I do. What you do with your own money is at the heart of the issue. And what I’m saying is that when the Government gives away taxpayers’ money no question of morality can arise, because it is somebody giving away other people’s money. There is no element of morality involved in that. So, the point of this debate is—[Interruption.] The point of this debate—[Interruption.] The point, if I may finish my remarks—. The point of this debate is simply to advertise the fact that a great deal of the money that is spent on overseas aid is spent on questionable projects, debateable projects, which don’t necessarily lead to the relief of poverty, the eradication of disease, the improvement of water facilities, et cetera, et cetera—all those things we can universally approve. Sending dance troupes to Ethiopia perhaps is not something of which we can approve—£5 million or whatever the figure was that was spent on that from the budget in 2013. I deliberately didn’t give colourful examples of that kind from the archives of the ‘The Daily Mail’—something to which I referred as an ironical remark in my speech earlier on—because I didn’t want to trivialise the debate or allow it to be trivialised.

But there is a serious point at issue here. We can choose to spend the money that we take from taxpayers in any number of different ways. We know that the health service is underfunded everywhere. It’s bound to be, given the nature of its construction and infinite demands that are placed upon it. We can choose to increase the aid budget by another £10 billion and take it away from some other budget. Well, if so, what is that other budget? Is that an example of moral superiority on the part of those who’ve taken the opposite side of the argument to us today? You know, there are plenty of things: what about the arts council and things like that? They are all virtuous things in themselves, but is it better to fund a theatre or a symphony orchestra than to relieve real poverty and eradicate disease? These are difficult questions and difficult choices that we all have to make.

But to take the view of the smug, superior, condescending approach that we’ve heard this afternoon I think demeans the debate. To think that out in the country, at large, a very small proportion of people would support the UKIP motion today I think is to fool yourselves. If you had some kind of a referendum on overseas aid then that would produce a very different result indeed—[Interruption.] And I see now that Members are not quite so keen on asking the people what they think about what we do with our money in that way. So—

Are you winding up?

[Continues.]—I think I’ve reached the end of my speech for today, and I commend our motion to the house.

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

Unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, I will proceed directly to voting time.

Okay. The first vote this afternoon, then, is a debate on the Member’s legislative proposal proposed by Dawn Bowden, and I call for a vote on the motion tabled in Dawn Bowden’s name. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 36, 11 abstentions, nobody against, therefore the motion is passed.

We now move to the Welsh Conservative debate on child safety online. I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Paul Davies. If the proposal is not agreed to, we will vote on the amendment tabled to that motion. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 13, no abstentions, 34 against. Therefore we will vote on the amendments.

I now call for a vote on amendment 1, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the amendment 47, therefore the vote is agreed.

We now call for a vote on amendment 2 tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the amendment 47, and that amendment is agreed. There were no abstentions, no against, on either of the amendments.

Therefore, we move to vote on the motion as amended.

Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 47, no abstentions, no against. Therefore the motion as amended is agreed.

We now move to the Plaid Cymru debate, a medical school in Bangor, and I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. Again, if the proposal is not agreed, we vote on the amendment tabled to the motion. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 14, no abstentions, 33 against. Therefore the motion is not agreed.

We move to vote on the amendments. 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. Therefore amendment 1 is agreed.

I call for a vote on amendment 2, tabled in the name of Paul Davies. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the amendment 46, no abstentions, one against. Therefore amendment 2 is agreed.

We now move to a vote on the motion as amended.

Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 26, 16 abstentions, five against. Therefore, the motion as amended is agreed.

We move to vote on the Plaid Cymru debate on the economic development in the south Wales Valleys, and I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. Again, if the proposal is not agreed, we vote on the amendments tabled to the motion. Open the vote. Close the vote. For 13, no abstentions, 34 against. Therefore, the motion is not agreed.

We now move to vote on amendment 1. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 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.

And we move to vote on the motion as amended.

Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion, 25, no abstentions, 22 against. Therefore, the motion as amended is agreed.

We now move to vote on the UKIP debate on the foreign aid budget. I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Neil Hamilton. Again, if the proposal is not agreed, we vote on the amendment tabled to the motion. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion, five, no abstentions, 42 against. Therefore, the motion is not agreed.

I call for a vote on amendment 1, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the amendment 42, no abstentions, five against. Therefore, the amendment is agreed.

And I now call for a vote on the motion as amended.

Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion, 47, no abstentions, no against. Therefore, the motion as amended is agreed.