Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru

I call Members to order.

The first item on our agenda this afternoon is questions to the Cabinet Secretary for Education, and the first question, Mohammad Asghar.

Well, the Welsh Government makes sure that, in the most deprived communities, we offer tailored support, and we're really involved in the communities. We give support to unemployed households, to workless households, people who are disabled, redundant, and, of course, NEETs—people who are not in education, employment or training. And we mentor and support people to make sure that they can develop some kind of resilience, and to make sure that they're ready, then, to enter the workplace.

Thank you very much for this reply, Minister. But, Mencap Cymru recently pointed out that there are huge barriers facing people with learning difficulties who want to work, in Wales. They estimate that, of the 14,000 people with learning disabilities known to social services, only 800 are in employment. It means less than 6 per cent, Minister, which is definitely not acceptable. Can I ask what the Welsh Government is doing to extend employability programmes to this largely untapped potential workforce, and to make employers aware of the benefits of employing someone with a learning disability in Wales?

Thank you. Absolutely. We are very committed to this agenda. In the new year, you will see that we're going to be bringing out an employability action plan, and a part of that action plan will be to make sure that people—. We have a special programme, Working Wales, and when people go through a particular gateway—everyone will be put through a particular gateway, because there are so many different programmes at the moment, it's quite difficult for people to find their way around—we will then identify what their needs are and channel them to the right places. Because, at the moment, there are so many different groups, we're just trying to make sure that they're streamlined so that it's easier for disabled people then to get the access and the support that they need.

People with mental health issues have particular difficulties in finding routes to work or back to work after a period of illness. One way of facilitating access to the workplace is to offer work placements, which would mean that they wouldn’t need to go through the traditional process of interview and the anxiety and stress that that can lead to. What attempts has the Government made to encourage work placements of this kind, and will we see that kind of approach in the employment action plan that you mentioned, because that would facilitate and support individuals with mental health issues to rejoin the workforce?

Thank you very much. I do think that it’s important that we focus on this aspect of mental health, because there’s so much of it in Wales and it’s important that we work for the individual and that we can adapt things for the individual. What we’re attempting to do in this new plan is to ensure that we’re working across Government. And so, we’ll be working with the health department, where, evidently, we have to assimilate all of these issues. This idea of a placement is one that I will now consider when considering this new plan. So, I am pleased that you’ve raised this point. Thank you.

Rhianon Passmore.

Diolch, Llywydd. Now, you extended me best wishes for the Christmas season yesterday, and I extend my good wishes to you and your family today. Nadolig llawen i chi i gyd.

Cabinet Secretary, addressing the Learning and Work Institute's Welsh Employability and Skills Convention last week, the new Minister for Welsh Language and Lifelong Learning, Eluned Morgan, stated employability is not just about jobs and skills; it is about getting every aspect of Government policy—education, health, housing, and communities—working together to support people into sustainable jobs. Will the Cabinet Secretary outline how the Welsh Government is working holistically to ensure vulnerable groups benefit from Government policy initiatives? Minister.

Thank you very much, Rhianon. Absolutely. We are trying to work cross-departmentally. If you think that we've got a budget of about £15 billion, we need to make sure that every penny of that we use to the maximum, and working cross-departmentally makes absolute sense. What I've been doing is to meet independently and individually with different Ministers to make sure that they are concentrating on this agenda. So, I met with my colleague here last week to discuss how we can help, for example, in relation to care. A lot of people can't go back to work because they have caring responsibilities. So, how do we plait these things together to make sure that they're all connected and that we can get people back to work? This idea of cross-departmental work is something that is not just words; we are now getting down to the nitty-gritty of how that happens in practice.  

The reforms that we are implementing in response to the Diamond review will deliver a fairer, more sustainable system of student support. I am confident that the Student Loans Company, which provides the Student Finance Wales service, can deliver the changes to the student finance system for our nation. 

I'm grateful to the Cabinet Secretary for that reply. Is she aware of problems that have been created for students who want to study postgraduate law degrees at universities like the BPP University in Bristol, where these courses have not been designated for student support? Students have had to defer enrolment to another time. This is very unfair. I know the Cabinet Secretary has been critical of the UK Government over Brexit in one respect, in that she fears that student exchange programmes will suffer as a result. If the result of the Student Loans Company's tardiness in designating suitable courses at English universities is not dealt with, then we're going to face a similar problem within the United Kingdom, and it would be quite wrong for students not to be able to go to the university of their choice for the course that they want and need for their future professional lives simply on grounds that the Student Loans Company is, in effect, stopping them from using the freedoms that everybody else has within Wales. 

All courses provided by alternative providers must be specifically designated by the Welsh Government before students are able to apply for student support. We have issued guidance on the Welsh Government's approach to the designation of specific courses by non-regulated providers for the purposes of student support funding. I'm sure most people in the Chamber would agree with me that it is in the interests of the students that the Welsh Government assures itself that any providers who are seeking designation for particular courses are able to meet specific criteria relating to, for example, financial and quality standards. The Welsh Government considers that institutions that have their courses automatically designated should provide education of an adequate quality, be financially viable and make a significant ongoing contribution to the public good with regard to the education system. We have endeavoured to deal with any applications for specific course designation as quickly as possible, but I do not intend to row back on the safeguards for Welsh students and the Welsh public purse. 

Cabinet Secretary, Jo Johnson made an announcement on the weekend about some of the changes that he was making to university courses and the availability of two-year courses in the English higher education system. Obviously, student finance and the amount of debt that students take on is of grave concern to many students when considering their options. Have you made any assessment of the viability of two-year degree courses and the opportunities that they would present to many students who wish to undertake them by maybe having those courses available here in Wales?  

I would agree, Andrew, that many students are concerned about how they will financially support themselves whilst undertaking a period of higher education study, and that's why we're implementing the Diamond review, which will see Wales have the most comprehensive support for students, especially for those students from a non-traditional background who perhaps in the past wouldn't even have aspired to go to university. I have noted the speech by Jo Johnson with regard to two-year degrees. At this time, I'm considering the evidence as to whether those two-year degrees are of sufficient quality, whether they allow students to have the depth of learning that they need, and also the cost implications, because there is some evidence to suggest that when it comes to delivering courses over a two-year period, they're not necessarily cheaper and there are sometimes issues around the quality, and I would not want to move forward unless I was absolutely confident of the evidence that to move to two-year degrees would be beneficial to students. 

Questions now from the party spokespeople. Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Llyr Gruffydd.  

Diolch, Llywydd. Cabinet Secretary, it's taken four years to embed the Hwb+ virtual learning platform and get more than 80 per cent of schools using the platform. All schools have been trained to use it after a great deal of time, effort and money. So, can you explain to us why you believe it's the best use of public funds to abandon that project now? 

What’s really important, Llyr, is that we learn from the experience of practitioners who use this online resource. There are certain sections of the project that have been very successful. High amounts of usage and feedback from practitioners and students say that it’s very valuable. However, there have been aspects of the platform that have been less well used, and, as we update our offer on Hwb, it’s necessary to reflect on the feedback from practitioners and develop a set of services available to schools online that are helpful to them, especially the interface, making it easy to use those resources.

But it’s no small undertaking, is it, to move from one particular type of provision to another? You stated in June,

‘From the outset—

and I quote,

—‘we have been clear that being digitally competent is one of the fundamental pillars of a modern education'.

Nobody would doubt that.

‘That is why digital competence was identified as the third cross-curricular responsibility, alongside literacy and numeracy’.

We have a situation where the consortia have advised schools that the tools in Hwb+ are necessary for the Government’s new curriculum and digital competence framework. Given the scale of this project, your intended change will mean, no doubt, a year or two of disruption. So, can you tell us how you will ensure that changing this platform at this key time will actually enhance learning rather than put an extra burden on teachers who will have to start over again, be retrained and familiarise themselves with a new platform at a time when many people are saying that they’re still becoming familiar with the current set of tools?

I think it’s really important for Members to be clear that we are not ending the Hwb project. We are looking to refresh a particular part of that programme, Hwb+, which is a part of the programme that has not seen particularly high levels of usage, and the feedback from practitioners has been that it has not been particularly useful. Hwb in the round will stay and we will be looking, working with large software companies, to find a more useful interface.

But the Member is absolutely right to draw our attention to the importance of digital skills in the new curriculum. It is absolutely essential that our young people leave education in Wales being literate, being numerate and being digitally competent. That goes beyond simply being able to use a computer, but it’s about being able to interrogate information that they may find online, it’s about being safe online and safe using social media, and crucially, as part of our ‘Cracking the code’ and extension into coding clubs, it’s about understanding how computers and information technology works, because it is those people who can design apps, design websites and design programmes—. That has a massive potential economic benefit to those students and young people.

I find it interesting that you say that feedback from practitioners has been less than positive, because the Government’s own evaluation of the implementation of the Learning in Digital Wales Programme in October last year reported positive feedback from schools on Hwb+ and concluded that,

'Abandoning the project would severely disappoint and alienate teachers, who are enthusiastic about further take-up of digital learning and have invested their considerable time and effort setting up Hwb Plus school sites and promoting it to colleagues at their school.’

You yourself have lauded Hwb+ as being a finalist in the Microsoft global education partner of the year this year, so that’s positive feedback in my book. Where you get the negative feedback from, I’d be interested in understanding. But also we need some clarity, I think, about the level of investment that’s been invested by the Government in this. You recently gave the cost of the Hwb project on the basis of the contract for the Hwb platform as being £2.53 million. That’s inconsistent with a Government answer in 2015, which said that the supplier contract value to provide Hwb+—the all-Wales learning platform—to all schools in Wales is near £4.5 million. There’s a disparity there. So, can you tell us what has been the total cost of the project? Can you also tell us what additional cost will there now be resulting from your decision to make these changes?

As I said, Llyr, it is absolutely crucial, because, I have to say, you’re giving the impression that Hwb itself is coming to an end, and that is not the case. We are changing a very small part of it because the contract is coming to an end and there are no options within that contract to renew. I have decided, on the basis of public value for money, to pursue this project in a different way. Those figures that the Members asked for—I will write to him and put a copy in the library.FootnoteLink

Conservative spokesperson—Darren Millar.

Diolch, Llywydd. Cabinet Secretary, fewer Welsh students than ever before are going on to top Russell Group universities. We know that the figures from Oxbridge suggest that just 2 per cent were offered places last year that were Welsh domiciled. What action are you taking as a Welsh Government to address this challenge and to make sure that more of our brightest kids get on in the world and get to these top universities?

I'm sure, Presiding Officer, the Member is very well aware of the Government's investment in the Seren network. I would refer the Member to data that I told the Chamber not so long ago about with regard to the closing-off date when students have to take individual entrance exams for Oxford university, for a number of medical schools and veterinary schools—applications are up.

It's not just about applications, though, is it? It's about how many places are actually offered to students from Wales. Can you tell us how many students who are part of the Seren network were actually offered places at Russell Group universities in recent years?

With all due respect, if we have got limited numbers of people applying to go to those universities, we can't hope to raise the number that are offered and hopefully go on to accept a place. What's really important to me is that Welsh students' aspirations are raised so they feel confident enough to make those applications to Oxford, to Cambridge, to medical schools, to veterinary schools. I will write to the Member because I do not have the exact figures to hand. Given his—very rightly so—commitment to making sure that ministerial answers are absolutely correct, I will write to the Member with the absolute figures.

Well, you already have responded to questions on this matter, and of course you're not able to provide the information because the Welsh Government doesn't actually record it, which is pretty astonishing given that you're making significant investment in the Seren network and we want people to be able to succeed. But if you're not tracking the success or otherwise of the Seren network in terms of the numbers of young people being offered the opportunity to take up places at top universities, how can we be confident that this isn't yet another complete waste of taxpayers' money, because you've not been able to show value for money for it?

As I said, we keep very close eye on the number of applications that students are making to universities. I'm well aware of the questions that the Conservative group have tabled; it was 61 individual questions on this particular topic in one day. I'm grateful to the Conservatives for taking such and interest in this programme and I will endeavour to ensure that the data that Darren Millar wants is given to him.

UKIP spokesperson—Michelle Brown.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. Can the Cabinet Secretary tell me the details of any additional educational provision that is made for the looked-after children in Wales, please?

I thank Michelle for the question. I'm sure the Member is aware that looked-after children are subject to the pupil development grant. There are additional resources that are made available to support the education of looked-after children, and looked-after children who wish to attend university will be entitled to the full package of student support under the Diamond proposals.

Okay, thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for that answer. The reason that I ask is that the announcement that you made back in May and what you've just said—there's not very much in there about any details of how extra support for this group would actually manifest itself. Although you've announced positive actions in the past, have you actually considered making additional teaching hours available to looked-after children? It's a sector that the charity Children in Wales says are still having poorer educational outcomes than their non-care counterparts. If you have considered it, have you committed to ring-fencing funding for schools, or indeed other establishments, to offer looked-after children some additional extra learning time, either face to face or in a group?

Well, Michelle, let's be absolutely clear: children who are care experienced at present do not achieve the qualifications in the numbers that I would like for them to do so. There has been significant progress in recent years with the number of looked-after children leaving school with five good GCSEs, but we have a significant way to go to ensure that all those children reach their potential.

The Member asks about ring-fenced resources. The pupil development grant is ring-fenced. It is a set amount of money that is passed to the regional consortia to support schools in a variety of techniques—whatever is best for those children in those particular schools.

The Welsh Government is also working across departments, with my colleague Huw Irranca-Davies, to fund the adverse childhood experiences hub and ACEs network. We know that many looked-after children, by the fact that they are in care, have suffered adverse childhood experiences, which can negatively impact on their education. The ACEs hub is there to support schools to look at a variety of interventions that can best support those children who are care experienced.

The reason I'm asking about this is that children who have been put in local authority care are already disadvantaged because of all those ACEs that you spoke about—that will have had an impact on their education. They're going into care, which has an impact on their education. What the state can do is give them additional schooling to actually give them a leg up—schooling that wouldn't actually be particularly expensive per child to offer. I was just wondering whether you're prepared to look at that option of, perhaps, offering a summer school arrangement to looked-after children, whose education is being disadvantaged by the ACEs that they've suffered.

The Member will be aware that, this summer, the Welsh Government funded the school holiday enrichment programme, or the lunch and fun programme, predominantly aimed at disadvantaged children so that they could access educational provision and a hot meal during the school holidays. That programme has been very successful, and we hope to be able to fund even more local authorities next summer to be able to offer those opportunities. We continue to support those families that are foster caring with additional advice on how they can make an impact.

But what's really important to remember—if you listen to children who are looked after, what they tell you time and time again is that they don't want to be stigmatised and they don't want to be seen to be treated any differently from their cohorts, and that's really important to those children. We are supporting them within mainstream education—not singling them out, but giving those schools additional resources to help those children's education. Importantly, we're seeing results, because results are improving for that group of learners.

Thank you, Angela. On Monday, I announced our plans for implementing the Additional Learning Needs and Education Tribunal (Wales) Bill, which is at the heart of our ambitious programme to transform the education and support for learners with ALN. The code will be consulted on next year and will be in place by the end of 2019.

Cabinet Secretary, thank you. I welcome the passing of Stage 4 of the additional learning needs Bill yesterday, and noted with interest the statement you issued earlier this week on implementing the new code. However, I would like clarity on the advice that you are providing to local education authorities as to the interim measures that are in place now that the Bill has been passed. I've raised this issue before with previous education Secretaries, because it seems that there is a reluctance by authorities to give out statements because the new system is coming. With the implementation phase not due to be completed until 2023, what assurances can you provide that full support will continue over the intervening years and that local authorities will not row back on providing support for those very vulnerable children?

Only this morning, I met with the leader of the Welsh Local Government Association, and the implementation of the additional learning needs Bill was an item on that agenda. What's absolutely clear is that we are introducing a phased approach, so that we can successfully move from one system to the other. But I've been quite clear in my statement that new children coming into the system, or being newly identified in the system, should be put onto the new programme. They should be put onto the new programme, and what we are looking to transition across are those children who already have a statutory statement of educational needs, focusing at first on those children who are at very important stages in their education, which is usually the move from primary school into secondary school or from secondary school into further or higher education, and that will be a rolling programme. Newly identified children should be put on the new approach.

The Cabinet Secretary will probably be aware of Coleg Elidyr, which is a specialist further education college in my constituency. I was wondering if the Cabinet Secretary would be prepared to look again at amending the terminology used in the draft code to describe institutions like Coleg Elidyr, which is more in line with that which the sector would prefer but also Estyn as well. I'm happy to meet with the Cabinet Secretary to provide some further information, if that's helpful. 

Of course, I'm aware that the Welsh Government funds a number of students to undertake study at Coleg Elidyr, and the whole purpose of the process going forward is that we can work collectively to get the code right, and I would be very pleased to meet with the Member to talk about any concerns that he has. Of course, the code will be subject to full scrutiny by the committee here at the National Assembly and to a vote by the Assembly as a whole. That's the reason why we're going out to consultation so that the code is correct, but if the Member has specific concerns about wording, I'm very happy to look at it. 

Diolch yn fawr, Llyr. The Welsh Government respects the choice that some parents make to home educate their children. I'm considering how we can strengthen the support available to the home-educating community, not just limited to education support and services, but to include universal and specialist support services, where appropriate. 

You tell us you're considering it—I'm afraid it's been considered for a very long time now, and we know that the child practice review report published last year into the Dylan Seabridge case recommended firmly that changes in legislation were needed to require parents to register with a local authority children who are receiving home education, and also to ensure that those children are seen and spoken to annually. We're all aware that the Children's Commissioner for Wales has consistently also been calling for the current guidance to be given statutory force and for it to include a compulsory register for all home-educated children, with clear powers for local authorities to see those children and to speak to them directly about their education. Most recently an evidence-based review on the risks to children who are educated at home commissioned by the national safeguarding children board gives a damning verdict of the status quo, and has called for home-educated children to be registered and regularly assessed. I know local authorities as well have been calling for this and, as you recognise, we also recognise that parents have the right to choose to educate their children at home rather than at school, and home education isn't in itself a risk factor for abuse or neglect. You say you're considering the matter. Well, do you not agree that whilst there's any possibility that a child can become invisible and of another Dylan Seabridge being out there somewhere we need greater action and leadership from this Government? Can you tell us: when will you be taking definitive action? 

Thank you, Llyr. I think it is important that you said that being home educated in itself is not an indicator for risk or abuse to children. The Welsh Government did publish revised non-statutory guidance in January of last year, but you will be aware that I have accepted in principle the Children's Commissioner for Wales's recommendation for a statutory elective home-education register. Officials are currently working on the further detail of how that can be taken forward. But I have to offer a word of caution: that register would only apply to children of a statutory school age, and it cannot and it will not be the answer to those children who are unseen by the system, because even a register that is brought forward would only apply to children from the age of five and, potentially, there are children who could spend the first five years of their life unseen by services. And I think, whilst we can move forward in this regard, we have to be mindful that this is not the sole answer to the issue of safeguarding children whose parents, for whatever reason, are determined to keep them hidden from authority.   

Cabinet Secretary, I'm pleased that you said that you respect the decision of parents who do wish to home school their children. It is a viable legal option and works very well in many cases. But you're also quite right to point out concerns that children who are home schooled need to be monitored in the same way as children who can also disappear from the system when they're actually in what you would call a conventional school environment. Given what you've just said about the way that a register may well miss some of those children, what other potential is there for making sure that children—I think under the age of five you mentioned—don't slip through the gaps, whether they're in conventional schooling or home schooling, and that we are looking out for all our children?

The reason I mentioned the issue of potential gaps is because the powers that we have would allow—and they're existing powers, it should be said, for local authorities to satisfy themselves that children are in receipt of an adequate education. Those powers already exist, and I have given additional resources to local authorities to gain a greater understanding of the level of elective home education in their own areas and the reasons why parents choose it. Clearly, there will have to be measures undertaken by other Cabinet colleagues to look to safeguard those children who are below a statutory education age, and that's why, only last week, I, myself, and the Minister for children met with the national safeguarding board to discuss options with regard to children under the statutory education age. 

Thank you, Vikki. I have encouraged and will continue to encourage strong engagement between schools and universities. This was the main theme of the recent civic mission summit in October and was highlighted as a key theme in my remit letter to the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. I was very interested to read both of those documents. From my own experience, the school that I taught in had very strong links with the University of South Wales, which was very beneficial to our students. I also believe the Seren network—previously mentioned—although focusing on our most able and talented students, has wider benefits to schools too. But I am concerned that we need to do more to integrate these approaches more generally into schools, especially in areas such as my own constituency that don't lie in immediate proximity to a university. How will you take this forward to ensure that these types of students do not lose out?

I agree, Vikki, that we need to do more to integrate approaches like Seren into schools in Wales. I'm working with universities to ensure that they work on the delivery of their civic mission. As you say, that's especially important in communities that perhaps don't have a university on their doorstep. So, for instance, the modern foreign language mentoring scheme that has proven very successful is now going to be offered on a digital basis to those schools where we can't physically get the graduate into the building. I am pleased to say that, at the 27 January deadline for applications to start higher education courses in this current academic year, the application rates for 18-year-olds in the Cynon Valley reached 30 per cent, and that's the highest rate in more than a decade of the data that is recorded. I hope to see further increases in the Cynon Valley in the years to come.

I'm particularly interested, Cabinet Secretary, in the research links between universities and schools. You'll be familiar, because of your visit to Ysgol Pen y Bryn, in Colwyn Bay in my constituency, with the strong links between that school and Bangor University in terms of research into mindfulness and the development of the Paws b curriculum there. What can we do to establish more of those links across Wales and, in particular, classroom-based research?

You're absolutely right, Darren. North Wales are in the very fortunate position where there are strong links between individual schools, the regional consortium, GwE, and Bangor University, which look at specific classroom practice and the impact that that has on children. GwE have agreed to take on a leading role across the other consortia to develop similar programmes of linkages between research and school-based practice.

You'll also be aware of the work going on at the moment with Trinity Saint David, the University of Glasgow and schools with regard to the research underpinning our new curriculum. It would be great to have more universities engaged in such research and I hope that, by clearly identifying this in the GwE consortium and urging them to share best practice and to take a lead on this for other areas, we will see further developments, because the work is very strong and it's very valuable to practitioners.

Thank you very much. Welsh Government’s plans and targets for attaining the target of a million Welsh speakers are included in the 2017-21 ‘Cymraeg 2050’ strategy work programme.

A new report by the Welsh Language Commissioner on the provision of childcare and early years provision through the medium of Welsh states this:

'Although the Welsh Government is aware of the importance of childcare to the future of the language, there are no specific and firm plans on how they intend to integrate the 30 Hours Scheme and the 2050 vision.'

'Prosperity for All' notes the importance of collaboration across departments in order to achieve the Government's ambition. Isn't the lack of collaboration in terms of the Welsh language and childcare a sign of the total failure of your Government to bring together two of your main policy strands?

Well, we do collaborate, and I think the first thing that should be said is that there is an understanding that you have to focus on those early years, and it's fair to say that we do have a strategy in place for childcare. And it's important—it's vital—that, for everything that goes through the Government now, we ask, 'What are you doing to support the Welsh language? And therefore that will be a central part of the work that the Minister will have to undertake. So, of course, there is work to be done, but I do also think that we need to focus on the subsequent years with the nursery schools, and we're going to secure an additional 150 nursery schools over the next decade, and I think that's the way we can ensure we see growth in the Welsh language.

The former Minister said that he'd be willing to look at the role of small businesses themselves in promoting the use of the Welsh language. I believe that it's a very good idea to find key individuals within small businesses who could share the responsibility for developing this as part of lifelong learning or CPD, continuous professional development, or some other appropriate approach for the small business. Are you considering setting targets for the number of small businesses that you would like to see developing their Welsh language skills? What incentives could be available to inspire those key individuals?

Well, you're quite right. One of our targets is to ensure that people are not just able to speak Welsh but to use the Welsh language, and so it's important we give them opportunities to do so. And, in small businesses, ensuring that people are aware that you can use the Welsh language when you deal with them is important. So, there are strategies that we will be developing in order to ensure that people are aware of where there is the potential to use the language.

Already, many of us are wearing these badges and so on, but I do think that we should ensure that people are aware that it's a way for people to be able to identify who is able to speak Welsh. But we have to go further than that. We need to look at technology and so forth. Many businesses use technology in order to buy and sell goods, so we must ensure that people are able to use technology through the medium of Welsh. When I get up in the morning, I ask Alexa to turn the radio on. Well, I can't do that in Welsh. But it's important that we are—and we're doing a lot in that field.

Well, since launching our youth engagement and progression framework in 2013, the percentage of school leavers not entering education, employment or training in South Wales West has fallen from 4 per cent to 2.3 per cent. We remain committed to the framework, investing an additional £1.1 million this year, supporting local authorities to realise further improvements all the time in this field.  

Thank you for that. You'll be aware that a recent report from the Social Mobility Commission ranked Neath Port Talbot as the worst county in Wales in terms of social mobility. Neath Port Talbot was also bottom of the pile specifically in terms of the numbers of young people within the county who are not in education, employment or training, with rates of more than three and a half times those in other counties in Wales. So, in light of all that, will you commit to introducing a targeted support package to assist Neath Port Talbot council and its partners in tackling the issue of social mobility within the county?

I think it's very concerning to see some of those figures, and I think it is important that we shine a spotlight in particular on those areas where we do need to ensure that we can improve the situation. The recent visits by local authorities are suggesting that there is generally good progress in terms of NEETs, but what we do need to do is make sure that we understand where counties are doing well and why others are not doing so well. So, sharing that valuable information is absolutely critical, and putting that best practice, I think, would be very good for the local authority to really understand what other counties are doing. Because, actually, the unemployment rates in Neath Port Talbot are very low, so it is a specific NEETs issue that does need to be addressed.

The education sector is represented on the Swansea bay city deal's shadow board by universities. A range of skills, which may, of course, capture some of the individuals that we speak about in this question, will be needed in the workforce if the deal is to reach as many communities as possible, which raises the question of the role of further education colleges in the deal. They need to be able to support the aspirations of the deal by planning their courses, of course. On behalf of Welsh Government, would you make enquiries of the shadow board to establish how FE colleges across the deal's footprint can contribute to and benefit from those aspirations, but with particular focus on those who are not currently attracted to further education or training, but where we might actually see some opportunities with the deal?

Thank you. One of the things that I'm keen to do in the employability action plan is to make sure that we link into this new regional approach. So, what we heard yesterday from the economic Secretary in terms of, 'Right. This is the priority. We're going to regionalise'—we know that there is a programme of economic development, and, of course, the skills now have to marry that programme. So, I know that the further education bodies are involved in the city deals already, but we do need to make sure that they are providing the right skills for the kinds of economic developments that we are seeking to deliver in those deals.

Thank you, Andrew. Responsibility for promoting school governorship lies, primarily, with the local authority and school. I recognise that, in some areas, recruitment is more difficult. My proposed revisions to the legislative framework for school governance will enable schools and governing bodies to constitute flexibly according to the skills they need to meet their specific challenges and circumstances.

Thank you for that answer, Cabinet Secretary. This is an area I've taken a special interest in, because I think one of the most rewarding periods I had was the 13 years that I was a primary school governor. But, regrettably, in that time, I did become aware of many vacancies that did exist at that time and I have to say, in the evidence that I've seen gathered here via written questions, et cetera, I think those vacancy rates have, sadly, increased across Wales. 

I hear what you say about local authorities, as the local education authority, having the primary responsibility for promoting such roles, but, with the agenda change that you are putting forward as the Cabinet Secretary, obviously, you would accept that school governors have a critical role in supporting the teachers and the rest of the school family in promoting those changes. So, it is vital that we get people interested in the first place in school governorships and fill those vacancies. How confident are you that, working with local authorities, you will be able to arrest the decline in the number of people who are taking on the responsibility of a school governorship?

Well, Andrew, I think this gives me a fantastic opportunity to thank those who take on the role of being governors of schools across Wales. There are approximately 22,000 governors, which constitutes the largest body of volunteers that we have in the country. I've yet to come across a great school that has poor governance. Often, when things go wrong in a school, it is as a result of a failure of the governance of that organisation. So, you're absolutely right: there is a crucial role to play.

I'm not just leaving it to local authorities, because I'm very keen to have a broader section of people who take up governorship roles. That's why, earlier on this year, I met with the Confederation of British Industry and the Federation of Small Businesses to see what more we could do to encourage their members and people from the business community to take an active interest in education in their area. The FSB are going to use their monthly magazine and their comms to encourage their members to think about opportunities offered to them in school governance and the CBI are discussing with their members' organisations' human resources departments as a way in which they can develop leadership skills within their own workforce, as well as contribute to the national mission of raising standards and closing the attainment gap. So, we're not just sitting back and leaving it to local authorities; we're investigating a number of ways in which we can increase the interest and get people to recognise the significant benefits there are to participating in school governance.

Thank you, Paul. Welsh Government, the regional consortia and the local authority are collectively supporting schools in Pembrokeshire to improve education in line with the priorities set out in our national mission.

Cabinet Secretary, there have been concerns from headteachers I've spoken to in Pembrokeshire recently, who feel that pushing pupils into studying the Welsh baccalaureate post 16 can have a detrimental effect on pupils' futures, given that some universities in England still don't recognise the qualification. Now, I very much support the Welsh baccalaureate and, of course, it's not compulsory in its nature. Can you confirm what guidance is issued to schools to ensure that teachers equally promote the full range of options to pupils post 16, so that students in Pembrokeshire and, indeed, across Wales, are able to receive the best possible education?

Thank you, Paul, and thank you for your support for the Welsh baccalaureate. It's important to recognise the increasing recognition of the Welsh bac by universities both inside and outside of Wales. Even where a university won't use the points associated with the Welsh bac in an offer, they recognise that the extended set of skills that students develop as part of undertaking the Welsh bac make them a really rounded, great candidate to have at their university. We encourage all schools, where appropriate for an individual student, to enter into the Welsh baccalaureate, but we recognise these concerns and we want to ensure it's the very best qualification that it can be. That's why Qualifications Wales are undertaking an independent review into the Welsh baccalaureate, and they will be reporting shortly.

Can I return to the case raised by Llyr Gruffydd earlier, on Dylan Seabridge and the lessons we need to learn from that experience? I'll just quote from the case review, which specifically said, 'It is possible that had the child been seen or spoken to by a childcare or health professional in the later stages of his life, they may have been alerted to the fact that he had some health issues that the parents were not seeking appropriate help for.' I think that does come into the realms of educated at home and the register that you've talked about. We also know that the Scottish Government has talked about a named individual for every child, to ensure a continuity of care and to ensure that every child is looked after and has the right safeguarding. Is that something that the Welsh Government is continuing? Or can she add to what she said to Llyr Gruffydd earlier about ensuring that the case of Dylan Seabridge is never repeated again? 

Thank you, Simon. As I said, my primary responsibility in the field of education is to ensure that local authorities that have a current duty to know whether a child is in receipt of an adequate education are exercising those functions, and what extra support they need to exercise those functions adequately. I have accepted the children's commissioner's recommendation for a compulsory register in principle, and officials are actively working on how that could be established and, crucially, implemented. But I also recognise that, for many families that decide to home educate, there are a variety of reasons for that. Sometimes they feel they don't get the support from the local education authority, whether that be exam entrance or access to Hwb, which they currently are not allowed to have. And working across the department—because it has to be a cross-department approach—education can't safeguard every child on its own and we can only ask questions with regards to relationship with education. There's some debate whether that conversation should happen in the home, or whether that conversation could happen somewhere else, whether that conversation should happen in the presence of parents, or whether that child should be seen on their own. These are complex issues where we have to balance the rights of the family against the rights of those children, and we will be looking at good practice across the United Kingdom—indeed, across the world—as we, across the Government, look to take this agenda forward. I think we have to recognise that a register with regards to home education, on its own, cannot provide all the protection that I know that you and I would want to see for our children.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. 

The next questions are the questions to the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Services, and the first question is from Caroline Jones.

Ambulance performance in the Abertawe Bro Morgannwg health board area has exceeded the eight minute target for red calls in each of the last 19 months. In October, the typical response time for a red call was just over five minutes, and for amber calls the typical response time was less than 20 minutes.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. We have made great progress in dealing with immediately life-threatening calls, but not so well for amber calls. Last month saw over 35 per cent of amber calls taking more than half an hour for a response in ABMU. The longest wait across Wales was a staggering 23 hours. When you consider that suspected strokes are categorised as amber, and these patients can wait up to 10 hours, this could hamper their recovery. The new response model was supposed to filter out calls that did not need a blue-light response in order to free up resources to respond to those calls that did. Cabinet Secretary, what more can your Government do to ensure that Welsh patients are not waiting up to a day for an ambulance?

Well, this is an issue of obvious concern, not just to the wider public but to myself as well. I have seen and identified in the independent evaluation of the new clinical response model some concern about the boundaries of categorisation, between red and amber, as one issue that is being addressed by the emergency ambulance services committee and the Welsh ambulance services trust, in addition to the longer tail. Because whilst our average times are reasonable, there are too many people waiting too long. There are examples of people waiting significant amounts of time, so I have already asked the chief ambulance services commissioner to undertake a piece of work to understand why that is happening, and then also for our whole system to look at what needs to change to resolve that. Because overall, we actually provide a good service, and we should be proud of the improvements that we have chosen to make. Ninety-six per cent of people with suspected strokes received the appropriate care bundle—a significant improvement in the quality of care being provided. The average response to a stroke call is less than 14 minutes. But for some people, they wait too long. We should be honest about that, recognise that, and look to improve that. That's exactly what I've tasked the health service with doing.

Cabinet Secretary, co-responders are an essential part of the ambulance service provision, not least in rural areas. Their role is also being increasingly felt as, when attending amber or even green calls, what they discover is a person whose status was red, or whose status had become red due to the delay, which they can either deal with themselves or escalate. Can you confirm that you've been asked by the ambulance service to transfer the responsibility for funding this essential service to health boards, who are, bar one, already overspent, and that you've been asked that co-responders should only be sent out to red calls, thereby jeopardising the safety of those whose calls have been wrongly categorised, or which have become more serious due to delay? If you have, will your response to both those questions be 'no'?

I haven't been asked to make those choices. Those are operational choices for the service to make about the right way to deploy services. If there's a choice to be made about what's a clinically appropriate thing to do, then again, that isn't something that I think I should try and step into as the Cabinet Secretary for health. We instituted a new model based on clinical evidence and advice to try and get away from the interference of politicians and targets that didn't necessarily make sense. That must also apply to how we make the best use of our staff to deliver the right response. Co-responders and community first responders are part of what makes a difference for people, in particular for those people who require an eight-minute response. So, there's something about understanding how they're properly deployed, how we use them effectively, and actually there's a piece of work again about trying to make the best use of those people and understanding where they come from—whether they're there from other public services or from the community first responders team. So, it's an area that I take an interest in, in terms of asking questions about what could and should happen, but I won't step into the space of giving direction about operational matters, or indeed matters where clinical judgment should lead the way the service uses its resources appropriately.

I've been made aware of recent examples in Swansea where patients—well, one patient had to wait three and a half hours with an urgent situation for an ambulance, and another patient waited four hours having suffered a myocardial infarction. Still at home, they waited four hours for an ambulance to attend the scene. Another patient waited five hours for an ambulance to attend the scene in the community. On top of that, I'm aware of people having to wait on trolleys for over 20 hours in accident and emergency, having had a heart attack as well. Now, I take on board all that's been said so far, that this is obviously about improving patient flows through hospitals, and naturally I'm aware that much good work is being done, and in all these cases that I've outlined, there is nothing but the highest praise for the nurses and doctors involved in the cases. But those waits remain. So, what in addition can you do to address matters?

I think you neatly highlight the point that I was trying to address in response to Caroline Jones's supplementary, that overall our service is good. The great majority of people receive a timely response that properly meets the care need, and actually we now have a better prospect of getting to people with the highest level of care need because of the changes we have made. But, there is a recognition that some people do wait too long. You've highlighted four instances where I wouldn't try to tell you that everything is fine. I'd be very interested, if you wanted to write to me with more detail on those, so that I can have them properly investigated, but there's something about not standing up here and saying everything is awful, and then equally not trying to stand up here and saying, 'Everything is fine, so don't criticise.' It's important for us to understand what doesn't work as well, and then to honestly look to address it. So, if you want to give me the individual instances you've raised, I'll look at whether they're individual matters or part of the system-wide challenge that I've already tasked the chief ambulance services commissioner with actually looking to address for us.

In light of the significant concerns raised on this issue, I established a task and finish group to advise on any further action that should be taken within Wales on the use of mesh implants for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse and incontinence. That group will report to me in January 2018.

Cabinet Secretary, the list of mesh implant survivors is growing every day and so is the campaign against its inappropriate use. New Zealand has effectively just ended the use of vaginal mesh implants and questions around consent are increasing all the time. Some people's bodies are rejecting this mesh in a very painful way, but they often are not given the proper chance to reject having the meshes fitted in the first place. Given the growing number of mesh implant survivors, England has adopted multidisciplinary teams of specialists who support patients who have had issues with mesh and advise them on treatments. Do these multidisciplinary teams exist in Wales and, if so, where are they? I'd specifically like that question answered. So, do multidisciplinary teams exist in Wales and where are they?

I'm happy to respond. This is an issue of significant public concern, and understandably so. I recognise perfectly well that there are a number of people who have had life-changing consequences from mesh implants. And it's important to recognise that, that it is a real issue. My interest is in understanding the exact scale of the challenge and what we could and should do about it.

I note what you said about the campaign against inappropriate use. Part of our challenge is that, actually, some people are campaigning for a total ban—a blanket ban—and others are saying that we need to understand how implants could or should be used, and what's appropriate. That's why the terms of reference that I gave the task and finish group were to look at current practice, to look at historic practice, and in particular one of the points was about fully informed consent. Because I really am concerned about a number of the stories that have come from people who've had mesh or tape implants that have gone wrong and whether they actually had a fully informed consent process. So, it's really important to understand what we're doing. Interestingly, there's been a significant reduction in mesh and tape implant use in these procedures in Wales.

My understanding is that, yes, we do have multidisciplinary teams around each surgical procedure. I think it's helpful to try and set out that before people get to the point of having surgery, they should already have had all other treatment options exhausted. It's not a first-line treatment; that does mean things like physiotherapy and other forms of therapy first. And, indeed, in the task and finish group, it is a multidisciplinary group. So, it's not just surgeons; there are physiotherapists and others on it. Those teams should exist wherever the surgery takes place. So, rather than saying, 'Where are they?', and trying to pinpoint locations, that depends on where the surgery took place. My interest, though, comes back to the regulator indicating whether or not these are appropriate devices for clinicians to use and then the appropriate professional advice about when they could and should be used; and, again, the role of politicians in endorsing clinical evidence and advice and not getting ahead of that. So, it's difficult.

I expect as part of the work to meet a number of people affected. I expect, as I've indicated, to receive the report in January. Whatever happens in Wales, we will take account of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance that is being revised, and I fully expect to meet the commitment that I've already given in this place, through the leader of the house, to provide a statement to Members. So, there is no doubt that this will continue to be an issue of significant concern to all of us around the Chamber.

This is a horrific story: a 10 per cent failure rate on average throughout the UK, and, my understanding is, throughout the world. One of the things that really concerns me is that these devices were allowed to be used because, although they had not been tested, they had gone through the medical devices process, under some sort of guidance-like similarity. I just wonder, Cabinet Secretary, whether you could produce a written statement to inform us how the medical devices guidelines work, and what process any medical device that would be inserted into our bodies—what the normal run rate, what the normal processes are. Because I do have a concern that this particular brand of tape—and there has been some questions in the past about the kind of tapes used to hold hernias in; some of those have been made of these highly synthetic materials, and have caused problems. So, I'd be really interested, and I think we'd all be really interested, in understanding how we allow these devices to be used, and what the guidelines, the processes, the procedures are for safeguards to make sure that we only let stuff that's been really well tested into our Welsh NHS.

When I provide the written statement—. I'm expecting the group to report to me in January and then to make a written statement after. So, when I do that, I'll make sure I cover the exact point that you raise. The task and finish group is actually looking at pelvic organ prolapse, as opposed to hernia operations. There'll be a different group of surgeons to be involved. But I know that some people have also raised concerns about hernia operations. And, interestingly, in the failure rate, it looks like that part of our challenge is in the data that we have, and understanding what the failure rate is, or the complication rate, in Wales. It looks like it's lesser; it looks like the surgical community in Wales didn't actually have the same enthusiasm for mesh and tape as other parts of the UK. But there is still a challenge around the UK, and let's not pretend that, somehow, there are no challenges here, because we understand there are. And I want to be as transparent as possible in setting out the advice that I will be giving, what will then take place afterwards, and to make sure that Members and constituents are properly informed. And I will, as I say, make sure your point about device testing is covered when we provide a statement in response.

Cabinet Secretary, I've raised the issue of pelvic mesh within the Welsh NHS in this Chamber previously. The issue was brought to my attention by a constituent of mine, who spoke to me about her heartbreaking experience. And my constituent is among thousands of other women, across the UK, who face the same life-changing circumstances. Now, this issue is receiving increasing publicity, and there was a Panorama programme on earlier this week, highlighting the suffering caused by these implants. And the investigation also suggested that doctors were unaware of the risk posed by mesh implants.

You mentioned the work of the task and finish group, and I look forward, as other Members will, to hear the progress on that. But what assurances can you give me, and my constituent, to ensure that women like her won't have to go through similar traumatic experiences because of mesh in the future?

I think it's important for me to be honest about what I can and can't do, and I can never guarantee to anyone that a surgical procedure won't go wrong. There is an inherent risk in invasive surgery that it may not work as you would wish it to and as most of the evidence suggests it should do. What matters even more so in this case is the consequences of that surgery going wrong, the life-changing impact, and whether there has been, as I say, a proper understanding of the risks that the operation presents in terms of benefits. Because most women who get to this point have actually got a life-changing challenge in the first place, but are still then properly understanding what risks are being borne, how and why, and whether there are better alternatives. So, the work of the task and finish group, the NICE guidance, will be really important for us to understand what is the best possible response for and from clinicians, what is the role of Government, and making something happen where that is not the role, but understanding whether the devices themselves continue to be available to clinicians, and in what circumstances as well. That's why I say I want to have clarity in providing an answer, when the report is provided to me, and to be utterly transparent with Members about what will and what won't happen. Because, as I say, I recognise it's had a significant, life-changing impact on a number of our constituents right across the country.

Questions now from the party spokespeople. I call first on the Conservative spokesperson, Angela Burns.

Diolch, Presiding Officer. Cabinet Secretary, in 2009, the Welsh Government supported the national inflammatory bowel disease standards, which recommended a minimum of one and a half whole, or full-time equivalent, inflammatory bowel disease nurses per 250,000 of the population. Could you please tell me how you're getting on in meeting this target?

You have me at a disadvantage, and I won't pretend to have the figures off-hand.

Well, if nothing else, I praise you for your honesty. Now, according to figures obtained from Crohn's & Colitis UK, in 2016, there were only 16 full-time equivalent specialist IBD nurses working across Wales. My own health board of Hywel Dda only has one IBD nurse and Betsi Cadwaladr has only got two and they have to cover a vast region. What are you going to be able to do to address this geographical deficit, which leads to patients often having to travel outside of their health boards to obtain treatment? 

I'd like to come back to how we have the most appropriate service possible. I actually spoke at an event organised on IBD in London in the past, which was organised with a range of people from across the UK to look at what we're doing, and I recognise that I do know that we don't have the number of specialist nurses that we would ideally wish to. But it's still about understanding how many specialists we could, should and will get, what that means in terms of workforce consequences in other places, and even if we can't have the number of specialist nurses we would ideally want to, how do we still, nevertheless, provide the very best possible care. I'm more than happy to undertake to come back to the Member directly about the current position and what improvement plans are in place within the service as well.FootnoteLink 

Thank you for that. I think it's really important, because you as a Government have agreed to meet a certain set of standards and, some years on—let's be frank, it's eight years on—those standards are nowhere near being met. Rather than having 16 full-time nurses, we should actually have 30 of those full-time nurses. Inflammatory bowel disease is a horrible set of conditions. It taxes people, it makes them very, very ill and they've struggled to know how to cope, because it's very visible—or they feel it's very visible—it's very embarrassing and it's one of the diseases nobody ever likes to talk about. If we can look at how we can drive specialist help for those people—one nurse for every 0.25 million people—it doesn't seem too much to ask. I'd be very grateful to you if you had a good look at this and provided us with an update, as 2009—that was a promise made a long time ago. 

If I may, in providing a response, I'll look not just at specialist nurses, but more broadly at how we help people to manage their condition, to understand not just at the nursing end but a range of other issues like, for example, diet support we do give to people. It's a relatively common condition actually and a number of people suffer at various points in their life, including staff within our health service who will be managing it. You're right: lots of people don't want to talk about it, as they feel stigmatised and embarrassed about the condition. So, it is something that I recognise as an issue for our service and how we appropriately meet the needs of people who do have the condition. So, I'll be more than happy to come back to you on the whole service, where we are and what our expectations and aspirations are for the future.   

UKIP spokesperson, Caroline Jones. 

Diolch, Llywydd. 

Cabinet Secretary, despite just over 3 million people living in Wales, our accident and emergency departments were visited more than 1 million times in the past 12 months. There has been an increase of around two thirds in the numbers of people waiting more than four hours in A&E, and the media have reported that one senior doctor saw examples of people waiting for 80 hours. Difficulties accessing primary care services is often the reason for A&E attendance. Cabinet Secretary, what is your Government doing to improve access to out-of-hours GPs and what consideration have you given to using digital technology to improve access to primary care? 

I'm happy that Caroline Jones recognised this as a whole-system issue. This is not simply about saying that accident and emergency departments need to either run quicker or faster or more efficiently and that it's just about a hospital issue. It's actually about flow all the way through our healthcare system. So, it's about how we prevent people going unnecessarily into hospital, whether it's a minor injuries unit or a major department. It's about whether people do need to be there, about how quickly they're able to either be seen, treated and discharged, or, if they do need to be monitored, about that taking place, but also the flow through the hospital.

In terms of our use of information technology, well, actually we've just had a soft launch of A&E Waiting Times Live—a pilot done last year in north Wales. It was particularly helpful about helping people to direct themselves to the most appropriate point in the system and to give an indication of likely waiting times at different places. But, more than that, there is the work that is already ongoing at looking at how we anticipate care needs throughout the whole year—not just in winter—in trying to direct people at the most appropriate service. It isn't just about the out-of-hours primary care service; it's still about the regular hours service as well. But I'm also particularly interested in the learning we'll take from 111, with a relatively successful pilot in Abertawe Bro Morgannwg and Carmarthenshire, because that is partly about out-of-hours but also a much wider suite of issues and equally a constant challenge to try and inform and empower the public to make different choices about how they wish to access care and the most appropriate place for that care to take place.

Thank you for that answer, Cabinet Secretary. In just over 10 days, the NHS will once again experience the miracle of Christmas, where the wards are empty on Christmas eve but fill up again on Boxing Day. If we are to avoid the scenes witnessed in previous years that saw ambulances queued up outside A&E, we have to reduce demand on our urgent care system over the festive period. Cabinet Secretary, how can we further highlight the Choose Well campaign and encourage the public to utilise community pharmacies for minor ailments, and how can we ensure that local health boards publish information about availability of pharmacy services over the Christmas period?

Thank you for the questions. Again, part of our challenge regularly is how we reduce demand and redirect demand. There's a significant amount of work that is already ongoing, and not just the seasonal Choose Well campaign. Part of that this year is looking at My Winter Health Plan for those people who are particularly vulnerable and more likely to appear in our accident and emergency departments throughout the winter. So, actually, Age Cymru have been particularly helpful, and a range of others, in promoting the idea of having a plan for that person and their care and to understand what their care needs are. That's already proving popular in terms of people understanding how they can help people to understand their care needs in order to keep them in their normal place, but if they do need to go into a hospital setting for their care, how much more quickly they could expect to be turned around and for people to understand the information about them.

I recognise and I'm pleased to highlight the additional services we're providing through pharmacies in Wales. We made a deliberate choice on the £0.75 million in developing the Choose Well pharmacy platform—not just the common ailment scheme, but a range of others—and now over 60 per cent of pharmacies in Wales are available on the Choose Pharmacy system. Health boards are, on a regular basis, putting out information about the services available in pharmacies. The challenge always is that, in a sea of information for people to choose and understand and to make those different choices in terms of services, there won't be a single, one-off campaign to resolve all of this; it will require a constant level of information and, actually, word of mouth as people use a service successfully themselves.

Thank you once again, Cabinet Secretary. Choosing well requires having the right information to hand. NHS Direct and the 111 service have a role to play in providing such information to patients, helping them to make informed decisions and signposting them to the most appropriate service. My local health board was the pilot area for the 111 service, so could you provide an update on the pilot, Cabinet Secretary, and give a timescale for its wider roll-out over Wales?

I made a statement on the 111 service some months ago and I'd indicated that, through the winter, I would expect not just more about the evaluation of the 111 service in ABM and Carmarthenshire, which has been broadly positive, but to make choices through the spring about roll-out through the rest of the country. So, I will have an evaluation and have already committed to providing another public statement and update to Members and the wider public on how and when that will take place and indeed the scheduling around the country for the roll-out of the service.

Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Rhun ap Iorwerth.

Thank you very much. Cabinet Secretary, last week, you made a statement on funding training places for health professionals over the next year, and I certainly welcome much of what was said in that statement: a 10 per cent increase in the number of training places for nurses, physiotherapists and occupational therapists, and an increase in the number of training places for health visitors and so on and so forth. Given that training budgets in England have been cut, what structures will the Government put in place to ensure that those trained in Wales at the expense of Wales remain in Wales?

Thank you for the question. This goes back to the policy intent of this Government, which I've already indicated, to maintain the NHS bursary. It's not just a bursary for nursing students; there is a range of health and care professionals who receive the bursary. The continuation of the bursary in direct contrast to England—this Welsh Labour Government decided to continue with that support—has been particularly important for mature students to stay in the system on the basis that there'll be an expectation that people then work for NHS Wales for two years after their training has been completed. I believe that's a fair settlement of something for something. We recognise that most people who are starting as mature students already have ties to a local area, and so whilst their qualifications mean they're mobile, they already have ties that will keep them in their community in any event. I look forward to reporting back on the practical success of the bursary in the next few years, as people complete their training.

There are other parts of the announcement I certainly agree with: maintaining the 40 per cent increase in midwifery training places that happened this year, maintaining investment in training places for other key parts of the workforce— healthcare, scientists, paramedics, dental hygienists, therapists and radiographers—all very good news. I was unable, though, to find the bit about increasing undergraduate medicine study places or training places for GPs. Was that a deliberate omission or a mistake?

No, it's simply that we make these announcements at different points in time, as I'm sure you've noticed. We'll make different announcements about doctors and training places in the GP field. We've just announced, of course, the final fill rate for this year—we actually overfilled our GP training places. With the creation of Health Education and Improvement Wales, we'll have a different system to understand how many doctor training places and other health and care professional places—. At the appropriate time in the year, we'll make the next announcement about that. But you will of course know that in 'Train. Work. Live.' we have announced another incentive within the field of doctors for our psychologists. We recognise there's been a significant gap right across the UK—so additional help and support to hopefully get more people to undertake their training places here in Wales.

I'm glad you're engaging on the issue of doctors today. It seemed, quite often recently, that you've wanted to direct me away from talking about doctors to talk about other parts of the health service, but we know that all health professionals within the health service are dependent on each other, and doctors are very important too.

I cannot emphasise too much, though, the need to come forward with definitive figures and a vision of how many doctors we need to train in Wales over the coming years. I've seen some figures recently that should frighten all of us here, really. The figures I saw suggested that, of all the young people in Wales who decide they want to go into medicine, 75 per cent of them end up working in the NHS in England. Now, apart from the fact that we need doctors and more doctors from Wales to stay in Wales, as well as recruiting from elsewhere, it is a frightening brain drain from Wales in general terms. These are bright young people who, for all sorts of reasons, we need to keep within our community. Will you not recognise that a decision is needed quickly, and a positive decision, on increasing the opportunities for young people to study medicine in Wales in order for us to try to address that brain drain?

This Government has never tried to put a halt on young people from Wales having opportunities in Wales to study medicine. Our challenge has been something for something with our medical schools and our capacity to do so. So, we already have a slight increase in the number of Welsh domiciled students acquiring places in both Cardiff and Swansea. I've been clear, as indeed has the Cabinet Secretary for Education, that if we're going to invest more in training doctors here in Wales, then we need to see a greater return in terms of Welsh domiciled students. We also need to be better, frankly, at reacquiring young people from Wales who go to study medicine in different parts of the UK. I would not criticise a young person from Anglesey, Cardiff, St Davids or Newtown who decided they wanted to study medicine in Liverpool, Manchester, London or somewhere else. Our challenge is how we actually persuade those people to come back to Wales to undertake national health service work on a longer-term basis.

We're actually seeing some success in having more people, particularly with 'Train. Work. Live.', choosing, after undertaking some of their career within England, to actually come back to Wales as well. So, as ever, there is not one simple answer. There is a range of different things that we need to get right to have the best prospect of having the greatest number of Welsh domiciled students undertaking medical education and training here within Wales, as well as reacquiring people from Wales who have undertaken their medical education training in other parts of the UK in particular.

We have invested an additional £8 million a year to support a substantial programme of work to improve access to specialist CAMHS services in response to the significant increase in referrals in recent years. All local health boards are working towards consistently meeting the 28-day target.

Cabinet Secretary, there has been tremendous progress in the past 12 months in reducing the number of children and young people waiting for a CAMHS appointment. I welcome the work the Welsh Government has undertaken on this issue. As a result of the additional investment, we cut the numbers waiting for treatment by over two thirds. However, we still have over 500 children and young people waiting between four and 26 weeks, and a handful waiting longer than that. Cabinet Secretary, given that children and young people should be seen within 28 days, what more can your Government do to ensure that no young person has to wait up to half a year?

Thank you for the question. I welcome the fact that you've recognised the significant progress that has been made, but also I recognise there is still more to do. There was a significant amount of improvement to achieve the 28-day target across Wales in March this year. Since then, we've seen achievement slip back, and we now have some people waiting too long again. We've actually seen that the average wait is under eight weeks. Given that a couple of years ago people were regularly waiting more than six months, that's a significant step forward.

I've made clear to health boards, at chair and vice-chair level, that not only do I expect to face continued scrutiny, and rightly so, until we see significant improvement that is sustained, but also they can expect me to raise it in accountability fora with them until they not just achieve the target of 80 per cent of people being seen within 28 days, but actually that they can sustain that achievement as well. We've invested in the staff that they said that they would need, and we've injected an extra £300,000-worth of money to make sure that within this year we deal with that backlog that does exist. I fully expect that through the next year we will have much more regular and sustainable achievement to make sure that people don't wait too long, either for specialist CAMHS or to be referred to other parts of our health and care system if CAMHS is not the place to meet their health and care needs.

Cabinet Secretary, can I ask you what assurances you can give that the budget allocation for CAMHS will be ring-fenced? 

We've been very clear in investing the additional resource that was for CAMHS. We've got our broader mental health ring fence, and, actually, we know that we spend more than the ring fence both in mental health and in CAMHS services. Part of the challenge is about seeing CAMHS as part of a whole system, because we know that part of the challenge has been that there are more people being referred in, while we still have that significant challenge of inappropriate referral. So, as well as getting the investment right in CAMHS, which I believe we have done, we've also got the investment in other services where people do have very real health and care support needs. I'm confident that we've made the right investment and I'm confident that that money is being spent on CAMHS as it's intended, and I fully expect that we'll report back on improvement. If not, I will face your questions, and others, on why significant improvement has not been made and sustained.  

I've been raising the issue of CAMHS waiting lists for some time. Recently, the First Minister wrote to me explaining the reasons behind the changes in the way that these waiting lists were measured and published, explaining that some local health boards were wrongly including referrals of children and young people to local primary mental health support services in their specialist CAMHS data submissions, and local primary mental health support services also have a 28-day target for access to assessment and interventions, but this is reported and measured separately. However, this isn't quite accurate—it isn't possible to break down the published data for this service by age group. This means we have no idea how long children are waiting for these services. Do you have any plans to publish this data to allow greater scrutiny of this Government's performance in terms of child and adolescent mental health?

We expect to make available properly scrutinised and accurate data as official statistics, so that people can see transparently whether the health service is meeting the 80 per cent of children and young people being seen in CAMHS services within 28 days. I cannot be clearer about my expectations or about the transparency of the information that the public and Members will receive.

Thank you for the question. We are committed to increasing GP trainees across Wales, including in north Wales. Our targeted incentives have made a difference, with more than 100 per cent of posts being filled in most GP training schemes across north Wales. We continue to work with others to identify additional steps that could assist.

I listened with interest to the answers that you gave to Rhun ap Iorwerth earlier, but we do know that only 3.5 per cent of trainee doctors in the UK are in Wales, although we have 5 per cent of the population and, I would argue, that our health needs are greater than that. I just don’t feel feel that the Government fully understands the level of the problem that we have in north Wales. The number of trainee GPs in north Wales is around two for every 100,000 of the population. In Cardiff, it's around six to every 100,000 of the population, and this is rehearsed year on year, with the situation at its worst now in north Wales. So, may I ask: when will the Government truly recognise the specific needs of north Wales in this context in order to resolve this problem once and for all?   

I'm happy to respond about where we are this year and the approach that we'll take to future rounds of GP training places. As ever, we'll look at the right number of places, about what we want and what we think we can reasonably fill. I said at the start of the year's round that we've just completed that if we're able to overfill, then I'd be happy to do so, and that's exactly what we did. That includes north Wales: we had 24 places offered but we actually appointed 25 candidates across the three areas of north Wales where training takes place. That shows that we've been good to our word.

As we go through this year, and going back to a previous question from one of your party colleagues about the way in which we announced doctor training numbers, in particular GPs, we'll make announcements on the number of people and where they'll be, in a completely transparent manner, because there is no one part of Wales where you could say there is no challenge in this area. And it's got to be the honesty about recognising this is a difficult and challenging area for every part of the UK, and what we are seeking to do in Wales is having the right number of people and making sure that we fill those places. It's about high-quality training and also to keep people to work in our healthcare system here Wales—in north Wales, south, mid and west Wales—every part of the country has a challenge for this Government to address.  

I always find that it's easy in opposition to come up with solutions, but when you're in Government you have to make decisions, and the decision here is about where the health workforce sits within its community and different parts of the country. In that regard, I welcome the progress that's being made by our 'Train.Work.Live' campaign and the recent investment to increase the number of nurses, physiotherapists and occupational health visitors. I ask you, Cabinet Secretary, if you'd agree with me that we do need—and I accept that—to train more doctors, but that to play their part in a more important, multidisciplinary workforce, we need to treat people closer to home, and that they are but one element in a given whole?  

Yes, you're absolutely right, Joyce: we need to make sure that we have the right number of GPs, as really important leaders within local healthcare, but, equally, they're taking part in a wider multidisciplinary team to deliver care. Recently, at the national primary care conference I was really heartened by GP leaders but also other healthcare professionals who recognised that it was the right thing for them to do. And we need to support them, both in the way that we design and deliver our training of workforce numbers, so the £12 million increase that I announced recently to train other healthcare professionals, and for them to be trained and work together with GP colleagues as part of that team. And, actually, it's about delivering better care, and better care that, actually, all of those healthcare professionals—GPs and others—would rather work in as well. There's a challenge because not everyone is at that point in time, but most people recognise it's better for the staff and better for the citizen as well. We get better value from it and, ultimately, better care as well. So, that will be a consistent theme in this Government, and I won't apologise for talking about GPs and others as part of a wider care team, and I'm not going to split off one group of healthcare professionals against another.  

Can you tell us what work is being done to ensure that GP training takes into account the fantastic opportunities that new technology provides for GP services in the future? You'll be aware, I'm sure, that there are applications now that people can download, even onto their mobile phones, in order to have consultations with a GP, and we need to be at the cutting edge of this. I'm sure you will agree with that statement. So, what specifically is within the current training offer to make sure that these are the sorts of things in the future that GPs will be able to use? 

The current framework isn't just about doctors and training; it's also about the continued professional development and training that takes place through the profession. For example, I announced at the recent medicine safety conference with the Royal Pharmaceutical Society in Wales that we'll have a roll-out of a trial of pharmacists having fuller access to the GP record, and if that's successful that will then be rolled out to other pharmacies who are part of the Choose Pharmacy network in the spring of next year. There will need to be training and understanding of what that means both for the pharmacist but also for GPs themselves as well.

To be fair, both the Royal College of General Practitioners and the general practice committee of the British Medical Association are fully engaged in a conversation about how to make better use of information technology. I'm actually meeting the medical director of NHS Wales Informatics Service later on this afternoon, to talk exactly about what we already do and what our ambitions need to be for the future. So, it isn't one simple part of understanding the opportunities that exist to work in a different way, it's actually about how we do that on a more successive basis and expecting GPs and others to be able to adapt to do that as well. There's lots of opportunity, but our biggest challenge in many ways is how the health service catches up with the expectation of how people already live their lives today. We're not where we need to be; there's more progress to make up, but I'm optimistic about where we'll actually get in the next few years. 

We are committed to delivering high-quality health and care services centred on individual needs and outcomes. Our 'More than just words' strategic framework sets out our commitment and actions to support and strengthen the planning and delivery of Welsh language services in health and care, including, of course, mental health services.

Thank you for that response. It is true to say that there is concern that there is a lack of support and provision available through the medium of Welsh in dealing with mental health issues at a national level here in Wales. It's extremely important, of course, that individuals with mental health problems have the assistance in the language they are most comfortable using—you come to a diagnosis more quickly and improve the quality of care in general terms. So, would you agree to look at what is currently available—including software and electronic packages available—in order to support people effectively, and how things can improve for the future? 

Yes. I'm happy to give that commitment and I recognise this is an issue that isn't about a care preference, it's about a care need; the two are different and it's important to recognise the distinction. It's also about where the active offer takes place, so people don't need to say, 'I would like to be able to access healthcare through the medium of Welsh', but actually there is an active offer for people to do that, particularly with mental health services where there are a range of challenges you've got to get over to actually access a service and recognise the need to take part in that service as well. Your point about software as well—I actually have current work already ongoing looking at the opportunities for software, looking at what exists in both English and in Welsh, and trying to make sure we appropriately equip the health and care service to do so. So, I recognise the point and I'll happily update in the future about where we get to.FootnoteLink

Thank you for the question. Our stroke delivery plan provides a framework for action by health boards and NHS trusts, working with their partners. It sets out the expectations of all stakeholders to prevent, diagnose and treat stroke in people of all ages, wherever they live in Wales and whatever their circumstances.

Thank you for the reply, Minister. The fact is, according to the Stroke Association, atrial fibrillation—it's a kind of disease with irregular heartbeat—can increase the risk of stroke by up to five times. AF is easily detectable and effective treatments exist to reduce the risk of stroke. However, the number of people who have not been identified as having AF combined with the number identified but on inappropriate medicine means that many people in Wales are having preventable strokes each year. What is the Welsh Government doing to increase the rate of AF detection as well as ensuring that they receive appropriate treatment so that the risk of people suffering an unnecessary stroke is reduced in Wales? Thank you.

Thank you for the question. I recognise atrial fibrillation is a significant risk in people who have strokes. The latest sentinel stroke national audit programme clinical audit showed that 18 per cent of Welsh stroke patients had atrial fibrillation prior to their stroke. We already have work going on in this area. In the previous statement I made in this place on stroke and stroke improvement, I noted the University Hospital of Wales-led Stop a Stroke project. That was specifically about consultants working with the third sector, the British Heart Foundation, NWIS and Public Health Wales to look at how you have appropriate treatment for people with atrial fibrillation to reduce their risk of stroke, but also about the proactive offer in looking to find out who has untreated and undiagnosed atrial fibrillation. To date, 40 per cent of atrial fibrillation patients were not on the appropriate treatment and could be anti-coagulated to reduce their risk of stroke.

So, there is work that's already ongoing. That work now, following the pilot in the University of Wales Hospital, is being rolled out across the country. This is one of the risk factors we could and should control, but of course there are many others. The big public health challenges of smoking, overuse of alcohol, our diet and not exercising enough all have significant impacts on our risk of a range of conditions, including, of course, stroke. If we can do more as a country to change our behaviour, we'll have fewer people suffering ill health in the first place in stroke and a range of other areas.   

Thank you for the question. I've just recently announced plans to deliver 19 new integrated health and care centres across Wales by 2021, to help deliver care closer to people's homes in their communities. I've identified up to £68 million for the centres. Construction will be subject to the agreement of a successful business case. The expectation is that those schemes will be delivered by 2021 to make sure the estate is fit for purpose to deliver a new integrated health and care system.

The money for delivering a much more appropriate primary healthcare estate is much appreciated, but I want to focus my question today on the delivery of services. I was particularly interested to read a report from The King's Fund on the success of Canterbury in New Zealand in limiting the rise and rise in demand for emergency services because of the investment in primary care services. This included having integrated teams, all of whom were valued. This included much better—many more primary care services, including 24-hour GP services, including observation beds to ensure that people weren't inappropriately admitted to hospital because people weren't sure whether or not they were seriously ill, and targeted falls prevention, which we know is one of the main causes why older people are admitted to hospital for emergency treatment. So, I'm just wondering whether you are thinking about the Canterbury, New Zealand service and the way in which it could influence the Welsh health service, because I know that Cardiff and the Vale is looking very closely at this. Do you think this is something that all health boards should be looking at as a model for future care or do you think this is very specific to Cardiff and the Vale?

No, I don't think it's just specific to Cardiff and the Vale. I think there is a range of elements, both within the UK and internationally, about the requirement to shift even more to a primary care-led system, and having a shift not just in services from hospital-based to a community base, but, actually, the appropriate shift in resources to make that happen as well. We've already seen some of that taking place already within Wales—community cardiology being a good example. What I think is instructive about Canterbury is that it took determination and it took consistency. What Canterbury have achieved has taken place over a decade, and there's something there about the challenge for all of us as policymakers and decision makers, scrutineers and Government members, which is that understanding the challenge is much easier than understanding the answer and, actually, how we get there often takes time. So, the decade Canterbury have taken—. We've already made steps in Wales, not just with my immediate predecessor in the room but other health Ministers in looking to shift resources into primary care and having a much greater focus on trying to get away from the health service just equalling hospitals.

That's the path we've set ourselves. That's why I've made sure that primary care is a national focus of attention. It's why we've had a national primary care conference. But it says something about the time that Ministers are prepared to use in directing the service to say, 'This is the direction we must take in having more care closer to home', and I fully expect that the parliamentary review, when it reports early in the new year, will say more about having a primary care-led service and integration at that very local level being the path that we must take if we're going to do something about resolving our public health challenges and also providing the right quality of care in each of our communities across the country.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary.

The next item, therefore, is topical questions, and David Melding's question.

We have a long-term positive trend in house building in Wales, and the reality is that the number of new dwellings started in Wales increased by 2 per cent in 2016-17, compared to the previous year, and this is the second highest annual number recorded since the start of the recession in 2007.

Oh dear. [Laughter.] Minister, let's just remind ourselves that, for the latest year, which takes us to September 2017, just gone, the figure is 6,830. That's a drop on the previous year, which was 6,900. But let me remind everyone here: your target is 8,700—8,700. You are nearly 2,000 below that, and it's 10 years since this Government achieved its target for new homes. It is simply not acceptable. You have, and the Government has had for several years, the Holmans report, one of the most authoritative reports ever produced on housing need, which said that this Government should consider adopting the alternative projection that Professor Holmans calculated, which was for 12,000 homes a year in Wales between now and 2030—not 8,700, which you are pitifully missing as a target anyway, but 12,000. Don't you agree with me that it's high time the Welsh Government at least accepted the alternative projection so we can start to make some inroads into the housing crisis?

Well, Welsh Government, as you'll be more than aware, is committed to pursuing all avenues in order to create and build homes, particularly affordable homes, with our target of 20,000 over the course of this Assembly, but also homes for market sale as well. There are a number of ways in which we're doing that. We recognise the important role that the SME sector will play in terms of meeting our housing aspirations, so we've announced recently an additional £30 million for the Wales property development fund, and that will support SME developers to build homes, and that was a sector that we know took a particularly bad hit in the aftermath of the recession. That actually quadruples the initial investment in that particular sector and it's expected to provide over £270 million in support for the sector over the next 15 years.

That's in addition to our commitment to spend £1.4 billion on housing over the course of this Assembly, so there's no doubt that Welsh Government is certainly putting its financial resources behind this and working with all sectors in order to build homes, learning from what we did in the previous Assembly in terms of the housing supply pact we had with Community Housing Cymru. That helped us achieve our target of delivering 10,000 affordable homes. We have a pact, now, with Community Housing Cymru and the Welsh Local Government Association, but also a pact with the Home Builders Federation and the Federation of Master Builders as well, so we're constantly trying to explore how we can work with new partners to increase house building across Wales.

Thank you, Minister. The next question is from Simon Thomas.

Recent changes made by the UK Government to stamp duty land tax have led to additional funds being available for the Welsh Government, and this has allowed me to make some changes that will mean that some 90 per cent of homebuyers in Wales will pay either the same or less tax than would have been the case under the stamp duty land tax.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for that response. I appreciate the fact that he published a written statement on Monday regarding these issues, but, as we look at devolved taxes for the first time, I think it’s appropriate that we have an opportunity before Christmas to share good news or bad news with residents the length and breadth of Wales. So, thank you for confirming that 90 per cent of first-time buyers won’t be affected, or, if they are affected, they will be affected in a positive manner by this change.

May I ask you just two specific questions? Have you had an opportunity to profile the funding that will be collected by the Welsh Government as a result of these changes, and are you, therefore, of the view that when we come to vote on the final budget in the new year that you won’t need to make any changes to that budget? Have you also taken the opportunity to model the impact of this change on house prices in Wales? You will recall that the Office for Budget Responsibility stated that introducing the relief for first-time buyers would increase house prices across the UK, or, rather, across England and Wales, and I think that they suggested that that would be an increase of up to 1 per cent in house prices, which puts housing further out of reach for some first-time buyers. As you’re not doing that here, can you model that and the impact that that would have on house prices in Wales and will there be a report by Bangor University looking at these issues in order to update the situation by the time we come to vote on the final budget?

Well, I thank Simon Thomas for those two additional questions.

Llywydd, just to say that the underlying assumptions behind the decisions we are making in relation to devolved taxes will be independently scrutinised by Bangor University in the way that Simon Thomas suggested. I am committed. I told the Finance Committee that I would do my best to make sure that, alongside the final budget on 19 December, we will lay Bangor's updated assessments, taking into account the changes that we have made, and they will test those assumptions so that Assembly Members will see both the assumptions we've made and their independent look at them.

Simon Thomas is right, of course, to refer to what the OBR said about the Chancellor's decision to raise the starting threshold for stamp duty land tax for first-time buyers in England on prices in the market. There is previous evidence, when there was a previous first-time buyers' rate, that that led not to lower bills for buyers but to higher prices for sellers. We will keep a careful look on that here in Wales. My decision to increase the starting threshold for anybody buying a home in Wales valued at £180,000 or less at least guarantees that other people beyond first-time buyers are not doubly penalised—not having a relief available to them but having to bear the inflated prices that sellers might be able to charge.

We, on these benches, would like to welcome the increase in the tax-exempt amount up to £180,000. Would the Cabinet Secretary similarly welcome the tax cut by the UK Government that made this money available to him? Will he also reflect on whether a written statement is really sufficient to announce changes in tax rates, as he considers the evolving financial procedures in this Assembly?

Could I also ask him is he now engaged in tax competition with England? I think, perhaps, this increase to £180,000 may mitigate the risk of first-time buyers perhaps looking to buy over the border, but actually people who are buying a second or further time—does he think the reduction of up to £1,100 at the £180,000 mark may be sufficient to encourage people to come and buy in Wales? And is that something he would welcome?

Could he also just clarify: is this a grand statement of progressive politics, what he's doing with land transaction tax, or is it just a sensible alignment of the tax rates to the level of house prices prevalent in Wales?

Finally, last week, he said that the commercial 6 per cent rate would lead to just a small number of thousands being raised. On the basis of other data given to us by his department, we calculate it as at least £2.7 million a year. Could he look again at his calculations, and will he at least keep that 6 per cent rate under review in light of its impact on development across Wales?

Well, Llywydd, I did make a conscious decision to use money that is available to Wales as a result of the Chancellor of the Exchequer's decision in relation to first-time buyers in England. I did take a conscious decision to apply that money for broadly the same purpose here in Wales. The Member will be well aware of the awkwardness that we face in our draft budget being laid at the beginning of October and then a major event at the UK level halfway through it. My ambition was to be able to lay information in front of the Assembly at the earliest point that I was able. A written statement was the practical way of doing that. The regulations to give effect to all of this will not appear in front of this Assembly until the new year, and there will be a full opportunity for Members to scrutinise the regulations then. 

I entirely reject the idea that what we are involved in here is tax competition. What the devolution of land transaction tax to Wales does is to allow us to design this tax in a way that reflects the needs of Wales. I understand that the Chancellor of the Exchequer, when he was having to make a decision on an England-and-Wales basis, had to take into account house prices in London and the south-east of England as well as house prices in Merthyr and Blaenau Gwent, here in Wales. He then has to take a very broad-brush approach where some of those figures simply don't meet our circumstances. Having the tax in our hands here in Wales means that I have been able to set thresholds that reflect house prices here in Wales. Eighty per cent of first-time buyers in England will pay no tax at all as a result of the Chancellor's decision. Eighty per cent of first-time buyers in Wales will pay no tax as a result of the threshold that I have set here in Wales. 

The decisions I've made are not part of a grand statement, Llywydd. They are part of a carefully calibrated announcement in which I've tried to remain true to the commitments we have given that we will begin the journey of devolved taxes in a way that is careful, that is focused on doing a competent job, that allows those people who have to do the practical work to have a system that they recognise after 1 April as well as the one that they operate now, but at the same time to concentrate the help that we are able to offer into the hands of those who need it the most. 

Today, I announced that a permanent small business rate relief scheme will be introduced from 1 April 2018, which provides assurances and security for small businesses in Wales. The scheme targets support at businesses, supports jobs and growth, and delivers wider benefits for local communities.

At the time of the Assembly election, the Labour manifesto promised,

'We will offer a tax cut to all small businesses in Wales'.

I presume that this is the policy announcement that is designed to give effect to that pledge. Now, that could have been achieved through a variety of means—by raising the lower and upper thresholds for relief and increasing the rate, introducing a split multiplier differential between small and larger businesses. Can the Cabinet Secretary confirm that he's done none of those things? And so, effectively, by my calculation, the proportion of small businesses that will benefit from the relief that he's announced will be around about 70 per cent, not all small businesses in Wales, as was suggested by the pledge. 

In terms of the detail of what he's announced, could he give us a bit more detail about the targeted support for the small hydropower schemes? I was very glad to see that. That was part of the budget agreement between Plaid Cymru and the Government. But could we have some more of the detail of that? I presume the reference to the living wage is a reference to the real living wage, not the national living wage. And in terms of the forward programme of work, the ideas for future exploration, there seems to be a suggestion that business rate relief will be conditional in future. Does he see it being linked in some way with some of the criteria set out yesterday in the economic action plan in terms of the economic contract between businesses seeking investment and the Government?

I thank Adam Price for those additional questions. Llywydd, it is 70 per cent of business premises in Wales that have help with their rate bills, and more than half of those pay no rates at all. It isn't 70 per cent of small businesses. It's 70 per cent of all businesses. That's why the vast bulk—I would say it's hard to find small businesses that do not benefit from the help that is provided here in Wales, and what we've announced today is that that help is a permanent source of help, not, as Members here will know, a scheme that has had to be brought in front of the Assembly every year with no certainty that it would be available in the year after.

The Member is right to say that I am not proposing, in the changes that we are making today, to change thresholds or indeed to introduce a split multiplier. The idea of a split multiplier was quite heavily opposed in the consultation that we had on changing the small business rate relief scheme. There was a strong sense in that that the fact that we have a single multiplier in Wales is one of the things that helps us to attract people to set up businesses here. I'm very pleased, though, to confirm that the high-street rate relief scheme that we agreed with Plaid Cymru last year on a one-off basis—that we're able to find £5 million to extend that for a further year. It will be half of the amount that we were able to offer in this year, but it will allow high-street businesses to have further help into 2018-19. I'm glad to confirm as well that this package will allow us to provide extra help in the small-hydro area, and detailed discussions are now going on by policy officials with the sector to design that help in the most effective way.

Llywydd, Adam Price is correct to point out that, in the information that we've published today, I also set out a series of ideas that we want to go on exploring. The fact that we are committed to a permanent scheme—there will always be a scheme—should not be confused with a belief that the scheme we have today will never be changed in the future. There are many ways in which I think the scheme could be usefully further developed. Amongst the ideas—and they are ideas for discussion with the sector—are a series of ideas coming out of the Barclay review of business rates, undertaken in Scotland this year, and the idea, which has been developed in Scotland already, although not completely implemented, of linking the help that businesses get from the public purse with key objectives of public policy. How we would do that: certainly the economic action plan that was published yesterday has some ways in which we might be able to link that, and the work being carried out by the fair work board in Wales might provide another series of ways in which we could link the payments that companies get from the public purse with being confident that they conduct their business in ways that are consistent with our policy objectives.

Cabinet Secretary, I've also been perusing yesterday's written statement and a permanent business rates relief scheme of the type you've identified was desperately needed, so we welcome the permanence of the new scheme. I've raised over the last months—and years, probably, now—some of the problems that small businesses, particularly high-street businesses in my constituency in Monmouth and Chepstow, have been facing with some of the extraordinary hikes in business rates that they've experienced. I know that that was out of your control in many ways, but the relief scheme that you implement is within your control.

As you said in answer to the last question, you are able to frame that so that it does meet Welsh needs and the Welsh context. I do share Adam Price's concern that this new scheme doesn't tick all the boxes and there will be notspots, so to speak, out in towns and high streets, particularly in my constituency, and pockets elsewhere. Will you at least undertake that you will keep the new system under review, so permanent it may be, but intransigent and inflexible it won't be, and, in the future, if you do get advice that it needs to be altered and amended that you will do that as soon as possible?

I'm very happy indeed to give that assurance. I want the scheme to be developmental. I want to find new ways in which we can improve it further into the future. I'm interested to make sure that we work with the Chancellor of the Exchequer in the announcement he made in the budget about more frequent revaluations, so that we don't get these major shifts in some parts of the country when revaluations only happen once every five years. I'm sure the Member will welcome the fact that the additional support that we are able to offer through the high-street rate relief scheme will now be continued in 2018-19 to assist those places that did see hikes in their business rates to accommodate themselves to that over a longer period of time.

Will the Cabinet Secretary agree with me that when you have to provide a multiplicity of reliefs and exemptions, it's generally speaking a sign of a bad tax? Whilst the measures that have been announced yesterday are certainly very welcome, they don't actually get to the heart of the problem. Additional support for the childcare sector affects 100 businesses out of nearly 4,400 and for local authorities, £1.3 million divided between 22 means less than £60,000 per authority. There will still be, as Nick Ramsay pointed out a moment ago, lots of small businesses in Wales that will be suffering as a result of the existing system, and any tax that is unrelated to the ability to pay is bound to produce these kinds of anomalies. I take what the Cabinet Secretary said about the Barclay review in Scotland and ways in which we may be able to tweak the existing system, but either we go to a system where we exempt a much larger number of businesses or we design a new tax altogether that removes some of the more objectionable elements of the current tax. I appreciate that that's a long-term solution to the problem, but would the Cabinet Secretary at least commit himself to looking at the possibility of having a better type of tax to tax businesses, which is more related to ability to pay than the existing model, which, as we know, having been in existence for a very, very long time, regularly produces the problems with which he has to grapple today?

Well, Llywydd, I don't think the spirit of Christmas entirely entered into the Member's question, because I think the extra support for childcare providers has been welcomed by that sector, and it's consistent with this Government's policy of being able to provide an extended level of childcare support for working parents. The extra money for local authorities is to help them to go on using their discretionary powers. We know their budgets are under pressure, and some of the areas where they have discretion to offer relief have come under pressure as a result. That extra money will allow local authorities to go on providing targeted relief to support local businesses, where that help is most needed.

I think I ought to have mentioned as well, Llywydd, that, in the announcement, I also made it clear that I have decided to use the money that has come to Wales in the budget to change the way in which the annual uplift in which business rates are calculated in Wales—to move it from retail prices index to consumer prices index. That by itself will be worth £9 million to businesses in Wales next year, and £22 million to businesses in the year after, and that's a very substantial additional support to businesses here in Wales.

On the general point that Mr Hamilton raises, however, I'm happy to say that we are already committed to a more fundamental look at the way in which taxes are raised in this area. Whether we will be able to do it in a way that links ability to pay to taxes paid is something that we will look at. But land value taxation, which it is often argued that, in a practical way, you would be best to try and introduce it in the field of non-domestic rates, rather than trying to do it in domestic rates, in the first instance—we're certainly committed to research that will look at the practical issues that will have to be addressed, if that way of raising money were preferable to the system we have currently.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary.

Point of order—Joyce Watson.

Diolch, Llywydd. I want to raise a point of order regarding Gareth Bennett's disgraceful outpouring of homophobic rhetoric in this Chamber yesterday, while talking about—ironically—the debate on the Equality and Human Rights Commission's annual report. And he did talk about minority rights as rights belonging to one individual being denied to another, which undermines human rights. But he has caused outrage, and I've received phone calls and messages this morning from the transgender community. He has caused further misunderstanding, and according to that community, potentially promoted further hatred against those individuals.

So, I want to ask him to come to this Chamber, and to consider the words that he has spoken, and to apologise for them. And I want to ask UKIP to ensure that never again do we have to sit in here and listen to that sort of rhetoric, within this Chamber, which prides itself, actually, on equality. I feel that it's important that, as Assembly Commissioner for equality and people, I want to send a very clear message to the wider community that if they come here to work, or help in any way whatsoever, they will be welcome and they will be treated with absolute dignity and respect.

I want to thank Joyce Watson for raising that as a point of order. I've had the opportunity myself to relook at the contribution made yesterday by Gareth Bennett, and some of the comments were particularly hateful to the transgender community. This Chamber is not a platform to demean citizens of Wales, and everybody deserves our respect and our understanding.

You were informed that this point of order was to be made, Gareth Bennett, and I would like to give you the opportunity to withdraw your comments from yesterday, and to apologise to this Chamber and to those who have taken offence.

Thank you, Llywydd. There will be no apology. There will be no withdrawal. 

Further to that point of order, Llywydd, I'm concerned about your ruling today, because I also have read what Gareth Bennett said yesterday—I wasn't in the Chamber for the speech—and it seems to me that this is a point of argument and debate rather than a point of order. The remarks that Gareth made yesterday seem to be related to a proposed Bill in the House of Commons, the gender recognition Bill, which is going to be introduced, apparently, by the Government for the autumn of next year. If we cannot in this Chamber debate the matters that are contained in a Bill that is proposed to be introduced in the House of Commons, then I think that's a very serious diminution of the democratic rights of the Welsh people as represented by those that they elect to this place. Now, it may well be that what Members say in speeches can cause outrage in certain parts of the community, but that is what democratic debate often entails.

I would like you, if you will, to identify exactly what it was in Gareth's speech yesterday, which precise words, to which you take objection in terms of the Standing Orders of the Assembly. 

Thank you for that contribution. You will know that I did not intervene yesterday. I take the right of Assembly Members in this Chamber to make comments that aren't wholly appreciated by other Members very seriously. But, on careful reflection of those words uttered yesterday, I have no doubt in my own mind that they were particularly hateful to transgender people, in reference in particular to 'deviation from the norm'. I have made my ruling on this. I have asked the Member to apologise and to withdraw his comments. He has said that he will not do so. That Member will not be called in this Chamber in 2018 until he has done so.

So, we move on to the 90-second statements—

I'd like to raise another point of order— 

No, I'm taking no further points of order on this today—

Another point of order about Joyce Watson—

We are moving on to the next item on the agenda.

The next item is the 90-second statements. Mark Isherwood. 

Diolch, Llywydd. 

The curlew is special. It is one of our largest waders with a beautiful haunting call, but this bird species is in serious trouble across large parts of Britain. Between 1994 and 2016, the curlew population declined by 68 per cent in Wales. The UK regularly hosts up to one quarter of the global curlew breeding population and the curlew is now considered the most pressing bird conservation priority in the UK. In response, the RSPB has initiated a curlew trial management project to test whether a combined package of habitat management and predator control can successfully recover curlew populations on their breeding grounds. This involves six study areas in the UK, including the one in the north Wales uplands, which I visited last year. 

As well as being a species champion for the curlew, I also recently attended the curlew country presentation in Shropshire, a lowland project to bring curlews back to Shropshire and the Welsh Marches, where we've seen a 30 per cent decline in the last decade. This has also emphasised the need for predator control, where the fox and then badger are by far the biggest cause of egg failure.

They call for more and better monitoring of breeding curlews, use of electric fences to protect nests, support through agri-environment schemes for farmers on whose land curlews are nesting, and head-starting chicks in captivity prior to release into the wild.

I thank the Member. 

The next item, therefore, is the debate on the Climate Change, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee report: 'Branching out: a new ambition for woodland policies'. I call on the committee Chair, Mike Hedges.  

Thank you, Presiding Officer. I'm delighted to open today’s debate on the report from the Climate Change, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee on our inquiry into woodland policies in Wales. I want to thank the previous Chair of the committee, Mark Reckless, and former members of the committee, Vikki Howells, Siân Gwenllian and Huw Irranca-Davies, for the work they did on this report, most of which was carried out before I became Chair of the committee. 

Our report is based on expert opinion from stakeholders from industry and environmental groups. The committee also visited the Spirit of Llynfi Woodland in Maesteg, where they spoke to people where they spoke to people who are organising community participation in woodlands. I'm grateful to all those who took their time to contribute to this inquiry.

Overall, the inquiry found that stakeholders generally felt the policy direction of the Welsh Government’s strategy 'Woodlands for Wales' was appropriate.  However, they all called for it to be refreshed, urgently, in order to significantly increase planting rates.

We made 13 recommendations. I am pleased that the Welsh Government has accepted 12 of those recommendations either in full or in principle. However, the committee was disappointed with a subsequent exchange of correspondence with the Minister for the environment. The committee wrote to the Cabinet Secretary in early October to ask for clarification of the responses to several recommendations in advance of this debate. The committee wrote for a second time to emphasise the importance of receiving clarification of the responses in advance of this debate. The Minister said that she would respond fully to the issues raised during the debate.

Turning back to our report, the committee’s recommendations come under three broad themes: increasing planting and growing the commercial forestry sector; increasing access to and community benefits from woodlands; and taking full advantage of the environmental benefits of more trees.

On more planting, the need to significantly increase planting rates was the key priority for all our stakeholders. In 2010 the Welsh Government’s climate change strategy called for an average planting rate of 5,000 hectares every year. By 2015 the total of new planting had only reached 3,200 hectares. This enormous deficit led the industry body to tell us that woodland creation in Wales has been a catastrophic failure.

What are the barriers to planting? According to the commercial forestry sector, the greatest barrier to woodland planting was what they described as the overly rigorous enforcement of environmental impact assessment regulations. We were pleased that the Welsh Government and Natural Resources Wales recognised that this is a problem and we recommended that progress should be made as a matter of urgency.

Farmers told us they are deterred from planting woodland because the Glastir woodland schemes are too complex and prescriptive and the payments are low relative to payments received for agricultural land. We believe that there is an opportunity in future to reconsider the approach to payments, including payment for ecosystem services—such innovations could incentivise planting.

There are many positives: the Glastir woodland opportunities map, which shows areas most suited to new woodland creation, is a good starting point. It has the potential to be developed into a decision-making tool. If it can be aligned with the regulatory process and local authority planning, it could become an enabler of woodland creation on the ground. One example of this would be if regulatory barriers could be relaxed for areas identified by the map as areas most suitable for woodland creation. Something else that could perhaps be beneficial is when we have local development plans, they could actually identify land within the local development plan that would be suitable for the planting of forestry. While it is not a necessity in order to plant forestry there, it will identify, for people who wish to plant forestry, areas that have been deemed to be suitable, without having to go searching through a whole range of other pieces of information—all available from the Welsh Government. Keep it simple: look at one thing and find it and that'll make, I think, a big difference. So, the Glastir woodland opportunities map has tremendous opportunities.

Turning to the commercial sector, we heard about constraints brought about by low planting and restocking rates. We were greatly concerned by the impact of this on the future of Welsh sawmills and on rural communities. I think we all recognise that one of the weaknesses of the rural Welsh economy is that we do not get sufficient high-value processing out of our raw materials. We develop, both in agriculture and forestry, the raw materials, but the big money is made by the people who do the processing. Further along, it is made well outside Welsh rural communities and, in most cases, well outside Wales. The Welsh Government must actively support the commercial forestry sector in Wales to realise its full potential. We recommended that the Welsh Government should consider changing building regulations to promote the use of timber in construction. 

Social benefits is the second theme explored in the committee’s report. Woodlands have a significant role to play in regenerating former industrial areas. The committee saw this first-hand when they visited the Spirit of Llynfi Woodland in Maesteg. This project is a real inspiration: it shows what can happen when dedicated volunteers receive the support and funding from local and national decision makers to bring about a complete transformation of what was contaminated wasteland. We have an awful lot of contaminated wasteland in Wales, so these opportunities exist across a large part of the older industrial areas of Wales. They have also benefited from private sector funding from Ford. We want to build on this and recommend that the Welsh Government assesses the potential of developing a national forestry company to regenerate the south Wales Valleys. 

Trees and urban areas have substantial environmental, social and economic benefits. More needs to be done to increase canopy cover. We recommended that the Welsh Government should set out a plan to achieve at least 20 per cent tree cover by 2030. Unfortunately, this recommendation has been rejected, so I will be interested to hear the Minister’s alternative plan for increasing canopy cover in these areas.

Finally, on environmental benefits, the final theme is creating more woodlands. The benefits are obvious and should be the main driver of our push to plant more, given our statutory responsibility for sustainability. Trees can mitigate the effects of climate change, trapping carbon into useable timber. They also reduce the risk of flooding from excessive rain. This is why we recommended that the Welsh Government should incentivise planting upstream from flood-prone areas.

I think very few Assembly Members will not know of areas that used to be covered in trees and somebody decided to chop the trees down, either to build or to make the area look better or to get a better garden, and then they can't quite understand why there's flooding when there hasn't been flooding in the previous 100 years. Trees are wonderful at sucking up water and stopping flooding occurring. 

Following Brexit, we will be able to direct funding towards more sustainable activity by landowners, including planting more trees. This is why we recommended that future funding should be based on sustainable outcomes. The committee would like an update on the Cabinet Secretary’s discussions with NRW to develop a system for funding positive changes for wildlife, water quality, flood-risk reduction, health and well-being.

In conclusion, there are substantial benefits from woodlands, which we are not realising fully. We are not realising the environmental gains from mitigating climate change, preventing flooding, and increasing the availability of sustainable timber. We are also missing out on the social benefits of woodlands for the health and well-being of those who live near them. We are not ensuring that those benefits will be available for people living in urban areas, where trees are most needed and valued. We know that woodlands can regenerate our Valleys and that accessing them can provide opportunities for learning and recreation. But none of this is possible if we carry on the way we are. Woodland policy needs to be much more ambitious. 

Since 2010, just one tenth of the target for woodland creation has been met. The next iteration of the 'Woodlands for Wales' strategy needs to set out this radical shift in thinking that stakeholders are demanding. It cannot simply be an update on current policy that just takes into account recent legislative changes but must have challenging achievable targets.

Trees make a big difference to our society. Tree-lined roads look a lot better than non-tree-lined roads. Trees on hills above housing help stop any flooding, and trees in areas of urban deprivation can actually make the area look an awful lot better. I think that if there's one thing we can do without a huge amount of difficulty, it's just have more trees in Wales, and I hope the Minister is going to say that's exactly what she's going to do.

Can I just say that it was a pleasure to be involved in this report? I think it was a really important piece of work. We saw some excellent practice, but, in general, an area of public policy that needs to improve its game. I'd like to concentrate my remarks on the forestry sector, because I think it's often overlooked, its significance, at just over £0.5 billion every year.

Trees in general—many of them in the forestry sector, rather than scattered woodlands or urban woodlands or whatever—absorb an awful lot of carbon pollution. That's again a great benefit, as well as the commercial one, and then, in terms of habitats for thousands of different species of plants and animals, especially when forestry is designed to allow occupation by a wide range of species, it can have many, many benefits. It's also good for flood management when we see afforestation upstream.

The recreation and tourism that forestry and woodlands provide is something that we've already seen grow in use, and there is more potential still. Over 10,000 jobs in Wales are in forestry, it's an essential part of the rural economy, and it also offers a feasible way for many farmers to diversify. So, I think those are some of the clear benefits and they should be taken further.

So, it is rather disappointing, as the Chair alluded to, that, since 2010, Wales has managed to plant just one tenth of its target of 35,000 hectares. This performance is well below, say, what's happened in Scotland. I think, overall in the UK, we should be planting more, but it is an area, really, when you compare us to the European average, where we are well below. So, I would urge the Government to look at its targets and see how they can be met more effectively, or, at least, we start to see the rate pick up, so that at some time in the current framework of 2010 to 2030 we really will be able to say we might hit 100,000 hectares.

Can I look at a couple of the other recommendations? I have to say, Llywydd, that I have noticed in the Assembly that the Government is increasingly accepting recommendations in principle. It can be very difficult for a committee to get down to the root—no pun intended—of what this qualification means. The Welsh Government has not entered into vigorous correspondence with the committee on what 'in principle' meant, and has just said that they'll outline some of the reasons in today's debate. I'm glad that they're doing it in a public forum, but we've been after these answers for a couple of months, so I am concerned by this, as I am by the general principle of, instead of accepting or rejecting, having this sort of middle stream of intense ambiguity.

I'm particularly worried also by the rejection outright of recommendation 4, but at least that allows us to engage and discuss and try to persuade the Government to change its mind. But, anyway, this is the recommendation of a 20 per cent urban tree canopy—again, our Chair referred to this. This is the target internationally recognised for establishing urban forests—that 20 per cent of your urban land has canopy. I really think that that's an aspiration that we should have for our urban areas, or certainly most of them, in Wales. We weren't given terribly convincing reasons, in my view, by the Government why this shouldn't happen. They said, 'Well, it would undermine local decision making'—well, crikey, if that's the test they're going to apply throughout the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015, I'm afraid we're not going to see the sort of progress that most people are looking for. Again, I do hope that they will examine that. I should say, Llywydd, that urban tree canopy in Wales is falling; we're currently at 16.3 per cent, so I do think that it's time that we raised our level and adopted the 20 per cent.

I was going to talk about the Glastir dimension for woodland schemes; I think the Chair has covered that. Can I just say in conclusion, Llywydd, that, in terms of woodland policy, again I think we need to be more ambitious? Wales is a natural area for temperate rainforest. We could see more planting and encouraging this sector to grow. It's really good for local communities, often, to take ownership or have schemes. I think many of us who visited Maesteg and saw the Spirit of Llynfi Woodland were really, really inspired, and I urge the Government to follow that example and raise its sights.

I'm very pleased to contribute to this debate and to have been part of bringing together the report as well. We're sometime accused of making policy on the hoof—we actually made policy on the foot, walking the woodlands of Wales, in this regard, and I think we were all better for it. It was a very good demonstration of what forestry can do for Wales—it's good for our health, good for the environment and good for the social and economic opportunities it brings as well. It has real benefits in terms of carbon capture or carbon storage, flood alleviation, reduction of air pollution, particularly in urban areas, and real recreation and health opportunities and for economic growth.

This was brought home to me, certainly, in the inquiry, but also in a visit to James Davies Limited in Cenarth, which is a wood-processing sawmill in the Teifi valley, which I was very pleased to revisit, as it happens to be, but they've made a significant investment since I was last there, and to see that this is a really thriving part of rural development in Wales as well. So, there are real opportunities for woodland development in Wales, and, of course, as Natural Resources Wales, which is part of the Welsh Government woodland estate managed by Natural Resources Wales, is 40 per cent of all woodland in Wales, then I think Welsh Government is in a position to show very clear leadership. 

I want to share David Melding's disappointment regarding the way that committee reports are being replied to by Government increasingly in this 'accept in principle' manner. And on this occasion as a committee we said, 'Well, let's find out what "in principle" means then', and we were told, 'Well, wait and see', in effect. I think we need—. You know, it would be more honest to say, 'We don't accept this recommendation', and then to have a proper debate about those things.  

Will you give way? 

Yes, if it's a—. 

Just to help you on this point, the Public Accounts Committee has recently written to the Permanent Secretary on this very point, asking for an intellectual honesty from the Government—when they genuinely don't agree with the point, to say so and give the reasons why. And we've had a letter back this week from the Permanent Secretary saying that the Government will do that, so we need to keep an eye on that.   

I would welcome that because I think it's more honest and allows us to perhaps have that dialogue and sometimes creative tension that would emerge in a different way forward perhaps, but simply washing us in whitewash, if you like, or a bit of wool pulled over our eyes that we are being supported when we're not, I think is less beneficial. So, let's watch that one. 

I think one of the things that we have to recognise in Wales is that we are under-wooded, if I can put it that way. We have huge opportunities for more woodland development, and we have missed our targets, as has already been mentioned, for quite some time now. But I think one of the things that really surprised me during this inquiry was the strong feeling and response from investors that Wales was closed for woodland development, particularly on the commercial side. I didn't want us to give that message and I didn't think we were giving that message, to be honest, but in practice that's what people were saying, and that's why we make the recommendation in the committee that perhaps within a mapping system—by which, of course, you map for environmental sensitivities—you can then have a much stronger presumption in favour of development. And I wonder whether a wider adaptation of the UK wood assurance scheme would give some environmental assurances in that and allow for commercial development—the sort of mixed commercial development that we see these days—to go ahead. 

Glastir has got very little money in it, as I'm sure any Minister would say, but it's also plagued at the moment by some delays. Only this morning I was contacted by Hugh Wheeldon & Co, a wood processing company in Carmarthenshire, saying they've had several Glastir applications that they think have to now be withdrawn because of the severe delays in that process. So, I think, when we go into the details of this, we see that the Government is, through its operations, also not realising the real benefits for woodland development in Wales. 

I think we have to really work hard, obviously, on the Government around the 20 per cent for urban canopy; I think that will be hugely beneficial for our well-being and also for mitigating climate change, because some of our towns and cities—hard to believe today, I know, but some of our towns and cities can get very hot and tiresome in the summer these days, and tree cover is very beneficial for our citizens. 

And the final thing that I think we need to look at is what would be the Government's ongoing proposals for land management. We're leaving the European Union, the common agricultural policy is coming to an end, forestry hasn't traditionally been supported in that manner, but now if we're taking a more coherent and cohesive view of what land management should be, and what the benefits should be, both in commercial and environmental terms, then we can see perhaps opportunities here for support for woodland development, woodland management, protection of ancient woodlands, certainly, but also I am clearly of the view that there are parts of Wales that will see land use change now. There are parts of Wales that are marginal sheepland or marginal ffridd that could come back into woodland; they were cleared probably at the end of the ice age, and maybe they'll come back again. We will see changes in our landscape as a result of leaving the European Union. I would want those to be beneficial changes that help our economy and help our environment more widely, and I think woodland development is one of the clear things that we can support in that regard.  

Can I echo some of the comments with regard to urban conurbation that have been made by the Members here? If you stand on a hill overlooking Cwmbran and Newport, then the actual conurbation itself is often obscured by tree cover, and it would be great to see that echoed in other cities throughout Wales. 

Woodlands are a unique environmental and commercial asset, so given the environment of targets and Acts brought forward by the Welsh Government over the last decade, it is quite astounding how it has neglected this vital national resource. I'm afraid it is yet another example of the Welsh Government talking a good talk and yet failing to meet the agendas and targets it itself sets.

Since its 'Woodlands for Wales' strategy was published in 2001, which amongst other things was to encourage the planting of trees in a sustainable and expanding forestry industry, we have actually lost 14,000 hectares of woodland and have a shortfall running at 31,000 planted hectares. Under its new strategy, the Welsh Government has set a target of just 2,000 hectares of new planting for the next five years. This means it will take all of 50 years to achieve its once-stated goal of 100,000 hectares of new woodland—hardly a substantial commitment to the forestry industry.

It seems incredible that this resource, which has the potential to give such diverse benefits as economic growth, reduction of imports, carbon reduction, flood prevention, not to mention health and tourist promotion, has been so neglected by this Government for so long. Surely it is time for the Welsh Government to step up to the plate and not only implement the recommendations of the report, but commit to a truly ambitious strategy to greatly expand this industry and let Wales be a world leader in embracing this vital, natural asset. Notwithstanding the above comments, I can confirm that UKIP will be supporting this report. 

As this important piece of work from the climate change committee reminds us, 15 per cent of Wales is covered by forestry. Our woodlands are an important ecosystem; a vital, environmental tool, an opportunity for healthy leisure and recreation and a valuable, economic resource. How we manage them is crucial to the sort of Wales we want to create.

I welcomed the opportunity to contribute to the early part of this inquiry and commend the committee and their clerks on a really useful report. I intend to address the bulk of my comments today to recommendation 5 on the way in which woodlands can serve us as an effective tool for regeneration and for engaging with local communities. I think this is key. It also echoes an important strand of the Valleys taskforce work, with their priority focus on the development of the Valleys landscape park. As the Welsh Government notes in its response to the committee's recommendation, this landscape park will help the communities in the south Wales Valleys to work with the public sector to maximise sustainable, local benefits from their area's natural resources. Woodland is a key strand of this, with opportunities for community development, the creation of green infrastructure jobs and locally sourced timber being used for modern housing. 

On my visit to Garwnant when I sat on the committee, I heard about the ways in which the NRW forestry there offers economic and community benefits. One of the most exciting developments I was told about were the plans to develop the first Welsh Forest Holidays facility on the site. This is a really good example of sympathetically diversifying the activity at the site, boosting its earning potential and local economic contribution. The plans involve a £5 million investment in the site that wouldn't require public subsidy, creating approximately 40 jobs and new opportunities for local businesses. Getting more community involvement in our forests could also boost health and well-being. I want to use just two stats to show why we need to do this. In my constituency of Cynon Valley, over one in four children is affected by childhood obesity. In my local health board area of Cwm Taf, one in six people have mental health challenges. Both of these statistics are above average but both could be reduced by encouraging people into the woodland found almost on their doorsteps. In particular, there are opportunities in the context of outdoor education and I'm glad that this is explicitly mentioned in the recommendation.

Members may recall my short debate from June last year on this theme. Dare Valley Country Park in my constituency is home to a nature-based parent and toddler group that has learnt from the global Skogsmulle movement. Children who've benefited from this outdoor education were found to be able to concentrate twice as well as their peers and have better motor skills and more advanced well-being. Benefits are also recognised by the elements of outdoor learning embedded in the national curriculum, but I do think we are missing a trick if we don't take steps to further integrate this. Another example I'd like to commend is the Ynysybwl Regeneration Partnership, who have secured nearly £1.3 million from the Big Lottery for a seven-year community project. Community forestry plays a large role in their vision. As part of this, £200,000 will be allocated for YRP to build facilities and a visitor centre at Daerwynno outdoor pursuits centre, and £65,000 will also be used to develop trails and routes through the local forestry.

In the time remaining to me, I just want to make a few reflections on a few of the other recommendations. Recommendation 1 is really important: it is not good that we lag so far behind other countries in terms of planting rates. I think this links to recommendation 9, with the economic benefits we could gain from boosting timber production. I'm thinking of the housing opportunities on display at Pentre Solar in Pembrokeshire for example. Recommendations 3 and 8 are also really important. Afforestation can reduce the risk of flooding, and the National Trust announced earlier this year how they were developing forest in the Lake district in response to flooding there. Such a programme could also support farmers in marginal areas, in upland areas that are difficult to farm productively. So, it's essential that we look at how support can be tailored to encourage them to do just that. Finally, on recommendation 4, I share the disappointment that the Welsh Government has rejected this recommendation, especially in light of our discussions on air pollution last week. A scientific study from EarthSense Systems looked at how pollution could be reduced on Oxford Street in London, and concluded that the planting of trees was effective at reducing pollutant levels and did so up to 100 times cheaper than other strategies.

Thank you. Mark Isherwood.

Sorry, my hearing device is trapped—I'm being strangled here.

Oh—

I'll do it without.

The first recommendation in this committee report states:

'The Welsh Government must, as a matter of urgency, refresh its woodland strategy with the aim of significantly increasing planting rates.'

And its final recommendation states:

'the Welsh Government must ensure that future funding should be based on sustainable outcomes.'

However, Confor, the Confederation of Forest Industries, state that, although forests in Wales are managed to the UK forestry standard, which defines sustainable forest management as the basis for the 'Woodlands for Wales' strategy, planting trees is often viewed negatively, Government agencies, non-Government agencies and society oppose land-use change, leading to a presumption against woodland creation and the loss of the benefits of modern mixed forestry for people and the environment.

They therefore call for an acceptance of land-use change at a significant scale, a Government willing to promote forestry, and a national campaign for Welsh forestry and timber, stating that Wales will benefit because modern forestry operates to a world-leading sustainability standard that leaves other sectors far behind and produces a natural, versatile and infinitely renewable material, creating vibrant places for recreation and biodiversity in the process. But they also state that, in addition to producing timber, forest must be designed to mitigate flooding and conserve important species and habitat.

As I stated in my 90-second statement earlier, the curlew is special. It's one of our largest waders with a beautiful, haunting call, but this bird species is in serious trouble across large parts of Britain. Between 1994 and 2016, the curlew population declined by 68 per cent in Wales. As Wales species champion for the curlew, a bird that has historically been hugely affected by inappropriately located forestry plantations in the uplands, I'm concerned to ensure that, while woodland expansion in Wales has the potential to make a significant contribution to securing resilient woodland ecosystems, it must be appropriately located. Inappropriate woodland expansion has been identified as a key threat to upland habitats and the species found there. This includes curlew, which require large areas of open habitat on which to nest. Locating new woodlands on or adjacent to sensitive upland areas causes loss of habitat and changes in vegetation, thus reducing the amount of suitable breeding sites available for these ground-nesting birds.

As the RSPB states, appropriately located and well-designed woodland expansion has the potential to make a significant contribution to restoring and enhancing woodland biodiversity in Wales. Focusing woodland expansion on buffering and connecting existing woodland will improve the resilience of woodland ecosystems, and new woodland must be designed to deliver the full package of species requirements—places to breed, food sources for young and adults during breeding and winter food for adults. If we're to deliver genuine biodiversity benefits as well as increasing the area of certified woodland, we need appropriate monitoring to ensure that certified woodland is delivering for priority species and habitats. Failure to monitor the impacts risks woodland creation negatively impacting on both habitats and species.

To ensure woodland expansion in Wales delivers the full possible range of benefits whilst limiting the potential negative effects, the data used to inform woodland expansion must be fit for purpose. If we're to ensure that woodland expansion avoids negative impacts on species of open habitats, the underlying data must be updated and regularly reviewed, and must cover the full range of species impacted. Forest design plans must be based around delivery of desired objectives, and wherever possible, designed to deliver the maximum benefit. Timber production plans should aim to deliver a range of benefits including biodiversity, water flow and quality improvements, and recreation opportunities alongside sustainable timber production.

In recent years, woodland expansion in Wales has been restricted to the creation of numerous small woodlands, many located on farms, through both Glastir woodland creation and the Glastir small grants scheme. Many of these woodlands have involved the planting of the last remaining areas of semi-natural habitat within the landscape, and the loss of these last refuges is likely to have a significant impact on farm wildlife. Ensuring the impacts of woodland expansion are fully understood will be vital to avoiding future problems, and this can only be achieved through appropriate monitoring. Learning the lessons of poor historical forestry practice is vital. If we are to secure our natural resources for future generations, ensuring woodland expansion avoids negatively impacting on the species and habitats that underpin our natural resources will be critical.

The simple act of planting trees can have many spin-off benefits, from tourism to a nascent woodland economy, from flood management to thriving wildlife, from improved health and well-being to house building and jobs. Many of us do not realise the positive impact that forests and woodlands in Wales can have on our lives. As a member of the Climate Change, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee, I would like to stress the social benefits of woodland—the second main theme explored in the 'Branching out' report.

As our Chair, Mike Hedges said, on our visit to the fantastic Spirit of Llynfi woodland in Maesteg we all saw for ourselves just how beneficial woodlands can be to the local community. Natural Resources Wales is working with the communities in the upper Llynfi valley to restore the former Coegnant colliery and Maesteg washery sites into community woodland. Local residents, community groups and schools have all been involved, from tree planting, community orchards, cycling tracks and designing dog trails. On our visit to Maesteg, one of the contributors suggested that we needed to make woodlands cool. Engaging with young people and encouraging them to visit a woodland with family or through school can ignite a lifelong love of the outdoors. As well as incorporating woodland education into our schools, as the report suggests, it would be good to explore ways that the Welsh baccalaureate could work with community woodland groups in the future.

We all know that we don't take enough advantage of the things on our doorstep, but having access to green spaces and woodland, particularly in urban areas, is so beneficial to the health and well-being of people, and I agree with other Members on the importance of increasing our canopy cover, particularly in those urban areas. The potential benefits to our communities are significant. On discussing the issue with representatives of the Woodland Trust on my visit to Wentwood forest, they told me of their Wandering in the Woods project. This project took place in Essex, East Sussex and Wiltshire and looked to reconnect people living with dementia in care homes with nature and, in particular, with woodlands. The project showed that there were potentially very significant physical, emotional and social benefits to people living with dementia and their carers from visiting woodlands, and I'd urge the Cabinet Secretary to look at that project.

In my own constituency of Newport West, the Bassaleg Community Woodland Trust are working hard to safeguard their local natural woodland environment. The dedicated group of volunteers aim to create a woodland park that is accessible, well managed and attractive for all to enjoy. Sharing information and good practice around Wales is crucial. Llais y Goedwig supports all community groups across Wales. Bringing these groups together and sharing practical advice is an important way to help volunteers come together to look after and manage community woodlands.

I welcome the Welsh Government's intention to increase funding for small community woodland groups across the country. Community woodlands are valuable spaces that enable visitors to make the most of the outdoors and contribute to the health and well-being of local residents. We must strive to support local community woodland groups, making it easier for people to manage and preserve woodlands for the benefit and enjoyment of future generations.

Thank you. Can I call on the Minister for Environment, Hannah Blythyn?

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I welcome today's debate as an opportunity to discuss what, it seems, are shared ambitions for the woodlands of Wales. The Welsh Government has accepted all but one of the recommendations, and I'm making sure that we are starting to act on them. The committee chair has written to me, asking for some clarification on the Government's response, but I felt it would be useful to hear what Members have said in this debate before responding to the letter and the work of the committee. And of course I'd welcome ongoing dialogue on this issue.

I'd like to thank the committee for a report that has been helpful and has well-informed recommendations. It has helped focus my thinking and firm up my view that improving and expanding the woodlands of Wales would be amongst my top priorities as environment Minister. To that end, one of my very first meetings as Minister was with the Confederation of Forest Industries. Stakeholders were clear in this meeting that we do need to maximise the opportunities provided by Brexit for the forestry sector, and consider the role forestry and foresters can play in our future land management approach.

Land use change is inevitable, and I think we must use all of our levers, in terms of policy, money and regulation, to make sure that these changes are for the better. We want to use our land to deliver additional public goods, and this is vital if we are to meet our commitment to resilient ecosystems and decarbonisation in the Environment (Wales) Act 2016. I will now seek to address a number of the key issues raised by the committee in their report, in correspondence and during today's debate—including new planting, the resilience of woodlands, timber supply, the role of communities and decarbonisation. 

Clearly, we need to begin with new planting, and the committee asked what specifically we should do differently. I'm acutely aware that not enough trees are being planted. Wales needs a mix of woodlands. Our forests should be a combination of large scale and small scale, containing conifer and broad-leaf species, and a mix of commercial forestry and peaceful, biodiverse, natural environments. But I recognise that conflict can exist between these aims, and I am keen to work with stakeholders to understand the issues and find a means to resolve them. This is likely to involve taking a place-based approach, because not every type of woodland is right for every part of Wales, and woodland creation cannot just be delivered through Glastir or Government alone. Creation of woodland at scale requires co-operation, collaboration, involvement of innovation and involvement of a range of interested parties. This is why we have established a co-operative forest planning scheme to support strategic approaches driven by stakeholders to find the right places to plant new woodland and what to plant there. I acknowledge that there will be challenges, but the first stage of the co-operation has begun, and I encourage participants to continue in these efforts.

I also want to explore the role of regulation as a barrier. We have asked NRW to look carefully at the way they work so that they can clear away complexity and identify opportunities for new woodland planting. I was really interested in the ideas put forward by the committee, including the possibility of a presumption in favour of approval for woodland in certain areas. I will also ensure we strengthen the guidance on the woodland opportunities map, building on feedback from users about the places where woodland creation can do the most good. We must also reflect on the interaction between forestry and our systems of agricultural support. We have paid over £2 million through Glastir for woodland creation to date. Farmers who plant trees get annual payments and continue to receive base payment for some 12 years after planting, but we are constantly looking for new ways to improve the application process for Glastir, and we will build on the lessons in the design of future support mechanisms. Brexit brings challenges for Wales across the piece, but also brings an opportunity to redesign support systems to remove biases against forestry. We can clearly do more, and I intend to visit Scotland in the new year to learn more from the relative success they had in creating new woodland there. 

If we now look to tree health and resilience, the woodland strategy advocates the diversification of woodlands through improved resilience. The lesson of the phytophthora ramorum outbreak in larch and of ash dieback is that we cannot afford to rely on just a few tree species. We want our woodlands to be more diverse and resilient, and there is a wealth of advice and training available to woodland owners from Forest Research, NRW and through Farming Connect. But we also make sure that we are quick to restore woodlands when they have been damaged, and that we support the management of diseased woodlands through the Glastir woodland restoration scheme.

Turning to timber production, we should also take steps to make existing woodland more productive. An important part of this can be bringing unmanaged woodlands into management, increasing the production of useable timber and supporting the development of local businesses. I'm keen to work with my Cabinet colleagues and stakeholders to build a sustainable supply chain for timber and increase demand for Welsh wood products and biomass, enabling Welsh companies to trade freely, get best value for their green products and support green jobs.

We have taken steps to promote timber through the innovative housing programme and a new cross-Welsh Government group to study supply chains. As part of this, I want to explore the case for a timber-first principle for Welsh housing and other construction. And I've already spoken to the Minister for housing about this, and there will be a new ministerial group to take such things forward.

Beyond economics, we must not forget about the value that communities can draw from our woodlands. Our communities should have the chance to be involved in the management of their local woodlands. I've heard some particularly good examples today from my colleagues Vikki Howells and Jayne Bryant, and I'd love to hear more about them, to see how we can share that best practice as part of our strategy going forward. Over the past few years we've supported Llais y Goedwig, a network of community woodland groups across Wales that helps communities engage with woodland management.

The Welsh Government declined the committee's recommendation to impose a single target for urban tree planting across all local authorities. Instead, we want to see local targets reformed by an expansion in the use of the i-Tree eco-tool for monitoring urban trees and woodlands, ensuring that the right solutions happen in the right places.

Finally, forestry can also play an important role in delivering our decarbonisation aims. In 2015 the forestry sector removed around 1 per cent of Welsh emissions, acting as a carbon sink. Increasing stores of carbon in woodland gives us a nature-based solution that reduces emissions, prevents flooding, improves air quality and provides us with a good-quality—

Will the Minister give way? Just on the point about decarbonisation, I think we also need to bear in mind that we import a significant amount of timber. I think 80 per cent of the timber we use is actually imported, and there's a huge way in which we can meet our objectives under the future generations Act by growing more of our own timber here and using that—I welcome what you said about housing, for example—in that way. We would have a double decarbonisation going on then, because we would be reducing travel for imports and we would also, of course, using a carbon-friendly way of creating our own timber.

Yes, absolutely. The Member makes a very good point there.

We want to build on initiatives like the woodland carbon code, where those who create new woodland are paid for carbon sequestration, and in addition I'm encouraged to see the early development of the peatland code, which supports these valuable ecosystems.

In concluding, I believe that these could be exciting times for forestry in Wales. Amid the many serious challenges of Brexit, this industry has the potential to turn challenges into opportunities, and I think that today's debate shows that there is a strong consensus for action on this. I note what Members have been saying across the floor in terms of the 'accept in principle' response, but I'd like to place on record today that there is no ambiguity in my commitment to taking this issue forward. It will be one of my top priorities as Minister for the environment.

I am genuinely grateful for the committee's 'tree-mendous' work on this report. [Interruption.] It is Christmas, come on. [Laughter.] I couldn't resist. [Interruption.] I think I should move on quickly.

The Welsh Government has accepted all but one of the committee's recommendations, and now we're fully engaged in ensuring that our aspirations grow into action, taking root to deliver the right results. Diolch yn fawr.

Thank you. Can I call on Mike Hedges to reply to the debate?

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. First of all, can I thank David Melding, Simon Thomas, David Rowlands, Vikki Howells, Jayne Bryant, Mark Isherwood and the Minister for taking part in this debate, and I think, most importantly, for the positive and consensual way we've all taken it forward? I think I could sit down now and say, 'Well, we're all in agreement, aren't we?' But there are a number of things that I think need saying. I think the first one is: I have no problem with local targets, but is somebody going to count up all  the local targets and publish what those local targets are? Are we then going to find out how people are doing against those local targets? I've no problem with local targets, but if adding up all the local targets comes to 2,000 trees, we've got something wrong. And I think that if it comes to more than we were expecting, then we're moving very much in the right direction, but we also need to make sure that people are meeting those targets. Targets are wonderful things, but if you have lots of local targets around, then somebody needs to co-ordinate it, and I would hope the Minister would report back to our committee on an annual basis—the Climate Change, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee on an annual basis—on how they're doing against those targets.

Moving on. Most people have said very similar things, which is hardly surprising. The committee was in total agreement. There are things like the economic benefits of it, the environmental benefits of it, the wider range of species, and the number of jobs created. I think Vikki Howells highlighted very important work that was done in her area that didn't actually need any Government money either, which is abnormal—every time somebody has got a project they want to know how much they're going to get in either sponsorship or in Government money to do it. I think there are means of doing this that can be economically viable and people can make money out of it.

People talked about a whole range of very good projects. I think one of the things that saddens most of us is that these are sort of isolated projects around Wales. There's the Llynfi project, which I know Huw Irranca-Davies is very proud of, what's going on in Bassaleg, and what's going on in the Cynon valley, but what we should be talking about is what's going on in every town, every city and every valley. It's not just, 'We'll find some good practices.' When people used to visit North Korea, they were taken to see this one area, which was their area to show visitors. We don't want that, do we? We only want to see whether it's working everywhere, so that you can take your pick in terms of where in Wales you go and you will see forestry growing.

It's hugely economic. Natural Resources Wales complain about not having money—or they complain to the committee about not having money. Well, they have major forestry; they should be making money on their timber. Commercial developers are making substantial sums on their timber. We should be looking for them as well to be showing a lead on this.

Mark Isherwood talks about increasing planting rates and sustainable outcomes, but I think on the lack of general support for forestry, what he says there, is absolutely right. We don't talk about forestry here very often. Compare the amount of times we've talked about forestry in here with the amount of times we've talked about agriculture. I think that forestry is losing very dramatically against that.

We want sustainable outcomes, but I think that, really, there are huge benefits to trees. I mean, they benefit the environment. We talk about the problems we've got with air quality. Well, plant some trees. We talk about the problems we've got with flooding. Plant some trees. We talk about the problems we have with urban areas looking unpleasant. Plant some trees. We talk about dereliction in some of our older communities. I know that people use the words 'Valleys communities', well, can I welcome them to areas like Swansea East, for example, which may not be considered a Valleys community, but it has areas of economic deprivation and has one of the largest tree planting schemes in Europe taking place in it, to reclaim the lower Swansea valley? Kilvey Hill was covered in trees. This can be done. It's been done before.

It really is important that we work on ensuring that we increase the amount of coverage that we have of trees, that we work on ensuring that forestry is seen as an important part of the Welsh economy, that it is seen as an important area. If anywhere else was generating 10,000 jobs, we'd be talking about it as a major employer and how important it was. There are 10,000 jobs in forestry, but because they're not all in one factory—. If somebody created a factory with 10,000 jobs, we'd have a list of people in here rushing down—Ministers, opposition spokespeople—to go to visit it and say, 'Isn't it wonderful that this place is creating 10,000 jobs?' But because they're distributed all around Wales, then we're perhaps less inclined to consider it. But many of them are in areas that have high unemployment and often the employment they have is very low-paid. So, forestry makes a big difference to those areas. 

I just really want to say that I think we're all on the same side. I think the Minister has responded very positively and I'll just end by repeating what I said earlier: can we have a report to the committee, or to the Chamber here, on an annual basis on how we're doing against those local targets? Because I think that really is something that very many of us want to see. Local targets are fine, but can we have them added up and given to us? Thank you.

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

We move on to the Member debate under Standing Order 11.21, which is on public transport network, and I call on Lee Waters to move the motion—Lee.

Diolch, Llywydd. Yesterday, the Cabinet Secretary told the Assembly that demand for public transport is predicted to grow by 150 per cent in the next 13 years. If that’s correct, then it's vital that we make the investment now to ensure that there's an attractive alternative to car use in place. 

Evidence from the most successful cities around the world, where public transport is thriving, is that people will use buses and trains if they are easy to use. Passengers need to be able to turn up and go. But, in many of the communities I represent, people’s experience of public transport is very different. They turn up, and it’s gone. We’ve got bus services like the L1 from Morfa to Llanelli, which stop at 4 p.m. If you live in Kidwelly or Trimsaran, there are just three bus services a day to Llanelli, and the last bus from Tumble leaves at 6.30 p.m. There are just four trains a day from Bynea to Swansea, and, if instead you take the number 16 bus, it will take nearly two hours—a trip you can make by car in 30 minutes. 

My constituents have been telling me that, when they do take public transport, it often turns up late, the heating will have packed up or buses will only accept exact change. I accept that may not be most people's experience, but anecdotal evidence like this is commonly cited by people who drive as a reason for not using public transport. And, if they can be persuaded to give it a try, it only takes a couple of bad experiences to put them off for good.

There is cross-party support to build metro systems. Our motion today welcomes the commitment to taking forward the Cardiff and the Valleys metro, the pledge to develop one in north-east Wales, and for a study of one for the Swansea bay city region. I am holding a meeting with businesses in Llanelly House on Friday to build support for the metro in my region and to get ideas of how to shape it to make things better for the communities I represent. We quickly need detailed blueprints now for all three metro projects, and for these to be ambitious—not just good services for the main towns and cities, but to reach out and link in outlying communities. It's crucial too that we design the metro with the whole journey in mind, door to door. So, as well as buses and trains, we need to think about how this links with walking and cycling for the journeys to and from stations and to design them in. Otherwise, we could end up blowing a huge pile of money on a series of massive car parks at each station. 

So—so far, so familiar. But the purpose of today’s debate, I hope, is for us to look at metros differently, to look beyond their transport benefits to their wider regeneration benefits too. By improving transport connections to key settlements, we are opening up the potential for bringing other benefits to those areas as well. When a service improves, or a new station is built, the value of nearby land tends to increase as it becomes a more attractive place to build. Businesses are drawn in, not just to the individual metro station, but to the large urban centres that become within easy reach of the end of the line, increasing their talent pool exponentially. And it helps the unemployed and the under-employed too by making jobs more accessible regardless of whether they have a car. We know that those on the lowest incomes can spend a quarter of their income on running a car to get access to work. Affordable public transport can help remove that barrier to employment.

These potential benefits, Dirprwy Lywydd, are well established, but we've misread this potential as being inevitable. With these new metro systems, as well as getting the mechanics right, we need to make sure that, from the outset, we build in the additional levers that are needed to ensure that, as we upgrade the transport system, we lock in the wider benefits that this new investment will create. For people to take advantage of the new jobs that will be accessible to them, not only do we need to ensure they have the transport means to access these new jobs, but they have the qualifications too. This mustn’t be a broad-brush approach, but a targeted one. Can I ask the Cabinet Secretary: where is the analysis of what new jobs will be accessible and of which specific new employers might be attracted to these communities as a result of a new metro station? It’s only with this analysis that we can see where the skills gaps are and how the existing population can be supported to meet those skills gaps so that we aren’t simply importing talent, we’re developing it.

On land prices, if we are to prevent profits falling only to private landlords and homeowners, Transport for Wales must have the power to act as a development corporation, with the ability to capitalise on rising land values in areas close to metro stations so that they can lever in further funding to expand the metro network. And, in terms of attracting new businesses, what measures are in place to ensure new businesses increase the social value, not just the shareholder value? Will the appearance of a new Tesco Metro, for example, put existing local businesses at risk? Could alternative approaches boost, rather than undermine, the existing foundational economies? All of this needs to considered and designed in.

The Welsh Government needs to make sure that Transport for Wales has all of the tools and the direction to design metro systems that don’t just improve public transport but change the life chances of the people in the areas we represent. This is not just a project for engineers to play with buses and trains, and Ministers must make sure the different portfolios come together to capture this opportunity. Diolch.

Thank you very much. Nick Ramsay.

Diolch, Deputy Presiding Officer. It's a pleasure to subscribe to and to contribute to this debate this afternoon. The key tenet of this debate, as Lee Waters has alluded to, recognises the importance of a modern public transport network to relieve pressure on our road network. I don't think this is controversial. Well, it certainly shouldn't be. It seems common sense, but how often over recent decades has the eye been taken off the transport ball? This has been a long-standing problem, not just with one Government but many Governments over many years and many decades.

It stands to reason that if we can get more people on buses and trains—and trams, indeed—there'll be more space on our roads for motorists who really do need to use them. Of course, at the same time, the development of driverless cars, which we discussed in this Chamber recently, should further increase road capacity as computer technology reduces the stopping distances needed on our roads, and so we can increase the capacity there, but that's for another debate.

I would like to stress that I don't see this as being about penalising the motorist, and I think there will be journeys where the car has been king and will be king, particularly in rural areas, where it's always difficult to plug some of those gaps. But, quite simply, not enough has been done to support public transport over the years and decades following the second world war up to the present day. So, we warmly welcome plans to develop a south Wales metro, which is in the motion—the first phase, at any rate—and also the north Wales metro, which has also been mentioned in the phrasing of the motion. But we need to move on from the concept to shovel-ready projects, and to get on with the job.

Clearly, parts of the metro map will be easier to deliver than others—a tram link, often talked about, from Cardiff city centre to Cardiff bay, for instance, perhaps the reinstatement of other tram lines across the capital, and making use of the existing Valleys lines, because the infrastructure is already there. Trams are great, of course, because they can run on rail and road and they are completely clean in terms of the urban emissions that aren't released, unlike buses and other transport. 

Of course, where we really need better infrastructure is in the rural areas I mentioned earlier, where there is currently a very patchy public transport service. We know full well just how expensive reinstating that rail infrastructure can be—far pricier in the short term than bus services. I know that some work has been done over the years in terms of reinstating the Wye valley line in my area from Chepstow to Monmouth, but it would prove prohibitively expensive, as would some other rail schemes.

I often jest that in 1950 you could travel from my village of Raglan to Cardiff by train with ease—how we long for those days. We talk about progress—in some ways, it doesn't seem that we have progressed. Sixty years on, that service is not there, and it was much easier to do. Today, in my constituency, it's actually very easy to commute to Cardiff in the morning from Monmouth by bus and rail, but the problem, as Lee Waters said, is actually getting back—that's not so straightforward. I think the last bus from Newport is at around 5.30 p.m., maybe a little bit after that, and at about the same time in Abergavenny. So, you're then stuck; it doesn't give you sufficient time to get from your place of work to Cardiff Queen Street, to Cardiff Central, to Newport in time for the connection, so you're then reliant on cabs, hitch-hiking or lifts from friends, so that simply isn't good enough.

Cabinet Secretary, these problems need to be ironed out to make public transport the viable option that we all want it to be. That's not to say that we haven't seen some positive developments over the last few years, with some new stations and others on the horizon—a new station promised at Magor. I've previously raised the possibility with you of a hub at the Celtic Manor next to the proposed conference centre, and the more I think about this the more I think it is a solution to a number of our problems in south-east Wales at least. I know that you're amenable to this. It would be a matter then of getting passengers from Newport to the hub and then worrying about the second phase of their journey from the hub on to rural areas and beyond after that. So, it would potentially break down the current barriers that are there. 

And, of course, it's not just about the transport—ticketing is all-important as well, and the holy grail of integrated, seamless ticketing, a great idea in practice but a devilishly difficult thing to achieve, as Professor Stuart Cole once memorably said when we were considering the issue on the previous economy and transport committee in the last Assembly. New technology can play an important part in helping deliver these objectives. Apps on phones are more likely to keep up to date than conventional bus timetables, which are usually days or weeks out of date, if not even worse. And what will happen if we don't act? Well, we've seen the problems on the M4. I think my reticence about the new M4 is well known. Leaving aside the environmental issues, I think the past has shown that if we simply rely on road building without developing public transport at the same time then we will end up in severe problems. 

Deputy Presiding Officer, I think the last paragraph of the motion is all-important. Transport for Wales must have power, it must have the teeth that Lee Waters alluded to, to succeed and not just be a talking shop, and I think the devolution of the Traffic Commissioner for Wales is a very good start. But let's get on with the job and deliver a public transport system in the future that Wales can be proud of.  

The car may need to be king in rural areas, but in inner city urban areas like Cardiff public transport has to be the default option for those unwilling or unable to walk or cycle. People in Cardiff are starting to wear face masks like they do in Beijing. This is the consequence of the do-nothing approach to 80,000 people commuting into Cardiff and Newport from neighbouring authorities by car. The whole region experiences road gridlock at peak times. If the Welsh Government fails to act over the illegal levels of air pollution, they will end up in court, costing a huge amount of money that we could be spending on public transport.

People want to do the right thing. The demand for rail has grown from 20 million passenger journeys to 30 million in the last decade. That's just on the Valleys lines. It's impossible to drive more people out of their cars and onto rail services without increased capacity, so one of the things we need to know is: at what point in the contract for the new rail franchise provider will there be greater capacity and ticket transferability to enable more people to do the right thing?

This motion welcomes the commitment to the first stages of a south Wales metro, but I want to ask: where is the rest? It's five years since Mark Barry's report, 'A Metro for Wales' Capital City Region', and two years since Cardiff capital region board identified that an integrated transport system, aligned with land use planning, could be the catalyst for economic change across the region. And at the heart of this aspiration is the metro vision for a modern, high-quality, multimodal, integrated public transport network.   

The Central Cardiff enterprise zone is expected to attract thousands of jobs to Wales, but only a fast metro connection will enable the people of the south Wales Valleys to access these jobs. Inward investors have been promised access to 1.5 million people within a 30-minute commute, and that cannot be achieved without the metro. Only a fast metro connection can cater for the tens of thousands of predictable short journeys people make every day to and from work and school.

So, the consensus is there, but where is the money? We know that £734 million has been allocated for the south Wales metro, of which £250 million is from the Welsh Government and £375 million from the UK Government, which includes £150 million for electrification. And then there is some European money of something in the region of £120 million to £130 million. So, in this £375 million the UK Government has promised is a conditional sum of £125 million to electrify the Valleys lines, only if the Welsh Government also puts in at least £325 million for electrification. If not, the £125 million from the UK Government can be withdrawn. So, I'm concerned that we're going to put at least £450 million of this £734 million into electrification, and it's not cost-effective.

The topography and number of stops on the Valleys lines means heavy electric trains will never achieve speeds in excess of 50 miles an hour, and that can be provided by trams. Like Nick Ramsay, I am a fan of the tram. It's a much cheaper alternative. It means that from Pontypridd, instead of six or seven trains an hour with an electrified train, you can get 10 to 12 fast trams. From Merthyr, two trains an hour could be substituted by three or four trams an hour. Only then can you reduce the journey time from Merthyr to 40 minutes—you can't do that with heavy rolling stock—because you can run light rail much closer together and they stop much more quickly. 

So, what if the successful rail franchise bidder says that electrification of the Valleys lines is a waste of money and a much more cost-effective approach is light rail on all or nearly all Valleys lines? Will we have to be dictated to by London and go ahead with a less effective, more costly approach? What does that say about Welsh Government desire for industry to provide the answer to what mode of transport will work best through market testing and eventual bidding procurement processes? I want to ensure that we are able to do the right thing so that we have enough money to get the rest of the metro vision of an integrated public transport network, with centralised ticketing, and to make it cost-effective. We know that, in order to get the rest of the money, pound for pound, a mile of rail investment costs about the same as a motorway mile but benefits up to 20 times more people. We have to stop chasing car-centric investment and invest in a fully integrated public transport system if we're to provide a practical alternative.

This is the shift—

Are we winding up, please?

Yes, I am winding up—that the well-being of future generation Act demands and the carbon reduction targets that the environment Act requires. In Cardiff city region, that means the metro.

Transport has tended to be, in Wales, something that's done to us, not for us and certainly not for ourselves. Our transport infrastructure has often reflected the prevailing power dynamics, the prevailing economics, rather than being used in the way that I think Lee Waters was suggesting and, indeed, Jenny Rathbone—as a creative tool, if you like, for reinventing our country and our economic and social landscape. What I mean, more explicitly: if you look at the transport map of Wales, it essentially has all the hallmarks of a colonised economy. Essentially, it's still basically arterial routes that were either mine to coast or farm to major market. And we're still struggling with that. That's the essence of the problem that we face as a nation: that we are dislocated. To get from the south to Aberystwyth by train, or even more so to north Wales, requires a heroic effort worthy of Odysseus. At a smaller scale, at the micro level, try traversing valleys in the former coalfield area—whether in the west, the centre or in the east—there is no connection. So, how can we create better jobs closer to home when you simply can't get there? You can't even get to a job that may be eight or nine miles away because it's over the next valley.

My fear is that while there is much that is good in the motion, it's interesting what it omits. It refers to the key areas that the Welsh Government are looking at, which are metros: metros for three metropolitan regions. And I find that strange in a country that actually is defined by the fact that most of us don't live in cities. We're a less metropolitan nation than almost any other. The 700,000 people that live in the former coalfield, if they were a city, they'd be a big one, but those are post-industrial villages. I wonder whether in our transport policy we've been somewhat seduced by the snake oil of city regionalism, which has become—. You know, the theory of agglomeration economies: 'If we could double the size of Cardiff, then everything would be fine' is the basic underlying idea of city regionalism. I know, because I've studied under some of the authors of the idea of city regions. Read the book Triumph of the City et cetera. This is absolutely the wrong idea and, in fact, city regionalism around the world now—I think critics and sceptics are coming to the fore, because it hasn't actually delivered what it says it can. [Interruption.] I give way.

Can you not accept that the city region concept in south Wales is about connecting different communities, not about forcing everybody to move into Cardiff? That would be the nightmare scenario.

It can be that, but there is a tension. For example, in the versions and the discussion that I've heard, the emphasis almost always seems to be on basically—to simplify it, but essentially—to use it as a commuter service to get people from the hinterland to work in jobs in Cardiff. That makes no economic sense for us. It will not be delivered. I agree with the Member that, actually, a different vision needs to be presented. Some of the original ideas, some of the work that Roger Tanner did on a city of the Valleys, was actually a much more exciting vision, which had a sense of a polycentric region, which actually addressed in transport terms the very problem of traversal links, rather than this very linear approach, which actually, again, mirrors our economic history and I don't think is a blueprint for our economic future.

The motion also does not refer to the west and the south-west or to the issue—I think the big issue—of the big opportunity to create a rail corridor, a national rail corridor, starting with Carmarthen to Aberystwyth. That is an exciting and imaginative idea that I think will inspire people and will change the shape of our nation and the shape of our future.

I thank the Members involved for bringing this debate to the Chamber, though following on from the Cabinet statements yesterday and the responses that followed, I'm not sure there's a great deal to add to what has been said before. But, in the great tradition of politicians, I won't let that deter me. It is universally accepted that Wales is in dire need of a modern integrated transport system, and it should be one that puts Wales at the forefront of what makes a benchmark public transport network. Only by implementing such a system will we be able to move away from a gridlocked road infrastructure, exacerbated by our overdependence on the motor car.

We have to acknowledge that Wales's topography is a barrier to achieving a seamless transport system, but given the right strategy and, of course, the financial commitment, there is no reason why the Welsh Government's goals cannot be achieved. It is a given that a well integrated transport system renders huge benefits, both economically and socially, so it is vital that the planned metro system, both in north and south Wales, is implemented with a rigid and timely schedule.

Although the use of trains has risen substantially over recent years, it is still true that buses carry 80 per cent of the people who use public transport. Therefore, it is vital that these services are run in as integrated and efficient a way as possible. Where deregulated bus operators are seen to be concentrating on profits rather than customer satisfaction, Transport for Wales should be given the powers to plan and specify the network in line with the guiding principles of providing targeted needs and the reduction of congestion.

Most of Wales is rural, and many of those who live in the countryside are solely dependent on public transport. Therefore, it is incumbent upon the Welsh Government to make sure that there is an adequate, well integrated public transport system with good connectivity between train and bus services so that our rural communities are not left behind in this move towards better quality public transport services. I mentioned earlier the potential shortfalls of a deregulated bus industry. I therefore agree with the proposal that Transport for Wales should have the powers to act as a development agency, so that it can intervene when services are not being run in an integrated or efficient manner.

We all recognise that in order to have a successful, modern economy, the ability to guarantee the smooth and efficient transportation of goods and people is a fundamental requirement. Failure to deliver this represents the greatest threat to the competitiveness of Welsh business. We look forward to the Welsh Government delivering the transport system that Wales so desperately needs.

I'm very pleased to sponsor and to speak on this motion, and I'm very keen to see the metro plans come to fruition and to see less use of the car. The motion notes, as several speakers have already said, that a fully integrated public transport system, including active travel, is needed to provide a practical and attractive alternative to car use.

I'd just like to quote from an e-mail I received from a constituent this morning, which I think sums up our train transport problems in Cardiff in a nutshell, which have already been referred to by my colleague Jenny Rathbone. My constituent says, 

'Last night 3 trains went by before I could squeeze on a 4th. None had adequate carriages. I’m heavily pregnant at the moment and it’s becoming harder and harder to use the train as it’s so crushed. Plus it’s making me too late to pick my son up despite leaving 40 mins for a 4 min journey. I will soon be going back to using my car—something I really don’t want to do. I also miss out on cheaper childcare available to me in the city centre (provided by my work) as I'm not willing to put my two-year old through going on the trains in those conditions. There's no way anybody elderly or with certain disabilities could handle it either (I doubt a wheelchair would ever fit on).'

So, I think that e-mail illustrates what commuters are experiencing, but it also shows how the different priorities that are very important to us in this Assembly and important to the Government, such as cheaper childcare—or we hope that there'll be a lot more free childcare available—are dependent on transport to get you there. So, all the different bits of the Government are all linked together, and I think that e-mail does illustrate that.

I had another e-mail only this morning, as well, saying,

'The trains are old, smelly, unreliable, stiflingly hot and usually extremely overcrowded. I moved to the area recently and I started my new job in the city centre approximately 3 weeks ago. I have already been late due to the poor running of the trains on 4 occasions. You can imagine this does not really make a good impression on my new boss but my other options of commuting are extremely limited—the amount of traffic into town certainly does not need to be added to. In any event, I purchased my property based on its proximity to the train station!'

That is really picking up on the point that Lee Waters has made—that people want to move to live near the train stations. There will be rising land values, and I certainly support the proposal about capitalising on the rising land values, but obviously, we've got to get the transport systems to work.

I welcome the plans for the metro, but fully integrated public transport and active travel also requires us to think, as Lee Waters also said, about how people get to the existing train stations and also the train stations that are proposed under the metro scheme. And promoting walking and cycling to transport hubs must be in the discussion, and high up in the discussion. We've got to keep it right there, in the front, and it’s vital that there are bike parking facilities at all stations, which is not currently the case, of course.

This is especially important, as we know that the number of short journeys under 1 mile taken by car are increasing. The latest statistics for active travel show that only 5 per cent of adults cycled at least one or twice a week, 61 per cent of adults walked at least once or twice a week, and people in urban areas are more likely to walk three or more times a week, compared to those in rural areas. I think there is a particular issue about rural areas, which has been raised. So, I think it's really important that we invest in walking infrastructure as well as cycle lanes.

I am organising an event in my constituency in January to promote cycling for short journeys—commuting to work, going to the shops and doing the school run. We are going to have talks about getting on your bike, and particularly to encourage older people and more women to cycle, because we need to tackle people's very real worries about cycling in traffic, and we will be giving them practical help to do things like fixing a puncture or advising them about cycling in the dark. We'll also be talking about electric bikes, because I think it's very important that we do promote cycling for these short journeys, and we want to make sure that cycling doesn't become the preserve of, as has been quoted to me, middle-aged men in lycra. We want it to be for all the community, and we want everybody, particularly women, to get more involved in cycling. Diolch.

Thank you. Can I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Transport, Ken Skates?

Yes. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I would like to thank all Members for their contributions today and for bringing forward this particular debate. As many Members have already said, improving our public transport system is absolutely critical to the economic, social and environmental ambitions of our country. I want to begin by saying that there is a huge amount in what Lee Waters said in opening this debate that I wholeheartedly agree with. Lee rightly outlined the scale, for example, of the challenge ahead of us. Public transport growth has been very significant in recent years, and it's likely to increase substantially in the years to come. As Lee outlined, and as others have outlined in their own areas, it's incredibly difficult for people in many communities, particularly those rural communities, to connect with other communities at a convenient time and with regular, decent, high-quality services. Lee, and others, demonstrated very clearly that enhanced connectivity is essential to supporting both economic and population growth in all parts of Wales. Others, like Julie, shared particular case studies concerning the use and need for better public transport, better integrated public transport. And the metro projects that we're developing in the north-east and in south Wales will be multimodal. They will be integrated, rapid transit networks that have improved bus, rail and active travel services right at their very heart. 

As Julie, Jenny and others have outlined, it's also important that passengers have confidence in the quality of services and that standards are universally applied to local public transport, right across the whole of Wales. As Adam Price rightly said, the quality of service delivered in the more rural parts of our country should be of no less favourable quality than those provided within the metro or more urbanised parts of the country.

Now, at this point, I'd like to say something about accessibility, which is something that I see as being crucially important to transport design. Buses are now required to offer priority seating, lower floors and spaces for wheelchairs. In relation to the publication of lists of wheelchair-accessible taxis by licensing authorities, passengers can now be better informed about the availability of wheelchair-accessible taxi services operating in their areas. And, of course, in addition, from January 2020 all trains operating on our railways will be required to meet accessibility standards set out by the European Union and also the UK Government. Now, whilst these advances have been, no doubt, welcome, there is still much more action that needs to take place to make public transport more inclusive and more accessible. It's something that I want help with from Members in this Chamber as we move our public transport system forward in the next few years. 

One of the key barriers, Deputy Presiding Officer, to accessibility identified by many disabled people is a lack of consistency in the way that services and facilities are delivered. Central to this issue is the need to transform the understanding of accessibility and inclusive design amongst professionals who plan, design, build and operate transport infrastructure and interchanges, services and streetscapes. 

The new accessibility objectives that we have developed and the actions underpinning them have been designed by my accessible transport panel, comprising organisations representing disabled people, older people, people with learning disabilities and equality groups. Now, as Members have said, transport plays a pivotal role in improving prosperity, and yesterday we launched the economic action plan, which set out the importance we attach to effective and integrated transport infrastructure in achieving our aim of prosperity for all. One of the important changes of approach in the document relates to the point made by several Members during this debate, namely the need to utilise major projects such as the metro, through which to undertake major, wider housing, land use, skills and economic development planning. I don't see Transport for Wales itself becoming an independent development agency by which to achieve this, but I will be expecting it to work with partners very closely in order to achieve that joined-up planning that Lee and others called for, to exploit increasing land-use values driven by transport investment, and to ensure that we have the development of houses and services in the right locations, linking up with transport investments.

Deputy Presiding Officer, a number of Members including Nick Ramsay and Lee Waters spoke about the need to address the failures of bus deregulation in 1986, and we'll do just this through the radical reforms that we'll be consulting on in the spring. Wales's bus network carries more than 100 million passengers a year, and I am determined that this number should not just stay steady, but should increase if we are to tackle road congestion and pollution as outlined by Jenny Rathbone. An effective and efficient rail service is also essential to this process, and I expect the new Wales and borders rail services franchise to deliver this.

These are exciting times, I think, for rail in Wales. A huge amount of activity is under way in finding the operator and development partner to operate the Wales and borders rail services from October next year, and to deliver the south Wales metro from 2023. This procurement exercise that we're currently engaged in is indeed the largest single procurement the Welsh Government has ever undertaken. The new rail services will deliver a step change in the quality of rail travel across Wales.

Now, the south Wales metro will provide the model that we can roll out across the rest of the country, and we've also already funded development work on the outline concept of a metro for south-west Wales this financial year. I'm very pleased to say that Swansea county council is co-ordinating this work in partnership with other local authorities, and the project is progressing well, with consultants appointed to develop the concept. Both an inception meeting and a regional workshop have been held, and Swansea council will seek to continue the development of the concept into the next financial year, when work will be undertaken to apply a more thorough assessment and testing of the concept through a strategic outline business case. Our metros will deliver much more that just an improved public transport network. They'll provide more frequent services, allowing passengers to turn up and go.

Will the Minister give way?

Yes, indeed.

Would you address the specific point about the need to empower Transport for Wales with the powers of a development corporation to lever in this added value that will be created?

I should say that Transport for Wales is being designed as an expert group to be able to offer advice and to manage rail services. I think it will require more than just Transport for Wales to deliver the maximum value for land and land-use planning that the Member and others have outlined. I don't see this being a role just for Transport for Wales, but for an entire raft of partners working together to exploit improved land values and opportunities for development. In terms of, for example, Cardiff Central railway station, that's become incredibly congested. It's six times busier than any other station in Wales, but I am pleased to announce that we have a vision for Cardiff Central station as a world-class transport hub, and today I'm able to announce our intention to enter into a formal joint venture with Cardiff council and their partner developer to take this vision forward. We'll start by focusing on the development of a new bus station in Cardiff. Our aim is for the joint venture to deliver on all of our ambitions for the interchange.

But it won't just be Cardiff that benefits from our vision. I'll be outlining tomorrow additional funding for a transport interchange in another part of Wales as we seek to roll out a north Wales metro, again spreading prosperity and opportunity across the country. Our vision of a transformed, integrated transport system that delivers economic growth and achieves social and environmental health and cultural benefits has been outlined. It's about enhancing transport infrastructure and services to reduce congestion and improve journey times, both of which are recognised as being fundamental to prosperous economies and sustainable environments.

Thank you very much. Can I call on Hefin David to reply to the debate?

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. You can say what you want about Lee Waters, and, let's face it, many people do, but he has used this debate that he's led to stand up for his constituents and, at the same time, advocate policy change and cultural shift. I don't know how successful he's been, and perhaps we'll come back to that at the end of my summing up.

Work in progress.

It's not going to change how I'm going to vote. But certainly it's led to some consideration in this Chamber and a serious consideration in this Chamber, which is an important thing.

We're talking about the topography—Adam Price mentioned it—of the south Wales Valleys. Adam Price connected it with nation building, as you'd expect and as he does so often, so effectively. But, I think that there's not a lot you can do about our geography; it is what it is. But, those spokes that feed into Cardiff have hampered our ability to connect. And I think that you're absolutely right: when you're living in Caerphilly, when you're living in the Rhymney valley, it's very rare that you would ever think of anyone existing in the Rhondda valley or in Blaenau Gwent. It's very rare you would think of it, and I've said that before in this Chamber. 

So, we've got to connect, as Lee Waters said, our transport approach with economic policy. I think we're right to ask the Cabinet Secretary for a little bit more detail on some of these things in the future, in the new year, to see how we can precisely tie in our economic policy with transport policy.

Nick Ramsay mentioned—I knew he'd look up when I mentioned his name—not penalising the motorist in a not particularly party-political speech—it is, after all, nearly Christmas. He did say, 'Not penalising the motorist', but he trod a very fine line there and talked about the need for bringing transport to the rural economy. I'd say he's got—and I know he's got—advocates for that in Government now, who feel very strongly about sustainable transport in the rural economy, and he has an open door there if he continues to push as constructively as he did in his speech. I think that's quite important.

Others, including Jenny Rathbone, emphasised the environmental impact of our over-reliance on the car. I absolutely agree with that. Again, I think you're bolder than Nick Ramsay, Jenny Rathbone; I think you'd come and stand on Pwll-y-Pant roundabout with me and you'd tell people to get out of their cars and get on the train. Absolutely. Well, actually, I wouldn't say 'with me' because I wouldn't be there; you'd be on your own. [Laughter.] But, what we've got to do is get people out of these cars and onto public transport. But, as you said quite rightly, and the battle I'm having is that public transport has got to have capacity and it's got to be good enough. That's a conversation that I've had with Arriva Trains and it's a challenge you put to the Cabinet Secretary. You asked the Cabinet Secretary, 'How are you going to deal with the issue of electrification and the uncertainty over funding?' I'm not convinced that the Cabinet Secretary answered you in this Chamber, but I would expect the Cabinet Secretary to address these issues further in the future, particularly these funding issues. The Cabinet Secretary knows that the Economy, Infrastructure and Skills Committee is looking for answers in that area.

Adam Price again—I'm going to come back again. If I was so minded I'd be awarding a prize for the best speech, but I'm not going to do that because I think it's going to be mine. [Laughter.] I joke. What I am going to do is that I'm going to say to Adam Price that he used a very evocative phrase there, which was really good: 'creative tool'. We can use this policy as a creative tool for reinventing our dislocated country. I think that's a grand vision for what our transport policy should be, and I think, actually, it's already underpinned in what the Cabinet Secretary is trying to do.

I actually have a lot of sympathy with your criticism of city regions too. The 'snake oil of city regionalism', you said. I am writing down these turns of phrase because I do videos every now and again and I tend to trot them out and they're very good. But, you're quite right to talk about linking the northern parts of our Valleys communities with each other, across south-east Wales, and linking south Wales with north. I think that's an incredible challenge that we must address. We've talked before about new garden towns perhaps offering such solutions. That's an interesting idea that I'd perhaps like to explore in future. I think there's an intervention coming.

Would the Member give way? Thank you. In terms of the cross-valley links, it's integral to the metro thinking that we include active travel, because the old network of railway tunnels—the Rhondda Tunnel is the most talked about, but there's a whole network of these across the Valleys, which, for active travel in particular, could make inter-valley journeys a practical option.

Yes, and I'm well aware that individual constituency AMs on these benches have raised these issues with Government. I think this is a discussion that needs to go on, and I would expect Government to be responding to those issues already. I know that that dialogue is going on, so you raise a very pertinent point.

David Rowlands talked about the overdependence on the motor car as well, so he'll be joining Jenny Rathbone up on the Pant roundabout asking people to get out of their cars. There's a real challenge there, though, because what you are talking about is cultural change. You are trying to change the culture in such a way that will change people's behaviour. Politicians telling people to change their behaviour is not a popular thing. So, for UKIP to advocate something that is so far from being populist is actually very welcome, and I look forward to having support if I go in that direction too.

Julie Morgan raised many stories of the problems of her constituents. This sounds a bit like a pun, but she said we need to shape a policy that goes in the direction that our constituents want us to go. That's a challenge when different areas have different demands. The city, perhaps, has different demands to the Valleys communities. Meeting that challenge, I think, will require us all as politicians of all parties to find a way to work together. 

Finally, I come to the Cabinet Secretary, who made some very welcome statements, and I was very welcoming of his economic plan yesterday. I think a lot of the answers lie within there, but we require further detail. But when it comes to point 5 of the motion, and point 5 of the motion reads that we believe

'Transport for Wales must have the power to act as a development corporation—with the ability to capitalise on rising land values in areas close to metro stations—in order to lever in further funding to expand the metro network',

I've got a feeling that the Cabinet Secretary gave us a polite and charming 'no'. Transport for Wales doesn't have the capacity to do that was his response. We can challenge that in the way we vote later, perhaps, but certainly the answer was encouraging in that he said that he would ask and require Transport for Wales to work with partners to deliver the kind of change that we want to see. So, he wants it to be broader, and I accept that, Cabinet Secretary. I accept that answer today. 

I think it's been a hugely constructive debate and I welcome all the contributions. I'm not going to pick a winner, because I don't think it would be fair to do so. I think all the contributions were excellent. Let's just choose the catchphrase of a Member who currently isn't in this Chamber, but it's apt on this occasion, 'Let's get it done'.

Thank you very much. I think, if anyone's going to award prizes at the end of term for speeches, it will be me, and you may not like my decisions. So, we'll move on very quickly.

The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Therefore, we defer voting on this until voting time.

We now move on to the UKIP debate on modular housing and I call on David Rowlands to move the motion. David.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Given the prevailing situation, I shall deliver the opening part of this debate on behalf of my fellow AM.

Today's debate is on the subject of housing need and how we can use the levers that we have in the Assembly to address those needs. A variety of different kinds of housing is needed to serve the interests of all the population of Wales. We in UKIP are not attempting today to offer any kind of wholesale solution to the housing problem—it is a complicated challenge that will require a multifaceted solution. Today's debate focuses on one aspect of housing, which is modular housing.

Our view is that modular housing does have an important role to play in providing for Wales's present and future housing needs. To be fair, the Welsh Government have recognised that and they have earmarked funds for the provision of this modular housing. So, we have established that this is an area where we can agree with the Welsh Government, to some extent. And today, they haven't, for once, given us an amendment saying, 'Delete all and replace with'. This is what they usually do with UKIP motions. In fact, Ross, our trusty researcher, has a printout on his desk stating, 'Delete all and replace with'. So, today, the Labour Party are not deleting everything we have to say—we are highly amused about that, as you can well imagine.

The main body of our specific proposals Labour has taken issue with. Understandably, the Government wants to draw attention to progress that they have themselves made in the field of modular housing. Our specific proposals were for a review of the planning process to remove red tape and make it easier for people who want to build their own home. We also wanted to encourage brownfield development, and we have proposed setting up a housing development corporation to help acquire these sites and use compulsory purchase orders, if necessary, to stimulate actual house building on those sites. Lastly, we want to establish a register of those sites and give priority to smaller-scale developments.

The Conservatives, in their amendment, appear to agree with the general theme of our motion, but have also diverged from us on some of the specific proposals, notably the need for the housing development corporation. They favour incentivising local councils and other public bodies that already exist, rather than creating something new. I will examine that specific issue later on in the debate.

One thing that we probably can all agree with is the need to build more homes in Wales. On the actual need for housing in Wales, there was some significant recent research by the late Dr Alan Holmans. He was the head of the Cambridge university's Cambridge Centre for Housing and Planning Research, he was a former senior adviser to the UK Government, and he was regarded by many as the pre-eminent expert in projecting future housing needs and demand. A report by Dr Holmans was published just after his death in 2015 stating that Wales could need as many as 12,000 affordable new homes a year. This is due to a variety of factors, including an unexpected increase in the number of single-person households. Just to recap, we have stated a variety of factors, of which immigration is only one. So, although in UKIP we will always point to the effect of uncontrolled mass immigration on the housing market, we by no means say that it is the only one.

I've used the term 'affordable housing', so I better explain what I mean by it. It refers to social housing or housing in the private rented sector that is affordable to people whose needs are not being met by the normal private housing market. The monthly rent of affordable homes should not cost more than 80 per cent of the average local market rent. Dr Holmans's figure was 12,000 new affordable homes a year; the Welsh Government have come up with a target of 20,000 affordable homes, but this is spread over an entire Assembly term. This will effectively mean 4,000 per year, which is a long way short of Dr Holmans's figure; in fact, it's only a third of the projected need.

In 2014-15, just over 6,000 new homes were built in Wales, and we have to put this figure into some context. Fifty years ago, in the 1960s, the construction industry was building around 20,000 homes a year in Wales. So, we are now building much smaller numbers of houses, and the balance between private and council houses has also changed. In 1955, over 70 per cent of all new homes were built by the public sector in the form of council houses. Today, that situation has reversed, and we now have over 80 per cent of new homes being built by private developers.

Many councils have large waiting lists, and many people would state that this means that we face a housing shortage, perhaps even a housing crisis. Of course, we've had housing shortages before in the UK, and we have come up with innovative means of tackling those shortages. There was a shortage of decent-quality homes immediately after the first world war and again immediately after world war two. On the latter occasion, the solution was prefabricated houses, or, as we all knew them, prefabs.

In the six years after the war, 150,000 prefabs were built. They were only designed as a temporary solution, with an intended lifespan of only 10-15 years. Many of these prefabs lasted a lot longer than their intended life; there are some still standing and still occupied that must be at least 65 years old. Many people who lived in prefabs swore by them and proclaim that they were just as good as any other form of housing. 

With these prefabs, there was a move away from brick, using instead timber frames, steel frames and aluminium frames. There are indeed certain similarities between the postwar prefabs and modular homes that are going up, albeit in small numbers, today. Modular homes are built in sections in a factory setting, then transported to the site. There, they are placed on a pre-made foundation, joined and completed by the builder.

With modular housing, a significant percentage are timber framed with a concrete base. They are relatively bespoke, and purchasers can request that additional features be incorporated into the design, such as plaster and glass components. The idea is that the parts can essentially be bolted together. The components come in the back of a lorry and are put together onsite. It's like one big flat-pack house. 

Modular homes can be built quickly and efficiently, with the ability to add on to the property later. As the buildings contain embodied energy, which is locked into the fabric as a result of the construction process, they represent a uniquely sustainable form of construction. In the case of traditional buildings, this energy is lost when the house comes to be demolished. In the case of modular builds, though, the embodied energy is preserved when the building is relocated to another site, thereby reducing the impact of landfill. 

There are various types of modular homes. They can include, for instance, zero-carbon homes, which are dwellings that have no net carbon emissions from their energy use. This can be achieved through reducing their energy use using renewable energy, or a combination of both. So, features could include solar-panelled roofs and special insulation panels. As I stated earlier, most modular homes are likely to be energy efficient in any case, due to the sustainable materials that are used to construct them. But incorporating some of these other features would mean that you could have modular homes that also qualify as zero-carbon homes. In theory, some of these could actually generate more energy than they use, and could end up exporting energy to the national grid. Some Members here today have seen this in action at the SOLCER house project, constructed by the Welsh School of Architecture, which is Wales's first low-cost smart energy house.

Another relatively new idea is the shipping container home. These can be commissioned very quickly with manufacturers claiming that they can move from receiving their order to delivery in less than four weeks. The units are modular and can be stacked or placed side by side, or back to back, to either extend the living space or to create blocks of units. In Bristol, a project has been under way for about a year to help 40 homeless people through the provision of container homes. Bristol City Council have given them a plot of land to secure the future of the project. The Welsh Government have indicated that they feel the shipping container idea could help with the homeless problem in the short term. 

Another type of modular home is a self-build home. A survey conducted by the Building Societies Association in 2011 suggested that 53 per cent of people, more than half the population, would consider building their own home given the opportunity. On one of the UK's leading plot-finding websites, there are currently wanted adverts for 60 self-build homes in Wales. The UK as a whole has had a much lower rate of self-building than other European countries. The sector makes up less than 10 per cent of new builds here, whilst in Austria it is some 80 per cent of housing completions. In France, it is close to 60 per cent, and the same applies in Germany and Ireland. In the USA, it is 45 per cent. The Netherlands is closest to the UK in western Europe, but even in the Netherlands the total is close to 30 per cent. 

In England, under the Housing and Planning Act 2016, local councils have to consider how they can best support self-build. There's no such obligation on local councils in Wales currently. In 2013, a report by the University of York identified a series of challenges to self-build projects. These include land supply and procurement, access to finance, the planning process and general regulation and red tape. On the important issue of finance, lenders tend generally to perceive self-build loans as a higher risk. There's currently no Welsh Government grant available to people who want to self-build.

The Welsh Government did relax some planning requirements to enable the development of Lammas, a rural eco-village in north Pembrokeshire, so there has been some flexibility in this field.

We appreciate that the Welsh Government is doing things in the field of innovative housing. We aren't trying to have a go at their endeavours. That isn't the purpose of today's debate; we are just floating the idea of some specific proposals that may help to achieve the aims that we all share of providing more and better affordable houses in Wales.

We want to review the planning process so that we can remove some of the red tape. So, what they have done in north Pembrokeshire we'd like ideally to extend to the whole of Wales. We'd ask for the same obligation on local councils to allocate land for self-build projects that they have in England, so there would be a duty on councils to set aside plots for self-build in their local development plans.

Land banking is a problem that has been acknowledged by the Welsh Government. Finance Minister Mark Drakeford has floated the idea that taxation powers could be used to tackle the problem of land banking in the form of a vacant land tax. Now, that is a tax proposal that might well attract support from UKIP, because we want to ensure that where land has been purchased housing development does take place in a fairly short time period. But, we will await the specific tax proposals from Mark Drakeford and we haven't put anything down in the motion today on that issue.

What we have called for is a housing development corporation so that brownfield sites can be purchased quickly and cost-effectively. We think that an organisation set up with specific expertise in the field of property can help facilitate building on brownfield sites. Compulsory purchase orders, or CPOs, could be used to acquire these sites if there was no development within a period of three years. So, that could be an alternative to the idea of taxing vacant sites, or they could possibly work together.

We need a body to identify these sites in the first place, so our final proposal is for the housing development corporation to also compile a register of relevant brownfield sites that could be developed in Wales. So, those are our proposals and we are eager to hear what other Members think of them, so we avidly await your responses.

Thank you very much. I have selected two amendments to this motion. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 will be deselected. So, I call on the Minister for Housing and Regeneration to move formally amendment 1, tabled in the name of Julie James. 

Formally.

Thank you. I call on David Melding to move amendment 2, tabled in the name of Paul Davies.

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. Can I thank UKIP for bringing this debate forward? I think it's actually a very important subject and is a way of tackling the housing challenge in Wales. I hope that we develop a level of consensus beyond our usual, conventional, traditional house building methods.

I was very pleased, actually, to notice that even the Welsh Government seems to be moving a bit in this area. In the statement in October that introduced the innovative housing programme, one element that was included was modular housing. So, I think we are pushing at an open door, to use an appropriate colloquialism. 

In my response to that statement, I did speak about how I hoped the Welsh Government would undertake more modular house building. I'm pleased to see that UKIP have picked up on this also and share a vision for its greater use, particularly in some of the changing circumstances and the urban communities that we're now seeing develop, partly in response to the new type of housing that we do require.

As has already been alluded to—. Overall, I wanted to be as constructive as possible with the motion, so I've just amended it where we absolutely do have a slight issue, and that's the proposal for a housing corporation, aiming to bring in much more brownfield land. I completely share the objective, but I think this is a rather bureaucratic way of going about it and I think there are plenty of levers for Government to do this and they need to get on and achieve better results, I think, in terms of land supply. And it's not just brownfield sites, but they are an important source.

We need to build on—. Obviously, we need to release more land if we're going to see more house building. It really is important that we look around and are creative and look at the public sector. Lots of land is fairly redundant or could be used more innovatively and more economically, therefore releasing land for development. So, that was the reason we amended the motion.

As David said, modular housing, or what we used to call prefabs, has a very noble record. It was a central part of solving the crisis of post-war house building. The challenge they faced was just beyond anything the nation had experienced before because of the destruction in the second world war. Vast numbers, which David outlined, were built. I think that, when we look at the opportunities today, we should reflect on the role it had then. Many of the housing units that were built were innovative for the time, and they were popular—a point David made. I remember campaigning, against Jane Hutt I should say, in a whole street of prefabs that still survived in Barry, and the residents were very happy with that way of living. It was really quite a convenient layout. I was shown around. I'm not sure the person voted for me, but there we are. [Laughter.] I was never successful in either election I fought there. But it does show you that these methods can be absolutely sector-leading, and today even more so in terms of speed of construction and cost—about twice as quick and half as expensive. There are a lot of innovations as well—new materials, less energy-dependent and they can also lead to this incredible SOLCER experiment, where you actually generate energy from the house rather than consuming it. So, there are a lot of opportunities there.

I think it also allows us to look at the possibility of higher density developments—not high-rise—where there are more shared facilities, for instance. Not everyone wants a garden to maintain. I've often said to people when you go to posh areas in London, like Belgravia, they all have a key for the central garden; they don't have their own garden. It's regarded as a great social advantage to have access to those gardens. So, there are ways of building family-sized homes very efficiently and possibly, potentially, eliminating fuel poverty because you'd actually be getting money back from your home.

Can I just say in conclusion, Deputy Presiding Officer, that SMEs are very well placed to take advantage in this sector? Also, the shortfall we have in some building skills would be addressed more quickly in this sector. There are a lot of opportunities there. I do think they've been unloved for too long, and we should see that it's time for a renaissance in modular building. Again, I thank UKIP.

Putting an end to homelessness is one of the key reasons I entered politics. As recently as Monday night, when I attended an event in Cardiff, I was confronted with the sad situation of two gentlemen, homeless, in need of a cup of coffee. In the twenty-first century, homelessness is morally reprehensible. In the prison service, I saw many young men who committed crimes simply to have a roof over their head and hot meals served to them, while other poor souls had been arrested for vagrancy.

Whilst the causes of homelessness are many, the main contributor is the lack of housing. We simply aren’t building enough new homes, particularly affordable and social housing. Experts predict that we need to build around 12,000 new homes a year, yet less than half that number are being built. This lack of housing has resulted in 2,652 households becoming homeless between April and June of this year, and saw nearly an additional 2,000 threatened with becoming homeless within eight weeks. There are around 2,000 households in temporary accommodation, and over 200 of those are in bed and breakfasts. Thirteen per cent of those in B&Bs were families with children. This is totally unacceptable. These families need homes urgently, yet there isn’t enough social or affordable housing to meet that need.

The Welsh Government has a target to build around 4,000 affordable homes a year, yet only three quarters of that amount were built last year and they are relying on the private sector to build over a third of affordable housing in Wales via section 106 agreements.

Private developers tell us that they are being hampered from building more homes due to red tape and an overly bureaucratic planning system. They also state that there is an inadequate supply of land and additional costs as a result of building regulations and the method of providing affordable housing on new developments. Simply put, Wales is a less desirable place to build houses due to this. This has to change if we are to end homelessness; we have to make it easier to build homes, not harder.

In England, the Government have started looking at using prefabricated housing to meet demand. This has long been a UKIP policy. Prefabricated, modular housing is a quick and cheap solution to addressing housing shortages. It was the use of prefabs that helped address housing shortages following world war two. Many people were critical of post-war prefabs, but I can assure you, as someone who lived in one growing up, they were loved by all of those who called them home. 

Modern modular, prefabricated housing is much more advanced than prefabs of the past. They can be constructed from eco-friendly materials and are highly energy efficient, saving home owners money on electricity and heating costs. They are flexible, as they can be completely tailored to the needs of the home owner and some types of modular home can be reconfigured to meet future need. But above all, they are cheaper and faster than traditional construction to erect. A two-bedroomed home can be built for around £50,000 and installed in days—well below the construction costs of a traditional property, which can take up to a year to build.

There are plenty of companies offering modular prefab housing. The barrier is finding land to build upon and the length of time it takes to get planning permission. If we are to address the housing shortage in Wales, then we have to look at flat-pack homes and make it easier to reuse brownfield sites for modular housing. 

I urge Members to support the motion before you today and for the Welsh Government to begin a prefab revolution in Wales, where people cannot only own their own home, but also play a role in its design and building. We need solutions that will put an end to the necessity of placing families in temporary accommodation; put an end to children spending Christmas in a cramped B&B.

This is part of that solution and I ask you to support it. Thank you. Diolch yn fawr.

Could I say at the outset how appalling UKIP’s comments were yesterday about minority rights? Members of minority groups have an inalienable right to be treated equally, whatever their gender identity or sexual orientation or the colour of their skin or their religion or disability or anything else. I hadn’t ever—[Interruption.]

Sorry, can I—?

Point of order—

Just a moment, can I ask you—? Sorry. I'm speaking. 

—expected to hear such a foul opinion in our Senedd.

Sorry. Could I ask you—? You must stay to what's on the order paper for the debate.

It's very relevant.

No, I'm sorry, I'm ruling. I don't need any help from anybody, thank you very much. So, can I ask you to stay on modular housing and not stray away from that, or you will be outwith Standing Orders?

I move on to the subject at issue. The method of providing low-cost, affordable housing is one of the great challenges that face this Government. Certainly, modular housing can be a useful tool in increasing the housing supply in Wales, and brownfield sites are appropriate for housing developments.

But, a word of warning about some aspects of this: historically, modular housing has been seen as poor-quality housing, with restrictive value in terms of resale. This, therefore, can create problems for first-time buyers with low deposits, and problems of having access to funding. The industry is trying to change that perception, but it shows that we need to give full consideration to how we help people to fund the purchase of such homes. There is also concern about the longevity of this kind of housing and, once again, we have to ensure that this has consideration in the funding arrangements.

Secondly, we need to be careful about these housing developments and be careful that not only one kind of house will be built—a house that would be appropriate for only some residents. Mixed communities, where families with variable incomes live together, offer better social outcomes. There is a lot of evidence for that. We need to think about that as we plan new housing estates, as well as the design of those estates. In addition to that, public services, including active travel requirements, must be part of any development, but that’s not what happens very often, and I’m aware of one housing development that is next to a school, and yet that school is already full. So, there is a challenge facing families moving there to live.

Now, modular housing can be part of the jigsaw that will meet the demand for housing, but we must also cover other parts of the jigsaw: to start with, eco-housing, although I’m not sure if a party that denies climate change would share our enthusiasm in Plaid Cymru for eco-homes. Clearly, eco-friendly homes with low energy bills do fit into the category of affordable homes, and also fit into the category of high-quality housing as well as contributing to reducing the carbon footprint. Secondly, we need additional care homes in order to meet social care requirements. There aren’t enough of these homes built, and they are essential to assist those people who have care needs and wish to live independently.

And, finally, we need to recognise what ‘affordable’ truly means and to acknowledge that affordability relates to income. Clearly, instability in terms of working arrangements, as well as low incomes, makes it difficult for households to put funding to one side to purchase a home. What is affordable in one area certainly is very different to what’s affordable in another. I have a member of my own family who lives in Abersoch, where an affordable home is way beyond what would constitute an affordable home in an area of the Nantlle valley or Arfon, and is beyond reach and can’t be described as affordable, if truth be told. The main problem with affordability is the fact that the percentage of young people earning an average national income has reduced, and there won’t be much increase in real-terms salaries, whilst, at the same time, a higher proportion of salaries go towards paying rent.

This leads to my final warning: if we do want to see more modular homes built, we must ensure that they won’t be purchased by buy-to-let landlords. That can also create numerous problems. So, briefly, yes, there is room for this kind of housing, but only as part of a comprehensive package of different kinds of affordable homes.

Thank you. Can I call on the Minister for Housing and Regeneration, Rebecca Evans?

Thank you. I think this debate has been very useful and very positive, and I hope I'm able to respond in similarly useful and positive terms. I'm really glad to have this opportunity to talk about the exciting work that we're doing to find new and creative solutions to Wales's pressing housing needs. Our innovative housing programme is designed to test new ways of increasing the supply of affordable homes and get them built more quickly, whilst also reducing their impact on the environment and lowering their running costs.

In a statement to the Assembly on 24 October, Carl Sargeant announced the 22 schemes to be funded under the first phase of this programme. We know that good-quality, affordable housing is fundamental to people's health and well-being, and we can't accept that people in today's Wales should have to decide whether they heat their homes or eat. Finding new models of housing that significantly reduce heating is a priority, and homes that can also generate income from surplus energy are now a real possibility. And, indeed, some schemes funded this year include the active homes scheme in Neath Port Talbot, which is about using homes as power stations, and that's being delivered in partnership with Pobl housing. 

I want to develop new methods of building that increase supply and speed up delivery. I want to see excellent-quality, affordable homes that are less damaging to the environment—and, listening to the debate here today, I think that we share that vision. I agree that modular homes do look very promising, and appear to offer the sort of benefits that we're all looking for. There are seven modular schemes being funded in the first year of the programme, providing 91 homes, and we'll continue to fund a range of new models in 2018-19 and 2019-20. 

The motion today focuses on the potential use of modular housing by individuals building their own homes. That may be one aspect of its potential, but concentrating on that alone ignores the need for scale and the wider opportunities in harnessing this approach. Modular building is particularly cost-effective when it is produced in large volumes, and could, when combined with our investment in new social housing, provide an opportunity to develop a flourishing new industry with a series of manufacturing facilities and new jobs across Wales. This is an opportunity to refresh the housing supply chain in a strategic way, and that's why I want to test out a large number of different modular build types over the next couple of years—so that we can be sure that we find the right solutions for Wales. I'm therefore very pleased to say that the innovative housing programme's budget is now £90 million for the three years between 2017-18 and 2019-20—£70 million more than initially announced in February. 

Raw materials are also a key part of the supply chain, and I'm really keen to look at how we might use more Welsh timber and steel in modular housing. We have a lot of both materials, so there are real opportunities here for us in Wales. Reflecting on the debate we had earlier this afternoon, I do sense that there is also a real appetite for this. 

Please be assured that the Welsh Government is certainly keen to help to bring forward land for housing and find ways of enabling small developers and self-builders to do more. But we do not accept the specific prescriptions contained in the UKIP motion. The Conservative amendment calls for incentives for identification of sustainable brownfield sites. I'm actively looking at how we can help to bring forward stalled sites across Wales, and I hope to make an announcement on this very soon. 

The Development Bank for Wales can play a key role in both unlocking stalled sites and also bringing Welsh SMEs back into the market. These are two particular areas that I've taken a strong interest in early on in my time in this portfolio. So, I've therefore allocated an additional £30 million of loan funding to the bank through the property development fund. Alongside our initial investment of £10 million, we will recycle and reinvest this funding over 15 years, meaning a total value of £310 million can be achieved. 

We have a co-ordinated approach to land sites and their use to help address housing need. We're developing a register of all public land in Wales and some local authorities are already compiling lists of brownfield sites suitable for self-builders. So, we're looking at all options. We are, for example, looking at sites where the land is pre-prepared for development, with planning consent in place. This approach can allow people to choose the type, style and cost of homes that they want by selecting from the pre-agreed designs. This is just one of a number of ideas being explored, and it is still at a formative stage, but I do think it illustrates the serious thought and creativity that we are bringing to this challenge. 

I'm very pleased that, despite the obvious differences between our approaches, there is nonetheless a very clear shared recognition of the need to use fresh approaches to tackling our housing needs. Welsh Government is funding the exploration of a broad range of methods. I don't believe that now is the time to single out one technique or identify self-build alone as the way forward. We have to be bolder than that, and more open to a range of new ideas, learning from innovation and refining our approach as we move forward. Thank you. 

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

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I'm pleased to reply to the debate and to welcome the speeches of David Melding, Siân Gwenllian—95 per cent of it, at any rate—and Caroline Jones, and indeed the positive speech from the Minister. Because we do accept that the Government is doing some useful things to help to solve the housing shortage, but, given that on present population trends the United Kingdom will have another 15 million people within the next 35 years, clearly there is going to be a massive problem if we don't substantially increase the number of houses built all over the country, and that applies to Wales as much as anywhere else.

When I was a very small boy my parents and I did live in a prefab, and my mother always said, to the end of her life, that actually it was the favourite of all the houses that she lived in. So, I think that, as David Melding pointed out, the future, in a sense, lies in the past on this. And I think that the note of consensus that we had during the course of the debate is much to be welcomed—not something that is always associated with my party. But I'm pleased that Gareth Bennett did actually open the debate in words, although the voice wasn't his. It was his speech.

Thank you very much. The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Thank you. Therefore, we will vote on this item in voting time. I propose to move to voting time unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung. Everybody happy? Fine. 

So, then we move to voting. The first vote this afternoon is on the Members' debate under Standing Order 11.21 on public transport network. I call for a vote on the motion tabled by a number of Assembly Members. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 39, seven abstentions, one against. Therefore, the motion is agreed.

We now move to vote on the UKIP debate on modular housing. I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Gareth Bennett. If the proposal is not agreed, we will vote on the amendments tabled to that motion. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion five, no abstentions, 42 against. Therefore, the motion is not agreed.

We move to vote on the amendments. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 will be deselected. So, I call for a vote on amendment 1, tabled in the name of Julie James. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the amendment 31, no abstentions, 16 against. Therefore, amendment 1 is agreed and amendment 2 is deselected.

We now move to vote on the motion as amended.

Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 42, no abstentions, five against. Therefore, the motion as amended is agreed.

We now move on to the short debate and I call on Mike Hedges. We'll wait, Mike, until people move.

I thought you were going to say that.

If you're going, can you go quickly out of the Chamber, please?

It's not a good thing to be picked for the last week of term.

Yes. Right, we now move to the short debate and I call on Mike Hedges to talk on the topic that he has chosen. Mike.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer.

I hope to show the importance of the construction industry, the importance of apprenticeships and having a skilled construction workforce, the importance of supporting and growing Welsh construction companies and also the importance of big projects such as the tidal lagoon in Swansea. The sad thing is that, if I'd been making this speech two years ago, I'd have still said 'the importance of big projects such as the tidal lagoon in Swansea'. I think that one of the saddest things is that we've got a lot of very large projects in Wales that seem to take an inordinate length of time to come forward.

A former county council colleague of mine used to say that success is having a lot of cranes on the skyline. What he meant was that when construction is booming then the economy is booming. I have taken an interest in local construction companies and I have visited Dawnus, Hygrove and RDM Electricals, amongst others, during the last few months. One of our weaknesses in Wales is that whilst we have a large number of small and medium-sized construction firms, many sub-contracting on large projects, what we currently lack are large Welsh construction firms. What we need to do for our economy is to grow some of these medium-sized construction firms into large construction firms.

Construction is hugely important. The Office for National Statistics shows that, in Britain, there are over 2 million people working in construction. In Wales, there are over 90,000, which is almost one in five of the workforce. The Welsh construction industry is predicted to grow fast—the fastest in Britain up to 2020. According to in-depth research from the Construction Industry Training Board, the sector in Wales is predicted to have an annual average growth rate in output of 7.1 per cent, compared with 2.5 per cent for the rest of the UK between 2016 and 2020. During this period the number employed in the sector is expected to rise to over 120,000. The increase forecast is predicted to only be beaten by London, the south-west and the north-west of England. Employment in the construction sector is likely to meet its 2008 peak next year and exceed it by 5 per cent in 2020, according to the Construction Skills Network forecast 2016-2020 report, in association with Experian.

This expansion will be driven by a range of major infrastructure projects. It's almost like we're waiting for them, aren't we? Infrastructure projects like Wylfa—we're still waiting. The tidal lagoon—we're waiting. The work that has been done by local authorities in terms of schools and the twenty-first century schools programme, which has been a huge success, and has had huge support right across the Chamber, has made a difference in terms of employment, and it made a difference in the quality of schools that pupils go to. I remember once, when I was with the county council, we used to say that, realistically, we now expect our schools to last slightly longer than medieval castles, because at the rate we were replacing them it was going to take about 700 years for all the schools in Swansea to be replaced. The only way to get a new school was if the old one burned down. Headteachers were rather pleased when they found their school had burned down, because they knew they were going to get a new one, which is really not the direction we wish to travel in.

So, we've had these huge projects. Flintshire County Council, Carmarthenshire council and Swansea council, amongst others, are engaging in building a large number of council houses again, and I'm really pleased to see this happening. We talk about a housing shortage quite regularly, including this afternoon, and I think that construction, the building of houses, is incredibly important. There are strong growth forecasts for the Welsh construction industry, driven by the infrastructure projects, driven by schools, driven by housing. Construction plays a vital role in delivering a vibrant economy and a quality environment. With spend for the sector estimated at more than £2.3 billion per annum, the sector contributes around 10 per cent of GDP. There are in excess of 12,000 companies involved within the sector, employing more than 100,000 people, including professionals such as planners, architects, surveyors and building engineers as well as the traditional construction companies responsible for new builds and the maintenance and upkeep of our historic and heritage buildings.

I think that's perhaps one of the problems we've got is that people think of construction and think of people putting one brick on the other. They forget about the highly skilled jobs that exist right the way through. Anybody who's tried to build a wall will know that putting one brick on top of the other and getting it to stay up is incredibly difficult. But there are also highly skilled professional jobs—architects or quantity surveyors. It's a highly skilled business, and I think that probably most of us in this room, if we tried to build a house, would probably have it falling down when we got up to one storey, if we got that far. So, housing is incredibly important to all of us.

The challenge of climate change requires a more sustainable approach to development. Wales is committed to cutting its carbon footprint. These changes produce fresh challenges for indigenous businesses engaged in developing, maintaining and renovating homes and other buildings. I was very fortunate, along with other colleagues on the Climate Change, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee, to visit the SOLCER building just outside Pyle, to see how you can actually have a building that is positively putting energy into the grid rather than taking it out. I'm also very much aware of the excellent work being done by Swansea council in their new development in the Portmead and Blaenymaes area. Companies in Wales are at the forefront in developing the knowledge, skills and innovative technologies needed to maximise the opportunities that these challenges bring. The Welsh Government and the industry is working together to ensure that they are able to deliver the environmental and low-carbon solutions that clients want now and in the future, and through this, enabling social and community regeneration as well as business competitiveness.

Research by the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors show that skills shortages remain a problem, with quantity surveyors in particular in short supply, with 51 per cent of respondents citing difficulties in recruiting quantity surveyors. The key thing is we need to support our small and medium-sized firms. This is something I keep on going on about to the Minister, both in public and in private. The size of contracts put out by Welsh Government matters. Very large contracts mean that medium-sized Welsh companies are excluded. Whilst sub-dividing contracts into a size small enough for Welsh companies to bid adds additional administration, it increases competition and the benefits to the economy of Wales far outweigh that. Also loans against income and guarantees allow smaller companies to bid. If we are serious about growing medium-sized construction companies then we need to have a strategy on how we can support them to be main contractors, not just sub-contractors, when they sub-contract and all the profit, or most of the profit, makes its way to the large construction company that is sub-contracting to them.

Can I talk about the tidal lagoon? It could have been the topic of the whole 15 minutes. It's a huge project. It's incredibly important to Swansea. It's incredibly important to Wales. It's a pathfinder for the sector. If Swansea gets the tidal lagoon—I could say 'When Swansea gets the tidal lagoon', because it is inevitably going to come. If we're the first tidal lagoon, we'll build up the skill set, we'll build up the design capability, we'll build up the companies able to be part of the construction. It'll be a bit like what's happened in Aarhus in Denmark where they were one of the first to develop wind turbines. All of a sudden, they now send their wind turbines all over the world, because they are the people who can do it, they are the ones with a knowledge base, they are the ones with a supply chain. It works so incredibly well. If we are the tenth, we'll be the ones buying it in. It's incredibly important to be the first.

I'll just say this: the Hendry review, which many of us who are pessimistic thought was kicking it into the long grass, is the most positive I've ever heard. I'll quote it:

'I believe that the evidence is clear that tidal lagoons can play a cost effective role in the UK’s energy mix.'

Ultimately, the UK Government faces

'a strategic decision, every bit as much as an economic decision.'

Moving ahead with a pathfinder lagoon at Swansea bay, as soon as is reasonably practicable, is a 'no-regrets policy.'

I think we can take it that Calder Hall or Windscale or Sellafield would never have been built if the same rules existed back in the 1950s that exist now. We've had technological changes—some have worked and some haven't. Many people remember the arguments over Betamax versus VHS—that's an old argument that's disappeared—and hovercrafts were going to be the vehicle of the future. But, you've got to try, because some of these things really have worked. I think it really is important that we do try. It can do no harm. At the very worst, what you end up with is a defence against flooding in Swansea.

It's a £1.3 billion capital investment; they're targeting 50 per cent of the spend in Wales; reliable net power output of over 530 GWh, enough to meet the annual electricity requirement of 90 per cent of the homes in Swansea bay for 120 years; direct employment of over 2,000 people in construction; £316 million GVA through construction; the key is investment in three new Welsh manufacturing facilities—one for machining and pre-assembly of turbines, one for heavy fabrication of steel components, and one for pre-cast of concrete components; a 12-month process from moving into final-phase negotiations with the UK Government to start construction. It's not just construction jobs, which are very good in themselves, but the fact you're creating a new industry. I just feel it's really important that we do get this tidal lagoon for Swansea. Perhaps I can use the term people often use when developments take place in other parts of Wales: it will be good for Wales. Maybe people in Rhyl may not be speaking of it, but it's going to get up there to Colwyn Bay and Rhyl, it's going to go all around Wales. We're just a pathfinder, the rest of Wales will follow.

Housing is the bread and butter of the construction industry. It has changed a lot in the last 50 years, not necessarily all for the best. There has been a large increase in empty properties, which is unfortunate. Again, I give credit to what the Welsh Government have done in their twin-track approach of giving loans for people to bring properties back into use, and also the opportunity to increase council tax on empty properties. There are people who leave properties empty, quite often very nice properties, for reasons of their own, but it is reducing the amount of housing available within the community. We've seen an increase in the number of single-person households and the number of pensioner households. We've seen a change back into private renting. Council housing has declined. There has been a substantial growth in housing associations. The private rented sector, which in the 1960s and 1970s appeared to be in an almost terminal decline—apart from students—now has had a huge increase.

Construction work is important. We need to build houses. We need to build houses for people. We've just had a debate on housing, which I didn't know was going to occur when I put this in. It's about building houses and building new estates. What type of houses do people want? Most people are not massively ambitious. They'd be quite happy, like me, to live in a three-bedroom semi, whether it's provided by a housing association, the council, or whether we own it ourselves. That's what they want—actually having that done. Can I just say how impressed I am with the Hygrove development on the former Morris Brothers bus site in Swansea? It's building over 200 houses, 20 of them are for the housing association, the rest are for sale. It's a development that has brought a brownfield site back into use. It's producing good-quality homes. How do I know they're good-quality homes? Because they've produced about 60 or 70 now and there's not a 'for sale' sign against any of them. You don't often see that in new estates.

On apprenticeships, construction needs skilled workers. We need apprentices to come through to replace retiring tradespeople. We went through a period of time with too few apprentices. This needs resolving. I am well aware and appreciative of the work done by the CITB, and I know the Welsh Government is looking to work with employers. All apprenticeships include an appropriate competency qualification to at least level 2, an Essential Skills Wales qualification, a technical knowledge qualification, or other qualifications or requirements, as specified by the particular occupation. But one of the great difficulties is getting companies to take people on. I think that is a problem in construction because we've got so many very small construction companies that they're not able to offer apprenticeships. And that's why, if we can start growing some of these companies, you get into a really good system. Companies grow, they start getting bigger contracts, they take on apprentices, and everybody benefits. The Welsh economy benefits, the people taking on benefit, and we as a society benefit.

Construction is at the heart of the Welsh economy. We all rely on it. We need to grow. But can I just say, as I always do—? I always try and end, like I used to when I was teaching, on the things that I really think are important. We need to grow more large Welsh-based construction companies. We need to support them with contracts that go out—especially Welsh Government contracts—that mean they can bid. If you have a building contract to build six schools at £70 million, you won't have a Welsh construction company able to bid. You break it down into six schools at £10 million each, you've got Welsh construction companies able to bid. We have some major projects coming, but we can't just rely on major projects, important though they are. We need to ensure we have a skilled workforce; we have an opportunity to develop construction skills and, most important of all, we need to make sure we get the houses that our people need. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Can I call on Ken Skates as the Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Transport to reply to the debate?

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I'd like to thank Mike Hedges for calling this debate, and it's my pleasure to respond to him. I'm incredibly pleased to see that the Construction Skills Network, in their latest forecast, predict that Wales will see unprecedented growth in construction over the next five years, and these forecasts are a reflection, I believe, of our continued commitment to long-term infrastructure planning and investment here in Wales. Our intention, as a Government, is to provide the industry with a clear pipeline of public sector projects, and clearly they are huge opportunities for the construction sector at every level, and it's our intention to work with the sector in capitalising on these many opportunities. 

Development and delivery of innovative procurement policy has seen clear, direct benefits to Wales and its economy. Application of community benefits has resulted in thousands of jobs and training places for individuals right across Wales, and it's helped small and medium-sized enterprises in our supply chain to grow and to expand. Low-carbon energy generation is one area that offers enormous economic opportunities over the coming years, and that's why we're supporting the development of the Wylfa Newydd nuclear power station on Anglesey, and it's why we have been and we continue to be supportive of the tidal lagoon in Swansea bay. 

Improving and investing in our transport infrastructure is another key area of growth in the coming years, and we remain committed to improving the M4 motorway around Newport, the metros in south Wales, and also in the north-east of Wales. Investment in infrastructure helps us to grow the economy. It also, though, helps us to tackle social problems, and despite the strong record we have of building more homes in Wales, we still have too many young people who simply can't get onto the housing ladder. And that's why we've set an ambitious target of delivering 20,000 affordable homes, and why we're investing £1.3 billion to support the housing sector over the course of this very Assembly term.

We're particularly keen to see more SME house builders entering the building sector to diversify the market and to promote innovation. The £30 million Wales property development fund, managed by the Development Bank of Wales, will continue to support SMEs that are unable to access affordable finance from traditional sources. Modern methods of construction can also help build homes faster and more efficiently, and we've launched our £20 million innovative housing programme to specifically support alternative and new approaches. It's crucial, given this unprecedented level of infrastructure development, that construction is recognised as an attractive career choice.

The construction sector has come together to develop Go Construct—the first industry-wide interactive careers portal showcasing the wide variety of jobs in construction and the best routes in. As Mike Hedges has already said, apprenticeships have proven their effectiveness in the marketplace and are very highly valued by both employers and apprentices themselves. That's why we've committed to the delivery of a minimum of 100,000 all-age apprenticeships during this Assembly term.

Now, we have to build intelligently and sustainably if we want the investments we make now to be worth while in the long term, and that's the reason we put sustainable development and decarbonisation at the heart of all we do as a Government, and why we're establishing a national infrastructure commission for Wales. As I've said, I want to see as much as possible of the investment made in Wales stay here in Wales, helping us to create better jobs closer to home. 

Our national strategy 'Prosperity for All' focuses the whole of the Government on a number of areas to deliver real impacts, and yesterday I published the economic action plan, which will help us to work with the business community in responding to those key challenges. The plan outlines my aim to deliver modern and connected infrastructure to meet the productivity challenge and also to drive sustainable economic growth as we build as never before. 

Thank you very much. That brings today's proceedings to a close. Thank you.