Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru

I call Members to order. 

Before we begin today's proceedings, I'm sure Members will want to join me in marking a year since the death of our former colleague Carl Sargeant. On behalf of all Assembly Members and staff, I'd like to send our deepest condolences to our colleague Jack Sargeant, and his family, at this very difficult time. 

The first item, therefore, on our agenda this afternoon is questions to the Cabinet Secretary for Energy, Planning and Rural Affairs, and the first question is from Llyr Gruffydd.

Diolch. Our vision was set out in the 'Brexit and our land' consultation. We want a thriving and resilient agricultural sector, where farmers produce outcomes of huge importance to Wales as a whole. Many of these can only be produced by Welsh farmers on Welsh land.

Thank you for that response. The agricultural sector is one of the key pillars of the Welsh language here in Wales, and you will be aware of the Government's responsibilities in light of the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015, where cultural and linguistic considerations are to be equally balanced with economic, environmental and social considerations. With that in mind, and being aware of the response from Cymdeithas yr Iaith Gymraeg, from Cytûn—Churches Together in Wales, from the Welsh Local Government Association rural forum, and the concerns expressed by some on the impact that the recommendations within 'Brexit and our land' will have on the Welsh language, will you confirm that the Government will carry out a thorough assessment of the linguistic impact of any changes that you will introduce and that, if the impact assessment shows that there will be damage to the future of the Welsh language, the Government will change course?

Thank you. We certainly will carry out an impact assessment in relation to the Welsh language, probably over the next few months before we introduce the White Paper. The Welsh language is probably used more by the agricultural sector than any other sector in Wales, and I think one of the best ways of preserving the language is to keep farmers farming on our land. 

One of the resilience issues that have been exposed by the whole discussions about what can happen as a result of Brexit is the shortage of fruit and vegetables grown in this country. Obviously, this is an important issue both for the well-being of all of us, but particularly for our ability to supply our schools, our hospitals and other public services with fresh produce. So, I just wondered what your plans were for ensuring that we have sufficient supplies of vegetables and fruit, which have been rather undermined over the last 20, 30 years.

Thank you. I should have probably mentioned in my opening answer to Llyr that we've had 12,000 responses to 'Brexit and our land'. So, we are currently analysing the responses and we'll have a more detailed consultation again in the spring, and, obviously, it will determine our policy. But I think there is a real opportunity around fruit and vegetable production, probably for the first time. We'll be able to look at schemes that can increase market potential, that can drive improvements in productivity, diversification. So, I think it's an area where we'll certainly want to support farmers to be able to diversify into areas such as horticulture or agroforestry. 

Thank you. We've been notified of a very small number of complaints relating to cavity wall insulation installed under Welsh Government-funded schemes. All work undertaken through our Nest and Arbed schemes is delivered by registered installers. In the event of failure, beneficiaries are able to seek remedial work to be done by the contractor. In the event that the contractor is no longer trading, consumers are referred to the Cavity Insulation Guarantee Agency for remedial work to be undertaken where appropriate.

Thank you for that answer, Cabinet Secretary, and I'm sure the small number that you refer to are probably all in my constituency, because I've got large numbers of people who have faced problems as a consequence of cavity wall insulation failing, and, therefore, they are now facing large bills because of the work that has to be done. Now, as you said in your answer, they went back to the builder, but most of those builders seem to have disappeared all of a sudden. Whether they were only in it for their own cash is another question. Then they went to CIGA, as you said, and CIGA are not really being supportive of their guarantee. In effect, CIGA are very much saying that, 'Sorry, this is a problem with the maintenance of the property. It's nothing to do with the cavity wall insulation.' And these individuals are vulnerable individuals who have not got the money to actually pay for the work that needs to be done. Will you take action against CIGA, please, to make sure they meet their obligations? They put a guarantee in place to reassure people who took on these Welsh Government schemes, so that, if there was a problem, they knew they would have that backing. Unfortunately, that backing is not there.

I thank David Rees for that question. I mentioned that CIGA has been the traditional and main guarantee provider in this issue. You'll remember we had a debate—probably about a year ago, actually—where there was some criticism levelled at CIGA, and, following that debate, I met with the chief executive, to discuss the concerns raised, to understand what action they are taking to alleviate these issues. And I am aware they have addressed a lot of previous concerns; we are monitoring it much more carefully. I have to say, in recent months, correspondence around problems have reduced, but I think it's really important that I am aware of the problems. So, if you have any individual cases, please do write to me, and I'll certainly take it up with CIGA. We are continuing to work with the UK Government, and CIGA and other agencies, so that we can encourage effective consumer protection; I think it's really important that people do know where to go. But I'd be very happy to look at any cases that you have. If want to write to me on a case-by-case basis, I'd be very happy to do that.

I think that David Rees has raised a very important issue, very forcefully, and it's not just your constituents who've been affected by this, David—it's constituents for AMs across Wales. Cabinet Secretary, this really does highlight the problem when you retrofit existing housing stock in a way that deviates from the original standard, and isn't done in the way that it should be. And it's very important that companies who do this sort of work really do know what they're doing, and that lessons have been learned from this. It may well be that we don't know the full extent of this problem yet, as it can take some time for problems to surface, and it might even be that some of the vulnerable people who are living in these houses that have been poorly retrofitted haven't even been made aware of the problem yet. So, what are you doing to make sure you fully do ascertain the number of people who do need assistance in this regard? And, as I said before, what lessons have been learned by the Welsh Government and, indeed, the companies retrofitting, to make sure that this problem isn't happening now and that different but associated retrofitting issues in the future won't emerge?

Well, you ask what we've done as a Government, and, certainly under the new contracts that we have for Nest 2 and Arbed 3, we further strengthened the process by including strict minimum guarantee requirements, robust monitoring—because I don't think the monitoring was as robust as it could have been in the beginning—and assurance, and we also obviously inspect all installations.

Questions now from the party spokespeople to the Cabinet Secretary. The Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Llyr Gruffydd.

Thank you, Llywydd. The news that the Planning Inspectorate for England and Wales intends to scrap the role of the executive director for Wales is clearly going to come as a surprise to many people, and it will send a clear message in terms of the risk that Wales is being downgraded within that inspectorate. Can I ask the Cabinet Secretary what role she and the Welsh Government played in that decision?

I quite agree with you—any downgrading in the status of the Welsh arm of the inspectorate, I think, is completely unacceptable. Previously, Llyr may be aware that we considered having a fully separate planning inspectorate for Wales in 2015. I've kept that under review, and I'm very grateful that my predecessor did and that I've been able to consider that also. We've expressed concerns that the removal of the post of director for Wales should not happen without any discussion with us. We have to be consulted formally before any proposals are finalised.

But what does that say about the relationship between the Government here, and other partners within the Planning Inspectorate, that such a decision can be considered without there having been adequate consultation with you as Cabinet Secretary and with the Government here? Our party, of course, has been calling for a very long time for an independent inspectorate for Wales. We see, in light of devolution, how the Planning Inspectorate has been evolving in very different directions in Wales, as compared to England, and particularly in light of the Planning (Wales) Act 2015. So, you say that you're keeping this under review, your predecessor said that it was under review, and his predecessor also acknowledged that there was scope to accept that, if the situation were to evolve in different directions, having one inspectorate to oversee two very different regimes wouldn't be sustainable. At what point will you come to a conclusion? If this isn't a clear message of the direction of travel, at what point will you come to the conclusion that the time has come to have an independent planning inspectorate for Wales once and for all? 

Well, I think now that, obviously, the chief executive is currently consulting staff on that restructuring exercise, as part of that programme, they are looking at—as I say, consulting on—the structure. We have to be formally part of that consultation. But, as you say, I think the time certainly is now, isn't it, in answer to the question of when will I do something about it in the way that you want to. I certainly think we need to look at that much more seriously now.  

I think I hear you saying that the time has come for an independent Welsh inspectorate. Could you confirm whether that's the case? 

Well, I said I think the time has come now to look at something that we've been monitoring for the past three years, in light of this consultation. 

Excellent. 

The Conservative spokesperson, Andrew R.T. Davies. 

Thank you, Presiding Officer. Cabinet Secretary, you recently took the decision on the Hendy windfarm to allow permission for that to be granted, despite the local authority's planning committee refusing the application and the planning inspectorate's own appeal inspector refusing the application. As I understand it, Welsh Government officials have been involved with Powys County Council in the zoning of areas that would be acceptable for windfarms to be developed. The unitary development plan or the local development plan up in that neck of the woods clearly identifies certain areas, and Hendy, as I understand it, falls outside of those areas. What confidence can local people have that the system is working on their behalf when you go in and override the local planning committee and also the planning inspectorate, who have stuck to the rules? 

I don't think it's a matter of overriding; I'm satisfied the planning inspector considered the relevant issues, but I disagree with the conclusion. I'm also the Cabinet Secretary with responsibility for energy. We have set renewable energy targets. We have to make sure that we deliver on those targets and, for me, the benefits of the proposal in terms of delivering renewable energy are material considerations that are sufficient to outweigh the identified impacts of the scheme on both the landscape and the visual amenity. 

I think in your reply to me there, Cabinet Secretary, you indicated that the planning inspector did stick to the rules but you disagree with his conclusion. Your department recently, as well, when it comes to shooting on public land, disagreed with the independent report that was commissioned at a cost of £47,000. Can you give us a sense of why the department is going against the evidence, in particular when it comes to this particular application? As you said, the planning inspector stuck to the rules; it was just that you disagreed with those conclusions. What part of the conclusions do you fundamentally disagree with that overrides the planning imperative here that local residents need to have confidence in when these applications come into their areas? 

Well, I mentioned in my original answer to you why I believed the proposals around delivering renewable energy—. Our material considerations—they are sufficient to outweigh the identified impact. So, I think the balance, therefore, weighs in favour of the appeal. But I think, also, wind energy is a key part of Welsh Government's vision for future renewable electricity production, and I think that has to be taken into consideration by decision makers. 

I do take the point that Welsh Government, in fairness—we can disagree or agree with the policy—has had a policy of promoting wind energy, but they've had a policy of promoting wind energy within certain areas and certain zones that are proved for the development of these windfarms. Here, this particular development was outside of that zone and, as I said in my opening question to you, the Government have been involved in identifying those zones and the local authority have engaged in that discussion. How can communities and, in particular, local authorities have confidence that they will not be undermined and will not face huge costs from developers when you take such an arbitrary decision as you have on this particular application, because the planning permission that was refused stuck to the rules, the appeal inspectors, as you said in your own answer, stuck to the rules—the planning guidance that was given—and yet you came in and overrode that? This is causing huge frustration in this part of mid Wales. Other areas of Wales where they see that you will not intervene when you are requested to intervene are completely bemused by the decision that you have taken. So, can you clarify whether it is now open season to develop windfarms the length and breadth of Wales, because, as I said, this application is outside of the zone that you, as a Government, have approved with the local authority? 

It's certainly not open season. I think one of the ways of ensuring the public do have confidence is not to have conflicting policies. And I think one of the things that has become very apparent to me over the two years that I've been in this portfolio is the conflict in policies, and we are taking steps to ensure that that's not the case. 

UKIP spokesperson, Neil Hamilton.

Diolch, Llywydd. Hendy windfarm is being built in an area of outstanding natural beauty. It's perfectly clear from the answer that you've just given, Cabinet Secretary, to Andrew R.T, Davies, that your mind was made up on this even before the planning inspector was appointed, because you've said, in effect, that the Government's policy on renewable energy outweighs any planning considerations. So, what on earth is the point of having planning inquiries in these circumstances because it's evident from your decision that this was merely a charade—a pretence—of taking local opinion into account, when you had no intention of doing so?

It certainly wasn't a charade or a pretence.

I think others will judge your actions rather than your words. But let's look at the decision that you've made and the reason that you've given for it. Yes, I understand that the Government has a commitment to renewable energy, but even if one accepts the Government's view of global warming and its causes, I cannot understand how the desecration of an important beauty spot in mid Wales can be outweighed by renewable energy considerations, because whatever the United Kingdom does in relation to global warming is immediately extinguished by what's happening in the rest of the world. 

In China, for example, they are currently in the process of building another 210 GW of coal-fired power station. Now, at the moment, we are consuming in the United Kingdom 37 GW, so the Chinese are going to add, in the next few years, seven times the entire consumption of electricity in the United Kingdom on a dark and dull day, like today. So, whatever reduction in carbon emissions and whatever contribution that might make to solving the problems of global warming, it's going to make absolutely no difference whatsoever, but it's going to make a vast difference to the people of mid Wales.

I think most people, apart from Neil Hamilton and members of UKIP, do accept that climate change is happening and the reasons for it. I was waiting for you to mention China, because you always mention China when we're talking about renewable energy. You can't just sit back and do nothing. We, in Wales, may be a small nation, but I think we take our proposals to do all we can to mitigate climate change very, very seriously. I was out at the global climate action summit in San Francisco in September. People were looking at us because we are held up as best practice, not just in renewable energy, but in things like waste and recycling. You can't just sit back and say, 'Oh well, China are doing this, so we shouldn't do anything.' I really don't accept that. But I really do wish that you would look at what we're doing in climate change mitigation and join the rest of us in accepting that we have our role to play.

The Welsh Government may be leading, but nobody's following. That's the problem—that's what I'm arguing here. If this was going to make any difference at all and if people were actually going to be impressed by what's happening in Wales in parts of the world where it matters, if you were going to sort out the problems of global warming on the basis of the theories that you espouse, I could understand it, but that isn't happening. You say I always mention China—yes, I do, well, let's mention India as well. In addition to China, India is currently in the process of the construction of 130 GW of coal-fired power stations. So, 130 plus 210, that's 340 GW—that's 10 times the entire British consumption of electricity. Those are just new power stations in construction, fired by coal. So, whatever difference Llandegley Rocks wind turbines are going to make, it is a minute fraction of 1 per cent. It's going to make no difference, but what you've done by your decision, is to wreck and desecrate one of the most beautiful parts of mid Wales. 

You say nobody follows, but at that conference that I just mentioned that was held in September, there were 100 states and regions of which, I would say, most are coming forward with actions similar to Wales's. So, you mentioned India, I shared a platform with the mayor of Delhi who is desperate to do what we're doing in Wales, and is actually achieving that. So, I'm sorry, but you can't just sit back and blame everybody else. You have to take action and you have to show leadership.

Question 3 [OAQ52884] is withdrawn. Question 4—Rhianon Passmore.

Thank you. I'm committed to supporting the long-term development and profitability of dairy across Wales. Market support includes trade development in the UK and overseas markets. Business support includes benchmarking, technical support, business clustering and significant resources training.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. And as you stated at the recent annual dairy show, the need to prepare for a post-Brexit world has never been more essential, as Wales is set to be buffeted by the tsunami of its impacts. Cabinet Secretary, how does the Welsh Government assess that the new HerdAdvance project, which is part of the Welsh Government's £6.5 million dairy improvement programme, is going to aid farmers in my constituency of Islwyn? And what can the Welsh Government do to ensure that the new project, delivered by the agricultural and horticultural board, is embraced fully by as many farmers as possible in south-east Wales?

Thank you. You referred to last week's dairy show, and that's where we launched the first phase of the dairy improvement programme. So, now dairy farmers are able to apply for support to help them improve the health of their herds and the profitability of their businesses. The HerdAdvance project to which you specifically referred has been allocated £5.5 million over the next five years, and that aims to pilot how a farm can have a holistic approach to disease prevention and also can improve the efficiency and profitability of farm businesses.

It's become very apparent over the last two years, since we had the vote to leave the European Union, that we need to do all we can to support our farmers ahead of Brexit to make sure that they are resilient, that they are sustainable and that they are productive. So, we did some benchmarking, for instance, with the dairy sector last year. We had some funding from Europe, and about 75 per cent of dairy farmers took advantage of that money; it enabled them then to learn a great deal about their business.

Thank you. In Welsh Government’s 'Taking Wales Forward 2016-2021', we made clear our opposition to fracking. Over the summer, I held a public consultation on petroleum extraction in Wales that set out not only a policy to oppose fracking, but also proposed there should be no new petroleum licensing in Wales.

I recently sponsored an event in the Senedd with Friends of the Earth Cymru and Frack-Free Wales, Cabinet Secretary, and I am strongly opposed to fracking and have worked hard to stop it happening in the Vale of Glamorgan. You said recently in Welsh Government's 'Taking Wales Forward'—and you restated today your clear opposition to fracking. You noted that Welsh Government has powers over fracking and that you believe this type of energy production is counter to well-being goals and our environmental aims. So, I welcome the current moratorium on fracking and the consultation to remove fossil fuels from our energy mix, and not to support applications for hydraulic fracturing and petroleum licence consents. So, will the Welsh Government commit to permanently banning fracking in Wales?

Thank you. I'm determined to use every possible lever to ensure fracking does not take place in Wales. This includes strong opposition to issuing new petroleum licences, or consents for fracking, and the introduction of a much more robust planning policy. So, taken together, I think these will represent the most robust approach taken by any country in the UK to ensure fracking doesn't happen.

The policies that we've had in place have prevented any fracking occurring. I will be making an announcement before the end of term. So, we've got the 'Planning Policy Wales' revision, and we've also got our petroleum consultation summary, and that will ensure that Welsh Government's policies mean no future fracking in Wales.

Cabinet Secretary, thank you for that answer to the previous question, because I was going to ask you the timeline that you're working to. You indicate that you're bringing forward a statement before the Christmas recess. Will that statement include a timeline of delivery? Because, at the moment, the moratorium, in effect, has been brought forward by the prevention of new planning permissions in this particular area. Obviously, that can only last a certain period of time, and given it is a Government commitment, what sort of timeline are you working to to implement these stronger safeguards that will obviously enhance the ability to stop fracking and shale gas extraction here in Wales?

Thank you. Yes, I confirm I will be making a statement before the end of this term—so, within the next month and a half—and it will contain a timeline.

Cabinet Secretary, I welcome your Government's stance on fracking. Regardless of whether the fracking process can be made safe for the environment, the end product is still a fossil fuel. Cabinet Secretary, will your Government also be opposing any, and all, licences for underground coal gasification in Wales, as well as licences for new coal extraction?

As I say, I will be making a statement before the end of term to keep Members updated.

Diolch. The proposals in 'Brexit and our land' are designed to keep farming families on the land and communities intact. Supporting the Welsh language within those communities is an integral part of what we are seeking to achieve.  

Almost a third of Welsh farmers are Welsh speakers, which is 50 per cent higher than the average of all Welsh speakers in Wales. The agricultural sector and farming families make a crucial contribution to the Welsh language and safeguard the Welsh language in our rural communities. Therefore, the proposals in 'Brexit and our land', which suggest ceasing direct payments to farmers after Brexit, are a threat to the viability of agriculture in Wales, and therefore the Welsh language. How, therefore, can the proposals outlined in this consultation correspond to the Government's million Welsh speakers policy? Isn't putting the future of the Welsh language in our rural communities at risk, where the Welsh language is alive and well, entirely contrary to those objectives?

Diolch. Well, you will have heard me mention in my answer to Llyr to question 1 that I believe that the best way of preserving the Welsh language—. You're quite right, the agricultural sector, I think you said 50 per cent uses the Welsh language, 50 per cent more than other sectors, and it's an absolutely inseparable part of the social fabric for parts of rural Wales. So, again, you will have heard me say that we will be doing an impact assessment. 

But I just want to address your questions around the basic payment scheme. There's absolutely no link whatsoever between the BPS and a farmer's efforts, the performance of the farm business or the outcomes that the farm business achieves. I think the BPS delivers neither resilience nor long-term prosperity. I think it's time for change. Many people have said to me it's time for change. I was at the National Farmers Union conference last week and took the opportunity to speak to many farmers—we've had 12,000 responses to our consultation and they're just now starting to be analysed. But, again, amongst them—I've seen some of them—there are people who absolutely support what we're doing. But what I want to make really, really clear is that there is a need to support farming businesses—I've said that from day one since I've been in this portfolio. Support will continue; it'll just be done in a different and a smarter way.

'The Welsh language is an inseparable part of the social fabric of parts of rural Wales. Cultural connections with farming across Wales are strong and agriculture plays an important role in sustaining the Welsh language.'

That's it. That's the quote in 'Brexit and our land'. There was no more than that.

Having said that, though, I think you would agree with me that young farmers' clubs in particular are a great place for farming to grow and continue with youngsters progressing in the industry, and, of course, sustaining life and lifestyles in parts of rural Wales, providing the society, if you like, preventing loneliness, taking on community roles and nurturing an understanding of personal and mutual responsibility. So, I'm wondering if you will look again at the direct cuts that have been made to young farmers' clubs and speak to local government colleagues about the cuts that they're making to youth services' budgets and so on, which have indirectly supported young farmers' clubs.

I absolutely think young farmers' clubs are—it's a fantastic organisation. I've met with many members over the past few years. I don't want to make cuts; I didn't come into politics to make cuts, but you'll be aware, because of austerity, we've all had to make very difficult decisions and nobody more so than the Cabinet Secretary for Local Government and Public Services. I will do all I can to support them. I have conversations with them about how they can support us in return for that funding and I'm very keen to do all I can to support them.

Thank you. The 'Brexit and our land' consultation closed on 30 October. We've had over 12,000 responses from individuals and organisations. We will now thoroughly analyse all responses ahead of a planned further consultation in the new year.

Thank you. I appreciate that you and your Government officials will now be wading through those 12,000 responses that you have received. However, we know, as AMs, from our mailbags, that our farmers have been very clear in their responses to you and they are asking for significant changes, including greater emphasis on actively farming the land; for productivity to be at the heart of the legislation; for food production to be regarded as a public good; for revised schemes to be accessible to all farmers, including tenants; and that a form of direct payment be continued. The lack of direct payments in your plan is a source of great concern, because, if unchanged, it could see numerous farms across Wales lose stability, confidence and ability to invest going forward. Cabinet Secretary, you don't need me to tell you that for every pound invested in our farms, there is a return in the local economy of around £7.40. Therefore, I am perplexed as to why you would even consider pursuing a policy that could see farmers lose this stability. You recently stated in a Farmers Guardian interview that implementing any form of direct payments would not be an option, even if an overwhelming majority of respondents have requested it. This is alarming. Please, will you give assurances to Members here and to our farmers that you will not make a farce of this Brexit consultation? And I can assure the Cabinet Secretary that I myself have responded; I'm one of those 12,000, and I write on behalf of every single farmer in the constituency of Aberconwy.

I'm not sure you could possibly respond for every single farmer in your constituency with one view, because that's clearly not the case. I mentioned we've had 12,000, and I'm not disrespecting what you're saying about your mail bag, but I've seen a lot of correspondence that absolutely agrees that basic payment schemes shouldn't be kept. So, we can't generalise; we have to analyse all the responses.

If I can just address some of the points you make. Active farming is really important, and active farming will be absolutely at the heart of our new land management scheme. Food production cannot be a public good; it's got a market. There is no market for public goods, and what we're attempting to do with the public goods scheme, and what we want to do, is make sure that farmers are paid for public goods, for which there is no market at the moment. So, the air quality, the soil quality, the water quality—they don't get paid for that at the moment. We need to ensure that that changes. 

Food production—I've made it very clear that the economic resilience scheme is around productivity. We've seen productivity go down in the agricultural sector, and we want to ensure that it's now raised. So, food production is absolutely at the heart of the economic resilience scheme. Again, I'll go back to what I said in a previous answer: I don't want anybody to think that there is not a need for farming businesses to be supported; we've made that very clear. Both the First Minister and I have said, any agricultural funding—. And let's be clear about this—your Government in London hasn't told us of any funding that we're going to get post Brexit for agriculture, so ring fencing nothing is not going to do anything for our farmers, is it? So, until we get that assurance, I suggest the Conservative Party are very, very careful.

Greenland white-fronted geese are categorised as endangered under the International Union for the Conservation of Nature global red list criteria. The African-Eurasian waterbird agreement has recently raised the issue of a statutory ban in Wales and England, and I will consider and respond later this term.

I thank the Minister for that response. At the last count, there were only 22 Greenland white-fronted geese on the Dyfi, and there's limited protection for those birds wintering in Wales outside of areas of voluntary moratorium on shooting. So, given the very low population and that limited protection in Wales, I would be very grateful if the Minister did introduce a legal ban, and I'm grateful that consideration will be given.

I thank the Member for his question and his considerable interest and work in this area himself. I recognise that the existing year-round voluntary moratorium on the shooting of Greenland white-fronted geese in Wales is working effectively and being adhered to by wildfowling clubs in Wales. The African-Eurasian waterbird agreement also recognises this success and the work of the Welsh Greenland white-fronted geese partnership has been a fundamental part of this. The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds is also an active partner in the partnership, and in recent years has actually reported rises in numbers of such geese at sites in north Wales.

As I said in my first answer, the African-Eurasion waterbird agreement has recently raised the issue of a statutory ban in Wales and England, and I intend to respond by Christmas.

Minister, the Government has already had two consultations, in 2013 and 2016, on this particular issue. At the time, the Cabinet Secretary, Lesley Griffiths, said that there was no evidence to indicate that Greenland white-fronted geese are currently being shot in Wales. I think, from your answer to John Griffiths, there's an indication that the Government is minded to pursue legislation in this particular area. Given the assertion from the Cabinet Secretary that there is no evidence to indicate that, why does the Minister believe there is a need to move from the voluntary moratorium that currently exists?

The Member—[Inaudible.] We received a complaint made under the African-Eurasian waterbird agreement, alleging non-compliance with certain provisions of the international agreement in respect of the measures taken in Wales concerning the conservation of Greenland white-fronted geese. Our initial response to the AEWA complaint stated our view that, as there was no evidence of shooting, these voluntary measures in Wales were proving sufficient. However, the AEWA has considered this position and has not accepted it as sufficient. We take this complaint seriously, and so we are considering the course of action best needed to safeguard Greenland white-fronted geese for the future.

Question 9 [OAQ52883] was withdrawn. Question 10—Dawn Bowden.

Thank you. Common land is valued for its contribution to the natural and national heritage of Wales. Common land policy aims to protect such land, promote sustainable farming and public access to the countryside, balanced with wildlife and conservation interests. Our future policy will be influenced by the 'Brexit and our land' consultation. 

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, and I'm very aware of the great value of the extensive common land in my constituency, which includes the Merthyr and Gelligaer common. I'm sure you'll know that EU funding has been available both to help in the management of the common land and for local farmers to co-operate and to market their produce through a local butcher's shop, Cig Mynydd Cymru, in Treharris. Will the new farming and land management system that we introduce in Wales after Brexit continue to support this type of rural enterprise?

I suppose the short answer is 'yes'. We certainly want to see more collaboration and ensure that we have robust supply chains. As you've heard me say a couple of times this afternoon, we are currently analysing all the responses to the consultation, so I can't give comment on the content of any specific future scheme. But, of course, organisations such as Farming Connect, for instance, which I know has provided support in establishing the co-operative to which you referred—. I'm certainly very keen for Farming Connect to continue post Brexit to support farmers and foresters.

A significant part of Gower within my region is made up of common land, as you know, and I have asked you before to have a look, maybe, at secondary legislation and the powers it might give you to curb irresponsible exercise of those rights. I know that my colleague Andrew R.T. Davies and, indeed, Hefin David have raised with you the opposite problem in the past, where some farmers have been stopped from exercising rights on common land. If I'm right, I think you've met with some Assembly Members about this, so I'm wondering if you can update us on any action taken on the back of that meeting to support farmers with their grazing rights and adjacent landowners, and whether there is anything in regulation that might assist you to solve some of these ongoing problems. 

Thank you. You're quite right. I met with Hefin David and Andrew R.T. Davies and Mick Antoniw—I'm trying to think if there was anybody else; I don't think there was—probably last year. I'd certainly be very happy to share the correspondence with the Member following the meetings we've had.

I am committed to maintaining the protections and safeguards in the current EU standards of species protection and building on this through the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 and the Environment (Wales) Act 2016. We aim to embed nature recovery across all of our policies and programmes.

Of course, rare and endangered species are not just in the Welsh countryside. They are also resident in many of the zoos across Wales, including the Welsh Mountain Zoo, which is the national zoo of Wales, of course, in my own constituency. It has endangered species programmes that are working to conserve the red squirrel population, of course, which I am the species champion for, but also red pandas, snow leopards, chimpanzees and many other species. What action is the Welsh Government taking to support such conservation work, where there are globally threatened species that are resident in Welsh zoos, and what specific support is the Welsh Government doing with the Welsh Mountain Zoo in my own constituency?

I thank the Member for his question. I remember many childhood trips to the Welsh Mountain Zoo myself, and I know that you are a proud champion of the red squirrel, which can actually be found in your own constituency in Clocaenog. When I actually went to visit there on a brisk north Wales day earlier this year, the seven red squirrels that have been released in the forest were feeling quite camera-shy that day, and I unfortunately didn't get to see any of them. 

The Welsh Government is absolutely committed to supporting such projects, in terms of working with endangered species. I can't comment specifically in terms of the Welsh Mountain Zoo, but it's certainly something I'm willing to look into for the Member and perhaps to meet to discuss at a future date. 

Thank you. Responsibility for freshwater fisheries protection resides with Natural Resources Wales, who have a statutory duty to maintain, improve and develop freshwater fisheries. Welsh Government has a similar responsibility for marine fisheries protection.

Thank you for your answer, Cabinet Secretary. Anglers have been in contact with me for some time with regard to the lack of capacity within Natural Resources Wales with regard to the protection of our fisheries and lakes in the catchment area around mid Wales in particular. Now, I'm told that poaching for salmon is becoming more widespread, which of course ruins the future of fishing stock. The concern is partly attributed to the lack of officers in the area and residing in the area to police the situation and to also work with angling clubs, farmers and fishery owners. So, do you recognise that there is a lack of policing power within NRW in this area? And if so, if you do agree with that, what can be done to resolve the situation?

Obviously, we provide core funding to NRW to make sure that they can fulfil their statutory responsibilities. They also receive about £1 million per annum from rod licence funding. I know you have written to me about this, and I'm awaiting a response to send back to you. I'm also meeting with the interim chair and the chief executive, along with the Minister for Environment, with NRW—I think it's next week. I will certainly raise it with them. But the short answer is: no, I don't agree with that.

Diolch. It would be for the UK Government to assess the environmental impact of not supporting this national energy infrastructure. Welsh Government has been clear and consistent in its support for tidal lagoons. We remain keen to see the recommendations in the Hendry report supported by UK Government.

Thank you for that response. Further to that, will you as Welsh Government support the development of a public energy company for Wales in order to tackle the issue of developing Swansea bay tidal lagoon?

Well, the Member is probably aware that I did some previous work with another member of Plaid Cymru around this, and it was decided that we did not think that was the most appropriate way forward.

Thank you. The Welsh Government provides a range of support to farmers in Wales, helping them to become more profitable, sustainable, resilient and professionally managed. This includes over £300 million a year support for farming, animal health and welfare, and rural development via the common agricultural policy. Agricultural businesses also benefit from Farming Connect grants and advice.

Thank you. I congratulate you on being the first Cab Sec or Minister to complete questions in a very long time. [Laughter.]

In August I joined the National Trust, the RSPB and a farmer on a National Trust farm, and they told me that a new sustainable land management scheme is needed that's fair to farmers, provides food, manages diversity and protects data and the environment. During the recess last week I had a meeting with NFU Cymru Clwyd county chair and their county adviser. They told me that within your proposals, the missing ingredient was the need for a stability mechanism to futureproof agriculture policy if we are to ensure a continued supply of quality, affordable food alongside public goods because of the economic resilience that the two together can provide. How do you respond to their call for that missing ingredient, for a stability mechanism within that, to help them now in planning for their investment in the future, given the uncertainty ahead, but also recognising that the whole principle behind agricultural support, going back to the 1940s, was recognition that, on occasions when the rain does fall, when the international disasters occur, or even conflict arises, we're going to need them again and we can't afford to lose them in the interim.

Thank you, and thank you for your comments. You've certainly laid down the gauntlet to the Cabinet Secretary for Local Government and Public Services to follow me.

I think you've raised a very important point around stability, and certainly I've had discussions with farmers over the last couple of years around volatility. Clearly, this year, with the weather, we've absolutely seen that to the full. We had that very long, wet winter, we had heavy snow in the spring, and then we had the very dry and hot summer. I don't want to presume anything, because, as I say, we're analysing the responses to the consultation at the moment, but certainly the common agricultural policy has not provided the stability and the protection against that volatility that I think farmers want to see. And I think it's very important that, when we bring forward our Welsh agricultural policy, we do that.

Top marks, Minister.

Thank you.

And let's see how well you can do, Mr Davies, in answering your questions. [Laughter.]

Questions, therefore, to the Cabinet Secretary for Local Government and Public Services.

Forty-five minutes starting.

First question from Siân Gwenllian.

Thank you, Llywydd. I announced the provisional local government settlement for 2019-20 on 9 October. It is for authorities to determine how they spend this funding, together with their other income from specific grants, council tax and other sources, according to local needs and priorities.

Gwynedd Council is facing an £11 million cut in light of the fiscal policy of your Government, which will impact on services for the most vulnerable people in my constituency. The Government has announced that an additional £15 million is available for schools and £13 million for social care, but this is restricted by certain conditions. You, like me, have argued consistently for stronger local government and giving more powers to local authorities. Why, then, is this additional funding not reaching the councils through the revenue support grant—the core funding of local authorities, and funding that could be used to safeguard basic services and crucial services at this time of austerity and huge cuts?

All the funding does go towards these core services that you've described. I don't believe that anybody here wants to argue that the funding shouldn't go to schools or social care. I don't believe people want to see that, and that's exactly what we are doing. But, if I could return to the purpose of your question, when you talked about the policy of this Government, this settlement is part of a formula that has been agreed by local government and it's something that we administer jointly with local government.

Could I ask you to confirm, Cabinet Secretary, that you wish to group questions 1, 5 and 8?

Yes.

Question 5, therefore, Darren Millar.

Diolch, Llywydd. Cabinet Secretary, people have just listened to your question, and they will be absolutely astonished at the complacency of your response. The Government in the UK, the UK Government, made some £550 million-worth of additional investment, which is coming to Wales as a result of their budget just last week. That means that there are extra resources available to the Welsh Government, and the Welsh Government's own First Minister has said that local government would be at the front of the queue if any additional resources come as a consequence of the budget. So, can you tell us: is any additional resource going to come into your portfolio that you can pass on to local government? And will you also rise to the question of leadership on the revenue support grant settlement, because, quite clearly, you're obfuscating on this particular issue and refusing to actually show some leadership in recognising that that revenue support grant is unfair? When you look at the settlement, it's delivered significant cuts to local authorities in north Wales, significant cuts to local authorities in rural parts of the country, and what appears to be the case is that there's cronyism, because most of the increases are going and the smallest cuts are going to Labour-led local authorities. People aren't stupid, they see the evidence of this year in, year out, when these settlements are presented through this National Assembly.

So, will you show some leadership? And what extra resources are local government going to get as a result of the bonanza of £550 million that has been awarded to Wales as a result of the UK Government's budget?

Presiding Officer, the Member for Clwyd West is right, people aren't stupid, and they'll see through his shouting and his bluster. They'll see the reality of what austerity has done, not just in local government, but to other parts of the public sector as well. And let me say this—let me say this—he talks specifically about the local government settlement in Wales. When we made that announcement on 9 October, the University of Cambridge also published some data on local government on that date. What they showed was that, in Wales and Scotland, local government had been protected by the Governments in both those countries. In England, where the Conservatives have the opportunity to take these decisions, local government has been cut by 26 per cent—26 per cent. So, when he and his party come here with their crocodile tears telling us about what is happening in local government, I say to him, 'Physician, heal thyself'—you go back to your Government in London, you go back there and talk to them about austerity. You go there—[Interruption.] You go there—[Interruption.] You go there—[Interruption.] You can shout as much as you like; I've got time on my side. You go there. You go there and you tell them about the impacts of austerity on people, and I'll tell you, when you do that, that you're doing the right thing. But, up until then, don't come here making allegations that you cannot sustain about matters you do not understand. 

Cabinet Secretary, I have recently raised, on behalf of my constituents and all those working in local government across Wales, concerns in this Chamber about the funding settlement for our local authorities. Pre UK Government budget, there was strong condemnation from our local authority leaders and the WLGA itself about your lack of understanding about the essential moneys needed to support our social care, schools, housing and mental health support. Then you compounded this problem by likening our council leaders to Oliver Twist, wanting more. Your comments were a staggering insult and a betrayal to those working in our hard-working, front-line services. They were offensive and, frankly, they should be withdrawn.

Now, given the additional £370 million—. And, yes, forget the word 'austerity' now and stop hiding behind it—£370 million is coming, courtesy of the UK Government, for spend on public services. Why can't you guarantee that this funding will go where it's actually needed, to fund our schools, to fund our social services, to fund our housing and to fund our mental health support? But, most of all, will you, Cabinet Secretary, for once show some humility and apologise for those dreadful comments likening our local authorities to Oliver Twist?

The Member for Aberconwy says she's speaking on behalf of local government employees and workers. I don't know which trade union you're a member of. [Interruption.] I'm a member of Unison, which isn't just the biggest union in Wales but also the biggest union in the public sector in Wales. Let me tell you, when I talk to colleagues in Unison—[Interruption.] When I talk to colleagues in Unison, what they don't do—what they don't do—is say to me, 'Do you know, Alun? What you should be doing is following the same approach as is taken by the Conservatives in England.'

Do you know what else I hear—[Interruption.] What else I hear—[Interruption.] And what else I hear from Conservative council leaders across Wales is that they don't want us to follow Conservative policies either. The only people who want us to follow Conservative policies are the people sitting behind me. Their council leaders don't want to see the same cuts in Wales as we're seeing across the border in England. They don't want to see Conservative policies implemented here. The only people who do are the Conservative group.

It's time that the Conservatives were honest, were absolutely honest, with people about the impact of what austerity is doing to people. I can understand that they don't want us to keep coming back to it. I can understand that they don't want us to talk about austerity, but, if she understood the UK budget, if she read the UK budget, she would know this as well—that spending on most public services will be reducing and not increasing, and, as time goes by, this time next year, there'll be more money spent in supporting local government in Wales than there will be across the whole of England. That's what Conservative policy leads to. 

The Cabinet Secretaries covering areas such as transportation, education and the economy can provide funding to local government to spend in the areas of their responsibility. What financial support from other Cabinet members, out of their budgets, has the Cabinet Secretary asked for to support local government, which is in desperate need?

Let me say this: the point that's made by the Member for Swansea East is well made, because, of course, local government isn't just receiving the funding through the RSG but is also receiving funding from other elements of the Welsh budget. Others have spoken already—I think Siân Gwenllian from Plaid Cymru spoke about the £15 million that's going into education. That of course is also going through local government. The Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Services and the Minister for social services have also made significant statements on the funding going through local government to support social services and to support regional working. So, there are significant sums of money that are going into local government that go beyond the RSG and, in total, I suspect that that will be over £70 million in the next year. 

In my oral statement yesterday I outlined the progress that we have made in improving services and support for veterans, which includes those living in Islwyn. 

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. The communities of Islwyn will, this week, pay their respects to those who have fallen and to those brave men and women of our armed forces who have been willing to sacrifice everything to defend our precious freedom, which we treasure so deeply. Alongside many thousands of our citizens, I will be attending remembrance services across the breadth of my constituency and beyond. Cabinet Secretary, what update can I give to my communities of your avowed aim earlier this year to strengthen the veterans' unit within Welsh Government and the now benchmarked assessment the Welsh Government has made of any gaps in service delivery? And, further, how can these potential gaps be addressed?

Presiding Officer, I did make a statement yesterday, which outlined many of these matters, and I know that the Member took part in that debate yesterday. In addition to that which we discussed during that oral statement, I will say that we have recruited additional members of staff to work and support and strengthen the Welsh Government's team supporting the work of the armed forces. This will enable us as a Government to undertake further work to enhance services and support for the armed forces community, including work to support the programme that is being taken forward by the armed forces expert group, including that work that I announced yesterday in taking forward an employment pathway. 

Can I also say, though, that we are going to be looking towards creating a new funding stream to sustain and support the local authority work that is going on, the liaison officers that will be appointed and who will work with the Welsh Local Government Association to ensure that those people who are delivering services at the heart of our communities also have the support that they require in order to deliver for the armed forces community? I should say, Presiding Officer, that, although we remember the sacrifice of our armed forces during this week in November, the real way in which we pay tribute to our armed forces is by delivering on our commitments in the covenant week on week, month on month, year on year. 

The Cabinet Secretary will be aware that unpreparedness for civilian life can result in veterans facing considerable obstacles, including getting a job. In your statement in April, you said the armed forces expert group is leading on the development of an employment pathway and employer's toolkit to help veterans to access meaningful employment. Good thinking. Could the Cabinet Secretary provide an update on this work, and when does he expect to publish the group's proposals?

I made that announcement yesterday.

Questions now from the party spokespeople. The Conservatives' spokesperson, Mark Isherwood.

Diolch, Lywydd. Why do you feel that the current local government funding formula is fit for purpose, has the full support of local authorities across Wales and is able to keep pace with changing priorities of local government services?

The formula is owned, if you like, by the partnership council for Wales and is updated regularly by the work of the finance sub-group and the distribution sub-group, upon which the whole of Welsh local government is represented. I don't think that the formula is fixed, if you like; it's constantly being reviewed and it's constantly being amended, year on year on year. The Member will understand that the distribution sub-group produces a report, which is made public, every year, which outlines the work that the distribution sub-group does do, or leads on at least, in order to ensure that amendments are made on an annual basis to the formula. So, I would say to him that I don't believe the formula is fixed in the way that he sometimes describes, but is constantly kept under review and is constantly updated by local government and Welsh Government working together with independent members. 

Thank you. Well, I can note that, following my lead, the Welsh Local Government Association coined a term for you—'Mr Bumble'. And, despite what you and the finance Secretary have claimed about agreement by the WLGA and the finance sub-group, the WLGA's chief executive stated before committee just a few weeks ago that the formula as it currently stands is held together by duct tape and sticking plasters, and that it probably needs a long hard look at it, and he further explained that such a review could take three to five years. Your own colleagues, including the Minister for Environment, recently called for the Welsh Government to undertake a review of the support given to council services. The First Minister met with Labour council leaders about funding, which we believe should have been open to all Welsh council leaders. The Welsh Conservatives have been calling for a review for years, but all the Welsh Government has done is divert the blame to local authorities and tinker around the edges, and, of course, the leader of the Conservative group in the WLGA tells me the standard response is that the WLGA were party to creating the formula. That's true, but it was constructed in partnership with the Welsh Government a long time ago and it's not now fit for purpose.

Will you, therefore, now listen, to this growing chorus of voices from all parties and political persuasions and initiate a review of the formula? If not, please tell those bodies why you still tend to repeat what we've heard from you in your earlier responses.

Almost all the people that you've described—and there are very few people in Wales who have reviewed the formula as hard as the outgoing chief executive of the WLGA; I think he's sat through more meetings on this formula than any Minister has at any time—. Can I say this: the formula is open to review year-on-year-on-year? And it is reviewed year-on-year-on-year, and Conservative leaders take part in that. Now, if they wish to ask for a fundamental root-and-branch review of the sort that you have described, then they are able to do so, except, of course, they do not do that when they are in the meetings having these conversations.

I'm very happy, Presiding Officer, to ensure, and I make an undertaking that, if these minutes are not already in the public domain, I will place them in the library so that Members on all sides of the Chamber can understand the work that is being done by the finance and distribution sub-groups, and to ensure that this information is made publicly available. 

Well, that's a very timely response, because, since you took your post a year ago, you have continually peddled the story that Conservative councillors in Wales are happy with the funding they've received and that they wouldn't want Conservative policies in Wales. You told my colleague, Russell George, last month,

'I tell the Conservative group that their councillors do not want Conservative policies in Wales; they are delighted to have a Welsh Labour Government delivering support and funding to local authorities that Conservative councils in England could only dream of. So, when I meet Conservative councils, what they tell me is that what they need is a Labour Government.'

Something pretty much like what you've already said to us today. So, I put that to the Conservative group leaders across Wales. The first response I got was, 'A bit of a joke.' The second,

'He's demonstrated again and again that he has no real comprehension of the issues we're facing in local government',

and then terms like, 'The funding formula is a total disaster, not fit for purpose', and they said your claims were both 'ludicrous' and 'nonsense'. I quote. 

Furthermore, it seems that even Labour councillors have been supportive of some UK Conservative policies, such as tomorrow's democracy event. On Monday, the Labour leader of Newport came out to support the devolving of business rates to local authorities, and revealed that the Labour leadership contender that you endorse is also in favour of devolving business rates to local authorities.

Therefore, will you now stop trying to deflect the serious issues facing local authorities, drop the adversarial position you've built up over the last 12 months, and work with councils of all persuasions, many of which are coalitions, to find a way forward so that their funding is fair, acknowledging that the points I've raised today were not something I plucked out, as you might say, from a party lines-to-take paper, which I rarely ever look at and almost never use. These were given to me first-hand by the persons I quote, either in committee or in response to my requests from the bodies concerned. 

I seem to be being accused of consistency, which is certainly an original allegation to make. Can I say this: I understand that it is the role of the Conservative spokesperson in this place to make the worst possible case for the policies being pursued by this Government and to scrutinise us on the basis of that? But to come here and suggest that any council leader, of any colour, is coming to Welsh Government and saying, 'We want to see the same depth of cuts to local government funding as we've seen across the border' is frankly incredible. And it simply isn't a credible position to take. There is no suggestion that I hear from any local authority leader, of any political background, that they want to see their budgets cut by 26 per cent, which is exactly what's happened across the border, and I don't believe that the Conservative spokesperson does himself any credibility at all in order to try to sustain that argument. The issue that many of those people raise with us is the quantum of funding available—not simply the distribution of it, but the quantum that is available to us. And we know, from the Chancellor's budget last week, that funding on public services is going to be cut in this area time and time again. And perhaps, when the Conservative Government finally abolish the rate support grant in England, he will learn the folly of his position.

The Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Dai Lloyd.

Diolch, Llywydd. Clearly, Cabinet Secretary, you are well read, and a fan of Charles Dickens. So, if local government is Oliver Twist, does that make you Mr Bumble?

I would suspect that the Member opposite represents Harry Secombe in a way that I could only hope to.

Just moving away slightly from any Dickensian wordplay, do you accept that local government has suffered in funding priorities, compared to other portfolios here? 'Hard times; for these times', as Dickens would say.

In terms of where local government is, clearly, we would want—. The Welsh Labour Government is not a Welsh Government that seeks to pursue a policy of austerity; that is not what we seek to do. What we want to be able to do is to fund local government, and other public services, properly, to enable us to deliver the high-quality services that we all want to see. But it is not credible to come to this place and argue that we can increase local government funding whilst not cutting funding elsewhere. And if the Member is arguing that we should change completely the budget, then he's welcome to make that argument, and I look forward to him telling me where he would want to make the cuts.

With the UK budget announcement last week, can local government have 'great expectations', or will they end up with 'little Dorrit'?

I am very impressed with Dr Dai Lloyd's literary knowledge—he puts me in my place. Can I say this: the Cabinet Secretary for Finance will be making a statement on the final budget, and on the consequentials, as a consequence of the budget of the United Kingdom Government? That will be made in due course.

The UKIP spokesperson, Gareth Bennett.

Diolch, Llywydd. Good afternoon, Minister. There are some events commemorating Carl Sargeant, your Welsh Government predecessor as the housing Minister. Of course, he did many good things in that field. I've just gone through a file of questions that I asked—[Inaudible.]—and I see that—[Inaudible.]. I was specifically asking on that date about the use of publicly owned land in Wales that might be used for brownfield housing. The Minister stated that his team at housing were in discussions with Ken Skates and his department, looking at what land the Welsh Government owned that might be available for housing development. These discussions also involved the health department. Now, I don't recall any mention of this idea of developing publicly owned land from the Welsh Government since then. This was back in April 2017. So, are you in a position to give any update on this idea for brownfield housing on publicly owned land?

Thank you very much for that question. I can certainly confirm that the Welsh Government, since that time, has been working on the agenda of identifying and freeing up publicly owned land for housing. There is a specific ministerial group that works together, also including my colleagues Lesley Griffiths and Ken Skates, and we work together to identify those parcels of land that Welsh Government owns, but also now we're seeking to look at land that is owned by the public estate much more widely—so, land owned by health boards, for example, local authority land. We've identified three parcels of land thus far that we think will be appropriate for housing, and we look, therefore, to bring those forward as soon as possible. I'd also add that we have the affordable housing group, which has a specific work stream under that which looks at land for housing. 

Before you ask your question, Gareth Bennett, with the exception of the Cabinet Secretary's microphone, no other microphone is currently working. [Laughter.] So, we're not able to resolve that without postponing the session. So, the session is now postponed. 

We may now reconvene our discussions. And, therefore, I call Gareth Bennett. 

Diolch, Llywydd. Good afternoon, again, Minister, and apologies if my first question sounds somewhat familiar, but the record didn't pick it up so I will rehearse it again. We have had some events today commemorating Carl Sargeant, who did much good work as your predecessor as the housing and communities Minister. I've just been looking through the file of questions from when I used to shadow Carl, and I see that 18 months ago, we were discussing various brownfield site initiatives. I was specifically asking about the use of publicly owned land in Wales that might be released for brownfield housing. The Minister stated that his team at housing were in discussions with Ken Skates and his department, looking at what land the Welsh Government owned that might be available for housing development. These discussions also involved the health department at the time. This was in April 2017. I just wondered: are you in a position to give any update from the Welsh Government on this idea of releasing Welsh Government land for brownfield housing? 

Thank you very much for that question, and I can confirm that the work has been continuing since you had those initial discussions. There is a cross-Government group, which includes myself and the Ministers with responsibility for planning, economy and finance, that is looking right across the Welsh Government portfolio to identify parcels of land that we could bring forward for housing. And we're looking at them in a strategic way alongside our other priorities, for example, the proposed metro and so forth. 

That group has identified three parcels of land thus far, although there are several others that we are looking at, and, of course, I recently announced the review of affordable housing, which has a specific sub-group under that, that is looking at land for housing and what more can be done to bring forward land for housing. I should add as well that the ministerial group is not just looking at Welsh Government land; we're looking at land owned by local authorities, health boards, and the public sphere more widely in order to identify those parcels that are strategically important and that haven't yet been brought forward for housing. 

Thanks for the response, and it's encouraging that you are taking on this as an ongoing project, and, also, involving other parts of the public sector. There is also a UK Government scheme, whereby they're getting local councils in England to compile a register of all their available brownfield sites—the idea being that this will make it easier for developers to know what land is available. That idea may well fit into what you're doing, as you just explained. 

But local councils, as we know, are somewhat strapped for cash, both in England and Wales. So, if we followed a similar course here, then funding would presumably have to be released to the councils to allow them to compile those brownfield registers if they are the bodies that are going to be doing the compilation. So, what thoughts do you have on the scheme in England, and how it fits in with your plans in Wales?

Thank you again for that question, and it reminds me of the work we're doing to release stalled sites. So, stalled sites specifically include brownfield sites, which might be infill sites, or windfall sites, for example, and those are well known to the local authorities. Our stalled sites fund is a £40 million fund, which will be recycled over the period of the grant fund to achieve £160 million of investment, and that's informed by some research that was undertaken that demonstrated around 7,600 homes could be built across 400 sites in Wales, were there the opportunity to release those sites because they've been stalled for reasons such as groundworks or infrastructure being prohibitively expensive. So, that fund is there specifically for small and medium-sized builders to access in order to be building on those plots of land that aren't attractive to the volume house builders, but, equally, are important in terms of using sites that perhaps might be eyesores, for example, within local communities. 

Again, you mentioned in your statement a few weeks ago that you saw a big role for small and medium-sized enterprises in providing housing. Of course, they haven't played a major role in the housing sector in Wales in recent years, so I'm glad that you've again mentioned that today. And what you've said in that response was again encouraging. Are there any other specific incentives that you're providing for the SMEs in order to encourage them to participate in the house building schemes?

Yes, we have our £40 million property development fund, which is specifically there—it's a loan fund at an attractive rate for SMEs. It's run through the Wales Development Bank. It was originally a fund of £10 million, but actually the demand was so high for it and it was so popular that we were able to increase the funding available to it. And, again, that's money that will be recycled over the lifetime of that scheme.

I also see a real role for SMEs in terms of helping us meet our decarbonisation ambitions. Lots of SMEs moved out of building houses to move into house repairs, and renovations, and so on, but, actually, in future, I'd like them to be part of the ambitious programme that we're trying to develop, in terms of retrofitting existing homes, and I hope to be able to say more about that in due course.

Local authorities are democratically accountable for the performance of their services, including their governance arrangements. They are supported through external audit, inspection, and regulatory bodies, who have a key role in ensuring the quality of our public services.

Thank you. Two months ago, a councillor in Flintshire said he would name and shame officers who did not reply to calls and e-mails if further action wasn't taken, stating that, after he'd previously raised this in 2017, new guidance was introduced, but it hadn't had the desired effect. Councillors voted to take action over these concerns, subsequent to which the chief executive pledged to tackle the issue by speaking to chief officers. However, in my experience on behalf of constituents, such delays are commonplace—I've had to refer them to the ombudsman in the past. I have one case with the chief executive himself, where an autistic adult had to go to the ombudsman to get the action after this non-response was escalated to stage 1 and stage 2 complaints, which were never responded to either, despite judicial review proceedings in May finding the council had failed to assess and meet the needs of a different autistic person, in terms of the care and support they needed. In these circumstances, and the further ombudsman's case last month, where a complaint was upheld against the council, having removed and destroyed a vehicle without notice, and it was recommended the council should review and amend procedures to ensure appropriate records are created, something we've heard repeatedly, with the internal audit manager whistleblower scandal, the housing maintenance scandal, the AD Waste scandal, and on it goes, when is somebody going to get a grip of these circumstances, and ensure that this culture no longer continues?

Presiding Officer, the Member seems to have a large number of issues with his local council. I would suggest to him that he takes those matters up with that authority. It is not a matter for the Minister here in Cardiff to second guess the decisions of a local authority in any part of the country.

We continue to protect local government funding from the impacts of austerity within the resources available to this Government.

Thank you for that answer, Cabinet Secretary. It seems that austerity is still the ideology of the Tory party in Westminster, and it continues to affect and impact upon our public services here in Wales. Now, since I've been a Member of the Assembly, the Welsh Labour Government's successfully been attempting to ensure that the impact is minimised as much as possible on local government. If you compare that to England, you can see the different impacts upon it. However, when I meet with local councillors and their officers—and I met with them in September at a meeting in Neath Port Talbot Council—they clearly emphasise—not just councillors, but employees—that they are now in a situation where they are down to the bare bones. They can't make any more cuts—they are really going to start hitting services that people rely on so dependently. Now, you've already answered this afternoon that the Cabinet Secretary for Finance will come back to the Chamber with plans for using the consequentials that we expect from the budget from the Chancellor last week. But will you be discussing with your Cabinet colleagues how we can look at all the grants that are going to local authorities, or to services that local authorities provide, to ensure that we can improve those as much as possible, but also where grants can be transferred into the RSG, so that we can minimise the paperwork required on grants, and also release the flexibility to local authorities to use that funding?

Presiding Officer, all Members in the Chamber will be aware of the differential policies that are being followed by the different Governments within the United Kingdom. We debated earlier the consequences and the impacts of those differential policy decisions, and I felt that the research published by the University of Cambridge, on the same day, ironically, as we published the draft local government settlement for the coming year, demonstrated clearly that, in this country, we value local government and we value local services. We value the people who deliver those services, and the people who receive those services are at the centre of our thoughts. The fact that local government in England is being cut to the bone has an impact on us here. The fact that local government in England has seen a quarter of its budget taken away demonstrates that the United Kingdom Government does not share the same values or outlook as this Government here.

Members will also be aware that we have given some very clear commitments that we will look at the financial situation as we move through the debate on the budget. The Cabinet Secretary for Finance is in his place. He will have heard these exchanges, and we are debating and discussing how we take forward the budget. And I will say this, because I think sometimes there's some confusion about these matters, there is no differential view, if you like, within the Cabinet on these matters. All Ministers want to see this money delivered to front-line services. There isn't a single member of this Government who wants to see the policies of austerity ripping their way through public services in Wales as they have done so across the border. It is the purpose of this Government to protect, invest in and enhance public services in Wales and that is what will guide all of our debates, all of our discussions and all of our decisions. 

Well, not all employment issues are down to how the Welsh Government chooses to spend the £16 billion that it gets. Research earlier this year by Wales Online shows that, between them, the three local authorities in my region spent almost £2.3 million paying staff who were suspended for a variety of reasons. Now, of course, I don't expect you to comment on individual cases, but do you think that there's more that Welsh Government could do, perhaps, in terms of guidance to help both councils and individuals deal with allocations and incidents? I'm very conscious of the work that we're doing here on respect and dignity, and I'm wondering whether councils are picking up on what we're doing and whether Welsh Government might be able to point them in this direction for good advice. 

I'm always happy to work with all local authorities and work with the WLGA, as a representative body, in order to deliver the sorts of respect policies that we would all want to see both within this place and all our democratic institutions. I'm very happy to continue working with local authorities to deliver that. If the Member has specific issues she wishes to raise with me, I'd ask her to do that via correspondence. 

I intend to introduce a Bill in the next calendar year that will give effect to a number of proposals set out in the 'Electoral Reform in Local Government in Wales' consultation paper that will contribute to strengthening local democracy across the whole of the country, including Mid and West Wales.  

I thank the Cabinet Secretary for that response. In reply to Mark Isherwood, a moment ago, he said that it wasn't the role of Ministers in this place to second guess the decisions of local authorities. But, of course, that's exactly what his colleague, the Cabinet Secretary for energy, has done in respect of a planning decision at Llandegley Rocks in Radnorshire. I think he heard the exchange that took place between us earlier on. In this particular instance, the local authority turned the planning application down by an almost unanimous vote. Does he agree with me that it does tend to undermine local democracy if Ministers, for reasons that cannot be described as of overriding national importance, overturn the decisions of those who are elected on the ground to represent the interests of the people who themselves overwhelmingly opposed this proposal? 

Presiding Officer, the Member is tempting me into a terrible indiscretion. I have learnt through bitter experience not to speculate on decisions on any planning issue and it is not my intention to do so this afternoon.  

Powys County Council recently unanimously passed a motion that stated that local authorities too often lose the confidence of the electorate, because they appear detached and unaccountable, and councillors of all parties supported this motion put forward by Dolforwyn county councillor Gareth Pugh. It was agreed that more needs to be done to engage and enthuse the electorate to make local government a more vibrant and relevant part of our communities. These concerns come about as a result of the local authority not engaging as sufficiently as perhaps they could have with regard to a large recycling facility planning application at Abermule in my constituency. From your perspective, Cabinet Secretary, is there anything that you can do in terms of providing local county councils with guidance in terms of how they can improve their engagement with the electorate when it comes to large, major decisions?

With the consent of the Presiding Officer, I won't refer to individual decisions of individual authorities, but what I would like to be able to say is that all of us, on all sides of the Chamber, want to see a vibrant democracy in all parts of this country and that means local authorities, ourselves as local Members, and Members of the UK Parliament as well, all participating in local debates about the future of our communities.

I very much welcome the decision of the National Assembly to introduce the Welsh Youth Parliament and I know that I'm seeking to talk to the people who are standing for the Blaenau Gwent seat, where I have a particular interest in seeking to—[Inaudible.] I don't think my days of standing for any youth institution are ahead of me, let me say. [Laughter.] I hope we will all be participating in that debate—

We were the future once.

We were the future. [Laughter.] And I hope we will all be able to join with those young people to engage in a debate about the nature of our democracy. 

The proposals that were put forward by my predecessor, the current Cabinet Secretary for Finance, and I, in terms of strengthening local democracy, were to do exactly that: to strengthen political participation, to strengthen participation in decision making and to strengthen accountability of decision makers locally. I hope that, when it comes to a debate on this Bill, we will all, on all sides of the Chamber, participate in that discussion and ensure that we reflect on how we further strengthen democratic accountability in all parts of this country.

I believe that community councils can have a very important role in strengthening people's democratic participation and feeling that services are delivered in a way that's relevant to them. One of the recommendations of the independent review panel on community and town councils was that the whole of Wales should be covered by community and town councils—of course, that's not the case now—in order to provide place-based services as envisaged in that report. I wonder what your view of that is, Minister. In order to strengthen community councils, are there steps that the Welsh Government can take to increase the pool of qualified and appropriate town and community council clerks across Wales? I know that, particularly, some of the smaller community councils in mid and west Wales sometimes struggle to find the right person to support them. 

Can I very much welcome the report of the panel on town and community councils, which reported to us on 3 October? The recommendations, I thought, were very persuasive in many different ways. I'm a great fan of local community and town councils. I know we've benefited greatly from the work of Tredegar Town Council at home. Can I say that I think there are a number of ways in which I want to take forward the reports and the recommendations? I'm anxious to ensure that we do have that conversation about the role of town and community councils and do so in the informed way that the panel have been able to go about their work. I will be asking the views of Members on how we wish to take this forward. We have proposals to make on doing so, but what I hope we'll be able to do is to engage in a positive debate about the positive impact that town and community councils can have, both on our accountability and our democracy and also on how we deliver services across the country. Whether we wish to create new councils or merge existing councils is a matter for conversation locally. There is current law that will enable that to happen. But I will look towards bringing together amendments to the Bill next February, if that is necessary, in order to give life to some of those recommendations. 

I set out my plans for the next steps for local government reform in my statement on 17 July. 

I thank the Cabinet Secretary for that non-answer. The WLGA, which is of course yet another unelected body that costs the public purse some £7 million per annum, seemed to be totally confused at your proposal to reduce local authorities. Was this because they were in the throes of responding proactively to the previous reform programme, as well as progressing the city deal agenda? Was their confusion further exacerbated by the fact that the Welsh Government had informed them, just a short time previously, that no local government reorganisation would take place for at least 10 years? Is it any wonder then, Cabinet Secretary, that local authorities responded by saying this announcement had caused disquiet, confusion and showed a lack of clarity at the heart of this Welsh Government, and that you had failed to make the case that the proposed mergers would deliver the savings envisaged?

Presiding Officer, I'm not sure the WLGA are confused, but I think the Member is. He's confused a number of different issues in a single question, which I accept is quite an achievement. Let me say this to him: I set out my intentions in the statement on 17 July. It appears he doesn't know that, and perhaps he should know that. I will be meeting with the working group next on 30 November to progress these matters. We have agreed terms of reference for that work and that work is being continued. I would suggest the Member tries to keep up.

I think we're all aware how your Welsh Government and previous Cabinet Secretaries have churned out three different proposals for local government, each of which have been widely rejected with 21 of our local authorities coming out with lots of criticisms about these proposals, and, indeed, by council leaders and the WLGA. If I may, I'll just—Carmarthenshire came out and said that they were very disheartened after the much-welcomed assurance that there would be no structural change for a decade. Ceredigion—'It wouldn't be of any benefit to our residents.' Conwy—there is no compelling evidence that bigger is necessarily better; on the contrary, the experience in north Wales is that creating a large, single health board—well, we know what's happened there, don't we—has created problems that will continue to have negative impacts for years. At what point will you listen to local authorities, work with them across all the political groups and across all the council leaders, and come up with a sensible plan to help local authorities to work on a more regional basis, to collaborate with the partners that they see fit to work with, and actually allow them to take the lead on any local government reform going forward?

The Member asks me to allow others to take the lead in her question. In a previous question, of course, she demanded that I take the lead. I think she needs to make her mind up.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary.

The next item, therefore, on our agenda is the topical questions, and to ask a question of the Cabinet Secretary for Local Government and Public Services—Rhun ap Iorwerth.

No discussions have taken place on the use of RAF Valley for training purposes with pilots from Saudi Arabia. The use of RAF Valley for training purposes is a matter for the RAF and the Ministry of Defence. However, I did meet with the Ministry of Defence earlier this week and I will be meeting with Ministry of Defence Ministers again next week.

The RAF Valley site is a centre of excellence for the training of RAF pilots. It's also a centre where pilots from other nations do spend time—we know that. But in response to a parliamentary question in Westminster from Plaid Cymru last week, the Ministry of Defence did confirm that pilots from Saudi Arabia were being trained there at the moment. Now, given the grave moral questions raised about the actions of Saudi Arabia internationally at the moment, does the Welsh Government agree with me that it is inappropriate to welcome pilots from the Saudi Arabian air force to train here?

We could talk about the abhorrence internationally about the murder of Jamal Khashoggi, but what is most relevant here is the part played by the Saudi Arabian air force in attacks on Yemen, where war has created an appalling humanitarian crisis, and whilst humanitarian forces try to respond to that, many ordinary people, including children, have been killed in air strikes. Amnesty International said recently that they have recorded 36 air attacks that appear to contravene international humanitarian law, including attacks on hospitals and schools, and we know that the Saudi air force is leading those strikes. The US Government has also been criticised for its role in supporting and training the Saudi Arabian air force. Will you, and will the Welsh Government, also condemn the use of RAF Valley for that purpose?

In addition to the ethical and moral issues, there is a practical element here too. In the past few days we have heard the police and crime commissioner for north Wales raising questions about the pressure that the presence of Saudi pilots could place on north Wales police officers. So, no, defence is not devolved, and policing is also non-devolved, but given the protests happening in Valley this evening, as it happens, I think there is scope for an intervention here from the Welsh Government in order to raise a voice in the name of justice.

Presiding Officer, the Member is aware, and I think Members on all sides of the Chamber are aware, that operational matters for the Royal Air Force are not a matter for this place, and it's not properly a matter to be discussed here. We will all have our views on world events, such as those taking place in Yemen and elsewhere, and we will all have views on that. What is a matter for this place, and what I believe is a proper matter for discussion here, is the role of all our armed forces and the bases that exist in Wales in sustaining and supporting British armed forces and to ensure that British armed forces are available to take part in operations in any part of the world, at any time. This Government supports the role of the Ministry of Defence in its bases in Wales, and I assume that the Member for sir Fôn supports the role of RAF Valley in his constituency, and I don't think he would want to be seen to be undermining the role of RAF Valley in any sense at all. What I will be debating and discussing with the Ministry of Defence is the basing of serving personnel in Wales. I would like to increase the MOD footprint in Wales. I am discussing with the MOD how we sustain and support additional bases in Wales. I want to see the barracks in Brecon maintained as a national headquarters for the armed forces in Wales, and I think all of us have very great reason—particularly this week, but not only this week—to be grateful for the service of all of our armed forces. 

Last Friday, I was in Alice Street mosque in Butetown, speaking after Friday prayers. There's a Yemeni centre there and an established Yemeni community going back centuries. People told me how proud they are to have somebody with an Arab Yemeni background being elected to this Assembly for the first time. It was more than disappointing to find out that, at the other end of the country, in Anglesey, Saudi Arabian pilots are being trained to bomb Yemen, leading to thousands of civilian deaths. Now, some of these civilians being killed are family members of some of the people I met in Alice Street mosque. I find it an absolute disgrace that our country is being used to train pilots to bomb Yemen, a country with which we have such a strong connection historically. So, will you now, please, take urgent action to demand that the training of those Saudi pilots in Wales ceases? Diolch. 

Presiding Officer, as I've already stated, Members on all sides of the Chamber will have their own views on world events and those taking place in Yemen and elsewhere, and I think we would all share similar views on the impact of warfare on civilians, wherever they happen to be, and we recognise that. It is not, however, a matter for this place to debate or discuss the operational decisions taken by the Royal Air Force in the deployment of UK resources. That is quite properly a matter for the Ministry of Defence, and it is quite properly not a matter that is devolved to this place. We may have individual views as individuals. However, it is right and proper that we support our armed forces, support the ability of the Royal Air Force and other parts of our armed forces to take the operational decisions that they believe they need in and within the structures that are established for them by the United Kingdom Government, which is accountable to the United Kingdom Parliament. 

The next item is the 90-second statements, and the first statement from Bethan Sayed. 

I wanted to take this opportunity today for each and every one of us to remember our friend and colleague Carl Sargeant, on this, the anniversary of his passing. I know that we are all thinking about his family and friends here today, and we all remember him in our own unique ways—from his mischievous grins to his unconventional speeches, to the care that he had for others. He always had your back. I wasn't able to pay tribute to Carl in the Senedd last year; I broke my arm at the very same time, and watched all of your heartfelt tributes on Senedd.tv. I first met Carl when I was a student president, lobbying Ministers and Assembly Members as they entered Tŷ Hywel, at the time, for debates, and he always stopped and talked to me when other Assembly Members actually didn't—and I will name no names here today. He tried and failed to recruit me to the Labour Party, but in recent years he became a really good friend, a confidante, and someone I could always rely on to listen to me and support me when I had my own personal challenges in my life. And I will always respect that friendship, and I hope that I can take that friendship forward with his son, Jack Sargeant.

That day last year changed politics forever. It made me think about how we treat other people, and how we can develop long-lasting bonds beyond the confines of narrow party politics. I know that Jack Sargeant's work on talking about a kinder politics can help and assist all of us—all of us—in this room today. 

I think it's important also for us to remember Carl's dedication to the White Ribbon campaign and the initiatives he took to tackle the scourge of domestic abuse in Wales. After his death, Welsh Women's Aid said, and I quote, Carl

'was a charismatic and influential leader, and was a supporter of many domestic abuse services across Wales.'

He played an

'instrumental part in the Welsh Government’s work to end violence against women, and was rarely seen without a white ribbon on his lapel'.

Well, Carl, if you're up there listening to us, we are all right, mate, but we will always remember you, and we will do justice to your legacy, but we miss you terribly here today. Diolch yn fawr iawn. 

Jane Hutt.

Llywydd, I want to pay tribute to women in the first world war whose roles and lives were brought to light by my constituent and Welsh historian, Professor Deirdre Beddoe, last Sunday on BBC2. As Professor Beddoe told us, at the start of the war, women were encouraged by Ministers, including David Lloyd George, to say goodbye to the men they loved in every street and every community in the land, with government propaganda stressing that mothers, wives and sweethearts should send their men to the war. Professor Beddoe has highlighted the key role that women, particularly Welsh women, played in winning the war. She described how women were feeding the nation in the Women's Land Army, nursing, and working in often dangerous roles in 11 munition factories in Wales, and she discovered that the suffragettes were the first port of call for recruitment to the police.

At the start of the war, women who worked often did so for a pittance as domestic servants and waitresses, so the opportunity to work in a range of different workplaces was liberating, and, by the end of the war, 80 per cent of the workforce was made up of women. Women played their part behind the front, but entered the war without the vote. When the war was over, they were told, 'Your place is in the home.' But women won partial suffrage in 1918, a victory we've celebrated in this Senedd and in the centenary this year. In this very significant week of remembrance, we must remember the sacrifices and contributions women made, as well as remembering the devastating loss of their menfolk in the first world war. 

David Rees.

Diolch, Llywydd. Ninety-three years ago, on 10 November 1925, Richard Walter Jenkins Jnr was born in the family home in the Afan Valley. We know him as Richard Burton. Now, today, I'm not highlighting his life, as I hope to be here on the centenary of his birth to do that, but rather celebrating the thirty-sixth running of the Richard Burton 10K. The inaugural road race took place in 1982, following much work undertaken by the committee of the Cwmafan Welfare Association, who continued to operate that race for many successive years. The first race travelled the 10 km through my own village of Cwmafan, and it was used to raise money for the communities and facilities. Those early races raised sufficient funds to develop a gym for sporting clubs and local people to access, and thus we saw real benefit coming to the community from this race.

Since 1982 we have seen the race grow in stature, and, last Sunday, in its thirty-sixth year, it attracted approximately 1,800 runners—and that's not including the 400 plus mini-milers who took part in an earlier race on the same day—from all over the UK, running one of the oldest 10 km road races in our nation. Now, everyone is—. Quite a few people are involved: councillors, MPs—and one Assembly Member's actually run that race as well, and Bethan Sayed is that one Member. My stature does not match into road racing, so—. [Interruption.] No, I think I'll give that one a miss.

But whilst becoming a recognised race in the Welsh athletics calendar, it still remains true to its original concept and raises funds for local groups. Today, it's organised by a couple called Shaun and Anna Tobin, supported by a very active committee of volunteers, and they've transformed that route now to encompass both Cwmafan and Pontrhydyfen along the Richard Burton trail. It's a race that epitomises the spirit and beauty of our famous Welsh valleys with the spirit of the legend that is Richard Burton. Long may it continue to do so. 

The next item is the motion to elect a Member to a committee, and I call on a member of Business Committee to move the motion formally—Darren Millar.

Formally.

Does any Member object to the motion? The motion is therefore agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

That brings us to the debate on the Children, Young People and Education Committee report on targeted funding to improve educational outcomes. I call on the Chair of the committee to move the motion—Lynne Neagle.

Diolch, Llywydd. I’m very pleased to open this debate on the Children, Young People and Education Committee’s inquiry on targeted funding to improve educational outcomes and our report, 'On the money?', which we published in June. The aim of our inquiry was to focus on whether Welsh Government's work on using a targeted approach to support disadvantaged pupils to reach their full potential and raise school standards more generally is truly on the money, and what more can be done to get the greatest impact and value for money from a targeted approach. If Wales is to have the first-class, heralded education system we all aspire to, we cannot and should not leave any pupils behind. That is why I'm pleased that the Cabinet Secretary for Education welcomes our report and has accepted 24 of our 31 recommendations and a further three in principle.

The Welsh Government has a well-established approach of targeting additional resources at particular groups of pupils who are at risk of not reaching their full potential. Tackling the negative correlation between deprivation, as measured by eligibility for free school meals, and attainment has been a priority for many years. Of course, some pupils from deprived backgrounds do very well and flourish academically, but we know many more do not. Pupils who are eligible for free school meals—eFSM—who often do well often do so against the odds and in spite of, rather than because of, their circumstances. This is why targeted support and intervention to break these structural inequalities, such as the pupil development grant, is so vital. This is why the committee’s report expresses general support for the principle of targeted funding. However, at £94 million per year, the PDG takes up a significant chunk of the education budget and it's crucial that we get the best possible value for money.

Our report also looked at the Welsh Government’s targeted school improvement programme, Schools Challenge Cymru, which between 2014 and 2017 worked with 39 underperforming schools in Wales. 

Firstly, on the PDG, which is intended to be for every eFSM pupil, including those who are high-achieving but could achieve even more, our inquiry found that the PDG is predominantly being targeted at low-achieving eFSM pupils, and not at more able and talented ones. I am pleased that the Cabinet Secretary has accepted our recommendation on this and has already taken steps to address it. 

The Welsh Government has also committed to closely monitoring the impact of the PDG and ensuring value for money, which we welcome. Estyn told the committee that two thirds of schools were using the grant effectively. Both Estyn and the Cabinet Secretary indicated that this was to be expected as it reflects the proportion of schools with good or better leadership. However, the committee believes that we should not be satisfied with a position whereby a third of schools are not using the PDG effectively and would seek further assurances from the Cabinet Secretary on this point.

The PDG has been in place for over six years now, and almost £400 million has been invested in it. The school improvement consortia have now appointed PDG leads in each of the four regions. We recommended that they should do much more to challenge ineffective use of the grant. This is something that the evaluation by Ipsos MORI and the Wales Institute of Social and Economic Research, Data and Methods found was not happening sufficiently. I welcome the Cabinet Secretary’s acceptance of our recommendations in this area, particularly on how the PDG can be used to improve eFSM pupils' attendance and engagement with their education.

Deputy Presiding Officer, I will now focus on a couple of the recommendations that the Welsh Government has rejected. From 2018-19, the Welsh Government expects schools to use the PDG on pupils who've been eligible for free school meals in either of the previous two years; this provides welcome flexibility. However, schools have not been given any extra money to do this, as their PDG allocations are still based on a one-year eFSM headcount. If the Welsh Government wants schools to adopt a more flexible definition for targeting the grant, the committee recommended that it should commit to fully funding this.

Furthermore, in relation to allocations, the committee recognised the rationale for using the 2016 annual school census data: eFSMs figures were higher in that year, which had enabled more money to be drawn down for the PDG. However, we were concerned about schools that buck the trend and may have had a higher number of eFSM pupils in 2017 or 2018. As such, we called for schools' PDG allocations to be determined by whichever is the higher of their 2016 eFSM headcount or the latest available.

The committee made a number of recommendations about the impact of the PDG on attainment of eFSM pupils and unintended consequences of changes to key stage 4 performance measures. Attainment data shows encouraging progress in narrowing the gap in the attainment of pupils eligible for free school meals and non-eFSM pupils, at least up to 2016. However, the committee was very concerned by what happened following the Welsh Government’s changes to key stage 4 performance measures in 2017, which reduced the weighting given to vocational qualifications due to concerns that pupils were being excessively entered for these.

I know that rates of achievement of the level 2 threshold measures are not comparable between 2017 and previous years. However, what really concerned the committee was the widening gap between eFSM pupils and their peers. We found that there's now a disincentive to schools to enter pupils for vocational qualifications, even where it might be right for that pupil, and this has affected eFSM pupils disproportionately. The committee recommended that the Welsh Government urgently investigate this unintended consequence and learn lessons at the earliest opportunity. We recognise that new interim performance measures have been announced for summer 2019. However, given that the provisional 2018 results show a similar position to 2017, we'd welcome further assurances from the Cabinet Secretary that the 2017 and 2018 eFSM cohorts were not unfairly and adversely affected by the previous changes. How has the PDG mitigated, or failed to mitigate, against this?

The same can be said for looked-after children; their attainment relative to their peers has widened since 2016 after years of good progress in narrowing the gap. Moving on to the element of the PDG for looked-after children and adopted children, I welcome the Welsh Government’s commitment to using the evaluation it has commissioned from ICF Consulting to improve the programme going forward. The committee heard that this aspect of the PDG has been insufficiently strategic until quite recently, when the regional consortia have improved the way they target and administer the grant.

The committee's biggest concern, however, related to the way the PDG is used or not used on adopted children. There are around 4,000 looked-after children in Wales, and an estimated 3,000 to 3,500 adopted children. Whilst the Welsh Government expects consortia to target the PDG at adopted children as well as looked-after children, the funding allocation is based only on the numbers of looked-after children. This means one of two things: either the PDG is not being used for adopted children or if it is, then the per-head amount of £1,150 is effectively diluted by almost half.

I'm really pleased that the Welsh Government has said it will look at how adopted children can be more proactively identified and subsequently supported through the PDG. However, we are disappointed that our recommendation that the PDG is allocated to consortia based on the numbers of both looked-after children and adopted children has been rejected, although we note that the Cabinet Secretary will keep it under review.

Turning to Schools Challenge Cymru, I am pleased that the Cabinet Secretary has accepted our four recommendations, albeit one in principle. Whilst the improvements shown by schools involved in the programme were variable, some schools did extremely well as a result of the extra challenge and support, particularly in the central south Wales region. It is vital that there is no loss of momentum in these schools following the closure of a programme, and I am glad that the Government has agreed that the regional consortia should closely monitor the position. We did hear different interpretations of whether Schools Challenge Cymru was always intended to be time limited, but there was general consensus in our evidence that a programme of this kind really needs to run for longer than three years to have a lasting effect.

The committee noted the Cabinet Secretary's position that Schools Challenge Cymru served its purpose while the consortia were in their infancy and that they can now take on the baton of targeted school improvement in specific schools. But what the committee couldn't really understand was why the decision to discontinue Schools Challenge Cymru came seven months before the evaluation, which the Welsh Government itself commissioned, was completed. We were also concerned to be told of a lack of engagement in learning lessons from Schools Challenge Cymru with those central to delivering the programme, who told the committee that they felt somewhat frozen out.

The committee recommended that the Welsh Government and the consortia do more to learn lessons from Schools Challenge Cymru in order to apply these to school improvement more generally, and I am pleased the Cabinet Secretary has agreed to do this. The committee was concerned that, following the closure of the programme, its annual budget went back to reserves, rather than elsewhere within the education budget. Indeed, this inquiry has highlighted the wider issue of school funding, which has come up time and time again in various inquiries the committee has undertaken. The committee will be examining these issues and the process of allocating school budgets in its forthcoming inquiry into school funding, and this is, of course, a key issue for the 2019-20 draft budget, particularly given the concerns expressed over the level of funding for school budgets.

Finally, Deputy Presiding Officer, I'd like to thank stakeholders for the way they've positively engaged with the inquiry and their invaluable contributions, as well as the schools that we visited. I'd also like to thank the Cabinet Secretary for her positive response to this inquiry and our recommendations. I know the Welsh Government is committed to supporting disadvantaged pupils to reach their full potential and raising school standards more generally. I hope that our report has shown the value of regularly monitoring that Welsh Government's approach is truly on the money.

All our pupils, whatever their background, deserve to receive the greatest impact and value for money from a targeted approach. Thank you.

Thank you to the committee for this report. As a new member of the committee, I've found this a really interesting read and, with that very necessary focus on school budgets now, I think we all welcome this scrutiny of the effectiveness of particular activities and the stability of the income streams that underpin them.

I'm interested, too, in whether school leaders make spending decisions on the basis of what they think will work best and hope that they can then resource those decisions sufficiently a bit further down the line, or whether it's finance first, resulting, maybe, in an offer to children that is less than optimum. Because, arguably, in both those cases, neither decision is as effective as it needs to be. In the first, the quality is there, but may be unaffordable and therefore not achievable, and in the second, the cheaper option may not quite hit the mark for the more challenging objectives for particular children. Obviously, I realise this is an oversimplification of the dilemmas that school leaders face—it's not all about money—but as recommendation 1 in this report does make clear, value for money and opportunity cost are considerations for this Assembly, considering the financial constraints we're under.

We recognise what you hope to achieve through the PDG, Cabinet Secretary, and would expect, of course, a robust defence of it when it appears to be falling short, but what we will be looking for in particular is a credible explanation of why it works when it does and an honest appraisal of why it doesn't when it doesn't. Because, if it is literally just about money, we'll support you in your arguments to the finance Secretary to get more money. However, if it's about weaknesses within school leadership or consortia or local authorities, or even within Welsh Government or Estyn, you need to be frank with us. So, while I completely accept the value of tracking systems and data gathering, which I see you mentioned in your response to recommendation 1, I'm also interested in what you might call—'performance management' is not quite right, but how you gather meaningful information about that, on which you can then act.

As you know, Welsh Conservative believe in more direct funding of schools and trusting teachers and other staff with decisions, but with that comes a greater responsibility for transparency and governance. Because we can hold Welsh Government to account until the cows come home, but, as we see time after time, that is not the same as Welsh Government accepting accountability and acting when this Assembly calls it out. So, it's pleasing, Cabinet Secretary, that you've accepted so many recommendations in the report, which speak to concerns about mission slip, really—not entirely across the board, but in some instances.

And the point about loss of focus on more able and talented children from the PDG target groups is an observation that matters particularly to me, I must admit. Just to be clear, I'm not going to be running any grammar school arguments in the course of this debate, so please don't be distracted by that, but this question about what has happened to working class, non-affluent Wales's status as an acme of educational achievement still hovers over us. And while we can talk about our greater understanding of the effects of poverty and other adverse childhood experiences, it's not as if they didn't exist before, and yet our education system doesn't seem to capture and raise up more of those poor but really able young people to reach the opportunities to an extent that they were able to do previously. So, we will expect to see that acceptance of recommendations, including recommendation 3, turned into action and attainment improvement, and we'll also be expecting assessment of the attributable effect of your PDG strategic advisers. 

Finally, your approach to stopping some of the schools gaming the system—this move from BTECs to GCSEs for the cohorts of pupils that we're talking about in this debate, and the apparent effect on grades and the nature of vocational qualifications. It's been raised previously, and I'm sure we'll hear a bit more again today, that entering the children that we're talking about for GCSE equivalents rather than GCSEs made the narrowing of that attainment gap look a bit more impressive than it's actually been. So, I admire you for not accepting that, but I'm not sure what happens next for the young people who are on the wrong side of that attainment gap, and what you now need to do with the PDG—because it's funding we're talking about—as well as other strategies.

What it has exposed, though—or confirmed prejudices, if you like, Diprwy Llywydd—is that pre-16 vocational qualifications have been treated as lightweight qualifications, and, having seen copies of the relevant science papers in my own household, I can see why. Vocational courses and exams surely should be about responding to learners' different aptitudes and learning styles, and they should still be about achieving excellence, but in a different way with different ways of achieving high levels of practical applicability. We are never going to get anywhere near parity of esteem if the establishment treats vocational exams as the 'That'll do' option, especially for those who are in the greatest need of social mobility.

I think the issue that most concerns me is how we manage to use this targeted money to level out the opportunities for young people in more deprived areas, or the pupils within schools who don't have the range of possibilities that better off households can provide for their children. I think there's a big challenge for those schools in my constituency that have significant numbers of mobility within year and within the period of the lifetime of the child's presence in the primary school. So, for example, at Albany school in Plasnewydd, there's a huge range of movement in and out of the school that occurs throughout the year. So, if we only have a snapshot of eligibility, this can lead to very challenging fluctuations in funding from one year to the next. So, for example, in a particular year, the lowest year they had was 80 pupils eligible for free school meals. Then, in the following year, there were 100 pupils. The school had planned for the current year that there would be funding for 100 pupils, but has now got to cope with £30,000 less in its budget with very little warning. That makes it extremely challenging for headteachers to ensure that they are providing for deprived children without overspending a budget they haven't got. So, I think that if there could be more monitoring over a slightly longer period, rather than just a snapshot on a particular day of the year, that would help those schools that do experience huge levels of mobility to be able to plan a bit better and not have surprises. Overall, though, I think that the pupil deprivation grant is hugely important in ensuring that every child gets the opportunity to succeed to the best of their abilities, because that simply isn't going to happen if we simply have per-pupil funding.    

I'd like to thank Llyr Gruffydd, my predecessor on this committee, for his thorough work. I also look forward to contributing with great energy to the work of this committee and as the spokesperson for Plaid Cymru on education. Improving the attainment of pupils from deprived backgrounds is vitally important to Plaid Cymru and, according to the Cabinet Secretary, it's also a priority for the Welsh Government. The commitment to maintain the pupil development grant throughout the fifth Assembly was one of the 10 education priorities agreed with the First Minister when she was appointed to the Cabinet in June of 2016.

But, unfortunately, a number of the recommendations that the committee has made have been rejected by the Cabinet Secretary with regard to extending pupils' eligibility for the pupil development grant, as has been seen, and the Welsh Government proposals to change the criteria for free school meals will have a detrimental effect on pupils from deprived backgrounds. At present, families who are eligible for universal credit are eligible for free school meals. Under the Government's proposals, only families with net earnings under £7,400 a year will be eligible for free school meals from January 2019. The Children's Society is calling on the Welsh Government to ensure that families receiving universal credit will continue to receive free school meals, and that will cost £35 million in addition per year. Increasing the cap on net earnings to £14,000 a year, as happens in Northern Ireland, would cost £20 million in addition.

Now, £15 million a year was lost from the education budget when Schools Challenge Cymru came to an end, and £12 million of that funding was a Barnett consequential. Scotland also provides free school meals for all pupils in infants units, which means that the Labour Welsh Government and the Cabinet Secretary from the Liberal Democrats will have the most miserly policy in the United Kingdom nations. I would suggest that the £15 million lost from the education budget could contribute to the cost of overturning that decision. The consultation on amending the eligibility criteria for free school meals was announced after the committee concluded its work on the evidence, and it's disappointing that the Government's timing has meant that the committee didn't have an opportunity to scrutinise this as part of this report.

I want to turn to a second aspect of the report that draws my attention and has drawn the attention of a number of committee members over a number of years now, namely the funding for schools in general. Some £94 million pounds, or 6 per cent of the education budget, is spent on the pupil development grant, with £400 million being invested to date. It's disappointing, therefore, that Estyn, in its evidence, says that only two thirds of schools are using this grant in an effective manner. Unfortunately, we do therefore have to come to the conclusion that consistent cuts to council budgets have led to cuts to schools budgets, and so it's no surprise, therefore, that schools have been using funding from the grant—the pupil development grant, that is—to fill gaps in their core budgets. I know that's not the purpose, but that's the reality of the situation in an increasing number of schools.

According to a focus group held by the committee, the grant hides the fact that school budgets are insufficient. It is not an additional resource, but core funding under a new guise. That's not what I'm saying—that's what experts in the field say. The committee came to the conclusion, therefore, that it supports the principle of targeted funding, but that it's of the opinion that this principle can't succeed unless core budgets for schools are funded sufficiently.

Recommendation 30 calls on the Welsh Government to continue to review how appropriate school funds are, and to consider how this affects schools' use of targeted funding, such as the pupil development grant and the use made of it.

We genuinely need to get to grips with these problems and the Welsh Government has to ensure that sufficient funding is available to provide a quality education for every child in Wales. Lifting the attainment of pupils from deprived backgrounds should be one of the main priorities, but this won't happen under austerity, where schools are losing teachers and teaching assistants, leading to a vicious circle of lowering standards.

I'm very pleased to speak in this debate about the committee report. I welcome the committee's investigation into this. As the Chair said, it's absolutely right that we scrutinise how this money is spent—and it is a large annual investment of £94 million and a significant proportion of the overall education budget. I support the positive impact that the pupil deprivation grant has had, and that was the general conclusion of the committee, covering pupils who are eligible for free school meals, those who have experienced care, and those who are adopted. I think it’s absolutely right that we offer extra help to improve the attainment of these pupils, and also to make sure that they're as engaged as possible in the education system, because we don’t want any pupils, if possible, falling through the gaps. So, I welcome the report and the opportunity we’ve had as a committee to shine a light on how the pupil deprivation grant in particular is used.

I want to concentrate my remarks on how the grant is used to improve the educational attainment of adopted children in particular, because schools can have a tremendous positive force in the life of a child who has experienced trauma and loss. That, of course, applies to children who have experienced care and, of course, to adopted children, and some children who have been in care and are then adopted. There are schools that I think are doing absolutely fantastic work around inclusion and attachment and are making their staff aware of attachment theory and awareness of trauma, yet I think a significant number of children who’ve already had an unfair start to life struggle to cope in an education system that too often doesn’t recognise the true nature of the challenges that they face. I don’t think, often, within schools, there is awareness of what the children may have been through, and this does prevent the foundations of knowledge and accomplishment being built, and it exacerbates social and emotional problems and diminishes life chances.

I sponsored an event here in the Assembly last June with Adoption UK—and, of course, we do quote Adoption UK in our evidence—and their survey of 2,000 adoptive parents and 2,000 adopted young people is very significant. It showed that almost three quarters of adopted children and young people agree that, 'Other children seem to enjoy school more than me.' Two thirds of secondary school-aged adopted young people said that they'd been teased or bullied at school because they are adopted. That's two thirds. Almost 70 per cent of parents feel their adopted child's progress in learning is affected by problems with their well-being in school. Sixty per cent of adoptive parents do not feel their child has an equal chance at school, and nearly half of parents of secondary school-aged children have had to keep their children off school because of concerns about their mental health or well-being. So, I think this is a very, very sad story.

So, I do really welcome the fact that adopted children are eligible to receive support via the pupil deprivation grant and I also welcome the fact that the Government has accepted, in principle, recommendation 24, although it does seem that it is difficult to set up a system whereby a school can know that children are adopted in order to be able to offer their help. But I'm pleased that the Cabinet Secretary has said that she will pursue this issue. But I am disappointed that the next recommendation, recommendation 25, is not adopted, because, obviously, as the Chair said in her introductory remarks, if we aren't able to allocate an amount of money to cover the number of children that we estimate are adopted, it's not going to be possible for them to have the benefit of a pupil deprivation grant. I think this is an area that is very important, and the Chair gave the figures—I think about 3,000 to 5,500 adopted children are allocated the pupil deprivation grant—but if we don't have those systems for collecting the data, we won't be able to ensure that they get the help that is needed.

So, in conclusion, I've just concentrated that briefly on adopted children, because I don't think it's generally known, and I don't think schools always recognise that adopted children do have many of the traumas that children who've experienced care have, so I thought it was important to highlight that in my contribution today.

I too welcome the CYPE committee's report on targeted funding to improve educational outcomes. It was actually quite heartening, given I've seen other reports where not so many amendments were accepted in principle—24 out of 31 I thought was fairly good going. But it is frustrating to note that the Welsh Government has rejected several of the committee's recommendations that, actually, were based on a lot of really good evidence taken during the evidence session. 

It was highly disappointing that the Government rejected recommendation 5, that it should fund schools' pupil development grant allocation for those students who have been eligible for free school meals at any point in the past two years, rather than over the past year. In her response, the Cab Sec for education said the Welsh Government recognised that there is a wider cohort of learners on the periphery who would also benefit from additional support. Yet, this additional support is been drawn from existing funding allocated to schools through the pupil development grant as opposed to extra funding. And at a meeting earlier today—this is a big issue within my own constituency now, where more and more families are coming forward with real concerns. The Government then is expecting schools to stretch their funding, to provide extra support to students who need it most, but not providing any extra support for them. This, of course, places these students, who already are at risk of lower educational attainment as a result of personal circumstances at a greater disadvantage when compared to their peers. I certainly ask: how can the Government believe that this is fair and, as the Cabinet Secretary wrote in her response to the report, what does the Government consider to be the optimum allocation?

This issue is exacerbated by the lack of a response from the Welsh Government regarding recommendation 13, which concerns urgently investigating the widening of the free school meal/non-free school meal attainment gap in 2017. The committee report presents data showing that the attainment gap between those receiving free school meals and those who don't increased from 17.4 per cent in 2016 to 25 per cent in 2017, thereby a very worrying trend, requiring, I believe, an urgent investigation by the Government to ensure that this doesn't continue. 

The Children's Society have recently stated that they are concerned that the Welsh Government's proposed changes to the eligibility criteria for free school meals could reverse progress made in closing the attainment gap. They say that the plans will mean that 55,000 children will miss out on free school meals. However, research at the Department for Education in England found that extending entitlement to free school meals would lead to academic improvement, particularly amongst children from less affluent families. If the Welsh Government is truly driven to tackle the impact of deprivation on educational outcomes, outlined to be a key priority in the 2014 'Rewriting the future: Raising ambition and attainment in Welsh schools' strategy, then surely it must review how pupils are calculated to be able to receive free school meals? Furthermore, it should seek to provide greater levels of funding to the pupil development grant following the UK Government's recent announcement of an extra £550 million for Wales. This would ensure that disadvantaged children and children who are giving us concern are provided with the resources they need to achieve the highest possible educational outcomes, helping to create a Wales in which social mobility is at the forefront of Government policy. Thank you.

Can I now call the Cabinet Secretary for Education, Kirsty Williams?

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. Can I say I welcome this report and I'm very grateful to the committee and its staff both for the report and for the constructive and collaborative approach taken during the inquiry? The report is fair and balanced, recognising the challenges we face and noting where improvements have been made, whilst also suggesting where we might go further to support our most disadvantaged learners. 

I am pleased to have been able to accept the vast majority of the committee's recommendations, a sign of the priority that this Government places on supporting all learners to achieve their potential. That's absolutely why we must continue to prioritise targeted support and keep striving to break the cycle of poverty and disadvantage.

Many of you here in this Chamber will have heard me say more than once that the PDG is both a policy and a personal commitment of mine as well as of this Government, but more important than what I say is what schools think about the PDG—that's more important—and they agree. The recent evaluation found that schools find the PDG invaluable and I am frequently told by headteachers and classroom teachers alike of the difference that it is making on a daily basis. In the previous half term, I have visited schools in Rhyl, Bangor and Merthyr Tydfil, and when I have asked them what's the most important thing I can do for them, they have all consistently said, 'You must keep the PDG.'

Can I just briefly comment on some of the issues that have been raised by other people in the debate? Julie Morgan is absolutely right to talk about the issues affecting adopted children. I am particularly keen to continue to work alongside David Melding, who is not in his seat, to look at the educational achievement of looked-after children. We have a mountain to climb in that regard and I make no apologies for acknowledging the challenges we still face as a Government for that cohort of children, for the need to redouble our efforts in that regard, and I am keen, Julie, to do what we can to better identify children who are adopted in our school system and look at ways of supporting their education.

I have to say, with regard to the eligibility of free school meals and the consequences of universal credit, let me be absolutely clear: as a result of universal credit—something that this Government has not asked for—we find ourselves in a very challenging position. If all people entitled to universal credit were to receive free school meals, then we would simply have more than half of our cohort of children in receipt of free school meals, and there are basic issues around affordability as far as that is concerned. Under the proposals consulted on recently, more children in Wales will be eligible for free school meals than are currently eligible. If there are some children whose eligibility may change as a result of universal credit, they will have cohort protection. And I have to say to Janet Finch-Saunders, of all people in this Chamber to lecture me about the fact that she's got families coming forward saying that they're struggling, I would direct her to her own colleagues in London who are pursuing this policy. And I have to say, Janet, it's pretty rich of you to say that we need to do more to support these families when it is the policies of your Government in Westminster that are causing these difficulties. 

Siân Gwenllian raised the issue of school funding in general and, of course, I'm not responsible for the day-to-day funding of our schools—that is the responsibility of our colleagues in local government; a function and a responsibility that they hold very dear indeed. Now, the upshot, perhaps, of what Siân is saying is that it is Plaid's policy to have a national approach to school funding directed from the centre. And, if that is the new Plaid policy, I'm sure her colleagues, such as Ellen ap Gwynn, will have plenty to say about it. 

If I could turn, then, to the issue of GCSE results, the 2018 GCSE results saw a slight increase in attainment at A* to C for free school meal learners in English and maths, which, of course, is to be acknowledged, but we still have a long way to go to support our free school meal pupils to achieve the highest possible grades. Because of changes to performance measures, we know this year that many free school meal pupils who have previously taken vocational science qualifications took GCSE sciences for the first time. There has been a 37 per cent increase in the number of free school meal learners taking at least one science GCSE, compared to 2016, and a 20 percentage point increase in the number of all year 11 pupils taking at least one science GCSE this year, compared to 2016. This is an extremely positive change, as we need to better prepare our learners to ensure that we as a nation produce the scientists of the future. It is essential that key stage 4 performance measures and school accountability arrangements incentivise schools to support free school meal pupils in achieving the highest grade possible, not adopting a 'poor dab' syndrome, and having high expectations for all of our children, regardless of their background. We have already taken steps in this direction through the commitment to implement the interim performance measures at key stage 4 from 2019. The approach of using measures that reflect attainment for all grades will incentivise schools to support all learners to achieve their best outcomes, rather than focusing on a very narrow cohort of children in their school. 

Alongside our wider reforms to raise standards and reduce the attainment gap, we are also directly developing the PDG arrangements. We have strengthened our regional approach to provide more effective challenge and support to schools in how they are using this resource. As acknowledged by the Chair, each consortium now employs a strategic adviser for PDG, with a focus on raising the attainment of all disadvantaged learners, and I have asked them to strengthen collaboration across Wales to ensure best practice is shared and built upon. There is an increasing body of evidence that tells us what works for these children, and that needs to be consistently applied across our system. Why is it, Deputy Presiding Officer, that schools in this capital city, in the same regional consortia, with the same local education authority, can ensure that all their free school meal children achieve five GCSEs or more, and a school with a similar profile cannot? That cannot be acceptable to any of us here, I'm sure we would all agree, and we need consistent approaches and consistent support so that all children, regardless of which school they are in, can achieve. 

We also know that early intervention in a pupil's educational career will have the best effects, rather than simply using PDG as a sticking plaster and a panic measure when a child enters year 10 or year 11. Now, of course, those children need support, but we also need schools to be ensuring that they are supporting their children from the moment they enter secondary school, but also from the moment they enter the education system at all. That's why this Government—. I have doubled the amount of PDG available for our early years provision because we know, if we can get children off to the best start, that's where we will have the biggest impact.

Now, Suzy Davies and Lynne Neagle both raised the issue of more able and talented children. We should not for one second draw a direct line between academic ability and a parent's ability to pay. More able and talented has not been an area where there has been sufficient focus in the Welsh education system in the past, and that's why we have introduced new arrangements to support more able and talented children, regardless of their background. But I would like to take this opportunity to make it clear once again: PDG is there for all children on free school meals, not just for those children that need additional help. 

Can I finish, Deputy Presiding Officer, by acknowledging the contribution of our raising attainment advocate, Sir Alasdair Macdonald? His wealth of knowledge and experience allows for continuous improvement and, crucially, reflection, contributing both to the strategic vision and the operational development of this grant. And in closing, again, I'd like to thank Lynne Neagle, the committee members, for their work in this area, and I commit to continuing to reflect on the recommendations and move forward with what I believe is a shared mission across this Chamber to ensure that children, whatever their economic circumstances, thrive in our schools. 

Thank you. Can I now call Lynne Neagle to reply to the debate? 

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and can I begin by thanking everyone who's contributed to a constructive debate this afternoon on a very important subject? I haven't had any advice via the messaging about how long I've got, DPO, so I think—

About three minutes. 

Okay. Right, thank you. [Interruption.] Okay. If I start, then, with Suzy Davies, who highlighted some of the shortcomings of the PDG, which were picked up in our report, but which we really hope our recommendations and the positive response by the Welsh Government will help to address—things such as the new guidance that we've called for. I know that the Minister is developing a toolkit that should improve consistency, and the new PDG staff in the consortia, who are going to be there to challenge, we hope will make a difference. And, as you know, the committee made recommendations around the parity of esteem issues that you rightly highlighted. 

Jenny Rathbone highlighted some of the concerns that arise because of large numbers of change in the numbers of kids in school, and that was something that we picked up in our report. We had hoped that the Welsh Government would accept that recommendation, but we hope that that will be kept under review, and I think it's particularly pertinent for, probably, areas like Cardiff where you are likely to have big changes in population, more so than in some other communities, because we don't want those schools to be left out or disadvantaged. 

Siân Gwenllian—. Can I welcome Siân to the committee, but also take this opportunity to place on record my thanks to Llyr Gruffydd, who has been an excellent and most conscientious member of the committee? So, thank you, Llyr, for everything that you've done. Siân raised some general issues around school funding, and what has been apparent in all our inquiries, really, is that there are pressures on funding, and I know that the Cabinet Secretary recognises that point. That is why we are undertaking now a more wholescale look at the school funding to try and see whether there are any recommendations we can make to improve the situation.

Both Siân Gwenllian and Janet Finch-Saunders raised the issue of this policy on free school meals. You'll be aware that we have recently written to the Cabinet Secretary to ask for some more information about the way the figures have been calculated, why the cut-off is where it is, but what I would also say is that members of the committee are very conscious of the need for there not to be any unintended consequences. I think that we do have to be mindful that, should there be a big increase in the number of pupils having free school meals, that may then mean a big increase in the pupil development grant, or, worse, the pupil development grant being seriously diluted for our poorest pupils, which actually would be a very regressive step. So, we are very mindful of that also; it's very important that we keep that in mind.   

Can I thank Julie Morgan for her contribution—a very important contribution—on adopted children? And, of course, our predecessor committee, as you'll remember, did an important inquiry on adoption, and we are acutely aware of the needs of adopted children, and also, of course, aware that many of those initiatives that are so important in schools around emotional and mental health are funded by the PDG in many of our schools, so that's why it is important that we get that support for adopted children in schools, and I hope that that is something that the Cabinet Secretary will look at again. It is absolutely crucial that that support is there.

Can I thank the Cabinet Secretary for her further response today and for the positive way in which she's engaged with the inquiry? The committee fully agrees with her about the need to do everything to support all our pupils, including our more able and talented. We welcome the steps that have been taken already in this regard, but we will be looking to follow up with this inquiry as to how the new guidance is making sure, how the new challenge is making sure, that our more able and talented pupils are also being impacted by this policy. Can I just conclude, then, by thanking, again, everybody for contributing, thanking everybody who gave evidence to the inquiry, thanking the committee team, who, as always, have been absolutely brilliant, and reminding Members here that we will return to this, as we have with all our inquiries, to monitor and scrutinise the progress on the recommendations of this very important inquiry? Thank you.

Thank you. So, the proposal is to note the committee's report. Does any Member object? Therefore, the motion is agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

We now move on to item 6, which is 'Equalities and Brexit—Joint findings by the Equality, Local Government and Communities Committee and the External Affairs and Additional Legislation Committee'. So, I call on the Chair of the Equality, Local Government and Communities Committee to move the motion—John Griffiths.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I am pleased to open this debate on behalf of both the Equality, Local Government and Communities Committee and the External Affairs and Additional Legislation Committee. I believe this is the first time that such a joint committee debate has taken place. I think that indicates the importance of the issues we are here to discuss. It is important that we continue to set the bar high in Wales for protecting human rights and reducing inequalities. Before going further, I would like to thank all those who contributed to both committees on these important matters.

I think it is worth setting this debate in the broader context. In Wales, we have a proud history of protecting equality and human rights in innovative ways, such as passing the Rights of Children and Young Persons (Wales) Measure 2011, a piece of legislation that leads the way across the UK and, indeed, the world. Our committees have been considering the impact of Brexit on equalities and human rights over the past 18 months. This culminated in our joint letter to the First Minister earlier this year, in which we called for the protection of rights under the EU charter of fundamental rights to continue after Brexit; the proposed UK shared prosperity fund to be administered by the Welsh Government to help take account of local needs and inequalities; greater clarity as to whether the socioeconomic duty under the Equalities Act 2010 will be commenced by the Welsh Government; existing rights to be protected, and a commitment to no regression in rights; for Wales to remain a world leader in human rights and equalities—in particular, our committee has repeatedly called for a formal mechanism to track future human rights and equalities developments to ensure this happens—and that the community cohesion plan is updated before summer 2018, which, obviously, has now gone, to take account of recent issues in hate crime.

I will now turn to each of these issues in more detail. The EU charter of fundamental rights incorporates rights beyond those in domestic legislation, such as the Human Rights Act 1998, in particular in relation to social and economic rights, which currently are not well-recognised in UK law. The Welsh Government’s Law Derived from the European Union (Wales) Bill included a requirement for EU-derived Welsh law to be interpreted in line with charter rights. This would have provided some limited protection for charter rights in Wales. However, the Welsh Government has now committed to take steps to repeal this legislation. We are unconvinced by the UK Government’s analysis that charter rights are already protected by domestic law. Our view was shaped by the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s legal advice that stated the charter rights went beyond protections currently provided for in UK law. 

In responding to our letter, the First Minister stated that discussions were under way with the UK Government about a political agreement that would endorse the existing framework of equal treatment legislation in force across the constituent parts of the UK. The First Minister also told us that they would continue to work with the UK Government to seek assurances on individual rights. Today, I would appreciate an update on these discussions from the Welsh Government—what further steps they intend to take to ensure that charter rights continue to be in force once we leave the European Union and for more detail on the political agreement cited in the First Minister’s response.

We heard evidence from a number of stakeholders raising concerns about the loss of EU funding targeted at human rights and equalities issues. Wales currently receives £370 million a year from the EU. We recommended that the shared prosperity fund should be administered by the Welsh Government to enable it to be sensitive to local needs and inequalities. We also called for the fund to be targeted at tackling inequality and socioeconomic disadvantage. We welcome the Welsh Government’s support for this call, and, today, I would ask for an update on how discussions with the UK Government are progressing on this important matter.

An important part of our work was understanding what more could be done in Wales to ensure that we stay ahead of the curve in relation to human rights and equalities. Stakeholders called for the socioeconomic duty in the Equality Act 2010 to be enacted in Wales. We note that this duty has now been enacted in Scotland, and we have the powers to do the same in Wales. In the recent report, 'Is Wales Fairer? (2018)', the Equality and Human Rights Commission have recommended that this duty is brought into force as a matter of priority. 

We called for clarity from the Welsh Government as to whether they would be seeking to enact this duty. We note that in the response, the Welsh Government places a great deal of emphasis on the Well-Being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015. This, of course, is an important piece of legislation, but it does not deliver the same effect as enacting the socioeconomic duty. The Government also stated that they would be reviewing their position in light of the rapid review into gender equality, and the Scottish Government’s experience of implementing the duty. So, can the leader of the house outline when she expects the Welsh Government to make a decision on whether this duty should be enacted in Wales? 

Dirprwy Lywydd, another way of protecting human rights within Wales would be the incorporation of international human rights treaties into Welsh law. We note that, in responding to our recommendation calling for further consideration to this suggestion, the Government emphasises the well-being of future generations Act once more as the primary legislative framework for this. While acknowledging that, we would highlight again that this Act does not provide for any legal challenge if rights are not being upheld. It's an important piece of legislation, but it is not one that can sufficiently ensure human rights protections.

We also heard concerns that, once we leave the European Union, human rights protections will be freeze framed. Disability organisations, in particular, highlighted a number of pieces of future UK legislation that they were concerned the UK would not benefit from. This is why we have called for a mechanism to monitor future human rights developments to ensure that Welsh citizens continue to receive the same protections as those within the European Union.

In responding to this recommendation, the First Minister highlighted that Welsh Government would continue to work with the Equality and Human Rights Commission to monitor human rights progress. Can the leader of the house now provide greater detail as to how this will happen?

Our final area of concern was around the perceived increase in hate crime following the EU referendum. We called for the community cohesion plan to be updated before summer 2018. In responding, the Welsh Government committed to publishing this, but did not state when that would happen. In July, the leader of the house stated that they would be consulting on the revised community cohesion plan in the autumn. Today, will the leader of the house outline exactly when this consultation will happen and when she envisages the new community cohesion plan will come into force? Dirprwy Lywydd, I now look forward to hearing contributions from across the Chamber.

This is a useful debate and report, and these are important matters that require very careful reflection. I think I will start with this controversy over the EU charter of human rights, which—. My understanding is that that actually catalogues the rights that exist under EU law, and as it is not a foundational document as such, but draws together those rights in existing EU legislation, it doesn't seem to me a very secure device for securing rights post Brexit—certainly not in the longer term—and it is the UK Government's view that those rights are protected in other pillars. So, I think it would be quite useful, if the Welsh Government genuinely feels there are some existing rights that are now threatened by withdrawal from the EU, that you actually make those explicit and then we can run the test, because at the moment it seems that our foundational document is the European convention on human rights and the way that's been interpreted—obviously, it's a living document—and the Human Rights Act 1998, which, of course, establishes it in UK law and makes it actionable in a much more practical way. So, I think those two pillars do ensure that we will not get regression. However, if there are genuine anxieties, and people can advance cogent reasons why there may be some diminution because of the fact the EU charter is not going to apply anymore, because it will be redundant, really, in terms of UK law—.

I do note the role of the well-being of future generations Act in embedding equality, and I think the Act is very useful in that sense of, again, allowing it to be a declaratory living document, and it allows us to work through these issues and see how they could be practically fulfilled. It has been the Welsh Government's position that that Act is so secure that other sources of embedding equality, through the equality duty, for instance, are not necessarily required. So, there are approaches that—. Now, that's somewhat analogous to the UK Government's position on the EU charter of human rights, one could argue—that because those rights exist and are embedded elsewhere, we don't need to be overanxious about one approach not being available.

I think the issues relating to UK governance, and this refers to the various frameworks that will now emerge, some of which will be highly relevant to questions of equality—they do need careful treatment, and of course, on this side of the Assembly, we've always been keen to emphasise the need for shared governance, and for the strengthening of UK institutions in terms of the joint ministerial council, for instance. So, there, we will continue to be very supportive and constructive, and I think that will help us navigate some of the very pressing concerns that people have around the future for regional investment and how that will be governed, and that is something, I think, that is a relevant interest to everyone here.

Can I conclude by talking about community cohesion? I think it is unfortunate, with various developments round the world, that some of our wonderful minority traditions feel under some pressure. They've only got to feel it. The objective reality of that is sometimes not as direct as people fear, but, it is, I think, really important to remember if people feel under some threat because of various developments, then it is for us to reassure people, just as, after Brexit, I think a lot of reassurance was required because of the way that some people feared that that might be a harbinger of some sort of rolling back from a multicultural society—and it isn't, and it doesn't require any reduction in that world-view at all. It is important for us to work through some of the other changes that are happening around the world. We've heard some of them being raised, in terms of international conflict and the generation of refugees. All these things are creating a level of debate in some quarters that is full of asperity and aggression, and that has, I think, reflected very badly and has led to a certain threat in terms of how various minority traditions feel. So, we need to be mindful of that and of ensuring that we are strengthening the networks and the consultations that we have with them, and valuing them in a very explicit way. That's the best way to counter those who are engaging in various forms of hate speech and hate crime. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer.  

I'm pleased to be able to speak in this debate. In many ways, it's a continuation of yesterday's discussion on equalities and human rights. Let's make no mistake: despite the words we will hear later about remembering the sacrifice of those who fought the Nazis, these rights are under threat. It wasn't the EU's smooth arrangements for the transportation of medical isotopes that annoyed the wealthy people who funded UKIP and the 'Leave' campaign. It was the EU's protections for workers' rights, for women, minority rights and so on that really motivated them.

The EU is seen as an obstacle towards creating a neoliberal, Thatcherite, low-tax, low-regulation and low-worker-protection UK. Indeed, that's why there's been so much enthusiasm for a 'no deal' Brexit, because it would create the conditions of chaos that are necessary for privatising the NHS, for example, that they wish to impose.

So, we've been consistent in calling for these rights to be protected. These joint committee report findings on the impact of Brexit on human rights also support many of our concerns. The initial letter to the First Minister notes, for example, that unlike in many other states, the right to equality in the UK is not protected by a constitutional bill of rights that would limit the extent to which equality could be eroded or removed by parliamentary legislation. EU law currently performs this backstop function.

What has concerned us the most is the implications of the deal made between the UK and Welsh Governments to repeal the Law Derived from the European Union (Wales) Act 2018. As you'll be aware, the UK Government's European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 does not include the inclusion of the European charter of fundamental rights in UK law, despite an attempt to amend that Act to include it. This has led to the reasonable question, raised by the committee, as to how the Welsh Government intends to protect those rights. The response is underwhelming to say the least. I quote:

'These are matters which require careful consideration. We will work with the UK Government to seek assurances on individual rights in the coming months.'

Well, that'll tell them, won't it?

It's further disappointing that, when asked how it can ensure existing rights are not eroded, the Welsh Government fell back on citing the Human Rights Act 1998. More bizarre still, they cited their Government's commitment to rights by noting the incorporation of the United Nations principles for older persons into the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014. Really? This was only in that Act because one of their group pressed the wrong button and voted for an amendment to incorporate that. It was never in the Act because the Welsh Government wanted it to be in there. So, it's clear to us that much more needs to be done, and we need to make sure that the Welsh Government is doing everything possible to protect the rights of people in Wales post Brexit. That means no selling out to a UK Government held hostage by the fundamentalists of the DUP and Rees-Mogg. And it also means that we need a Welsh bill of rights. That’s not the purpose of today’s debate, but it is something that I will be returning to another time.

The Chairs of the Equality, Local Government and Communities Committee and the External Affairs and Additional Legislation Committee stated in their joint letter to the First Minister earlier this year that Wales has a proud history of protecting equality and human rights in world-leading and innovative ways, noting that the Assembly, of course, became the first legislative body in the world to achieve gender parity. I want us to safeguard and make provision to support that proud history.

In the EHRC debate yesterday, I spoke of the importance of our joint committees’ support for the adoption of the socioeconomic duty in Wales, and I’m glad that the Chair of the Equality, Local Government and Communities Committee today has given his support again to this key objective. I do believe this is a vital duty, and the Welsh Government must now take responsibility to enable us to use this new power. It will play a part in counteracting adverse impacts of Brexit on equality and human rights. Scotland has done it, and we must do it too.

John Griffiths also drew attention to the threats to EU funding and the prospects for the UK’s shared prosperity fund. We made it clear that we share the views of our witnesses—and both committees had witnesses to our reviews and inquiries—that the UK shared prosperity fund proposed by the UK Government should be administered by the Welsh Government in relation to Wales to ensure that it’s sensitive to local needs and inequalities. We also made it clear that the fund should be targeted to tackling inequality and socioeconomic disadvantage. Our committees have identified the EU funds that relate directly to equality and human rights, with around 60 per cent of ESF-funded projects targeting people with one or more protected characteristics. I’m sure the leader of the house will endorse the committee recommendations on this point.

Can I also welcome the work of the recently established Wales civil society forum on Brexit? With over 40 third sector organisations, it is a formidable forum for evidence, backed by the Cardiff University Wales Governance Centre. The forum states that the UK’s withdrawal from the EU charter of fundamental rights presents a serious risk to human rights and equality. I welcome the call to secure domestic legal status for the EU charter through specific Wales-only legislation, giving due regard to the instrument across public policy, if this is feasible. And we need a response to that call. The civil society forum also states that the Welsh Government should seek to ensure that the UK keeps pace with the EU where there are advances in human rights or equality protections. The Welsh Government should seek to implement in Wales any new advances made by the EU. The Women’s Equality Network, for example, points out that the EU is currently considering new legislation regarding parental leave, flexible working and breastfeeding in work. In our letter as AMs to the First Minister, we asked the Welsh Government to set out how it will ensure that the charter rights continue to apply in Wales, and I look forward to the response from the leader of the house, and I hope that the evidence being developed by the Wales civil society forum will be followed up and taken forward.

I have, on many occasions in this Chamber, drawn attention to the Women’s Equality Network manifesto published earlier this year. They draw attention to the threats to equalities and human rights legislation post Brexit. They’re concerned that the impact of leaving the EU will result in the rolling back of legal rights for women, reducing the funding for women’s organisations and putting pressure on specific services.

Llywydd, I chair the women in Europe Wales network to promote women’s rights and gender equality in the context of Brexit. The network is concerned that women should have a stronger voice in the Brexit inquiries and negotiations. These networks are looking at this debate today; they very much welcome it and will expect the committees of the Assembly, as well as the Welsh Government, to take this forward for further exploration and monitoring. In a former role as a county councillor, I accessed the first tranche of ESF funding for the pioneering women's workshop opened in 1984 in Cardiff, training thousands of women over 30 years in information technology and electronics. Those women are now contributing to the local economy. This is now all at risk as a result of Brexit. As Leanne Wood said—bad for equality and bad for the economy. So, much is at risk as a result of Brexit, with equalities at the forefront of our concerns.

I thank the committees for their consideration of these issues and the First Minister for his response, and hope this debate will signal to the women of Wales, black, Asian, minority ethnic people, disabled people, and communities that we are standing up for their human rights in this Assembly.

I call on the leader of the house, Julie James.

Diolch, Llywydd. I apologise to colleagues because I'm struggling a little bit with my voice. 

So, I just want to start off by thanking the committee for their joint report and to all the Members who have contributed to the debate. I think there really is a distinctive approach to equality that is woven into the Welsh devolution mindset from the outset and built into the DNA of the Welsh Government. The commitment gives us a solid platform in Wales to create strong and inclusive policies and legislation. It's clear from what everybody has said in their contribution that we accept that we're heading into an unprecedented and uncertain period for Wales as we leave the EU, in terms of the discussions on whether a 'deal' or 'no deal' scenario has different implications for protections of human rights that we all wish to see protected. And I think there was agreement from every speaker that those rights need to be protected.

We've been very consistent in what we want to see by way of our priorities for leaving the EU and part of the Brexit talks, and one of those has been a fundamental maintenance of the human rights position for Welsh citizens and their place in the world. And, of course, that would also include a continuing commitment to ensure that no falling back happens as a result of our leaving the EU. So, some measure of checking what the human rights position of other leading countries around the world is and ensuring that we stay in lockstep with that must be done. And David Melding, I think, in particular, mentioned that it's not just the EU that we should be monitoring for that, and that's certainly our view as well, and we need to make sure that Wales stays in lockstep with the very best of practice around the work.

However, the continuing uncertainty makes it very difficult to evaluate the future of the landscape and to have very specific courses of action at the moment, until we see what that landscape might look like. David Melding also pointed out, for example, the public debate about the distinction between the EU charter of fundamental rights and the European convention on human rights deriving from the European Council, and the confusion in people's mind about what's incorporated where and so on. So, I think one of the things we are very keen to do is to look to see what we can do in terms of Welsh legislation, to enshrine in the laws of Wales, so that we protect those fundamental freedoms in a very straightforward way. And, actually, as a result of a conversation that was initiated in this Chamber, Llywydd, with Helen Mary Jones on her legislative proposal for incorporation of the UN convention on the rights of disabled people, we have commissioned a piece of research to show us how, in Wales, the interlocking pieces of legislation best fit together.

Many Members—Jane Hutt, John Griffiths and other Members—have mentioned the socioeconomic duty under the Equalities Act, for example, and whether we should bring that into force. We very much want to do that. But we want to ensure that we do that in a way that is completely compatible with, for example, our groundbreaking well-being of future generations Act, and that it doesn't cut across it in a any way or undermine that Act. So, we've commissioned a piece of research to see how that jigsaw best fits together and to give us a route-map to getting to a place that everybody in the Chamber outlined, which is a place where, very simply, we set out what those fundamental rights are in Welsh legislation and we don't have a layered effect. In conversation with the commissioner for the future generations Act, for example, she talked about the difficulty of ensuring that we don't slip back—we've passed the well-being of future generations Act, which has some things to say with regard to socioeconomic factors in decision making in Wales—and we don't put the socioeconomic duty on the next layer, so that people go there first, but we actually ensure that they interlock. So, one of the issues around just copying Scotland is that Scotland doesn't have a well-being of future generations Act, so we want to make sure that they meld together.

So, I want to assure everybody in the Chamber that what we want to do is ensure that we have the best, most cutting-edge protection for these human rights in Wales, in a way that's uniquely Welsh, in a way that blends our legislation together with the various conventions, and in a way that enshrines individual rights, as John Griffiths, I think, pointed out in his speech. One of the very important things to look at when we look at convention rights and the enacting of the various duties and so on is that individuals have a means by which they can enforce their own rights and fight against any infringement of that. So, I'm very happy, Llywydd, to say to the Chamber that we will come back as soon as we have that research with a route-map for getting to where we want to be and that that's independent of the EU debate, because we want to see what our legislation should look like anyway. And then, as that's informed by what the withdrawal Act looks like in its final form, and whether there's a deal or not, we can make sure that that's incorporated into that conversation.

So, various other Members—excuse me, sorry, I'm really struggling with my throat today, unfortunately—have also raised other concerning issues around this. I'd just like to reference a few of those as I end my contribution. One is the rise in hate crime and the 71 per cent rise in referrals. This is really shocking for us. Wales has a long history of welcoming people from all over the world. As the First Minister often says, we are all migrants, it just depends how far back in your family you want to go. None of us came from here originally. We very much want to see a welcoming, positive and tolerant country, and one of the things we'll be looking at in our research is to see whether the legislation gives us a platform in Wales to make sure that we enforce the cultural outward-looking country that we want to be by allowing people to have recourse to law if those rights are infringed. So, that's one of the things we're very interested in doing. We're also looking to see the Welsh public sector working collaboratively to develop shared equality objectives that can be targeted at tackling both inequality and socioeconomic disadvantage as part of a piece around hate crime. Many of the people who experience hate crime experience it for a specific protected characteristic, but, actually, there's intersectionality. Often, they have a number of those characteristics, which we want to see given the strength of the protection of the law as much as we can.

So, Llywydd, we want to walk the fine line between being very careful about imposing additional burdens on our public services and being very clear about what their obligations and duties are in terms of delivering services to the people of Wales. I'm very grateful to the two committees for their work in bringing this debate forward. I'm very happy to confirm that we are doing the research necessary to incorporate all of those pieces of legislation in the best possible pattern, and I look forward to working with both committees in the future to bring that forward. Diolch.

I call on the Chair of the external affairs committee to reply to the debate, David Rees. 

Diolch, Llywydd. Can I thank Members for their contribution to today's debate? I think it's perhaps the first time we've got a joint report coming before the Assembly of committees in this Assembly. It also shows, perhaps, the way in which we're working is evolving as we move on. Can I also put on record both committee's thanks to their staff, the committee clerks and their teams, and the witnesses who came forward? Without those, it would make our job very much more difficult. 

These findings are crucial for us, and Brexit has just perhaps highlighted something. I have a couple of points from what the Members spoke about. David Melding, on the charter of fundamental rights, I want to highlight the fact that it isn't law, I agree, but it's within the framework of the European law, and therefore it exists within that framework. As we leave the EU, that European law framework in which it operates disappears. Therefore, the rights that were in there are not necessarily protected by law within the UK because we don't have the same European laws. That is the issue we are trying to highlight. That's why our committee in particular was pleased to see that reference in the law derived from the EU Bill to ensure that Welsh Government would continue, as part of its continuity Bill—. But, of course, it was not continued in the EU withdrawal Bill—Act, as it is now. The Lords put it in as an amendment, but it was defeated in the Commons in the ping-pong section. But it is important that we have it because there are rights we need to protect, rights we've all benefited from. I think what's important is that no-one anticipates those rights to be eroded within day one of leaving the EU, but without legislation to underpin those rights, we're leaving ourselves open to opportunity in years down the line for other Governments to come in and undermine those rights. That's what the issue was about—ensuring that legislation is there.

I totally agree with you that the future of regional investment is a concern that's shared by all across this Chamber—we've often heard that—and shared governance is one—. We need to look at how we're going to manage that, and that comes with the shared prosperity fund. This isn't about the shared prosperity fund, but it highlights examples and concerns we currently have as to how we manage that fund and how we ensure the priorities for Wales will be delivered by the Welsh Assembly and the Welsh Government and not dictated to us by Westminster—something Brexiteers seem to want to do—to reflect the same arguments about Brussels. 

Leanne highlighted that rights are under threat, and that's why we identified it. They are under threat unless they are underpinned by law. And you highlighted some, perhaps, right-wing people who have that view that leaving, Brexit, is an opportunity. The reality is there are people in positions who have that view. That's the reality. And what we wanted to ensure was, as the EU took the opportunity to put legislation in place to protect people, that we also do the same here in the UK once we leave the EU, so the laws are there to protect the rights of individuals. Whether we get a Welsh Bill of human rights—I'm sure that might be something she'll be putting forward as a Member's, backbencher's, Bill.

Jane highlighted, again, the socioeconomic duty, and that's crucial here. Now, I've read the letters from the First Minister clearly saying that the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 is going to cover everything, and I understand the leader of the house's comments about ensuring that they work together, they knit together, they knit well. I totally understand that, but I think it's crucial. We have the powers to do this—let's just do it. Let's not make sure we're 10 months, two years, three years, maybe an Assembly down the road before we do that. Now is the time to take the opportunity. I appreciate you saying you've got research going into that. You didn't indicate a timescale; you said you'd come back to us as soon as possible. Timescales would be great if we knew—six months; some kind of time factor. 

February.

February. Thank you. That's good, because at least we've got a—. We now have an indication it's actually before we leave the EU. That's very important for us. 

Jane also highlighted that it's important that rights come to the fore, and particularly that we note the rights that come to the fore during the transition period, if there is one, because we'll be operating under those until we end that transition period. How do we ensure those are also within UK law and protected when we leave that transition period? So, it's a critical aspect; we intend to look at that. 

Leader of the house, you talked about the lockstep. I very much appreciate that. You talked about Welsh legislation. It is important that we don't simply keep on saying, 'We've got this unique Bill, the well-being of future generations Act, which delivers on this.' We can do more, and we should do more, with the powers we have.

Llywydd, the decision to leave the European Union will have profound constitutional, legal and political ramifications for the people of Wales in the years to come. There's no question about that. I hope that, in shining a light on the human rights and equalities issue, which was something people didn't want to talk about very much during the last two years, the two committees have actually reminded people that Wales has a proud history of leading the way in these fields, and our aim is to ensure that proud history continues. We need certainty that those rights will continue to apply in Wales after Brexit. We need to ensure that non-regression occurs so we do not see any erosion of those rights. And, looking ahead, we'll continue to keep an eye on this, we'll continue to keep an eye on what happens, hopefully, during transition, and I commend this joint report to the National Assembly for Wales.

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

We now move on to the Welsh Conservatives' debate on the armed forces, and I call on Mark Isherwood to move the motion. 

Diolch. Well, this Sunday marks the hundredth anniversary of the signing of the armistice that ended the first world war. On 3 August, with 100 days until this armistice centenary, the Royal British Legion launched a mass movement to say 'thank you' to the first world war generation who served, sacrificed and changed our world, with all communities encouraged to join and hundreds of community events organised. Remember Together, a new initiative from British Future and the Royal British Legion, also launched last week to bring people from different backgrounds together to mark remembrance and the centenary of the first world war armistice. 

There is increasing awareness that remembrance could, should and does belong to all of us, whatever our politics, ethnicity or faith. The armies of 1914-18 looked more like the Britain of 2018 than that of its day. British troops fought alongside soldiers of different colours and creeds from across the Commonwealth, including over 1 million Indian soldiers, 400,000 of them Muslims from present day Pakistan. This shared history of service and contribution is something that we can all commemorate in Britain and the UK.

Our motion calls on the Assembly to honour

'the contribution of those who have served and continue to serve in our armed forces.'

I led a short debate here in January 2008 supporting the Royal British Legion's Honour the Covenant campaign, concluding that this must be fought until it is won. I subsequently welcomed the publication of the armed forces covenant in May 2011, introducing a statutory duty from 2012 to lay before the UK Parliament an annual report that considers the effects of service on regulars and reservists, veterans, their families and the bereaved, and to also examine areas of potential disadvantage and the need for special provision where appropriate.

The Welsh Government and all local authorities in Wales signed the covenant and subscribed to work with partner organisations to uphold its principles. However, there's not yet been an independent review of progress and delivery across the whole of Wales since the covenant was established—or there wasn't until the cross-party group on armed forces and cadets fulfilled the job.   

In our debate on support for the armed forces last year, the Cabinet Secretary said that Members should have no doubt about the importance that this Government attaches to the delivery of the covenant in Wales. However, concerns do remain in regard to its implementation and in ensuring that veterans are aware of this support. 

Last year's review of the implementation of the covenant by the Assembly cross-party group on armed forces and cadets explored how services in Wales were fulfilling their obligations under the armed forces covenant. The group found that, since the introduction of the covenant, there had been good work across Wales in delivering its aims, with public services being more aware. Despite positive developments, however, it found that there is insufficient accountability to ensure that organisations subscribed to the covenant are actually fulfilling their obligations.   

The covenant states that no-one who has served in the armed forces should face disadvantage, and, in specific circumstances, can expect special consideration, in regard to their NHS care. Despite this, however, veterans and their families have faced inconsistencies when accessing healthcare in Wales, with the third and charitable sectors often having to deliver the specialist and rehabilitation services they need.

Adherence to and implementation of the covenant varies greatly across Wales's health boards, as evidenced by the recent information obtained from each health board by the Welsh Conservatives. Only Abertawe Bro Morgannwg had a dedicated budget for veterans. In the last three financial years, £242,000 has been allocated there, but the six remaining health boards only used core allocations to fund veterans' needs. Only Aneurin Bevan, Cardiff and Vale, Powys and Hywel Dda health boards have adopted the Welsh Government 2017 guidance in full and, worryingly, Betsi Cadwaladr stated that it was only adhering to Welsh Government guidance published in 2008, three years before the covenant was published.

Staff training and awareness of the covenant varied greatly across the health boards, with little formal training of its requirements taking place. Medical records teams in Aneurin Bevan and Cardiff and Vale had been trained in priority and fast-track referrals, with Cardiff and Vale currently working with the Ministry of Defence on a training package for primary care. Yet Abertawe Bro Morgannwg had merely circulated protocol guidance, Powys had undergone training and awareness-raising at board level only, and Hywel Dda and Betsi had delivered no formal training. Although the covenant applies to local health board employees, I was concerned when I recently accompanied a health board employee with diagnosed military PTSD to a meeting with his employers, when the health board stated their understanding that the covenant only applied to him as a patient.

I spoke at the 2013 launch of Change Step, a support and peer mentoring service provided by veterans for veterans seeking help for mental health, loneliness or addiction problems, led by north-Wales based charity, CAIS. Change Step has now helped more than 1,700 veterans and their families since its launch, yet its reliance on bid funding presents a long-standing challenge when seeking to provide essential services. The Cabinet Secretary will no doubt tell us about the amount of money given to Veterans' NHS Wales, which provides veterans living in Wales with assessment and psychological treatment for mental health problems, including PTSD. Despite this, Veterans' NHS Wales state that without extra Welsh Government support they will be unable to continue reducing waiting times for treatment. They've told us that they are reducing waiting lists for treatment by employing three full-time veteran therapists with charity money from Help for Heroes, and they've completed the first year of that, but, in September 2020, these posts will go and waiting lists are likely to rise again without an increase in Welsh Government support. Of course, without that increase, there'd be an additional cost burden generated on health and care services and therefore that would be a false economy. Veterans' NHS Wales also state that in Scotland and Northern Ireland large-scale studies on the needs of veterans and ex-forces personnel have been carried out by the Forces in Mind Trust, and are calling for a similar study in Wales to help inform policy and practice.

Housing is key to veterans and their families. First Choice Housing Association led the way on this in Wales and secured funding from the MOD veterans accommodation fund to deliver homes across Wales. Alabaré's Wales Homes for Veterans initiative delivers supported housing for veterans struggling to adjust to the civilian world. Working together, First Choice Housing Association and Alabaré delivered the ambitious self-build project for veterans in Wrexham, the third residence in north Wales to be managed by Wales Home for Veterans, which took the charity's provision across Wales to 57 places.

The Welsh Government has announced a housing referrals pathway for veterans and updated guidance. However, provision of leaflets and advice cards does not address the concerns of how housing officers themselves, who provide the necessary support, are able to manage the complex cases of re-homing veterans. Better integration of housing, health and care services, alongside support for schemes such as those provided by First Choice and Alabaré, is therefore needed from the Welsh Government, especially when there's been a large reduction in the number of veteran households accepted by local authorities as being in priority housing need since the Housing (Wales) Act 2014 was introduced. I can't believe that those figures reflect the true level of need. 

Woody's Lodge is a charity providing safe spaces for armed service veterans, recent leavers, reservists, and those who served in the emergency services, to socialise and access a range of health and social services and to interact with people who've had similar experiences. Following the success of their first established base in south Wales, they're now opening a site at Eirias Park in Colwyn Bay for veterans across north Wales. Alongside Age Cymru and Age Alliance Wales, Woody's Lodge is a partner in Project 360°, funded by the UK Chancellor's aged veterans fund, supporting older veterans across Wales.

Endorsed by the armed forces community and armed service heads, the review by the cross-party group on armed forces and cadets, referred to earlier, found that, in order to uphold the covenant, the Welsh Government should consider the appointment of an armed forces commissioner for Wales to improve the accountability of public sector organisations for the delivery of the armed forces covenant. It said the commissioner should be required to publish an annual report on adherence to the covenant to be laid in this National Assembly for Wales. Whilst welcome, the appointment of covenant-funded armed forces liaison officers across Welsh local authorities does not meet this requirement.

Responding to me yesterday, the Cabinet Secretary side-stepped this by stating instead that it was the role of the National Assembly to ensure accountability of Government. Is he therefore saying that we don't need commissioners in other areas, including children, older people and future generations? Does not their existence prove the principle that, actually, commissioners have a key role to play? One hundred years after the signing of the treaty that led to the end of the first world war, the armed forces covenant is a covenant that must endure. Diolch yn fawr.

Thank you. I have selected the two amendments to the motion, and I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Local Government and Public Services to formally move amendment 1, tabled in the name of Julie James. 

Formally.

Diolch. I call on Neil McEvoy to move amendment 2, tabled in his name.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. We don't leave soldiers behind on the battlefields and we shouldn't leave them behind when they come home. My amendment tonight is a simple one to bring about a no-soldier-left-behind Act to guarantee quality housing and healthcare for veterans who have seen active service.

Many soldiers serve and go through trauma. Some are injured and some, unfortunately, do not come back. Those who do, what do they come back to? A lack of healthcare, a lack of mental health provision and a lack of housing. There's a real problem in finding housing. Far too many former soldiers end up on the street. We do have a covenant for the armed forces, but I don't think it's good enough. In fact, I know it's not good enough. We need legislation to prioritise those who have seen active service. Identifying veterans should be the norm in the NHS, and I'm told that it's not far too often. Healthcare professionals should have the training and we should be looking at best practice.

Former soldier Gus Hales is on hunger strike to demand better support for veterans, especially those suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder. He said that 56 veterans have committed suicide this year in the UK. He's been on hunger strike for 10 days and he's 62 years of age. How can this man, living in Wales, have slipped through the net? How could it happen?

Norman McGuigan, a veterans campaigner for justice for the armed forces said earlier on the telephone that the covenant is simply not working. It may be slightly better in Wales than in England, but that really is not good enough. We need to bring in a specific no-soldier-left-behind Act to guarantee that, when people's proud military service is over, they have the support and the housing that they need and, more importantly, that they deserve. Wales can lead on this, so let's get it done. Diolch.

I welcome this debate on our armed forces in this important week of national remembrance and I rise to support the Welsh Government's amendment. 

I wish to start on a personal note. I know that the Member for Clwyd West was also a friend and colleague of Carl Sargeant. On the anniversay of Carl's passing, I know that his sincerity and presence lives on with those of us here today who cared for him, but it also lives on in the lasting initiatives and legislation that he drove forward for all of Wales, and I believe that it will continue to blossom for all of Wales. I will, on this matter, quote the Member for Clwyd West who stated that Carl was instrumental in ensuring that some of the significant improvements have been delivered, and one of the most important parts was actually getting the armed forces communities together, particularly the voluntary sector, which has often in the past been splintered and siloed. Carl helped ensure that there is now an armed forces conference each year, helping overcome those obstacles. And Darren also shares the same commitment for our armed forces that Carl always bore so passionately. Having been honoured to recently join the cross-party Assembly group on the armed forces, I look forward to working with you, Darren, on this important field.

So, as we mark the hundredth anniversary of Armistice Day and the end of the first world war, it is right that we join the Royal British Legion's #ThankYou100 campaign, which remembers those who served, who sacrificed and who changed our world between 1914 and 1918. As the Assembly Member for Islwyn, I am also honoured and very proud to stand here today in the Chamber of Wales's National Assembly and give thanks on behalf of our communities and my communities in Islwyn for the heroism shown by our brothers and sisters a century ago. We will remember them.

Although responsibility for the armed forces is, of course, non-devolved, I know that this Welsh Labour Government is extremely proud of the 385,000-strong armed forces community across Wales, and we are highly committed to the principles of the armed forces covenant. As I stated to the Cabinet Secretary for Local Government and Public Services earlier today and yesterday, I think it is important that we continue to strengthen the veteran unit within Welsh Government and further drill down into assessing any potential gaps in service delivery that need to be addressed. We can and will continue with Carl's legacy in this place, in this regard, and I am both confident and clear that this is the political will and the clear vision of this Welsh Government to ensure that this is a priority.

Llywydd, to conclude, I hope that the Welsh Conservatives, who have brought this motion, will rightly also call on the UK Tory leaders in Government to back our armed forces, because, in July, we learned that armed forces personnel will receive a 2 per cent pay rise. That is below the armed forces pay review body recommendation, and that represents a below-inflation pay offer. In today's climate of insecurity, no wonder that nearly 15,000 people left the armed forces just over the last year alone, whilst the number of people joining the armed forces is vastly decreasing.

I don't believe that this is right, and, in an era of increasing global insecurity, terrorist threat and Brexit security concerns, let us remember all those who served, who are willing to serve and who were willing to give the ultimate sacrifice for our nation—willing to ensure that we continue to live up to their commitment, not just in word and rhetoric, but, as Carl did, through legislative action and initiative, to ensure the safety and security of all in our society. Thank you.

Thank you for the opportunity to commemorate the great war. In 1916, my grandfather was 21, was recently married and was in the Royal Welch Fusiliers in the Somme and in Ypres. My grandfather was a Dolgellau boy and he served alongside boys from Trawsfynydd in the great war. They were together on the battlefield and they communicated through the medium of Welsh on foreign fields, and the death of close friends had a severe impact on them all in the battle, and ripped the hearts out of wives, mothers and rural communities across Wales. It also broke the pacifist traditions of Welsh nonconformity simultaneously. It was boys who rejected conscription on the basis of their faith who were prosecuted and ridiculed, and chapels at the time were full of anguish. It was the farm boys of Meirionnydd who went to war and the boys of the masters were allowed to remain at home. Yes, people do remember.

One day in the heat of battle, a friend of my grandfather was severely injured, shot while fighting next to my grandfather. My grandfather picked him up and carried him on his back and tried to take him to shelter, but another enemy bullet shot his friend from Dolgellau dead whilst on my grandfather's back. My grandfather, surprisingly, survived. But as the battle continued over the bloody fields of Flanders and France, my grandfather was poisoned by the mustard gas. He was among these deadly fumes, and his feet rotted as he stood in the water-filled, blood-filled trenches, facing the remains of bodies on the barbed wire.

Miraculously, my grandfather survived, or I wouldn't be here, but he barely spoke of his horrific experiences and all the suffering. It was a silent remembrance for my grandfather, so different to the fate of Hedd Wyn, the poet of the black chair in the Birkenhead Eisteddfod of 1917. Hedd Wyn, the poet and farmer from Trawsfynydd, won the chair that year at that Eisteddfod, but he had been killed at Pilckem Ridge in the battle of Passchendaele on 31 July 1917—a month before the Eisteddfod, but after he had sent his awdl Yr Arwr into that Eisteddfod. The day of the chairing at the 1917 National Eisteddfod arrived, in September, and David Lloyd George, the British Prime Minister, was in the audience on that day. But despite the name of the poet being called, the chair remained empty and a black cloth was placed over that chair, with tears flowing as everyone learnt of the fate of the winning poet.

Yes, we remember. Hedd Wyn joined the army so that his younger brother could avoid conscription. Today, the home of Hedd Wyn, Yr Ysgwrn in Trawsfynydd, has been restored and stands as it was in 1917 so that we can remember the sacrifice of that young generation. Hedd Wyn, who left a whole host of excellent poetry, was killed at 30 years of age. 

I will conclude with his poem War:

'Why must I live in this grim age / When, to a far horizon, God / Has ebbed away, and man, with rage / Now wields the sceptre and the rod? / Man raised his sword, once God had gone, / To slay his brother, and the roar / Of battlefields now casts upon / Our homes the shadow of the war. / The harps to which we sang are hung / On willow boughs, and their refrain / Drowned by the anguish of the young / Whose blood is mingled with the rain.'

We will remember the sacrifice of my grandfather's generation.

It is appropriate at this time of the year to remember and honour those who have served and who continue to serve in our armed forces. However, this year is particularly significant, marking as it does the hundredth anniversary of the end of the first world war. In recognising the sacrifice of those who served in the war to end all wars, I would like to mention those whose contribution can too easily be overlooked.

I refer to the loyalty and the heroism of those who came from what later became the Commonwealth. They came from thousands of miles away to fight for a country they had never seen. People came from some 80 countries now part of the Commonwealth to fight in the first world war. Many came from Australia, New Zealand and Canada, and many more came from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Africa and the West Indies. One and a half million volunteers came from an unpartitioned India alone, and 150,000 troops served in the western front alone. Soldiers from the Indian subcontinent won 13,000 medals, including 12 Victoria crosses. Fifteeen thousand soldiers from the West Indies saw action, and they won 81 medals for bravery. Fifty-five thousand men from Africa fought for Britain, winning 1,066 decorations. In these days of increasing racial prejudice and discrimination, it is right to take time to reflect on these facts.

In cemeteries across the world are the graves of people of all races and faiths, or of no faith, who fought side by side to defend the freedom that we all enjoy, and they sacrificed their lives. We owe every one who served a great debt, and that debt continues today because, sadly, the war to end all wars proved to be false. Twenty-one years later, the world was plunged into a second world war, and numerous other conflicts since: the Falklands, Kuwait, Iraq and Afghanistan, to name a few.

Many veterans today have to live with conditions related to their service. Recent research from King's College London suggests that conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan may have led to an increase in the rate of, as my colleague mentioned, post-traumatic stress disorder, or PTSD, among members of the armed forces. Sadly, one member, at least, dies every week from this problem. We have to do something, Minister, and I asked you earlier to mention something about veterans, and your reply was so pathetic that I am still ashamed of your reply, because you never mentioned anything in their favour.

And yet, veterans in Wales and their families have faced inconsistencies when accessing healthcare, relying on the third sector and charities to deliver the specialist and rehabilitation services that they need, in spite of the armed forced covenant. Unpreparedness means that veterans face considerable obstacles in returning to civilian life in Wales. Providing veterans with leaflets is not a substitute for the specialist support they need in accessing housing. The same is true of accessing employment. Many veterans have significant skills that could prove useful to businesses in Wales, yet research by Barclays bank shows that less than half of employers would look favourably on military experience on curriculum vitae. There remain no signs to date of Welsh Government's employment pathways. If we are truly to honour the debt we owe to our armed forces, we must ensure the effective implementation of the covenant at all levels. That is why I ask that the new First Minister, on taking office, reviews the decision to reject the appointment of an armed forces commissioner.

Deputy Presiding Officer, the Indian writer Raghu Karnad wrote, and in his words,

‘People have two deaths: the first at the end of their lives…and the second at the end of the memory of their lives, when all who remember them are gone.’

We must ensure our armed forces, present and future, remain unforgotten and appreciated forever in Wales. Thank you.

I don’t think I can in any way match Dai Lloyd’s poignant reflections on the first world war, but we must remind ourselves that our armed forces do not go to war of their own volition; they go usually because politicians have failed. But it is the personnel of our armed forces who pay the price for that failure. Men and women from our cities, towns and villages are remembered each year by our coming together in those same cities, towns and villages, not to celebrate, but to pay honour to the sacrifice that members of all the forces have made on our behalf. We in UKIP place great value on that sacrifice, not only by those who died in that terrible conflict for which we now celebrate 100 years since its end, known to us as the great war, but also those who died in that second great war of the twentieth century and, indeed, all the conflicts in which our armed forces have been engaged since the end of that second world war. On behalf of UKIP, I would like to thank all those who work in the charitable organisations, in particular the Royal British Legion, to ensure that those who have suffered in their service to this country are looked after in the best possible way.

We acknowledge and welcome the progress made by the Welsh Government in its support of the expert group on the needs of the armed forces community in Wales and their approach in ensuring that the armed forces covenant is upheld, and also the many interventions they have initiated in support of this aim. However, perhaps just one note of discord is that I understand the expert group met last on 7 February 2018, and prior to that on 5 July 2017, a whole seven months between meetings. If this is true, then it's not an acceptable time lapse for such an important organ for the delivery of the interventions put in place by the Welsh Government.

We support the call for an armed forces commissioner. We see him as someone who would have a co-ordinating role in bringing together all the disparate parts of the support mechanisms available to our ex-servicemen and women, and in making sure they work in the most effective way. If we have a children’s commissioner, an older people’s commissioner and a future generations commissioner, why not one for ex-forces personnel? We also support Neil McEvoy’s call for a no soldier left behind Act. Let’s give a legal binding to the Government’s duty of care to our ex-service personnel.

Our armed forces are renowned for being the best in the world, and therefore it is imperative that we have someone at the head to ensure that the best get the best in both the care and treatment they receive when they leave the armed forces and, indeed, whilst they are serving in any of the armed forces.

Let us be proud of the fact that Wales has just 5 per cent of the UK population but provides 8 per cent of Her Majesty’s armed forces. It is therefore fitting that Wales should be at the forefront in ensuring that our ex-servicemen and women are treated with the respect and honour they deserve. Sleeping rough on our streets or the mental problems associated with their days in combat not being diagnosed or treated are not what they should expect. We must do all we can to support such victims and eradicate the scourge of them being forced to live on our streets.

It is really heartening, actually, to be an Assembly Member and to stand here this evening in the National Assembly for Wales in solidarity with Members across all the political divides here in the Chamber, as we all pay our honoured respects to those who have gone before us and those who continue to work on behalf of us and our country, to ensure that we have the freedoms that we do.

And as we remember now the anniversary of Armistice Day, for me, I was absolutely delighted—and it was such an honour and a privilege—to be invited, as the Assembly Member for Aberconwy, to the Armed Forces Day in Llandudno, along with my colleague Darren Millar AM. And I think Darren would confer with me that it was just an incredible event in which over 1,000 serving personnel and veterans took part. It was a day of celebration of the wonderful work undertaken by our services across the UK, and our Royal British Legion, and overseas. And it was such an honour to meet so many inspirational people who have given their lives to serve and protect their country without fear whatsoever. And we do remember those who have paid the ultimate sacrifice to preserve the freedoms and values that we so cherish and that allow me, here today, to have freedom of speech.

We must never forget the terrible events, though, of 100 years ago and in many wars following. So, I do join colleagues in welcoming the Royal British Legion's #ThankYou100 campaign. Our armed forces, past and present, have contributed so much to our nation and they deserve our utmost gratitude.

It is welcome then that the Welsh Government did publish guidance in 2017 on how local authorities can uphold the armed forces covenant. The covenant is a hugely important means of recognising the sacrifices made by our armed forces personnel and their families, and seeks to help them, hopefully, to reintegrate back into civilian life. A fundamental obligation of this is to ensure that health services understand and respond to the particular health considerations of veterans, those who are injured in war, and those who now require much needed treatment. They need the distinct treatment pathways that clinicians are, technically, required to follow. Yet, the support and treatment that these individuals receive can be less than consistent across Wales. In a freedom of information request by the Welsh Conservatives, the Betsi Cadwaladr university health board, which covers my own constituency, stated that it was adhering to guidance published in 2008 by the Welsh Government and not currently the 2017 guidance. So, with the Cabinet Secretary being here present, I would ask him to look at that. This issue is exacerbated as the Betsi board has delivered no formal training to staff regarding its own obligations, whilst also not requiring veterans to identify themselves when receiving treatment. How wonderful it would be if there was some direction of travel where they could continue to receive support. And I see the Cabinet Secretary shaking his head. Shame on you. 

Veterans are being let down by a lack of wider recognition of these principles. It is increasingly difficult to measure how the armed forces covenant is delivered as the Welsh Government does not collect sufficient data to properly scrutinise this.

It is highly disappointing that the Welsh Government rejected the idea of creating an armed forces commissioner for Wales earlier this year on cost grounds. And I think this is the seventh time I've spoken since I was elected as an AM, where I know that Darren Millar and the Welsh Conservatives before I came here have wanted a commissioner. I cannot see why it is being rejected on cost grounds. What cost is one life? The welfare and well-being of our armed forces personnel should most certainly come before money considerations. The service they have given, and continue to give, to their country deserves recognition. Establishing a commissioner would help to ensure that the principles of the covenant are firmly established in Wales, focusing efforts on providing support for personnel and for veterans. It would particularly help to formulate a more coherent national plan to provide more access to tailored health services that meet the needs of these individuals. We need to redress the disadvantages faced by our serving military personnel and veterans; they deserve better. I urge every Member of this Chamber to support this motion and to ensure that our armed forces receive the best help possible. They need our support, they need our help, and it is our duty to provide that. 

May I begin by thanking the Conservative group for tabling this very important debate today? I'll begin with a few brief words explaining how the Plaid Cymru group will vote in this debate. We will support the Government amendment, not because we believe that everything that could be done is being done, Mark Isherwood has made a very effective case that that's not the case, but we're not convinced at this present moment that a commissioner is the answer, though we would be open to being convinced in the future. 

Similarly, with amendment 2, we will abstain on this occasion, though we appreciate the sentiment behind it. We're not yet entirely convinced that legislation is the way forward, but it may be that it does become necessary, and I would certainly personally be very interested in exploring how such legislation could work and could be made to ensure that the covenant is effectively delivered on and that there are sanctions for public services if they fail to do so. 

It is not always right, Deputy Presiding Officer, to use personal experience when we speak in this Chamber, but I feel I wish to do so today. I want to pay tribute to my father, John Mervyn Jones, born in 1910 in Cwm Aman, Aberdare. He joined the Royal Naval Reserve in 1938, not because he was young and naive, he was a 28-year-old schoolteacher, not because he was seeking adventure or longing to fight, he was one of the gentlest men I've ever known and he had seen his uncle come back broken and destroyed from the first world war; fighting was not what my father would have wanted to do. He didn't even join out of patriotism, but he had seen the rise of fascism in Europe, and he was convinced that the only way to defeat fascism was to fight.

He served throughout the war and, like many, spoke relatively little of his experiences. As children, we'd hear the funny stories. My personal favourite was my father describing being served pasta for the first time in Italy and having absolutely no idea what it was or what he was supposed to do with it. Regrettably, particularly for my poor mother, it left him with a long-going resistance to anything that he regarded as foreign food—meat there, vegetables there, and never the twain shall meet. 

Much later, he spoke particularly to me, and particularly when he could describe those experiences through the medium of Welsh, of the darker experiences he faced in the war. But he went on to have a family and a successful career, and he was lucky and regarded himself as lucky. Luckier, of course, than many of today's veterans, who are asked to risk their lives and lose their health in conflicts that many at home oppose. 

My father was horrified at the end of his life to witness the sacrifices asked of our servicepeople in what he regarded as an unjust and unlawful war in Iraq. Having fought himself, he knew what was being asked of them. He would have been sickened to see, as many ex-servicepeople, I suspect, are, our exceptional service personnel here in Wales today being expected to train Saudi pilots to bomb innocent civilians in Yemen. That was not what he fought for. 

He hated war, but he always believed that he had done the right thing and the only thing, and he came home to a grateful nation. He believed that he had defended democracy, he was proud to have done so, and the nation was proud of him. It is much harder emotionally for many of today's veterans, they have been asked to serve in controversial conflicts in very difficult circumstances and with unclear outcomes. Yet, serve they do. 

I passionately believe that, as we remember those who have served in the past, we must ensure that we support today's veterans, particularly those suffering from trauma and mental health problems, after what successive UK Governments have sent them to do. We must honour the covenant. Whatever we think of the conflicts in which those men and women have been asked to serve, serve they did, and we owe them our gratitude, our respect and our support.

I would like to thank the Welsh Conservatives for tabling today this important debate. It is a pleasure to be part of the cross-party group on the armed forces, and I would like to thank Darren Millar for the commitment he shows in his leadership. I also want to pay tribute to Carl Sargeant, who worked tirelessly in this area and achieved much.

On Sunday, we will gather at war memorials across the country to mark Armistice Day, the day the guns fell silent during the war to end all wars. One hundred years ago on the eleventh hour of the eleventh day of the eleventh month, the bloodshed ended five years of conflict that saw millions of lives lost in the so-called 'great war'. But, unfortunately, it was not the war to end all wars and in the 100 years that have followed, the world has seen innumerable conflicts and no end of bloodshed. It is a sad fact that sometimes war is unavoidable. We have to take a stand against despotic regimes and dictators hellbent on butchering even their own people.

There are currently 60 ongoing armed conflicts around the globe and, because of this, we are seeing increasingly emboldened Russia determined to return its borders back to its Soviet-era lines. Because of this, we need our armed forces more than ever. We need those young men and women in uniform who are prepared to make the ultimate sacrifice, to lay down their lives in defence of our freedoms. In order to honour those who made that sacrifice and to thank all those who are, and were, prepared to make that sacrifice, we will gather on the eleventh hour of the eleventh day of the eleventh month and we will remember them.

But we, as elected Members, have a duty to do so much more than honouring our dead heroes. We have to ensure our living heroes are well cared for. Far too many ex-service personnel are being let down by the state, far too many are suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder, and far too many are in prison because they were not helped to adapt to civilian life, and far too many are sleeping rough because they don't have adequate housing. Men and women who fought for us, who are prepared to die for us, simply abandoned.

The armed forces covenant is supposed to ensure that this doesn't happen, which is why I welcome the Welsh Government's appointment of armed forces liaison officers across Wales. I, like the Conservatives, want to ensure that the covenant is upheld, but I don't know if an armed forces commissioner is the right way. I also believe the covenant does not go far enough and will be supporting Neil McEvoy's amendment calling for an Act to guarantee quality housing and healthcare to veterans who have seen active service. How can we allow someone who risked their life for us in defence of our nation and freedoms to sleep in a rubbish bin behind some shops or to relive over and over the horrors and trauma of the front line? They should be given the best available treatment and housing as a very small measure of recompense for the enormous debt we owe them.

It was an honour a few weeks ago in Port Talbot: our local mayor honoured the armed forces covenant, and it was also wonderful to stand side by side with Blesma, the charity for limbless war veterans, and collect and see the generosity of the people of Port Talbot as the bucket got heavier and heavier. What better way to mark Remembrance Sunday and the hundredth anniversary of the end of the great war than to commit to introduce legislation to improve the lives of our veterans? I urge Members to support the motion and the two amendments. Thank you.

Can I now call the Cabinet Secretary for Local Government and Public Services, Alun Davies?

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. Like others in this debate, I'd like to start my remarks by paying tribute to the work of my friend and predecessor Carl Sargeant. I think today has been a difficult day for many of us and our hearts go out to Bernie, to Jack and to Lucy and to the family. And in replying to the debate this afternoon, I hope that we will all think about the work that Carl undertook and hope also that we will all be able to join together and remember somebody who was a friend and a great servant of the people of this country. 

Yesterday, I sought to outline how the Welsh Government will continue to support the armed forces community. I want to welcome very much the remarks made by Mark Isherwood in opening the debate this afternoon. I felt that he made some excellent remarks, and I thought it was a very thoughtful and valuable contribution to this debate. I will seek to answer most of the points that have been made in the debate during this reply, but I recognise I won't be able to respond to all the points that were made. So, I would, Deputy Presiding Officer, say that I will write to Mark and copy all Members in with a fuller response to the points that were raised in the opening contribution, because I do think it is important to us to respond fully to the points that were made there.

In terms of how we approach this, can I say I enjoyed listening to the speeches in the debate we've had this afternoon? I think it was good to hear the words of Hedd Wyn being spoken this afternoon, and I thought both Dai Lloyd and Helen Mary Jones were able to weave all of our family stories, our personal stories, into our national story. I think it is important to recognise that when we talk about the losses that this country has suffered in terms of maintaining our freedom, our society, our communities and our democracy, these are people—they are fathers and mothers, wives and husbands, brothers, sisters, sons and daughters—and we all know people who have suffered as a consequence of conflict.

It's very sobering to reflect, when Caroline Jones speaks about the guns falling silent on the eleventh hour of the eleventh day, that over 800 British and Commonwealth soldiers were killed on that day. To think about that toll on any day today would be quite an unimaginable loss, but that, on the day we where we welcomed the end of war and the advent of peace, demonstrates the actual impact of that conflict on communities up and down the country. 

I think it's also important to recognise the points that Mohammad Asghar made in his contribution, when he spoke about the troops who had fought in that conflict, and the fact that the fusiliers, which Dai Lloyd's grandad probably fought with and alongside, would have fought alongside Indian soldiers, and would have fought alongside those worshipping different gods—they would have fought alongside Muslim and Hindu soldiers as well, soldiers that we recognise in much of our own history. I think it's important that all of us, and some of us in this Chamber, in the debates that we have today, and the political debates that we have, recognise that the sacrifice in the first world war was a sacrifice made by people from all nations, by people from very different cultural and religious backgrounds. When we use loose language today, we should always recognise that the consequence of prejudice, the consequence of discrimination, is all too often found on the battlefield. And I hope that many people will reflect on the language that they use in politics today when remembering the sacrifice of others over the years.

We have spent four years looking back over the first world war, and the centenary of the armistice on Sunday is an opportunity for us, not simply as a Government, but us as a National Assembly, a national Parliament for this country, to join the other nations, not only in the UK but elsewhere, in marking the centenary. We will be having a national service of thanksgiving in Llandaff cathedral, and I'm grateful for the opportunity to be able to commemorate all those who were lost, injured and affected by that conflict. But I hope that we will all join together with all the nations involved in that conflict in remembering the sacrifice of all nations, and people who were lost in that conflict. I know that Members will also be taking the opportunity to attend events being held in their own constituencies, across this country, to mark this important time in history. It is right and proper for all of us to join together to remember the sacrifices of the armed services from each of our communities in this way.

I think it is right and proper as well that we commend the work of Cymru'n Cofio—Wales Remembers in delivering a comprehensive programme that commemorated the centenary of that conflict, of the first world war. The continuation of funding until 2020 will allow us to ensure that we also are able to learn lessons of that war. We remember that November 1918 was an armistice, it wasn't a peace. And peace came, and peace was created by leaders of nations, including, of course, our own David Lloyd George much later, and it is right and proper that we reflect on the consequences of war and the consequences of peace. I hope that the enduring legacy of Cymru'n Cofio—Wales Remembers is that people up and down this country will remember not simply the events of the first world war, but the consequences for our country of those events and the consequences for communities and families.

Deputy Presiding Officer, the Government agrees with the second point of the motion, and we will be supporting much of what has been said in the debate and in the motion today. Like many others, I've seen the silent silhouettes of the Royal British Legion #ThankYou100 campaign. Positioned throughout our communities, these figures provide us with the opportunity as a nation to say 'thank you' to all of those who served, sacrificed and changed our world. I am grateful to everyone who has supported this important campaign, and it brings home to us, I think, that these aren't simply names on memorials, that these are people, and these are people who stood and lived and worked and died and loved in our communities, and they're people who died defending our communities. These are people who we can all recognise in memory, but sometimes I think it's important that we recognise their place in our towns and villages across Wales. 

We will continue with our package of support to honour the contribution of all those who served and continue to serve in our armed forces, and we will attempt to continue to ensure that no members are disadvantaged in accessing public services as a consequence of their service in the armed forces. I have already this week discussed the support that the Welsh Government is providing as part of our work to deliver on the covenant. It is not my wish to repeat those points today, but I do wish to say a word about the expert group. Mark Isherwood was absolutely right when he said that there has to be public accountability for the actions of this Government in delivering on the covenant. I accept that completely. I hope that the expert group enables us to be able to do that, to understand how we deliver on the covenant, and to understand where we're not doing so, and to understand how we have to deliver in a different or better way in some areas, and we will continue to do that. We will produce an annual report, which will enable this place to hold us to account for what we do and the promises that we make. I hope that we will be able, also, to consider how our democracy here in Wales may help us to hold myself and others to account to what we say, for the commitments that we make. I hope that we will be able to do that together with the expert group and also with the all-party group on the armed forces.

Deputy Presiding Officer, in bringing my remarks to a close today, I hope that Members across the whole Chamber will join with me in thanking all those who have served and all those who continue to serve, and we'll join together as a nation this weekend to recognise the enormous sacrifice of those who didn't have the opportunity to come home.

Thank you. I now call Darren Millar to reply to the debate. 

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Can I thank the Cabinet Secretary for his positive response to this afternoon's debate and, indeed, all speakers for their often moving, very moving, contributions? I want to pay tribute to the Cabinet Secretary for the work that he's done in continuing the work of many of his predecessors, of course, including Carl Sargeant, who's anniversary of his passing we mark today. Carl was indeed a great friend. He was a friend to us and, of course, he was a friend to the armed forces and to the veteran community here in Wales, and I, for one, am very grateful for the work that he put in during his tenure as the Minister responsible for the armed forces and the way in which he engaged with the work of the cross-party group, which I have the pleasure of being able to share.

Just to touch on some of the personal stories—I have my own personal story as well, of course, today, on this poignant day. My great-grandfather fought in the first world war. He was an Irishman, from Dublin. He signed up when he was just 14 years old—he lied about his age. I've got a copy of the ticket on which he signed up, young Private John Collins. He went to fight on the western front and, thank God, he came back. 

Two hundred thousand Irishmen fought in the hostilities of the first world war, 35,000 of them died, and that's why I'm wearing a shamrock poppy today, in order to mark their contribution to the war. Because the Cabinet Secretary and Mohammad Asghar are quite right: it was the whole of the Commonwealth that was engaged in these hostilities. British men and servicemen from around the Commonwealth were fighting shoulder to shoulder against what they saw as the evil of their day, and many did pay the ultimate sacrifice. It's quite right that this weekend we will be remembering them, and we will ensure that their memory is not extinguished in the way that it is about so many other things in this world.

There has been a wonderful programme, I think, of commemoration that has taken place over these past four years, and I want to thank the First Minister for the way in which he initiated the Cymru'n Cofio—Wales Remembers programme all those years ago. I'm pleased to see that its programme of work is going to be extended. There are some very important anniversaries to mark over the next 12 months, of course, including the seventy-fifth anniversary of D-day and the 53rd (Welsh) Infantry Division's liberation of 's-Hertogenbosch in the Netherlands, which took place 75 years ago in October next year. I think it would be good if the work of Cymru'n Cofio could continue even beyond the timeframe by which it's already been extended, because there will of course be military anniversaries on an ongoing basis. It's not going to be that long away before we're marking the seventy-fifth anniversary of other events in the second world war, and indeed the eightieth anniversary and ninetieth anniversaries. So, this programme of military remembrance, I think, does need to continue.

Mark Isherwood opened this debate, of course, by highlighting the fact that not only has there been significant progress in recent years, but that we still have some way to go in ensuring that there is consistent support available for our veteran community, certainly as far as the national health service is concerned. We have a great story to tell with Veterans NHS Wales, but there are waiting times that are too long to access that service at the moment, and that is despite the good work of Help for Heroes, in terms of the investment that it's put in, in order to try to help fill those gaps.

The third sector, of course, does a tremendous job in supporting our armed forces family. The Royal British Legion has been mentioned on many occasions today already, as has Change Step, but Combat Stress, SSAFA, Alabaré, Woody's Lodge—a whole host of organisations are out there offering support, and I think it's to the credit of the Welsh Government that they've worked with them very well in extending that support to the veteran community. But, as I say, there's much more work to be done, and I think that we all need to put our shoulder to the wheel to make sure that those remaining gaps in services are indeed not just identified, but filled.

I just want to turn very briefly, before I close, to this issue about a commissioner, and the need for an armed forces commissioner here in Wales. My party of course welcomed the additional support for the armed forces liaison officers that are working and embedded in local authorities across Wales, and I think that we need to pay tribute to them for their work. But the reality is that those posts are junior posts in very large public sector organisations. Those individuals will not have the sort of clout that an armed forces commissioner supporting armed forces serving personnel across Wales and their families, and supporting veterans and their families, could have. We've seen the impact, the positive impact, of commissioners for children and young people, for older people, and indeed the future generations commissioner, now that she's taking on her work, and the way in which they can move an agenda forward in a way that others are not able to. So, I would urge all Members in this Chamber, including those that are still having the jury out, as it were, in terms of their views on this, to support the principle of an armed forces commissioner for Wales. Because I really do think it would make a huge difference to those armed forces families and the armed forces community across the country. [Interruption.] Yes, yes.

I just want to touch on the amendment that Neil McEvoy has also tabled, very briefly. I will not be able to support that particular amendment today, simply because you refer to soldiers only. Of course we know that those who serve in the military are not just soldiers. You have airmen, you have sailors, and a whole host of other people who are contributing to our armed forces. So, I regret that we will not be able to support your amendment today simply because of the limitations in terms of the way that it's been worded. But I do hope that people will reconsider this support for the armed forces commissioner in their voting intentions. Thank you.

Thank you. It's 15 minutes to open and close a debate and, if you're having two Members of your party, it's up to you to work out your timings. 

The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Object. Right, we move to voting time, then. Unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, I will proceed directly to voting time.

Okay, we are at voting time, then. The only debate to vote on is the Welsh Conservatives debate on the armed forces and I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Darren Millar. If the proposal is not agreed to, we will vote on the amendments tabled to the motion. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 16, no abstentions, 35 against, therefore the motion is not agreed.

We now go to vote on amendment 1, 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 35, three abstentions, 13 against, therefore amendment 1 is agreed.

I now call for a vote on amendment 2, tabled in the name of Neil McEvoy. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the amendment six, 18 abstentions, 27 against. Therefore, amendment 2 is not agreed.

We now call for a vote on the motion as amended. 

Open the vote. Close the vote. For the amended motion 47, three abstentions, one against. Therefore, the motion as amended is agreed.

We now move to proceed to the short debate. If Members are leaving the Chamber, can you do so quickly, quietly? We now move to the short debate and I call on Angela Burns to speak on the topic that she has chosen—Angela.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I've agreed to give a minute of my time to Mohammad Asghar, Janet Finch-Saunders and Russell George.

The countryside of Wales is not only the sweeping canvass that underpins our nation and defines our borders and identity, but it forms the backdrop to a way of life that is often not understood or as valued as it should be. Yet rural Wales is home to around 33 per cent of the Welsh population. A third of us live in towns, villages and communities where our landscape is quite different to the rest of Wales, and where we often feel that our valuable contribution to supporting the economy of Wales and its rich cultural and social heritage is not given the weight it deserves.

Like many nations, Wales experiences a split between its urban centres and the rural hinterlands. All too often, Government policy is centred on making sure that the large urban centres are catered for to the cost of the more remote and less populated rural counties of Wales. Policies surrounding healthcare, education and economic growth cannot be implemented through a one-size-fits-all approach, and the Government needs to remember that, for many, a rural way of life is one of survival and hard graft and not the picture-postcard, doe-eyed good life that many others consider it to be.

All of us weigh up many factors when deciding where to live and those who want to live in rural areas are often prepared to compromise, to accept that jobs might be harder to get, that services might be a bit further away, that schools might be smaller, that we won't earn as much or indeed have so many opportunities to spend what we earn and that our way of life does cost a bit more. But Welsh Government is now asking us to compromise too much. For example, education: access to a local village school and the community that comes with it is a key reason for many choosing to live where they do, but, under Welsh Labour, we have seen schools close and communities disintegrate; villages have lost their focal point. These actions were supported by Welsh Government, and whilst I was happy to see the revised school organisation code, which finally introduces a presumption against the closure of rural schools, it is too late for too many teachers, too many pupils and too many parents. After all, three out of five schools were closed between 2006 and 2016.

Another compromise too far is healthcare. It is no coincidence that the two health boards covering the majority of rural Wales are in major difficulties. These health boards have presided over major controversial reorganisations, which aim to centralise services and save money. However, what is often ignored is the views of the local population. It may be more economically efficient to centre services in one or two large hospitals, but does this deliver health and well-being outcomes for the rural population? I, personally, am always really impressed by how truly rural nations like Australia are able to balance the needs of providing services across thousands of square miles. Yet, despite a £9 billion budget, Welsh Government can't do it. It's not just the outcomes that concern me, but the ability to attract the appropriate workforce to support these systems of care, which are so important in rural communities. For people to choose to work in healthcare in rural communities, they want good local schools for their kids and a decent job for other members of their families.

So, whilst health and education are absolutely vital threads in the canvas of rural living, it is the economy of rural Wales that provides the golden thread. We must create and preserve a prosperous rural economy that can support our communities. The prosperity we seek stems from agriculture, tourism, sports, the public sector, and the extraordinary diversity of businesses, large and small. Whether it's the local newsagent in Tenby, the global supplier of agricultural matting in Llanglydwen, the fast-growing chocolate company in Llanboidy, or the niche boutique in Narberth, they, and many other extraordinary entrepreneurs throughout the whole of Wales, combine to create real opportunities for a vibrant rural economy. And, without doubt, the warp that runs through our rural canvas is farming. The Welsh Conservatives are united in understanding the importance of the agricultural industry to the Welsh economy, but I am not sure that the Welsh Government understand that. Because, without farming at the heart of the rural economy, we will lose not just farms, not just the next generation, not just the businesses that depend on agriculture, but we will lose the environment, the countryside that attracts tourists, and, finally, we will lose the people.

Farmers are rightly worried about what support will be available once the single farm payment stops, and I personally am deeply concerned about the 'Brexit and our land' consultation, because this consultation suggests that farmers will become simply custodians of the countryside, being financially rewarded for addressing problems such as poor air and water quality and flood risk, but this does not recognise the key role they already play, nor indeed their outstanding custodianship of the environment, or that the core focus of a farming business is to produce food. If we don't value the quality and abundance of our countryside and simply push farmers into a land management role, then what of all the other businesses that rely on farmers—those that produce feed, mend machinery, sell supplies, broker the product? Therefore, Minister, I urge the Government to listen to the 12,000 responses on the 'Brexit and our land' consultation. We could be changing the nature of farming forever, and, alongside that, changing the countryside for generations to come. We must remember the impact that a strong agricultural sector has on our rural economy. The Welsh Government ignores at its peril the fact that agriculture underpins a multi-billion pound food and drink industry that employs over 222,000 people, making it the largest employer in Wales, and which is worth over £6.9 billion to the economy. So, why—through arrogance, carelessness, or indifference—destroy it? And, if agriculture is the warp to our canvas, then business is the weft, and rural business is struggling. 

Last week's budget saw the Westminster Government backing high streets by cutting business rates by a third for two years, but we are yet to hear if support is being considered for Welsh high streets. In rural communities, footfall is often seasonal, vacancy rates are high, charity shops abound, more and more edge-of-town multiples are appearing, and, once a high street starts to die, the reverse is hard to engineer. Wales now has the highest business rates in the UK, and the Welsh Conservatives believe this is placing a crippling and unfair burden on businesses across Wales and threatening the economic well-being of many, many businesses. And it is these high streets that complement one of rural Wales’s greatest assets: our outstanding countryside. Destination tourism is a concept much talked of by Welsh Government: get people to come and see our fabulous national parks, the sheer majesty of the seas pounding our land, the quiet beauty of the mountains, hills and valleys of the hinterland, persuade people to cycle, run, walk, row and wander—singles, couples, families—and, when exhausted, or rained on, then head to the castles and churches, the shops and attractions, the museums and restaurants.

Thankfully, the tourism tax did not take hold; dropped from consideration by Welsh Labour when they understood the strength of feeling against it from rural communities. Because we have some wonderful accommodation on offer in rural Wales, from country hotels overlooking lakes and mountains, to bed and breakfasts next to the coastal path, all the way through to holiday parks and on-farm cottages. It is for these reasons that so many people visit, and in the first six months of this year there were 430,000 day trips to Wales, which contributed over £167 million to the Welsh economy.

Without doubt, Minister, another thread to our rural canvas, and in a great many country people’s DNA, are field sports, which attract people to shoot, fish, hawk and ferret from within and without Wales. I think that we all recognise there is a need to develop a tourism industry that operates year round. Shooting, for example, contributes significantly to 365-day-a-year tourism by maintaining employment in otherwise challenging environments, and it provides hotels, bed-and-breakfast establishments and pubs with vital income in the winter months.

And, Minister, it’s not just business that benefits from the field sports industry; it’s also the environment. Whilst farming has played a huge role in shaping these landscapes, it is shooting that has ensured that these farms continue to be infused with hedgerows, small woodlands, lakes and ponds. However, recent announcements by the Welsh Government have seen a decision taken to ban game shooting on public land. This decision lacks scientific basis, substantiated by a report undertaken by Natural Resources Wales, which said there was no need to change existing laws. I’m deeply concerned that the urban lobbyist, who doesn’t need to make a country life work, will push this Government into banning shooting on all Government land, such as forestry, then the national parks. Then, are the anglers to be driven from the rivers and waterways of Wales? Where does it stop? It is estimated that shooting in Wales directly contributes £75 million gross value added to the Welsh economy every year. Shooters pay for accommodation and services wherever they travel. Tables in pubs and restaurants, and rooms in hotels and bed and breakfasts are booked by shooters from all over the world throughout the game shooting season, which coincides with the otherwise quieter winter tourism months. Sixty-four per cent of all shoot providers say that their staff live within 10 miles of their workplace, ensuring that wages are being spent supporting local businesses and services.

Shooting supports the equivalent of 2,400 full-time jobs in Wales and is involved in the management of 380,000 hectares of rural land. Shooters undertake over 120,000 days of conservation work annually—conservation work, Minister, annually—across the Welsh countryside, and almost £8 million is spent each year on conservation and habitat maintenance by shooting estates here in Wales. It is this management that benefits rare songbirds, geese, and waders, providing shelter, food and protection from predators, and it should come as no surprise that when the management for shooting stops, vulnerable wildlife, including red-listed species such as grouse and lapwings, suffer.

As I mentioned earlier, I fear for angling. There is already a tussle between canoeists and anglers for our waterways. The canoeists are a vocal lobby group that swoop into Wales for a day or two, yet angling is also an important part of our rural economy. Rod licences raise well in excess of £1 million a year, and the fees are used for the management of inland water. According to your own Welsh Government figures, the total value of fishing to the Welsh economy is at £38 million.

The canvas of our rural economy needs many other threads, such as decent infrastructure and comprehensive broadband, and, of course, other threads have already been pulled, such as the closure of many rural banks and post offices. But, Minister, I’m concerned over what many see to be a fundamental lack of understanding of the interwoven threads of the rural economy and the rural way of life. These threads, drawn together, are the day-to-day canvas for one third of Welsh people, and so I urge you to give your backing to recognising the value that our rural economy plays in our nation's prosperity. In making the wrong calls, you risk permanently harming the countryside and our economy that is so vital to the future prosperity of Wales. We do not want to have a countryside that is empty and derelict.

I'm very grateful to Angela for bringing this debate forward this afternoon on the rural economy. For the rural economy to thrive, we need a fit-for-purpose road network to support long-term social and economic development. Hindering the development of the rural economy in south-east Wales is, of course, the level of ongoing congestion on the M4 motorway. The road has been blighted by a huge level of traffic congestion for many years. We desperately need a relief road, but a final decision should be taken following the conclusion of the public inquiry and with value for money in mind for Welsh taxpayers.

If we are to take full advantage of the opportunities presented by the abolition of tolls on the Severn crossing, then we have to improve our road, air and rail links between rural areas, mid Wales, and north Wales, to improve our economy, and we have a great potential. I'm pretty sure, if you improved the transportation, our economy will improve. Thank you.

Community transport provisions, following on from Oscar, are an important aspect of connecting rural Wales, providing a vital role in the lives of thousands of people across Wales, providing a vital lifeline to many vulnerable people who, possibly, couldn't leave their home, face social isolation, or even get involved in their communities without it.

In Wales, 2 million journeys are made every year by passengers, assisting 142,000 individuals. However, according to the Campaign for Better Transport, approximately 12 per cent has been cut from the budget for supporting bus services within Wales, with 25 of these services now withdrawn. And guess what and where these are? In our rural communities. The Welsh Government must work more with local councils to protect these services from budget cuts and to work with transport providers to increase the availability of such transport. This will go a long way in helping vulnerable people to access the services they require and will help to provide a well-connected rural Wales.

Can I thank Angela Burns for allowing me to speak on this just briefly, considering I represent a rural constituency myself? I think tourism is key to the rural economy. We have outstanding, beautiful landscapes that we need to utilise.

There are a range of views on shooting, and mine are on record, so I won't go into that now, but there will be an impact on my constituency, for rural Wales, as a result of the proposals if they go ahead. But, I'll say to the Minister, you've got to recognise that if you bring forward proposals and you force a change, you have to support the businesses that are affected and recognise the consequences of your policy. So, that is extremely disappointing and unhelpful to the rural economy. There is a great deal of permanent employment and partial employment, or seasonal employment, that will also be affected as a result. So, I ask you again, Minister, and urge you to look carefully at this again and think of the consequences on the rural community.

And a further concern of course, is the 'Brexit and our land' consultation—[Interruption.]

Are you looking at me?

I am looking at you, yes.

So, in that case, I will just say that there's a huge knock-on effect for the rural economy in this regard, for local shops and businesses that depend on that farming industry. If farming becomes unsustainable, there will be a huge knock-on effect and you will dismantle the local economy as it is now. 

Can I now call the Minister for Environment to reply to the debate? Hannah Blythyn.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Can I start by thanking all Members for their contributions today and, in particular, Angela Burns, for bringing forward this short debate? And whilst we may not agree on all elements of the content of Angela's speech, I'm sure everybody will agree with me in saying what a passionate and eloquent speech it was, promoting the wonders of our rural communities in Wales.

I think the key point you picked up on and something that struck me is that the economy of rural Wales is the golden thread. We know that the economy of rural Wales is vital to so many communities across our country. It's an economy that, as a Welsh Government, we are supporting and are keen to promote. During the summer, my colleague the Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Transport visited businesses throughout rural Wales to discuss the unique challenges and opportunities facing those areas. Businesses included Siemens Healthineers, which employs 413 people in Llanberis, PCI Pharma, which employs 360 people in Hay-on-Wye, and I know that he recently visited Wynnstay in Llansantffraid, which employs 400 people. 

The Welsh Government has supported all these businesses in one way or another, but we know these aren't the only examples of successful businesses operating in rural Wales that we have directly supported. We have supported DMM International, which employs 195 people in the mainly rural Arfon area, and in rural Carmathenshire we have supported Coaltown Coffee, which is now a thriving business. If I'm correct, I've actually spotted it in the Members' tea room here as well. All of these are important examples of successful rural businesses that have received direct Welsh Government support. We absolutely recognise, however, that the success of these businesses does not rely on direct support alone. We need to do more to grow our economy in an inclusive way, tackling the structural inequalities that exist within our regions, spreading opportunity to every part of Wales.

Skills and infrastructure have a key role to play in delivering on that opportunity, and I know a number of Members pushed on the importance of connectivity in terms of transport. We are working with regional partners throughout the regional skills partnerships to ensure we have the skills provision in rural areas to meet the need of that region and that area.

We also know how in today's world the availability of digital infrastructure is hugely important to businesses and communities in rural areas and these areas often face specific challenges with that. Since its inception in 2013, Superfast Cymru has invested over £82 million to provide access to fast fibre broadband to over 280,000 properties across the predominantly rural areas of Carmarthenshie, Powys, Pembrokeshire, Ceredig—I'm not doing very well today—Ceredigion—thank you—Gwynedd and Angelsey.

Our national transport finance plan recognises the importance of our rural economy. For instance, the £95 million investment in the Newtown bypass, which is a programme to be completed in early 2019. As a Government, we are committed to empowering our regions through our economic action plan, to build on their individual strengths to ensure maximum economic growth for Wales and for our people. Our economic action plan recognises that each region has its own opportunities and challenges and that a one-size-fits-all approach to economic development will not go far enough to drive the regional economic growth that Wales needs.

Will you take an intervention? May I just ask you, and I note you have the Minister for the Welsh language sitting next door to you, does your economic plan, which recognises all the regions, also weight and factor that Welsh lives very strongly in many rural areas? Unless you support those rural areas—the tourism, the health, the education, all the rest of it—then, actually, the Welsh language will also suffer as a consequence of the decimation of rural Wales. 

Yes, absolutely. Despite my poor pronunciation today, I do try very hard to learn Welsh and I understand absolutely how important it is particularly to our rural communities across Wales. Part of it is the well-being of future generations Act that needs to be considered as part of that. That's why I say that a one-size-fits-all approach will not work, because we know each area of Wales has their own unique not just challenges, but characteristics as well. So, it's absolutely essential to consider that the Welsh language is key to that.

In addition, the strong benefit of our new regional model is that it provides a holistic approach to relationships with businesses. Hopefully, it will enable better collaboration with public sector delivery partners, including local authorities and providers of both higher and further education. It will enable better integrated infrastructure decisions, including transport and digital requirements as well as the provision of good-quality commercial property. The new chief regional officers are now in post and they're providing a regional voice in Government. They are listening to local partners and involving them in decision making. They're feeding back local intelligence that's helping to tailor Welsh Government's work.

It's important, though, to remember that the rural economy has benefited hugely from EU funds and our broader access to the single market. The Welsh Government has made clear that Wales should not lose out on any of that funding or through lack of access to the single market. A thriving rural economy is fundamental to help sustain viable communities throughout rural Wales to provide quality employment opportunities for our people, particularly including young people and to help to secure the Welsh language in some of the heartlands in rural Wales. We are therefore working to achieve the best outcome for Wales, but, as a responsible Government, we recognise the need to plan in the case of a 'no deal' scenario. Last month, the finance Secretary delivered an oral statement setting out the next steps in the development of a post-Brexit regional policy. The oral statement confirmed that any replacement funding will be invested to support regional development and reduce inequality. It also confirmed that we will continue to adopt a multi-annual approach towards investing any replacement funding to maintain a long-term focus on the structural challenges in our economy and labour market. 

The Chancellor's announcement last Monday on the north Wales growth deal fell some way short of what the North Wales Economic Ambition Board had been hoping for. However, despite this, we remain fully committed to delivering this potentially transformative growth deal and will continue to work to get the package and direction right for north Wales, agreeing heads of terms for the deal as soon as possible. Similarly, we are fully committed to developing and securing a growth deal for mid Wales, and we'll continue to work closely with partners in the region and the UK Government.

May I finish by thanking, once again, all Members for their contributions and to conclude by reaffirming that this Government is committed to supporting our rural communities and economy for the prosperity of the whole of Wales? Diolch yn fawr. 

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