Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru

Good afternoon. Welcome, all, to this afternoon's Plenary meeting. The first item on our agenda will be questions to the Minister for Finance and Local Government, and the first question is from Gareth Davies.

Local government and public services across Wales are a priority in our budget considerations. Once the revenue support grant budget for 2024-25 has been determined as part of the draft budget process, it will be allocated based on relative need, using the settlement formula agreed with local government.

Many thanks for your response, Minister. I want to raise this subject with you in anticipation of the next financial year, as it's long been the view of north Wales local authorities across the political spectrum that they get short-changed compared to authorities in the south, thus leading to discontent around the spending priorities of the Welsh Government and its commitment to making sure that my local authority, Denbighshire County Council, and other authorities across north Wales, are on a level footing with the rest of Wales. So, what assurances can the Minister provide to my constituents, who are seeing library opening times narrowed, and other front-line services cut to the bone, that this Welsh Labour Government is considering the best interests of north Wales and its residents in the next 12 months?

I can give your constituents every reassurance in that regard, because the revenue support grant, and the formula that underpins it, is demonstrably one that is fair and one that doesn't favour certain parts of Wales over other parts of Wales. In 2023-24—in this year—four of the six north Wales authorities saw increases over or above the Welsh average. The reason why some authorities experience smaller increases than others in years, or larger increases, depends on the relative changes in population and pupil numbers, generally speaking. But, overall, I think that it is recognised that the funding formula is fair. It's been developed in consultation with the distribution sub-group and with local government to ensure that there is fair treatment of the different factors.

We work collaboratively with Wales’s public services boards when procuring goods and services, looking at more than just financial cost. This is resulting in investment in our communities, delivery of well-being impacts, and creating a multiplier effect, with the Welsh pound staying in Wales and circulating through the economy.

Thank you for that answer, Minister. In discussions that I've had on the Government's foundational economy agenda, there seems to be a recognition that interest has been focused on approaching public procurement reform at a public services board level, with the generic objective of shifting public sector contracts to firms headquartered in Wales. Thus far, the discussions I've had seem to suggest that work in this area hasn't really focused on what public procurement could do differently on a sector-by-sector basis. So, I'm really interested to understand if any analysis of activity has been undertaken to indicate in which sectors public spend could be best leveraged and how effective public services boards have been in furthering that work so far.

I'm grateful for the question. I'd be keen, perhaps, to have a meeting outside of the Chamber this afternoon to understand a bit more what lies beneath the concerns. But I completely agree that public services boards are critical partners in this agenda. They've recently been developing and publishing their latest well-being plans, and you can see throughout those the fact that they recognise the importance of public procurement and local procurement in developing the local economy.

There are lots of good examples out there. The furniture procurement by the Wales Council for Voluntary Action and the Welsh Local Government Association—they've worked together to commission the social enterprise Ministry of Furniture, based in Port Talbot, to fit out a new office space in Cardiff, with a value of £230,000. The focus of that work was to maximise the amount of existing furniture stock that could be reused and repurposed, with minimal material sent to landfill. And I had an opportunity to meet with the Ministry of Furniture at the Procurex conference, which the Welsh Government sponsors, bringing together people who are interested in public procurement and those organisations that can work with them. And I have to say, when I walked the floor there and met with people in the conference, I was just amazed by all of the conversations I was having—they were about, 'How do we keep the pound in Wales?', 'How do we spend money to have those social goods and demonstrate that social value?' It wasn't about the bottom line at all. So, I felt really heartened by those conversations, and it seems that people, in procurement now, are kind of getting the need to ensure that we don't just look at the actual cost, important though that is; it's the value as well.

Now, you'll recall, Minister, that we were both elected in 2011, and, since then, I've been really keen to raise in this Chamber public procurement and how we can actually use more Welsh produce as part of that procurement plan. Now, for 12 years, we've heard different plans. The national procurement strategy was supposed to help the Welsh public sector to collaborate more closely in procuring local goods and services. The Buying Food Fit for the Future scheme also stated that it aims to support Wales's everyday local economies and relocalise the public sector food chains. However, I noticed, quite worryingly, that it states that explicitly specifying local products is likely to be discriminatory and therefore unlawful. So, this policy has been launched to encourage local food on local plates, yet the document itself says it's discriminatory. Fresh Welsh vegetables and produce with a better nutritional value, fewer food miles and better nourishment for our children and patients are vitally important. So, if this scheme itself is a barrier to putting Welsh food on plates, I believe that should be changed. So, what steps are you taking to ensure that we do see more Welsh food in schools, hospitals and across the public sector, and, as a result, help to boost the local economy here in Wales? Diolch. 

I'm very happy to write to Janet Finch-Saunders with some more detail in regard to that specific procurement question that she asked, because it should absolutely be the case that organisations are able to procure locally, procure food from Wales. And, actually, the question is around public services boards, and all of those, in their well-being plans, have food, and the importance of procuring locally, and supporting local food co-operatives and so on, as part of their plans. So, I'd be interested to explore a little bit more what's underneath the question. But we are working with food stakeholders in local authorities and the NHS at the moment to help them become more self-sufficient in terms of procuring locally, and that then will help build our food resilience and our food security.

We do have those new food guidelines, and they outline sourcing approaches that are compliant with procurement rules and that should prompt a move away from those lowest cost approaches. And to help with that, we've got a new food resource called 'Buying Food fit for the Future'. So, I'll share information about that, but it might be that this situation has been overtaken by events. 

Questions now from party spokespeople. The Welsh Conservative spokesperson, Sam Rowlands. 

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Llywydd. Minister, you'll be aware of the hotly contested debates in this Chamber in recent weeks around the default 20 mph roll-out here in Wales. Indeed, you'll be fully aware of the petition of over 450,000 signatures seeking to reverse decisions around the default 20 mph. You'll also be aware that councils in Wales are struggling financially at the moment. Many are having to find significant budget cuts to balance their budgets to deliver the services that our residents so desperately need. Those things come together because it's incredible, in my view, that Welsh Government have given nearly £200,000 to English councils to support the roll-out of the 20 mph programme. Indeed, Cheshire West and Chester Council received £150,000 from the Welsh Government, Gloucestershire County Council received £20,000 from the Welsh Government, at a time when our councils in Wales are struggling to balance their budgets. So, I wonder, Minister, how you think our councils are feeling about money being taken away from them and given to councils in England.

Well, it's clear to me that roads don't end in Wales and begin again in England, and that those roads move across the border. And I think it is important that people both sides of those borders understand what the speed limit is so that they're able to stay within the law and have that clarity. And I think that one thing we've talked about a lot in the Chamber over the past couple of weeks is the importance of clarity. So, I think it's only fair to people driving on those roads that they're able to have signage that is appropriate to that road and gives them the confidence that they are obeying the law. 

Well, thank you for that initial response, Minister. I would have thought you'd think it would be unusual for Welsh Government to be funding councils in England. And there are, of course, many areas where it seems as though there are pressures on our drivers here in Wales. We know that, previously, Labour Ministers and backbenchers have advocated for a workplace parking levy for councils to put in place in Wales. Indeed, a previous transport Minister said that it was absolutely unnecessary. A workplace parking levy, in my view, would punish those who are perhaps most squeezed at the moment—people who are working hard, getting to work, trying to put food on the table whilst getting to work. We know, in Scotland, that a workplace parking levy introduced in spring 2022 allowed councils to impose taxes on car parking spaces at places of work. So, Minister, can you commit today to not implementing a workplace parking levy, and that councils won’t be seeking to put those in place across Wales?

I can confirm that I’m not having any discussions at the moment with any council in regard to a workplace parking levy.

Well, thank you for that, Minister. I think it’s important to have that on the record here today.

And just to end my questions here on, certainly, some positive news, I was very pleased, and I’m sure you’d agree, to see the UK Government announcing over £1 billion of levelling-up investment across the United Kingdom, with areas like Merthyr Tydfil, Cwmbran, Barry and, of course, Wales’s newest city, Wrexham, receiving £20 million to support those important areas across Wales. So, Minister, would you join me in celebrating that investment from the Conservative UK Government?

It's rather like having £100 taken out of your back pocket, being handed £5 back and being expected to be grateful for it. I mean, this is money that should have come to Wales and would have come to Wales if the UK Government had committed to its promise to return all of the funding that we would otherwise have had from the European Union to Wales. So, I think that the fact that the UK Government has announced this money over 10 years—the first money is to appear in the summer of next year—. So, really, to what extent these areas are likely to benefit from this funding is really to be questioned, I think.

The Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Peredur Owen Griffiths.

Thank you, Llywydd. Good afternoon, Minister.

These issues that we've been talking about, such as austerity and the cost-of-living crisis, have been exacerbated by the impact of the UK Government's hard Brexit, which continues to act as a heavy millstone on our economy. We all remember the now thoroughly debunked claim by the Leave campaign that £350 million per day would be redirected from EU-related costs to the NHS. Of course, this did not reflect the considerable costs that would have been incurred by the UK Government and the devolved Governments in managing a profound disruption to our trading relationship with the EU. From the perspective of the Welsh Government, this meant recruiting a considerable number of additional staff to deal with Brexit preparedness activity and committing to resourcing infrastructure and processes for new import controls. And more than seven years since the referendum, with border control posts still to be built and new import controls yet to be implemented, the Brexit bill for Wales remains hefty. In light of the unrelenting pressure being faced by local authorities, is it worth considering whether this money could have been far better spent elsewhere. On that basis, therefore, could the Minister outline how much Welsh Government has spent on Brexit preparedness work since 2016, and, also, would she agree that if Wales were to rejoin the single market, we could use the money that's currently being thrown into the sinkhole of a failed Tory vanity project to properly fund our public services instead?

Well, I'll just start by reflecting on the comments made by the Chancellor yesterday about the situation in regard to the economy in the UK. He seems to be very satisfied with its performance post Brexit. Well, despite what the Chancellor said, the latest official figures from the Office for National Statistics show that the UK economy has posted one of the worst GDP performances in the G7 since before the pandemic. So, I think that some of the claims being made by the UK Government about our performance post Brexit are dubious to say the least.

I don't have that figure in terms of how much we have spent on Brexit preparedness with me today, but I'd be more than happy to write to the Member with the detail of that. And I think that all of us, though, know the £1 billion figure very well in terms of the money that we would have had, which I referred to in my answer to the question from Sam Rowlands, had we remained in the European Union, had the UK Government kept its promise that we would not be a penny worse off.

Diolch, Weinidog. Thirteen years of Tory-driven austerity and economic mismanagement have left public finances in dire straits, and the consequences will fall particularly hard on the people of Wales. It speaks volumes, doesn't it, about the sheer arrogance of the Tory Party that the likes of Liz Truss, who crashed the UK economy in pursuit of a failed right-wing economic dogma, can still wield influence across the rank and file of Tory MPs. In another walk of life, such gross negligence would be rightfully given short shrift, but, as has been shown consistently over the past few years, the Tories don't seem to believe that they should be judged by the same standards that apply to the rest of us.

Over the next few years, local authorities will have to confront the most challenging set of circumstances in our modern history, with their capacity to provide even the most basic level of services set to be severely compromised. This is underlined by the recent estimates by the Wales Governance Centre that, relative to 2021-22, the funding gap facing Welsh local authorities could be as much as £744 million by 2027-28. This will mean that local authorities will need to be strategic and prudent about how they deploy the reserves that they have at their disposal, to ameliorate some of the worst excesses of the crisis in our public finances. What are you doing, Minister, currently, or what is your understanding of the extent of the reserves available to local authorities across Wales? And what guidance is being offered by the Welsh Government to local authorities on how best to utilise these funds?

So, the assessment of the availability of reserves to local authorities at the moment is that, at an all-Wales level, general or unallocated reserves would cover just 10 days of the costs of local government. Now, I am aware, of course, that the picture does vary quite dramatically, it's fair to say, across local authorities in Wales, and I'm very mindful of that. I know that the Conservatives would like us to consider the level of reserves when we're allocating the RSG, but I don't think that that is the right or the fair thing to do, because the level of reserves accumulated comes as a result of a longer period of decision making by that council, and many times those reserves are earmarked for specific activities. And it's worth noting as well that reserve levels in England have actually increased by over 50 per cent in the last two years as well. So, I think that we are seeing an increase in reserves across the border as well as in Wales. But, as I say, overall, it only amounts to 10 days' worth of local government.

Question 3, Peredur Owen Griffiths.

Yes, they're like buses, these.

I meet local authorities regularly and recently attended the Welsh Local Government Association conference, and I've also met with the WLGA executive. The revenue support grant has been protected in decisions about the 2023-24 budget. I welcome the pragmatic way local government work with us to collectively maximise what can be achieved with the funding available.

Thank you for that response, Minister.

Having spoken with some council leaders, as well as a number of leaders of other bodies in receipt of public money, it's fair to say that there is much anxiety about the reports that there is a £900 million black hole in the Government budget. There's been little or no detail to accompany the rounds of media interviews on the budget shortfall, which leaves a vacuum for speculation. People are wondering, for example, whether there will be any in-year cuts—and I take on board what you just said. I know you'll be making an announcement in two weeks' time, but people have been waiting a very long time and worrying about this for months. Can you set the record straight on this particular matter and rule out the need for in-year cuts to front-line public services? And can you also tell the Senedd how you arrived at the figure of the £900 million shortfall, because there's confusion about where that figure came from?

Certainly. So, I firstly want to just recognise and acknowledge the point that Peredur has made about the anxiety that organisations across the public sector are feeling at the moment. And, in terms of how we came to the £900 million, that was an exercise undertaken by Welsh Treasury officials and our analysts, which looked at the impact of inflation and the fact that our budget now is worth much less than it was at the time it was set, at the comprehensive spending review. So, it largely is an impact of inflation, and we're seeing that particularly acutely, I think, in the area of public sector pay, where some of the awards that we've had to agree have obviously created a big pressure on our budget. But, you know, obviously it's the right thing to do. So, we just need to now find a way to accommodate that within the budget.

Within health, we've seen the costs of medicines increase by about 17 per cent, so that's another area of significant pressure, as is the cost of energy, and, again, on the health estate, that's been quite severe. We've also seen people not returning to public transport in the same way as we'd anticipated post pandemic, particularly in rail where there are fewer options, I think, in terms of being able to flex the services, and so on, to respond to that. So, those are the main areas of pressure.

As you say, I'll be making a statement to the Senedd on 17 October about our approach to managing that particular issue, but we are still finalising some of that activity. Obviously, the impact assessments have been very important, so when colleagues have been considering which areas of their budgets to release money from, obviously they've wanted to undertake impact assessments before making those decisions. And then, I need to undertake a real cross-Government cumulative impact assessment to understand where the impacts will be felt the most because, of course, when we're cutting public spending, it is going to be the most vulnerable people who inevitably feel some of this, because they're the people who always will benefit most from public spending in any case.

And then the last thing to say on this is that, of course, it's not just Wales feeling this particular pressure. Scotland, I know, have been feeling the pressure in budgets as well, and they undertook an emergency budget last year to deal with some of the impact of inflation then. In Northern Ireland, of course, they breached their departmental expenditure limit last year, so now they're having to repay money back to the Treasury this year. And the UK Government is undertaking a productivity review, and I hope to hear more about the outcomes of that in the autumn statement.

Minister, local authorities across my region are already reporting massive overspends, tens of millions of pounds in the red, long before your budget cuts bite. It is clear that the axe will have to fall somewhere, but we must make every effort to ensure that it is not on front-line services, nor be an excuse to ramp up council tax bills. Minister, in this new harsh economic reality, is it now time to consider the cost of maintaining 22 councils? Surely, the only way to protect the front line is to tackle back-office waste. Therefore, what consideration have you given to root-and-branch reform of local government in Wales?

So, just a couple of key points to say. First of all, we have protected the revenue support grant in this financial year, but, of course, local authorities will be feeling the impact of inflation themselves, so their money will not go as far as it had been understood to previously. So, they will inevitably, I think, have to make some very difficult decisions. But it's not this Government's plan to undertake wholesale reorganisation of local government, especially at this time. There's no call from local government for us to do that. What we have done is put in place a system whereby local authorities can work together, can collaborate and procure together where they see it to be a benefit, and we see that happening all across Wales—it's already happening, that kind of joint working, and that does produce dividends for those local authorities. Local authorities are still able to merge if it's something that they want to do. That's possible under the legislation, but, again, no authorities have come forward to speak to me about that at this point.

Legislation places many requirements on local authorities to be open and transparent. I also recently issued revised statutory guidance to support councils to engage effectively with residents. Auditors and regulators are responsible for ensuring councils are following this legislation and guidance.

Thank you for your answer, Minister. A huge cloud of mystery is hanging over Newport City Council following its recent appointment of a city manager. The main aim of the role is to be the first point of contact and liaison for businesses in Newport, yet nobody has a clue who has taken this role, which pays between £37,000 and £41,000 a year, using taxpayers' cash. Now, a common question from constituents who've approached me is: how on earth are businesses supposed to contact their city manager when they don't know who he or she is? There are rumours that a cushy job has been given to the former deputy leader of the council who lost their seat in the previous election. Despite repeated attempts to reveal the city manager's identity, the powers that be at the local authority have remained tight-lipped about the role. So, Minister, do you agree with me that Newport City Council should drop the cloak-and-dagger operation and be upfront with the people of Newport, and will you join me in urging the council to do just that? Thank you.

What I would say is that I would expect all local authorities to act in accordance with the highest standards when recruiting to posts within their organisations, and to operate in an open and transparent way. I think there is plenty of legislation there in place to support that. But if there is confusion about who to contact with regard to a city's management issues, I would suggest, in the first instance, writing to the leader or the chief executive, who can hopefully provide you with the contact details.

The Welsh Government provides the funding, legislative framework and guidance to support local authorities to undertake their statutory duties in a way that provides flexibility to reflect local needs.

Thank you, Minister, for your answer. Local councils across Wales have been dealing over the past couple of months with the implementation of the Welsh Government's default 20 mph speed limits, and the cost in signs alone now, we have seen, has reached £40 million, and we've heard from Sam Rowlands earlier today that that's not even just in local councils in Wales, as that cost has gone to councils in England as well. But what I wanted to ask you about was the ability for councils to retain 30 mph roads in the first instance. The First Minister said, and I quote, there is

'scope for local authorities to retain 30 mph where they believe that that is the right thing to do.'

The Deputy Minister for Climate Change makes out that that's an easy process. I wonder what you make of Swansea Labour council's comments, in the area that we both represent, and they say, and I quote:

'Councils have very limited discretion to maintain a number of urban roads at 30 mph where those roads meet specific criteria set out by the Welsh Government.'

They go on to say that:

'Councils have not made the decision and cannot change the decision'.

So, we've got the Welsh Government saying there is the discretion, we've got Swansea Labour council saying the discretion is very limited, who is telling the truth?

I've been very pleased to be in touch with the leader of Swansea Labour council—although I should say, Llywydd, that is in my MS role rather than my ministerial role—but the aim there is to have a conversation very shortly to discuss those particular concerns. I did put on record my thanks to the team in Swansea, which has been working very hard to implement the legislation. I think the Deputy Minister was really, really crystal clear in his contribution in the debate last week that, across authorities, 

'councils have already used those powers to make exceptions ahead of the roll-out.... They've exercised their ability to keep some roads at 30 mph, which is why this is not a blanket policy, because there are roads kept at 30 mph.'

I'm just quoting from the Record from last week. He said:

'They have the powers to make those changes, and those powers remain with them to use in the light of experience. They can make changes.'

So, I think the point that the Deputy Minister was trying to convey there is that this is going to be an evolving picture. People will learn, councils will learn from experience as to how well the roll-out has gone in particular areas; and there will certainly, I think, be changes in particular areas where councils see sense in terms of moving to 30 mph—or there might be areas where 20 mph is the right choice after all. So, I think that just giving local authorities a bit of breathing space is important, so that they can assess what's happening on the ground.

Revising the budget lines has been a complex piece of work and has not been done in isolation. We have been working constructively across Government to understand the impacts of decisions and ensure the cumulative impacts—including those concerning children and young people—have been considered and captured.

I appreciate that the Minister is having to make really difficult decisions, and it is a fact that UK Government policies have immeasurably worsened child poverty in Wales and across the UK. I commend the Welsh Government for endeavouring to step in where the UK Government has failed to mitigate matters, but it remains the case that child poverty continues to cast a long shadow over our nation. Several stakeholders have raised concerns about the draft child poverty strategy in this context: its lack of targets and measurable outcomes, and, in particular, whether the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child is being adhered to. How does the Welsh Government apply the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child when formulating its budgets?

I'll be sure that the Minister who is leading on the development of this strategy is aware of those comments, although I think that she has probably had representations from the same organisations.

But in terms of how we consider the rights of children and the impacts on children in our budgets, that happens at the point at which Ministers are considering which programmes to support, which interventions to fund. Those kind of impact assessments take place right at the start. What happens by the time they come down stream to the bigger budget process, really, is to have that kind of cumulative understanding of the impacts of the choices that we make. Those are important always when we're developing the budget, but I think even more so now when we're looking at areas to move funding away from, so that we can properly understand the impacts. 

I did have an opportunity to hear from the children's commissioner last week as part of the budget engagement process—every year I have a round-table with all of the statutory commissioners—and she was keen to make very similar points about the importance of not only considering the needs and the rights of children in what we do but demonstrating that as well. 

We know students in Wales lag behind their peers in England when it comes to funding, to the tune of around £1,000 per student. We also know that last year Wales received an extra £129 million-worth of funding as a result of increased spending in English schools. However, despite this uplift from the UK Government, the Welsh Government cut funding for education in real terms by £6.5 million compared with the previous year. Latest exam results show that our top GCSE grades have hit a four-year low, as have our GCSE pass rates. Furthermore, research by the Education Policy Institute has found that there is a wider disadvantage gap in Wales compared with England. With that in mind, Minister, what conversations have you had with the education Minister surrounding the impact of cuts to the education budget on pupil grades?

I do think that the Member is being somewhat disingenuous, I'm afraid, in that contribution, because he fails to recognise that schools in Wales are funded through local government and through the RSG. After the spring statement, I was very clear with the Senedd that I'd put that £170 million consequential funding, and more, into local government. So, local government benefited from that funding, from funding that was in relation to social care, but also further funding as well. So I don't think it's fair to say that there was a cut. Not only do we fund schools through the RSG, we also have a whole range of programmes that are supported through the education portfolio budget as well, so I think the characterisation isn't fair and it isn't accurate. 

Good afternoon, Minister. I want to come back to the issue of children living in poverty, something I know that we are all concerned about. I'm going to speak a little bit about my own personal experiences of being a social worker in child protection for 25 years. I don't have the statistics, but I reckon that 90 per cent of the families that I worked with were living in poverty. And that is something that none of us want, but also has an economic impact in terms of the budgets for our safeguarding services and for our local authorities, in order to meet the needs of those children who need protection. I like the saying that an ounce of prevention now is worth a pound of cure in the future. I just wonder how the Government is able to calculate the costs of safeguarding services, when, actually, we could be offsetting that in terms of making sure that our children are not living in poverty and making sure that they have those outcomes that we would all need and want for our own families. Thank you. Diolch yn fawr iawn. 

One really important piece of work that we've been doing with our budget advisory group has been looking at how we define and measure prevention and preventative spend. I think that that work has been really helpful in terms of helping all of us think about our budgets, and even more so, I think, in a time of reprioritisation, because when you're dealing with the fire in front of you it's really hard, isn't it, to be thinking about the prevention of future fires, if you like. So, what I'm really keen that we do in this piece of work is just always be mindful of prevention, not just in terms of the social side of things, but actually in terms of the climate and nature emergency as well. Because I don't want the preventive agenda and the climate change agenda to fall off because they're just not important enough, not urgent enough, because they are absolutely important and urgent. I just want to reassure colleagues that that's front and centre of our minds when we're developing this piece of work, looking at how we meet that gap in our budget this year. 

I have repeatedly made the case for increased borrowing powers for the Welsh Government. When I met with the Chief Secretary to the Treasury last month, I pressed for the recent improvements to borrowing and reserve limits within the Scottish fiscal framework to be automatically applied to Wales.

The Welsh Government's fiscal framework was agreed in December 2016 and implements the powers of the Wales Act 2014. The framework increased the Welsh Government's capital borrowing limit to £1 billion and the annual limit to £150 million. Last year, a report by the Institute of Welsh Affairs called for the Welsh Government's borrowing powers to be enhanced. The UK Government is clearly unable and unwilling to invest, as we've just heard today, in long-term infrastructure projects, as evidenced by the Prime Minister's speech this afternoon, with the cancellation of HS2 past Birmingham and the failure to adequately invest in Wales's infrastructure. Does the Minister therefore agree we need the ability to borrow to invest more ourselves to deliver the transformational and sustainable change that Wales needs?

Yes, I absolutely agree with that. Our borrowing limits are very small, and that's one of the reasons that we've overprogrammed our capital budget this year by £100 million, just to try and safeguard against any slippage and to maximise the use of the Welsh pound. But we do need to have greater borrowing powers both annually and overall. It could just be a case of indexing borrowing to inflation. Next year our borrowing powers, for example, would be worth 17 per cent less in real terms than they were at the time they were agreed. Nothing's moving with the times, so it's important that the UK Government gives us those simple flexibilities that it's agreed with Scotland as part of its fiscal framework review. We don't believe that we need to have a full review, we don't need to take 18 months looking at the framework. It's working well at the moment. But the simple, pragmatic things that the UK Government could do to help us manage our budget I think would be very welcome, and there's absolutely no real reason not to provide it. 

I think it's an important question that Hefin David's raised today, and I certainly have a level of sympathy for the challenges that you're facing, Minister, there. I think we'd be happy to understand where we can look for cross-party support to consider some of the asks that you're seeking. In the meantime, one of the things that strikes me has continued to be the high level of reserves that our local authorities hold, to the tune of around £2.5 billion here in Wales. I wonder whether there's an opportunity when it comes to borrowing to understand how some of those reserves could be used to support borrowing for the Welsh Government. It may benefit some of your ambitions in terms of capital work while also supporting local authorities in terms of interest, perhaps, that may be paid to them over a longer period. I'm not sure what conversations you've had, or whether that's something that you may have considered. 

Thank you for the question. Also, I do think it is important to recognise that there is some significant cross-party support for some of the quite simple fiscal flexibilities that we're asking for. The Institute for Fiscal Studies has also suggested it would be a reasonable thing for the UK Government to do, and the Finance Committee, I know, has been very supportive of it in the past. So I do think that there is a genuine coalition on that. 

On the point of supported borrowing, we have had some discussions with local government. They are at an early stage, so I'm not in a position, really, to say much more without over-egging what we've been discussing. But at the point at which we're able to say more, I'll be more than happy to provide the Senedd with more information. 

I discuss the funding formula on a regular basis with the finance sub-group of the partnership council. The funding formula continues to be developed and agreed with the distribution sub-group to update and review the data and factors in the formula including sparsity, dispersion and deprivation.

Minister, it's quite clear to everybody that the funding formula for local government in Wales is outdated and it is not fit for purpose. It's got over 4,000 variables, some of which date back to the 1990s, and frankly, it is an ageist formula that does not serve those local authorities with older populations. Nor does it serve rural local authorities well either. It clearly needs an independent review. The WLGA's finance committee are not going to consent to significant change because there are too many winners and losers around that table with a direct interest in the matter. Can I urge you to use the commonsense approach and have an independent person to come and look at this in some detail so that we can have a fair formula that works for every part of Wales?

I will say that 72 per cent of the funding is updated annually, and that includes the population data, which makes up 25 per cent of the funding. That already uses the latest population data. That's from the 2020-21 budget. I updated the finance sub-group last week—or recently—at a meeting on work under way to update the population data, and also the other census indicators that are now coming through on the measures of sparsity and dispersion. That may cause some significant churn within the distribution.

The distribution sub-group has also recently held a workshop looking at the new Office for National Statistics data available for sparsity, and the statistical modelling underpinning the nursery and primary indicators, and the possible impact of changes to free school meal eligibility on deprivation indicators. So, there is a huge amount of work going on all the time to try and make sure that the formula is up to date and clear.

Let's remember as well that we are entering a period where we are looking at council tax reform. Now, inevitably, that's going to have an impact on local government funding because it will change the tax base for those local authorities. So, how much uncertainty and change do we want to introduce into the system at one time? Obviously, at the moment we are thinking about what transitional support might be required for local authorities in the context of making council tax fairer. But I just think that, at the moment, there is so much work going on to update the formula. As always, if local government wants to have that discussion about a more wholesale review— 

It's a stock answer.

—then I am more than happy to have those discussions. The Member says that it's a stock answer, but the Member asks me the question all the time, and the answer hasn't changed.   

I regularly meet local authorities in the finance sub-group and the partnership council to discuss budgets and pressures. My Cabinet colleagues also meet frequently with councils to discuss issues relating to their portfolios.

Diolch, Minister. Obviously, there has been a theme today with the questions. My own council, Bridgend County Borough Council, has recently met with me and just said that the three main areas that they are spending most of their budget on are homelessness, child protection and home-to-school transport. These are all statutory requirements and so, of course, they must be prioritised.

But of course, this is having a knock-on effect. For example, there is a huge commitment now to build a new Heronsbridge School in Bridgend—the local special school—but the budget that was set for it a couple of years ago has almost doubled now because of inflation. You know, all of these things—. And yet, I do want to really commend my local authority because we are still building new schools. We are having regeneration in Porthcawl and in Bridgend. We have had the sea defences recently done in Porthcawl to protect homes and businesses. So much is being done.

But I guess that what everybody is raising here today is that there is a huge anxiety now, with the Welsh Government's budget imminent. My question is, I suppose: are you going to continue to have those conversations so that they know beforehand what to expect from that budget, and also that reassurance that they will be no worse off—or no differently treated, I suppose—than any other Welsh part of our public sector? Diolch.

I'm really keen to keep those discussions going with local government, and just to be as open and honest with them as we can be at every point of this process. As I say, I was at the WLGA conference and met with the Welsh local government executive recently, and I was able to have this conversation about how we are managing the particular pressures on the budget.

Of course, the RSG is only one part of the picture. We have got our specific grants that go to local authorities as well. One thing that I think that is really welcomed is the work that we are doing on reducing the administrative burden on local authorities. I think that, in a time when there is no more money that we are able to provide, what we can do is provide them with flexibility to use the money that they do have. That work has been particularly welcomed, and I'm hoping to make at least some progress in the next budget. 

Finally, question 10—Rhys ab Owen.

Over a quarter of the latest local government settlement was allocated on the basis of 22 deprivation indicators, enabling local authorities to identify and provide support to those areas with the greatest need.

Diolch, Gweinidog. My question is similar to that of Darren Millar but from a different perspective. As you know, the research by the Oxford Consultants for Social Inclusion identified areas of Wales where over 800,000 people live as low-resilient areas, mostly areas on the outskirts of major population areas, such as Ely and St Mellons in Cardiff, and I'm sure you could think of similar areas in your constituency—areas of poor connectivity to the wider community, stunted economy and fewer community assets. The report also demonstrates the real impact of this on the people living in these areas—higher rates of unemployment, lower levels of qualifications and lower life expectancy. It's incredible that people have a lower life expectancy just because of where they live.

As Jenny Rathbone and Sarah Murphy said in previous questions, I appreciate that Welsh Government has faced very difficult choices, but will you consider adjusting the local government funding formula to account for this new important research? Diolch yn fawr.

Thank you for the question. Yes, my officials are looking closely at the research. One question that I've asked of them is to what extent it would make a difference to the formula—would it make a substantial and meaningful difference to the amount of money that went to local authorities if we were to make some of the changes? I don't really have clear sight on what the answer to that question is at the moment, but it's something that we are looking at.

The formula does take account of some of those factors, though, in terms of the importance of deprivation on different services. So, for example, the weighting for sparsity was previously increased in relation to social services, and that was as a result of the work that our distribution sub-group has done. So, it does look at some of these factors, but I'm certainly keen to have a good look, with my officials, at that report, which I think has been really helpful.

Thank you, Minister.

The next item will be questions to the Minister for rural affairs and north Wales. The first question is from Cefin Campbell.

Diolch. We are continuing to support our farmers and land managers through rural investment schemes, investing over £200 million. However, there are inevitable impacts from the ending of the rural development programme, as the UK Government has left our rural communities £243 million worse than if we had remained within the European Union.

Thank you very much. Well, last week in the Chamber, I referred to the fact that the Fflecsi Bwcabus programme in Ceredigion, Carmarthenshire and Pembrokeshire would come to an end at the end of the month, and I asked the Welsh Government to do everything within its ability to safeguard this crucial service, which is a saviour for so many people in our rural communities, particularly. As you know, Bwcabus is partially funded through the RDP, one of the EU's funds. The programme, on average over the last few years, has been receiving some £500,000 per annum from this fund.

Now, recently, an Audit Wales report back in March this year showed that £58 million from the RDP fund remained unspent, and that there was a risk that Wales would lose that funding unless we used it before the end of the year. So, we're in a very, very strange position. It appears that, on the one hand, there's substantial funding that's unspent, and yet there's no money to pay for the continuation of Bwcabus, so this is a very strange situation. Could I ask you, therefore, to provide us with the latest information as to how much RDP grant money is left to spend? What steps have you taken to ensure that these funds are fully spent? And if there is funding remaining, would you give us an assurance that the Bwcabus service will continue?

Thank you. As you say, Bwcabus has been funded by the EU for the last few years, but that funding is now ending. But it isn't strange at all, because there is no unallocated funding from the RDP. So, we do have until the end of this year to spend every penny of that money. And I've made it abundantly clear that I expect every penny to be spent, so we've over-allocated the funding because we know, from many years' experience, that RDP funding—invariably, schemes do come back not having been able to spend the money. So, we've learnt from those lessons and this year we've over-allocated. So, there is no £58 million unspent, it may have been at the beginning of the year, but by the end of the year, I can assure the Member that it will all have been spent. I meet with my officials regularly from the rural development programme team to make sure that they are absolutely pushing every scheme that's received funding through the rural development programme to make sure that they are able to fully allocate that money, because I'm really proud of what the RDP has achieved here in Wales. So, there won't be any underspend by the end of this year.

Minister, you'll know that I've previously challenged you on RDP funding and how it was spent, citing the scathing report by Audit Wales that found that millions of pounds of taxpayers' money had been allocated by the Welsh Government through favouritism and direct applications. I called for an independent review of the rural development programme, which you dismissed, stating that you were confident that lessons had been learned. But it seems that with the new Habitat Wales scheme, not a single lesson has been learned, because there's been no impact assessment, no consultation and, more surprisingly, no budget. The Welsh Government are in the unique position of having annoyed both the environmental lobby and the farming community in one fell swoop. To quote one farmer: 'If it wasn't so serious financially, it would be laughable.' Soil Association Cymru branded the new scheme as 'alarming'. So, with the RDP coming to an end, with Glastir coming to an end, and the sustainable farming scheme not launching until 2025, what reassurances can you give that the bridge between legacy and new support isn't crumbling away under this Government?

I think we need to be very clear about what the Habitat scheme is for. Everyone—absolutely everyone—knew that Glastir schemes were coming to an end at the end of this year. I couldn't extend it any more. I extended and extended. It's impossible to extend even further. If we'd have remained in the European Union, that funding would still be available. It's not available, so we're in a completely new world. This is a massive change, and I understand that it is a massive change for our farmers, but they all knew that it was ending this year. All of them knew, every single one of them. It's no good shaking your head, everybody knew that the Glastir schemes were coming to an end this year.

Now, I was asked, particularly by the farming unions, to make sure that we had an interim agri scheme ahead of the sustainable farming scheme coming in in April 2025. So, I've done that. There was a very small window to be able to do that. We worked very closely with the National Farmers Union and with the Farmers Union of Wales and many other stakeholders to try and get a scheme as quickly as possible. And that's what we did. Last Friday, that scheme was opened. We've already had over 100 applications.

I never said the money would be the same as Glastir. For instance, I don't know at the moment what the budget is, because we, as a Government, right across the Government, with all my ministerial colleagues, are having to re-prioritise this year's budget—not next year's, this year's budget. So, I was successful in making sure that we had a small pot of money for this scheme. I'm really pleased that scheme is there. And the other thing is you can say that everybody is unhappy about it, but I've had farmers say to me how pleased they are where we have an agri-environment scheme that every farmer can apply for, because that wasn't the way with Glastir.

Thank you. Our ambition is for all animals in Wales to have a good quality of life. Our priorities for animal welfare are set out in 'Our Animal Welfare Plan for Wales 2021-26'. It includes a timetable for the delivery of key actions against programme for government commitments and other animal welfare priorities.

I thank the Minister for that. I think we must always remember that domestic animals are sentient beings. The Welsh Government has an excellent record on legislating for the welfare of domestic animals. For example, it is now illegal for a commercial seller to sell a puppy or kitten they have not bred themselves at their own premises, and they must ensure the mother is present. I am still waiting for cat microchipping to be made compulsory, but I hope you're going to say that in the very near future that's going to happen. But most animal cruelty is based upon ignorance rather than people trying to be cruel to the animals. Will the Government consider making highlighting to new owners of rabbits information on how to look after them mandatory?

Thank you. Well, of course, today is World Animal Day. We celebrated it a day early this year here in the Senedd yesterday with an event sponsored by Luke Fletcher. I have committed to looking at microchipping cats, as you know, and whilst we haven't got a consultation planned for this year, it is certainly something that we're looking at in relation to databases for both cats and dogs. I'm really grateful that the Member always keeps that on the agenda. Responsible ownership of all animals, I think, is really important, and I will certainly consider his request.

Minister, puppy docking in Wales has been banned since 2007 with regard to some exemptions for certain breeds of working dogs. I met with a group of vets recently in my constituency who were telling me that when people are bringing their puppies into the vets for their vaccinations, they cannot prove that those pets have actually been docked properly. When they’re reporting that to the local trading standards department or the Animal and Plant Health Agency, they’re not willing to investigate and not doing any enforcement on that. So, I’d just like to know: what can the Welsh Government do to make sure that these bodies are actually enforcing the regulations that we pass here in this Senedd to improve the welfare of our domestic animals in Wales?

Thank you. That's not an issue that's been raised with me before, but I will certainly speak to the chief veterinary officer in relation to that, and also, obviously, with APHA—I meet with the chief executive of APHA very frequently—because if that is indeed the case, that's very concerning. But I will look into it and I will write to the Member. Thank you.

Questions now from the party spokespeople. Welsh Conservatives spokesperson, Darren Millar.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. Minister, you'll be aware that the North Wales Fire and Rescue Authority has been undertaking a review of emergency cover across north Wales, and has undertaken a consultation on three options for change. Each of those options will see cuts and reductions in emergency cover at key locations across the region, including the downgrading of fire stations in Rhyl and Deeside, and two of the options propose the withdrawal of a crewed fire engine in your own constituency of Wrexham. The Fire Brigades Union has described the proposals as, and I quote,

'three different ways to put the public at risk'.

Minister, as the Minister for north Wales, do you agree with them?

Well, obviously, this is a time of very tough choices for everybody, but I think this is a local and operational matter for north Wales fire and rescue association, and Welsh Government has no cause to intervene. Currently, I know the Minister does keep a very close eye and meets with the chief fire officer regularly, but, obviously, anything that affects the way our emergency services are able to react is a cause for concern.

Well, it's the Welsh Government that's ultimately responsible for the fire service in north Wales, and we know, Minister, that the fire services in Rhyl and Deeside are currently staffed around the clock for a reason: the station in Rhyl serves a very large population centre, much of which is deprived, and it's situated on part of the north Wales coast, which has the largest number of properties at risk of flooding. We know that Deeside serves a very large population, in an area incorporating a large industrial belt, where emergencies can be catastrophic for those working and living nearby. And in Wrexham, those three fire engines and crews are essential to the safety of the city, the largest population centre in north Wales.

Last year, under the current emergency cover arrangements, the North Wales Fire and Rescue Service achieved an extraordinary milestone: it was the first year in which there were zero fire-related deaths. Now, that to me suggests that the current model is working very well. So, do you agree with me that reallocating and cutting resources in the way that the fire authority proposes will put that record and lives at risk?

As I said, this is a local and operational matter for North Wales Fire and Rescue Authority. It's up to them to reach a solution that is sustainable, affordable—it has to be fair to their workforce, it has to be fair to the communities of north Wales. And I do recognise that what is being proposed could be causing some concern to those communities, but I think the Deputy Minister for Social Partnership has certainly urged the fire and rescue authority to seek a solution that is sustainable and affordable, and, as I say, fair to not only its workforce, but to the people of north Wales.

Look, I accept that operational responsibility lies with the north Wales fire authority, but you are the Welsh Government. You set the guidance. You set the guidelines for this organisation to function. You also are responsible for making sure that stakeholders like unions are listened to across the public sector. So, I find it frankly astonishing that there doesn't seem to be more effort being made by the Welsh Government to make sure that the Fire Brigades Union, in particular, has been listened to. They tell us, as local Members of the Senedd in north Wales, that there was no engagement with the union as a key stakeholder in the development of the proposals that have been out for public consultation prior to them being published. Now, that is clearly unacceptable. All professional firefighters want people to be safe. They all want improved emergency fire cover across the whole of north Wales, and the FBU, as you will be aware as a north Wales Member, have developed two alternative proposals, both of which will achieve that additional emergency cover whilst maintaining the 24/7 staffing arrangements in Rhyl and Deeside, and maintaining the fire engine and crew in Wrexham that was due to be axed. Will you join me in urging the North Wales Fire and Rescue Authority to consider seriously the Fire Brigades Union's reasonable proposals, and will you work with your colleagues and Minister for social partnership to make sure that new guidance is issued to our fire and rescue authorities in Wales to make sure that there is engagement with the Fire Brigades Union, and, indeed, other key stakeholders, prior to any plans coming forward for public consultation? That hasn't happened in this case, and it should have done.

Well, speaking with my MS hat on, I think that engagement is absolutely taking place. As I said, the Deputy Minister for Social Partnership, who's in her seat and will have heard your comments, is keeping a very close eye on this. But it is absolutely a matter for the North Wales Fire and Rescue Authority. It's absolutely vital that they do engage, and my understanding is that they are engaging, and that they are listening. But it does now need to operate within the limits it sets itself, and the Deputy Minister, I know, will be meeting regularly with the north Wales fire chief.

Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Llyr Gruffydd.

Diolch, Llywydd. Minister, details around the Habitat Wales scheme are, of course, still rather unclear, aren't they? And I couldn't agree more with the farming unions when they tell us that the ambiguity is unsettling for those considering entering the scheme, particularly the many farmers who have previously held Glastir contracts. Now, the transition away from Glastir payments was supposed to be seamless—it's something that you've promised—but this clearly doesn't seem to be seamless at least. There's a sense of uncertainty, there's a sense of confusion, and that of course means farmers walking away, potentially, from the scheme, undermining not only decades of investment in previous agri-environment schemes, but also undermining the policy objectives that you've set out in the agri Bill, and that you and many of us hope to achieve through the sustainable farming scheme. So, will you accept that the ending of Glastir payments in the way that it's happening now, along with this short-notice, short-term interim scheme, isn't seamless at all, and that the lack of clarity and the rushed nature of the scheme leaves a huge question mark over participation levels?

Well, I think it was rushed by—. We had to do something very quickly. I thought that's what people wanted—that's what I was lobbied for. As I say, it only opened for applications on Friday; we've already had over 100, so, clearly, many farmers do want to be part of this scheme. I do recognise that it's very unsettling, and I absolutely appreciate that, but we are where we are. As I said in my answer to Sam Kurtz, if we'd remained in the European Union, we could have extended Glastir again, but we can't. So, we had to have a new scheme, to bridge the period between Glastir ending at the end of this year and the start of the sustainable farming scheme.

We, unfortunately, weren't able to set the budget; it would have been much better if I could have set the budget, but, unfortunately, because of the reprioritisation exercise we're having to do for this financial year, I haven't been able to do that. What I do think is important is that as many farmers as possible do apply for it. As I've said, it is open to all farmers, which has certainly been welcomed. You may have known there was a bit of concern from our organic farmers, for instance, around funding, so we've made sure it's absolutely open to them as well, while we're looking at a way we can give them extra support.

Rather more than a bit of concern, I think, from the organic sector.

It's strange, isn't it, because two minutes ago, in response to another question, you said that farmers knew that Glastir was ending—there's no excuse, everybody knew that Glastir was coming to an end. And now you've just told us that you had to respond quickly to the fact that Glastir was ending—well, you knew that Glastir was ending as well. So, why levy one measure against farmers and then measure yourself against a different kind of approach? Farmers have just weeks here, frankly, don't they, before they potentially hit a funding cliff edge, because there are no guarantees of funding from the end of December. And you will know that farming, when you're working with the grain of nature, farming doesn't work that way; in fact, it cannot work on such irrationally short timescales. So, can you tell us—and I suspect I know the answer—what modelling was done about the potential impact of the Habitat Wales scheme particularly? What projections were made by the Government in terms of levels of take-up? And if that work has been done, I'm sure you'd be more than willing to publish it. And when can Welsh farmers expect confirmation and clarity on what the actual budget is going to be?

So, of course I knew Glastir was ending this year, but what I didn't know was would I have any funding for an agri-environment scheme. I was very keen that we didn't throw the baby out with the bath water, and that all the good we've had from Glastir schemes—. But, let's be—. We need a reality check here; we all do. There is very little funding available. And the fact that I was able to secure funding for an agri-environment scheme appears to have been lost in all the noise, because, over the summer, I wasn't sure if I could find any funding at all, and there would be a gap. So, of course I knew that Glastir was ending at the end of this year, but so did every farmer. So, within their business plan, they should have recognised that and made plans in relation to that.

I was lobbied very, very hard by our stakeholders, particularly by the farming unions, to bring forward a scheme. They were very keen to help us prepare the scheme, and we've certainly—. I know my officials talked a lot over the summer with, particularly, the National Farmers Union Cymru and the Farmers Union of Wales, to try and get the scheme to be something that farmers would want to apply for. There was very little room for and time for impact assessments and modelling, but what I thought was that this scheme would be welcomed, because it was additional funding to try and replace—although it couldn't possibly replace all of it—Glastir schemes. And I thought it was really important that every farmer could, because one thing I have learned is that many farmers were unhappy that they couldn't apply for Glastir, and, of course, we were extending year after year and they were missing out. 

Thank you. Whilst annual statistics on fruit and vegetable production are not collected, the Welsh Government has continued to provide comprehensive support for growers in Wales. This includes the horticulture development and start-up schemes for farmers. Tailored advice and training is also being offered to growers through Farming Connect.

I am concerned to hear you say that we don't collect statistics on the amount of vegetables and fruit grown in Wales, because we know that the climate across Europe is changing at a rate that is surprising even those of us who've been warning about this for some time. The weather at the moment in southern Europe is more akin to what happens in July and August. There will be no rain for at least 10 days in any of the places from where we normally import vegetables and fruit, and you can see how a gathering crisis of distribution of foodstuffs that we normally relied on—Brexit hasn't helped, obviously—means that we must surely focus on how much we need to be producing in order to ensure that everybody has access to a healthy, balanced diet. We know that two in 10 people have no access to a healthy, balanced diet, because they're relying on foodbanks, who almost always are unable to provide a healthy, balanced diet in what the supermarkets choose to dish out. 

So, we can't afford to go backwards, and I want to understand how the interim arrangements, pending the full adoption of the sustainable farming scheme, are going to promote what is a major food security issue, which is the need to grow more vegetables and fruit in this country, because we cannot rely on what is coming from abroad.

Thank you. Well, as you know, the horticultural part of the agricultural sector is an area I've been very keen to grow. And we've seen a slight improvement—I think it was 0.1 per cent when I came into portfolio, and that sort of equated to, I think, a quarter of a portion per person per day. And the ambition, for me, is to grow it to around 2 per cent, where that would then cover five portions per day, per person. So, we've put significant funding into it with our horticulture start-up and development grant schemes.

I mentioned in my answer to Llyr Huws Gruffydd that it's really important organic farmers were able to access the Habitat scheme. It takes a lot of time and effort for organic farms to become, if you like, to go from conventional to organic, so I'm really keen to maintain organic farmers going forward. And they've been undertaking sustainable land management practices for many years through their organic certification, so that's one of the reasons I was very keen to ensure that happened with the Habitat scheme.

We will continue to look at what support we can give to our organic farmers, and also I've ensured that Farming Connect—a strand of our new Farming Connect programme—is going to focus wholly on horticulture, because it does recognise that there is a breadth of specialist advice that that sector needs. 

Minister, we must never lose sight of the importance of our food security and, to that end, we must explore all options to encourage more local horticulture, and I agree with Jenny.

A study carried out by Tyfu Cymru, together with Food Sense Wales, found that small-scale investment can have a significant impact on horticultural businesses. The study gave investment to small growers who had previously had minimal opportunities to access capital investment grants, and the pilot found that the businesses had a growth in sales by an average of 74.5 per cent. Minister, if we want to help the market garden sector to rise to the challenge of our increasing need for local produce, we need to see Welsh Government coming forward with further incentives. Minister, what consideration have you given to expanding support payments to small-scale horticultural businesses under 5 hectares? 

Thank you. Well, I mentioned our grant schemes that we have in place; I mentioned the extra strand that we've got within Farming Connect. All these things are designed to help our horticulture sector grow, because you're absolutely pushing at an open door with me. I think it's really important that we support those small growers going forward. 

Thank you. Over £18 million of basic payment scheme payments have been made to farmers in Pembrokeshire during the past year. This is in addition to our Farming Connect service, which continues to provide crucial support and advice to businesses in the Preseli Pembrokeshire area.

Minister, as you know, bovine TB continues to have a major impact on farmers in Pembrokeshire, and a recent NFU Cymru survey showed that 85 per cent of farmers believed TB negatively impacts their mental health, and 70 per cent described Welsh Government's approach to TB eradication as very poor. According to the survey, the cost of the disease to each farm business is around £25,000 in the past 12 months alone. Now, next Tuesday is World Mental Health Day, and, as you will be aware, there are some excellent farming organisations that are working to support farmers with their mental health. Organisations that you will be aware of, like the DPJ Foundation, the Farming Community Network, Tir Dewi and the Royal Agricultural Benevolent Institution, continue to work hard to provide much needed support to people in agriculture, and it's crucial that their work is promoted and supported. Therefore, Minister, can you tell us what the Welsh Government is doing to support organisations like these, so that they can continue to provide support to farmers who are struggling with their mental health? 

Thank you. You raise a very important point, and the mental health of those involved in the agriculture industry is of great concern to me. And I would strongly encourage anyone suffering with stress or other mental health issues to speak to an expert in this field, and you gave many examples of fantastic organisations that work within the agriculture sector to do just that.

I was at the DPJ stand in the Anglesey show in the summer, in August, and it was very interesting just to watch the number of people who came to have just a chat, but then could be signposted in a way that perhaps, if they hadn't just taken that step into that marquee to talk to the experts there, that moment would have passed and they wouldn't have gone for help. So, I do all I can to support the charities that you named and other charities. I meet with them regularly. They come together as one, if you like, to meet with my officials on a regular basis. I try and meet them at least two or three times a year to hear what is going on on the ground, and I just think they provide such an excellent service to support our farmers and land managers who do access them. 

Thank you. The food and drink industry in Wales continues to grow in scale and reputation. Welsh Government programmes include support for innovation, capital investment, skills development and business growth in Wales, the UK and overseas markets. Later this month, our fourth BlasCymru/TasteWales event will be held.  

Thank you for that answer, Minister. 

Of course, the food and drink sector is a significant contributor to the Welsh economy and benefits from a number of food innovation centres. But, despite this, Wales's modest stock of medium-sized firms in food is not growing strongly. There is an acute problem for microfirms specifically looking to transition to small and medium-sized enterprises. The foundational economy research reports data show that medium-sized food and drink firms have only increased by five between 2010 and 2020—so, from 35 to 40. So, I’d be very much interested in what cross-portfolio work the Minister is currently undertaking with the Minister for Economy in this area to improve the situation.

Well, I’m not aware of any specific work jointly with the Minister for Economy, but what I certainly do is make sure that those companies are able to access financial expertise and also bespoke expertise. So, we offer a range of programmes. We’ve got the Investor Ready programme, and the aims are to support our businesses to obtain investment and, obviously, if they want to expand. We also want to make sure that any decisions they take are sustainable, so, if they are going to expand, it’s really important that they are aware of the pitfalls, but also what help is available too. We’ve come forward with schemes, such as the Food Business Accelerator Scheme and there are expressions of interest processes ongoing in that respect.

But I’ve seen many, many small—and I’m talking about one or two people—food and drink businesses in Wales really expand. And I think, in some ways, there was a surge during the COVID pandemic. I think that people started to perhaps shop locally and perhaps more people were cooking at home during that time. But certainly I’ve seen those sorts of businesses increase, and BlasCymru will be a place where we can absolutely showcase those businesses, not just the large businesses, as well.

Minister, among many parts of Wales, South Wales West is home to many fantastic food and drink producers. We've all heard of the Penclawdd cockles and Penderyn whisky, which opened a distillery in Swansea, but we also have the fantastic Drop Bear Beer Company and the Dog's Window Brewery to name but a few. Minister, I know that the Welsh Government is doing wonders to sell Welsh food and drink overseas, but what about at home? How are you working with partners here in Wales and across the UK to promote our amazing food and drink to a domestic audience prepared to travel to enjoy Wales's bounty?

Well, I mentioned in my original answer to Luke Fletcher that, later this month, we'll have our fourth BlasCymru event. Now, that is predominantly to sell Wales to the world, because we do have international buyers coming over, but it's also really important that we look closer to home and we absolutely do that. And we've seen our exports to England—if you want to use the word 'export' in that context—increase over the past few years, because it is really important that people access our wonderful food and drink producers. You named some in your region and there are many, many across Wales and it's just ever-increasing, and the amount of funding that we've been able to give—I'm really proud of it. I'm also very proud—Luke Fletcher mentioned the food innovation centres—we've had Project HELIX, and that really provided our companies with the ability to access a range of expertise that wasn't there before in a way that they then could grow and also be very innovative with their food products.

The application window for the Habitat Wales scheme opened on 29 September. The scheme offers support for the management of habitat land up to the introduction of the sustainable farming scheme in 2025. I would encourage all eligible farmers in Wales to apply.

Thank you for your answer, Minister. What we've seen is that the payment rates could be 45 per cent lower than what they are in Glastir Advanced and also the cap of 400 acres as well. And that's caused a lot of concern for farmers in my constituency about how they are going to continue going down more of an environmental route to deliver on some of the objectives that the Welsh Government have set. So, what I’d like to know is what analysis your department has done to see how many of those farmers who are currently accessing those schemes might ditch the agri-environmental schemes altogether and go down a more commercial route to make sure that they can bring back the profit they would have lost with the money that’s going out in these schemes. What I want to make sure is that all our farmers are profitable and that they can actually contribute towards helping out with getting to net zero and with our environmental challenges. But I just want to know what analysis you've done on this to make sure that those farmers aren't going to change course, go more commercial and be detrimental to everything you're trying to do here in government.

Thank you. As I said in earlier answers on the Habitat scheme, we haven't been able to announce the budget as yet, but I've never said it would be the same as Glastir, because I've never thought I would have the funding. Again, in an earlier answer, you heard me say that the UK Government have short-changed our farmers by £238 million. That's a huge amount of money and we just can't, obviously, fill that gap. 

Because the scheme has been brought forward very quickly—you will have heard my earlier answers—we haven't been able to do a huge amount of analysis, but that's why I'm saying it's really important that our farmers access these schemes. I think, again, it's a lesson that we've all had to learn. We've, really, moved to annualised budgets, and that budget and that funding won't be rolled over year on year as we had with the rural development programme, for instance, and other European funding. So, I think it's really important that, when these schemes are open, all our farmers take the opportunity to access as much funding as they can.

Question 7 [OQ60001] has been withdrawn. Question 8, Hefin David.

I have had many discussions with the UK Government and have written to different Ministers on eight occasions seeking action to strengthen non-devolved legislation relating to dangerous dogs. Now this is being progressed, officials are working closely with their Department for Environment, Farming and Rural Affairs counterparts to ensure the amended regulations have a positive impact on the people of Wales.

I appreciate that, Minister. The UK Government has, indeed, rather belatedly recognised the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 needs to be updated following recent attacks involving XL bullies. And, as I've said before in this Chamber, two fatal attacks involved people in Caerphilly, one a 10-year-old boy and the other an 83-year-old woman. My colleague Wayne David, MP for my constituency, for Caerphilly, has done a lot of work on this issue in terms of keeping it on the UK Government's agenda and has worked with The Mirror on their campaign and with constituents as well.

Minister, you have previously said that you would be organising a dangerous dogs summit to bring stakeholders together to see what action the Welsh Government can take in areas of devolved responsibility, such as breeding regulations. Can you then commit to working with the likes of Wayne David MP, me and campaign groups in and around Caerphilly to help keep the pressure on the UK Government and ensure they deliver on their commitment to make this much-needed change and help to keep our communities safer?

Yes, you absolutely have my commitment. As you say, I think it's welcome, but it's very belated action now being taken by the UK Government. It was very disappointing; I had a meeting with my DEFRA counterpart the day before the Prime Minister made the announcement on the Dangerous Dogs Act and looking at XL bully dogs, and we've seen another attack today being reported up in the north-east of England, with a fatality, and it is again being reported as being an XL bully. So, we can see how needed this focus is. But I just think it's such a shame that, as I said, I had a meeting on a Wednesday with my ministerial colleagues from DEFRA and I don't think they were even aware of the announcement that the Prime Minister had made. What's really important is that officials work closely together now, because there could be unintended consequences, and it's very concerning to listen to particularly the Dogs Trust and other very well respected dog charities now being very concerned at the action the UK Government is taking. 

As you said, I did announce that I will be hosting a multi-agency summit later this month. Absolutely, you and our colleague Wayne David have done a great deal of work, and there are other MSs in the Chamber that I will be inviting to that summit. You will be very pleased to hear that, yesterday, I had an e-mail exchange with Emma, Jack Lis's mother, who I would really like to come. She's agreed, and I'm very grateful for that, to come to the summit. I think it would be very powerful to hear her story, because it's really important that we remember why we're doing this, why we're promoting responsible dog ownership. It's always been my view that any dog, regardless of what breed, could be dangerous, and we really need to make sure that we do all we can to support owners and our third sector organisations to promote that responsible dog ownership, and we also need to keep it under review. So, whilst a lot of this legislation is a reserved matter, there are also lots of things we can do as a Welsh Government, and I want to continue to promote that.

Minister, it has been absolutely heartbreaking to see a big rise in the number of horrific dog attacks taking place in South Wales East, my region, alone. We've seen two young boys attacked by a dog, a five-month old baby was rushed to hospital after being attacked by a dog, and of course we all remember the truly tragic case of Jack Lis, who you and my colleague just mentioned, following a dog attack. Last month, the UK Government announced that American XL bully dogs will be banned following a spate of shocking attacks across the United Kingdom. I and, I know, my Welsh Conservative colleagues welcome this move, and I sincerely hope it will help end these vicious attacks, going forward. Minister, I know you gave us a number of updates just then, but can I get a commitment from you today that the Welsh Government will fully engage constructively with the UK Government over this matter? And can I also get a commitment from you that you will keep the Senedd updated every single step of the way? Thank you.

Yes, absolutely, I commit, as I said in my opening answer. I've written to a variety of Ministers, from Home Office Ministers to DEFRA Ministers, on at least eight occasions. I was looking back at the number of letters. Some weren't even responded to. But it's really important that we work closely together, and, as I say, the announcement from the Prime Minister I think even took DEFRA by surprise. But there's already been at least one meeting, if not two. I made sure my officials attended. In fact, the chief veterinary officer was also able to attend. It is really important. And I think we've got another DEFRA inter-ministerial group later this month. I will put it on the agenda, because I think it's important it's on absolutely every agenda, because this is something—. We're seeing far too many attacks, particularly by this one breed, but, as I say, all dogs can be dangerous, whatever their breed type or size. So, I think it's really important that, whilst there's been a disproportionate number of recent incidents involving American XL bully dogs, we don't take our eye off the ball in relation to responsible dog ownership, because that is something we can really promote as a Government.

There certainly seems to be a consensus across this Chamber around this important issue, and I commend that. There is also an opportunity, perhaps, here to do something different in Wales, away from the chaos of the soundbites of the Tory Westminster Government. I'll explore some of that approach in greater detail in my Member's legislative proposal debate next week, and I hope to get contributions across this Chamber for that, and I'm very grateful to the Business Committee for allowing that to happen.

One matter I will be touching on is the Local Environmental Awareness on Dogs, or LEAD, initiative that's currently been adopted by Safer Caerphilly. This scheme will give advice to the public on dog-related issues and improve dog safety and welfare. It also aims to tackle anti-social behaviour and inconsiderate behaviour by individuals with dogs, to increase public protection. Potentially, there are lessons to be learned from this initiative in order to create a pan-Wales approach to the promotion of responsible dog ownership and community safety, rather than a piecemeal approach. Would you be willing to meet with me and Safer Caerphilly to talk about some of the issues and some of the approaches that they're taking and take that forward into your summit and move forward with that?

Thank you very much. You're quite right to welcome the consensus. I think it's fair to say—I'm looking at Darren Millar now—all business managers were very happy to look at your legislative proposal. I think it was the one we all thought was so topical that it's something that should be debated here in the Chamber, and we very much look forward to that next Wednesday. Yes, I would certainly be very happy to do that. It might not be me, ahead of the summit, but I'll certainly make sure my officials engage in relation to the initiative you discuss. Again, as I say, I will be inviting Members to the summit. I can't have everybody there, but if you would like to come, particularly in light of your legislative proposal, I'd be very happy for you to do so.

Thank you. The laws protecting the public from dog attacks are non-devolved. I welcome the news the UK Government are finally taking action. I will host a multi-agency summit on 18 October to establish what additional steps we can take to improve responsible dog ownership here in Wales, building on the work already done with our partners.

I'm grateful to the Minister for her answer and also her leadership on this matter. Minister, it was a few weeks ago when I and my dog, Coco the King Charles cavalier, were involved in a violent attack from two Staffordshire bull terriers, both off their leads. Llywydd, I must pay tribute to the six members of the public who came to our rescue that day. Remarkably, I was physically okay from the attack; I was more mentally shaken up—still am, Minister. Coco, after six trips to the vets, seems to be on the road to recovery, thankfully.

Now, we've already heard from Members across the Chamber today—Hefin David in particular—about how things can go tragically wrong when it comes to dog attacks. I'm grateful for your responses in response to promoting sensible and responsible dog ownership. I wonder what consideration you've had of one specific ask, of promoting a responsible dog awareness campaign, particularly looking at reminding dog owners in Wales of their legal obligations to keep dogs and their animals under proper control in all places, at all times, encouraging owners to seek advice if they are concerned about their own dog's behaviour, and also urging people to report any suspicions that they may have about illegal breeding to their local authorities. Diolch.

Thank you, and I'm really sorry you and Coco had to experience that. You're quite right, I think there are things that we can do, but maybe there are extra things as well. The whole point of having this summit was to bring all our partners together, as well as some of us to hear about experiences. It's normally our constituents who come with stories like you just have, but you've unfortunately experienced it too. I think, certainly, an awareness campaign is something that we can look at as part of the summit. I'm very keen to do absolutely everything we can, but reporting is really important. Since we've had the rural crime and wildlife co-ordinator, I think we have seen—. He's been doing training with our police authorities right across Wales, and I think we have seen an increase in reporting incidents, as you refer to, so that's to be encouraged as well. So, anything we can all do, I think, to raise awareness. But I will specifically take that point to the summit to see if it's something that we can certainly consider and support.

Finally, question 10, Siân Gwenllian.

Diolch. I hold regular discussions with Cabinet colleagues, including the Minister for Health and Social Services, on a range of issues affecting health services in north Wales. However, it remains the responsibility of Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board to plan how local services are delivered, including recruitment and workforce planning.

For the first time ever, it's possible to apply for an undergraduate course at the new medical school at Bangor University, which is excellent news, and will lead, in due time, to improvements in health services in north Wales. Plans are afoot to create a school of pharmacy in Bangor, which is also to be welcomed, and the next natural development is to train dentists locally too, and Bangor University would be an ideal location for a new school of dentistry for Wales. Will you support this campaign as Minister for north Wales, and will you join with me in making the case to the Minister for health—the case for a new dental school in Bangor—building on the medical training that is already afoot in the city?

Thank you. Yes, I will certainly have a discussion with the Minister for Health and Social Services around that. I lobbied very vociferously, I think it's fair to say, to ensure we had the north Wales medical school, and we're starting to see—well, we certainly will be from next year—we'll start to see people training there. I'm very keen for anything that's looked at nationally to be brought to north Wales.

I thank the Minister.

The next item, therefore, will be the topical question. Today's question is to be answered by the Deputy Minister for Climate Change, and is to be asked by Delyth Jewell.

Thank you. Well, we've had no official notification of the decision in advance, but our position on HS2 consequential does not change: huge amounts of money have been spent in England, and Wales deserves its share.

Diolch, Gweinidog. Well, this was one of the worst kept secrets in politics; we all knew that HS2 was dwindling, we just had to wait to hear it be made official. I'd be interested to know, Minister, what effect it has on the Welsh Government's ability to make policy—on transport in this instance, but perhaps more generally—when the UK Government doesn't pick up the phone. You have to presumably find out about major policy decisions and changes from reading it on social media or news reports like the general population. I was going to ask if the Welsh Government was consulted at all about the announcement about Wales, which Mr Sunak made in his conference speech. Presumably it was not.

And, as welcome as the electrification of the north Wales main line would be—that would be welcome—that would not be in any way a sufficient replacement for the money we've lost from the first stage of HS2. That would be purportedly double of what is being promised now for the north Wales main line. Now, I do fear this might be cynical stuff: perhaps Mr Sunak might know he won't be in power in order to deliver on that promise. Let's wait to see. But it is ironic that they talk about strengthening connections across the union, Minister, when the HS2 project has only served to solidify in people's minds just how unequal this purported union truly is. The reality is that London gets high-speed rail and we get Victorian infrastructure.

So, finally, Minister, what discussions have you had, please—and what discussions will you have—to ensure that all of Wales will get a fair share of the redistributed money, and not just that, but what we were already owed from the first stage? And do you have any faith that this project will actually be delivered?

Well, I think it's fair to say that this is no way to run a railroad. We've heard a great deal from the Conservatives in recent weeks about money they think is being poorly spent, and here we have hundreds of millions of pounds being written off on a scheme that has been planned and agreed to and contracted with for years. And I've seen reports of people who've been forced out of their homes to make way for a scheme that is now not going ahead. So, this is chaotic, and we're seeing an increasing pattern of panic by Conservative Ministers, who have given up on governing and are just casting around for push-button issues to try and desperately hang on to power.

So, the cancellation of HS2 is clearly, from a transport point of view, a half-cocked initiative. There is no scheme, strategy or plan behind it. We don't know much detail. In principle, it is welcome that other schemes are going to be funded instead, because we would expect to get a Barnett share of that for us to fund our priorities. But, again, we know nothing about it; we've had no conversations with the UK Government about this.

We have been working closely with them, with their officials, over a number of months, to come up with a joint set of priority schemes for rail investment, because, as Members know, rail infrastructure remains a Westminster responsibility, and we are close to a point of getting agreement on three tranches of schemes that we can jointly agree are the right ones for Wales. And I must say, electrification on the north Wales line was nowhere near the top of the list. In fact, it will take at least 10 years. As far as we are aware, no development work has been done on this at all. None. We have no idea of the cost of it. One billion pounds has been quoted. This is a finger-in-the-air figure, and I don't even know where that has come from.

But no lessons are being learnt, because the reason why previous promises have not been kept—. You'll remember; they have form on this. They've promised before to electrify the south Wales main line—lots of headlines, lots of praise from the Conservatives, and they haven't—[Interruption.] And they haven't—[Interruption.] And they haven't delivered it. So, they've broken their promise on electrification—[Interruption.]

Darren. Darren Millar. Darren Millar, you're not on microphone. Can the Minister please be allowed to respond to the question? If you want to be called, I'll call you, Darren Millar.

So, they have form on breaking promises on this before. This is no more than an election promise with no numbers behind it. And the reason why the south Wales main line didn't go ahead is because costs ran out of control. They ran out of control because no development work had been done. Similarly, the reason they've scrapped HS2 is because the costs ran out of control because they hadn't done the development work. And yet again, here we are again, repeating their mistake of announcing an eye-catching initiative without any numbers, science or plans behind it, that's not on the jointly agreed list of schemes. It's not the most important priority for passengers in north Wales. Far more could be done, for example, to increase line speeds on the north Wales main line, to improve Chester station, to improve the Wrexham-Bidston line. These are the real priorities for getting service improvements to passengers in north Wales. Of course we want to see electrification, but this is no way to do it. And the money that's been squandered by the Conservative Government in London for no public benefit is a disgrace.

Today, we saw bold and decisive action taken by the Prime Minister, which will lead to major benefits for Wales. For far too long, the people of Wales have been let down by this incompetent Labour administration, particularly in the areas of transport, but thankfully the UK Conservative Government is on hand to deliver for Wales and today's announcement should show us how committed they actually are. As a result of the decision to scrap the Birmingham to Manchester leg of HS2, the money saved, as you've all mentioned—some £36 billion—is going to be spent on hundreds of much-needed transport projects across the UK instead. This includes spending £1 billion, as you've also already mentioned, electrifying the north Wales main line, which will undoubtedly bring huge benefits to the area, particularly for the residents of north Wales. 

Now, Deputy Minister, I know you may perhaps not have gone to north Wales, but my colleague here who does represent north Wales has said, and so have all the residents that have contacted me over the last six months, that they lack connectivity to much of the UK and have felt very much neglected by this Labour Government, particularly when it comes to areas of transport, particularly public transport.

So, it is also refreshing to see the UK Conservative Government go forward and invest in vital road infrastructure projects such as, as my colleague Darren Millar mentioned, the M4, unlike this anti-driver, anti-growth Labour Government with its ban on road building and, believe it or not, ludicrous 20 mph speed limit. Shock, horror, yes, I'm going to mention it, because that's what it deserves. And, of course, with the UK Government shifting to local spending, the good news just keeps coming for Wales. 

As a result, Wales will be receiving consequential funding. Sadly, this money will go straight to the Labour Government, which, I must admit, does fill me with dread and does send a shiver down my spine. So, Deputy Minister, can I get a commitment from you that this consequential funding will in fact be used to improve transport provision in Wales, and will not be squandered on your Government's never-ending vanity projects, which I've listed in this Chamber many, many times before?

Llywydd, it's difficult to take these comments seriously, frankly. The lack of connectivity that north Wales faces with the rest of the UK, which I've now just been accused of, is the responsibility of the body that has powers over rail infrastructure. These are not devolved. She is criticising me for her own Government's lack of rail infrastructure investment in north Wales. It makes no sense at all. We just get a tumble of lines to take from central office that bear no relation to reality.

She asked us about the consequential. A consequential of what? What are we having a consequential of? She's quoted £1 billion. Where does that figure come from? Where are the numbers behind that £1 billion, because we've seen no work done on the development cost? She has no idea because she's just spouting the latest lines that have no credibility. 

I would just remind the Member—I'm not going to respond to all of the absurd points that she makes; I've stopped taking a lot of it seriously, frankly—that there's a reason why only 1 per cent of under-25-year-olds support the Conservative Party, because they have nothing to say for themselves, and none of us can take them seriously.

I thank the Minister for those answers. 

The next item will be the 90-second statements. The first is from Mark Isherwood. 

Monday marked five years since the sad passing of my constituent, Alastair or Ali Thomas, from diabetic ketoacidosis, a complication of his diabetes. A singer, songwriter and a loved father, son and brother, he lived every day to the fullest and is greatly missed by his family. His sad passing should not have happened. Awareness of DKA has since been his mother's main priority and now, in her sixth year of campaigning, Dee Pinnington, who, like her son, lives with type 1 diabetes, continues her essential efforts. Awareness of DKA is as vital as ever, especially during unprecedented pressures on our health services. Understanding the symptoms and alerting medical services properly, so that they can categorise their help and prioritise an ambulance, can be the difference between life and death.

Her bilingual leaflet is supported by Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board and Diabates UK Cymru, and today will be shared digitally with general practitioners across Wales. Campaigners also call for this leaflet or its contents to be available on the NHS Wales app. As part of her campaign, Dee Pinnington has arranged a music festival, Ali Fest 2024, in north Wales on Saturday 6 July next year in Ali's memory, with all funds raised donated to Diabetes UK Cymru. DUK Cymru has sent an e-mail to extend an invite to you all—if you've not had it yet, you'll be receiving it—because Ali's story should never be repeated. Diolch.

Last week, Max Boyce, one of Wales’s cultural icons, celebrated his eightieth birthday, and a statue of him was unveiled in the village where he was born, Glynneath. The Llywydd and the First Minister were present, along with some of the biggest stars from the world of rugby, such as Gareth Edwards and Gerald Davies. But more important, perhaps, was the presence of the hundreds of residents of the surrounding area who came together to mark and celebrate the occasion, and pay tribute to a man who truly deserves to be called a man of his community. Because even though he has become such a familiar figure, through his talent for singing and comedy, Max is a man of his people. As one who understood all too well the heavy price paid for coal, having lost his father, Leonard, in a terrible accident in the Onllwyn No. 3 mine a month before he was born, and having spent a period underground himself, Max’s work was inspired by the experiences, aspirations and culture of south Wales’s industrial communities—the hardship, the friendship, the laughter and the camaraderie, and our love for rugby, of course. Furthermore, he also reflected the bilingual nature of these communities in an entirely natural way. 

The first recording of his songs was made in the Valley Folk Club in Pontardawe in 1971, and included some of the songs that are now familiar to all of us, such as 'Hymns and Arias'. And his second album with EMI, We All Had Doctors’ Papers, went to the top of the album charts in 1975, a feat that remains unmatched for such a recording. Like many of my generation who come from a similar background, I can recount the joyful and melancholy songs word for word. It is impossible to list all of his achievements and all of the plaudits he has received over the 50 years he has been performing across Wales and worldwide. But I’d like to encourage everyone to go to see the beautiful statue in Glynneath by Rubin Eynon, a local artist, and on the Senedd’s behalf I’d like to say, ‘Happy eightieth birthday, Max—and thank you’.

And finally, Heledd Fychan.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. In September 1983, Clwb y Bont was opened in Pontypridd by Dafydd Iwan, no less. From the outset it was a co-operative enterprise, and it remains so to this day, with the objective of promoting the Welsh language and culture in the area in a naturally bilingual environment. 

Over the decades, the clwb has hosted a diverse range of activities, from political meetings to community choirs, from Talwrn y Beirdd—a poetry slam—to rock, hip-hop, folk and jazz nights, not to mention quiz, film and karaoke nights, as well as being the place to watch rugby and football matches featuring Wales’s national teams. Many people have learnt Welsh there over the decades, welcoming the opportunity to learn in a more informal and comfortable environment. 

A number of times in its history, the clwb has suffered flooding, and I’m sure that many will remember seeing the venue underwater following the destructive floods of 2020. Soon after, COVID hit. But, through the hard work of members and volunteers from the local community, Clwb y Bont managed to reopen. Thanks to Prosiect Pum Mil, fundraising efforts and several grants, Clwb y Bont—as Caryl Parry Jones said during the fortieth anniversary celebrations there last Saturday evening—is ‘fit at 40’, and has come through a very difficult chapter in its history stronger than ever. 

Clwb y Bont is to be treasured, and is now preparing to welcome everyone who travels to Pontypridd for the National Eisteddfod next year. So thanks to everyone who has played a part in the club’s story over the decades. Onwards to the next 40: happy birthday, Clwb y Bont.

Thank you, everyone.

Item 5 is the debate on the Local Government and Housing Committee's report, 'The Right to Adequate Housing'. I call on the Chairman of the committee to move the motion—John Griffiths. 

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I'm very pleased to open today's debate on the Local Government and Housing Committee’s report on the right to adequate housing.

Ensuring that everyone in Wales has a safe place to call home is something that I'm sure we all aspire to. Several countries have the right to adequate housing enshrined in law, and there have been calls for such a right to be incorporated here in Wales. So we undertook this inquiry knowing that the Welsh Government has committed to bringing forward a White Paper that will include proposals for a right to adequate housing, and that there will also be homelessness legislation introduced during this Senedd term.

The Welsh Government has since published its Green Paper call for evidence on housing adequacy and fair rents. I'm pleased that the Minister has confirmed that the evidence presented to us as a committee will be taken into account as part of the consultation process. We believe, as a committee, that our inquiry can add value to that work by highlighting some of the important issues that require further consideration. We are therefore pleased that all 10 of our recommendations have been accepted, either in full or in principle.

The evidence presented to us by stakeholders was broadly in favour of incorporating a legal right to adequate housing in Wales, and we recognise that this could play an important role in addressing housing needs. However, we also recognise that system changes are needed before such a right could be implemented effectively.

Our report highlighted the importance of ensuring that the right type of accommodation is available in the right locations. A mix of accommodation is needed to meet people's varied needs. We welcome the establishment of the stakeholder advisory group and the Minister's commitment to working collaboratively with groups who are likely to be impacted. I would like to emphasise the importance of engaging with disabled people and older people's representatives to address the shortage of accessible accommodation, now and for future needs.

Dirprwy Lywydd, the shortage of high-quality, affordable homes is arguably the greatest barrier to delivering a right to adequate housing. Therefore, addressing housing supply is key. We believe that this must be addressed urgently to meet current and future demands. As a committee, we have previously expressed concern that rising costs and issues relating to the supply chain and workforce will make the Welsh Government's aim of delivering 20,000 new affordable homes by the end of this Senedd term more challenging.

Additionally, given the continued demand for affordable housing, and the increasing number of people living in temporary accommodation, we are concerned that the target of 20,000 new homes is itself insufficient. I would therefore like to emphasise our recommendation that the Minister sets out an assessment of how the 20,000 new affordable homes will contribute to meeting the overall housing need in Wales. We think that such an assessment should include how the types of homes being provided will address specific areas of need, such as one-bedroomed properties.

In terms of how a right to adequate housing could be incorporated, witnesses referred to two different models: direct incorporation into Welsh law; or indirectly, by placing a duty on Welsh Ministers and other public authorities to have due regard to the right. We realise that a 'due regard' approach may not be sufficient to ensure that a right is adhered to. Therefore, direct incorporation may be more effective. We believe that further consideration should be given to this.

I am pleased that the Minister has accepted our recommendation that consideration be given to introducing an annual housing survey for Wales. This inquiry, and our previous work, have demonstrated the need for better data to get a greater understanding of housing needs, and we believe that an annual survey would provide an opportunity to collect such data.

Dirprwy Lywydd, as outlined in our report, we recognise that there are challenges to overcome before a right to adequate housing can be implemented effectively. However, we believe that work should begin now in order to realise the aspiration of safe, appropriate housing for everyone in our country. Diolch yn fawr.

At this point, I would like to thank John Griffiths for his able chairing of the committee and guiding us through the production of the report that we're debating today. I'm also grateful to colleagues for their contributions throughout the process, as a committee.

We know that housing is one of the key issues of our age—in Wales here, yes, but across the UK generally, as well. We know that it impacts people across Wales in all sorts of different ways, perhaps from our young people struggling to get onto the housing ladder through to, perhaps, people sleeping rough, who are desperate to be housed. I think we have to admit that we haven't got it right at the moment, and we need to consider all options to improve things for the people of Wales.

In terms of our committee report, I'd like to just highlight some specific recommendations of the report and provide some comment on those. Firstly, recommendation 5 of our report considers how 'adequate housing' should be defined. I think within this debate, that is probably one of the most important things to consider. It's important because all potential policy making that may flow from this actually comes from that definition being right. We heard from Professor Hoffman, who gave evidence to say that adequacy is a flexible concept, and he added that there should be some non-negotiables, like every effort being made to end homelessness. It seems to me that this is already the case, so, the Welsh Government would need to ensure that any definition doesn't just consist of warm words that aren't deliverable. And I do, perhaps, have a natural cautious position, more broadly to what we're discussing here today and to what's within the report, because we know that, even if a right was created, pretend, today to adequate housing, that doesn't mean that the crisis of thousands of people living currently in hotels and bed and breakfasts in Wales will be fixed tomorrow, or indeed, in 10 years' time, it may not be fixed. There is no silver bullet to solving the problems we're facing and we have to work with developers, with landlords, with our social housing partners and with local authorities to ensure that the houses that we'll need tomorrow are being built and made available today.

And this brings me on to my next recommendation that I'd like to have a focus on and hear more from the Minister on in response, and our Chairman, John Griffiths, mentioned it in his opening contribution. It's recommendation 6, around the 20,000 new affordable homes that the Government have committed to building within this Senedd term. We know that that is not going to be achieved, or it is extremely unlikely to be achieved. One of the questions I raised with the Minister in the committee—and I'd perhaps like to hear from her again today—is this ability for our social landlords in particular to be able to afford to build those properties at the level that is required at the moment. We know from social landlords that, due to the quality requirement, it costs close to £250,000 now to build a social home in Wales, meaning that every £1 million spent just builds four homes. I'm not at all saying that we should be building inadequate housing for people, but when we have thousands of people in hotels and B&Bs at the moment, I wonder what consideration the Minister will give to getting that balance right between the quality and the affordability.

We have issues, of course, in terms of deliverability on the issue of phosphates, and that is addressed in recommendation 7 within our report today. It's absolutely urgent that we find a practical solution to dealing with delays in housing developments as a result of phosphate regulations. I know that the Minister understands this and is very, very keen to see this resolved, and I'm not saying that much of what's in there is wrong, but what we do need is a solution for our developers to ensure that those social homes in particular can be built as quickly as possible. We know that, in my patch in north Wales, for example, around 1,000 homes are currently not being built because of phosphate regulations, and we cannot kick this can any further down the road. As I say, I know the Minister is taking this seriously, but I'd be keen to hear perhaps an update on progress on that so that we can see these houses built, which are so, so important.

So, Deputy Presiding Officer, I was really pleased to be part of this work in producing this report that's in front of us today. I'll certainly be keeping a keen eye on the progress of this idea, of this right to adequate housing. I'll be keen to understand how the Welsh Government will continue to consider how something like this could be implemented. But I would also reiterate my point around caution if we believe that this is going to be a silver bullet to solve all our problems. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

I had prepared a speech, and I was going to talk a little bit around Vienna, Barcelona, Finland and other examples. But instead, I'm going to tell you a little story, and something that happened last night. When I left this Senedd last night, at about 8 o'clock, I got back to the flat, and in the doorway there was a young woman sleeping in the entrance, blocking my entrance to the flat. She had a little dog with her, a little puppy, and she'd been there since the morning, because she was there when I left. And in order to gain access to the flat, I had to wake her up, and in the process of waking her up, I asked if she was okay, and she said, no, she was hungry, desperate for food, really cold and in need of assistance. So, I ran upstairs, went to the flat, I got some food, I got what I could for her, and went down and had a chat, and offered to take her out for some food, in order to make sure that she was okay. And on that journey, she shared her story with me.

She was in her late 20s. She was born with an abusive mother and a father that was on heroin. She was put into care, and she'd lived through care throughout her life, and been handed from one family or one individual to another. When she was 14, she gave birth to a child—at 14 years old. A fortnight later, she lost that baby child. She was only 14, she didn't know how to handle that loss, she wasn't equipped to handle that. And then, when she was 16, she was put out back on the streets. When she was 18, she decided to get in touch with her father, her biological father. She met the father and he didn't want anything to do with her. She wanted to become part of a family, she had nobody else. So, she thought, 'Right, how could I become part of his family?' And she went to buy heroin for him. He wasn't interested, he was just interested in the heroin, so she started cutting that heroin for him. He still wasn't interested, and so she started taking heroin in order to be part of his life. She was then addicted to heroin for—well, she's been addicted to heroin since then. And she's been on the streets since 18, living in Cardiff—you've probably passed her, as you go about your daily lives. And she's earning money the only way she knows how to earn money, and that's through selling her body.

Now, it's not right that in a society like ours, in the twenty-first century—I'm looking around—that we're living in a society that allows this to happen. It shouldn't be—no, we shouldn't be in this position. She's been let down and abused by everybody throughout her life. She doesn't trust anybody. From her birth, she's been let down, and she's been let down by us politicians more than anybody else, who've not managed to put the structures in place to stop these things from happening to her.

Now, the right to adequate housing—and I will probably get back to this story about Polly when we hear about the legislation for homelessness—but the right to adequate housing wouldn't have resolved the issues when she was born, no. It wouldn't have resolved the issues around the care that she received, no. But now she needs some form of structure in her life. She needs something to hold on to. She needs a roof above her head. She's lost her phone—it was stolen from her a couple of weeks ago—so she's got no contact point. She'll go to some homes occasionally for a clean up, but she's got no one permanent address, she's got no way of contacting her. So giving her a roof above her head would give her that structure and give her a purpose.

And it's for Polly that I think we need to make sure that we have this right to adequate housing, so that she's got a roof above her head, in a place where she knows she can get that care, where there is wraparound care for her, where she knows there's transport available for her, to find a job when the time comes. But without a house to begin with, without a roof above her head, she's got no hope. So, that's why I think we should support and encourage the Government to develop and work on the proposals. Diolch.

A few days ago, we celebrated the ninety-ninth birthday of former US President Jimmy Carter. One of the President's legacies is the Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter Work Project, a yearly international home building blitz, organised by Habitat for Humanity, which is also about enabling community and neighbourhood renewal. The project relaunched this week, and since 1984, over 100,000 volunteers have helped nearly 4,500 families in 14 countries to move into safe, affordable shelter. When asked about his support for the project, President Carter said:

'A lot of people don't look at housing as a human right, but it is. I don't see how a family can enjoy other human rights...if they live in a disreputable place of which they are ashamed'.

I welcome the similar commitment set out by the Welsh Labour Government and Plaid Cymru in the programme for government to publish a White Paper that will include proposals for a right to adequate housing. I look forward to the publication of this in due course. As an interim, I want to commend the Local Government and Housing Committee for holding this short inquiry, exploring some of the key areas that the White Paper needs to cover. It's an excellent report, and I give my thanks to committee members, the clerking team, and all who gave their time and expertise as witnesses. I'm sure this will be really helpful moving forward. 

For the bulk of my time today, I'd like to focus on recommendation 6. That's the recommendation calling on the Welsh Government to set out its assessment of how the ambitious target of 20,000 new homes it aims to create will contribute to meeting the overall housing need in Wales, also ensuring they meet specific areas of need, such as the demand for one-bedroomed properties. I note the Welsh Government have accepted this in principle. In her response, the Minister's commitment to achieving this goal shines through, and I note the comments about local authorities, and how they assess and map the housing needs of their areas. 

As I'm sure is the case with many of us from across the Siambr, meeting this need is one of the main challenges constantly being presented in my constituency postbag. In addition to increasing supply, I was pleased to see Cymorth Cymru's second action for how we can meet this need, namely bringing empty properties back into use. I want to briefly touch on two examples of this being delivered from my constituency. First, I was pleased the Welsh Government, at the start of this year, launched the national empty homes grant scheme. Running over two years, and backed by £50 million of funding, this could see up to 2,000 long-term empty properties brought back into use as family homes. The grant grew out of the Valleys taskforce empty homes project, and I well remember our visit, Minister, to Ynysybwl a few years ago, where Jade welcomed us into her beautiful, newly restored family home. Similarly, I've been really impressed at the proactive way in which Cynon Taf Community Housing Group has brought up, renovated and rented out empty terrace properties in Penrhiwceiber. This is a sustainable way of repurposing empty housing and reinvigorating communities that have been blighted by properties that have been empty for far too long. I’d be keen to hear from the Minister if there is more that Welsh Government could be doing to encourage works such as these.

As well as accessing housing, the need for more accessible housing is also something that comes through my casework with distressing regularity. The evidence from Tai Pawb and Care & Repair Cymru here was quite clear. And I am struck by that figure, supplied by the latter, that

'By 2035, 58% of people over 65 are predicted to have a mobility impairment.'

As mentioned, I note the comments from the Minister about how local housing market assessments and local authority prospectuses provide a means to make sure the right type of affordable housing development is funded and delivered in the right place. However, I am concerned as to whether the system is agile enough to meet need. Houses could be adapted for use, but then a few years later need to be unadapted to go back into general housing stock. And, certainly, in my constituency, there never appears to be the necessary supply of accessible, adapted housing stock. There's no doubt that we need to futureproof our housing stock against current and future needs. The White Paper, especially if it meets the committee’s recommendations, offers us a perfect opportunity to do just this.

I refer to my own declarations of interest in terms of property ownership. I would like to thank the Local Government and Housing Committee, under the chairmanship of John Griffiths, and all the members, for their work on what is an extremely important area of policy. The right to adequate housing has been described by Community Housing Cymru as a 'golden thread.' Shelter Cymru consider it to be the lever that would overturn the long legacy that we've had of underinvestment. Alma Economics state that its modelling sees benefits significantly outweighing the cost, and Care & Repair Cymru believe that the right offers the opportunity to move away from crisis management and start looking at preventative approaches to health. However, as the very same organisation has stated, the reality is we just don't know what the cost of inadequate housing is.

We all know that a good-quality, warm, affordable home is fundamental to our well-being. It is also fundamental to the well-being of our children and to their educational needs. Several stakeholders have referred to the right as addressing matters, such as security of tenure, habitability and affordability. Yet, as recommendation 5 and your response highlights, there is no clear definition of 'adequate housing' in Wales. So, it's interesting how we can actually ensure that happens. Even if there was, the idea that creating this right in law will solve the housing crisis is nonsense.

The key problem in Wales is housing supply. In 2022-23 only 5,785 dwellings were completed. That was less than half of the 12,000 needed. The report has highlighted one problem being the major barriers to supply phosphates. Now, we know that—. We've raised this several times in this Chamber. Thousands of planned new homes, including around 700 social properties are now delayed—heavily delayed—because of this Natural Resources Wales guidance. Since 2021 we have known about this crisis, yet the best the Minister can do, in response to recommendation 7, is advise that there will be yet another river pollution summit. Delay after delay after delay. What the message Wales needs to hear is 'build, build, build'.

In response to recommendation 6, you have rightly stated that local authorities are responsible for determining local housing requirements. Yet, local authorities are part—some local authorities—are part of the housing supply delay. In fact, I'm confident that—. Hang on. So, over 100 vacancies in planning departments across Wales—. It is taking years for a developer—private or social—to get from acquiring land to laying a single brick. Our planning process in Wales is broken. So, we need to urgently consider a fast track for planning applications for sites that are 100 per cent social and the same for affordable housing, review the need for pre-planning applications on this much-needed housing tenure, encourage LAs to work together to fill those speciality gaps, where we haven't got enough planning officers, legal officers, highway engineers, civil engineers, and get these applications cleared.

I agree with the committee that engaging with different groups is crucial to understanding the types of accommodation that are needed and where they are needed in order to ensure the correct delivery. So, I believe it's incumbent on this Government to actually be much better at data collection. The stakeholder advisory group could be most helpful, especially if there's representation from disability and older people groups, in line with recommendation 3. We cannot allow any further delays in improving supply.

Quite rightly, we discuss housing policy on almost a weekly basis in this Welsh Parliament, but I am deeply concerned that no progress is being made. In fact, I'm very confident that the independent evaluation of the Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016 will also find out that this law has driven out private sector landlords and has made the supply of rental accommodation worse. I have many hotels in Aberconwy that are homes to people at the moment—one room classed as their home—because of this lack of supply. Now, the committee is right to call in recommendation 4 for an evaluation of existing law, but we need to go a step further. Minister, please commit to act on these findings, even if it means admitting that your 2016 Act has had a detrimental impact on supply.

For three decades, Welsh Labour and Plaid Cymru have overseen housing policy in Wales. What they have delivered is this shameful crisis. Legislating to create a right to adequate housing will not address that. What we need is a pro-housing Parliament— 

Janet, you need to conclude now, please. 

Okay. We need a Parliament that lifts the brakes on building, a Parliament that stops the attacks on private landlords and a Parliament that delivers homes for the people of Wales. Diolch. 

I call on the Minister for Climate Change, Julie James.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I would very much like to thank, firstly, members of the Local Government and Housing Committee, particularly the Chair, and all of those who took time to provide evidence based on their experience and expertise to the committee's inquiry. I'd also very much like to thank the committee for the timely publication of their findings and the recommendations following their inquiry into adequate housing. I’m very pleased to say that we’ve accepted, as the Chair acknowledged, either fully or in principle, all of the recommendations the committee has made. Our full response, Dirprwy Lywydd, was published on 27 September. I won’t have time to go through all of the detail of that, but our Green Paper call for evidence consultation also on adequate housing and fair rent, as part of the co-operation agreement, closed on 15 September, and my officials are currently analysing submissions from over 370 respondents. I’ve also committed that, as part of establishing the evidence base through the consultation, we will consider the submissions that were made to the committee’s inquiry as part of our analysis, and the Chair acknowledged that in his contribution.

As set out in the programme for government, and as part of the co-operation agreement with Plaid Cymru, the Welsh Government is committed to publishing a White Paper to include proposals for a right to adequate housing, to include fair rents and new approaches to making homes affordable for those on local incomes. The Green Paper evidence, along with the report of the Local Government and Housing Committee into adequate housing will help inform the development of the proposals to be set out and consulted upon in the subsequent White Paper.

And as I’ve set out in my written statement on the Green Paper consultation earlier this year, whilst there are international examples and academic work on the concept of housing adequacy and fair rent measures, they’re not directly transferrable to Wales and the Welsh housing sector. The consultation is therefore aimed at gaining a better understanding, particularly of the rental market in Wales, and particularly what factors influence landlord behaviour in setting rents and taking on tenants and what tenants consider is, in fact, an affordable and adequate property. So, we will be, just to address the points that I think Sam raised, looking very carefully at what the definition actually consists of and how we can best put that into practice in Wales.

I also set out in my evidence to the committee how the Welsh Government has already taken, and continues to take, significant steps towards meeting the criteria that would deliver housing adequacy. My focus therefore remains on ensuring we’re putting the right building blocks in place in order to deliver housing adequacy for everyone in practice. It’s the long-term strategies, policies and programmes we’re taking forward, together with record levels of investment across the housing portfolio, that will deliver the factors of housing adequacy. These include our long-term ambition to end homelessness by making it rare, brief and unrepeated and the legislative reform we are planning to transform our approach to homelessness, focusing on prevention and rapid rehousing. Dirprwy Lywydd, I will shortly be bringing forward a White Paper setting out a radical series of reforms necessary to achieve our ambitions, all of which help lay the groundwork to achieving some of the factors of housing adequacy.

I just want to briefly address the heartrending story that Mabon set out in his contribution. I do hope, Mabon, that you reported the young woman’s whereabouts through Streetlink as well. It’s a very important part of our strategy that we get housing outreach workers to every single person we know is sleeping rough. Most people sleeping rough on the streets of Wales have an adequate outreach worker with them, so we know where they are, and they’re not usually in housing because they have a multitude of other problems, mental health and substance abuse being the most common. So, I do hope you did report it. If not, then let me know and I will make sure that we get an outreach worker to the young women in question. It's very important, as you said, that it's somebody that they trust and feel can be relied on and it can take many, many months of work to do that. So, it's important to start that.

Dirprwy Lywydd, we also recognise, of course, the importance of increasing the supply of affordable homes, which is why we’re investing £330 million in social housing this financial year as part of our commitment to deliver 20,000 low-carbon homes to rent in the social sector this Senedd term. And unlike in England, we've also continued our support for Help to Buy, which, in addition to providing support for prospective homeowners, makes an important contribution to encouraging house building and supporting supply chains across Wales. 

Since its inception, the Help to Buy—Wales scheme has delivered more than 13,640 homes and we currently have more than 40 developers registered to deliver the scheme. We're also using our own land to bring forward exemplar sites containing more than 50 per cent affordable housing and have recently purchased an additional two sites, which together will deliver more than 500 affordable homes.

We also support access to land for affordable housing developments through our £88 million land for housing scheme. The funding is recycled when loans are repaid to provide new loans, and, to date, £248 million in loans have been made, which will facilitate the delivery of 8,187 new homes, of which 78 per cent are affordable, through a series of investments across Wales that help lay more ground work for delivering the factors of housing adequacy across Wales.

I'll just also address the point that Sam made, which is a point that is often made to me, about why don't we lower the standards. The truth is that one of the biggest problems for housing adequacy across Wales is the fact that we have housing that is of such poor standard, and, actually, homes built only 10 years ago are already applying for retrofit. So, it's a very false economy. I understand the short-termism of it, but, really, it's a false economy, because, if you've got to retrofit a house, it's far more expensive than it is to build it adequately in the first place. So, the idea is to build homes that are fit for life, that have adequate access arrangements, as Vikki highlighted, so that they really are homes for life. So, if you have a pram or a pushchair or a child on a trike, or an older relative or anyone else with mobility issues, the home is adaptable for that without great expense, and that's one of the main tenets of what we're building, so these are homes for life that people can stay in and be well housed.

We've got building safety commitments and proposed legislative measures also with an importance and obvious relevance to the habitability aspect of adequate housing. I don't have time, Dirprwy Lywydd, to go through all of those. We know that elements that go towards securing adequate homes are interrelated, and it's important to understand the potential risks and impacts of any policy changes for one factor in the context of another. We also recognise the need to reflect on the current age and quality of some of the existing housing stock in Wales, and the need to understand potential limitations and resource requirements, as I've set out.

In the private rented sector, in particular, two thirds of properties are EPC D or below. The decision by the UK Government last month to scrap the requirement for energy improvements is very disappointing, and will hamper progress to both improve the living conditions for tenants and reduce energy bills to help tenants with the cost-of-living crisis.

The biggest aspect of all for adequate housing for low-income households is, of course, affordability. As I set out in my evidence to the committee, one of the most important levers in this area, which sits with the UK Government, is the local housing allowance. Despite repeated calls from myself and others right across the UK, including English councils, the UK Government continues to freeze local housing rates to the thirtieth percentile of rents that were available in 2020. This is despite the ONS data showing that across Wales rents have increased by 6.5 per cent over the last 12 months. So, I want to take this opportunity, once more, to urge the UK Government to take urgent action to uplift LHA to reflect the actual costs of renting property today.

So, Dirprwy Lywydd, to draw my remarks to a close, the Green Paper call for evidence and the subsequent White Paper next year will help explore and provide a stronger evidence base for what further measures may be needed. We're already developing the strong foundations and building blocks that will provide the path of securing factors of adequate housing, and the journey is well under way. The timely work of the Local Government and Housing Committee in examining the right for adequate housing is very welcome, and I want to finish by thanking them once more for their work. Diolch. 

I call on the Chair of the committee, John Griffiths, to reply to the debate.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. May I begin by thanking all those who took part in this debate today for their interest and commitment to this extremely important area of strategy, policy and delivery, and thank Sam Rowlands for his work on the committee, and agree with Sam that this is indeed a major challenge of our age, and welcome Sam's recognition as well that these are problems that go far beyond Wales, across the UK, and indeed much further afield? Obviously, we always look to other parts of the UK and beyond to learn lessons and learn from experience, and, indeed, share our experience. I think it's important that we see everything in the wider context.

Can I also agree with Sam in terms of the definition, that. when we're looking at how we define a right to adequate housing, we need to deal with some of the starkest aspects of what is lacking at the moment? Rough-sleeping and homelessness are very obvious manifestations of the issues and the problems that we face. We really do need to concentrate on the most vulnerable and deliver for them as part of taking forward a right to adequate housing and moving to that objective and that end.

I also agree with Sam in terms of deliverability. I think we're all acutely conscious of that in general, that what really counts for people, of course, is delivering for them in practical ways on the ground. It will take time, and I think that's very much recognised by the organisations that have taken forward the Bill campaign and the idea of having a right to adequate housing and incorporating it into domestic law. They know that it will take time, and they're willing to work with Welsh Government and others on that basis. But of course, although it will take time, we want to see a real sense of urgency in dealing with these issues, and rough-sleeping and homelessness is right at the forefront in terms of that need for urgency.

And what Mabon so powerfully set out for us in terms of Polly and his experience in coming across Polly at his home here in Cardiff is, unfortunately, as we know, not an isolated problem, but, again, as the Minister said, so many people sleeping rough in Wales have these multiple needs, have very difficult backgrounds in terms of their upbringing and their lives, and it will take an multi-agency response. But that has to be woven around accommodation, doesn't it—as Mabon said, having a roof over their heads that allows then for that service delivery that gives them some sort of a base, some sort of stability, some sort of comfort. We all know how important that is to us and our families, because we benefit from having that roof over our heads, and I think many of us do think about people who are not in that position and think about them regularly, and then relate that to Welsh Government policy and action that's needed. So, it's really important to have those powerful examples, as Mabon brought here to us today, to concentrate our minds on the importance of these issues and the stark realities that far too many people in Wales face on a day-by-day basis.

Vikki Howells, Dirprwy Lywydd, I think was entirely right, in terms of the wider context that I mentioned earlier, to bring to our attention some of the initiatives around the world, including that of Jimmy Carter and his wife, and how that can relate to what we do here in Wales, because, in amongst the major initiatives to increase supply, there are lots of aspects that can play a part in that, not on the scale of some of the bigger developments, but, nonetheless, they're very important, and we want a variety of housebuilding. The formulaic approach that we see from the major housebuilders is not what meets the needs of communities here in Wales. We need a lot more variety, a lot more imagination and innovation, and it's good to have examples of that. And again, Vikki recognised the major challenge of the 20,000 social homes for rent in this Senedd term and how we might meet that challenge. And yes, bringing empty properties back into use, again is a significant part of the overall effort, although obviously we've got a much bigger challenge, but, nonetheless, that has a part to play and we should take the steps to bring those empty properties back into use. And in my experience, that's something that is keenly felt in communities. They can see the terrible waste that an empty property involves, when it could be brought into purposeful use for our families and our population here in Wales.

Vikki’s right in terms of futureproofing and our ageing population and disability, and I think that is a significant part of our report. We have to have—as Care and Repair Cymru brought to our attention—we do have to have that accessibility at the heart of what goes forward.

Janet Finch-Saunders had a different take, I think, to her colleague Sam Rowlands in terms of some of these challenges, but what I would mention and highlight from what Janet mentioned was that golden-thread approach, because it's a major aspect of the campaign and the 'back the Bill' campaign just to see how important a right to adequate housing is right across the piece; how important it is for health and care, how important it is for education, how important it is for the economy—you can trace that golden thread right across the responsibilities of Welsh Government Ministers and their departments, and it has to be seen in that cross-cutting way, and, if we realise that cross-cutting importance, it will, I think, give great strength to the urgency that we need to see.

Dirprwy Lywydd, may I conclude by thanking the Minister for her engagement in this agenda, for the way that she is working with stakeholders, by setting up the stakeholder group and her commitment to look at the composition of that stakeholder group? We've made points in terms of disability, for example, in terms of who needs to have their voice heard at that table, and I'm pleased that the Minister is going to look at that stakeholder group on an ongoing basis in terms of the voices that we need to have included.

And it's good to hear the Minister, as ever, setting out her recognition of the importance of the agenda, her commitment to providing the resource that's necessary. We do understand what the Minister has been saying about the steps that are necessary to get us into a position where we can deliver on that right to adequate housing and deliver on that legal right for individuals to take matters to courts or tribunals. We understand that there is a long way to go, but what we want to see—obviously the committee, and I think everybody here—is that real sense of urgency, and that starts off, in many ways, with rough-sleeping and homelessness, and ending those scourges that damage our society and individuals like Polly so much, and then building and going on from there. Diolch yn fawr. 

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

Item 6 is the debate on the Climate Change, Environment and Infrastructure Committee report, 'Natural Resources Wales—Annual Scrutiny 2022-23'. I call on the Chair of the committee to move the motion. Llyr Gruffydd. 

Thank you very much, Dirprwy Lywydd. This is the second committee report on Natural Resources Wales during this Senedd term, of course, and we will continue, as you would expect, I'm sure, to publish an annual report in this way and then hold a debate on it to allow Members to raise any issues with the Minister in the Siambr.

I want to start this debate, if I may, Dirprwy Lywydd, where I ended the corresponding debate 12 months ago, because at the end of my speech then, I said—I don't quote myself very often in the Siambr, but I will on this particular occasion: 'a year from now', I said last year,

'I do hope that I’ll be telling you about a very different outlook for NRW. But I am concerned that, despite the positive noises that we continue to hear, NRW's bumpy journey will continue.'

So, what can I tell Members about progress over this last year? Was I needlessly pessimistic a year ago? Perhaps what I'll do is go through the key points of our report and share our conclusions.

Now, the first part of our report focuses on the governance arrangements. And during the last year, of course, NRW and the Welsh Government completed a baseline review to map NRW’s duties and statutory functions against its funding. The review has resulted in several service level agreements between the Welsh Government and Natural Resources Wales, and these service level agreements will then underpin NRW's annual business plan and budget processes as a result. And they cover policy areas, of course, such as flood risk management and water quality, to name but two.

Now, the Minister will know that we have expressed concerns repeatedly over recent years about the capacity of NRW to deliver on its ever-growing list of duties and functions. As a committee, therefore, we welcomed the development of the service level agreements, and I would like to commend the Minister for driving this issue forward. We are, of course, conscious at the same time that these agreements should be live documents and subject to regular monitoring and review to ensure that they continue to be fit for purpose. But we are pleased that NRW and the Welsh Government told us that this is exactly the intention.

On staffing, we were interested, of course, to hear that NRW faces challenges in recruiting and retaining specialist staff in certain areas. Now, in some cases, this is because pay is more attractive in the private sector, and that has impacted local authorities and other bodies too, not just NRW. In other cases, of course, there is a lack of potential candidates with the necessary skills. That's an issue. We therefore recommended that NRW should seek to strengthen its connections with academic institutions and industry partners, to develop targeted capacity-building and training initiatives to try to tackle this particular challenge. We were pleased that NRW responded positively to this, and I'm sure we'll be returning to this issue next year so that we can assess progress over the coming period.

The second part of our report focuses on NRW's budget. During our scrutiny of the draft budget, it became apparent to us that there would be a funding gap of over £18 million for NRW. In response to our questions, the Minister confirmed that she would be looking to address this and mainstream it within budget allocations in the future. Of course, we will consider NRW's funding as part of the committee's budget scrutiny process in the coming months.

Cost recovery has been an increasing focus, hasn't it? This is understandable, given the broader pressures on budgets. An NRW review showed that under-recovery of charges was resulting in an annual shortfall of £3 million in the delivery of permitting activities. We agree, of course, that this must be addressed. However, this has not been without controversy. Members, I'm sure, will recall that there were some concerns expressed last year from farming unions about proposals for a steep increase in charges. Naturally, we raised these concerns with Natural Resources Wales.

We were concerned that a significant rise in costs at a time of economic uncertainty should be avoided if possible. NRW reassured us that cost increases would not be as sharp in future. Nevertheless, we recommended as a committee that there should be full consideration given to the cost impact on individual applicants before a decision was made. You will see in NRW's response an assurance that the Minister was fully informed of these implications before taking the decision.

The final part of our report focuses on NRW’s priorities for 2023. First, on pollution arising from agriculture, we recognise that NRW faces a considerable workload in enforcing agricultural pollution regulations. It should be noted that the Welsh Government has provided additional funding for this purpose. We suggested that NRW should keep under review the adequacy of staffing levels and resources in the light, of course, of developing experience.

As a committee, we continue to be concerned about the impact of unpermitted sewer discharges on water quality and public health. We encouraged NRW to work closely with water companies to improve infrastructure and reduce the frequency and impact of sewer overflows. I was pleased to see a reference to the better river quality taskforce in the Minister's response, and I would be grateful for an update from her on the taskforce's progress.

We were also pleased to hear about NRW's commitment to achieving the 30x30 biodiversity target and other global biodiversity goals. Now, this is a key area for the committee, and it was reassuring to hear that NRW is working with the Welsh Government to develop the necessary legislation, as well as a comprehensive framework of nature recovery targets. I would be grateful if the Minister could provide us with an update on the progress of developing the biodiversity targets in her response to the debate.

I hope, therefore, that I have covered the main themes of our report in the time available to me. So, where does this leave us now, one year on from our last debate? Well, the service level agreements are certainly a significant step forward. It is early days, and they must be subject to monitoring and review to ensure that we get them right, but as I said earlier, I think it's important to give credit to the Minister here. The Minister has also been constructive around the funding gap and resolute too, if I may say so, on the importance of cost recovery. And although that can be very challenging in some circumstances, I think in principle that is something that we can support her on.

Finally, on its priorities, we certainly should not underestimate the work that NRW must do. We are facing a dual threat, namely a climate and nature emergency, and NRW is going to be on the front line in that regard. Dirprwy Lywydd, there are several positive things that have happened this year to put NRW in a slightly stronger position, on more of an even keel, but now, of course, it must get on with the job, and given the scale of the climate emergency, and the scale of the nature emergency, I don't doubt that that presents its toughest challenge yet. Thank you.

The 'Natural Resources Wales—Annual Scrutiny 2022-23' report is very important, and it has also highlighted for us the key areas where we believe that NRW is lacking. The work of NRW is vitally important, and in our fight against climate change, we are hoping that they will lead the way in our response.

Many believe that Natural Resources Wales is simply too big—its portfolio is huge—and whether it is working appropriately and effectively or not due to the resource implications, many questions are asked. We've called in the past for a national flooding authority. We're in the midst of a climate crisis, so simply acting on the recommendations of this report to help combat the issues this brings about, such as flooding, is not enough. Flooding is Natural Resources Wales's biggest weakness, and we thought that by creating a separate body, resourced efficiently, maybe we could be more effective and faster acting in terms of flooding.

The Welsh Countryside Charity have raised concerns in their recent letter to you, Minister, that the developments of national significance planning process is not fit for purpose. Natural Resources Wales have admitted themselves that they do not have adequate resources to carry out their duties towards DNS applications in a timely manner. So, this system needs to be reviewed to ensure that the application process is upheld and carried out correctly.

Whilst not all of the recommendations and their answers highlighted specific issues, for example, I was glad to hear that NRW's corporate framework is being reviewed, and that outcomes are being reassessed because of the poor responses.

Recommendation 10 highlights that an expedited development and testing criteria for our inland bathing waters is needed, but it's needed with a clear timeline. This has been provided by other water companies across the UK, so why not here? There are concerns about NRW lacking in monitoring and evaluation processes for its service level agreements. Why is this? Many of the recommendations are basic requirements that should already be NRW priorities, but they should be this Welsh Government's priorities too.

Recommendation 4: collaborating to develop targeted capacity-building and training initiatives. The Welsh Government simply producing a report discussing the future skills needed across Wales is not enough. We need tangible actions on these reports.

Recommendation 14 highlights a need for updates and progress on the action plan for biodiversity conservation, yet the Welsh Government response is that this is not solely NRW's responsibility. It should still be a priority.

We are in the midst of a climate crisis, and biodiversity should be protected and conserved for generations to come. The response to recommendation 7, stating the need for a summary report on the main challenges in achieving good status for all water bodies by 2027, and the plans to overcome them, is lacking. To simply redirect to the river basin management plans is not enough; it is not thorough, and it does not address the issue at hand.

When it comes to issues such as recommendation 3, that the Welsh Government response is poor, whilst input from all stakeholders is required, it is important that you acknowledge that NRW should be leading the way on these issues and setting the groundwork to reform them, not simply waiting for input from other stakeholders.

Natural Resources Wales, in its current form, is struggling; it's overwhelmed, and it is a huge portfolio. Minister, every year, we make the same calls: the recommendations in these reports are very similar, year, after year, after year. Your response to the recommendations are often the very same, year, after year, after year. If we're going to see improved performance from NRW, I'm afraid it has to come from the top; it has to be leadership. Diolch.

I'm going to begin with a point of agreement and a point of disagreement with Janet. We're fellow members of the committee. One is that there is, as we all say with that rhetoric, a climate crisis; there's also a biodiversity crisis as well. I agree with that entirely. So, in all of our actions, in all of our decisions as individual Members and what we do in the Senedd, we have to act in accordance with that. Where I disagree with her slightly—and she'll understand this from the evidence that we took—is that we've had long concerns as a committee, I've had concerns ever since I arrived here as a Senedd Member, about whether NRW, with the massive responsibilities it has, has sufficient capacity to actually deal with all of those. What I would say is that in the evidence that I heard—and it is reflected in this report—some of the work that's been done with the baseline analysis and so on is starting to actually get to grips with that now and be very realistic, and I think that's a fair reflection of the evidence that we heard. But I'll turn to some of that in detail.

The first thing I want to say is that we talk about NRW like some blancmange entity. All the people I know who work in NRW are passionate about this. They genuinely want to make this work, and what they want to do is be freed in order to do the jobs that many of them are expert within their fields in doing, and that's long been my experience. And I think it is fairly reflected in the report that the Minister and the Welsh Government are trying now, particularly with the baseline review and the setting of expectations for NRW, to be quite real about what it can achieve and what should be expected of it. It was interesting, under paragraph 10 in the report—. It's a short report we have, but I'd recommend it thoroughly to anybody, to get under the skin of NRW now. Clare Pillman said to us—and we thank her for coming in front of us and giving evidence and being very frank—when we asked about the level of services NRW can provide:

'"If you want to do this, this is how much it's going to cost, and this is what you will get for that. And if you want to do a bit more, this is what it would look like. If you want to do the bare minimum, this is what it would look like." So I think'—

in response to the baseline analysis and the work that's been going on over the last year, 18 months and more—

'we have a really good granular understanding of our budget and resources and effort now.'

We can't expect NRW to solve all the problems of the world, but if you look at what it is doing, it is immense. It's not just the biodiversity and the flooding and coastal erosion and the water quality and everything else, and leaving the EU and how we respond to that, et cetera, et cetera; it's everything else we expect them to do.

During last year's committee session, we noted that the budget had reduced year on year, and in so doing, the Welsh Government had piled more and more responsibilities onto it. So, I do commend the Minister, actually, in saying, 'Well, we need to have a proper review of what we're asking it to do' and look at where things like charges apply as well. And we've touched on that in the report, the idea that we should actually have more cost recovery across a range of areas as well, not as a way of taxing those or penalising those who can afford to do it, but as a real reflection, quite frankly, of the costs that are now being incurred to the taxpayer as well as to NRW.

Let me just pick up a couple of things, Dirprwy Lywydd. The baseline review, as I say, I think has been welcome, and the development of service level agreements between NRW and the Welsh Government. This does give us a way forward, I think, to plan the way ahead there. We were worried about the funding gap that had been identified as part of that review, but we are pleased that the Minister has confirmed to us in writing that, actually, that funding gap will be filled one way or another. I do wonder, Dirprwy Lywydd, though—. Of course, during the summer, one of the things that hadn't factored into this report is the current financial situation facing the Welsh Government. We understand it's a real-terms impact, because of rising costs and so on, of around £900 million plus, and I just wonder if she can touch on that, whether that may need—. Every Government Minister, we're being told, is looking across their portfolios to see how that's going to impact. Well, NRW is the big player here within this sphere.

Let me just touch very briefly as well on something I know the Minister constantly gets from many people, including myself, and it's how we actually deliver really good water quality, as we've left the EU, as we're looking forward to future governance arrangements, et cetera. But there is a lot of good stuff going on: the work that's being done on phosphates; the work that's being done on combined sewage discharges; the work that I'd say that is now starting to look like being overdue on tackling diffuse agricultural pollution—all of those are important. But I think what we're looking for, in the resourcing of NRW, is actually, then, to see the outcomes of that work resulting in better water quality, and that's the big challenge we have here. But they aren't the villain in this piece—they're part of the actual solution to doing it. 

So, Dirprwy Lywydd, my time has run out. I strongly recommend for anybody who's an arch-critic of NRW: read the report and see the challenges they have and some of the ways forward. For those who believe that NRW is the body that can help us forward in resolving some of these major existential issues, then read it as well, because I think there is progress being made, but we've got to monitor it carefully now to see it's delivered on. 

I thank the committee, the clerking team and the committee Chair for their work on this report. NRW plays an exceptionally important role for our environment, as we've heard, and in helping us all to tackle the challenges of climate change and the nature emergency. And the responsibilities placed on NRW are at the heart of our efforts for future generations. This is so very important, but we must recognise, as the report does, the challenges that NRW itself faces. Our natural environment is under huge pressure as a result of climate change and loss of biodiversity. The demands on NRW are increasing, and we must ensure that they have adequate funding to respond to those challenges. 

We've heard already extensively how NRW's budget and capacity face limitations that simply cannot be ignored. These shortcomings can have severe consequences ranging from delayed responses that come about sometimes because of this lack of funding, to environmental emergencies, to insufficient efforts in conservation and habitat restoration. We have to understand that NRW is under-resourced, and when that happens, our environment suffers. Habitat degradation, increased pollution and decline in biodiversity have become more pronounced. These are not just environmental issues. They have long-term economic and social repercussions too.

But it's not all bleak, Dirprwy Lywydd. We recognise the commitment of the Welsh Government to NRW. We appreciate the support it has provided thus far. It is our hope that this commitment remains unwavering and continues to evolve. And yes, we recognise the undeniable commitment of NRW staff, who care so much about what they do. Huw was talking about the passion that those NRW staff that we all know feel. NRW is filled with dedicated, enthusiastic people and they are, I fear, being expected to do the impossible sometimes because of these troubles with their resourcing. We need to ask ourselves how the Welsh Government will continue to support NRW in the face of these resource challenges—well, not just ask ourselves but ask the Welsh Government: what initiatives or commitments have been made? What's the plan for the future? All these questions that are set out in such detail in our report.  

The collaboration between NRW and the Government is, after all, crucial for achieving our shared environmental goals. To build on that capacity, to allocate resources effectively, we suggest several measures in our report about how that can be achieved: to secure additional funding, to optimise the use of existing resources. We ask about the plans that are in place to invest in technology, training, partnerships to enhance NRW's effectiveness. So, I think that there is cross-party recognition of the vitally important work that NRW face. I would just close, Dirprwy Lywydd, by again reiterating the point that Huw had made, because it must be sometimes disheartening for NRW staff, because the headlines will so frequently be focusing on shortcomings—that because of the situation they are in, there's an inevitability, and that should focus on why we need to change that situation. This cannot ever be construed, and should not ever be construed, as in any way a criticism of those dedicated, passionate staff who want in their working lives to help make our environment better, make our society better, not just for us but for generations to come. 

So many thanks to them. 

Thank you so much to them for all the fantastic work that they do. 

Thank you to the committee for this report. 

I also want to thank those NRW staff who work so hard. In fact, I knocked on the door of one staff member in Llanwrtyd Wells and she did talk about the sense of feeling the weight that we demand of the staff of NRW on her shoulders, and that it felt like there was an atmosphere of real negativity towards all of the efforts that they'd been doing. They are at the vanguard of cutting-edge technology, new and innovative ideas, and it is our responsibility to support them in that, which is really what I wanted to focus on, if I may, just in my brief contribution here.

I do welcome the news that NRW has completed its baseline review and continues to work with the Welsh Government on developing detailed service agreements. I was pleased earlier to see the corporate plan, and I do remember the Minister saying that she had felt it was a very good read. I think I recall her saying she was reading it very late in bed one night, and felt it was as good as a really good book, I remember her saying. I’m not sure I’d go that far, but certainly that plan to 2030, 'Nature and People Thriving Together', I feel is really easy to read, and easy to access, and really, I suppose, to me—a complete amateur—makes real sense. It really talks about the commitment to pollution reduction, particularly focusing on improving mid Wales’s rivers, ecology and projects like the upper Wye restoration. Obviously, living on the River Wye as I do, it has always been a live concern for me that it remains the second-most polluted river in Wales, and it's often one that is raised, I know, not just with me, but I know many people here in this Siambr.

But it is about the concern around the personnel and capacity issues that were raised in this report that I just really wanted to spend a couple of minutes on. There are repeated difficulties that NRW have faced with recruiting specialist staff, which continue to have knock-on effects on their efforts to redesign their network and their monitoring. In response to the committee’s recommendation to collaborate on building capacity, NRW’s response focused on existing apprenticeships and internships, which is encouraging. I wonder if the Minister might be able to give a little bit more detail on the Welsh Government’s response to that, because if we don’t have the skilled people who feel supported to properly monitor and manage our natural resources, we can’t safeguard our environment.

I wonder if there are some ideas there about NRW accelerating the development of its talent management framework, and perhaps forming fresh partnerships with academic institutions, for example, to create new, tailored training programmes. I did actually look at their website just before I started this, and I think they have around 12 vacancies at the moment at all levels, and they’re paying relatively good salaries, to be honest. But they are really quite skilled roles, and it’s how do you get those roles and those people into Wales, particularly into the region I represent, Mid and West Wales. So, it really is important that we try and think of innovative ideas to try and get those people in to help us to really look after our environment, and to encourage those that are already working in NRW, and to make sure that we build a resilient workforce that’s able to take it forward. Because we know that—just staying with water quality—that may suffer as we continue to have deficits in terms of our staffing.

So, I just really wonder if I could hear, finally, from the Minister how the Welsh Government plans to work with NRW to recruit those specialist staff, and to enable the inspection programmes and robust water quality monitoring that we’ve heard is so important within the committee’s report. Diolch yn fawr iawn, Dirprwy Lywydd. 

I would like to thank the Climate Change, Environment and Infrastructure Committee and their clerking team for an extremely insightful report. Firstly, I want to also pay my thanks to NRW staff who work tirelessly under extremely challenging conditions. 

In planning the future of NRW in a post-pandemic world, the report notes that the NRW renewal programme is looking at transforming the way that the organisation runs, and that's a good thing. Alongside noble aims such as decarbonisation, staff well-being and increasing resilience, the programme also aims to look at financial savings. The committee report raises concerns that illustrate that financial saving work is coming at a detrimental cost to the undertaking of NRW's statutory duties. One such duty that has affected my constituency directly is NRW's national strategy for flood and coastal erosion. Due to be published in the autumn of last year, the report faced significant delays due to workforce pressures, and will now be published, we hope, this autumn. These workforce pressures are a recurring theme today, as well as throughout the report, with NRW explicitly stating that 'the problem is twofold'. As we've heard, skilled staff being lost to the private sector, where they can get more money, and also recruitment is being damaged by significant deficits in candidates with necessary skills for jobs—and skills is a theme, I think. The committee's report highlights the severity of the skills shortage in Wales, and the seismic effects that it is having on everyday lives and our communities. By way of example, in my constituency, Skenfrith has fallen victim to the financial savings and recruitment issues highlighted in the report. In April 2022 a public meeting was held considering a defence solution for the extreme flooding experienced by those living in Skenfrith, and in July 2022 there was confirmed funding to develop the case, but the public were forewarned that there may be difficulty in recruiting people, and that has a potential for delay. And in almost prophetic fashion, the project was left staffless due to inadequate recruitment, and the project stayed still until February of this year, 10 months after the initial public meeting and seven months after the financial go-ahead. And this gave the people of Skenfrith a very small light at the end of a very long tunnel. A team had been put together, and NRW were ready to bring about this lifeline change to the local community. Then, just a month later, this light was very quickly put out when our local MP David Davies enquired about an update on the project, and he was informed that NRW was facing financial pressure and had to prioritise projects that were likely to cause greater risk to people and property. The bleak picture summed up very clearly by NRW, and I quote, was there was not enough 'money or staff resource' to deliver 'everything we had planned'. Dirprwy Lywydd, it's clear, then, that the case of Skenfrith illustrates perfectly issues raised in this report. Clearly, NRW are lacking the skilled staff to carry out projects, demonstrating that there is a long-term skills deficit in Wales that requires addressing urgently.

Increasing resource to NRW is important, and it will go a way in helping to bridge concerns, however money alone will not solve a long-term, expansive staffing crisis, and this is something that requires an inter-ministerial approach. In light of this, I would like to conclude by stating that the Government must take seriously—and I'm sure it does—this report, to ensure that NRW is able to carry out its duties that it is legislated to do, so that residents across Wales are not left in limbo, such as the constituents in Skenfrith. Thank you.

[Inaudible.]—NRW's staff. The Minister won't be surprised that I'm going to focus here on water quality, and it is uppermost in most people's minds. There are very many aspects to that. One is enforcement and one is education with stakeholders—and, by the way, we are all stakeholders—and the need to promote sustainability. There have been additional funds by the Welsh Government to help with some of those things, and yet we know that raw sewage is being released by water companies, and we have seen the targets to reduce those being smashed, quite frankly. I live in Pembrokeshire and the levels of raw sewage that have been pumped into the seas around Pembrokeshire this year have been on a different level to that that I can ever remember. Surfers Against Sewage have put out very, very many reports into this.

The problem is that there is a potential here to impact negatively on health, but also the local economy. So, we know that you have set up a taskforce into better river quality, and I welcome that, but anything that's discharged into the river will eventually find its way into the sea in any case. But I look forward to seeing that report on the better river quality taskforce, to see what the outcome and suggestions are. I welcome the moratorium on poultry outlets, because, clearly, those things don't help at all with pollution.

But we can see the current change in weather patterns. I think it is predicted to be 20-plus degrees at the weekend. That will inevitably be followed by very heavy rainfall. That is something that we all know. So, the drainage and waste water management plans are key here, because the pattern has changed. What used to be something that would happen once every 100 years is not the case anymore. So, there are proposals for natural solutions, and the slowdown in surface water flows—. All of those things are welcomed, and I know that NRW are working with their partners. It will be partnerships that produce this, and I know, Minister, you recognise that in your answers in the report.

But I think, for me, there is another element to this. If we know that we have an antiquated system—and we do know and we recognise it—and we can't do something about that in the immediate future, I think that there is a greater emphasis needed in preventing that water from entering in the first place. I welcome all the legislation that you have brought forward with SuDS and other solutions. Are those solutions going far enough and fast enough? I think that is the question that we all have to ask. There has been an awful lot of talk here today about the expertise that's needed, which isn't necessarily available to NRW. How is the Minister working to find that expertise in other areas, so that it isn't only NRW who are going to produce those results? So, how all of those bodies work together—. I'm sure that the better river quality taskforce and others will have some recommendations on those.

I call on the Minister for Climate Change, Julie James.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I would very much like to thank the committee for preparing its second comprehensive report on NRW, published on 19 May, and for giving me this opportunity to respond. But before I provide my response to the committee’s report, I'd like to take the opportunity to pay my own tribute to the staff at Natural Resources Wales for their efforts to protect and enhance our environment and natural resources, and also for the crucial role they play as a category 1 responder, dealing with incidents and protecting the public and the environment.

I know Janet tried to correct it afterwards by going 'hear, hear', but the relentlessly negative tone that she struck really does not help to recruit staff—[Interruption.]—or retain them. And I really—[Interruption.]

I would like to hear the Minister's response to the debate, please.

There's a difference between scrutiny and challenge and relentless negativity. The staff at NRW work very hard indeed, in all weather and all hours. They work all through the night, they work all the time. If you saw the incident response reports that we get on a daily basis, you would have a great deal more respect for the crucial role that they play. The staff are—as many people have said, Huw in particular, but others have said—absolutely passionate about their purpose, and the individual efforts of each and every member of staff are very much welcomed and to be highly commended.

I also want to welcome the way that NRW is working with a range of partners across Wales. A new collaborative approach, drawing on strengths across sectors and between organisations and with communities is the right way, and the only way, we can successfully address the climate and nature emergencies. NRW is an absolutely key part of that team Wales approach, and I am very confident that they will continue to be so.

I very much welcome the committee’s scrutiny. Given the critical role that NRW plays as the Welsh Government’s principal adviser on issues concerning Wales’s natural resources, it’s imperative that the organisation and its leadership team are held to account on the exercise of their functions. The committee’s report made 14 recommendations, all of which have been accepted or accepted in principle. Where they are accepted in principle, it's because we are already doing what the committee recommends in a slightly different way. But, you know, they are very much welcomed.

The recommendations task NRW to work collaboratively with the Welsh Government and to share with the committee information and progress updates on the work. And I understand that NRW have fully engaged with the committee's request and have provided all the relevant information and updates, including, where necessary, meeting with clerks to provide additional clarity on such areas of their work. So, I'm very grateful indeed that they've done that, and to the committee and the clerking team for their work too. I was also pleased to see the committee's acknowledgement and commendations towards NRW's work, in particular their approach and commitment to integrating their work and activities with the programme for government and our overarching well-being objectives.

Jane Dodds mentioned the corporate plan. Maybe you have better reading material than me, Jane, but I actually really did honestly enjoy reading the corporate plan, partly because it isn't the same old, same old, despite Janet's characterisation of it. It's actually a very different approach and it shows a real combined effort of the leadership team there to put that different approach in place and to work in collaboration with partners right across Wales, including the Welsh Government. The corporate plan does have a plan, which, Dirprwy Lywydd, I won't have time to go into, for succession planning and recruitment, and they are very aware of all of the issues that Jane and Joyce and others raised about recruitment. I'm certainly working closely with them, and I won't have time today to go into it, but I'm more than happy to update the committee as time allows.

I also wrote to the committee to provide an update on the funding arrangements. I was pleased to inform the committee that I'd agreed to provide NRW with the £18.2 million of funding to draw down in 2023-24 and I made it very clear to the committee my intention to baseline that additional £18.2 million to NRW's allocation subject to the current process. We are in an incredibly challenging budget position, but I still intend to baseline the £18.2 million. There are still tough decisions needed, even with the baselining of that, and these will be made in consultation with NRW to ensure they continue to receive appropriate funding to allow them to meet their statutory duties. We'll continue to work with NRW to ensure that they receive appropriate funding to support the delivery of the work that we, after all, ask them to deliver, and the service level agreement approach and the baseline review have absolutely helped us to do that. And—I can't remember who contributed. Huw, I think—it absolutely does allow us to say, 'Well, if we give you this much money, what do we get for it?' It's given us a real opportunity to properly understand the effect of funding decisions on the ability of NRW to deliver, and, frankly, for us to understand that, 'If we want this, we may have to row back on something else', because, obviously, the resource is finite. So, that's a very important part of it. This year, for example, NRW have been very hit by the drop in forestry income, and so we've got to calibrate accordingly. I'd very much like to get to a point where NRW are funded without the vagaries of the market force of that, but we're not there yet. I really do hope that, by the end of this Senedd term, we will get to that point. We've already regularised the windfarm income, for example.

The Chair of the committee and others mentioned the regulatory charges and the delivery of the regulatory approach and outcomes, which are encapsulated there. I just want to set out that I fully support full cost recovery for regulatory charges, but, of course, we have to take into account the impact of sudden changes on the people being regulated and calibrate them accordingly. But where we aren't doing full cost recovery, what we've effectively got is a public subsidy for that, and I don't really see any real merit in that. So, I take the point about calibrating it and making it manageable, particularly for small businesses and small farm businesses in particular, but I make no excuse at all for having pushed NRW into looking very hard at full cost recovery, and we'll be doing the same in our infrastructure Bill work as well.

The committee are also aware of the work that NRW are doing with the water companies to manage, protect and improve the water environment in Wales. Dirprwy Lywydd, I would need an hour to go through all of the things we're doing on water quality, so I will go as fast as I can. We have the action plan to relieve pressures on special areas of conservation river catchments to support the delivery of affordable housing—all key partners are now signed up to that. It sets out clear actions, timescales and responsibilities on water quality and to address planning constraints. The committee is very aware of the work that Sir David Henshaw is doing with the better river quality taskforce to evaluate the current approach to the management and regulation of overflows in Wales. I'm very grateful to him for his personal commitment to that. The next overarching summit on water quality is in November and I will provide the committee and, indeed, the Senedd with an update after that. 

NRW continue to work on implementation and delivery of their agricultural pollution regulations and they're working closely with my officials and Lesley Griffiths's officials, providing regular updates on progress on building capacity and resources to support compliance and enforcement of the regulations. That's subject to a very specific service level agreement, of which I'm sure the committee is aware. 

I also wanted quickly to mention NRW's work on inland waters. They've been piloting new approaches with bathing waters throughout 2023, and I'm looking forward to seeing the outcomes of that, as we move forward towards designating inland waters. We're always keen to get people's views on what more we can do to encourage the use of inland waters and later this year we'll publish an inland water landowners survey. And I'd like to take this opportunity to thank the Deputy Minister, who's going to be taking that work forward for us. [Interruption.] Certainly. [Interruption.] I'm going to run out of time.

There's very interesting stuff about improving bathing water qualities in some areas in the rivers. But I just wonder: what's more important—that, or good ecological status of the rivers? It would be nice to have both, but they're not the same. 

No, but they complement one another. And so, one of the things we're very keen to do is to make sure that communities ask for designation so that we can do the work necessary to get the biodiversity piece put in as well—so, very complementary. I don't want anyone to think that, because we've designated it as a bathing water, that somehow takes away from the other work. It does not. And I hope, very soon, to announce an end-to-end catchment area approach that we'll be piloting as well. So, you'll see that we've got both of them together.

We've had the biodiversity deep-dive and developed a set of collective actions we can take immediately to support meaningful delivery of the convention on biological diversity 30x30 goal and these will inform our forthcoming Bill. And just on that, Jane, that's part of the way that we get other people outside of NRW to contribute their talent and actually to help grow the workforce. So, a large number of scientists from around the world have assisted us on that. They recognise the capabilities we have in Wales and reflect our and NRW's duties under the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 and the Environment (Wales) Act 2016, and, Deputy Llywydd, I've been delighted at the number of scientists prepared to come and help Wales with our plans, because they regard us as a very progressive nation. 

We'll continue to work with NRW to provide necessary support in relation to the committee's recommendations. I just want to end by thanking the committee for the report, and NRW staff for their ongoing work with Welsh Government, and in particular the leadership team at NRW, who, despite the comments from the benches opposite, have really worked extremely hard to turn around both NRW itself and its relationship with team Wales. So, diolch. 

I call on the committee Chair, Llyr Gruffydd, to reply to the debate. 

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Can I thank everybody for your contributions? I may not be able to touch on all comments, as you can imagine. A clear theme, obviously, is the size of NRW and the portfolio is quite huge, and that will naturally have implications in terms of resources. Now, we've heard calls for flooding, maybe, to be taken away from NRW. Well, that goes to the heart of the whole debate about setting up NRW in the first place and the economies of scale and bringing the predecessor bodies together.

But it isn't just responsibilities on flooding. You touched on the DNS situation and, you know, I've heard stories that companies have offered to pay for work to be done, but, of course, they haven't got the people in the building to do the work even if the money was there. So, there are multiple challenges, as we've heard in the course of this debate.

Water quality as well—Joyce and others touched on this. When you have a finite budget, there's only so much that you can do. And I think what we've grappled with in the past is how therefore can Government be clearer to NRW about what those priorities are, and what—let's be frank—they accept that maybe sometimes will have to come second. And that is exactly, hopefully, what the service level agreements achieve. So, moving in that direction is something to be welcomed. It's a pragmatic approach.

And you know, there may be negative vibes, but of course it all comes from a good place, doesn't it? Because we're all impatient in terms of getting to grips with the nature and climate emergency. We all want to do more, but we all have to remember that it is a finite resource. And that I think has to temper, maybe, our frustrations at times and accept that we can't do all that we want to do.

Now, Huw and others were right. NRW isn't just a corporate entity, it's people. It's people. And like us, they are passionate about the climate and nature emergencies, and they go over and above, more often than not, in terms of what they do, and resource capacity and lack of capacity means even more pressure on those who are there to do the work. So, I know we are mindful of that, and that's why the committee has always advocated for properly resourcing Natural Resources Wales. 

So, in conclusion, the Minister—. The fact that you galloped through a large number of areas of work that NRW are currently undertaking underlines, I think, the breadth of its responsibilities. Clearly, it's work in progress, as is our work as a committee. We will continue to scrutinise their work as things evolve. Joyce talked about prevention—prevention is better than cure and I think that goes to the heart of that cultural change, that societal realisation that we can't just do things as they always have been done. We talk about preventative investment, but there's a change in mindset that goes with that, and I think Natural Resources Wales is a big part of that as well. We're grateful that the Minister has plugged the funding gap that has been highlighted, and that £18 million will now be baselined. We don't hear that very often from any Governments these days, to be honest, given the challenging environment in terms of funding that they face.

Thank you to everyone for their contribution, but the biggest thanks go to NRW, because, whilst we're all on the front line when it comes to the fight against climate change and biodiversity loss, their role, of course, is a leading role in that context. Thank you.

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

Item 7 is next, the Plaid Cymru debate on bus services. I call on Delyth Jewell to move the motion.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. Securing a quality, adequate bus industry is crucial, not only for our planet but also for our people, our communities. Unfortunately, in so many parts of Wales, the public transport options available are poor, expensive and inadequate. This has left so many people reliant on the private car, whilst those who don't have that option have often been isolated.

The health of our bus service is not only a question of infrastructure, of fares and fleets, it's also a question of public health, of supporting community structures and preventing that isolation from taking grip. I'm sure many of us who represent, particularly, Valleys communities know from reading the complaints of our constituents that the frequency of evening bus services has been reduced greatly. We've seen cuts to, for example, the regular A470 corridor bus route linking Cardiff, Pontypridd and Merthyr Tydfil compared with pre-COVID timetables. It's services like that that have been cut in communities across Wales.

The Deputy Minister had written to me earlier this year explaining that a large bus operator had said that driver shortages and reduced passenger demand are what are leading to their inability to provide more services. I hope that during this debate we can talk about what—well, find out what the Government is doing and provide some suggestions as well about what the Government could do to address those two issues.

Plaid Cymru agrees with the Welsh Government's ambitious targets. They're laudable, including a target of 45 per cent of journeys to be made by either public transport, walking or cycling by 2040. But the big problem, of course, is delivery of those targets, because services are still on a cliff edge. Indeed, up to a quarter of bus services in Wales could be cut if operators fail to get further long-term Government funding, and an estimated almost 10 per cent of bus routes have been axed this summer because the Welsh Government's £150 million pandemic-era emergency funding has ended.

The crisis facing bus services is multifaceted. It has profound implications for social justice, economic outcomes and for the environment. We'll hear each of these being rehearsed, I'm sure, during this debate. With this in mind, I'd question whether—it would be useful to know whether the Government has reviewed the impact that the reduction in bus services would have on the Welsh Government's 10 well-being objectives and how addressing that could be mapped. Public transport should be a viable choice for many, but that has been in decline for decades whilst fares have risen above inflation. Between 2019 and 2020 alone, bus fares increased by 3.5 per cent. During that same period, Wales suffered a loss of 690 bus stops, which is about 3 per cent, making it even harder to catch a bus. Of course, we shouldn't ignore in any way the disastrous effect of policies going back decades from the Conservative Government in Westminster and how the service that we have of buses has never actually recovered from that.

Now, in the region I represent, many of the communities are—. I hate the term 'deprived'. They're referred to as socioeconomically deprived. What that term refers to or means is that the opportunities aren't there in the same way for those communities. People in our areas are often poorly served in terms of essential services, shops, health provision, job opportunities. There are fewer clubs, community centres that are still open and where people can socialise, they're often areas where car ownership is lowest, where residents are often older, less well, less mobile, and, yes, these are important communities, but, so often, they're the ones where the cuts are seen first—temporarily at first, and then permanently. The bus network has been letting its users down. The bus network has been letting its users down for far too long. This is made worse by the fact that 80 per cent of bus users don't own a car and are almost totally reliant on buses to get to work, to see friends and lead fulfilling lives, and not just that, but sometimes in order to socialise at all. The bottom line is that, for many people in Wales, living without a bus service means being marooned in their homes, unable to carry out even essential tasks.

Now the decline is nothing new, and, while the pandemic had a blatantly dramatic and detrimental effect on bus services, the Welsh Government will also, I'm sure, acknowledge that bus service availability has declined by a fifth in the decade running up to 2019. The Confederation of Passenger Transport estimate that around 10 per cent of bus services in Wales saw major revisions or changes in recent months, and I wonder what assessment the Government has made of the bus transition fund, and whether funding will be sufficient to sustain the current network until the end of the financial year. Many of our constituents, who are served by every party in this Chamber, depend on bus services, but they have faced cut after cut, disappointment after disappointment; they feel forgotten about, devalued, anxious and isolated. As a colleague of mine once said, 'This Government can change this. This Government should change this.' We need action, and now the Welsh Government must provide long-term funding to ensure the longevity of essential services.

I do recognise the very difficult situation that the Welsh Government is in with this, which is why I would welcome suggestions from across the Chamber on how this could be met, and key to all of this, of course, is the presence like a cloud over everything that we say, that cloud of the climate crisis, the disastrous decision of Mr Sunak to renege on key climate policies. Buses need to be part of our solution to that climate crisis. We need to find ways of encouraging bus operators to go electric. A possible way to address this challenge is for the public sector to buy vehicles and lease them to private sector companies, but that would require funding. Of course, for smaller bus companies that are working on tight margins, this will be all the more difficult. I wonder whether the Welsh Government would consider a bus decarbonisation scheme, similar to the one administered by Transport Scotland; it would be useful to hear the Minister's thoughts on that.

And Llywydd, it would be remiss of me not to mention the news that Prime Minister Sunak is scrapping the HS2 line between Manchester and Birmingham, and there have been promises of investment for the northern parts of this country, which would be welcome, but, as we've rehearsed already in the Chamber this afternoon, they're promises Mr Sunak potentially knows he wouldn't be in power in time to deliver on because of the length of time that would be, so there are still many questions about that, and Wales was already shut out of any money owing from the earlier parts of the HS2 project, because that was so cynically titled or considered 'England and Wales', and that money—our money—could have been used and could still be used to rejuvenate our bus network if the Treasury does the right thing, and to electrify, of course, all of Wales's rail network.

We need a commitment from all parties to commit to reclassify the HS2 scheme, particularly that earlier tranche of the HS2 scheme that's already under way. That is a way. It's a way of at least starting to put right the unjust way in which that sham of a project has been conducted. I would prefer to see these decisions being made in Wales.

But I look forward to hearing the views of others in this debate. I'm sure this will be a debate where people across Wales will have been in touch with us all to tell us about the impact that this has on people's daily lives. So, of course, politics is an integral part of this, but it's the lives of people that we need to improve. Thank you.

There's no denying that our bus network is in a dire state, with routes being cut and operators facing an extremely uncertain future. And the blame for this calamity can be laid firmly at the door of this Welsh Labour Government, and we've already heard—. Since the Welsh Government pulled the plug on vital funding, we've seen some 10 per cent of bus routes axed in Wales. [Interruption.] I wouldn't 'tut, tut' about it; it's a fact. I agree with Delyth Jewell and cannot stress enough how important buses are to the people of Wales, who use them to see friends, family, do their shopping and attend vital appointments. It's genuinely a lifeline for so many people from various communities across Wales, yet this Government has failed to protect, invest in and expand bus services. We were led to believe that the bus transition fund was going to save the day, yet the threat to bus services does indeed remain. It has been warned that, without the certainty of long-term investment beyond March 2024—

Would you give way on that point?

I'd like to be able to continue if that's okay. Thank you.

When the transition fund ends, between 15 and 25 per cent of all bus routes in Wales remain at the risk of cuts or major changes. One industry leader told me, and I quote: 

'The clock is ticking in terms of getting these decisions made. Indeed, we are all heading towards the same cliff edge that we were facing in July.'

I've stood in this Chamber on countless occasions and urged the Welsh Government to incentivise bus travel as other nations across the UK have done. It's a fact that no-one here can deny that, in England, more bus journeys—

Would you give way on that point?

—have been taken since a £2 cap on fares in England was introduced—[Interruption.]

The Member is not giving way and it is her decision. 

—something the Prime Minister announced today would be extended. And, in Scotland, they introduced free travel for under-22s in a bid to increase usage. What have we been doing here in Wales? In Wales, the post-COVID recovery of bus services remains the slowest in the UK and fares are, on average, 6.3 per cent higher. Things were made even worse for bus operators on 17 September, when the Welsh Labour Government brought out the 20 mph scheme. Another bus industry official has told me, and I'm going to quote them word for word,

'We have seen a significant reduction in punctuality since the implementation, and we are concerned about the longer term impact this will have on the viability of services due to the added operating costs and reduction in passengers as a consequence.'

It is another blow for the industry at a time when it needs all the support it can get to encourage people behind public transport. This comes despite the Deputy Minister playing down the impact his 20 mph scheme would have on buses. He said this move was unlikely to significantly affect buses. Well, I'd argue that the comments I've just shared with you all today, plus the admission from Arriva that 20 mph speed limits are making buses late and causing, and I quote, 'challenging operational conditions' begs to differ. Whilst it's too early to assess the full impact of this 20 mph policy, it's clear it's providing an additional layer of uncertainty for operators as they plan for future service provision.

I'd also just like to touch upon the Prime Minister's decision today to shelve part of HS2, a move that is going to bring benefits to Wales. As a result, some of the money saved is going to be pumped into electrifying the north Wales main line and consequential funding is on the way. Like I said earlier, it's imperative that the Welsh Government uses this funding to improve our transport network. The Deputy Minister and his colleagues might make all the right noises, telling us how much they value our bus network, but I'm afraid their actions certainly have not matched their rhetoric.

This Government is actively working to make travelling on near enough all modes of transport more difficult for people in Wales. Instead of pointing the finger at Westminster again and again, it's high time the Welsh Government actually took some responsibility and fixed the issues that it's responsible for. People need a fit-for-purpose bus network, but once again this Labour Government is letting them down and that's why we're supporting Plaid Cymru's motion this afternoon. It's imperative that protecting and expanding our bus services becomes a top priority for the Welsh Government. 

Well, one always wonders how you follow a transmission like that. And it tells you about the Conservatives, doesn't it? You read out your pre-prepared speech, and you don't allow a single intervention. You don't allow any accountability. [Interruption.] I will take an intervention. 

I don't want an intervention, I've had—[Inaudible.]

If you will, you will—

You can only make a point to the Member through an intervention. You can't make it from a sedentary position. If you want to make an intervention, Natasha Asghar, I'm sure Alun Davies will accept it. 

Members will know I'm always happy—

No? That's a 'no'. You can carry on, Alun Davies.

Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. Members will know I'm always happy to take interventions because I believe in the nature of debate. This is a debating chamber. It's not my Sunday school recitation—[Interruption.] Oh, here we go. I didn't even get to the end of the sentence.

Thank you, Alun. Would you agree with me that the bus service in your constituency has actually deteriorated over the years? Yes, or no?

Yes. Yes, it has deteriorated. It has deteriorated since the 1985 privatisation of buses, and that is exactly the point that I was going to make. What we heard this morning, and the chaos in Manchester through the week, tells you one thing about the current United Kingdom Government: it doesn't give a damn about this country, and it doesn't really give a damn about anywhere outside London. Everyone knows—and I tried to make this point earlier in the week—everybody knows that if HS2, if the Birmingham-Manchester link, was anywhere near London or the home counties, the money would have been found. And that's why London, of course, was excluded from the privatisation of the bus industry, because they knew, and they didn't really care, about the impact of privatisation outside of London. And what we've seen since privatisation has been the diminution of services, right through the last few decades. And we've seen the impact of the pandemic, and I pay tribute to the Deputy Minister and to this Government, who has put, I think, something like £200 million into the industry: £200 million to subsidise the services that my constituents require and rely upon; £200 million to sustain a service and an industry that's been broken by the tyranny of privatisation. You would have thought that somebody on the Conservative benches would be self-aware enough to understand the consequences of those actions and they—[Interruption.] I'm happy to take an intervention. [Interruption.] We need to be absolutely clear—[Interruption.] Every time I say that—.

You've asked us about half a dozen times, so I thought I may join in. It's six years since the UK Government you've once again castigated—of course, you do every time you stand up—and the Bus Services Act 2017 empowered the mayoral combined authorities to bring in franchising for their local bus services. Why have we had to wait so long for the Welsh Government to bring in franchising legislation for buses here?

I very much welcome the franchising of bus services and I welcomed the work that Andy Burnham has been doing in Manchester, and I think it demonstrates the need for public control of public services—something that you have an ideological issue with. I don't, because I believe in those people. I've just come back from Willowtown Primary School in Ebbw Vale, where I was at lunch time—a fantastic event in the school. Those people have a right to expect public services, publicly delivered, and publicly accountable, for them, for their parents, grandparents and children. And what you've done is to take those services away from them. And what this Government is seeking to do—.

And this is a question I have for the Deputy Minister, which I hope he'll address in his remarks answering this debate. How will the legislation that he will be introducing, I hope, in January, ensure that we do have access to services? Because this is where we need to be absolutely clear on what bus services are seeking to achieve. They bring people together. They bring our communities together. They link our communities with the services that those people require, and they link ourselves as a country. That's really important. And it's really important that people feel that they can depend on those services. It's important that those services are delivered with excellence, so that we have up-to-date vehicles that people can rely on, that people don't get left at bus stops in the rain because the bus has broken down, that people have access to Wi-Fi on the buses, that people know that that bus is going to turn up when it's supposed to, and that there are enough services to deliver the bus services that they require to access whatever they need to access.

We need it to be part of an integrated transport system, and the question I have for you, Minister, is this: what will the legislation you publish in January seek to achieve? How will that deliver the services that I've sought to describe in this contribution? How will, for example—? We are delivering on the rail improvements in the south Wales Valleys in a way that the UK Government would never ever do, and we know that, because the Ebbw valley railway is still not a devolved function, yet it is this Government spending money on improving those services. The Department for Transport in London doesn't care about the Ebbw valley railway. It doesn't know where it is. It doesn't care where it is. It's not prepared to put the money into it, because it's outside of London, it's not in a key constituency, and therefore you don't care about my constituents. I'm out of time, unfortunately. I've tested the Presiding Officer more than usual this afternoon. I'm happy to test her again—

No, it's no different to usual at all.

Mark Isherwood. Mark Isherwood, come on.

I didn't think there'd be time. Do you recognise that no Labour UK Government has ever electrified a single foot or inch of track in Wales, and that the UK Government since 2010 was the first Government to ever do so?

And it stopped at Cardiff, of course. It stopped at Cardiff, rather than Swansea. And let me tell you this: I don't seek to come here simply to defend UK Labour Governments either. That investment should have taken place in earlier years. I make no bones about that. The failure has been a pretty comprehensive failure, Mark. The difference between you and me is that I say it. You defend failure and I don't—I call it out.

What I want to do—. And I will conclude now, Presiding Officer, having tested your patience again. I will conclude with this. It is time, Deputy Minister, that we deliver services that connect up people with railheads, to ensure that people can reach doctors and shops, to ensure that we do so in a way that puts people first. And the work that the Welsh Government did with the Fflecsi service in Ebbw Vale is something that I'm very grateful to you for, and I think it's a demonstration of flexibility of thought and action, which is important in terms of delivering a service, and that is very, very important. But the fundamental question is: how will the legislation enable my constituents to use a comprehensive bus service that links them with their services, that links us with our communities, links our communities with other communities, and enables us to ensure that we make good on our vision for a future that has never been so different from the vision outlined—the grotesque nightmare outlined in Manchester earlier today?

I'm grateful for the opportunity to contribute to this debate today. I feel, week after week, that I find myself in this Siambr raising the issue of public transport in rural Wales in particular. I'm not yet convinced, and I haven't been convinced today, that the Welsh Government understands the extent of the problem in our rural communities, not to mention being convinced by their response to it.

As demonstrated by so much research, including by Sustrans, the Wales Centre for Public Policy and the Bevan Foundation, a lack of public transport contributes in a fundamental way to poverty in rural areas. It limits economic growth and it makes it far harder for people to access essential services. Time after time, a lack of public transport is the one issue that people raise in discussions with me across the region. And the sad thing is, where there is so much of a need for investment to expand public transport in rural areas, we now hear that there are more cuts on the way. As we've heard already today from me, the Fflecsi Bwcabus service, which has served communities in Carmarthenshire, Ceredigion and Pembrokeshire for almost 15 years, will be terminated by the end of the month.

Deputy Minister, this is testimony from one of Bwcabus's drivers—one of the key public services we have in rural west Wales—Mike Morgan, showing that Bwcabus is more than a bus service, as Alun Davies pointed out, and this is what he was alluding to: it's a social hub in its own right; it brings people together. And these are his words:

'To lose this, the people who travel on this bus, they're not just losing a service, they're losing friends as well. For many people who use the service, many who live on their own, it’s a way to get out and meet people and escape isolation.'

Now, mirroring previous announcements about the end of the bus emergency scheme, the BES funding, earlier this year, the announcement about the end of Bwcabus was made at dreadfully short notice, and was hugely disrespectful to the users and the providers. Indeed, it came as a shock to local authorities as well, following what they thought had been constructive discussions with Welsh Government about its future.

Now, in the 2021 'Llwybr Newydd' transport strategy, Welsh Government outlines as a core priority—and I want you to listen to this—

'A stable and coherent network of bus services that are fully integrated with other modes of public transport, that are reliable, affordable, flexible, easy to use, low-carbon and that encourage more people to use the bus rather than their cars.'

Now, I agree with that laudable ambition, but it's extremely difficult, if not impossible, to square this with the decision to discontinue the Fflecsi Bwcabus; it just doesn't make sense.

I know the Minister, based on an answer he gave me to a topical question last week, will say, 'Well, the lack of funding in light of the £1 billion shortfall represented by the transition from European structural funding to the so-called shared prosperity fund is an issue', and I share his frustration in that, at the Tories' broken promise that Brexit would not leave Wales one penny worse off. However, you have known that the rural development programme funding was coming to an end for some time, and the decision not to allocate alternative sources funding to the scheme is a political decision on the part of Welsh Government, for which you have to account. And I'm afraid to say it's a reactive and short-termist decision, one that demonstrates a lack of coherent vision or strategy for public transport in rural Wales.

Deputy Minister, I conclude with this: I urge you once again to reconsider this funding decision, and I ask you to work with those of us who represent rural areas to develop a strategy for integrated public transport as a matter of urgency. Otherwise, so many people, primarily older people and those with disabilities, will be stranded on the margins of our society and will be isolated from the world around them.

I'm pleased to be taking part in this debate today and to be speaking up on behalf of my constituents and those whose lives have been impacted by cuts to buses—constituents in places like my home village of Pen-y-fai. We have no active travel routes, and cuts to bus services have further isolated our community. So many people rely on buses, as they have no alternatives—no alternatives to get to school, to get to work or to attend vital healthcare appointments. Without buses, many people, particularly the elderly, are trapped in their homes.

We have already seen the disappearance of many bus routes, with many more on the way. Just at the start of the week, First Cymru informed us that they are axing many bus routes. They said: 'We were tasked by the south-west Wales region of local authorities, led by Swansea, to reduce our network to a level that is affordable given the available funding. Therefore, we have no alternative but to reduce some bus frequencies and hours of operations, and, in some cases, withdraw services.' That is just one bus operator; who knows what other companies will do in the coming weeks.

The decisions being made today will have a lasting impact on bus services. Once a route has ended, it is almost impossible to get it back. My neighbours and constituents can attest to that. The loss of bus services has forced people to use expensive taxis to get to doctor appointments. Not everyone has access to a car, so in many parts of Wales, buses are the only option. Now that option is being ripped away. The Welsh Government have been telling us for years to abandon the car and to use public transport, but they have failed to invest in the transport. We have the worst trains in the United Kingdom, and buses are becoming a non-existent sight in my community and many communities as well.

My constituents have been badly let down by Welsh Labour, propped up by Plaid Cymru, with both parties seeking to blame everyone else for their failures. But enough is enough. Stop making excuses and do something. Our communities, particularly the elderly and disabled, can't afford to wait for bus industry reform. By then, it will be too late. You can move fast when it suits you. We need solutions today. Diolch yn fawr.

Public transport has to be accessible and inclusive of everyone, and it should support people to participate fully in all aspects of their lives. That's what the first point of our motion emphasises, and I'm sure it's something that we can all support. But, for so many of my constituents, who live in Neath Port Talbot, the county of Swansea and Bridgend, buses are an essential service. They're as essential as education and health. For a number of them, there is no other option in terms of public transport. There are no trains, and a number of communities in these counties have car ownership rates below the national average. For those who cannot drive, people with disabilities, older people and young people, the cuts that have been announced to services over the past few months are having a detrimental impact on their quality of life and their life chances.

In Neath Port Talbot, as the bus emergency scheme comes to an end, South Wales Transport cut two services, and Neath Port Talbot Council had to fund shuttle buses to ensure that communities that aren’t on the main routes weren’t entirely isolated. A morning service was also cut, which meant that children from Rhos village can no longer travel by bus to Cwmtawe Community School. And on Monday this week, as we've already heard, First Cymru announced cuts to many services across the region, terminating one service between Neath and Pontardawe during the week, as well as a service between Swansea city centre and Tycoch on Saturdays. Many services will no longer run on Sundays, and 22 other services will run less often. Park-and-ride services, hospital services and services through communities like Pontarddulais, Townhill, Blaen-y-maes, Skewen, Cwmafan, Ystalyfera, Baglan, Bridgend, Maesteg and many others will face cuts, and this is just the beginning.

I've had so many messages from worried and angry constituents who've been affected by these cuts. I want to share some of them because I think it illustrates the reasons for the calls in our motion. One constituent said: 'I am writing to you regarding the X6 service from Ystradgynlais to Swansea. I depend on early buses to travel to work, and now I'm at risk of receiving disciplinary action as result of this because I have no other means of travel'. Another said: 'The 256 from Neath to Pontardawe is the only service which allows students to get to Cwmtawe school on time and home again. As so many parents work, we can't all give lifts en route to work. I work in Llanelli for the NHS—I have to leave for work at 7.45 a.m.' Another said: 'My job as a part-time children's support worker and part-time primary school teacher means I use early morning buses. I catch the 7 a.m. X6 bus in Cilmaengwyn to get to both my jobs around the Neath and Swansea areas. Without this service now at 7 a.m., I have to get a taxi daily into Pontardawe to get a connection to Swansea. This is going to cost me roughly £50 a week.  

'I can't get to work', says another, 'from Margam to Swansea University by 9 a.m. at all, and I also now have to drive my son to Neath College because he can't get there on time'. Another constituent said: 'The 202 service runs from Neath through Briton Ferry, Baglan, Neath Port Talbot Hospital and then onto Port Talbot bus station. I myself am a disabled, widowed mother of four children. With the cancellation of this service, I will be unable to get my children to school as I can't walk the 1.1 miles there and back twice a day.  A taxi, if I was actually able to book one during school times'—and we spoke about this yesterday—'will cost me in the region of £8 each way, four times a day'.

So, cuts to services are definitely having a profoundly dire effect on people, and on disabled people particularly, those people who depend completely on public transport but already have serious difficulties accessing services. The Government needs to look at its public transportation services across Wales through that lens and see if it fully meets the needs of disabled people, and to fully assess the impact of service cuts on the lives of disabled people, because existing problems such as difficulties with getting and renewing bus passes that they are rightly eligible for, which is causing disabled people such distress—and I have already raised this several times with the Government, and I have yet to have an update on this following the Deputy Minister's letter to me on this on 2 August—are being exacerbated now by these cuts, and it will only get worse if we don't plan for the longer term. When services are unreliable or unavailable, disabled people are absolutely stuck in their homes, and feel excluded from society, unable to access vital services and support and social networks.

We are seeing the problems with our bus services isolating disabled people, the elderly, young people and those on lower incomes, those who depend on buses. While many of these issues could be remedied, of course, by fair funding, we also need effective management by the Government to put that funding to use, and have an understanding of the impact both in the short and longer term of failing to improve the accessibility of bus services. The bus crisis is deepening. The depth of that crisis is taking a terrible toll on the least able to bear it. We need action, Deputy Minister. The people for whom buses are an essential service demand it. So how are the Government's plans to protect and expand the services going to address this? How will need be prioritised?

Thanks to Plaid Cymru for bringing this debate. Let’s be completely frank here: our bus industry is broken, and it is a bus industry. It is a private sector, commercially driven sector. That’s what it is. This is not municipal buses anymore, it’s not a regulated system that pulls together ticketing and timetabling and so on. It relies on public subsidy to run some routes that the commercial operators don’t think are viable, and then they provide it for us. Well, thank you very much.

And it’s been broken since 1986. We can all agree that the bus service is broken. Some of us are unwilling to actually say why it is broken. It’s broken fundamentally because we do not have people involved in this whatsoever. We don’t have people determining when the buses run the routes that they should, to do exactly that—getting people to the jobs in social services, or getting people to visit hospitals. We do not have people who can say when the top end of the Afan valley and the Llynfi valley service is withdrawn after 5.30 in the night. Unless the Minister, or Bridgend, or Neath Port Talbot, comes forward with a big cheque of money to say, ‘Please, please provide this’, then the operators simply say, ‘Well, I’m sorry, but it’s a commercial decision’. It’s gone. So we now have a swathe of the northernmost of my valleys completely locked off from bus transport. There are ways around this, but we need to be, quite frankly, honest with each other about what this is, and stop talking about temporary issues and stop-gap measures.

Nineteen eighty-six was when the buses were deregulated. You look at the only place in the whole of this country where there is a complete franchise model of buses, it is London. Every bus area throughout the whole of the UK has gone into abject decline, not just recently—year after year and decade after decade, the moment that was sent into purely commercial operation, every area of the UK. And by the way, the transport frontbench spokesman who refused to actually take an intervention from me—I was going to point out we’ve suffered 10 per cent recent losses in Wales of services, yes we have. And the only reason those services haven’t gone further is because of public subsidy that is coming in to keep the routes going. But they’ve dropped 20 per cent in England. You talk about this as if there’s a nirvana on the other side of Offa’s Dyke, you refuse to take interventions—which is your prerogative, of course—but on the other side of Offa’s Dyke, when the bus emergency funding finished in March, services finished that day in England, in some of the shires and elsewhere. So don’t pretend that this isn’t a UK-wide problem, because it is.

But let me go to some of the solutions. If we are genuinely willing to do this, we need progressively and steadily and consistently to support as a Senedd moving funds upwards on that sustainable transport hierarchy. Now, that does not mean that we keep on building, endlessly, roads and roads and roads. We should review every single road to see can you do this better, and should we be putting money actually into buses so that they can use some of those existing roads, and should we then be putting bus fast lanes, bus preferential systems on traffic lights, so that people can actually make a choice to say, ‘I’m going to get faster into the city centre on the buses rather than being one person sitting in a car on my own’.

And I drive, right? I’m a driver, but I will also take buses and trains. We’d be prioritising buses. So we need to move the available funding, which is limited, towards buses. If, as everybody has said today, spoken passionately about buses, we put the money into buses—. Don’t put the money into other things, put it into buses first. Because as we’ve been told previously, eight out of 10 of those people who travel on buses have no other choice. I can take a car, I can take a train, I’m fit enough to ride a bike. These other people have not got a choice of how to get to work. So if we’re going to be serious about this, Natasha, and if you want to take an intervention as the spokesperson on this, then be serious about actually moving funds towards this over time.

This is about social justice. It’s also about climate justice. It does mean also talking about those issues of better bus travel, better bus information, the sort of thing that I saw when I was in London as an MP. You could rock up in the only place in Britain that still has a properly franchised model, a regulated model, and you could see signs that actually said, ‘Your bus is delayed by seven minutes, but don’t worry—there’s another one coming along’. You could sit in warm, comfortable shelters and know that that was a choice you were making not only good for the environment, but it was going to get you faster there across London than getting a taxi, and so on and so forth. It had one ticket that allowed you to go on the trams and the bus or the overland train to get to the same point. It was remarkable, incredible. They've been doing it for years. Why? Because they've got a regulated system. So, we need to be serious about this, and it does mean then pulling together—because there isn't an infinite pot of money—all available pots of money, as well as moving that gradual change to focus on that social justice. One network. One timetable. One ticket. Bring forward the franchising Bill. Let's look at how we use all of the available funding to focus on that social justice through our buses, and let's put people before profits for the first time since Margaret Thatcher deregulated the buses.

Thank you so much to Plaid Cymru for introducing this, because we're talking about buses, and that’s a really important thing, isn’t it? Thank you also to Huw for such good points there. I totally agree with you. We cannot stand here, as we often do in this Siambr in a debate, just blaming other people and other things. We just need to work together from now on to solve the issue. I actually believe that the Deputy Minister is committed to ensuring that we have a better bus model, is passionate about making sure we have a better public transport model, and actually wants to see this move on. We've got some really good models around the world. We see Germany, France and Spain to see what real investment in public transport actually looks like, and the benefits that that has to encourage people on to public transport.

I wasn’t going to take part in this debate today because we've had quite a few discussions on buses, and as I say, I do feel that the Government and the Deputy Minister are committed to developing our bus model. But there are many people whom we represent who do not have a voice. Those are the people who travel on our buses. They are the poorest of our communities. They are our nurses. They are our cleaners. They are people who work in shops. They are the ones who are travelling on our buses at 5 a.m. and 6 a.m. in the morning, and getting home at 10 p.m. and 11 p.m. at night. That’s why I think that it’s important to contribute to this, so that we keep them in our minds.

There are so many people—and Sioned, you spoke about them as well—who can’t drive cars for lots of reasons. Apart from Huw, who stood here and said he's used buses, I would like us all to think about it, and I’m included in this: when was the last time we used a bus?

Saturday.

Thank you, Mike. [Laughter.] We're all a bit guilty in this Siambr of getting into our cars easily and thinking, 'Let's just go to this place in our car.' We've got to try and show the change that we want to see, because that modal shift can't happen unless we use our buses.

I just really want to finish with two things, really. We've said that we need to have free public transport for our under-25s, and I do wonder whether the Welsh Government could think about that. We heard evidence in the Equality and Social Justice Committee on Monday about how important it was to think about our children and our young people, and how their social mobility is affected by them not being able to get to places. I speak on behalf of people, as Cefin has, in our rural communities as well.

But I finish, really, with the words of Janet Pearson from Adpar in Ceredigion, who wrote to me about the Fflecsi Bwcabus. These are her words:

'Certain groups of people in the UK, especially the elderly, disabled and poorer sections of our society, are already neglected and given scant respect by some of the groups who often wield power. The decision to stop Bwcabus services will only increase this marginalisation in what is one of the richest countries in the world.'

That's why this debate is important. That's why we continue to talk about buses. Because we represent large swathes of our communities who are the poorest, who can't afford cars, and we need to continue to see the development, I hope, of a better service.

Just my final question to the Deputy Minister: if you'll pardon the pun, what is the timetable for us having this bus Bill? I think Alun just mentioned there it was January, but I don't think we know. So, perhaps in your response, you could provide an outline and a timetable for when we see this crucial Bill being presented to us here in the Senedd. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Thank you to everyone who has contributed to this debate. Jane Dodds asked the question to all of us in terms of the challenge of using the bus: why don't we use buses? Perhaps there might not be a bus service for us to use, perhaps you don't feel safe walking at night. We have options if we can afford cars, and for a number of us, buses are handy as an option from time to time, or if we want to make ourselves feel good and we want constituents to see us using a bus. But some of the moving stories that we hear is that there's no other option. And we have to think, not just—. It is one thing to ensure that there are services for people to make that modal shift from cars to public transport, as is happening internationally, but we have to think about those people who feel isolated at the moment, who have to depend on taxis to be able to access vital services, who are late to work sometimes, and aren't just late to work but who miss out on employment, or who can't pick up their children from school.

I've spoken before about a mother who contacted me whose heart was breaking because she was concerned about the safety of her children having to walk home from school at a terribly young age alongside a dangerous road, because she was late to pick them up, because the bus services were deficient. This is the kind of reality that faces people, and that's why we need to know what that timetable for change is and know when these changes will happen for the members of our communities who we serve. We accept the need for these services. We accept that there is need for improvement. But for everyone out there who can't reach appointments, who miss appointments at the moment, who can't access employment opportunities or, as we say, school and educational opportunities—they want to know when this change will happen.

Councillor Sera Evans from Treorchy contacted me this afternoon to talk about the whole host of complaints that she has received about the 121 bus service in Cwmparc. Now, if you're familiar with the Cwmparc area, it is an area with several steep inclines in it and older people and people with disabilities can't access the main road. They find it very difficult and they can't access a taxi, very often, to be able to reach appointments and so on. So, we're talking about a populated area here—I accept Cefin's point about rural areas, but there are also a number of people who are within towns, who can see the town centre but can't actually get there. This is a problem across Wales and one that we all have heard heartbreaking stories about.

It's a similar tale in Barry. Take, for instance, the new bus interchange in the docks, which I know Welsh Government contributes funding towards. It looks fantastic. There are four bus stops, but no buses running at all. So, we need to think about having a joined-up approach as well. There's no point investing in these fantastic interchanges if, then, there are no buses to service them.

Of particular concern to me too, as education spokesperson for Plaid, is school transport, or rather the lack of, and how this is negatively impacting on attendance levels and therefore attainment, but also opportunities to participate in extra-curricular activities. As we know, every week, thousands of children in Wales rely on bus services to take them to and from school. As was reflected in the review of the Learner Travel Measure (Wales) 2008 in 2021, parents and pupils alike have questioned the suitability of the legislative framework in catering for the current needs of society, particularly when other transport options aren't available, or crucially, are not affordable for many families. Almost 60 per cent of respondents to the review expressed concerns that the 2 and 3-mile radius in the current legislation does not adequately take into account issues related to child welfare, such as problems among secondary school children who may have physical disabilities. In different parts of Wales, we've heard tales of children having to walk for almost an hour to get to school, often along busy roads, because there are no safe cycle routes either. And it's a particular problem in our Valleys, where there are numerous hills and very few safe walking routes—

Would you give way on that point?

Yes, of course.

It's just to put forward a suggestion. Bearing in mind what I've described as the finite pot of money we will always have to wrestle with, and bearing in mind that there are some really good examples of how school transport is actually embedded in the standard transport network, so you can have those services going to some of the communities we talk about missing, and you put the extra coaches on at the times of the day when the schools are running, but you actually use the standard transport model and it develops independence—do you think that that's a way forward?

I think there are certainly—. If you take, for instance—I know Ruben Kelman, who is a Member of the Welsh Youth Parliament, has long campaigned in terms of Llanishen High School, where buses do pass by children who can't get on the bus because they can't afford the ticket. So, that's an example of buses going past and children and young people not able to afford a bus that is available. I think there are solutions, but the worst thing is we know that these young people have told us they can't get to school, there's a bus they can't get on to, they've been refused access to, and yet that problem persists. Cardiff Council and Welsh Government know of this issue and there's been no solution.

So, I think, crucially, when there's a service there, how are we not able to find that solution? We know that young people have suffered so much disruption. There are things we can do—Huw Irranca-Davies outlined one—but we need to ensure that every child in Wales, regardless of where they live, is able to access free, safe and efficient school transport.

I'm grateful for the opportunity to participate in this debate today. Personally, I have major concerns and reservations, some of which Heledd Fychan has just outlined, actually. In fact, I won't reiterate all that she's just said, but I want to concur with what she said on school transport just now, and I have concerns about the use of public transport for all secondary learners in lieu of dedicated school transport.

But if there is now a policy move to ditch dedicated school transport and force young people on to public transport for secondary, (1), I would suggest that the Deputy Minister ensures there's actually public transport to get on, because, currently, there is a lack of routes, especially in rural areas. In fact, we are seeing routes cut back. But, (2), and it's very important, this is why I'm intervening today, if a school falls within a bus route, I expect this Government to absolutely ensure that all councils across Wales, Stagecoach, stakeholders and the transport commissioner make sure that they all work cross border, cross county, cross country to ensure that that route is school-centric. I have young learners in my region waiting up to 45 minutes before and after school for the public bus or for the school to open due to a bus route that they're on failing to wrap around those school hours. That's 45 minutes in the cold, rain and dark, standing outside school at the beginning or end of the day, and it's not good enough, Deputy Minister. All routes, all buses that have a school on their route need to fit around that school day. It's absolutely essential that this problem is ironed out as soon as possible, as there are obvious safeguarding and well-being concerns, and I look forward to the Minister responding with what action he's going to take on this today. Thank you. Diolch yn fawr.

The Deputy Minister for Climate Change to contribute to the debate and to move amendment 1, if you would. I forgot to ask you to move the amendment earlier in the debate.

Formally.

It's in your name, so you're okay.

Okay.

Diolch.

Thank you very much for all the contributions. I think, whenever we discuss this issue in this Chamber, what's always very clear is that people care about buses, and the bus service currently does not meet our ambitions for what a bus service should look like. I think there is unanimity across the Chamber about that, and that is something positive that we can build on. Huw Irranca-Davies gave a masterful Minister's response to the debate. He's made many of the points that I would have made, so I won't repeat them, but I will use my time to respond to the points that were made in the debate so far as I can.

Let me start with the issue of the bus transition fund. We are currently spending £139 million this year on supporting bus services, £46 million of that is the special bus transition fund. On top of that, school budgets contribute around 25 per cent of all of their funding to funding school transport, so we are spending a considerable amount of public funding on supporting the bus industry. Now, it cannot be said that this Government does not support public transport or buses when you acknowledge those figures. The problem we have is that that is not done in a strategic enough way and it is being put through private companies who, obviously, have a commercial imperative to maximise their profit. That is the fundamental flaw in our system, and that is what our bus Bill and our White Paper are designed to rectify.

Now, I think the fundamental problem, I think, that Huw Irranca-Davies alluded to, is that COVID pushed over a broken privatised system, and austerity is restraining our ability to respond to the crisis that has created. That, I think, in a nutshell, is the problem that we have. And I was listening carefully to the contributions of Members on some solutions that I might look for that haven't already been attempted, and I was struggling to identify anybody. I understand very much the problems, and I too get constituency e-mails from people who are upset about the cuts, particularly people in Burry Port and Kidwelly, of the X11 service, which has been reduced from two services an hour to one service an hour. I understand, and I share their disappointment and frustration.

What do we do about it? The problem we have fundamentally is that we have a private system where its commercial model has fallen apart because of COVID, and passenger numbers around the world have not returned to where they were. The revenue simply isn't there for most bus services to run on their own terms, therefore they can only run with Government support. Now, I note that Sioned Williams quoted the example of Neath Port Talbot Council, and it is worth remembering that local authorities have a duty to provide bus services where there is social need and where the market fails, and Neath Port Talbot is one of three councils in Wales who don't contribute any money out of their own budgets towards supporting the local bus network, and that, I think, is a challenge. [Interruption.] Yes, happy to.

I'd just like to say that that spending was cut by the previous Labour administration in Neath Port Talbot and taken out of the base budget, so it wasn't then there for the current administration of Plaid Cymru and the independents to be able to use, so the only way they'd be able to do it, and they have tried to fill the gap, is out of reserves.

Well, she understands the challenge of being in power, doesn't she, where the aspirations we have often aren't matched by the funds available, and that's the dilemma that we all face. So, it's easy to point to the shortcomings of that, but what do we do? What we do about it? [Interruption.] It is a short-termism, yes, but, when you have austerity budgets, you have no option but to operate within the funding envelope you have, and it drives you towards decisions that you don't want to make, but you have little option but to make. Nothing I would love more—. I've said to this Chamber many times that we wanted to introduce a £1 flat bus fare for the whole of Wales. The Cabinet agreed it, we supported it, we did all the modelling for it, and, until Liz Truss's budget blew up the economy, we thought there was a sporting chance we could find the £19 million extra it would cost to do that, and I think that would have been a very important social justice measure, it would have been a very important climate change measure; it certainly would have helped me with the criticism around the roads review and the 20 mph introduction. So, there are all sorts of advantages to doing it. But we simply didn't have the money when the economy blew up and our budgets had massive holes appear in them. But there's no doubt what we want to do; it's our ability to do it, given the constraints that we have.

Cefin Campbell and Jane Dodds both mentioned the Bwcabus scheme, and, again, the needs of rural areas are very much in my mind, and I'm doing a piece of work at the moment looking around Europe on the models there are for public transport in rural areas. These are political choices, these are financial choices, that we all make, and I would just gently say to Members: there are many debates in this Chamber when demands are made and support is given for expensive rail schemes, for expensive road schemes, not so often for that funding instead to be spent on bus services. These are zero-sum choices. If you want to spend £1 billion on a railway through mid Wales, or close to £100 million on a rural bypass, that money is not then available for public transport. Members can't have the penny and the bun, and the funding for Bwcabus came from European funding. When people voted to leave the EU, there was a decision to no longer use that funding, and the UK Government said they'd replace it, and they didn't. So, blaming us for not supporting Bwcabus when it wasn't our scheme in the first place, it was a European funded scheme, I think is unfair. I would have loved to have seen the Bwcabus scheme continue. It had very few passengers, but it provided an important service in rural areas. And I really deeply regret that it has ended, but the idea this was a simple choice and was all our fault I think is disingenuous.

I'd like to turn to the point made by Natasha Asghar around the impact of 20 mph speed limits, and I've just come from a meeting with the managing director of a bus company, and I directly asked him this question. I asked him for a candid assessment of the impact of 20 mph on his services, and he said, 'If you ask the bus drivers, it's the end of the world, but it really isn't. The difference is marginal,' is what he said to me. Now, some of this is because local authorities have not been exempting roads that they could have exempted from 20 mph on regular bus routes, and that's something we can look at again. It's also a reflection of the lack of bus priority measures that local authorities have put in. Now, I've implored local authorities to apply for bus priority measures, and I haven't been overwhelmed with bids, but we have funded £6 million this year and £5 million next year to create these measures, which will give buses the advantage over cars in congested spots, which will improve their reliability and will help with encouraging passengers to use them. So, I think that absolutely is one of the points. 

Laura Anne Jones made the point about her anxiety and nervousness about asking secondary school pupils to use scheduled bus services and not stand-alone school bus services, and I understand the anxiety and it's a commonly held one, and that's because we're not used to having children travelling independently, using the public transport network. We've sequestered them in a stand-alone service, which then doesn't create the habits for use throughout their lives. [Interruption.] Let me just finish the point and then I'm happy to take an intervention. 

I met with Monmouthshire local authority last week to discuss this, because they have their own scheme, which is a reflection of the fact that the market has failed in Monmouthshire, so the council has had to step in. I think there's great merit, as Cardiff and Newport do in part, in using the commercial bus—sorry, the scheduled bus—service for school transport, and that's one of the things we're looking to build into the franchising model so that the services are there and available for everyone, and then we use the funding we have far more smartly to support an integrated bus service. I'm happy to take an intervention.

Thank you, Deputy Minister. I am aware of some constituents of mine actually who are concerned about getting on public buses. I said 'some' people I'm concerned about. Eleven to 12-year-olds I'm concerned about, girls on their own particularly. I have, actually, a constituent of mine who is a girl who gets on a bus for about four miles on her own in a rural area, and I don't think that that's okay. Her mum doesn't think it's okay, and the girl is suffering from anxiety about it, because obviously you've got the darker evenings now particularly, and, in the wet and the cold, it all adds to that anxiety. And so, in some cases, it's not appropriate. In towns and things like that, where there are a lot of children getting on buses at once, perhaps it could be looked at, and I do agree that in some cases it's okay. But, in some cases, in rural areas particularly, it's not okay.

This is an intervention. Thank you.

Sorry.

That's okay. 

Well, I recognise there is a real concern. I think a lot of it is about confidence and it's about being used to having to do it, and I do think we need to look at where we can provide some assistance and some training to build confidence to be able to use buses. Ironically, I think public buses could be safer for some children, because let's not idealise the child's experience on the school bus. I'm sure there will be many people in this Chamber with fairly traumatising memories of travelling on a school bus, and a public bus where you are in with other adults and other members of the community may, in fact, be a calmer and a more appropriate environment. 

I'm conscious that time is against me. I haven't responded to every point that I would have wished to. Just to say, we are in a very tight financial spot. We are committed to trying to safeguard as many bus services as we can, recognising the cost of running those bus services is going up and that eats into the amount of funding that is available, and we face some real short-term tough choices. Our challenge is to get from where we are into franchising, because I think franchising allows us to design an intelligent, integrated network where bus and train can come together, where school services can link in with other services and communities' needs can be planned in and services can be cross-subsidised between profit-making and loss-making services. I think we all agree that is the right place to get to. We are working very hard on designing that legislation and the system alongside it, and we will be introducing legislation next year. [Interruption.] I believe I'm out of time and unable to take an intervention, I'm afraid. But, back to the starting point, I think we all share an aspiration for the system to be better and an acknowledgement of how important it is, and, if Members have practical solutions, I'm all ears. 

Delyth Jewell to reply to the debate. 

Thank you, Llywydd, and thank you to everyone who has participated in our debate. 

Natasha talked about the need for certainty of future funding, and she quoted industry leaders who talk about a cliff edge. Natasha also talked about the decision to row back on HS2 and some of the other schemes that have been promised. I know that there are differing takes on this in the Chamber, but that was part of Natasha's contribution as well.

Alun talked about the effect that bus cuts have on people in his area, how buses link us, and Alun talked about how London has been saved from the privatisation of the bus network. I think there's so much that we, not just in Wales but in different parts of the UK, have to learn from that. It's come up in a few of the different contributions that there is a stigma sometimes about people using buses that is not there in London. As Alun said, we do need an excellent bus service. Huw, in his contribution, had talked about the London example as well, and how you can see on the screen that your bus is delayed by two minutes. I remember, when I was living in London, how I used to get annoyed if I saw that I had to wait for two minutes for a bus. I didn't know I was born, Llywydd, but there we are.

Mark made an intervention, and I agree that successive Westminster Governments have failed Wales when it comes to electrification, although I don't think that we should be grateful that only 2 per cent of our rail routes are electrified. But I do agree that that is a failure that has been undertaken by, or taken part in, by successive Governments.

Deficiencies in public transport in our rural communities was the focus Cefin provided, and the impact that has on poverty, and the cuts to Bwcabus, and the serious social impact that those cuts have.

Public transport is a public good—

—and that became clear from what Cefin said.

Altaf spoke about the effect seen by cuts in his home village, that people often have no alternative to the bus, that elderly people are essentially trapped in their homes. He said that, once a route has ended, it's almost impossible to get it back, which is so often the case. I agree that in so many ways we are badly let down in Wales in terms of the options, or the lack of options, in public transport, and I wonder whether Altaf would agree that the way of getting about this and the way of fixing this is to devolve those powers to Wales, rather than another nation deciding on so many things for us.

For Sioned's constituents, or some of them, at least, the bus is often a lifeline—for people who can't drive, older people, younger people, those who can't afford a car. And the cuts by First locally, as Altaf also referred to.

Sioned quoted the words of one of her constituents, having to spend £50 a week on taxis, which is just—. And that will be happening to people across Wales. She talked about the disproportionate effect it will have on disabled people, which is so important for us to remember.

Huw said that our bus industry is broken, and traced those problems back to the privatisation of the service in the 1980s. The market does not provide for the people who need it most. And I thought that Huw's idea about bus-specific lanes was intriguing. I think that's a good idea, yes, because, if people don't have the options, why shouldn't we make it easier to use those options, so that fewer people decide to do the easy thing and take their cars? That's an interesting idea.

Jane talked about some of the other international models we can learn from. She talked about how people who travel on buses often have the least voice. I think that you quoted one of your constituents, Jane, saying that certain groups in our society are disregarded. Exactly that. That point was taken up almost immediately by Heledd—

—because Heledd asked why so few of us use buses. We need to do more than just have services in place—Alun's point once again:

bus users deserve excellence.

The geography of the Valleys also means that people in towns are isolated occasionally. That's not something we always take into account, but, because of the hills, that's a really important point to remember.

And the impact on school pupils affects so many people.

That point was taken up by Laura—the concerns that Laura has as well about the issue of school transport. Buses should be central to the needs of communities and should be answerable to the needs of communities, not corporations—I agree. I know that we will have differing views on why it is that we've got into this situation, but I believe that the privatised sector is failing us.

The Deputy Minister found some unanimity in the Chamber, which is always helpful, and he set out the financial challenges. I do acknowledge those, which is why the final part of our motion referred to the need for consequentials from HS2 funding. I hope very much that that is still a point on which everyone in the Chamber is in agreement. The industry we have, though, further to that, even outside that, is broken. Privatisation and deregulation lead to the people who need services most losing their voice, and that is an inevitable part of this discussion.

The benefit that buses have for our communities is beyond simply getting from A to B; they link people. For lots of people, I think that it's not even about having the bus to get to a social occasion; being on the bus in itself is where people see their friends, where they go to feel less alone. I remember that, when my grandma was older, she loved getting the bus because she saw her friends on the bus. It wasn't just about where she was going; she just liked getting the bus. Cefin talked about it being a social hub. My grandma had a photograph in pride of place in her bungalow—the first thing you saw when you went in through the front door—of her standing outside the bus with her friends who got the bus with her, and it was so important to her, that bus service. It was a really vital part of her life. So, it wasn't just about where she went; it was being with her friends in that environment too.

The benefits of sustainable funding would go beyond just improving the transport network, of course. It would mean investment in our local economies, creating jobs, stimulating growth, and, yes, it could mean that fewer people feel alone. That's something of a kind of value we can't quantify—that is priceless.

So, there will be disagreement on different parts of why we've got into this situation in the Chamber. I think—I hope—that there will be agreement on the general direction we need to travel in, and I don't mean that as a pun. Obviously, the announcement today that was made by the Prime Minister, which I would see as cynical, but I know that others will disagree on that point, about how our public transport system should be funded, has given one focus in the media. I would like us to show that we in Wales can make these decisions ourselves, and that we can do that in a sustainable way; we can do that answering the needs of communities, with proper planning, and if we in Wales had those powers, then there would be far more passengers who would not just be able to use the bus, but enjoy it as well. Diolch yn fawr.

The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is objection.

Therefore, we will move to voting time and, unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, we will proceed directly to our first vote, which is on item 7, the Plaid Cymru debate that we've just heard on bus services.

Llywydd, sorry. I've got a problem.

Is it a technical one? [Laughter.] Okay. We'll just pause slightly and check. Okay. I'm going to move to the vote, and I will call your vote as—. Yes, I'm going to wait for you to log in. It's not only me that's waiting for you to log in; it's everybody waiting for you to log in, of course. I'll check. Okay. 

So, I will call for a vote on the unamended motion, tabled in the name of Heledd Fychan. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 26, no abstentions, 27 against. Therefore, the motion is not agreed. 

We will now move to a vote on amendment 1, tabled in the name of Lesley Griffiths. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 26, no abstentions and 27 against, therefore, amendment 1 is not agreed, which means that both the motion and amendment have been rejected and nothing is agreed under that item.

I think that lets you off the hook, Andrew R.T. Davies. [Laughter.]

That concludes the voting for this afternoon.

That's the end of the voting and we'll be moving on to the short debate.

The short debate is in Mark Isherwood's name and I'll ask Mark Isherwood to start his short debate when he believes that the Chamber is quiet enough for him to do so. Mark Isherwood.

Thank you. If my colleagues would silence themselves, I might begin. Thank you. 

Yes, exactly, Mark.

Sorry, I'm doing your job for you.

I think it was your colleagues who were the most noisy of the lot, actually. Mark Isherwood.

Thank you. I've agreed to give one minute of my time to Sam Rowlands. The issue of parental blame and the pathological demand avoidance, or PDA, profile of autism was given long-overdue attention at a hybrid meeting of the Welsh Parliament's cross-party autism group on 17 April when I chaired this at Bangor University.

In a presentation by Alice Running and Danielle Jata-Hall about their research on parental blame and the PDA profile of autism, published in February, they stated that being blamed for some aspects of your child's disability by professionals working with your child is a frightening and isolating experience. Their research was born from the personal experiences of the authors, who had both been subjected to misaligned scrutiny and blame by their respective local authorities in respect of their children's autistic presentations. This experience is not uncommon, with many families describing their experiences and how they've been blamed for their autistic children's presentation or perceived lack of progress. Families with autistic children fear losing their children to the care system, and the associated stigma around this fear can render sources of help as inaccessible. 

Their report presents the findings of a survey of more than 1,016 parents and carers of PDA children. The aims of the survey were to explore how prevalent parental blame is among families with PDA children; to identify any patterns around when, how and why parental blame manifests; to find out if there are any types of parents or carers who are more susceptible to being blamed for their PDA child's presentation; and to learn about how this feels for parents and carers. Eighty-eight per cent of parents and carers completing this survey said that they had felt blamed for some aspect of their PDA child's presentation or lack of progress. The authors' analysis showed that families headed either by a lone mother and/or a neurodivergent parent are most at risk of blame in the form of safeguarding. The report concludes with the changes that parents and carers would like to see and notes the need for more autism and PDA professionals.

The authors explain that parental blame is when a professional working with a family alleges or implies that the parent/carer is somehow causing their child's disability presentation. They said it can take the form of gaslighting, manipulating someone by psychological means into doubting their own sanity, of minimising and of repeated criticism, raising undue safeguarding concerns and blaming parental mental health—something I hear about in my casework constantly. They describe the PDA profile of autism as driven by need for autonomous control, due to anxiety, manifesting as consistent resistance to everyday demands. Raising concerns about a lack of recognition and understanding of the PDA profile, they said that this impacts the support that families receive and leads to parents facing safeguarding scrutiny. Common themes included parents being told by professionals that their parenting or mental health is causing their child's autistic presentation—Dark Ages stuff. Eleven per cent of respondents have been subjected to formal safeguarding procedures, citing the parents at fault for the child's presentation. Nearly 60 per cent were lone mothers, and almost 80 per cent were neurodivergent parents.

Asked what changes they'd like to see, parent/carers called for better training for professionals around demand avoidant profiles of autism, support for parents to understand their legal rights and UK-wide recognition of the PDA profile. The conclusion to their report states:

'In situations where parent/carers are blamed for their autistic/PDA child’s presentation, it is the child that ultimately suffers.

'Systems of support for autistic/PDA children can create mental health issues for the navigating parent/carer.

'Certain types of parent/carers are more susceptible to the most extreme form of parental blame—safeguarding.

'Neurodivergent parents are understandably fearful of disclosing their neurotype to supporting professionals.'

And, 'There is a need', as I said,

'for more autism/PDA informed professionals.'

A neurodivergent Flintshire mother shared her own lived experience of parental blame. Raising the importance of training, she highlighted the case of Paula McGowan OBE, who successfully campaigned for mandatory autism training in the NHS in England following failures that led to the death of her son Oliver. My casework also confirms the desperate need for mandatory neurodiverse training not only for staff in NHS Wales, but also in our schools and social services departments, endorsing both the Neurodiversity Unmasked campaign led in Wales by Clare-Anna Mitchell regarding education staff—so far getting an unfortunate knock-back from Welsh Government—and research by the British Association of Social Workers, the professional association for social work and social workers, published last year in the British Journal of Social Work. It found that an increasing number of families of children with neurodevelopmental presentations such as autism are finding themselves being investigated for fabricated or induced illness, FII, which used to be called Munchausen's, by social services and consequently labelled as potential perpetrators of child abuse, with these families subsequently being pulled into the child protection system and reporting trauma as a result. I thought treating autistic people like this had gone out with the Dark Ages.

At the cross-party autism group meeting in April, we also heard from Lavinia Dowling, a mental health and autism specialist nurse consultant, who gave a presentation about her study on mental health, autism and the PDA profile. The founder and director of a community interest company that specialises in mental health support, she's practised as a clinician for 25 years. She told the meeting that National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines—and I'm sure the Minister or Deputy Minister will tell us this—do not recognise PDA. She said that 70 per cent of children and young people with PDA cannot attend mainstream education, and many parents are accused of fabricating induced illness, that schools often fail to recognise autism or assert that PDA does not exist, and that child and adolescent mental health services lack knowledge of autism and do not recognise PDA. Raising the example, for example, of mimicking eye contact, she said screening is often a tick-box exercise, and professionals fail to truly understand autistic traits. She pointed out that, unlike PDA, oppositional defiance disorder, ODD, associated with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, is recognised, yet ODD has similar presentations to PDA because they both describe crippling anxiety. In closing, she raised concerns about lengthy waiting lists and limited resources, calling for a more preventative and proactive approach.

At this point, I should note that clinicians and academics with real expertise in this area have told me that they no longer accept the term 'pathological' in this context, where this is not something involving or caused by a physical or mental disease—people are born with this—that pathological demand avoidance is not a stand-alone diagnostic label, and that if the clinician observes traits of PDA throughout the assessment, they may, for example, word the diagnosis as 'autism spectrum disorder with a demand avoidant profile'. The failure to understand autism spectrum conditions—let alone those with demand avoidant profiles—is allowing senior public officials to effectively torture affected families, leaving it to people like us to pick up the pieces for them. A Wrexham mum wrote:

'We have a 15-year-old autistic son who is statemented, bright, in mainstream school and has a type of autism called pathological demand avoidance syndrome, which we've educated the school and the LEA about. It is anxiety-base driven, needs to have choice and be in control. You can clean your teeth upstairs or downstairs, electric toothbrush or manual: your choice, they choose, it gets done. If I was to say, "You need to clean your teeth," no chance. They need handling differently to other autism spectrum conditions. They can focus well and our son is a keen learner who just wants to be in class, being taught with his friends.'

She added,

'However, the very ALN unit staff supposed to be advocating for our year 11 son are doing the complete opposite.'

Their education tribunal is next month. A Flintshire mum whose son has PDA and selective mutism copied me in on her letter to Flintshire council, which included—quote:

'You state decisions were made based on views, including parent and pupil, which is clearly not the case.'

In this case, to be fair, the council did agree to place their son in his chosen school, but this took three months of chasing.

A neurodivergent Flintshire mum whose children were taken into care after she was recorded as mentally ill and making up illnesses, despite her children displaying evidence of behaviours consistent with children who have autism, PDA and ADHD, wrote, 'I can safely say'—and I'm quoting:

'no neurodiverse child or family in Flintshire is safe or exempt from this level of harm being done to our children and us as neurodiverse families, as long as there remains no accountability.'

Another Flintshire mum whose daughter's diagnosis includes autism with a PDA profile and ADHD, and who herself has a diagnosis including autism, ADHD and PTSD wrote:

'Flintshire's culture seems to be that of bullying, victimisation and cover-ups of serious safeguarding concerns and threats to remove children in order to gag the parents who complain. In my case, I was inappropriately referred by the council for a fabricated or induced illness assessment. I'm now in fear that my daughter will be removed from my care. This is not just about individual cases,'

she said, 'of targeting neurodiverse individuals.'

So, in conclusion, I ask the Deputy Minister to respond to this constituent's request for a face-to-face meeting with her and others, to which they could bring the key records as evidence for you to see. Diolch.

Thank you to Mark Isherwood for giving me a minute of his time to speak in this short but very important debate this evening. I want to speak briefly because a constituent of mine I've been working with recently on this very topic—and it's something admittedly that I hadn't come across before, this pathological demand avoidance—a parent with a child who was struggling in school, and I wonder whether the Deputy Minister may want to respond to the points that were raised.

The parent was contacting me because they were mostly concerned about the communication between the school, social services, the parent themselves, and health services. To me, from what I've heard working with this parent, there do seem to be some missing links in terms of that communication between the various services that governments of different layers have responsibility for.

As Mark Isherwood outlined in his contribution, with the examples that he gave, the example of the child being supported in this situation, really wants to learn and really wants to engage with school and has an appetite for learning, but doesn't seem to be able to have the structure around them to enable it to happen in the best way possible for them, and I think that's a really sad situation for that family to be in.

We know that PDA poses an extra challenge for parents and teachers alike, and we know that our teachers are overstretched on many fronts, but I think raising awareness around the challenges and solutions to supporting children's situations across those various services would do a great deal to help those children in those situations, so, diolch yn fawr iawn. Thank you.

I call on the Deputy Minister for Social Services to reply to the debate, Julie Morgan.

Thank you for the opportunity to reply to this debate. 

Thank you very much for putting forward this debate, Mark Isherwood. I'd like to thank you for the work that you do with children and families in north Wales, because I know that you consistently raise these issues and I'd like to congratulate you on that.

I do fully recognise the ongoing challenges and barriers faced by some neurodivergent families. I, like you, have met and heard experiences first-hand from families and young people—children with autism and many of whom have very complex needs. And, in fact, when I took up this job for the first time, I started off by meeting groups of families who were able to tell me straight away, first-hand, what difficulties and what struggles they had. So, I am aware of those. And these meetings, hearing about their experiences and witnessing the strength these families show, are always at the forefront of my mind while we do strive to make positive changes. So, firstly, let me reaffirm my commitment to ensuring that all neurodivergent children, young people and adults, along with their parents and carers, have access to the health and social care services that they need. I am committed and the Government is committed to that.

The issues around neurodivergence are complex and it will take time and collaborative working to see the changes that we are making come to fruition. And Sam Rowlands mentioned the importance of collaboration and communication, which I absolutely agree are crucial. There remains much work to do. We’ve already made some progress in moving forward through the neurodivergence improvement programme. We know that disabled children, including neurodivergent children and their families, are one of the most severely disadvantaged groups in the UK.

The Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014 places duties on local authorities and health boards to meet the identified needs of autistic children and their families to improve the quality of their lives. And I am very saddened to hear about the very difficult experiences of some of our families in Wales.

Thank you to the Member for North Wales for bringing this to our attention.

And for also sharing research on parental blame and pathological demand avoidance. And I'm pleased to say that this research has already been shared with our clinical advisory group.

The Welsh Government is committed to helping children remain in the care of their families, and we expect local authorities to provide timely support for parents. We’re clear that person-centred care must be at the heart of our social care system, and Ministers expect that everyone must be treated with dignity and respect, and supported to achieve their assessed eligible needs.

I know, as Mark Isherwood has said, that within Wales our neurodivergence services do not recognise the specific diagnosis of autism with a pathological demand avoidance profile, and this is because it is not a recognised category in standard diagnostic manuals. It’s important to note that there is a national approach to PDA that is accepted by all health boards.

Neurodivergence services do recognise that some children present with characteristics of PDA in terms of their anxiety, emotional and behavioural differences. And these children require careful and thorough assessment within the neurodevelopmental services, child and adolescent mental health services, and the social care child disabilities teams. The provision of support and intervention should be tailored to the presenting need, such as anxiety, as we know that some traditional behaviour responses will not work.

And of course, an individual’s experience of their own autism can vary over their life course. It is therefore important to assess the presenting needs, challenges and strengths of the individual as they arise, rather than provide a diagnostic and medical label that will remain with the child throughout their life. It’s how we understand and respond to the breadth and difference of autism that will make a difference to people’s lives. It's acknowledged that information regarding PDA is freely available to parents and that, as such, parents may query PDA as an explanation for their child's difficulties. If this is the case, it's really important that services do not dismiss these concerns, but explore the presenting needs with parents.

Through the neurodivergence improvement programme, we are advising services to move away from a medical model of diagnosis and provide a person-centred approach. Services should be equipped to provide early intervention at the onset of needs, regardless of diagnosis. The statutory code of practice on the delivery of autism services places a strong emphasis on training and awareness raising of autism. Underpinning the code is the importance of having an effective, trained and knowledgeable workforce, which the Member referred to in his debate—how important it is for the workforce to be aware and trained—a workforce that can deliver the duties on behalf of organisations.

The code has been a real driver for workforce managers across health and social care services to engage with training opportunities. The national neurodivergence team have successfully developed levels of training to support health, education and social care staff. All local authorities currently have access to two training modules: 'Understanding Autism' and 'Understanding Effective Communication and Autism'. And I know that over 5,200 social care staff have accessed at least one of those two modules.

The national neurodivergence team are also—

Will the Deputy Minister take an intervention?

I'm so sorry, Deputy Minister. Are those training courses compulsory?

I think that people are encouraged to do them, and as I say, 5,200 have actually done them. So, I think we are making real progress there.

The national neurodivergence team are also working on developing additional training for all professionals around understanding autism and assessment. The training will have a bespoke element for particular professions, such as social workers. It'll provide professionals with the skills and knowledge to make reasonable adjustments and adapt their practice to better understand and meet the needs of neurodivergent families.

We've also committed to an independent evaluation on the impact of the autism code of practice. This is a two-part evaluation, and the findings of the initial phase are due shortly. This evaluation will highlight whether local authorities are meeting the requirements of the code and asking whether the practitioner assessing an autistic individual's eligibility for social care services has sufficient knowledge and skills to understand the impact of autism on the individual in their day-to-day life. The evaluation will show us where more support is needed. 

And of course the role of education, which has already been mentioned here this afternoon, is absolutely crucial in supporting neurodivergent children and young people. And we are working closely with education colleagues, who are delivering improvements through additional learning needs reform to ensure that the needs of neurodivergent children and young people are recognised and that staff have knowledge and skills to support them. This includes raising awareness that many autistic children can mask and manage their autism traits in school, releasing their overwhelming frustration once they feel safe at home. And I've had many parents telling me about the struggle at home, while the children may be presenting at school—not causing any concern for the school, and that is fairly common. 

I'm also pleased to report on the early success of our listening line pilot for neurodivergent families. We've provided this as an expansion to the existing 24-hour call helpline. And, up to July this year, only three months after the service had started, the listening line had received about 260 calls on matters relating to neurodivergence. I encourage you to remind families of this support that is available, because it is new and it's really a response to the experience I had of meeting with families, meeting with young people, and their desperate need to be able to phone somewhere at any time, 24 hours a day, to have somebody to listen to them. At whatever stage they were in terms of getting an assessment or a diagnosis, they wanted that support. So, we are doing that in response to what neurodivergent families have said directly to me. 

So, in conclusion, we will continue to drive forward transformational change to make a difference to lives through neurodivergence services. And I'm sure you will all agree that the key to supporting individuals is good communication that is adapted to the needs of the person in front of you. I know that parents and young people have a great struggle in terms of, often, getting the services that they want, and I'm absolutely prepared to admit that. I think we have made a bit of progress. [Interruption.] I'm going to finish off now, if you don't mind. I think we've made a little bit of progress, but I know there's an awfully long way to go. And I'm very happy, Mark Isherwood, to come to your cross-party group to meet any of the families you think it would be appropriate for me to do so. So, I'd like to once again thank you for presenting this really important debate. We value so much the bringing of the experiences, the lived experiences of families, to this Senedd, and I can assure you that we'll be doing our utmost to make sure that every child is able to have a fulfilled life.

Thank you very much for your time today. 

I thank the Deputy Minister. Thank you, all. That brings today's proceedings to a close.