Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru

Welcome, all, to this afternoon’s Plenary meeting. The first item on our agenda will be questions to the First Minister, and the first question is from Siân Gwenllian.  

Diolch yn fawr. With your indulgence, Llywydd, I’d like to begin by expressing my sympathies as First Minister with those involved in last night’s rail accident near Llanbrynmair. And, in particular, I’d like to send our condolences to the family of the man who died, and also pay tribute to the emergency services. And just to let you know that the transport Secretary will be making a fuller statement later on this afternoon.   

My priority is to deliver more affordable homes across the whole of Wales, and we have allocated record levels of funding during this Government term. We are also working closely with partners across Gwynedd, as part of the Dwyfor second homes and affordability pilot, to apply and evaluate a range of interventions.

The housing crisis is impacting every part of Wales. Homelessness and sleeping rough are the increasing and very visible results of this crisis. The number of rough-sleepers who have died has doubled over the past few years, which is appalling and unacceptable. Now there’s mention made about releasing prisoners early, creating a risk of even greater homelessness. Front-line workers, who help to prevent homelessness, and provide support to the homeless, need full support. In order to support some of the most vulnerable in our communities, will you today commit to ensuring a fair and adequate funding settlement for the housing support grant in next year’s budget?

Thank you very much. We are highly aware of the situation and how difficult it is for people, particularly those who have homes but can’t afford to continue to pay their rent. And that is why we have provided record funding—£1.4 billion of investment in this term—to social housing, and £15 million of this has been provided to Gwynedd. But you will be aware that we are to introduce legislation on homelessness too.

But we are highly aware of how difficult the situation is, and that is why we have helped, for example, with things such as the Help to Buy scheme, which helps people by providing mortgage advice, with advice on how to deal with debt, and which also gives them an opportunity to borrow money without paying interest for a period of five years.

The then Assembly’s north Wales regional committee took evidence from people from Gwynedd on the affordable housing crisis in October 2003, over 20 years ago, when deliverable solutions were proposed to us, which were ignored by the Labour Welsh Government then. Your Welsh Government’s only housing target is to build 20,000 new, low-carbon social homes for rent during this five-year Senedd term. However, only 3,120 were completed in Wales by social landlords in the first three years of this Senedd term. So, you changed the goalposts, adding some homes that are not new builds and not low carbon, and also homes for intermediate rent and shared ownership. But, even with this, Audit Wales still expects you to fall short of your target without additional funding. So, now that former Minister Lee Waters has been drafted in to help you hit the housing target, will you now be moving the goalposts further, or how will you be responding to proposals by social housing providers in Wales to remove the barriers to deliver longer term sustainable funding, and to ensure that they are still building new homes?

Well, thanks very much. You’ll be aware that there’s been a whole package of measures to address this situation in relation to housing. And the fact is that the situation has changed since we first set that target. We’ve had massive inflation, we’ve had huge hikes in interest rates, but the fact is, despite all of that, we have seen, for example, in Gwynedd, a five per cent drop in the number of second homes compared to last year.

There's a whole series of measures that we are putting in place on top of that record investment in social housing, including the transitional accommodation capital programme, which is delivering 1,700 homes and brought many back into use. We've got the Leasing Scheme Wales, which allows private landlords to allow local authorities to rent out their homes, at a particular rent level, set at local housing allowance rates. All of that goes to help people to stay in their homes, but also allows people who have properties, who want to lease them on a long-term scheme, the security of knowing that there will be somebody in that home for a long time. So, there's a huge amount being done in the housing space, and, as I say, we will be bringing in some new laws in relation to homelessness soon.

Health boards are responsible for the planning and delivery of safe, high-quality healthcare services on behalf of their local populations within the resources available. Powys Teaching Health Board has set out its position, and I expect any service change to be informed by continuous stakeholder engagement.

Thank you, First Minister. With a number of people waiting for appointments across Wales, especially for operations, they have a system in England where, if you've been waiting for a certain amount of time, they will offer you to go to other health boards across England to actually get that treatment done, especially in orthopaedics. So, in Hereford, for example, there are long waiting times for orthopaedic treatment, but they are sending patients to other hospitals across England to get waiting lists down and get people seen. After doing some research, the Welsh NHS doesn't offer this service to patients. So, is this something that the Welsh NHS would look to do, to give patients who are waiting on those lists the opportunity to go to somewhere else in the system where there is capacity, to get seen, because I don't want to see patients in Wales, and especially in my constituency of Brecon and Radnorshire, subjected to a postcode lottery, where they cannot get seen and when there may be spare capacity in the system elsewhere to get the treatment that they need?

Well, it's a shame that the research that you did didn't actually look at the latest statistics in terms of what already happens in relation to cross-border support and care. It's very interesting, in particular in relation to GPs on the border. There are 13,000 residents from Wales registered in England, but there are 21,000 English residents registered in Wales. And when you look at the number of people who are going into hospitals already in England, 60,700 just last year were involved in admission to an NHS English hospital. So, it is already happening, and we will continue to see if and when there's capacity. But, at the moment, we are focusing on making sure that we use the capacity that's available within our system, and making sure that we expand the opportunities for that to happen, with longer hours being used, for example, in Wales, rather than going across the border. Let's make sure we maximise and see an efficient system in Wales first.

Good afternoon, First Minister. Just following up on the question from James Evans there, I just want to concentrate, if I may, on elective treatments for patients in Brecon and Radnorshire, who do go across the border—we're actually quite used to going, to, for example, Hereford hospital, for our treatment. And I'm pleased to hear that this will be bolstered after the announcement from the Labour conference and, I think, backed up by the Welsh Secretary Jo Stevens. You've appointed a group of experts to help with bringing down waiting lists here in Wales. But could I ask you specifically, please, how will that work in terms of the cross-border arrangements that were announced, and what targets do you have, and what timescales do you have, in order to reduce the waiting lists, particularly for people living on the border, as in Brecon and Radnorshire? Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Thanks very much. Well, as you say, we have got this group of experts now who have been appointed, and, if you look at their CVs, you'll see that these are genuine experts, people who want to help us out. And in fact, one of the people on that group is the person who's presented and introduced the GIRFT approach to best practice—that is, 'get it right first time'. That really looks at how you optimise work within our hospitals. They go into hospitals and they tell them what they can do to tweak things, and that's precisely what we're talking about. You know, there are hospitals in England where this has been introduced and is working really well. There are some hospitals in Wales that have introduced part of it but not all of it. So, what we're hoping is that this group will come in and specialise, look at how you can do that, how you can bring best practice and introduce it to Wales. And, of course, on that cross-border work, as I mentioned earlier, with 60,000 Welsh residents already going to England, I'm sure that that will continue as well.

Questions now from the party leaders. The leader of the Welsh Conservatives, Andrew R.T. Davies. 

Thank you, Presiding Officer. As my colleague Mark Isherwood highlighted, we learned on the weekend that the Member for Llanelli is now, I presume, part of the Government, because he will be, in the Minister for Delivery's words, doing—well, these are your words, Minister—

'a "very rapid deep dive" of each planning application as they come forward.'

Could the First Minister confirm what the exact role is of the Member for Llanelli in what is a very sensitive subject—the planning system—here in Wales?

Well, you'll be aware that the Cabinet Secretary who's responsible for housing will be making sure—and we are, as a Government, absolutely determined—that we're going to deliver. That's why we are still in discussions about the role that Lee Waters will play. We'll be finalising details of that role and will be letting you know exactly what that is in the next few weeks. But the Minister for Delivery has a role in supporting—[Interruption.]

Can we hear the First Minister's answer, please? 

The Minister for Delivery has a role in supporting delivery of all our ambitions as a Government, and a formal statement on the work to support the delivery of affordable housing will follow. 

I'm sorry, First Minister, but the words of the delivery Minister on Sunday were that a backbencher in the Labour Party was going to do a rapid deep-dive of each planning application that came in. You, in your response to me, clearly indicate that you haven't a clue yet what he's going to be doing, and yet you're trying to incentivise developers to come forward with applications to hit your manifesto target of 20,000 social housing here in Wales. That really is no way to run a Government. The auditor general highlighted in his recent report that this manifesto commitment would require an extra £600 million to £750 million to hit your 20,000 target by 2026. So, where is that money coming from? You can't highlight how the backbencher's going to help you. How's the finance Minister going to help you hit this target, because, at the moment, you haven't delivered half the units that your manifesto commitment alludes to?

Well, there's still a long way to go until the end of the term, and what we're aware of is that, actually, a lot of this is not to do with finance. Some of it is about getting bits stuck in the planning system that, actually, can be unlocked, and what Lee Waters will be doing is to help unlock some of those areas where there are challenges. We know that we have committed £1.4 billion to social housing this Senedd term. This is a huge amount of money, and this is absolutely key to making sure that we prevent homelessness in future. 

Can I suggest you know what your Ministers are saying when they're on the media round? The Minister herself, actually, said there is very little amount of time left to deliver this manifesto commitment—15 months, she said, in her words. So, it's not me saying that you've got a very small amount of time. The auditor general has highlighted the additional moneys that you will need to make available to hit this manifesto commitment, and you don't know what your backbencher for Llanelli is going to be doing. When he was a Minister, he was charged with slowing Wales down. Now, in your words, he's going to speed the planning system up. The two can't be happening at the same time, First Minister. So, can you say to me today, are you going to be the First Minister who misses this manifesto target of delivering 20,000 units of social housing, just like you missed your NHS targets to reduce waiting times here in Wales? Or is this manifesto commitment going to be hit, which, obviously, the auditor general is very sceptical that you'll be able to do?

There's no doubt about it, it's a stretching target, but it's a target that we're going to make absolutely every effort to hit. That's why we're drafting in some additional support to make sure that we can unlock those areas. There’s a huge amount of work to be done here. There are 22 local authorities. Actually making sure that you unlock all the benefits and the potential in those places—there’s quite a lot of work to do here. Why wouldn’t we want to draft in some additional support if we’re able to do that?

Leader of Plaid Cymru, Rhun ap Iorwerth.

Thank you, Llywydd. May I begin by expressing our sympathies in Plaid Cymru with the family of the individual who died in the accident on the Cambrian line last night and those who were injured? I’d also like to thank everyone who was part of the emergency response.

I know that the First Minister is eager for us not to question the UK Labour leadership here in the Senedd, but, a week before Rachel Reeves's budget, it's important that our eyes are cast over decisions made by her and Keir Starmer, and it's important that the First Minister of Wales is entirely robust in her expectations in lobbying Downing Street before the budget on behalf of Wales.

Plaid Cymru set out our demands for the budget in a motion that will be discussed here in the Senedd tomorrow afternoon. Why does the Welsh Government want to delete our call for fair funding for Wales by bringing a new funding system in to replace the Barnett formula?

Because what we do is take things seriously, and we have those direct conversations with the UK Government, rather than us writing resolutions on the floor of the Senedd. That's how we work. I know that is difficult for people to bear in mind, for people like you perhaps to bear in mind, that individuals like me can speak directly to the Prime Minister. But the fact is that that’s how it works. I have made it clear what our priorities are as a Government. I will make that case again and again. I have made it several times, as has the Minister responsible for finance, and we will continue to make the case until the budget.

I don’t doubt that conversations are taking place; it’s the content of those conversations that really interests me. And it’s come to something when the First Minister of Wales, a Labour First Minister, doubts our right in this Parliament of ours to discuss budgetary issues as they affect Wales. We want a First Minister with real clarity on the core issue of funding, a First Minister that takes a firm position. I’m afraid she’s more interested in not putting Keir Starmer in a difficult position. Now, the true test of a so-called partnership in power is not the extent to which one partner agrees with the other unconditionally, but whether that partnership responds positively to the needs of our communities.

It’s the same with rail funding. Welsh Government Ministers are on record estimating shortfalls of over £5 billion in rail funding for Wales over a decade. The Secretary of State for Wales quoted £4.6 billion as the figure owed in HS2 consequentials. Now, in power, they want us to accept that it’s a fraction of that. Amending Plaid Cymru’s budget motion for tomorrow, Labour simply calls for further discussions on HS2. Why is the First Minister giving up on fighting for Wales’s billions?

Well, he clearly doesn’t know me very well if he thinks I won’t make the case as the First Minister. I will stand up for Wales on every occasion, including with the Prime Minister, as I have done on every occasion that I’ve met him. Let me make it clear that in relation to HS2 I think we have been done an injustice, and I will continue to make that case—[Interruption.] If you don’t mind, I will continue; £350 million is what has been spent so far proportionately in relation to HS2. That was the figure that we gave before, when the Conservatives were in power. Now, if they continue to expand HS2, then of course that number will go up, but, at this point in time, the amount that they’ve spent, that is what we think should be coming our way. I’ve made that case, I will continue to make that case, and it’s important now that they look at the proposals we have from the Welsh Government in terms of how they can support our rail infrastructure in Wales. But one thing I will say is that, already, we have seen a difference. They have committed to more infrastructure in Wales, and what we will see is Transport for Wales will increase 50 per cent in terms of more timetabled services in future.

The £4.6 billion was the figure quoted by Jo Stevens when she was in opposition, £4 billion was the figure quoted by the current economy Cabinet Secretary. You have heard it here officially: they have given up on fighting for Wales's billions. We've been repeatedly promised a reset of relations between the UK and Welsh Governments. It looks like a reset of what we're owed on HS2, but it's also been quite a reset for pensioners needing to heat their homes this winter. Wales's older people's commissioner predicted that scrapping the universal provision of winter fuel payments could lead to 4,000 excess deaths this winter—a shameful first act of a new Labour Government. 

Again, Plaid Cymru's motion to be debated tomorrow gave Welsh Government a chance to side with those pensioners, but they chose to side with austerity. They won't even ask UK Government to act on winter fuel or on the two-child benefit cap, or on the Crown Estate, or a better justice system. We want a Government that makes the case for Wales always. Come 30 October, let me ask this: if the UK budget fails to deliver a fair deal for Wales, for pensioners, for families in poverty, is the First Minister willing to share the blame with the Chancellor?

Well, honestly, I don't know why I have to come here every single week and give him a lesson in how devolution works. They have their powers; we have our powers. I will do what I need to do here with the powers that are available to me.

Diolch yn fawr. Wales is a globally interconnected nation with an increasing profile on the world stage. Our international strategy sets out three key ambitions for delivery. These remain as: to raise our international profile, to grow the economy through exports and inward investment, and to establish Wales as a globally responsible nation.

Diolch, Prif Weinidog. First Minister, in the year since the horrific Hamas attacks, Israel's military forces have killed over 40,000 people in Gaza, including so many children and women, with an unknown number buried under the rubble. Humanitarian aid has been prevented and used as an instrument of war. We have seen basic public services and infrastructure destroyed, and extreme hunger and disease is spreading. International law has often been ignored and genocide proceedings taken to the International Court of Justice. World opinion strongly supports an immediate ceasefire, release of the hostages and the beginning of a process towards a political solution.

First Minister, along with community members in Newport East with connections in Palestine, I very much welcome Welsh Government's donation of £100,000 to the middle east appeal of the Disasters Emergency Committee Cymru. Will you also carefully consider other ways in which Welsh Government can make clear its concern at the ongoing death and destruction in Gaza, the West Bank and now Lebanon, whether that concerns disinvestment in the economy of Israel, recognising the state of Palestine, or working to influence our UK Government?

Well, diolch yn fawr, John, and I know how troubled we all are when we see those scenes from the middle east. They're genuinely horrific, and it just breaks your heart, in particular when you see children suffering, and the scale of devastation that we see is just unimaginable for us, as we consider how they are coming to terms with this incredibly difficult situation. I'm very clear that we need a genuine long-term two-state solution. The fighting needs to stop. We need to see an immediate ceasefire, an end to the killing, and we need to see a significant increase in the amount of aid that can be provided, and, of course, the hostages should be returned. 

I am pleased that the Welsh Government was able to contribute £100,000 to the Disasters Emergency Committee for the middle east. What is more impressive is the incredible response of the people of Wales—over £0.5 million within 24 hours. And I'd like to thank and pay tribute to all of those who have contributed and ask that other people might consider a donation at this very difficult time in the middle east.  

Can I welcome your response to the question posited by John Griffiths? We are indeed all concerned, and we want to see a resolution to this crisis—and it is a crisis, as well as a conflict—in the middle east as soon as is possible.

It's important, of course, that the Welsh Government has a voice on international relations and issues, but one of the concerns that has been raised with me is that, very often, Welsh Government officials are based in the mini-embassy network that's been established around the world by the Welsh Government and its predecessors rather than embedding officials in British embassies, where they can work alongside and collaboratively with the UK Government. Can I ask, First Minister, will you consider having a look at your international relations strategy so that there can be better collaboration and a saving to the taxpayer by closing the mini-embassy network, which is unnecessary, and by working instead with the British embassies around the world to embed Welsh Government officials in a more strategic way than is currently the case? Because the cost of the mini-embassy network, at £8 million per year, is a luxury that this country cannot and should not be paying for.

Darren, look, first of all, I'm really pleased that you see how important it is that we fly the flag internationally; I was really pleased to do that in Ireland last week, where I was able to meet the Tánaiste and President Higgins. Part of the reason we were able to do that and that we've got such a strong relationship with Ireland is because we have representatives in Ireland who indeed are embedded with the UK Government, which is what happens across the world. So, in all circumstances—in all circumstances—our people are embedded with the UK Government. I'll tell you what is interesting, though, is where we don't have representation: in this reserved area, when your Government was in power, how little they flew the flag for Wales in those countries where we didn't have representation. [Interruption.] I'm sorry—I'm sorry—I'll give you an example. I'll give you an example: I went to spend St David's Day in Denmark. I happened to be there on a conference, and I said, 'Let's have a St David's Day event in the embassy.' They told me they'd done nothing to promote Wales in 22 years—and it's their job, it's a reserved area. So, I am confident, because I've already had conversations with the European Minister, who happens to be Welsh, who I know is going to correct the situation.

Can I firstly thank John Griffiths for raising such an important question? Some of the elements of the question weren't addressed, so I wonder if the First Minister could perhaps write a written response to some of those, particularly about divestment; it would be useful to have.

On a wider matter, First Minister, my committee at the Senedd is responsible for scrutinising the international work that the Welsh Government does, and we have a current consultation on priorities following 2025, when the strategy comes to an end. Previous First Ministers have committed to include our committee in that process. We've welcomed that. Could you set out the current timescales that you have in mind for this important work, including when you will be consulting stakeholders and with the committee?

Thank you very much. As I've said, what's of interest to me now is delivery on the policies and strategies that we have, and I'm eager that people continue to focus on that until we get to a point when we turn our attention to the next phase. When we do start to prepare what comes next in terms of priorities, I'm sure that things such as the fact that we've had an investment summit that was extremely successful across the UK, what is our role and what can we do in terms of attracting more inward investment into Wales—. There are lots of things that we could do when it comes to prioritisation for the future, but what I'm interested in now is delivery on what is contained within the current strategy. But there will be an opportunity, of course, for people to join in with that consultation.

Maximising the levers we have here in Wales to tackle poverty remains a key cross-Government priority. The Welsh Government continues to support those at risk of falling into fuel poverty. We continue to invest in our fuel voucher and discretionary assistance schemes to help people in crisis with fuel costs.

Thank you, First Minister, although I'm afraid that's not going to wash, as 30,000 people in Conwy and Denbighshire will lose their winter fuel payments this year, with both set to become the hardest-hit counties in the United Kingdom as a result of this callous decision by the UK Labour Government. Denbighshire has an older population, with the median age being five years older than the average age across Wales, and higher pre-existing levels of poverty than the Welsh average. So the cruel withdrawal of this essential payment will impact the poorest and the most frail in my constituency, with four in every five pensioners living below or just above the poverty line set to lose their winter fuel payments, which will coincide with a 10 per cent rise in energy bills.

We are also bracing ourselves for an additional 4,000 deaths this winter due to the Chancellor's decision, and we should be quite clear that this is a political decision. The Chancellor found £22 billion for carbon capture subsidies and billions of pounds were found from somewhere for above-inflation public sector pay rises to please the Labour Party's union paymasters. Given that Wales is set to be disproportionately affected by these cuts, my constituents are outraged at just how impotent the Welsh Government have been in standing up for Wales and the most vulnerable people in our society, with a total lack of interest in persuading the UK Government to change course.

Given that Welsh Government winter fuel payments have been ruled out, will the First Minister stop making excuses for the UK Labour Government's wicked decision and start speaking to Ministers in Whitehall and urging them to reverse these cuts so that my constituents won't freeze this winter?

It really is shocking when you think about the legacy that we were left by the Conservative Government. But I tell you what, you're quite right; we do have to make priorities, we do need to find money, and I know the Chancellor's going to have a very difficult task ahead of her, but what she has said is that the triple lock that protects pensioners will be in place, so the 9 per cent increase will be in place this year, 4.5 per cent next year, which is obviously far more than what they'll be losing in relation to the winter fuel payment.

It's difficult and it's challenging, and we understand how challenging it will be for people. That's why we're investing £30 million this year in our Warm Homes Nest scheme, and we're making huge efforts to make sure that people claim what's theirs. There's a helpline available and 36,000 people in Wales have already been helped. They've had £10 million of additional income because of the efforts that we've put in as a Government to make sure they're aware of what's available to them.

I'm very pleased also to see that the Secretary responsible for social justice has announced that there will be £1.5 million for warm hubs this winter. This is something that we did before. It was highly successful, massively appreciated. It's somewhere people can go not just for warmth, but also for company and for advice, and that will be rolled out this winter. So I'm sure there'll be a huge welcome all over the country, and if you'd like to know where yours is, Gareth, in your area, then get in touch.

If you extrapolate the 4,000 additional deaths that the Older People's Commissioner for Wales says the cut to the winter fuel payment will cause to the population of North Wales, the region I represent, then it's about 40 additional people dying as a consequence of Labour not rowing back from their proposals. Can you really stand here and make excuses for a policy that, for people like me, will kill 40 of the constituents that I'm here to represent?

I really don't think it's necessary to use that kind of language and I don't think it's appropriate, but what I can say is that we do have schemes that can support those people. We have a fuel voucher and we have discretionary assistance schemes that can help people in crisis with their fuel costs. We can also make sure that there are measures that are available to them in relation to energy efficiencies that will help them to reduce energy bills in the long term. And those who are eligible for pension credit of course will continue to receive that winter fuel allowance.

The Welsh Government supports the publishing sector, and it is delivered via the Books Council of Wales through an annual grant.

Thank you for that response. 

My constituent Penny Thomas runs the children's book publisher Firefly Press. The English language grant to publishers in Wales via the Books Council of Wales has been cut by 17 per cent in the last 10 years. Grants to publishers in Wales are an absolute lifeline; in the intensely competitive, highly discounted world of children's books in which Firefly Press exists, they can often make the difference between staying afloat and going under. It's so important that we retain book publishing in Wales and Wales-based literature because it's important for children especially to have stories that are set locally to them, and printed by publishers here in Wales. It's so important we don't lose this sector. So, I'd just like to ask what more the Welsh Government can do to keep this vital sector going.

Thanks very much. I hope you'll pass on my congratulations to Firefly Press, who, of course, adapted Llyfr Glas Nebo into English, and that won the Carnegie prize, which is the highest honour for children's publishing. If you haven't read the book, you should—it's a remarkable book. Publishing does remain a priority, but I recognise that this is a really difficult time, and we've had to make some very difficult decisions. I accept that there has been a cut to the books council, but it is in line with the cuts faced by other sponsored bodies across the culture sector in Wales. But what we have been trying to do is to make sure that there are opportunities for people to work together. For example, Creative Wales held a networking event in Yr Egin so that different publishers could work together on creative projects and maximise those commercial opportunities. Of course, we have given additional funding to allow publishers to attend London and Frankfurt book fairs. So, yes, I accept it's a difficult time, but it is important to recognise that we've been trying to give that additional support when we can. 

First Minister, last week we heard the chief executive of the books council describe the existential crisis faced by publishers across Wales. We also know the books council has not received any additional in-year money in this financial year from the Welsh Government. And we've heard about the impacts that the wider cutbacks to the books council have had on publishers across Wales. One of those publishers is Seren Books, based in Bridgend, who wrote quite a detailed letter about the impact that those decisions were having. Let me quote from that. They said: 'We can't continue to offer likely loss-making opportunities to writers and readers, no matter their cultural value and impact'. They go on to say: 'As it stands, we're rapidly heading towards a tough decision—either we slash costs and therefore strip out everything that makes Seren Books what it is, or face the prospect of closing for good'. What is the long-term viability of a publisher like Seren Books in the opinion of the Welsh Government? 

We will continue to work closely with the Books Council of Wales to respond to the challenges, and, of course, we will have to and they will have to be creative and work out new and innovative ways to make sure that we can support the sustainability of the publishing sector in Wales. This includes, for example, support for the new audiences fund to suppport diversity in the publishing sector. So, I think it is important to recognise that whilst the big grant may have been cut a little bit, there are other pockets where we're trying to drive them into other areas where they could actually make a difference. So, I recognise it's difficult time. I know how brilliant Seren Books are as well, and obviously we will give them all the support we can despite these really difficult circumstances we're living through.

Question 6 [OQ61733] has been withdrawn. 

Improving women’s health services is one of my priorities. Key to that is listening to women and acting on what they are saying they want from health services. The views of nearly 4,000 women have formed the basis of the women’s health plan, which will be published in December.

Thank you for your response, First Minister. 

This month marks Breast Cancer Awareness Month and last month was Gynaecological Cancer Awareness Month, both of which are personally important to me. Nineteen years ago, my mum was diagnosed and treated for breast cancer thanks to a Breast Test Wales programme in Wrexham that found it at an early ductal stage. She wouldn't have known otherwise. However, just four years later, she was eventually diagnosed with ovarian cancer. Later on, after reflecting on family history, my mum requested a genetic test and found that she had the hereditary BRCA2 gene. I initially went to see an NHS genetics counsellor when I was in my early thirties, and whilst I didn't feel personally in a place to take things forward then, because of my family history I qualified for early screening, and when I did have a scare, I was put through the system at pace.

In 2019, my personal circumstances had changed, and with the support of my mum and wife, I decided it was the right time for me to take the step to get tested. I was referred by my GP to the Wrexham Maelor genetics clinic, and the service I received was incredible. In fact, my own journey stopped there, as the results came back saying that I did not have the BRCA2 gene. I had mentally prepared myself for what the next steps might mean and be for me, but I will never forget the look of relief on my wife's face when we were given the news. However, I'm painfully aware that it's not the same outcome for everyone. So, Prif Weinidog, I know you will understand this remains important to me, so can I ask what the Welsh Government is doing to ensure that those who may be impacted in the way I've outlined can make an empowered choice to take control of their own lives at a time that is right for them? And will you work with me to raise awareness and availability of the importance of this? Diolch.

Thanks, Hannah, and thanks very much for sharing your mum's story and your story, which is not easy in an environment like this. Please send on my best regards to your mother. She, like many others, has recovered. There are very many, and I think we should celebrate every success. But you're quite right, and I just think about the pressure that you must have felt going through that screening. What I will say is that healthcare professionals can refer women who are concerned about their familial risk of breast cancer to the genomics service. That provides genetic counselling to help people understand their risk, and, if necessary, they provide that testing that you underwent. It is, I think, important that people understand that that is available to people. If there is a risk within your family, then you can ask for that to be done. So, please send on my good wishes, and I hope that women across Wales will hear that the support and counselling around that very difficult screening will be available to them.

I'd like to thank Hannah Blythyn for asking the question and sharing her experiences with all of us here in the Chamber today. It was truly very remarkable for you to share that with us.

First Minister, the publication of the women's health plan is long overdue and finally within reaching distance for us all. It is essential that we see a plan that outlines a strategic and holistic view of how to improve women's health and treatment here in Wales. As you'll be aware, the national cancer recovery programme will be specifically considering breast cancer action within it, but this area could also be built on within the broader women's health plan, so that the plans aid each other in advancing women's support and treatment, and don't risk creating a siloed approach. There are also many broader aspects of breast cancer that may not be covered within the recovery programme, including breast health and awareness, improving uptake of screening, and access to breast reconstruction, a central aspect of women's identity following cancer treatment.

First Minister, almost 3,000 women in Wales are diagnosed with breast cancer every single year, so with the long-awaited plan due to be published at the end of December this year, will you outline how it will in fact improve diagnosis, treatment and support for those women living with breast cancer all across Wales? Thank you.

Thanks very much. I'm very much looking forward to seeing this long-awaited plan, I can tell you. It's been longer than I'd hoped in coming to us, and I've made an agreement to have a drink on the steps of the Senedd with the people who've been campaigning and championing this when it is published. I've told them that's got to happen in December, however cold it is.

It is important, I think, that we allow the NHS to own this plan, because it's more likely to be delivered if they have a real sense of ownership. I think that's why it's taken so long, because we do need to get all of the health boards across Wales to buy into it. But I'm sure there will be references in that in terms of uptake and the importance of screening. And there are pockets where we're not seeing people take up the screening in the way that they should, so targeted interventions with particular communities are also important. But I'm sure you'll be pleased to hear that 3,800 women actually were consulted during that discovery report.

The other thing I'm particularly pleased about—. When it comes to research in health, women are very under-represented as well. I'm very pleased that we have committed £750,000 to research on women’s health projects, and that's a first.

Welsh health boards continue to build on the well-established mutual arrangements already in place where NHS providers in Wales and England commission services for patients who live in border communities. Both NHS England and NHS Wales have, and will continue to utilise, the available capacity to meet patients' needs.

First Minister, there does remain some uncertainty as to what your plans for cross-border co-operation actually involve. It was first announced at the Labour Party conference in Liverpool by the Secretary of State for Wales and you. The Secretary of State made it clear that she wants more patients coming across the border for surgery, and repeated that several times, and, of course, it appears that Welsh Ministers seemed to have rowed back on that statement and emphasised more about cross-border co-operation. So, what is the plan, and what information have you provided to health boards across Wales following your announcement? And, of course, you will know that many of my constituents already access facilities across the border in England, and they have done for decades. But how are you going to address issues such as consultants working in NHS England hospitals telling Welsh patients that they have to wait longer because they’re Welsh patients? And how are you going to address the technological issues that exist when NHS trusts can't access Welsh patients' records, and, therefore, my constituents have a poorer experience as a result? How are you going to address those specific issues?

Thanks very much, and, Russell, as a Senedd Member who represents a border constituency, you'll be very aware how much cross-border activity already happens. In fact, the rail crash last night took people to England as well as to Welsh hospitals. So, I don't think we should overegg this too much. I think it's really important to recognise that there is a huge amount of work cross-border that is already done. In fact, you're quite right, there are opportunities for people in Wales. They are referred to hospitals in England. In fact, there are 27,000 Welsh patients waiting for admission to English hospitals. So, they're struggling the other side of the border, as well as the challenges we have here.

What we do have is the ministerial advisory group who will inform us and let us know where best practice happens. It may be that it's just across the border. It may be in other parts England. We've got to learn from best practice, we've got to copy the best practice. There's best practice happening within Wales. First of all, we've got to roll that out and make sure, if there are opportunities to go further in terms of that cross-border, learning from each other, then why wouldn't we do that? But, of course, there's already a cross-border statement of values and principles that has been agreed between the NHS in Wales and the NHS in England. That all exists already.

Our aim on our land and elsewhere is to reduce the effects of pesticide use on people and the environment to the lowest possible level. Non-chemical control methods must be considered first. Chemical pesticides, including glyphosate-based products, should only be used where alternatives are impractical or will not work.

Thank you for your answer, First Minister. There's plenty of research that shows that glyphosate is harmful to both human health and environment health as well, but it's still widely available for use by the general public in their gardens. Many local authorities continue to use it in parks and recreation areas. France, the Netherlands and Belgium have banned the use of this herbicide from household use, but Germany has also gone a step further and banned its use in public areas, and I believe there's a backbench proposal in Parliament today to prevent the use of that in areas where people live. But what I'm particularly interested in, First Minister, is the actions that you're taking, with the powers that you have, and the conversations that you're having with local government and also the UK Government, so that we can have alternative uses and really stop poisoning our land and, potentially, the people around it.

Well, thanks very much for your commitment and your interest in this matter. I'm sure you'll be really interested to know that, today, at the Royal Welsh showground, the Welsh Government is hosting an event for local authorities to demonstrate alternative methods of weed control. So, we're very aware of the need to move away from the use of glyphosate, and we're doing all we can to secure effective alternatives. So, it is being used to an extent across Welsh Government land and estate, but we're making efforts at the moment to make sure we secure effective alternatives.

I thank the First Minister.

The next item will be the business statement and announcement. The Trefnydd will be making that statement. Jane Hutt.

Thank you very much, Llywydd. There is one change to this week's business. Later on this afternoon, the Cabinet Secretary for Transport and North Wales will be making an oral statement on the rail collision on the Cambrian line.

Draft business for the next three weeks is set out in the business statement and announcement, which are both available to Members electronically.

Trefnydd, can I call for a statement from the Cabinet Secretary with responsibility for animal welfare today, specifically in relation to dog welfare and dog rescue centres? As many Members will know, I am the proud owner of a rescue whippet called Blue. He will be 15 years old this Christmas, and he's very, very close to my heart. But I do know, from visits to rescue centres in north Wales, that they're currently absolutely overwhelmed. I had an e-mail from Almost Home, a greyhound rescue centre—which also takes other breeds as well, but primarily greyhounds—and they say they're in a very, very worrying position. The rescue centre is full—they're having to turn animals away, and, unfortunately, they're in a position where they're having to euthanise perfectly healthy animals because of the sheer numbers that are coming to their doors, including entire litters of pups. This is a tragedy. We need to do something to help resolve these matters, and I would be grateful to know what action the Welsh Government is taking to promote responsible dog ownership and responsible dog breeding in order to address some of these challenges.

Diolch yn fawr, Darren Millar. You raise a very important question, and I know shared around the Chamber will be the importance of those rescue centres, in the goal of improving animal welfare and rescuing those animals that are at risk. Can we congratulate you on how you have cared for your rescue whippet over all these years? But I know there are others in this Chamber who also have done very much the same, at a personal level, but also supporting their own local rescue centres. I will ask the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary to look at this in terms of rescue centres for dogs. And let's also praise the work of organisations like the Dogs Trust, who do so much good work not just in terms of rescuing dogs, but also recognising where dogs might be at risk in certain circumstances, and we know that they're looking to all ways in which they can improve animal welfare.

Can I ask for two statements? I joined a protest in Wrexham on Friday, supporting around 700 workers at Oscar Mayer, who produces ready meals for some of the main supermarkets. Now, they're on strike because the company wants to cut their wages by £3,000 a year, and they're already, of course, on low pay. They even want to fire and rehire them on new terms, if that's necessary. So, can we have a statement from the Welsh Government not only supporting calls from the unions and others to criticise the company, but to support a boycott of the company's produce and the company itself, until it starts treating its workers with the dignity and respect they deserve?

Can I also have a second statement? There are concerns in Flintshire around the transfer of leisure and library services from Aura, which is an employee-owned, community benefit society, to Flintshire County Council. Now, not only is this a move away from the Welsh Government's focus on developing the foundational economy and the emphasis on social businesses, worker-owned co-operatives et cetera, but it also raises serious questions about whether the handover will be concluded by the end of this month. So, we need assurances on the continuity of employment, of course, for the workforce and continuity of services for the public, but also I'm sure that the Government would be keen to see continuity in the delivery of some of your own policies in that respect.

Diolch yn fawr, Llyr Gruffydd. So, your first point was on Oscar Mayer, and, in fact, this was raised last week by Carolyn Thomas as well, and I provided assurances then that we were looking at ways in which we could support the—. The fact is that that situation has threatened those employees. We do need to look at what ways we can put pressure in terms of what levers we have, but also recognising this totally goes against our social partnership legislation, and, of course, that’s where we lead the way, in terms of social partnership, and I’m aware that the Minister for social partnership is also engaged with this issue.

Your second point is very important in terms of the Aura Wales contract. It is a negotiation, as you say, with Flintshire council and library services, understanding that Flintshire library services under the management of Aura Wales consistently performed well over recent years, with particularly good attendance, Welsh language provision, and, in fact, Flintshire’s performed well in its Welsh public library standards annual report. So, what is important in terms of community asset transfer—and, as you say, this is partly about how we build that community foundational economy—is that it is looked at carefully in terms of the way forward, the difficult options to be explored, but also recognising that there has been good provision and that the transfer now needs to take place in a managed and responsible way.

Could I ask for two statements, leader of the house? First of all, on banking hubs, the Government was elected with a commitment to create a community bank. Now, we understand that that can't be taken forward for many different reasons, but the reasons for the commitment are still real to people up and down the country. There are communities and towns in my constituency that no longer have access to banking services, and it appears to me that banking hubs are taking the place of the traditional high-street bank. It is important, therefore, that the Welsh Government supports and sustains communities who are seeking to retain financial services in that community.

Could I also ask for a statement on the future of the shared prosperity fund? There are many organisations and individuals in Blaenau Gwent who have been relying on funding from the shared prosperity fund to deliver programmes and projects. Now, there doesn't seem at the moment to be a commitment on the future of that fund beyond the end of the current financial year. That means that organisations are looking towards potential redundancies and bringing projects and programmes to a premature conclusion. It would be useful, therefore, if the Welsh Government could update this Chamber on what is happening with the shared prosperity fund and how it intends to work with the United Kingdom Government to ensure that communities such as Blaenau Gwent receive the funding that people in the communities I represent need and require.

Thank you very much, Alun Davies, for those two very important questions, because we know this is about financial inclusion in our communities and the scale of the closure of commercial banks across Wales, which, I mean, we've charted in this Chamber over the years. Of course, this is where we have to ensure that our commercial banks are taking responsibility and that, actually, they are listening to us in terms of engaging with us as to how and where they can develop, particularly those banking hubs, access to finance, and remembering that so many of the people most affected by this are older people who aren't digitally included.

I'm very pleased that the Cabinet Secretary for Economy, Energy and Planning and, indeed, I and the Cabinet Secretary for finance have recently discussed this in terms of the way forward. I'm also looking at meeting with all of those responsible lenders in Wales, including credit unions, on how we can work together. I'm looking at pilots such as the Principality's OneBanx pilot in terms of access to cash, which is also a major issue, and we’ll be debating that tomorrow. I think it is also important that we look at the issues around regional investment and post-EU funds in terms of the levelling-up agenda—the so-called levelling-up agenda—of the previous UK Government. What we have to do now is make sure the strategic forum for regional investment and our approach to the long-term programme will be informed by the views of all our partners in Wales, building on our framework for regional investment and lessons learned from our EU funds and, indeed, the shared prosperity fund.

Trefnydd, fireworks season is fast approaching, and I’d like a Government statement, please, setting out what guidance could be given to local authorities to help reduce the stress that fireworks can place on people with post-traumatic stress disorder, on older people and on animals. RSPCA Cymru research has found that at least half of Wales’s pet owners experience distress during the fireworks season.

Now, I realise legislation that’s relevant to fireworks is reserved to Westminster, but I would support the RSPCA’s call for local authorities to be encouraged to do more, like establishing designated firework-free zones, exploring alternatives like drone displays and quieter fireworks, introducing restrictions on loud fireworks in public spaces, and providing public notices about when council-organised celebrations are expected to take place, so that people can plan and know what to expect. Could that guidance, please, be issued before November, and can that be set out in a statement?

Thank you very much, Delyth Jewell, and this is very topical. And I will ask the Cabinet Secretary to issue a written statement on the current situation, in terms of not just the legislation, not all of which, of course, is under our purview in terms of roles and responsibilities, but also the guidance on the best practice at a local authority level.  

In the winter of 2022-23, the Welsh Government provided £1 million to support and expand the provision of safe and warm places within the local community, which were very well liked. I welcome the Government’s announcement that, this year, it will be making available a further £1.5 million to continue to support the provision of spaces within the local community where people of all ages can go to access services and advice, participate in social activities, or simply get a warm drink with company. What I’m asking for is a statement on how will the money be distributed: will it be using the local government formula, by population, or via an application and assessment system?

Thank you very much, Mike Hedges. Well, I’m hopeful that colleagues around the Chamber have seen the written statement that I issued earlier on today, to announce that £1.5 million for warm hubs. It is about funding warm and safe spaces in the community. It’s very much building on previous investment. If you recall, we announced this warm hubs initiative as part of our response to the cost-of-living crisis. And I think also it’s really interesting that Gordon Brown, only a couple of weeks ago, who heads the warm welcome centres initiative across the UK, urged people to support warm spaces, warm welcome centres—they’re called many things. The good thing about it is that the funding is being allocated to local authorities in the same way, in terms of the division of funding, as it was, because it was very successful when it was introduced.

In 2022-23, we saw over 800 spaces being developed. And we know, in all our communities, some of those kept going. You can see that already, but now this means that local authorities will be funding the third sector, communities, libraries, their own provision, faith groups and venues. And, of course, what’s going to be very important about those warm and safe spaces is that they’re intergenerational, they’re for all age groups of the family, and also families and older people as well can access services, advice and get a warm cup of tea, coffee and refreshments, but it’s also about company and breaking down isolation. So, I do hope that colleagues across the Chamber will welcome the warm hubs, as I’ve named them, open to all.

Diolch, Llywydd. I’d like to ask for two statements, Trefnydd, one from the Minister for culture around arts funding. I recently visited Wyeside in Builth Wells, and they celebrate 150 years next year of that theatre and that cinema being open in Builth Wells. They have an ambitious project to actually bring the building back to life and spend an awful lot of money there. So, I'd like a statement from the Minister for culture about the equitability of arts funding across Wales to make sure that all venues get funding and not just specific ones in certain parts of the country.

I'd also like to ask for a statement from the Minister for transport regarding the roads review. I've got a scheme in my constituency that was on Pontybat crossroads; there have been an awful lot of accidents over the years. The roads review panel took that out and said it wasn't suitable to be proceeded with. That's something that came as a great alarm to my local community. So, it would be very useful to get an update on the roads review panel and its work to make sure that schemes like the one at Pontybat get done, because we've lost too many lives unnecessarily there and any delay might cost more. Diolch, Llywydd.

Thank you very much, James Evans. Of course, the importance of the social, cultural, economic and local value of the arts centre at a local level in Wales is profound. I know the Minister for Culture, Skills and Social Partnership will be glad to hear this question this afternoon. We have actually allocated an additional non-recurrent sum of £1.5 million revenue funding for this financial year to help the arts council—because, of course, this is an arm's-length funding principle with the Arts Council of Wales—to particularly protect jobs and strengthen resilience in the arts sector, and that would of course include support across your constituency, across Powys.

Your second point I think is a matter for—. If there's a particular issue about particularly road safety—obviously, we still very much support local authorities with road safety grants—I think this is something you need to raise not just with the local authority, as the key recipient of that road safety, but also I'm sure that the Cabinet Secretary for Transport and North Wales would be happy to receive correspondence from you on that matter.

A large number of constituents have been in touch with me who are on the Penrhyndeudraeth dental surgery's books. Those books are now closed to NHS patients, and have been for some time. Now, Denplan has been sold to another company, and those patients who are constituents of mine have received a message from the new company saying that they will now have a dental plan that will cost something in the region of £23 a month, with free care for children up to the age of six only, and children over six having to pay. Many of my constituents can't afford to pay these rates for dentistry, and, therefore, there is no dentist available to them locally. Of course, the core of all of this is the new dental contract that was introduced a few years ago, and the British Dental Association warned us that dentists would leave the sector because of this. So, can we have a statement from Government on this dental contract, with a full assessment of its impacts since its introduction, please?

Thank you very much, and thank you for drawing attention to this issue.

It's very important, as we've raised, and, indeed, the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care has also commented and provided statements on dentistry in Wales. And just in terms of our record in dentistry, I think it's worth again putting on record that, since 2022, 400,000 new patients have gained access to an NHS dentist. And in terms of—. But you raise an absolutely valid question about the contract and what that means, and, of course, dentists have signed up to the contract. Indeed, contracts are always negotiated, and I remember those negotations when I was the health and social services Minister many moons ago. But it is important, again, the impact of the contract, which, of course, will modernise the way that dentistry is provided to all sections of the community, but particularly to perhaps those who are furthest from the access to dentistry that we would wish. So, I thank you for the question, and, again, I will draw this to the attention of the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care.

The First Minister made it clear that fixing our roads is a priority for Welsh Government. This weekend, I was invited by Flintshire council to see their JCB Pothole Pro machine, with three dedicated attachments to cut, crop and clean the pothole. All that's needed is the tar. And with a typical pothole repaired in just eight minutes, the machine is up to four times quicker than traditional pothole repair methods and half the cost of current solutions. So, Flintshire are open to sharing the machine and showing other local authorities the benefits of using it. The only thing currently slowing them down is funding for the tarmac. So, may I request a statement to explain Welsh Government's plans to devolve funding to local authorities so they can begin to work on the pothole backlog and repair our roads? Thank you. 

Thank you very much, Carolyn Thomas. Well, as you said, a priority of our First Minister is to fix our roads. Obviously, this is crucial for road safety, but also connectivity and economic activity. And the need for maintenance across the network has to be, then, a priority in terms of the impact, for example, of the effects of climate change, higher volumes of vehicles, cars, more frequent rainfall. It's a challenge dealing with potholes and road maintenance, and that's why we are enhancing our maintenance response and learning from a lot of data-driven solutions. You've given a very good example of what you witnessed. I think it's about what is the best way that local authorities can use their resources in terms of inspections, public reports and also addressing potholes more efficiently. We know that potholes can be filled and then appear again unless they're refilled and repaired in the right way. So, yes, this is something that we will focus on as part of the Wales transport strategy—futureproofed, safe, accessible and well maintained. With a statutory duty on Welsh Ministers to maintain the strategic road network under the Highways Act 1980, of course, that's where we then work with our local authorities closely to deliver on those statutory duties. 

Trefnydd, I'd again like to request a statement from the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care regarding access to GP services. At the end of this month, St David's, in my constituency, will probably be the only city in the UK without a doctor's surgery, and that should be deeply embarrassing for this Government, which has stood back and done nothing to challenge the local health board and nothing to support the local community. Patients in St David's are very anxious and frustrated that they have been dispersed to other practices in Pembrokeshire. For some, the travel to another practice is simply too far and too stressful. Trefnydd, this should never have been allowed to happen, as the community has made it very clear that it opposes the health board's decision, and they've even brought forward alternative proposals themselves. Now, the Welsh Government has a duty to ensure that people can access primary care services in their local community. So, given that a Welsh city will no longer have a GP surgery on this Government's watch, I'd be grateful if we could have an urgent statement on access to primary care services, so that the Welsh Government can tell us what it is doing to stop the centralisation of GP services in the future. 

Thank you very much, Paul Davies. This is a key point, isn't it? You use the words 'access to primary care', which, of course—. Primary care, indeed, is, yes, the GP at the forefront of primary care, but also all the other ancillary services as well. I think it is important to recognise that that's how this is being addressed, given the example of St David's, in terms of the range of services that we would include in primary care, and that obviously includes pharmacy, in particular, but also the other health professionals and the nurse-led services, which are now being provided successfully across the whole of Wales, and the role of paramedics—all of these—and, indeed, optometrists, with the great Wales eyecare initiative, which means that people with eye conditions don't have to go to their GP; the optometrists can refer them straight to secondary care. So, we must look at—. And I know that you and many across this Chamber embrace that wider definition of primary care. But let's say, on GPs, more than 70,000 people have an appointment with their GP every day, and, by bringing in a new GP contract, the 8 a.m. bottleneck at surgeries is now, and should be, a thing of the past. I think we all know that in terms of our own experience. I think it’s important to recognise that 58 per cent more English residents are registered with GPs in Wales than Welsh residents registered in England, and we’ve been talking quite a lot about cross-border healthcare, haven’t we, this afternoon. So, it is regrettable that we don’t have a GP service in St David’s, but it is about how we can address this in terms of that wider understanding and provision of primary care.

Good afternoon, Trefnydd. I'd like to request a statement, if I may, from the Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs. In 2023-24, Dŵr Cymru Welsh Water were responsible for 105,000 spills, of which 93 per cent were rated significant. Dŵr Cymru is described as a not-for-profit organisation, and yet its chief exec in this last year has received a bonus of £91,000. Whilst on the one hand we as residents see bills increasing by 29 per cent, we see Dŵr Cymru—again, a not-for-profit organisation—seemingly receiving enough money to pay its chief executive nearly £100,000. The previous First Minister, Mark Drakeford, did promise—[Interruption.]

The Member needs to be heard. She’s making very important points. I think Members are interested in hearing them. 

Diolch yn fawr iawn. The previous First Minister did commit to a review of Dŵr Cymru, having set it up, I believe, over 20 years ago. Please could we have a statement with regard to timelines on when this review will happen? Diolch yn fawr iawn, Llywydd.

Thank you very much indeed, Jane Dodds. Indeed, this was a particularly hot topic last week with questions to the Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs, and indeed statements on the issue, concerns raised about the appalling record that had been revealed with Dŵr Cymru. And we see that that was mirrored across the UK in terms of the failure of those water authorities. We would hope, as a not-for-profit, that Dŵr Cymru Welsh Water would be in a better place—and they are compared with some, we must recognise that—but I think the legislation that’s now being introduced in Westminster is going to be important and helpful in addressing this. I know that the Cabinet Secretary is engaging closely with colleagues and ministerial counterparts in the UK Government on this issue. In fact, it’s important that that is worked through in terms of where we would go in terms of such a review of Dŵr Cymru.

But can I say that there are important—? I certainly work well with Dŵr Cymru on other issues. For example, the fact that they have a social tariff I think is very welcome in terms of their charging policies helping the vulnerable, reaching out to vulnerable people. So, there is much to be commended, and also the way in which members, citizens, have a role in the governance of Dŵr Cymru. So, I still think we should—. I’m sure we are proud of the fact that it’s not for profit, but its performance and delivery obviously need to be looked at and scrutinised very carefully, and certainly that’s the Cabinet Secretary’s approach to working with Dŵr Cymru.

Leader of the house, is it possible to have an oral statement from the Deputy First Minister in relation to the NRW tax fine? I appreciate a written statement was issued yesterday, but £19 million was paid on account and there’s more to be paid. That’s the sum total of what the Welsh Government is on the hook for for NRW’s incompetence, as I see it. Other public bodies had to lay staff off and obviously not undertake projects. NRW tried to put staff off the books and then continue to do projects that clearly couldn’t be undertaken if they were paying the appropriate taxation levels, national insurance and other costs. Any person involved in business understands that, if a self-employed person is taking the majority of their income from one contract or employer, that contractor or employer is responsible for the tax liability. We know that £19 million has been paid on account, we know from other comments that have been made that there's more to come. What confidence can anyone have that the Minister has correct oversight over NRW? It is an organisation that, back in 2020, I said was not fit for purpose, and clearly this fine indicates that. So, could we have an oral statement so that Members can challenge the Government as to why the taxpayer is on the hook for such a massive amount of money?

Thank you for that, Andrew R.T. Davies. Of course, you have seen the written statement issued by the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary. I think it is important to recognise that NRW and HMRC are working together to bring about a resolution, as the written statement said. I think it's important to say that this has not just been an issue for NRW, I think that it's been an issue—and this is back to your former Conservative Government—that has been identified for DEFRA as well as for the Welsh Government, and of course the MOJ as well, in terms of managing these issues. 

What's important—and hopefully you will hear me out on this—is how the Cabinet Secretary has increased engagement with NRW, is monitoring its progress, resolving the issue, learning lessons from how it came about—which is crucial, as obviously you would recognise—and also to ensure that there is work with NRW to enhance monitoring, support capacity and capability within NRW. But I know that the Cabinet Secretary is willing to come back and update the Chamber with statements as we move forward. We're working at pace on this, and I'm sure that, when we come back after recess, there'll be more to report to the Chamber and to Members.

We have used up all of the allocated time, so if the next three Members who speak can do so briefly, I would be grateful. 

I call for a single statement from the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care on support for children and young people with cancer and their families in Wales. The Young Lives vs Cancer 'Running on Empty' research has found that children and young people with cancer and their families in Wales spend an average of £280 every month, higher than the UK average, travelling for their specialist cancer treatment, and only 12 per cent receive financial support to cover these costs. We need to know what immediate steps the Welsh Government is taking to ensure that young people with cancer and their families can afford to travel to their treatment, such as introducing a young cancer patient travel fund. I call for a statement from the Cabinet Secretary accordingly. 

Thank you very much for that question, Mark Isherwood. Clearly, we want to have the best provision and services and access to cancer treatment for children and their families in Wales. Of course, our clinical networks are crucial to delivering that, but also the specialisms that are provided in support of children with cancer in our children's hospital, and, indeed, in terms of north Wales, the provision, of course, in England, which is crucially important and always has been networked for patients in north Wales.

Minister, please can I request a statement from the Cabinet Secretary for Transport and North Wales about ensuring that Transport for Wales services are truly accessible for all? The reason I ask for this today is because an 80-year-old constituent of mine in Caerphilly phoned Transport for Wales in an attempt to renew her concessionary travel card. The TfW operator she spoke to said that she couldn't renew her pass over the phone anymore and would have to go online to renew it. My constituent sadly does not have any online access, but thankfully her nephew did come in and save the day to help her. Cabinet Secretary, we've discussed in this Chamber many, many times—and I know that you are personally aware—that Wales has high levels of digital exclusion, with around 170,000 residents not being able to access the internet, and not everyone has someone to help them. So there must be another route for those people who are unable to use the internet to access these sorts of services. So, a statement from the Cabinet Secretary outlining what steps can be taken to ensure that this is the case and people aren't disadvantaged would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Natasha Asghar. Of course, last week, there were opportunities to ask questions and raise issues of that kind with the Cabinet Secretary for Transport and North Wales. I'm also very minded, as Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice, that this is for me as well in terms of accessibility, working very closely with disabled people in our disability rights taskforce with the travel group, working closely with Transport for Wales. So, again, we will look into this as a joint, cross-Government issue.

And finally, Sam Rowlands.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Trefnydd, I'd like to call for a statement from the Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs on progress on delivering flood alleviation projects. This is particularly following flooding incidents taking place at Sandycroft, Mancot and Pentre in the last few days following huge downpours, leading many homes to be evacuated and roads shut down in the area. I know the Member for Alyn and Deeside and I have both personally raised these issues, both with the local authority and with NRW. I'm aware that NRW do have plans to tackle the issues in the area, but it is clear that this needs to be done at pace to alleviate those fair concerns of local residents who have, sadly, been flooded not just once but many times in the past, because we need to see that work delivered quickly. So, a statement on the progress of this delivery would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

Thank you, Sam Rowlands. We're aware of recent flooding incidents across Wales. Our sympathies are with all those affected. Details of impacts on communities are still emerging, obviously, through contact with local authorities. We can see what impact that has on properties. That includes areas in north Wales, in Flintshire, to give one authority as an example. But also, I think the most important thing for today is that we've got a statement just coming up, Dirprwy Lywydd, on climate adaptation, and there'll be plenty of opportunities—this will be addressed this afternoon—for scrutiny, but also remembering that there was an oral statement on 1 October on flood preparedness. I think returning to that is important, to look at that statement, and the fact that NRW was provided with £800,000 to address the flooding problems, for example, at Sandycroft, one example of where that flood impact was so devastating.

I thank the Trefnydd.

Item 3 today is a statement by the Counsel General and Minister for Delivery on the Legislation (Procedure, Publication and Repeals) (Wales) Bill. I call the Counsel General, Julie James.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. The Bill, though technical in nature, is intended to form an important part of the infrastructure that underpins Welsh law. Some provisions fill gaps and regularise the position of Welsh legislation, such that it is given a similar status to Scottish and Northern Irish legislation. Other provisions are more novel, and I am particularly pleased that the Bill, should it be enacted, will for the first time impose a duty on the King’s Printer to publish Welsh legislation in up-to-date form. I am also very pleased to say that we will for the first time be imposing comprehensive and clear functions on the King’s Printer in relation to Wales. And in exercising the functions under the Bill, the King’s Printer is now to be known as the King’s Printer for Wales.

As the title of the Bill suggests, there are three main parts to the Bill. The first relates to the procedures for making Welsh subordinate legislation. The Bill seeks to rationalise and, essentially, codify procedures that have become overly complex. This involves labelling these procedures in accordance with the fundamental issue of whether Ministers should be able to make subordinate legislation subject to the Senedd being able to annul it at a later date, or whether it is appropriate for the Senedd to approve the legislation in advance.

My intention is to simplify existing legislative provisions relating to these procedures so that we set out the procedures once in this Bill, giving them a shorthand label that will be used to describe them in future Billsand, in due course, in our Standing Orders. The two main procedures are the Senedd approval procedure, which corresponds to what we today call the draft affirmative procedure, and the Senedd annulment procedure, which corresponds to what we today call the negative resolution procedure.

We also provide for a Senedd confirmation procedure—what we today call the made affirmative procedure. Under this, Ministers may make subordinate legislation, but this applies subject to obtaining the later approval of the Senedd, a procedure that we, of course, saw being used frequently during the coronavirus—honestly, how can I have forgotten how to say that in such a short amount of time—during the coronavirus pandemic.

Finally, in general, all other Welsh statutory instruments not subject to any of these procedures must be laid before the Senedd. This provides for uniformity as, today, not all statutory instruments are subject to this requirement. I should stress that, through this Bill, the Government is not seeking to impose its will on the Senedd in this respect. It is open to the Senedd to decide, as it does now, the form of scrutiny that it considers should be applied to the exercise of powers to make subordinate legislation. The existing procedures have operated in the UK Parliament for many years, have been adopted both here and in the Scottish Parliament, and ultimately there has been very little innovation over time. And, Dirprwy Lywydd, that's probably understandable. As I have said, essentially the question is one of whether the Senedd approves a draft before the legislation is made, or whether it is content for Ministers to make the legislation first and then vote to annul it after the event if the Senedd does not agree to it. It is hard to imagine what else might happen.

The second Part of the Bill modernises the rules on publication of Welsh legislation. The legislative framework for publishing Welsh laws is fragmented and outdated. The current provisions are scattered across multiple enactments, some of which are very old and not fully adapted to the modern Welsh legislative context. This fragmentation leads to confusion and inefficiency. For instance, while Acts of the Senedd are officially printed and preserved, there is no clear legislative obligation to print these Acts, nor is there formal recognition of Welsh legislation within the remit of the King’s Printer of Acts of Parliament. Similarly, Welsh statutory instruments are published as part of the UK series, lacking distinct recognition and numbering, which complicates their identification and accessibility. Subordinate legislation not made as statutory instruments, such as temporary road orders, suffer from inconsistent publication practices. Although the Welsh Government has made efforts to publish these on its website, the process is not always straightforward, leading to gaps in public access and transparency. 

To address these issues, the Bill establishes a more coherent and bespoke system for the publication of Welsh legislation. This involves making provision for Wales that is similar to that made for Scotland by the Interpretation and Legislative Reform (Scotland) Act 2010. This includes, surprisingly perhaps, the formal creation of a class of legislation that is to be known as a 'Welsh statutory instrument' and the formal imposition of requirements on a person who is now to be known as the King’s Printer for Wales. Notably, the provisions are also designed to reflect today’s reality of processing legislation electronically.

As part of our wider initiatives to make Welsh law more accessible, the Bill also reflects work that the Government has been undertaking for some time to identify provisions on the statute book that are no longer needed. Part 3 of the Bill, therefore, introduces a series of repeals of provisions that are no longer of practical utility or benefit. On the face of it, these are technical behind the scenes matters but, of course, when people want to see and read the law, it needs to be available to them at the click of a button. They need to have confidence that they are reading the correct version of the law, and not have to worry whether provisions have been amended and updated or are not relevant because they have become spent or obsolete.

Dirprwy Lywydd, finally, the Bill will make some minor amendments to Part 2 of the Legislation (Wales) Act 2019. By modernising our legislative framework, we can enhance the clarity and accessibility of Welsh law, ultimately benefiting all who rely on it. I very much look forward to working with Members as they scrutinise this legislation. Diolch.

There is merit, in terms of completeness, accessibility and accountability, in a technical procedural publication and repeals Bill to both bring together and formalise the procedural arrangements for making and publishing Welsh subordinate legislation and to improve the accessibility of Welsh law.

The Law Society have stated that the purpose of the Bill, to bring together and formalise the procedural arrangements for making Welsh subordinate legislation and the requirements for publishing Acts of Senedd Cymru and Welsh statutory instruments and other subordinate legislation that is not made by statutory instrument, is not only going to help their members working in Wales, but also their members who work cross border on Welsh matters. As an example they gave a London firm working for a Welsh client to buy a property in Wales. More widely, though, how will this operate where it intersects with both UK law applicable in Wales and Welsh residents operating under the legal system in England?

The Law Society have also stated that improving the accessibility of Welsh law is going to be beneficial in increasing public awareness of law. They added, however, that it can really only be successful if it comes with a public awareness campaign, as people need to be informed about what is happening. It has the potential to be a good education campaign for the rule of law, but only if followed with the publicisation that it deserves. So, what plans, if any, are being made to maximise this opportunity from the Bill? In other words, how will the accessibility of Welsh law increase the public's understanding of devolved powers and devolved legislation, so that they can access the correct information from the right place at the right time?

The Bill itself has noble aims. The Law Society states, however, that it will only fulfil them if resource is put in to supporting the legal sector, both in Wales and cross border, to understand the changes and how these may affect their ways of working. So, what assessment has the Welsh Government therefore made of the financial impact of this proposed legislation? What, if any, resource will it be providing to support the legal sector to understand and implement these changes? And how does the Counsel General plan to support and work with the legal sectors in both England and Wales throughout the passage of the Bill?

Unless Members of the Senedd sit on the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, they won't necessarily know that the Welsh Government is making subordinate legislation when it is made via the negative procedure, rather than the affirmative procedure, when it comes to Plenary. Finally, therefore, what consideration will you give to better ways of bringing negative procedure subordinate legislation to the attention of Members of the Senedd, bearing in mind that we are deemed to consent to this?

Diolch, Mark. Thank you very much. I think that we agree that this is very much wanted and needed, and I’m glad that you had a look at the Law Society’s reaction to it. I wasn’t quite clear whether you had spoken to them. I have spoken to them, and I am sure that you will have, or will do in the future. This is just very much to be welcomed.

What this does is, effectively, make it very—. If you go on legislation.gov.uk, which is where all lawyers look for things, and where members of the public can as well, it will make it very obvious what is a Welsh statutory instrument, what is a Welsh piece of legislation and what isn’t. You can still find that today, but it’s a harder search. So, it will just make it much more straightforward. You can, of course, also find UK Government legislation that affects Wales there, so, it's England and Wales legislation for reserved matters, for example.

In terms of some of the other questions that you asked, obviously, this doesn’t affect how the Senedd decides which procedure to use. I very much want to make very clear to everyone that the Government is not proposing to have an influence on that. This is very much a matter for the committees scrutinising the legislation, to indicate to the Minister, and make amendments accordingly, as to which procedure they want to use.

What it does do is clarify what the procedures actually do. So, I have had conversations in previous roles, for example, in various committees, about whether an affirmative procedure should be used, and if so, which affirmative procedure. And, frankly, I think that it hasn’t been straightforward to make sure that everyone understands what that is. This will make it very clear what that means.

So, effectively, what we are doing is making a much more straightforward choice between a Minister that lays statutory instruments and—. By the way, just answering your last question, all statutory instruments will be laid in the Senedd. So, that’s an improvement as well, and that’s your chance to know that they are happening. Then, if the Minister was using the annulment procedure, as it will now be called, because that’s much more straightforward, it will be laid, and if the Senedd doesn’t like it, it can call for a debate on the floor and pass an annulment motion. If it’s an affirmative process, then the Minister, as we all do, comes to the Senedd and makes a statement on the statutory instrument; it’s debated, and then the Senedd decides whether or not to approve that, as part of the affirmative process—so, the approval process.

So, I think that it just clarifies it. It makes it much, much more accessible to people who aren’t inside this building. I only speak for my own constituents, but if I knock doors in my constituency and talk about a superaffirmative procedure, there are not too many people who know what that is, in all fairness—apart from you, Huw, obviously. But what we are doing is making the language accessible, making it much more obvious what it is, and putting an obligation on the Government to lay every single one.

As a technical Bill, it's very difficult to find anything to disagree with in this Bill, so I'm going to mention a few things that aren't in the Bill and that could be included, or could be relevant to it.

You've just mentioned, Minister, in your response there the changes that will emerge from this Bill in terms of the digital accessibility of Welsh law on legislation.gov.uk, and this emerges from the work programme that followed the previous corresponding Bill, the Legislation (Wales) Act 2019, and then a programme on the future of Welsh law and digital accessibility. But another part of that was the Law Wales website, which is a lot more accessible than legislation.gov.uk to ordinary constituents. I was looking earlier at that website and many of the pages haven't been updated for four years, three years or two years. On some pages—education, for example—there's nothing there at all. So, can you update us on those other elements in terms of the digital accessibility of Welsh law?

The Bill relates to the subordinate legislation process, as you've mentioned. You said, in terms of the different options available in dealing with subordinate legislation, that there is no other choice. Well, there is another choice that's been discussed on a number of occasions, truth be told. In the Westminster context, it's come up on a number of occasions over the years, and it's arisen in some of our debates here in the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, and that is to have a process that enables the Senedd to pass an amendment to subordinate legislation—an amendable statutory instrument. They do exist in Westminster. They are exceptional, but they do exist, and there is some debate around having a system that would allow this Senedd to pass an amendment to subordinate legislation, in order to ensure that there is improved democratic accountability for subordinate legislation. So, is this Bill perhaps a vehicle for us to introduce that democratic innovation in our context?

And finally, Dirprwy Lywydd, the issue of bilingualism. We have been discussing in our committee too the statutory instruments that are scrutinised here and in Westminster, and that, at the moment, are only published in English. The argument made up until this point is that there is opposition in Westminster to having bilingual versions. Now, our understanding is that there is no opposition in Westminster to that. So, is this Bill a means for us, with the agreement of the Westminster Government, to ensure that those statutory instruments that are scrutinised in both places are produced bilingually? 

Diolch, Adam. You make a whole series of really interesting points there. In terms of digital access, we're talking here about the changes to legislation.gov.uk, and, Dirprwy Lywydd, that does give me an opportunity to put on record how much we value that website, operating as a trusted free-to-access and free-to-use resource for the public. My officials have been working with the team behind that for a number of years and have engaged with them on all the publication aspects set out in the new Part 2B to the 2019 Act. This will have a limited impact for the website, but it will be necessary for a new formal category of legislation to be set up within the system underpinning the site, and the cost of that is estimated and is not huge.

In terms of other websites, that's outwith this. This is basically putting obligations on something that is a pan-UK site, to make sure that it correctly identifies Welsh legislation and statutory instruments in a way that's easy to access. You can access it now, but you have to spend some time, as you clearly have—I certainly have. So, I think this is a huge improvement on that, and we can look again at other means of accessing Welsh legislation on other websites, for sure, but this is specifically about imposing obligations on the King's Printer and on the website, so a slightly different point.

In terms of the amendable statutory instrument, I'm very keen to look at that. I think the made affirmative process is one of the ones that we can have a look at, the approval process. So, in approving it, I don't see any reason why you couldn't suggest an amendment.

I've recently been appointed onto the committee that the Deputy Presiding Officer is going to chair to look at the Senedd processes. One of the things I'm keen to do is make sure, as we use statutory instruments very frequently on big framework Bills—. So, the one I've been using as an example is the infrastructure Act that I took through the Senedd. That has a very large number of statutory instruments attached to it, rightly so. I still am absolutely certain that that's the right way to go, because they will include the detail of how to make an application through that system, and that might change very rapidly over the years, but it does seem to me sensible that a statutory instrument containing policy of that sort should not just go to the LJC committee, but should be referred to a policy committee for the policy scrutiny of that, and that would necessarily lead to an amending stage, it seems to me. So, I think there are different routes to that, and that's something to be discussed as part of that committee's processes for improved processes for the next Senedd, and indeed we could look at it for the end of this Senedd. But I do think that, as those kinds of big framework Bills come through, as they increasingly will as the Senedd matures, we do need to look at a different process for policy SIs as well as for the regulatory ones that we've been used to.

But I think this does make that easier in the sense that there's one process for that and then one other process for the ones that aren't controversial. Although I do remember Suzy Davies, when she was a Member of this Senedd, bringing an annulment motion, I think that's the only one I've ever seen, actually. So, the process is possible but it's more complex now. So, I'd be very, very keen to have a look at that.

And then, in terms of the bilingual point, I know the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee have written to the Secretary of State. I'm not quite certain of where the status of that correspondence is, but we've also made the point that we'd like things made bilingually, and I'm very keen to do that. My understanding is it's not quite as clear cut as they think it's okay, but I think it's something we should pursue, because obviously anything that's made either jointly by this Parliament and the UK Parliament or by us should be published bilingually, clearly.

Thank you for the statement, Cabinet Secretary. It might be technical, but I genuinely believe it's an important step forward to give parity to Welsh law, to improve Welsh law, and to make Welsh law more accessible. I'll give an admission now: around 15 years ago, I was in the Swansea Civil Justice Centre, and my main point of argument was a section of a piece of legislation I'd printed off the Legislation.gov.uk website. The point was conceded by my opponent, and the judge retired to draft his judgment. Less than five minutes later, a very annoyed judge came back and informed me that my main argument had been based on a piece of legislation that had already been revoked. The reason I say this is that the law is complicated; it's even complicated for lawyers. So, any work done by the Welsh Government to make it more accessible is to be commended, especially because you won't be praised for this, you won't be congratulated for this, and it won't gain positive headlines, but it's important work to do. Of course, this work is time consuming and very expensive. We've seen that in Westminster. We haven't seen a repeal Bill in Westminster since 2013. How often would you like to see a repeal Bill here in Wales, and do you have the capacity to do it, considering that we have seen a delay with the planning consolidation Bill? Diolch yn fawr.

Yes. Thank you very much for that, Rhys. I have to say, I share your experience: I too have been caught out exactly like that when I was still practising as a lawyer, and I also very much remember the butterflies in your tummy as you put forward a novel proposition and aren't absolutely certain that it's the most up-to-date piece of law. So, I wholeheartedly understand the point, and I do think that this will really help. I really meant it when I said in the statement that it should be accessible at the touch of a button. You should get the most up-to-date law, as it is currently in force in Wales, when you do that. It doesn't help the historian in me where you want to trace, perhaps, going backwards; that can be a bit more difficult. And, of course, if you do want to do it on paper, for a small fee you can actually get an officially printed copy, and you can print it off from the website, as I'm sure you know. But it does mean it's more accessible to non-lawyers as well as lawyers in profession, so I completely agree with all of that.

As to the repeals, we are going to take the planning consolidation Bill through, I very much hope, as long as we can get our legislative timetables sorted out. I will have the privilege of doing that as things stand. Having practised law in that area for a very long time, I know how much it's required. And what we hope is that, as the Senedd matures and becomes more accustomed to the consolidation process, the repeals will follow automatically. Because it's in consolidating the law that you start to realise where the outdated pieces are. And I think our Office of Legislative Counsel is very keen indeed to make sure that we do have a regular repeals process in place, because that obviously assists with the whole issue about what is and what isn't in force.

So, I think we're very keen, we'll be very keen to have a discussion about how the consolidation process works in the light of the first one, which is nearly through its passage now. And then the big planning consolidation one I think will help us hone our practice in that regard, and we'll be able to make some recommendations for the future Senedd work off the back of, if you like, the experience of doing that. It's the first really big one we've done.

Thank you very much for your statement and also the work you're doing to try and make the law more accessible to the citizen, because this is a really important part of the process of enabling the citizen to be able to challenge an act by either a public or indeed a private company that they think is not fit for purpose. So, having everything in one place—not literally in one place, but a framework that obviously then signposts people to the relevant piece of legislation, depending on what they're interested in—seems to me absolutely crucial. We also have to make Welsh lawmaking more nimble, because we're about to debate the climate adaptation strategy, which means we really do need to get on with certain matters if we're going to avoid disaster.

So, you mentioned the infrastructure Act as being a framework piece of legislation. As somebody who was involved in the scrutiny of it, one of the most important elements of our recommendations was to ensure that everything in relation to that, and any updates to it, were all in the same place. What you're saying, though—

Can you ask the question now, please?

—is that there's still an awful lot of work to be done on making it a live document that's relevant to speeding up and simplifying the process of applying for environmental or any other infrastructure legislation. So, I wonder if you could say a little bit more about how this piece of work you're doing is going to improve on that. 

Thank you for that, Jenny. That's a very good example. There's a framework Act now that's gone through the Senedd, completed its processes, had Royal Assent, but now we need to make the subordinate legislation that brings it to life. I took that Bill through, you'll remember. I was very clear that it was a process Bill, I didn't put any policy in it, it was just a process, it would apply to all policies hitherto, regardless of what they were, and so on. The statutory instruments that go with that will set out on the face of them—the statutory instruments that is—exactly how an application would work, what's included in that, how you should do it and so on. There's policy in there; it's not a straightforward—. And once it's all published, once those SIs have gone through in whatever form the Senedd approves them, then they will be published together as part of this. You'll be able to follow one to the other.

At the moment, our processes would refer all of those SIs through the LJC committee, because they're considered to be technical. I just think it's one of the things that we should consider—it's just my personal opinion—that we should consider whether for some SIs there is a policy element to that that ought to be referred to a policy committee, and that's something I'm sure the Deputy Presiding Officer will be wanting to look at as part of the piece of work that we're about to do on a revision of the Standing Orders, because that's what that would take, and it's something that the Trefnydd and myself have discussed with the Llywydd very recently, actually, as recently as this morning in fact, Jane, wasn't it? So, it's a live point, and I think it's one that we're all very interested in.

And finally, Alun Davies.

I'm grateful, Deputy Presiding Officer. Can I welcome very much the publication of this Bill—I'm probably one of the few people who has actually really enjoyed reading it since it was published—and also the way in which you've answered questions this afternoon? I'm particularly grateful to you for the way in which you answered Adam Price, because I think this is an opportunity for us to change the way we operate here, and it's an opportunity for us to potentially co-produce legislation in a way that perhaps the system, as it currently exists, precludes us from doing. 

I'm particularly interested—. The Deputy First Minister—since he's here, I'll name him—was in front of the committee yesterday, in fact, and I argued that a legislative consent motion that he's taking through is simply creating framework legislation. Now, he wouldn't have dared say that, of course, as a Chair of the committee, but times change. In terms of where we are now, that framework legislation will be delivered through secondary instruments, and it appears to me that we have an opportunity—following on from the points that have already been made—here to design a way in which the Government gets its business, which is its right, but this place has an opportunity to play a richer role in delivering those statutory instruments so that we can debate policy and we can ensure that the statutory instruments that are on the statute book then deliver not just the ambition of Government, but also the active participation of the Senedd. 

Thank you, Alun. 

I completely agree with that. I think one of the things, as we mature as an organisation and as an institution, is to continuously review our processes, and I think the way that we've started to pass these big framework Acts—it's inevitably the case that the more administrative power this place has, the more likely those kinds of Acts are—that we then need to review the process by which we make the secondary legislation that, as Jenny Rathbone said, brings them to life, if you like.  

I thank the Counsel General. 

Item 4 now, statement by the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs on the climate adaptation strategy, and I call on the Cabinet Secretary—Huw Irranca-Davies. 

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. Climate change is happening now. We can already see the effects. Here in Wales, it is affecting our communities, our public services, our infrastructure and our natural world, and these changes will only escalate over the next few years. 

Many of our communities are already feeling the impact of rising sea levels and coastal erosion. We are seeing increasing risks from storms, heavy rainfall, heatwaves, drought and wildfire. And we must always remember that the impacts of climate change will not be felt equally by everyone. The most vulnerable people in communities among us are and will be the most at risk. 

That said, the change brings opportunities too, from new outdoor activities and jobs in building infrastructure, to new types of crops and different tourism offers. We must do everything we can to ensure the benefits are also equally shared between us. And that's why, with a month to go until world leaders gather at Baku for COP29, we are setting out how we will help Wales adapt to climate change. This Government's priorities—to deliver a healthier Wales, green jobs and growth, opportunity for every family, and connecting communities, must be tackled in the context of climate change.

We must tackle both the impacts and the causes, and both are inextricably linked. For example, making progress on reducing our carbon emissions relies on us protecting carbon stores in healthy peatland, in soils, in woodland and the sea, which are themselves at risk from climate change. That's why work like our commitment to protecting 30 per cent of our land and our seas by 2030 and our pealand restoration programme are so important. And I'm pleased to confirm that we have indeed reached our peatland restoration target a whole year early. This has safeguarded more than 1.6 million tonnes of stored carbon. it's resulted in an estimated emissions reduction of 8,000 carbon tonnes each year—that's equivalent, Dirprwy Lywydd, to the emissions of 5,700 cars annually. We are protecting peatland from damage from climate change and reducing emissions at the same time. Now, this is a solid example of why it's essential that we consider decarbonisation and adaptation together. 

The climate adaptation strategy is focused on addressing the latest evidence on climate risk. The strategy also addresses the findings of the Climate Change Committee Wales's climate adaptation progress report 2023, and sets out how these are informing our work. There is already a huge amount of work happening right across Wales to build resilience. It’s key in so many areas—water and flood management, public health, forestry, agriculture, transport, development planning and more. For example, we are providing more than £75 million to flood risk management authorities across Wales this financial year—2024-25—to protect people’s homes and businesses. We have committed to protecting an additional 45,000 properties this Senedd term. We are delivering more sustainable schemes via nature-based solutions and catchment-scale management approaches.

Indeed, during a recent visit to the coastal risk management programme scheme in Aberaeron, I had the opportunity to meet two apprentices who are actively involved in learning and developing skills and approaches within the project to ensure sustainable construction methods for future generations. The construction company, BAM, have met with local school pupils to help pupils understand and realise their potential in becoming the civil engineers of the future, and to learn about how civil engineers can work with communities to design engineering solutions.

But we know that more needs to be done. We are committed to embedding our response to the climate and nature emergency in everything that we do. The strategy includes plans for all parts of Government working together, from protecting vulnerable transport networks from extreme weather conditions to working with the UK Government to improve food security. And while the Welsh Government has an essential role in delivering climate adaptation, we simply cannot do this alone.

The strategy also, therefore, captures the key actions taken by partners, including Natural Resources Wales, Public Health Wales, local authorities and public services boards. For example, Public Health Wales has published the health impact assessment of climate change in Wales to help organisations assess the risks to health and well-being from climate change, while Natural Resources Wales focus on nature-based solutions to reduce flooding and are developing coastal adaptation pilots in the most vulnerable parts of Wales. 

I am really grateful to stakeholders, whose contribution has provided such breadth and depth to this strategy. We will continue to work with our communities, with all sectors and businesses across Wales, to strengthen our climate adaptation policies further. We also want to support people right across Wales to take part. To this end, we will continue to develop our Climate Action Wales programme. This year’s Wales Climate Week in November will also be focused on climate adaptation and will provide an opportunity for people across the country to get involved. We are also supporting community groups to host local events, through our climate conversations fund.

In essence, this strategy is a catalyst for further action. We are developing a new monitoring framework to help translate the policies into action on the ground and to drive that continuous improvement. The framework will be published next year, and we will work with relevant public bodies to gather the evidence needed to support this. And we are exploring how to further strengthen our links with academia on a range of topics, such as climate adaptation.

Dirprwy Lywydd, several difficult and complex challenges stem from climate change, and there is still a lot to do. Our new strategy on climate adaptation is certainly an important step forward. Thank you.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for your statement on this crucial policy area. Indeed, the Climate Change Committee’s 2023 progress report on adaptation in Wales found that there was insufficient progress in delivery and implementation, and that monitoring is very limited. Climate change is here—we know that. A new maximum daily temperature was recorded in Wales of 37 degrees in Hawarden Airport, Flintshire. In fact, the costs arising from climate change could now be around 7 per cent of UK GDP by 2100. So, we must adapt in the best and most economical way for Wales.

However, to ensure that we have sufficient Senedd scrutiny, and effective Senedd scrutiny, it is essential that we have ample time to consider documents ahead of Plenary sessions such as this. Today, we did not receive a copy of the new 88-page adaptation strategy until after midday. So, I would ask, Cabinet Secretary: I know that you are heart and soul in this portfolio, and that you are very busy, but surely your officers could provide all Senedd Members more than a few hours' time—well, it was less than that—to consider paperwork and policy ahead of sessions in this Chamber.

I welcome the fact that you will be setting up a new policy forum with experts on climate change to help drive forward this agenda. Again, how inclusive will that be to other Members not within the Government party? Climate change policy, as we see from the plan, is broad. So, how are you going to ensure that the forum is representative of the whole sector? You're aware that no part of NRW's work will be unaffected by climate change, and that over 50 actions have now been compiled. On top of that, they are a member of the 13 public services boards. The Senedd has previously heard that NRW is facing a significant funding failure, exacerbated by rising costs and grant-in-aid allocations that do not match inflation. What consideration have you given to reducing the pressure on NRW, by sharing some of its responsibilities, such as flood management, to a new national flood agency for Wales?

Section 4(3) rightly acknowledges that councils are at the forefront in tackling global warming and mitigating climate risk. So, how will you ensure that local authorities, including my own, Conwy County Borough Council, where they are potentially facing bankruptcy as a result of the lack of funding coming from here—? [Interruption.] What consideration have you given—? Oh, so we've got austerity in the Welsh Government now, are you saying, the Member on the backbench. What consideration have you given to the fact that statutory services, such as education and social care, are pulling resources away from projects that could help to tackle the impact of climate change? They themselves are very important areas of service delivery.

I welcome the plan for nature and the fact that the Welsh seabird conservation strategy that we have long called for on these benches is now a pledge for 2025, and that commitment has also been made to fund restoration of key coastal habitats, such as salt marsh and seagrass. But can you go a step further and arrange for a national marine development plan for Wales to be created that maps out exactly where we want large renewable projects and others to take place? In terms of fisheries, there is no reference to the impact of green energy projects on our fishermen. Could you add as a target the need to look at how infrastructure such as offshore windfarms can have a positive impact on our fishermen, such as through the creation of artificial reefs, seagrass farms and limiting disturbance to the sea bed?

In terms of agriculture, it is noted that the Welsh Government will support on-farm renewable energy projects. Will you caveat that by objecting to the loss of whole farms to solar? In relation to food security—and I've raised this so many times since I've been here—the vision does not mention reducing reliance on imports. So, will you confirm that you agree with me that we should help both Wales and the rest of the world to adapt to climate change by making a clear policy commitment to produce more food in Wales and rely less on costly imports—costly to our residents and costly in terms of the climate change agenda?

There is much more that I could ask, but, finally, it is noted in the report that the Welsh Government will undertake further reviews and report on progress within the next five years. Can we have those progress reports annually? And also, we need a proper opportunity to debate all the targets that you have set in this plan. Diolch.

Diolch, Janet. Dirprwy Lywydd, just to point out that the strategy that has been brought forward and the statement today is to give the first opportunity, not the only opportunity, to discuss the range of issues within this. Because the strategy, indeed, is cross-Government, cross-sector, cross-society. We're not going to do this justice within 45 minutes this afternoon, but it is an opportunity, I would say, to bring this to the floor of the Senedd, and it will be the first of many opportunities as well. Because this covers climate mitigation, business and economy, social justice, flooding, health and well-being, food, agriculture, plants, invasive species—nobody mentioned that this afternoon, but it's a real one that I'm fascinated by—culture, historic environment, planning, buildings, ICT and telecoms, resilience of our wider infrastructure, work with UK Government. There's a heck of a lot within this. 

We can't do it full justice this afternoon, Janet, but if you or other Members, beyond the discussion here on the floor of the Senedd today, want to go into more detail, I'm always keen to engage with it. But what it does do is it sets out the challenges we have, the causes and impacts of climate change, and it also sets out a very clear vision of what a well adapted Wales would look like in a positive future that does address the risks from the change in climate, but also the opportunities that it affords and also reducing inequalities across our society as well. So, the purpose of this strategy is to drive wider engagement, including, I have to say, with Senedd Members as well on the topic of climate adaptation. And we're well under way now with progress towards Wales Climate Week in November as well. But it does call, Janet, for collective action; it does, actually, point out that there will be a monitoring framework, as you mentioned, which will be published next year; it does very clearly say that we must embed climate adaptation into decision making across all policy areas, and also the fact that this will save money in the long run, as the cost of not doing anything, the damage, will be greater. 

Just to pick up a couple of the many points that you did raise there, Janet, in respect of flooding, we recognise the challenge of this, and that's why the capital spending that the Welsh Government has committed last year and this year is huge and significant, it's at a record level. But, of course, we're also providing more than £75 million to flood risk management authorities across Wales this financial year, to support wider adaptation and resilience. This will go towards the combination of flooding and sea rise, protecting an additional 45,000 properties this term. This is working with local authorities and others, like contractors and NRW, on the ground, but we are also working with nature-based solutions as well. We do, indeed, have to do more on the marine environment. That's why the work we have under way in Government on marine planning and the bringing forward of marine zones is well under way, and we look forward to bringing that forward to the Senedd as well for further scrutiny.

Certainly, in terms of food security, we often have this debate that, sometimes, gets drawn down to the lowest common denominator of percentages of how much food we actually produce. And I keep saying, 'Of course, we actually need to produce good, affordable, nutritious food here for our domestic markets' and there's much we can do within that, but we also shouldn't exclude the ability of our farmers, where they see the commercial opportunity, to export their produce as well. And, actually, they get better prices sometimes and premium prices for things that we don't consume here, that we export. So, where does that tie in to food security? Because there is global food security. There are some things that we import because they are not produced here. We can definitely do more. Jenny regularly raises the issue of horticulture. We can do much more on that. But with food security, there's an international aspect to it as well as a domestic aspect.

Indeed, the Welsh Government works with DEFRA and the devolved administrations, and the United Kingdom Food Security Report—the UKFSR—which sets out our analysis of food security. And whilst we can never be 100 per cent secure, we do, through the sustainable farming scheme, want to make sure that we can produce a future for sustainable farming in Wales that helps us with climate resilience, because actually the best protection for our farms and farming livelihoods in Wales is delivering climate resilience into farming, which is what we're trying with the SFS, and that will also boost our actual food production here for domestic and international markets as well. There were many more points, Janet, that you raise, but I'm more than happy to have further debate on these as time goes by.  

Thank you to the Cabinet Secretary for this statement. It is so important, because adapting to the climate is one of the most serious challenges facing us in Wales as we, as you've set out, endeavour to safeguard our communities, our infrastructure and our natural environment against the increasing impacts of this climate crisis.

Tthe projections are frightening: by the 2050s, annual temperatures in Wales could rise 1.2 degrees Celsius, with wetter winters and drier summers threatening our ecosystems, water resources and, of course, public health. Bearing this context in mind, today’s announcement on the new climate adaptation strategy is a key moment, I think.

My first concern relates to the fact that the last climate change risk assessment for Wales was undertaken in 2021. Building on what's already been said on this, because the climate is evolving at an ever-increasing rate, what more recent assessment will you look at to consider the risks that face us now? Do you have confidence that we have the most up-to-date data to ensure that this strategy reflects the evidence and the latest scientific trends in an adequate manner?

The UK Climate Change Committee’s report, the CCC, noted 61 risks and opportunities related to climate change, with almost half of them requiring urgent action. I’d like to ask therefore what specific steps the Government will be taking to mitigate threats across several key sectors, such as water management, public health and infrastructure. How will you be prioritising those within the current Senedd term, please?

The CCC has highlighted that monitoring and evaluation are so limited that the CCC was unable to assess progress against over half of the adaptation outputs. This raises the question as to why, despite the planning frameworks, the desired results haven’t yet been achieved. So, how does the Welsh Government intend to tackle that problem and those deficiencies, and what steps will be taken to strengthen the monitoring and evaluation framework, please?

One of the other key findings in the CCC’s report, because it’s so important in this context, of course, was the need for greater clarity, and this has been raised already, as to where responsibility lies for providing climate adaptations. Public bodies like Natural Resources Wales, local authorities, local resilience fora and public services boards all play a role, but we haven’t seen clear lines of accountability that ensure co-ordinated and effective action across these bodies. So, how will the Welsh Government ensure that these organisations are resourced adequately and are empowered and co-ordinated appropriately to ensure that that all happens across organisations?

Now, turning to the public health dimension, extreme weather events increase the number of cases of heat-related illness and mental health conditions, and the spread of vector-transmitted diseases. So, what are you doing to ensure that the health and social care systems have adequate resources and that that is aligned with this, please?

Finally, Dirprwy Lywydd, if I have time, water management is a vital matter in this context. It’s expected that the volume of rain we will see during the summer months will decrease 15 per cent by the 2050s, and perhaps by up to 26 per cent by the 2080s. There will be an even greater decrease in rainfall in south-east England. If we in Wales don’t have additional powers over water, we will continue to see these companies in England being able to extract water without a fair payment, leaving us in more of a crisis. So, will the Welsh Government be prioritising trying to devolve powers over water in full to ensure that we avoid such a crisis?

Thank you very much, Delyth. There were many things there.

I will try and respond to most of the points that you’ve raised there. First of all, as you rightly acknowledge, we have declared nature and climate emergencies here, as indeed have many local authorities across the country, as indeed have many public bodies as well, and we actually need to act on that. There is a role for all of us in doing this. I’ll describe some of the strategic imperatives briefly in a moment.

I was saying I was out in Aberaeron recently. One of the other related visits I did was to the school in Aberaeron, and I was with children there who were planting an orchard. You might say, ‘Well, that’s lovely, planting an orchard’, but, actually, planting that orchard was exactly to do with climate resilience and absorption of some of the carbon as well. You could see how engaged they were as young citizens on this. My message to them was, ‘Don’t give up on this when you go home or when you leave school or whatever, keep on being passionate about it.’ But there’s a read-across for Government, as well as for every individual citizen there as well.

The important thing to say in terms of the challenge is that we recognise the challenge, we recognise that we’ve actually got to go further. It’s clearly shown within the strategy that’s been brought forward, the 15 cross-sector adaptation plans covering different systems. So, those 15 plans are deliberately set to go right across the piece, to some of the areas that you've described and more, and then to bring forward the monitoring framework, so that we can measure how we're doing against that, going forward.

But this is a recognition, I have to say, that in bringing forward this, which replaces our previous national adaptation plan, 'Prosperity for All: A Climate Conscious Wales', published in 2019, and being informed by the Climate Change Committee's 2021 'Independent Assessment of UK Climate Risk', and the 2023 'Adapting to climate change: Progress in Wales', which was commissioned by Welsh Government, of course, and showed the evidence that the climate risks are increasing manifold times, but adaptation is falling behind, hence why we brought forward this strategy now, right across those 15 sectors, and everybody has to play a part. And it is a systems-based approach. It is actually based on the Climate Change Committee's adaptation monitoring framework. It's the way that they've said we should do it: lay it out in granular detail who has responsibility, as you say, who has accountability to drive this forward. Well, we actually all do, but in setting this out within the strategy, it identifies those prime areas.

You rightly flagged up the issue of risk analysis, and just to say, each of the four nations have to produce the national adaptation plan. This strategy is founded on our response to the UK Government's statutory climate risk assessment, which shows us some of the shortfall that we have and how we need to go further. And the CCC has advised us on this as well.

Now, on resourcing adequacy, for all of the organisations involved, sometimes people say, 'Well, it's local authorities or it's NRW', but it's also organisations such as the Animal and Plant Health Agency, dealing with animal welfare, and it's APHA dealing with plant phytosanitary issues as well, because all of these are challenges within climate resilience. Now, all of them will be under budgetary stress. There isn't an organisation in the country that isn't, but we need to make sure, in order to deliver this, that they have adequate resources and that they prioritise this effectively as well.

On health, on the critical issue of health and well-being, Public Health Wales have brought forward the publication of 'Climate Change in Wales: Health Impact Assessment', which is a comprehensive appraisal of the impacts on population health of climate change. There is a new integrated climate and environmental public health surveillance team, which has recently been launched by Public Health Wales, and also the development of a climate adaptation toolkit for health and social care organisation in Wales. Those are some of the tangible things that are being delivered within that sphere, and I think it speaks again to that granulation within the strategy that says that everybody now has a role to play within it.

And just finally, on the issue of powers over water, it falls to Ministers, Welsh Ministers, and I know we'll keep a close eye on this, because you are right, in that we will have periods in Wales when we are inundated and deluged and we'll have drought as well. But we recognise that there may well indeed be calls upon us, going forward, to help with some of those social and equity issues we talk about across the UK and access to water. But, the control of that falls to Welsh Ministers. We'll keep an eye on the relevant legislation and regulation and whatever, but we are very clear that it is for us to make the decisions then in terms of the asset of water that's within Wales. But we'd want to play our part, clearly, if there were proper and due asks of us, going forward.

I'd like to congratulate all of those involved in meeting the peatland restoration target a year before it was supposed to have happened. That's fantastic. I saw some of this work when the economy committee visited mid Wales the other day. Obviously, I just want to be cheeky and say, 'Well, was the target not challenging enough?' [Laughter.] [Interruption.] Okay. Fine. But it's really important that we continue doing what we obviously are good at. And we have a large number of stakeholders who are prepared to get involved in delivering on that, because it's good for the environment, good for the climate and good for everybody. 

I like very much the pie chart that you've got for the five stages of emergency management, because it makes really clear all the different things that we need to do. And this is really important if we're going to engage the public in this, and we can't do it without them. And clearly, if PSBs didn't exist, we'd have to invent them.

I just wanted to ask one specific, because tomorrow we're going to be discussing sustainable farming schemes and, therefore, everything relating to soil, et cetera, can be discussed there. But one of the biggest risks, as you highlight in your document, is the heat in homes and other buildings, and that would of course include schools and hospitals. All public buildings are supposed to be net zero by 2030, but I find that many public servants don't seem to be really thinking along those lines, and it's like, 'Oh, we haven't really thought about that.' Well, 2030 is the day after tomorrow—

You need to ask the question now, please.

—in climate terms, and also it's clear that the Warm Homes programme is also the cool homes programme. Now, I wondered what discussion you've had with your Cabinet colleagues on massively increasing that £30 million to something more realistic in terms of the immense task in front of us on that front.

Jenny, thank you so much, and simply in terms of the peatland restoration targets, no, they were high and ambitious, and it's a real credit, as you said, to all of those involved that we've met those. And I think the peatland restoration programme shows the way in which we can bring partners together with a quantum of funding that isn't only to do with public sector, to really drive change and hit the targets a year ahead. And then think about, 'Well, where do we go next? Can we do that in other areas?', which would be really fascinating, that would deliver climate resilience and biodiversity gains, et cetera, et cetera.

You specifically mention—and again, reflecting the breadth and depth of this strategy—the issue to do with what you described as, quite rightly, that some of our Warm Homes approach must also now be to do with cool homes, as we adapt to the realities of climate warming, but also to climate change. So, we're very committed to embedding this requirement to build and retrofit the homes to be resilient and recognising those different aspects of climate change and how we need to adapt. We'll shortly be publishing a route map and an action plan for the decarbonisation of homes in Wales, which seeks to recognise the adaptability and the resilience requirements of homes, and balance those with decarbonisation needs as well, and taking into account exactly what you're saying, that we need warm homes and cool homes as well. They need to be designed in that way.

We've also of course got the work that we are doing in Welsh housing quality standards and also in building regulations, and they need to play a part in this as well. But you are right: some of the old, conventional, slightly passé understanding now of, 'Just build warm homes, warm buildings', now needs to be thought of in a more granular fashion of actually saying, 'Well, they actually need to be buildings that are very adaptable in terms of climate resilience and climate adaptation.'

Two things, briefly, if I may. Everyone is naturally concerned about the sea level rising, but one of the greatest challenges facing us in terms of water is the amount of rain falling on our mountains and coming down our rivers. One way, in my area especially, to deal with that is the internal drainage districts that we have. They are very effective in ensuring that water can flow out to the sea, but the current system of operating internal drainage districts is failing. So, have you considered a review of these internal drainage districts, and will you meet with me in order to look at a better system and better ways of operating those areas?

Secondly, I was very pleased to attend a recent session planting seagrass in Penychain near Pwllheli, and a great number of seagrass seeds have now been planted along the Llŷn coast. We know that seagrass is a very effective way of locking in carbon, but there isn't enough being done in that respect. Swansea University is doing excellent work in this area with the WWF. What more will you as a Government do to ensure that more seagrass is grown along our coastlines?

A couple of really good points. First of all, I'm more happy to meet with you and discuss the issue. Just so I don't get it wrong, are we talking about sustainable drainage systems or drainage in agricultural land?

IDDs—internal drainage districts.

Ah, right, okay. Yes, I'm more than happy to meet with you and discuss those, because part of the climate resilience piece is thinking differently. In years gone by, IDDs or IDBs, as they were in England, when I was the DEFRA Minister, were very much seen as, 'What's the quickest way to get water off the land?', straight out, and so on. Some of the thinking now is slightly different on this as well; it's actually about how do you use those to actually build in climate resilience to that farm system. So, I think there is a discussion to be had on that. I'm more than happy to sit down and meet with you and take your thoughts on it.

On seagrass, there is incredible potential, without a doubt—immense potential. Our challenge is, to be quite frank, how we turn the potential and the plans that are being put forward and the proposals—. By the way, we're working the seagrass network on this and trying to support them, but it's how we find the quantum of funding to actually put into what are highly ambitious plans; they reach the levels of ambition of what we've been doing in peatland. The problem is that the call on seagrass and on peat and on everything else tends to land squarely on us. I do think there is a way forward, and my colleague who was speaking earlier on, Julie James, actually said I need to get down to Prifysgol Abertawe, Swansea University, to look at the work they're doing, which I'm keen to do. But I'm also keen to meet with others within the seagrass network, because there is enormous potential here as part of this climate adaptation and climate resilience piece. What we need to do, and we have actually been supporting them on this, is to try and see if there are ways to draw in other sources of funding that aren't all drawing simply on the taxpayer, a little bit like what we've done with the peatlands. That's why we've hit the targets a year early—we've got other partners involved in it. Now, that's a harder piece of work to do, but I think that's where we need to be, because I can see that, beyond peatlands, and beyond seagrass, there might be other areas we also need to do.

You'll be aware that we're currently consulting, by the way, on very hardwired principles on ethical investment within green finance. I think we have to be in this space, and we have to draw on the very best of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development work on this. We have to draw on some of the work of third sector organisations like the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds and others have done, and WWF, where they've drawn in additional funding in a way that only they can do, that I can't do.

We'll always be there as the public realm, but I think we need to think creatively, recognising that the quantum of funding that we need in nature-based solutions on things like climate adaptation are well beyond what the taxpayer will be able to do on its own. We need to draw others in, but to base that in principles of ethical funding, with cast-iron integrity around funding, not replicating mistakes that have been made in the past with some of the carbon offsetting stuff and so on. Could we do a gold standard in Wales? I think we can, because we've got evidence on the ground already of projects with third sector organisations, on peatland and so on, that we've done it. Can we do the same with seagrass? So, that's the discussion space I think we need to be in.

I welcome this statement. Ninety per cent of land in Wales is agriculture. It has been severely impacted by poor soil health. Tree and hedgerow planting, greater crop diversity and rotation and investment in infrastructure will make a huge difference to resilience for flooding and droughts, but this needs to be backed up with resources and education. I was pleased to hear Andy Wall, a flood risk manager at NRW, talking on BBC Radio Wales about the importance of residents signing up to flood alerts and taking precautions to become as flood resilient as possible. Cabinet Secretary, could you please look into the possibility of adding to that message by Andy that landowners should ensure that their ditches, culverts and drains are kept clear? They are responsible under riparian law and must not drain onto highways. The sewerage drains and highway gulleys cannot take the excess water, and it damages highways and then flows into homes. Thank you.

Carolyn, absolutely yes, and thank you again for raising this constantly and loudly and repeatedly here on the floor of the Senedd, and outside in the public domain as well. All landowners have that responsibility to make sure that their ditches, their watercourses and so on are functioning effectively as part of our natural ecosystems here in terms of our response particularly to flooding, but wider as well. Curiously, the point that Mabon was raising earlier on about IDDs as well plays into this: how do they help us, as opposed to hindering us? But, yes, you're absolutely right, and, as I've reminded in response to your questions on the floor before, every riparian owner has a responsibility, and that includes those little ditches that run down to the sides of the roads that otherwise end up in us flooding those roads and the local authorities picking up the can for the cost of clearing it and the mess and everything else.  

And finally, Lee Waters.

Diolch. It's clear from the strategy that the impact of climate change is not simply an environmental issue. It's a health issue. It's an economy issue. It affects buildings, transport networks, food and water security. Now, we know that there is one intervention that can have benefit for both climate adaptation and mitigation to deal with what's baked in and to make what's to come less of an impact, and that's planting trees and hedgerows. So, I have two questions to you, Cabinet Secretary. The first: from a very quick reading of the actions in your strategy, there is welcome reference to the outcomes of the deep-dive on biodiversity, but I couldn't see reference to the outcomes of the deep-dive on tree targets, which cover many of the actions that you wish to achieve, including putting pressure on all public bodies to map what land they have that could be suitable for tree planting. So, could you confirm that is still the commitment, and could that be referenced in future documents?

Secondly, the strategy notes the risk of heatwaves, prolonged periods of drought, and wildfires, on Welsh farmers and rural businesses in particular. I am worried by suggestions that entry into the sustainable farming scheme via the universal layer could be now a very low bar. Instead of the 10 per cent tree cover that was recommended, there's a suggestion that entrants for public support would only need to provide a plan for trees, with no requirement to actually plant trees, and we know plans are only as good as their implementation. So, could he reassure us, in terms of achieving the ambitions of his adaptation strategy, that he will make sure that the sustainable farming scheme, when it comes out, does not resile on this really important step forward?

Lee, thank you very much. Just to confirm, we are very committed to growing the woodland estate and the forestry estate throughout Wales in all aspects of the work that we do, so whether that's the national forest, whether that's the good work that is going on at the moment within the SFS scheme—please don't ask me to pre-empt where we might get to, but we have good dialogue going on amongst all the stakeholders on the ministerial roundtable at the moment. We've progressed well on a range of issues, I have to say, including the wider environmental habitats and so on, and we're deeply engaged on how woodland plays a part within this, and I keep re-emphasising the point that, actually, the greatest way in which we can build resilience into the farming and food sector is to have the right woodland in the right place that can do things such as shelter for animals, which increases productivity of animals, which is good for the bottom line of the farmer, but it's also good all round for that farm environment and for biodiversity and so on. But we are working through that as we speak, and we will come back when we are ready to come back and say the point that we have got to.

We also, as you know, are hoping to bring forward, and it is relevant to this point as well, the timber strategy in fairly short order as well, which I know you played a critical role in driving forward. We have in place at this moment the woodland grants, and our message to farmers and other landowners is that we want them to avail themselves of that. [Interruption.] Indeed. So, in everything that we're doing, not simply in the SFS but wider in terms of climate adaptation, including those children planting trees in Aberaeron, including the Coetiroedd Bach that I went to visit in Monmouth recently as well, woodland creation is a fundamental part not just of adaptation, not just of resilience, but also of improving biodiversity as well. So, you've got my reassurance on that, but what I can't do is pre-empt where we'll get to on SFS. All I would say is that the discussions are very constructive. They're very frank. And we're trying to bring everybody to a place where we can agree that we can create woodland in the farming environment, in the right place, not taking up productive land, that actually that is good for the farm and the farm business, but also doing the wider aspects of SFS as well. So, bear with us. We're working hard to get there.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary.

The next item is the statement by the Cabinet Secretary for Transport and North Wales on the rail collision on the Cambrian line. I call on the Cabinet Secretary, Ken Skates.

Dirprwy Lywydd, last night, two Transport for Wales trains were involved in a low-speed collision near Llanbrynmair in Powys, mid Wales. Sadly, a man has died following the collision and 15 others have suffered injuries, which are not believed to be life threatening or life changing. Our thoughts are with all those involved.

The Cambrian railway east of Machynlleth will be closed while specialist teams continue their investigations, and Transport for Wales urges passengers not to travel to this part of the network. I'm extremely grateful to the emergency services who attended the scene and helped our passengers and staff. The safety of our passengers and staff is, as always, our key priority. Transport for Wales are working closely with all agencies, including emergency services and the Rail Accident Investigation Branch, to understand how this accident happened and they will have my full support.

Can I, Cabinet Secretary, align myself with your views as well in terms of our thoughts being with the family of the gentleman who, sadly, died? And of course, it must have been an anxious time for the many others involved, including the 15 that you mentioned who were injured as well. And again, also the emergency services, how they reacted so quickly to the incident as well.

The public will want to know what happened and how it could have happened, so I appreciate the investigations that need to take place, and you've outlined some of that, but can you tell us who is leading on those investigations, what agencies are involved in that? How are the Governments working together? And can you provide any timelines as to when we might have any initial answers to those two questions in terms of what happened and how this could have happened?

Also, Cabinet Secretary, of course, the trunk road and the railway line are currently closed still. Can you give us any indication of when that might be reopened, and, if you can't do that today, can you tell us when you will be in a position to make any update on that?

And then, finally, you've mentioned that 15 people were injured. Is there anything more you can say about the level of injury those people suffered as well?

Llywydd, can I thank Russell George and Members across the Chamber for how constructive they've been today in assessing what has happened in the past 24 hours? What has happened is tragic, but it will take time to come to conclusions, and the Rail Accident Investigation Branch is leading the investigation into the incident, supported by British Transport Police. A full report could take months—several months—but it may be possible for the Rail Accident Investigation Branch to produce an early indication of the cause. That would be for that branch, that organisation, to issue; we will not be interfering, and we wish to give the Rail Accident Investigation Branch as much time and freedom to conduct an exhaustive inquiry as they need.

I received updates throughout the night and then, this morning, met with the chief executive officer of Transport for Wales, James Price, with the First Minister, and James Price is at the scene today. The situation is fluid, as Members, I'm sure, can appreciate. In terms of the time frame, the A470 will reopen once the Rail Accident Investigation Branch and British Transport Police allow it to be. We are in their hands at the moment, but I will inform Members as soon as we get an indication of when that route can be reopened. Meanwhile, the local diversions that are in place do appear to be working well, and Transport for Wales have just confirmed to me that rail services are still unable to operate on the Cambrian line between Machynlleth and Shrewsbury until at least the end of tomorrow. Rail replacement services are in operation, but I will keep Members informed of the time frame regarding reopening the line and reopening the road.

I can't pass comment on the severity of individual injuries, but, as I said, we are confident they're non-life-threatening or life-changing, and I'd like to put on record my thanks to all of the emergency services who were present. I know also that British Transport Police have specialist officials who have been assisting the family of the gentleman who, sadly, lost his life last night.

I've met with the unions as well today for very constructive talks, hearing about what additional support should be brought forward for staff. My understanding is that four members of staff were on the trains, and approximately 40 members of the general public.

Cabinet Secretary, thank you for your statement today, and I echo the views expressed by Russell George and yourself.

On behalf of Plaid Cymru, I wish to express our deep concern and sympathy following yesterday's train collision in Powys. Our thoughts are with the individuals affected and their families. This news, as it has unfolded overnight and this morning, is very worrying and raises a number of concerns. I understand that a full investigation may take months to complete, but I would welcome, as you've already alluded to, an early conclusion, as has happened previously in other rail accidents.

Cabinet Secretary, could you outline the support that's being offered to passengers and staff that may have been traumatised by this incident? Can you also outline any support that is being made available to Transport for Wales or local authorities to help deal with the operational impact of the incident? Finally, what assurances can you provide to passengers concerned about the safety of the network, particularly in light of this tragic incident? Diolch yn fawr.

Can I thank the Member for his questions and for the sympathy that he has expressed for everybody involved in this incident? Specialist support is being requested by trade unions, with whom I met today, and I've asked Transport for Wales to make that available. That will be in addition to the emergency assistance programme that has already kicked in and that is being offered to Transport for Wales staff. In terms of the support being offered to passengers, clearly, emergency services were quite exceptional in the way that they responded to the incident and have supported those involved in it. Ongoing support will be made available through health services. I'd like to place on record, as well, my thanks to the hospitals that have received the passengers, not just here in Wales, but also in England. I wish everybody involved who suffered an injury a speedy recovery.

In terms of the safety of the rail network, this is our prime concern: that the network is as safe as it can possibly be. These incidents are exceptionally rare. Rail travel is still incredibly safe compared with other means of travel. At this moment in time, though, I would encourage the travelling public to plan ahead if they intended to use this particular route and to use the bus services instead whilst this investigation takes place on the ground. The Member is absolutely right that people are striving to hear answers as to why this happened, but we must give the investigators time to reach their conclusions, to make thorough enquiries, to download the contents of black boxes that have been recovered from the trains, and to ensure that the answers that we receive are comprehensive.

Thank you very much, Minister, for your update. Of course, my thoughts, along with everybody else's, are with the family and the loved ones of the passenger who sadly lost his life, and also those who were injured and the others who were involved in this dreadful incident. I want to put on record my thanks to the emergency services who attended the scene for their dedicated work, for helping passengers and also the rail crew, and also the people who administered help through the NHS, whether that be at hospital or on site.

Once the results of the investigation are available, I hope that you will give an update publicly, not only to us here, but to all those people hoping to use the service in the near future. I'm really pleased that you've met with the trade unions, because the anxiety will reside in those people who are operating the service, and they then, in turn, can give those assurances once we have them to the wider public.

You've touched upon the future travel plans, but this is an arterial road from north to south, the A470, and there will be many people affected, whether that's schoolchildren trying to go to school or people trying to go to hospital. Those people will be very anxious to know which routes to take. So, I'm asking whether that information is available in what is a very rural area. They will be very narrow roads at this time of year. Thank you.

Can I thank Joyce Watson for expressing her empathy? I agree, very much so, with her sentiments regarding the incident. It is a tragedy, and we are very grateful to those who responded so rapidly to it and helped the people involved. School and college transport is operating, albeit via diversions, and, through Traffic Wales, people are able to keep up with the latest information regarding not just the trunk road, but the diversions along local roads as well.

I was very pleased to be able to meet so soon with the unions, as well, and what struck me this afternoon when we spoke about the incident and how we respond to it collectively is that the rail industry is a very close-knit family and it will come together—those employed within the industry will support one another.

I will, of course, Llywydd, return to the Siambr to make a statement on the inquiry once the investigation has concluded and a report has been published, because I think it's vitally important that we scrutinise the cause or causes of last night's incident.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for this afternoon's statement. I'd like to echo what every single Member has said here in the Chamber itself. On behalf of the entire Welsh Conservative group, our thoughts and prayers are with the family and loved ones of the passenger who tragically passed away and with all those affected by the shocking incident last night. I'd also like to place on record that our thoughts are with all of the emergency services personnel who rushed to the scene and worked tirelessly throughout the night.

Cabinet Secretary, everyone here can understand that this is an incredibly fluid and sensitive situation, and whilst more questions will naturally arise in due course, I know that you have limited information at present, as the investigation has just commenced. However, we all can appreciate that this will have been a traumatic and extremely frightening experience for every single person on board those trains. I wondered, in light of this, what conversations have been had about necessary pastoral support being put in place for those on the train during the collision itself. This incident will undoubtedly have a lasting impact on every single person on those trains and I'm sure that we all want each and every single one of those affected adequately supported as they come to terms with what has happened, as well as the family of the man who tragically passed away onboard.

Cabinet Secretary, whilst I understand and appreciate that we are in the early stages of the investigation, the public will naturally want to have answers as soon as possible. I believe that it's imperative that the authorities are open and transparent with the public throughout this ongoing process. So, can I get a commitment from you today that MSs will be fully updated? I know that you've just said that you will, but I am hoping that you will be able to keep us abreast of the situation as it progresses. Also, do you have a rough timeline as to how long the investigation will take to complete?

And finally, Cabinet Secretary, sadly, tragic events such as these really do highlight how important rail safety truly is to each and every single one of us. As more details emerge, there will, of course, be more questions to answer. However, I just wanted to conclude by again expressing my deepest sympathies with the loved ones of the individual who tragically passed away. Thank you once again for this afternoon's statement.

Llywydd, can I thank Natasha Asghar for her questions and for the points that she raised? Because they do reflect the general concern that we're hearing, following last night's incident. We can't speculate on the outcomes of the investigation, but I do know that all bodies and all organisations will be keen to understand exactly what happened and how any failures can be addressed.

I've been incredibly impressed by the way that British Transport Police supported passengers and staff, alongside emergency services and alongside NHS services, and ongoing support will be made available in the appropriate way, in the usual way, through the NHS, for any passenger who suffers as a consequence of the experience that they went through. Transport for Wales also supported passengers and they will be supporting their staff, as we move forward. As I said, I met with the unions earlier, who asked for trauma specialist support and that request has now been put to Transport for Wales. And I will, Llywydd, update Members whenever developments occur in relation to the investigation.

Thank you for the statement. May I extend my sympathies and condolences to the family of the person who lost their life, and wish those who were injured in the accident well—injured either physically or mentally? And I thank, also, the emergency services for their excellent work last night and this morning.

There are lessons to be learned, of course, in looking to the future, and we will be waiting for that further statement from you with regard to the findings of the investigation that is now under way. But, naturally, there is going to be concern amongst travellers on trains today, tomorrow and over the coming weeks that safety measures should be in place. So, will you confirm that the relevant investigations are being undertaken to ensure that a similar event doesn't happen again?

On one further issue, as you know, at the end of this month, the highway, the A470, is going to be closed for around 10 weeks near Talerddig, which is very close to the site of the accident, and advice was given to travellers and to parents of pupils to use the train either to go to school or to get to whatever destination they were seeking to arrive at. So, what advice would you give them if this line were to have to close for a longer period of time than expected? Thank you.

Can I thank Cefin Campbell for his questions and assure him that, while we don't yet know the cause of the accident—and it may take several months for that final report to be issued—rail safety is of paramount importance to Transport for Wales, to Network rail, to British Transport Police, and for all operators across Great Britain? Other lines are affected by the recent severe weather that we have experienced, and information on disruption is available, clearly, on Transport for Wales's app and website.

This time of year is very challenging for rail operators, given heavy rainfall and leaf fall. But passenger safety is of paramount importance, and whenever and wherever there is concern about safety, then risks will be averted. We don’t know the cause of this accident, though, and I think that any speculation would be unhelpful at this moment in time.

In regard to the length of time that the route will be closed, as I said, I will keep Members updated on this. We don’t expect any services to operate until at least tomorrow night. Two thorough investigations need to take place concerning the trains themselves before they can be removed, and also the track.

At the moment, officials from the Rail Accident Investigation Branch are on the ground, and it is an extensive area that they are covering at the moment, which is why we believe that it could be several days before services resume. My hope is that services will resume in good time not to impact on the plans that have already been outlined and that the Member has outlined again today. But, clearly, if we were not able to honour the alternative means of travel, then we would have to revisit the plans that have been published to date.

May I echo the condolences and the thanks that have been given today? The Cambrian line, of course, is one that is often used by my constituents in southern Meirionnydd, and I have received a number of messages overnight and this morning from some of those constituents, who are expressing concerns, quite naturally, following this terrible incident—concerns as to whether this will happen again. If they are to travel by train, will they experience something similar? So, they want that reassurance that they will be safe as they travel on the railways.

I do accept, as you have said, Cabinet Secretary, that it's too early to know how, why and what happened, and I echo your comments that we shouldn't make any baseless comments or come to any conclusions based on rumours. But my constituents do deserve that assurance that the Government will do everything that it can to learn lessons from this, and to ensure, to the best of your ability, that this doesn't happen again. So, what reassurance can you give in order to ensure that lessons are learned by Transport for Wales, which is under your control, and by Network Rail and any other relevant body, when it comes to the lessons that need to be learned from this experience? 

Can I thank Mabon for his questions and say that lessons will be learned once the report has been published and the investigation has been concluded? All organisations involved in this incident are keen to know exactly what happened last night—what led up to the incident. It's only the investigators who are going to be able to provide that comprehensive analysis of events leading up to the collision.

In terms of rail travel, though, as I have said, passenger safety and staff safety is of paramount importance. Rail travel remains exceptionally safe by comparison to other modes of transport. So, I would assure passengers that, while last night's incident was tragic, rail transport remains one of the safest means of transport available to them.

We will endeavour to ensure that the lessons that need to be learned from this incident are learned as soon as possible. But we are in the hands of the Rail Accident Investigation Branch, and I just want to impress the point once again: we do wish to ensure that they are given the space and the time to be able to carry out a thorough investigation.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary for that item.

Item 6 is next, the Historic Environment (Wales) Act 2023 (Consequential Provision) (Primary Legislation) Regulations 2024. The Minister for Culture, Skills and Social Partnership to move the motion. Jack Sargeant.

Diolch, Llywydd. I'm delighted to be in the Siambr today to introduce the Historic Environment (Wales) Act 2023 (Consequential Provision) (Primary Legislation) Regulations 2024 for the consideration of Senedd Members. This set of regulations is the final piece in the jigsaw of secondary legislation needed to support the Historic Environment (Wales) Act 2023, which will come fully into force on 4 November.

Llywydd, I am proud to say that the 2023 Act has once again placed Wales at the forefront of the UK nations in legislating for the historic environment. In a single coherent Act, fully bilingual law for the diverse components of the historic environment is provided in well-ordered and comprehensible provisions. The new Act will provide a secure foundation for the future development of the law for the historic environment in Wales.

These regulations are required because the drafting of Westminster's Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023, which deals in part with heritage matters, proceeded simultaneously with the drafting of the Historic Environment (Wales) Act. Since it was unclear which Act would be commenced first, consequential regulations were deemed the best way to achieve compatibility between the Welsh and English legislation. Diolch.

The Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, Mike Hedges.

Nothing really to add on this item. We don't have a view of any problem with it.

Diolch. Does the Minister wish to respond to that contribution? [Laughter.] Or is there anything the Minister wishes to say? There are no other contributors on this item.

Diolch, Llywydd. Just to be very grateful for the leadership of Mike Hedges and the work of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, and I look forward to engaging with him and his committee on future matters.

The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? No. Therefore, the motion under item 6 is agreed.

We'll move on now to item 7. This Order is the Vehicle Emissions Trading Schemes (Amendment) Order 2024. The Cabinet Secretary for Transport and North Wales now to move the motion. Ken Skates.

Diolch, Llywydd. I'm pleased to be able to bring forward the motion to approve the Vehicle Emissions Trading Schemes (Amendment) Order 2024. This amendment extends the territorial extent of these schemes, which the Senedd agreed last year, to include Northern Ireland. It's a technical measure, but it does represent another step in the UK's long journey towards net zero, and it's a journey that I'm proud to say Wales has helped to lead. 

Members will recall that the UK Government, the Scottish Government and the Welsh Government have jointly created the vehicle emissions trading schemes, which mandate that an increasing proportion of new cars and vans sold in Great Britain will be zero emission. These schemes are at the heart of our efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from transport, which is Wales's third largest emitting sector. Setting Wales on a pathway for net zero means making big changes to the way that we travel, and it means helping people to make greener travel choices. It means using new technology to connect communities, and it means investing in low-carbon, reliable and affordable public transport that people will want to use. 

The car is going to remain important and the zero-emission vehicle mandate, along with our electric vehicle charging strategy, will be critical in achieving our targets for reducing emissions. The Climate Change Committee has welcomed this as an important policy measure, and we estimate it will save 23 million tonnes of carbon dioxide in Wales between 2024 and 2050. So, I urge Members to support the motion.

The Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, Mike Hedges.

We've got no concerns about it, and we're very pleased to see it go forward. I won't be saying that for the next item. [Laughter.] 

Cabinet Secretary, do you need to say anything further? Thank you. 

So, the proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? No. Therefore, that Order is agreed.

Items 8 and 9 are next, and in accordance with Standing Order 12.24, unless a Member objects, the two motions under items 8 and 9 will be grouped for debate but with separate votes.

As there are no objections to that, I will call the Minister for Children and Social Care to move the motion. Dawn Bowden.

Diolch, Llywydd. I move the motions. I'm pleased to open this debate on the general principles of the Health and Social Care (Wales) Bill, and move the motion and the financial resolution.

The Bill has two principal aims: to eliminate private profit from the care of looked-after children, and to enable the introduction of direct payments for continuing NHS healthcare. Both these aims support programme for government commitments. The Bill will also make several amendments to ensure that the regulations and inspection of the Social Care (Wales) Act 2016 and the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014 can operate fully and effectively.

Llywydd, I'd like to start by thanking the Health and Social Care Committee, the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, and the Finance Committee for their thorough scrutiny of this Bill during Stage 1 and for their reports. I'd also like to thank all the stakeholders, communities and individuals who have contributed, supported and taken an active role in developing this vital legislation.

The provisions to eliminate profit are part of our wider programme to transform children's services. In developing this Bill, we have been guided by young people who have told us that they're strongly opposed to being cared for by organisations that make a profit from their experience of being in care, and where commercial interests can affect how they're looked after.

Over a number of years, stakeholders have also raised issues about the interface between social care and continuing healthcare and the compromise of people's voice and control when transferring from local authority-provided care, with direct payments, to continuing healthcare, where that option is currently lost.

I welcome that, under recommendation 1, a majority of the members of the Health and Social Care Committee support the general principles of the Bill, and I'm also grateful to the Finance Committee for welcoming the aims of the Bill. Llywydd, given the number and detailed nature of the recommendations across three reports, it will not be possible for me to respond to each of them today. I will, therefore, write to the committee Chairs individually with my full response, accepting that I have already written to the Finance Committee with my response to their report and recommendations.

I received 72 recommendations in total: 26 from the Health and Social Care Committee, 28 from the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, and 18 from the Finance Committee. The recommendations ranged from providing additional clarificatory information to making amendments to the Bill itself. I'm pleased to say that I will be accepting the majority of them in full, in part, or in principle. I hope that this debate and the letters that follow will satisfy committee members that we've taken their recommendations seriously, even if we have not felt able to take all recommendations forward.

I will concentrate today on some of the principal topics and issues raised by each of the committees. Turning first to the Health and Social Care Committee, I'm welcoming or accepting 24 of the 26 recommendations in full, in part, or in principle. I'm pleased to accept recommendation 2. We will continue to work with our partners to consider any other models that might fit within our policy objectives. In doing so, we will need to ensure that these models do not allow profit of any sort to be extracted, even where these would be the types of models that we would encourage in other circumstances. This is because we have to ensure that we eliminate private profit from the care of looked-after children.

I recognise that the committee's support for the aim of preventing the extraction of profit lies behind their recommendation 3, and I sympathise with the concern that the legislation should not allow organisations to circumvent the restrictions. However, I believe that section 6 of the Bill already allows the regulator to respond should an organisation pursue unreasonable or disproportionate financial arrangements to extract profit in an unexpected way. For that reason, I have rejected this call for a broad regulation-making power to be added to the Bill, but I do believe that the Bill will address your concerns.

I recognise stakeholders' concerns about the risk of disruption to children currently in care as these changes are introduced, and I accept recommendation 8 and am continuing to carefully consider the evidence received alongside information gathered from our own engagement with stakeholders. I am also pleased to accept recommendations 4 to 5, 11 to 12, 14, 18 and 22 in part, and 6 to 7, 9 to 10, 13, 16 to 17, 19 to 21 and 23 to 26 in full, although I do not believe that amendments to the Bill are required in response to these recommendations.

The committee has made a number of recommendations relating to published guidance, resources or updates on progress for eliminating profit and enabling direct payments in continuing healthcare. I am keen that committees and Members are updated regularly on progress, and so I have accepted these recommendations in full or in part. Some of the recommendations invited us to respond to the Children, Young People and Education Committee with reference to three previous recommendations of theirs, and I am happy to write separately on these in due course.

I'll now turn to the recommendations made by the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee. Alongside five general conclusions for wider consideration in relation to the legislative programme, the committee made 28 recommendations on the Bill. Now, whilst I've not been able to accept all of these, I am pleased that we have accepted 16 recommendations in full, in part or in principle, and we aim to bring forward eight Government amendments directly responding to or on topics associated with committee recommendations 10, 12, 14, 16, 17, 18, 22 and 28.

I accept the committee's first recommendation on providing a response prior to this debate in principle. Unfortunately, this was not possible due to the tight timescale and the need to consider the committee's recommendations carefully in advance of this debate. Regarding recommendation 2, I accept and confirm that the Secretary of State for Wales has provided Minister of Crown consent for the provisions in paragraph 4 of Schedule 2 to the Bill. I'm also pleased to accept recommendations 3, 7 to 9, 11 to 12, 14 to 18, 22, 24 and 28 in full, in part or in principle.

I've considered each of the committee's recommendations carefully and I have decided in a number of cases to make changes to the Bill to respond to these. For example, having considered the committee's concerns, I will table amendments to the Bill in response to recommendations 14 and 28 to subject the two regulation-making powers referred to in these recommendations to the draft affirmative procedure rather than the negative procedure.

Finally, turning to the Finance Committee's recommendations, again I welcome the conclusion that the committee is broadly content with the financial implications of the Bill as set out in the regulatory impact assessment, subject to its comments and recommendations. I am pleased to accept all 18 of the committee's recommendations either in full, in part or in principle. In the case of this committee's report, I have already responded in writing to provide further information and clarifications as requested.

I have accepted recommendations 1, 2 and 3 on the need for clear, accurate and full explanations of all the estimated costs and benefits in the regulatory impact assessment. I have accepted recommendations 5 and 6. In the revised explanatory memorandum following Stage 2, I will provide information about any significant change in the expected costs for the Bill. I am also happy to provide modelling for the financial consequences of a longer transitional period for eliminating profit in response to the committee's recommendation 7.

So, Llywydd, as I said at the outset, given the number of recommendations, I have been unable to deal with each and every one of them in turn in detail today, but I have tried to respond to some of the main points from the three committee reports. I do, however, look forward to addressing further questions later in this debate. Diolch yn fawr. 

The Chair of the Health and Social Care Committee to contribute first of all. Russell George. 

Diolch, Llywydd. I hope I get my speaking notes in the right order as I've just dropped them and they all went in the wrong direction. But thank you, Presiding Officer.

What I should say at the start is that more than one child in every 100 children in Wales is now in care. The numbers of children and young people in care have increased significantly over the last 10 years, and the needs of those children and young people are becoming, of course, more complex as well.

Now, during our scrutiny of the Bill, the Minister was quite clear that doing nothing in this area was not an option for the Welsh Government. We did hear from care-experienced young people themselves and children in care, and how they don’t want to be treated as a commodity, and they don’t wish to be advertised with a price tag. We also heard about the unsustainable cost of the current system for local authorities.

As a committee, we firmly believe that all care provided to looked-after children and young people should deliver the best possible outcomes for those children, and in a supportive environment as well that meets their individual needs. The young people that we heard from were very clear that money spent on the care of looked-after children should benefit those children directly. A majority of the committee believe that this is best achieved by the restriction of private profit from the care of looked-after children. As such, a majority of the committee supports the general principles of the Bill.

Now, despite this in-principle support, we have very real concerns about how the Bill will work in practice, and I want to touch on a few of those areas. Transition to the new arrangements and sufficiency of placements were two of the headline concerns for stakeholders, particularly in the light of the significant and long-term challenges facing local authorities in securing enough accommodation for the children and young people they look after. There are huge risks for the sufficiency and sustainability of residential and foster places, especially in the short to medium term, as an unknown number of providers leave the market, and local authorities and the third sector work to build their capacity. This, in turn, could increase the challenges of finding suitable, stable and safe accommodation for looked-after children, particularly for those with more complex needs.

Of greatest concern to us as a committee was the potential for negative outcomes for children and young people if the transition is not managed effectively. Young people themselves told us that they were concerned about what will happen if companies decide to leave the market because of restrictions on profit. So, I would suggest that the Welsh Government must do all it can to ensure an orderly transition, one where the needs of children and young people are paramount. For many providers, moving to a new not-for-profit model will not necessarily be an easy or straightforward process. This is why we have recommended that the Minister makes available a detailed offer of support and guidance for private and independent providers who may wish to move to that non-profit model. That needs to be done, I would suggest, as a matter of urgency, and that's outlined in our recommendation 4.

The cost of caring for looked-after children has increased dramatically over the last decade. Projecting ahead, that position seems unsustainable for public finances in the longer term. The Welsh Government has committed £68 million directly to their eliminate profit policy. However, there is a clear need for sustainable ongoing investment in the responsibility for providing sufficient and sustainable care for looked-after children as it shifts to local authorities, and the extent of that is also unknown. At a time when local authorities are likely to be under some significant, enormous financial pressures, I think there needs to be a clear commitment from the Welsh Government on the funding and support they can expect to receive for at least the next five years—a time frame that will be crucial for local authorities in developing their own provision.

Finally, in relation to timescales for the transition, the Bill does not include specific timetables for transition, but the Minister has been clear that she sees things moving relatively quickly from April 2026. In our report, we set out the significant concerns of stakeholders, notably local authorities and the third sector, about what they considered to be the unrealistic timescales proposed by the Welsh Government. Their concern is that these timescales could exacerbate existing sufficiency problems with any sudden loss of provision. For this reason, we have called on the Minister to review the concerns of stakeholders about the transition timetable, in order to assure herself that the policy can be delivered in the time frame proposed, without impacting on the lives of looked-after children and young people.

We have also called on the Minister to prepare and publish a report on progress with the transition at six-month intervals from this point forward, in our recommendation 9. The scale of the challenge facing local authorities, social services and providers themselves in giving effect to Part 1 of this Bill, I think, cannot also be underestimated. So, I would urge the Minister to give deep and serious consideration to the recommendations in our report, to ensure the best possible outcomes for looked-after children and young people.

Of course, the Bill does not just relate to the restriction of private profit from the care of looked-after children. Part 2 will introduce the option of direct payments for continuing healthcare. Here, the Minister’s intention is to give a greater voice and control to service users. So, there was broad support for the general principles of this Part of the Bill, although, as with Part 1, there were concerns about how it would operate in practice, especially given the current staffing shortages in social care. Just bear with me a moment. Yes. Okay.

We also heard directly from disabled people and other stakeholders about the difficulties in recruiting and retaining personal assistants, so we'd recommend that the Minister works with her Cabinet colleagues and wider partners to promote the role of PAs and drive up numbers of applications. I think this is a particularly important position. Significantly, we heard that some people might be reluctant to take up the offer of direct payments for continuing healthcare, because of a fear of the unknown and the upheaval that might be involved with that. So, in response to this, we have called on the Minister to include in the Bill a right to information, advice and support for anyone seeking to take up payments directly for CHC.

Minister, I look forward to your formal response to our recommendations. I couldn't quite keep up. Sometimes it looked like you were reading the lottery figures out, so I didn't make a note of all the recommendations. So, I'd be interested in looking back at the Record, but, of course, more importantly, I look forward to your formal response to our committee's report and recommendations.

The Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee next, Mike Hedges.

Diolch, Llywydd. The committee’s report drew five conclusions and made 28 recommendations. I first of all welcome the response from the Minister this afternoon.

I will focus my remarks on general themes emerging from our scrutiny. We do not consider it satisfactory that full details of the impact of the Bill on the key issues including human rights, the justice system and data protection were not published in time for the Senedd’s consideration of the Bill at Stage 1. In our view, developing the legislative proposals should be informed by the outcomes of impact assessments. The preparation of these assessments should be completed prior to the introduction of a Bill. This should be regarded as standard practice. Our first two conclusions therefore highlighted what we consider to be good practice on these matters.

The lack of timely information from the Government was a theme of our findings. It is not surprising, therefore, that our third conclusion expressed concern that the Bill was introduced too early and before all the necessary preparatory work had been completed. In reaching this conclusion, we took account of the Minister’s own admission that there was a need to give further consideration to the drafting of certain provisions. This in part explains the large number of recommendations in our report.

We also expressed concern that the explanatory material is potentially misleading, because it refers to the elimination of private profit from the care of looked-after children. This was instead of referencing the fact that the Bill makes provision to restrict the making of profit. We therefore recommend that the Minister should amend the explanatory memorandum, including the explanatory notes, by the start of Stage 3 proceedings to ensure it accurately reflects the intention of the Bill to restrict rather than eliminate the making of profit from the care of looked-after children.

The commencement and implementation of the Bill is subject to transitional arrangements. In our view, the end date of the transitional arrangements is unclear, which is a cause for concern given that they are, in part, intended to protect the rights of looked-after children. We believe that the Minister should place information about the end date of the transitional arrangements on the face of the Bill. This would offer more certainty to all those affected by the changes to be made by the Bill and give a target for them to work towards in terms of preparing for those changes. However, we recognise that the end date may need to be changed. This could be achieved by the inclusion of a regulation-making power subject to the draft affirmative procedure. In our view, this would mitigate the concerns expressed by the Minister about having an end date on the face of the Bill.

I will now turn briefly to some of the matters covered in chapter 4 of our report. Conclusion 4 of our report said that

'legislation should clearly define terms that it uses, rather than require the reader to exercise a degree of interpretation when doing so, however simple that interpretation may be perceived to be'.

That principle was reflected in a number of recommendations aimed at making terms used in the Bill more precise.

As regards section 3 of the Bill and the insertion of the new section 6A to the Regulation and Inspection of Social Care (Wales) Act 2016, we made two important recommendations. First, we recommended that the Minister should define 'public good', given that it is a fundamental concept to the nature of the service providers that wish to be registered to provide restricted children’s services. Secondly, we recommended that the regulation-making power in new section 6A(3)(b) of the 2016 Act should be a superaffirmative procedure. This is because the power is exceptionally broad and could be used to widen a key element of the Bill. Moreover, this power will be available to the Welsh Ministers of all future Governments, and so there should be greater oversight of the exercise of this power by the Senedd.

Finally, and again as a matter of principle, the Welsh Government should be clear on the need for delegated powers before the introduction of a Bill to the Senedd. So, while we welcomed the Minister’s intention to review the need for the regulation-making power in paragraph 2(4)(b) of new Schedule 1A to the 2016 Act, we recommended that it should be removed from the Bill.

Chair of the Finance Committee, Peredur Owen Griffiths.

Thank you, Llywydd. I welcome this opportunity to contribute to today's debate to discuss the recommendations set out in the Finance Committee's report. I'd also like to thank the Minister and her officials for attending our evidence session, and for providing a response to our recommendations prior to today's debate. I'm pleased that the Minister has accepted all 18 of the recommendations, although I note that two of them have been accepted in principle only and three accepted partially, and I'll turn to those in due course.

The committee is broadly content with the financial implications as set out in the regulatory impact assessment. However, we are very concerned about the quality of the information provided alongside this Bill. As a result, we have made 18 recommendations aimed at improving the clarity of the financial information, which we found to be disappointing and below par in a number of areas.

Let me begin though with the good news. We agree with the aims of this Bill: that there should not be a market for the care of looked-after children, whereby profits are distributed as dividends to shareholders or members. Regrettably, however, our ability to consider the financial implications of these provisions was significantly hampered by the serious lack of detail across the RIA. This is particularly evident in the inconsistent approach taken to the presentation of the costs and benefits of the proposed policy changes, which are wide ranging and often vague.

An area that caused great confusion for the committee was in determining the correct variances for the total cost of the Bill. For example, the range set out in the summary table of the costs and benefits of the Bill was corrected by the Minister in her own written evidence. The additional information provided by the Minister on 26 July went some way to support some of the cost estimates outlined in the RIA. However, we then received further correspondence on 3 October, finally confirming the total net cost of the Bill—a full three months after committee's initial evidence session with the Minister.

Although we are grateful for the clarification, this approach is simply not good enough. It is especially disappointing that we received this information just one week prior to the Stage 1 reporting deadline. I think you'll agree, Minister, that this is not the best practice, and, frankly, not what we expect from the Member in charge of a Bill. In particular, this does not reflect well on the procedures the Welsh Government has in place to quality check information before it is presented to the committee for scrutiny. Recommendations 1 to 5 of our report are therefore aimed at addressing these fundamental ambiguities.

Moving on to the cost estimates around eliminating profit from the care of looked-after children, we note the current uncertainty around the exact number of independent providers who would be willing or able to convert to not-for-profit status. For this reason, the committee found the modelling of different scenarios, and the range of potential cost implications, very useful. However, we ask that the Minister updates the Senedd on provider intentions as the evidence around this emerges.

Members will be aware that the transitional arrangements in this Bill are due to come into force in less than three years' time. However, the Minister told us that if the transition period takes longer than forecast, associated costs would be incurred over the longer period. We, therefore, are concerned about the effect this could have on providers and are not assured that the possible consequences in this area are reflected in the RIA.

The committee also questioned why the Minister has based costs for the Bill around the number of children who are placed in care at a constant level during the appraisal period, when the evidence suggests that numbers are, in fact, increasing, and has asked for clarification on this point. We also urge the Minister to review the costs that fall directly on local authorities, and to provide more information on the alternative models considered to achieve the policy objective of the Bill, as well as details of how reinvestment of the profit will improve services for children and families.

Finally, in relation to the introduction of direct payments for continuing healthcare, the committee welcomes the incentive behind this proposal. However, we feel that there is an over-reliance on figures based on similar models elsewhere to estimate costs, rather than empirical, tangible evidence. The Minister has not provided the evidence to support these assumptions and has not explained why this approach is appropriate.

To conclude, Llywydd, the laudable objectives of the Bill shouldn't obscure the poor standard of the financial evidence provided, which has made our work of scrutinising the costs harder than it needed to be. I'm pleased that the Minister has accepted the majority of the recommendations in full, and others in part, but hopefully the Minister will consider our recommendations as the Bill progresses. Thank you.

As I outlined when this Bill was introduced, we all agreed that nobody should be profiting from vulnerable children. Qatari and United Arab Emirates private equity firms have no place running children's services in Wales. Those are the intentions behind this legislation. They are good intentions, admirable intentions, but we all know the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

The unintended consequences of this Bill could lead to a huge decline in the care of looked-after children. For-profit is not incompatible with caring for the most vulnerable in our society—children in care. The majority of independent care providers, who provide 83 per cent of all looked-after children's care services in Wales, are small operators who provide excellent care. As the Welsh Government's own explanatory memorandum states, these are typically owned and operated by people with experience in children's social care and almost exclusively owned by people based in Wales. These are people who deeply care for looked-after children and have responded to a failure by the state to provide residential accommodation. The numbers of looked-after children have risen by 79 per cent over the past two decades. Children placed in residential care have increased by 186 per cent over the last 20 years, and by 54 per cent in the past four years. Seven local authorities provide no care at all, so the private sector is the only game in town. And now the Welsh Government wants to demonise those very companies who provided a lifeline to our most vulnerable children. This Bill is flawed and based upon a flawed premise. Everyone who has commented upon this legislation has highlighted the barriers to implementation.

At this point, I would like to thank the Health and Social Care Committee for their invaluable Stage 1 deliberations on this Bill. Witnesses have told the committee of their concerns that the public and third sectors would find it difficult to provide the places currently offered by the for-profit sector. In fact, the Welsh Local Government Association warned of the risk of sudden and critical shortage if current providers decided to exit the market. And sadly, that's exactly what's likely to happen. The Children's Homes Association, which represents 22 providers who provide more than half of the beds in Wales, told the Health and Social Care Committee—

Will you give way?

Yes.

Thank you. I don't think it is about demonising the private sector, but I accept your point that capacity is constrained, and it's about allowing local authorities to build capacity. Wouldn't he agree that what is inappropriate is putting out to tender some of our most vulnerable young people, and they can see this for themselves—the costs associated with their own care? Isn't that right to move away from that system?

Thank you very much. So, I therefore ask the Welsh Government to withdraw the Bill and go back to the drawing board. There is a need and a desire to protect the sector from profiteering, but this Bill is not the answer. If you truly want to eliminate profit from children's care, then have the state provide the care homes. But you can't, and you won't, based upon past performance, and if the Welsh Government is truly opposed to private-sector provision of public services, are you going to nationalise general practice, dentists, pharmacies, opticians? What is next? Adult social care? No, of course not. I urge Members to reject this Bill and motion. Thank you.

Well, Plaid Cymru has been unstinting in our belief that our health services and care services should be run for the benefit of the people, not for profit or commercial enterprises. I'm pleased, therefore, that this legislation will achieve one of the priorities of the co-operation agreement that existed between ourselves and Government, namely to limit the ability to make profit at the expense of children in care.

The need for reform in this area has, of course, been apparent for some time. As was emphasised in the Competition and Markets Authority report of 2022, the market for the sector is skewed heavily and disproportionately in favour of private suppliers, where the ability of local authorities to provide their own foster care has been severely eroded by the long squeeze of austerity. With private providers now accounting for almost 80 per cent of all placements of children looked after, and 90 per cent of children's homes, approximately £3 of every £10 currently spent on foster care in Wales is going into the pockets of shareholders and equity firms, rather than being reinvested to improve the quality of services. And, as we've long argued, the market certainly does not know best when it comes to catering to the needs of looked-after children. This is particularly apparent in relation to geographic location, which in this context is a factor of paramount importance for well-being. Whereas 84 per cent children in local authority foster care in Wales remain in their local area, ensuring a vital degree of continuity in their lives during a period of inherent uncertainty, 79 per cent of children in private fostering are cared for outside their local area, and 6 per cent are moved out of Wales entirely.

But the most compelling case for change surely comes from the testimonies of the children themselves, which demonstrate widespread dissatisfaction and discomfort at how their circumstances can be used as a vehicle for profiteering. There is no doubt this legislation will be a profound shake-up to the sector and, without careful planning, it is likely there will be collateral in the form of private suppliers choosing to exit the market. That is why effectively managing the transition period is so important, to mitigate any resultant disruption as far as possible, and to ensure there is sufficient capacity for foster care once the changes kick in from April 2027.

So, could the Cabinet Secretary outline the measures being undertaken by the Welsh Government to encourage and support private providers to transition to a not-for-profit model? What is her latest estimate of the proportion of such providers who are likely to continue their operations beyond April 2027? Does she also accept the need for a pragmatic application of section 4 requirements on for-profit providers during the transition period, especially for those that will be called up for supplementary placements, as per section 13 of the Bill?

Turning to the other aspects of the Bill, we support the introduction of a legal duty for reporting on children and adults at risk of exploitation in line with the recommendations of the independent inquiry into child sexual abuse. It is essential that this duty is underpinned by robust support mechanisms for the affected individuals, which should include a children's rights approach in the case of minors. The reporting guidelines should also be developed so as to prevent creating a de facto hierarchy of abuse cases. The Minister will also be aware that the UK Home Office intends to legislate for mandatory reporting of child sexual abuse as part of the Criminal Justice Bill, and I would welcome her view on how this will interact with the proposals in this piece of Senedd legislation.

Finally, while the Government is right to address the shortcomings in the current legislative framework regarding direct payments for those eligible for continuing NHS healthcare, it is vital that local authorities are provided with the requisite resources to manage this additional responsibility. So, I'd be grateful, therefore, if the Minister could give an indication of the expected annual cost to local authorities as a result of these changes and explain how their revenue support grant will be upscaled to accommodate them. Diolch.

I'd like to thank the various committees of the Senedd for their invaluable scrutiny of this Bill. We should not underestimate just how important this Bill is. If passed, it will have profound and far-reaching consequences for children in care. The eliminate agenda has not been a central part of our work on the Children, Young People and Education Committee. Our work has focused on the Welsh Government's commitment to radical reform for care-experienced children and young people. We have been frustrated by the rate of progress in that area, but we do recognise the level of ambition set out in this Bill. We also know that removing private profit from the care of children is strongly welcomed by many care-experienced children and young people themselves.

However, I urge the Welsh Government to listen to the concerns identified by the Health and Social Care Committee during its Stage 1 scrutiny, particularly those relating to potential placement shortages. But this Bill does more than restrict the realisation of profit from children's care; it also makes it easier for local authorities to place children outside their home local authority. The Bill requires that accommodation for children in care is within or near to the authority's area. Currently, accommodation must be within the authority's area. The Welsh Government says that these provisions would allow local authorities to place a child closer to their home community, even if that is in a different local authority. We have significant concerns about this proposal. First, there is not enough detail in the Bill about what 'near to' means. Given the critical shortage of quality placements, we fear that these provisions will mean that children are inevitably placed further away from their homes.

Secondly, as soon as you place a child outside their home local authority, however near that placement is geographically, two local authorities have to share information about the child—two children's services departments, two housing departments, two education departments. It might even mean that two health boards have to share information about the child, and two police forces. We know that multi-agency working can be incredibly challenging. It comes up time and time again in safeguarding reviews when things have gone terribly wrong. We also know that 24 per cent of children who go missing are in care, despite children in care making up 1 per cent of all children in Wales. Every time a child goes missing from care, multi-agency working becomes an urgent and critical necessity. Minister, you have acknowledged to us that out-of-area placements are a leading driver for missing episodes, and that missing episodes place children at risk of being exploited. We therefore urge the Welsh Government to amend the Bill in line with the Health and Social Care Committee’s recommendation 15 to recognise the risks associated with out-of-area placements.

We're also concerned about provision in the Bill relating to supplementary placements. Whether unrestricted or unregulated, our worry is that these provisions could push more vulnerable children into accommodation where they are not cared for, where they are not supported, and quite possibly where they are exposed to unacceptable risks. It is no coincidence that the agencies that have also raised concerns about these provisions work closely with care experienced children and young people: the National Youth Advocacy Service, Voices from Care, TGP Cymru, the Association of Directors of Social Services, not to mention the Children’s Commissioner for Wales, Children in Wales and the Children’s Homes Association, even Care Inspectorate Wales.

Let’s remind ourselves of the reality that social workers will be facing when these provisions take effect. A child will need somewhere to stay immediately—that night, even. There will not be a placement for them somewhere that is inspected and regulated by Care Inspectorate Wales. There are wonderful, supportive placements that are not regulated by Care Inspectorate Wales—placements by Llamau, Barnardo’s and others—but these placements are in short supply. There might not be any available at such short notice. So, where will that child go? At the moment, placing them in unrestricted accommodation is completely illegal. It does happen, when there is no other option, but that illegality is a critical safeguard. These provisions weaken that safeguard.

Minister, can you please guarantee care-experienced children and young people that these provisions will not result in more children in care being placed in unfit and unsafe accommodation? Diolch.

I am proud to be here in the Senedd, and in a nation taking historic steps to eliminate private profit from our care system. This is a landmark Bill on the road to creating a care system in Wales that puts vulnerable children and young people right at the heart of decision making.

As a former social worker and chair of the cross-party groups on children and families and care-experienced children, it seems to me that the current system that we have is completely dysfunctional. If we think about it, we are paying our council tax; that goes straight into the shareholders' pockets and it doesn't meet the needs of those really vulnerable children. As Rowan Gray powerfully testified to the Health and Social Care Committee:

'Children in care want to be looked after by people who treat them as if they were their own. They don't want to be advertised with a price tag'.

And we don't need to look far to see the effects of profit on the consequences of inaction or slow change. Just this past month, an Oxford University report marvelled at the astounding pace of children's home privatisation over in England, finding that almost all residential care settings forced to close by regulators in the 12 years to 2023 were privately run.

Getting this Bill right, though, is crucial. The Welsh Government needs to avoid the pitfalls and consider learning from the experience of Scotland. Depressingly, research earlier this year showed that Scottish local authorities spent £218 million on providing residential children's care to profit-making companies. That was since committing to avoiding the monetisation of care in 2020. Fourteen local authorities stated that they had absolutely no plans to stop using profit-making companies. And the report by Who Cares? Scotland pointed to a lack of appropriate alternatives and infrastructure, meaning that, until local authorities are given sufficient funding, the monetisation of care will not be adequately challenged.

Here in Wales, we face similar challenges. As we've heard, currently, over 80 per cent of children in residential care and 35 per cent in foster care in Wales are placed with private providers. Should these providers not transition into the not-for-profit model, then we are clearly facing severe challenges. While the Welsh Government's £68 million transition funding is welcome, all local authorities and third sector organisations have made it clear that this funding must extend beyond 2025. So, I do welcome your statement, Minister, that you have made a commitment regarding future funding of this Bill, but I'd like to see more of the detail, particularly going beyond 2025.

I now wish to address another crucial issue—the glaring omission of active advocacy within the Bill. This represents a missed opportunity, just as there was a missed opportunity in the radical reform report. Children affected by changing care arrangements, particularly during this transition period, need and deserve special advocacy support. As NYAS Cymru told the Health and Social Care Committee, advocacy has to be at the heart of safeguarding. So, I’d like to call on you, Minister, if I may, to amend this Bill to include a statutory right to advocacy for every child and young person whose care arrangements may be affected by these changes.

Finally, I would like to echo the Health and Social Care Committee’s view and call on the Minister to amend the Bill in relation to what is a local provision—a 'near to' provision. Please could we be clearer about this, and perhaps say that it means bordering local authorities only, limiting these placements to exceptional circumstances only?

Ultimately, I believe that we as a Senedd wish to see a better care system that serves the needs of our most vulnerable children. However, this Bill’s success depends on thoughtful implementation, proper funding, appropriate timelines and, most importantly, keeping care-experienced children at its heart. We are the corporate parents of the children and young people who are within our care system. We need to do better, and I hope that, through this Bill, we will. I remain committed to seeing the outcome and the report from the Minister. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

The first thing that I want to say is that the people who provide care for looked-after children give the majority of those children excellent service, and they go above and beyond to ensure that, whether they're working in the private or public sector. I just wanted to clarify that.

This is an important issue, and everybody, it seems, is agreed that we need to eliminate profit from the care of looked-after children. It’s something that many of us have campaigned for for a long time. So, we welcome that part of the Bill. We know it's ambitious. We know it's groundbreaking, and that reform should be recognised.

I agree that we should aim for fewer children to be taken into care, and services should provide the right support for families at the right time, to help them stay together wherever that is possible. Also, when young people are ready to leave care, they should be properly supported to plan for the future, to lead independent lives. But removing the profit from care will help support a network of local community-based services that, in turn, can safeguard and promote the welfare of young people.

Like everyone here, I’m keen to see smooth management of that transition from private care into not-for-profit care. It has been mentioned many times—the importance of that to the children, giving them confidence and certainty of the final date, which will happen without a cliff-edge adding to their challenges, creating unnecessary anxiety for them and their families.

The timescale does need really careful consideration of adequate placement opportunities throughout Wales, and vulnerable children, as has been mentioned, should be looked after as close to home as is possible. But there needs to be flexibility so that, when that is not appropriate, the nearest possible location is afforded to them. I understand that Carmarthenshire council is at the forefront of that transition, and also to remember that there's been £68 million gone to local authorities to help them implement some of these changes, and all local authorities have been asked to submit plans. While Care Inspectorate Wales is still getting private provider applications, it seems—I hope—that some of those are intending to move into the not-for-profit market.

I also want to support the following recommendations: recommendation 7, registration of foster carers should be mandatory with Social Care Wales, thus creating a national register of foster carers. Because not all children in care find themselves in residential care. The mandatory reporting of child sexual abuse—recommendation 16—is, obviously, of paramount importance. We've seen reports that make for very difficult reading, but, principally, they ruin the lives of those affected. The key aim here is to listen to those who express concerns, particularly the children. Their voices have, in some cases, been ignored. I think we also need to recognise that there are a number of children who are neurodiverse; they're not always able to express their feelings, and their behaviour can be attributed to the child rather than the perpetrator. I think it's essential that we have proper training and I agree wholeheartedly with Jane about advocacy. It's an absolute necessity here, and particularly for those children who cannot express themselves.

I also recognise that the corporate parent is us and also the local authorities, and, again, we need to ensure that, while this transition is happening, there are regular reports to local authorities that are clear and accountable and transparent, and that the structures are in place so that people do take responsibility for the children that they, ultimately, are the corporate parents for.

I call on the Minister for Children and Social Care now to reply to the debate—Dawn Bowden.

Diolch, Llywydd. Can I say at the outset that I very much welcome the positive response to this piece of legislation? I want to acknowledge and recognise the work that we did with Plaid Cymru in developing this legislation whilst we were in the co-operation agreement. 

I think we're very clear on why we are doing what we're doing. We don't want to see children treated as commodities in the care sector; we want to see investment in the care of our looked-after children. As I have said on many occasions, both in committee scrutiny and on the floor of this Chamber, doing nothing is not an option. If we just look at costs alone, without looking at the morality of profit making out of looked-after children, we've seen the rise in costs from £60 million just 10 years ago to around £200 million now in the cost to local authorities in providing care for looked-after children. If we carry on that trajectory, we will be looking at a bill for local authorities of around £1 billion in the next 10 years. So, clearly, doing nothing, as I say, is not an option. And I want to try and deal with as many of the key points that came up today as I can, but there were so many, and, as I said at the outset, the fact that we have 72 recommendations across three committees means that that's going to, really, be very difficult for me to do. But there were some very clear themes, of course.

The first one I wanted to pick up on was—I think it was Russell George who raised it, Peredur Owen Griffiths raised it, Mike Hedges raised it, as did others—the concern around transition and the need for us to move from where we are now to where we want to be, and how we are going to do that in a way that protects the rights of the child as well as looking after the interests of providers that are currently in the market and who may want to transition.

I want to give an assurance to the Senedd that we are doing everything that we can to ensure that we have reasonable conversations with local authorities, with the private sector, with the third sector, to ensure that they develop sufficiency plans for a transition period. We cannot move from where we are now to where we need to be until we have sufficient provision.

Thank you to the Minister. I think part of the evidence that we heard in committee and part of the experience that I've received from the private sector is that they're concerned that they haven't had that information or guidance to date. It's been talked about for some time, but because this isn't yet legislation, they've held back and now they're desperate for that information, because they want to know can they continue in the new model.

I think that is fair. We have been involved in discussions with the third sector and with the private sector. I absolutely acknowledge the point you made, and I think when you see our response to the committee's recommendations, we will take that on board. We do know that we have to provide very detailed and specific guidance to organisations, because we want as many as possible to transition into the not-for-profit model. Far from the picture that Altaf Hussain presents, we're not trying to demonise organisations. We know that there are very good providers out there who are private providers. What we're saying is we want to use that expertise and we want to work with those providers, those good providers, to transition into a not-for-profit arrangement where the profits that they make are reinvested into the care of children rather than into the pockets of shareholders, and that's where we part company. 

There is still a lot of work to do around that. We're very clear as well that we have listened to the views of stakeholders around the transition—and when I talk about stakeholders, I include local authorities in this—who are concerned about the costs of the transition period, and we're taking all of that into account. When I have considered fully all the representations that we've made, we'll be making a further statement about the position on the transition period, because that is not actually on the face of the Bill. It will be in regulation, but we need to allow a transition period that will deliver what we need it to deliver in the way that we want it delivered. 

Russell, Peredur and Jane also made comments—[Interruption.] Sorry, Jane, were you—?

I think we've run out of time. I'm so sorry.

You're very generous in—

I've got lots more to say, Llywydd, but I am very conscious that I'm out of time, and I did say that I didn't feel that I was going to be able to get through all of the issues that were raised.

I'm happy for you to extend your time by a few minutes. I know that there were many questions to you during the debate.

Thank you. I'll try and have a little bit more brevity this time.

On commitment to future funding, what I can say is we have set out very clearly what we consider will be the funding levels required for the next three years. That will be a joint enterprise between the Welsh Government and local authorities. I can set out the commitment to what we can do in the here and now; what I can't do is give future commitments into a period when the Welsh Government itself doesn't know what its own budget and finances are going to be. But that does not in any way diminish our commitment to this. It is a programme for government commitment, it is a priority for this Welsh Government, and that will be taken into account in the next budget round. And the Cabinet Secretary for finance, of course, is sat here listening to this debate today.

On sufficiency, we've talked about guidance for private providers. I just wanted to touch on the issue that a number of colleagues have raised about what we mean by 'near to', and where we place children near to where they live. Buffy Williams made the point that 'near to' should be more specific. I think we do need to give more detailed guidance on that, and we're happy to do that.

What we can't say is that absolutely has to be in the local authority area, because we have to acknowledge that we need the flexibility to be able to accommodate a child in accommodation that is best suited to their needs, and so it has to be as near to where they live as it possibly can be, but that won't necessarily be in their own local authority area. And let's just bear in mind that if it's in their own local authority area, in an area like Powys, that could be much further away than if you put them over in a neighbouring local authority. We need to take that into account, so that we don't just draw a map, but we look at where a child is living and where the best place to put them is.

Can I just make one or two comments on the comments made by Peredur Owen Griffiths in terms of the Finance Committee? I have to acknowledge the points that you were raising in your contribution, and I hope that we have addressed that in response to the committee's report, in particular by accepting in full your recommendations 1 to 5, which were the key ones that you wanted us to look at.

Again, with Mike Hedges and the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, I think when you see our response, Mike, you will see that the key recommendations that you were making to us in terms of amendments that we need to bring forward at Stage 2 to address the issues of concern that the committee had will be dealt with with Government amendments that are being brought forward at Stage 2.

Mabon, I think you also raised the issue of geographic location. You also raised the issue of private providers distorting the market, the costs of private providers, and again that really underpins what we are trying to do and the reason that we're trying to do that. In terms of mandatory supporting, I'll say that very quickly: we have no plans to change our current arrangements for mandatory reporting. That is already there, it is already something that we do, and that is something that we will be strengthening in terms of our guidance.

Jane Dodds, just very quickly in relation to advocacy, I do need to remind colleagues that within the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2024 it does outline local authorities' duty to provide advocacy, and we will actively engage with local authorities to ensure that that does happen in the circumstances set out within the Bill.

I think, Joyce Watson, you also raised the issue of placements near to home and sufficiency planning. You also raised the issue of the register of foster carers. In response to the committee I'm saying that I am more than happy to continue that discussion. We have given that commitment to Foster Wales that we will continue to have discussions with a view to having a foster care register when we can do so, but we have to take everybody's views into account.

As I've outlined, I have carefully considered all the recommendations from the committees and will be responding to the Chairs of the relevant committees where I haven't already done so following this debate. Moreover, I will be more than happy to meet with the Chairs and with party spokespersons following today's debate with a view to reaching as wide a consensus as I possibly can ahead of Stage 2.

I would just like to reiterate my thanks to all Members who contributed to the scrutiny of the Bill through Stage 1 during this debate, and I look forward to further debate and scrutiny at Stage 2. I would ask Members to approve the motions. Diolch yn fawr.

The proposal is to agree the motion under item 8. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection. We will therefore defer voting until voting time, which means that we will also defer voting on the financial resolution until voting time.

That brings us to item 10, the debate on the first supplementary budget 2024-25. The Cabinet Secretary for finance to move the motion. Mark Drakeford.

Thank you, Llywydd. The first supplementary budget for 2024-25 is the first opportunity to update the plans for this financial year. It follows changes that have been made since the Senedd passed the final budget in March. The supplementary budget also makes changes to be consistent with the new Cabinet. This will be the basis for our draft budget in December. Thank you, of course, to the Finance Committee for considering the budget and thank you for the report. I will be responding in detail to that report in the usual way.

Llywydd, the supplementary budget includes both spending and financing plans for the Welsh Government and the bodies directly funded from the Welsh consolidated fund. It has been the usual practice for the first supplementary budget to take place before the summer recess. However, this year this was delayed due to the UK general election, which, in turn, delayed the laying of the UK Government's main estimates. 

This is a budgetary exercise, the first supplementary budget, that does not contain any new funding announcements. Given the period it covers, however, it continues to reflect the spending decisions flowing from the co-operation agreement between the Welsh Government and Plaid Cymru. And as is usual for supplementary budgets, the changes include adjustments to the overall level of resources available to Wales, reflecting transfers and consequentials arising from changes in UK departmental spending. The budget also regularises approved transfers within and between Welsh Government ministerial portfolios.

The supplementary budget includes allocations relating to the increased employer pension contributions for superannuation contributions adjusted for past experience, or SCAPE as they are usually known, arising from a change to the applicable discount rate. Consequential funding has been received from the UK Government, of which £117 million has been allocated to the health and social care main expenditure group for NHS costs, £64 million to the housing and local government MEG for costs relating to teachers and schools and the fire service, and £12 million to the education MEG for costs related to teachers in sixth form settings and further education colleges. 

Llywydd, as over the last few years, there are also changes in this first supplemntary budget relating to a technical reclassification of budgets to reflect implementation of the international finance reporting standards—or IFRS 16 as it's commonly known—in relation to leases. Although we are awaiting confirmation from the UK Treasury, we expect the budgetary impacts of IRS 16 to be part of our non-ring-fenced financial settlement from 2025-26 onwards. 

This supplementary budget also regularises a small number of transfers from the Welsh reserve. These are £39 million to the health and social care MEG to help fund the doctors pay award, £5 million for the economy, energy and planning MEG to support our culture and sports arm's-length bodies and Cadw, and £1.58 million to the social justice MEG to take forward digital inclusion, local food partnerships and the cost-of-living communications campaign. 

In addition, this supplementary budget regularises an allocation of £141 million consequential funding from the March UK budget to the health and social care MEG that was too late to be reflected in our own final budget, and these funds reflect the recurrence of additional resource provided late in 2023-24 that funded NHS pay settlements in that year. 

Llywydd, there will be a second supplementary budget later on in the financial year. The second supplementary budget will identify any other funding that is allocated from reserves this year. That too will include the details of any consequential funding for Wales, positive or negative, following changes to the departmental expenditure of the UK Government. Thanks again to the Finance Committee for scrutinsing the first supplementary budget, and I ask Members to approve it. 

The Chair of the Finance Committee—Peredur Owen Griffiths. 

Thank you, Llywydd. I'm delighted to speak in this debate today on behalf of the Finance Committee. The committee scrutinised the first supplementary budget on 10 October, and I'd like to thank the Cabinet Secretary and his officials for their attendance.

The committee notes that the changes included in this supplementary budget are largely operational and transactional in nature. However, we found it particularly difficult to understand the real impact of cash and non-cash movements on this occasion. Allocations made in this supplementary budget, such as those relating to new accountancy standards, setting employer contributions for public pensions and provisions relating to student loans, appear significant but they have a limited impact on the Welsh Government’s day-to-day spending.

While we recognise the challenges in presenting complex and technical financial information, we believe that the Cabinet Secretary has a duty to explain as plainly as possible the budgetary impact of decisions made in this supplementary budget. That is why we want the Cabinet Secretary to provide further narrative alongside the supplementary budget, to help differentiate allocations and changes where the Welsh Government’s discretion to spend might be limited. This would go some way towards ensuring that such decisions can be clearly understood and mitigate the risk of confusion.

We understand why the Cabinet Secretary has drawn down further funding from the Wales reserve and that this provides assurance that spending decisions in the supplementary budget are affordable. However, we found this prudent approach to be somewhat at odds with the Welsh Government’s decision to fund NHS pay awards before securing confirmation from the UK Government that the funding would be baselined into the Welsh Government’s budget for 2024-25. We would like further assurance on this point and ask for details about the decision to be provided, including the risks identified with this approach, and whether an impact assessment of how it could affect other areas in the Welsh Government’s budget was made.

Llywydd, I would like to say a few words about some of the main departmental allocations made in the supplementary budget. The committee welcomes that the current financial position of NHS bodies is better now than last year, and that health boards are a lot closer to managing within budgets prior to experiencing winter pressures. This is clearly good news. However, we note that the Welsh Government has no active plans to provide additional financial support for health boards, through the supplementary budget, to mitigate such pressures. We are therefore interested in the contingency plans the Welsh Government has in place for this purpose, and ask the Cabinet Secretary for progress updates on the work being done, to understand the likely financial impact of this for the remainder of 2024-25.

In terms of the additional funding provided to the core Valleys lines, the committee notes that this is the latest in a number of instances where additional funding has been provided by the Welsh Government to the rail network in Wales. We have previously asked for clarity on funding in this area, and reiterate this again in our report, particularly in terms of the funding amounts the Welsh Government expects to receive for this purpose from the UK Government, and the impact of these funding transfers on other areas within the transport MEG.

Llywydd, I'd like to finish my contribution by talking about progress made between the Welsh Government and the Treasury on securing better budget flexibilities in order to maximise devolved spending in Wales. Members will be aware that this is an area of long-standing interest to the committee, and our report, published last week, on fiscal inter-governmental relations includes a number of recommendations aimed at addressing such issues. It's encouraging that the Cabinet Secretary is willing to pursue these and we support both his objectives of increasing limits within the fiscal framework, as well as the wider objective of developing a more effective relationship with the Treasury.

We call for further updates in this area and believe that the Welsh Government should have the same level of fiscal discretion as other devolved  administrations. This is particularly important, given the Cabinet Secretary’s view that Wales, by now, has the least amount of fiscal flexibility of all the devolved nations in the UK. Thank you.

So, we know the supplementary budget shows us where this Welsh Government has allocated its funding that it has received in-year, and while we cannot go back in time and change their choices, we can challenge the priorities that were made and highlight the need for a change in direction.

While the Welsh Government budget has increased, as have the pressures that many of our public services are facing, I'm glad that there has been an increase in funding to our NHS. However, something is clearly still not working. For the last six months, we have seen NHS waiting lists increase to record numbers, and our hospital beds are still full of patients who are healthy enough to be discharged, but simply can't be, because, in part, of the pressures that the social care sector is under. We cannot address these waiting lists without addressing social care as well, so I would hope that, going forward, the Welsh Government takes a holistic approach to tackling the crisis in our health system. This would ensure that our social care sector receives the funding required to address the pressures it's under and enable the sector to play its part in unlocking the blockages we see within the NHS.

I'm disappointed also that the Welsh Government didn't find a way to provide more business relief for the hospitality, retail and leisure sector. We hear that the economy is a priority, however, the reality is to the contrary. And this is clear when we see businesses on the Welsh side of the border having to pay almost double the rates of non-domestic rates as counterparts in England. It's a fact that small businesses in Wales pay the highest levels of business rates in Great Britain, paying the same rate as larger businesses. More could be done. The Welsh Government has the ability to ease the burden and implement the split multiplier, but it hasn't.

As it stands, the challenges for our businesses and workers are about to get worse here in Wales as the Chancellor looks set to increase national insurance for employers. This move, as the Chancellor herself has previously said, will make each new recruit more expensive and increase the cost to businesses. But we know this would also apply to the public sector, with 330,000 employees, bringing huge extra pressure on them. If the Labour Party are serious about economic growth, then surely we need to be creating an economic environment that allows for growth, not levying higher taxes against businesses.

Another area to focus on is our local government. We clearly need to see a better approach to funding our local authorities, and if the Government does not act soon, then the public services that the people of Wales deserve will continue to crumble.

Finally, I want to touch on the state of education here in Wales. The supplementary budget has done nothing to reverse the cuts that our education sector has faced over the last year. Whilst I recognise that non-fiscal spend moving to reserves does not affect educational spend, there are remaining questions on areas such as the additional learning needs budget. This supplementary budget sees another cut to the ALN budget, not just in real terms, but in cash terms, and it's not clear why or where it has gone. Perhaps the Cabinet Secretary may be able to clarify that. If we are to ensure that our children and future generations have the best possible chance in life, then we must ensure things as important as ALN support are focused on those who need it. Clearly, Labour’s lack of ambition and poor management of our education system, from all perspectives, is letting our young people down.

Llywydd, this supplementary budget reflects the priorities of Welsh Government, and it is clear that they can't get things quite right. The people of Wales urgently need the Government to change direction and refocus their priorities before it's too late. Only then will we get the public services that the people of Wales deserve.

Thank you for the opportunity to respond to this debate on the supplementary budget. As the Cabinet Secretary said in opening this debate, clearly there aren't many unexpected things in this budget today. The fact that the Westminster election was so unexpected means that we are later, but clearly one thing that's disappointing is that there hasn't yet been additional funding for Wales from that Government. There are so many areas that would request an increase in the budget, so many areas where we could be making a difference, and clearly the additional funding that we have seen to date isn't going to make life better in terms of those organisations.

But as I have noted previously, Plaid Cymru, of course, welcomes the additional funding announced on 10 September for public sector wages. After 14 years of austerity under the Tories, this increase was very much needed. But, of course, it doesn't solve the major challenges that continue to face these sectors, and as you noted when you presented that to us in September, it didn't provide additional funding for local government salaries. At that time, you said, in September, that further discussions with local government would be required on this issue. May I ask, therefore, what discussions have taken place? And has there been an outcome to those discussions?

Another element of the budget that I have welcomed is the £5 million of additional funding for arts and culture. I wonder whether you could outline where this funding came from. Five million pounds is a significant proportion of this budget. And what is the impact of the additional funding? Clearly, a large number of staff have had to leave these organisations, such as Amgueddfa Cymru and the National Library of Wales, before this funding was announced, through voluntary redundancy schemes. On the culture committee, we've heard about the excruciating impact on these organisations and the impact on their work, in terms of being able to deliver what the Welsh Government expects of them. Some elements of the key work that they undertake are under threat, including the ability to generate income. So, this funding has come too late in the day to safeguard those jobs.

This is a story that a number of us will have consistently heard from bodies as we scrutinise their budgets, that the financial instability and the increases in funding that often come late in the day, following a major cut, make it exceptionally difficult to plan activities and work in a strategic manner. They're not saying 'no' to this £5 million—certainly not—but it does mean that jobs have already been lost, and that's something—. We're not talking about one or two jobs here. A large number of jobs have been lost. So, whilst this funding can go towards other elements, it doesn't enable the institutions to be strategic in their planning. I am sure that you share the same frustration in terms of the additional funding that comes to Wales from Westminster, and how difficult it is then, when ad hoc funding arrives, to forward plan as a Government.

So, while looking forward to next week's budget from the Labour Government in Westminster, what discussions has the Cabinet Secretary had in terms of ensuring multi-year funding cycles for the Welsh Government, so that you then can give the same certainty to bodies that you fund, such as local authorities and the other bodies I've mentioned? And do you agree that this should be a consideration as part of the wider reforms required to the fiscal framework? 

One element of this budget that is disappointing is the fact that it doesn't address the cuts made in terms of the preventative budget. I think we've been robust here—Rhun ap Iorwerth and Mabon ap Gwynfor—in terms of the importance of continuing to invest in the preventative agenda. So, can the Cabinet Secretary confirm whether a risk assessment has been undertaken of the latest cuts to preventative programmes and public health, and if so, commit to publish it in the interests of transparency as soon as possible?

Tomorrow, we will, of course, have the opportunity to discuss the UK budget, but before then I would like to ask you about a wider point, which is perhaps more pertinent to today's debate. In your first appearance as Cabinet Secretary before the Finance Committee, you said that you would be arguing for greater flexibility in terms of the Welsh Government's fiscal powers, including aligning the draw-down limits from the Wales reserve with inflation, as has already happened in Scotland. Could you update us on that today, please?

With those few comments, I will take my seat, but I do think that there will be more discussion in terms of budgets tomorrow, and there will be responses that we will want in terms of your demands of the Labour UK Government in Westminster.

This is a minor financial event, but it still needs and deserves full scrutiny by both the Senedd and the Finance Committee. There are no new allocations to this budget, and all changes relate to previously announced funding. Additional funding agreed for the public sector pay awards announced on 10 September are not included. The finance Minister has said he is confident that this expenditure will be funded from expected consequentials from the UK Government, and he has said that those allocations will be regularised as part of the second supplementary budget in February. The supplementary budget confirms that Welsh Government borrowing remains at a maximum of £150 million, and that an additional £39 million in revenue is being drawn down from the Wales reserve, meaning a total of £125 million is budgeted to be drawn down in 2024-25.

I will again say this: there is no reason outside Treasury micromanagement why movement out of or into reserves needs to be controlled. Every local authority in Wales can move money into and out of reserves, however much they want. It's their money and they're allowed to spend it. This is Welsh Parliament money; why are we not allowed to spend it? This is something that is fundamentally wrong. And on borrowing, local authorities can borrow prudentially. I'm not sure how prudential some of those small English districts have been, who have borrowed 12 or 15 times their annual income in order to buy up shopping centres in order to support their income, but that is considered to be prudential, and they're allowed to do it. Why is the Welsh Government so constrained and controlled by the Treasury, in a manner that they don't even think about doing to local authorities, even the smallest of local authorities? I mean, it's fundamentally strange, and I think it's fundamentally wrong as well.

The Finance Committee has recommended that the Cabinet Secretary confirms that IFRS 16 changes will not impact on the Welsh Government's spending capacity, and clarify as to whether the scale of the IFRS 16 changes included within the supplementary budget will be replicated in subsequent budgets. The Finance Committee, during our consideration of the supplementary budget, found it difficult to understand the real impact of cash and non-cash movements. While I accept that you provided the detail in the supplementary budget narrative and tables, and I'm grateful for this, I would welcome further information in future supplementary budgets to differentiate allocations and changes where the Welsh Government's discretion to spend might be limited. Is it real money that is within the spending capacity of the Welsh Government, is it money that comes in as a consequential and has already been allocated, or is it just a financial regulation where you see money moving up and down in the hundreds of millions, but it isn't actually money that can be spent? It's important that budgets included in the supplementary budget distinguish between expenditure and allocating cash resources.

There is the £372.278 million of allocations from fiscal revenue reserves for the health and social care budget in this supplementary budget. I again highlight my disappointment that the money is not being allocated for health improvement. Action to reduce smoking and obesity to reduce health demand is urgently needed. There are also other health improvement initiatives needed. We need a healthier population, not to spend more money on dealing with people who are ill.

There is a need to deal separately within Government with the costs relating to student loan provision from the rest of the education spending. The Cabinet Secretary explained that they do publish one table where they could do that but acknowledged that they could try to give it more prominence in the way that they describe things. I do not believe that that goes far enough, and it should be treated separately as expenditure over which the Welsh Government has no control and that doesn't affect the cash available. Unless that happens, people will highlight either a substantial cut in education expenditure, as in this budget, or a substantial increase, as was previously reported.

The capital overprogramming is a very good idea because capital schemes slip for a variety of reasons. The Welsh Government needs external support to show how maintenance such as new boilers or a new lighting system in a hospital can be either capital or revenue and allow the funding to come from either capital or revenue, depending on the available funding. I believe that the Cabinet Secretary has a duty to explain as plainly as possible the impact of the budgetary decision made in the supplementary budget. This ensures that they can be clearly understood and to reduce the risk of confusion. I welcome the indication from the Cabinet Secretary that the Welsh Government would try to give more prominence to the way in which allocations are described in this supplementary budget and ask that this is considered for future budget rounds.  

The Cabinet Secretary to contribute to the debate and to reply—Mark Drakeford. 

Thank you, Llywydd, and thank you to all Members who have contributed to the debate, particularly those who have focused on the supplementary budget.

Can I thank the Chair of the Finance Committee for their report? I share his ambition and that of Mike Hedges that we report as plainly as possible on the changes that are recorded in what Mike Hedges correctly described as this minor financial event. I can provide very easy clarity for those who have asked whether or not the changes to the treatment of leases and the changes to the treatment of student finance have any impact on the Welsh Government's ability to spend. The answer to that question is 'no'. It really is as simple as that. These are accountancy matters. It looks as though large sums of money are flowing in and out, but it's not real money; it's money that the UK Government has provided to regularise some of the changes to accounting standards on the one hand and the treatment of student loans on the other. 

To respond directly to a couple of other points made by the Chair of the Finance Committee, Llywydd, particularly, the NHS additions that you see in this budget are very largely to reflect pay awards. And it was a risk-based decision and a difficult decision for the Welsh Government in laying our final budget in March of this year that we did not have certainty from the UK Government whether the funding awards that they had agreed for the last financial year would become recurrent into this financial year. We didn't have that certainty. We took a risk-based decision that it was impossible even for the last Government to pay for pay awards in one year and to choose not to pay for them in the next year. So, we took a risk-based decision that that money would come to Wales. And, truthfully, the proof of the pudding is in the eating, isn't it, because very late in March, after our own budget, that money did indeed come to Wales and it's therefore regularised and reflected in this first supplementary budget. This is not the budget that deals with winter pressure allocations, it’s not the budget that deals with future funding for core Valleys lines.

But I do agree on the points that the Chair of the Finance Committee made, and which Mike Hedges referred to, in terms of flexibility. The Welsh Government’s policy is to have greater flexibility in order to deal with the money that's in our hands, and we raised that with the new Ministers in the Westminster Government, and Ministers from Scotland and Northern Ireland made exactly the same points. I look forward to having further discussions with the Treasury on providing greater flexibility for us to deal with the funding that has been our money from the outset.

Llywydd, Peter Fox asked for more money for the NHS, more money for social care, more money for rate relief, more money for local authorities, more money for education, and then said that it was wrong to raise taxes in order to pay for any of those things. I look forward to seeing in any budget from the Conservatives—in the very unlikely event they should ever get their hands on it here—how they would manage to do that.

We heard from other Conservative Members earlier today that they were opposed to pay uplifts for NHS staff. That’s not the policy of this Government; that’s why you see the money for pay in the budget. I did welcome what Peter Fox said about—

Will you take an intervention?

Yes, of course.

I hope that the finance Minister will acknowledge that, from these benches, we have always said that the pay review body award should always be paid in full, at a time when the Government that you led was not implementing those pay review awards, like last year. So, this side of the Chamber has been consistent. Where we do not believe you’ve been consistent is the 20 per cent-plus pay award that has been given to junior doctors and that the money hasn’t been guaranteed for.

Well, I’m grateful to the leader of the opposition for clarifying again that his party is opposed to the pay award that was made to junior doctors here in Wales. He’d rather have seen them on strike like they were in England, no doubt.

I did welcome what Peter Fox said about social care and about the need for a holistic approach—investment in one part of the system has a direct impact on other parts of the system. It was never the policy of his party in earlier years, but I’m glad to see that conversion.

I thank Heledd Fychan for her contribution. As I explained to the Chair of the Finance Committee, it was difficult to assess the risk at the end of the period when we were preparing our final budget, and, in terms of the £5 million that we found subsequent to that to invest back in the arts and culture, that was something that we were unable to do in March when things were too uncertain. But I thank her for her comments in welcoming the fact that we have found the money to do that in this financial year and to include it in the budget before the Senedd today.

So, I thank Members for all their contributions. This is, at the end of the day, an exercise that just regularises decisions already made. Importantly this year, it means that committees who will be scrutinising the draft budget that we will lay in December will be able to do that with the information now properly aligned to Cabinet portfolios, and I think that that will be a material help to the Senedd in the important work of scrutiny that lays in front of us. Diolch yn fawr.

The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There are objections. We will, therefore, defer voting on item 10 until voting time.

That brings us to voting time and, unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, we will proceed directly to our first vote. The first vote is on item 8, the general principles of the Health and Social Care (Wales) Bill, and I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Dawn Bowden. Open the vote—[Inaudible.]—14 against, and the motion is agreed.

The next item will be a vote on the financial resolution in respect of the Health and Social Care (Wales) Bill. I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Dawn Bowden. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 37, one abstention and 13 against. Therefore, that motion is also agreed.

Item 10 is the final vote, the debate on the first supplementary budget 2024-25. I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in name of Jane Hutt. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 26, 24 abstentions and one against. Therefore, the motion is agreed.

That concludes voting for today and brings our proceedings to a close.