Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru

I’d like to declare an interest in this matter. First Minister, last week  was proud to stand with thousands of farmers and my constituents in Westminster, and yesterday at the winter fair, against the family farm tax. This tax is going to damage the fabric of rural Wales, putting our family farms at risk, putting our food security at risk, and has the real consequence of putting food prices up. You told farmers that they needed to calm down. That statement went down like a cup of cold sick with the farmers that I represent. First Minister, you said you would stand up for Wales. Will you now join the thousands of Welsh farmers and stand up for rural Wales and condemn your colleagues in Westminster, and stand with me and those farmers and condemn the family farm tax? And will you please raise it with the Prime Minister to say that the Welsh Labour Government here does not stand with them on this matter?

Thanks very much, James, and can I first of all thank you for declaring an interest in this important matter? Certainly, we are very aware of the concern in the agricultural community around this issue. We know that agriculture contributes a huge amount to our economy, to our culture, to communities in rural Wales in particular. And that’s why the Deputy First Minister has been speaking to the farmers unions in Wales and has got that assurance that the UK Government will listen to them in relation to this matter. So, the National Farmers Union Cymru and the Farmers Union of Wales's voices will be heard.

So, I think it is important for us to recognise that this is a UK Government tax, and it is important that those figures are bottomed out because, clearly, there is a lack of an agreement on who exactly will be impacted. So, I would recommend again that the letter that was sent to the committee in Parliament is read in detail.

Decisions on national insurance contributions are made by the UK Government. The UK Treasury has indicated additional funding will be provided to meet the costs of employer national insurance contributions in the public sector. Impacts on third and private sector service providers could affect local authority budgets.

First Minister, Monmouthshire County Council has written to me, setting out the financial impact of increased national insurance contributions that have been imposed by the Labour Government. They estimate these changes will result in a direct loss of at least £3.5 million from an already overstretched budget. However, the true cost will be far higher as many of their service providers will face increased expenses, which will inevitably be passed on to the council. This is a problem entirely created by the Labour Government in Westminster, whose budget will result in huge financial costs on councils across Wales. Unless this money is replaced in full, it will either result in higher council taxes or fewer services. So, First Minister, will you guarantee that the millions of pounds in extra costs faced by councils like Monmouthshire will be covered by this Welsh Government? And, if the extra costs are to be covered, will you confirm that this funding will not be misrepresented as new or increased investment but as simply the replacement for cash that has already been taken away in the budget?

Well, thanks very much. I've got to be absolutely clear that the problems in local government have emanated from the fact that, actually, there have been 14 years of austerity. And if you look at—[Interruption.] And if you look at how we've stood in this Government—[Interruption.]—how we've stood in this Government with local authorities, giving them more than was given under the Tories to local government in England, that partnership that we've got, a very good partnership, is something that should be respected. Now, we don't expect confirmation of the funding until the main estimates, which will happen in spring to summer next year, so we can't give a detailed assessment. So, clearly, Monmouth can't be absolutely sure of what the implications are for them. But I appreciate this makes it difficult for local authorities to plan, and, obviously, we will work very closely with the Welsh Local Government Association to see how far we can go to get some sense of where this is likely to land.

It's incredibly rich for the Conservatives to scaremonger local authorities in this way. It has been 14 years of ideologically driven austerity from the Conservatives in Westminster—[Interruption.] I knew they were going to shout, I knew they were going to shout, but it's the truth, and the First Minister's pointed that out. The key issue—[Interruption.]—the key issue is it's unnecessary to scaremonger, given that we have heard about the contribution made to the public sector by the UK Treasury. Can the First Minister, therefore, confirm that that will then be allocated through the Barnett formula, and perhaps give us some insight into the discussions that she's had in the build-up to the Welsh Government's budget?

Thanks very much, Hefin. We will, of course, be pushing the UK Government to cover the costs of the national insurance increases to the public sector in Wales, and I'll expect at least the Barnett consequentials of cost. So, the Welsh Government, I'm afraid, are currently not in a position to be able to provide that full analysis of the impact of these changes until we're clearer on the financial picture. But you're absolutely right that the reason we're in this situation is because of those 14 years of Tory austerity.

I'm sure, First Minister, the last thing you need this afternoon is lectures from supporters of Liz Truss on economics. We all saw what happened when we had the Conservatives in power; they can't decide whether it was £30 billion or £60 billion they lost that afternoon. But what we do know is that they crashed the economy, we do know that austerity led to no growth, and we do know that they supported a Brexit that has reduced our trade. On every test—[Interruption.]—on every economic test, in 14 years, the Conservatives have failed Wales. First Minister—[Interruption.]—First Minister, what the UK Government—

Alun Davies's voice is quite loud, actually, in this Chamber, but even I'm struggling to hear him now with all the noises around. So, can we have some silence for the question, please? Diolch, Alun.

Presiding Officer, they’re embarrassed—we should forgive them.

First Minister, do you agree with me that what we require now is a UK Government that believes in Wales, that’s going to invest in Wales, that’s going to invest in public services, and is going to invest in Welsh people for the future?

Thanks very much, Alun. The difference between this Government and the last Government is the difference between night and day. The amount of additional money that will be coming into our coffers in order to support public services is something they’ve already demonstrated. They’ve even demonstrated it in this financial year, where we’ve been able to give above-inflation pay rises to people in the public sector—something that’s been difficult to do for years and years and years under the Tories. And now we’ve got a budget settlement for next year where, for the first time, we’ll be looking at a situation where we won’t be having to think about cuts and cuts and cuts, which is the situation we’ve been in year after year after year. So, thank you, Alun. I think it is important to recognise that the UK Government is serious about investing in Wales and is interested in making sure that we see growth in our economy, which, in turn, will help us to support the public sector.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. First Minister, we all saw the scenes over the weekend of the flooding that affected many parts of Wales, and our thoughts, I’m sure, are with the family of the bereaved gentleman in north Wales, which shows the ultimate price that can be paid by people when such severe weather hits our communities.

There is a genuine question that’s coming loud and clear from those communities that, if there was greater warning, then there could have been more preventive measures put in place. I fully accept the force of the water in many areas was enormous, but there was a genuine point around a yellow alert being issued when we were forecast by the meteorologists and others that a month’s rain was going to fall in a 24-36 hour period. I hope you are as concerned as I am over those warnings. But, unlike me, obviously, you’re in Government. What are you doing with your agencies to get to the bottom of the lack of urgency around the warnings that could have prevented such losses as we saw of property and assets, and, ultimately, got the agencies better prepared for that appalling situation we saw on Sunday into Monday?

Thanks very much. It’s been a devastating weekend for many, many families across Wales, where we’ve seen in particular those impacted for the second time, after storm Dennis. They’ve seen storm Bert really create havoc in their homes and destroy lots of the property that they care about. I am particularly saddened to hear about the death of Brian Perry, who lost his life in Conwy. Obviously, I’m sure we’d all here like to extend our sympathies to his family.

The Deputy First Minister will be making a statement later in the afternoon in terms of the detail of the response. I’d like to thank him for his tireless work over the weekend, along with the north Wales Cabinet Secretary, who was also on visits. I think it’s probably worth also putting on record how important it was in terms of the response of the emergency services. Local government have stepped up. It was very clear, visiting Pontypridd yesterday, speaking to the council there, that there were people there who’d gone way above and beyond the call of duty on the weekend, trying to protect people’s properties.

Clearly, there will be lessons learnt, as we learnt them last time, and we will need to work with Natural Resources Wales in terms of seeing if there could have been better warning. I’ve called a meeting next week with local authorities and NRW to assess the situation.

I’m grateful for the final point, when you indicated that a meeting is to be convened next week. But what’s important from meetings is that there are concrete actions that come to address some of the shortfalls. Many people indicated in some of the most severely affected areas in Pontypridd that the first that they realised the flooding was taking place was when neighbours were going from house to house banging on the doors. In an area that, only five years ago, had severe flooding—four years ago, I should say—from storm Dennis, that really is a failure to learn the lessons and implement an alert process. I really do hope that the First Minister will use her office, and that of the rest of Government, to drive this narrative that information is power in these situations and, ultimately, if that information isn't used to best effect, as we saw on the weekend, that devastating circumstances ensue. So, with that in mind, what financial support is the Government putting in place to support some businesses and individuals who are now in their second and third major flooding incident and ultimately will be facing a very bleak future unless there is some sort of intervention to support them to get to the other side of these flooding effects that are affecting their businesses and their domestic properties?

Thanks very much. Well, I know that Natural Resources Wales issued 131 alerts and warnings, including two severe flood warnings, with over 95,000 messages sent and 46,000 plus customers being reached. So, they did quite a lot. The question is: could they have done more? And that is something, clearly, that will need to be analysed. I think it is important also to recognise that, actually, we did learn a lot of lessons as a result of storm Dennis, and massive investment has been put in place. 

In relation to support that the Welsh Government can give, I'm very pleased that the finance Secretary has been working very hard over the weekend to identify additional funding. And I'm pleased to announce that £1,000 will be given to households who don't have insurance, £500 to those who do have insurance, which will replicate the kind of support that was put in place following storm Dennis. 

Can you confirm, First Minister, because, in fairness to the UK Government, they have offered support—to date, I think Steve Reed has indicated that no response has come from the Welsh Government; I don't mean that in a negative way, I mean most probably the Welsh Government, in fairness, is calibrating what is required—that there will be a taking up of that offer from the Welsh Government to bring more resource in to support the communities? And importantly, you've talked about the lessons learned, but can you confidently stand there and say, after storm Dennis, that the recommendations and the preventative measures were implemented in full to protect the communities as best as possibly could be expected, albeit in exceptional circumstances?

Well, thanks very much. I think that the first thing to say is that it was really notable that Keir Starmer actually picked up the phone and spoke to both me and Andrew Morgan, the leader of the Welsh Local Government Association on Sunday night, something that hasn't happened before, to offer that support. Clearly, we're working through at the moment the impact, not just on homes, the number of homes, which amount to around 400 now across Wales, but also to businesses and infrastructure. So, we will need a little bit of time to work through that. But I was very grateful that he reached out and offered that support, and, clearly, we will be getting back to him on that. 

But, in terms of lessons learned, since storm Dennis, we have invested £300 million in defences to try and support people. And I think that it is important to note, particularly in places like Rhondda Cynon Taf, for example, where last time about 2,000 homes were affected, that, this time, around 150 homes were affected. That is a significant number of people who were protected as a result of the investment that went in by the Welsh Government—thousands of people protected because of that investment. And I think that that is something. Clearly, it's of no comfort to the people who were flooded out, and clearly we're trying to stand by and with them in these very difficult days for them. 

I visited Pontypridd yesterday evening with my colleague, Heledd Fychan. I must say that the speed with which the community had responded was very, very impressive, but those I spoke with are again now looking to Government, of course, for a response. Bad weather is inevitable, we know that, but floods hitting the same places time and time again is not, and, when storms hit in early 2020, we implored Welsh Government to hold an independent inquiry into flooding. Instead, we had a review, which can't give us all the answers, unfortunately, on infrastructure, on the investment needed, on warning systems, are they fit for purpose, is the current multi-agency approach the right approach. Given, though, that we had repeated flooding again, in Pontypridd in particular, does the Government accept that there's deep frustration that Government doesn't seem to have learnt the lessons, and what does she intend to do differently from her predecessors to make sure that we're not in this situation again, a few years down the line?

Thanks very much. I've got a sign in my office; it says, 'Less chat and more do', and that's what we did. After the last flood, we got on with it, investing £300 million. Yesterday, I was pleased to be able to go and see some of the investment and what a difference that was making: real-time identification of where the floods were hitting, where the blockages were coming, looking at those culverts—massive, massive investment in the culverts—and local authorities being able to monitor in real time, being able to send JCBs in to dig out any of the debris that had built up, which was then able to be removed, saving those thousands of properties. The system improved hugely, compared to what happened under storm Dennis. That is not a small amount of money. I accept that that is very little comfort to the people who were affected, and I know how devastating, just before Christmas, this must be for them, but we did learn lessons, and we have put in massive investment.

It's quite an assessment that the First Minister has been able to make in just a day or two. I'm sure there are lessons that have been learnt. We'll need to know exactly what happened. Was there less rain this time? Why did some of the warnings not come from NRW on time and so on? But the flooding will have caused, of course, significant financial hardship for families, for businesses and for other organisations, not least local authorities themselves. They're looking for both short-term and more medium- to long-term responses now.

The First Minister said again now that hundreds of millions of pounds have been put into flood defences. What she has forgotten to say is that there's been an £8.5 million cut to flood risk management in this year's budget. NRW reckon that flood spending needs to more than triple because of climate change, and I'm interested in knowing how the First Minister intends to reflect that kind of warning in the forthcoming budget.

But let's focus on what's needed right now. I hope to hear later on today what financial support is going to be made available, and, meanwhile, businesses in flood risk areas being unable to get insurance is a major problem. We've raised it many times on these benches—is the First Minister willing to address that now? But, on immediate spending, UK Government has said there may be more resource available if and when it is needed. Does the First Minister agree with me that it's not a matter of 'if', it's, 'We need it now, and let's get down to talking how much'?

Thanks very much. The rain this time, in some parts of our communities, was more intense and more frequent. The river levels were higher than they were under storm Dennis, and yet, despite that, far fewer homes were affected, so I do think that we need to acknowledge that that investment is making a difference. I accept that people need better warning, and that is something, clearly, that will need to be discussed with NRW and the Met Office. There will be times when it'll be difficult for us to protect every property in Wales. With the changes in climate, that is going to be very, very difficult.

But what we can do is to build resilience, and it was really interesting in Pontypridd yesterday to speak to some of the shop owners who had been flooded out. They were back on their feet the next day, because of some of the investment we put in, because the floors were able to resist flooding, because the sockets had been raised up, because they'd been given protection by local authorities in terms of storm protection. And they were open the next day. Last time, it took them about two weeks. So, that building in of resilience—. Sometimes, I think we're going to have to accept that it'll be very difficult to protect every property. Climate change is not going anywhere; if anything, it's going to become more difficult. So, we do need to recognise that we'll need to adapt to a changing climate. And clearly, there is a limit to budgets; if you spend it on this, you're not spending it on something else. So, you'll have to be clear, if you want us to spend it on this, exactly where you'd like us to take that money from.

I'll move on to anxiety over the landslip in the former mining community of Cwmtillery. We've now had three First Ministers, I think, in post since the idea of introducing coal tip safety legislation was first raised in the Senedd. And we in Plaid Cymru have long argued that Westminster should be footing the bill for making tips safe. These tips predate devolution itself; our communities shouldn't have to live with the risk that they pose or have to pay for their removal. Estimates suggest that making tips safe could cost maybe up to £600 million over 10 to 15 years. Yet, with a fanfare, the new UK Labour Government announced that they were making just £25 million available. This week, the First Minister has admitted that that is all she asked for. These tips need to be made safe, and urgently, so will she now be asking Keir Starmer to foot the whole bill for making these tips safe?

We've been asking for money from the UK Government for four years, and nothing was forthcoming until we had a Labour Government. And we were really pleased that the Labour Government answered our request for £25 million, which is what we asked for, because we recognise that this is a 10 to 15-year project, it's not something you can put in place overnight, and there will be limits in terms of being able to absorb additional money, because there will be limits in terms of expertise, equipment. So, if they gave us the money, it'd be very difficult for us to use it all up because of the lack of expertise, which we need to build up. So, as I said, Keir Starmer picked up the phone, offered support, and we, of course, will be going back to ask for more money in relation to coal tips and I'm very confident that he will be forthcoming, as he was last time.

Rhondda Cynon Taf County Borough Council consulted on their local development plan preferred strategy earlier this year. The Welsh Government, as a statutory consultee, made formal representations to the emerging plan, which are publicly available on the Welsh Government website.

First Minister, as you've just said and as you'll be aware, RCT council has recently published its formal response to all the consultation submissions it received about its proposed LDP strategy plan, and I'm happy to see that the council has responded positively to Welsh Government observations regarding one of its strategic sites and has completely removed it. However, it is disconcerting to see that the council is still considering residential development on the Ystrad Barwig site in Llantwit Fardre, which has been continually refused by this Welsh Government due to it being classified as a C2 flood zone, the worst classification there is. Council and national planning guidance is clear on this matter: you don't build residential developments on this classification of floodplain, which, as you can no doubt appreciate, First Minister, was under water over the weekend. I am conscious that you cannot talk about individual planning matters, but why can allocations such as these continue to be promoted by RCT council, when there is so much local and Government opposition to it? It not only undermines public trust and confidence in the planning system, but they are a substantial waste of taxpayers' money. Thank you.

Thanks very much. I welcome the fact that RCT have been revising their LDP and consulting on this. The closing date was 16 April and they've now been moving on with what happens next. Obviously, they have to comply with the planning needs and policies of the Welsh Government. All LDPs are subject to statutory processes, which include several stages of consultation. Welsh Government, as you said, made it very clear that we thought that the Llanilltud Faerdref and Efail Isaf projects should be removed from the plan. I don’t think it would be appropriate for me to comment further on individual plans and policies, because that statutory process is still under way.

Swansea Bay University Health Board serves around 383,000 people and employs just under 12,500 people. I expect the health board to work with its partners, through the pan-cluster planning group, to develop an increasing range of primary care services in line with the primary care model for Wales.

Thank you, First Minister. Primary care is the basic building block of the national health service. It is estimated that 90 per cent of patient health contacts are with general practice. Swansea East is covered by some excellent GP practices. When it goes wrong, and patients cannot get appointments, then pressure increases on accident and emergency departments. The ability to get an appointment varies by practice. When someone says they need an urgent GP appointment, a practice telling them they need to go into A&E does not help the system. The system is also not helped by inappropriate referrals to a consultant. General practice needs to feel valued. Protecting a share of the health budget spent on general practice would be a good place to start. I have regular complaints about one GP practice. Can the Welsh Government instruct health boards to monitor GP practice complaints and discuss them with GP practices?

Thanks very much. I think, first of all, we've got to recognise the amount of work that GP practices undertake. It is quite, quite remarkable that they see 1.6 million people every month in a population of 3 million. The scale of this work is quite, quite remarkable. And in Swansea bay, I think they're delivering exceptional access to their patients. Some of that is because, actually, there's been a new contract. There's been a new GP access contract. They've signed up to the contract. Ninety-seven per cent of practices told us they were achieving that commitment, supporting more equitable access arrangements across Wales. But you're right, there are some—and we all know who they are—practices that are not doing what they should, and you're absolutely right, I think it's important that we chase those down. Certainly, when I was health Minister—I'm sure Jeremy will do the same thing—when you hear about them, you get on the phone and you say, 'I hear this is not going well', and you chase them down. I'd encourage you, as Senedd Members, to get in touch with the local health boards to make sure that you're standing up for your constituents, because the contract has been signed. Most GP practices across Wales are doing exceptional work, but it is important that we chase down those are who not complying with those new rules.

You're right, GPs do do exceptional work across Wales. I've heard from a number in the city of Swansea over the last month or so who've written to me concerned about the UK Government's decision to increase national insurance contributions in the recent budget. One GP at a surgery, Tŷ'r Felin surgery in Gorseinon, said to me that that decision can, and I quote, 'only served to directly undermine access and patient care'. With that in mind, all they're asking you to do is to reimburse the costs, like other parts of the NHS. So, it's a simply request. Will you?

Thanks very much. I think it is important to recognise that they're actually seeing more people than ever more before. So, there's a 0.9 per cent increase in people being seen this year compared to last year. When it comes to the national insurance contributions, clearly, we've heard loud and clear that they are concerned about the situation. Don't forget that the health service has already been given a significant uplift as a result of the budget. That doesn't come from nowhere, that's got to come from somewhere, and some of that comes from an increase in national insurance contributions. Now, we recognise that there are specific issues in relation to GPs; clearly, we'll continue conversations with them around that. But the UK Government has made it clear that the money will be reimbursed in relation to people who are directly employed in the public sector, and GPs are not.

We work in social partnership to promote inclusive working environments in all sectors, so that women and, indeed, all workers, can work free from the limitations imposed by a sexist culture and the fear of bullying, sexual harassment and discrimination.

This month, Sky News reported on more shocking revelations about sexual harassment and misconduct in the public sector, this time in the ambulance service. The report followed a year-long investigation into sexual misconduct that, I quote,

'revealed a culture where abuse and harassment among staff are rife and patients are sexualised.'

Jason Killens, head of the Association of Ambulance Chief Executives, AACE, and the Welsh Ambulance Services University NHS Trust, is quoted in the report as saying that he expects 'a steady increase' in the number of cases, with more paramedics being sacked for sexually inappropriate behaviour over the coming years across the UK, because of the work AACE is doing to change the culture.

To be clear, the Sky News report did not cite services in Wales specifically, but sadly we've seen before that such inappropriate and unacceptable behaviour is present across society and services. Therefore, Prif Weinidog, what assurances can the Welsh Government give both the workforce and the wider public regarding safeguarding processes and culture within the Welsh ambulance service? In addition, surely the time has come for us to use what levers we do have in Wales for a pan-public-sector zero-tolerance approach to sexual harassment that includes avenues for whistleblowing, and one that has the full and firm collaboration, commitment and conditions of accountability for both employers and trade unions, however hard that is. So, can the Welsh Government commit to taking this forward and, in doing so, lead the way to make the public sector in Wales the safest and most inclusive place to work?

Thanks very much, Hannah, and I think it's important to note that actually the vast majority of people who work in our public sector behave incredibly well, and in a decent way. But anybody who conducts this kind of unacceptable behaviour should be chased out of town, frankly. It is not acceptable in our public sector today for us to have this situation in relation to sexual harassment. The case that was quoted by you was certainly unacceptable, and you know I would endorse what Jason Killens has said as the chief executive: these people must be sacked.

But, of course, we've got to change a culture before we get to that, and I think it's really important for people to recognise that sexual banter is not acceptable, but actually that whole tone within workplaces needs to be shifted. I'm really pleased to say that we have a conference series for public sectors leaders that promotes practical action to prevent and respond to workplace harassment, and that aligns with the Worker Protection (Amendment of Equality Act 2010) Act 2023. Compliance with law, though, as I say, is just the starting point; it's a cultural shift that we need to see, and we've been disseminating, for example, TUC Cymru's toolkit through the networks that we have.

Can I thank Hannah Blythyn for asking this really important question here today? First Minister, sexual harassment is far too common in and out of the workplace. In 2021, Welsh Women's Aid found that four in five women in Wales have experienced some form of workplace sexual harassment. This can include anything from degrading comments and unwanted propositions to unwelcome advances and inappropriate jokes. It is quite frankly despicable that in 2024 we are still in a position where so many women and girls are made to feel uncomfortable going into work just because of this behaviour.

But this is not just a work issue, Presiding Officer, and also First Minister. We know that many women and girls feel uncomfortable, even scared, to travel alone on public transport due to previous experiences of sexual harassment. With this in mind, First Minister, what is the Welsh Government doing to clamp down on this abhorrent behaviour and harassment towards women and girls, to make them feel comfortable and confident whilst travelling on buses and services, and that ultimately the threat of harassment is not going to be a devastating hindrance that is going to hold them back from using public services? Thank you.

Thanks very much. Well, public services should be a safe place, and it's really important that we lead by example in Welsh Government and in the organisations that we finance. We have a zero-tolerance policy in relation to this and I want particularly Welsh Government workplaces to be a model of safety and respect. I don't think people quite understand the impact that this has on people's lives and women's lives. We're talking sleepless nights, we're talking real stress and vulnerability and a real feeling of people feeling uncomfortable and feeling a little bit powerless, particularly if there's a power relationship. And it is something that I think almost all women have experienced, and it is something that we've got to take on.

It's important that men call out this behaviour. It's not just women; men have a responsibility here too to call it out. Don't be a bystander; make sure you're calling it out, whether that be in the workplace, on public transport, in the NHS. That is the key thing. We all have a responsibility to stop this from happening.

Public Health Wales recently revealed that more than half of all mouth cancer cases are now being diagnosed at the most advanced stages, with the number of cases in Wales rising each year. Timely access to dental appointments, of course, can help pick up the early signs of mouth cancer, but people in my region are still finding it difficult to get an NHS dental appointment. In 2022, I conducted a survey on this matter, receiving hundreds of responses, concerns that I've raised with you and the Government, but constituents are still coming to me asking for help. One dental practice in Neath said in their response to me, 'There is a crisis in dental workforce. We are finding it incredibly difficult to find dentists who are willing to provide NHS services.' 

Dentists and their staff are often bearing the brunt of the public's frustration. They're also frustrated themselves because they can't serve their NHS patients properly. I met with Morgannwg Local Dental Committee to discuss this and they said there are things Welsh Government can do immediately to avoid people being turned away, for example, showing more flexibility around the historic patient and new and urgent patient metrics, as these are having unintended consequences. People's dental and oral health are at risk and NHS dentists are voting with their feet, so what thought has the Government given to these types of calls? And I'm glad to hear you can give me an update on the negotiations. When will that come into force? Diolch. 

Thanks very much. We're challenged when it comes to dentistry. It's not something that's unique to Wales, but I'm really pleased to see that the change in the dental contract in Wales has made a difference, particularly if you compare it to the situation across the border. If you just look at your region, 69,000 people who previously could not see a dentist have now seen a dentist, and that is a—[Interruption.] Would you like to me answer? Sixty-nine thousand people have seen an NHS dentist. So, it is important, I think, to recognise that a new dental contract has been signed. The details of that contract will be made available soon, but I hope it will address some of the issues that you are concerned with.

There is an issue also around workforce. We're trying to increase training places for all members of the dental team, and let's be clear: we're interested in the whole dental team, not just in dentists. That is difficult to achieve in the current financial crisis and, obviously, it takes time for people to come through the system. But I'm very pleased to see that already we've increased the number of people doing dental therapy, and also we're just seeing the first graduates to qualify from the Bangor University dental hygiene programme.

Many of you here will have seen first-hand the benefits in your local communities. More than 4,000 green spaces have been created or improved for nature and growing food, transforming our towns and the lives of countless volunteers, and let's not forget the volunteers. The social and economic outcomes are currently being independently evaluated alongside a biodiversity assessment.

Thank you for that answer, First Minister. We ignore nature and the current crisis that faces us at our peril. No nature, no pollinators, no food, no economy. We must all come to the realisation that nature cannot flourish in neatly cut grassland—nature isn't neat—and we must properly manage areas in order for it to thrive. In turn, connecting with nature is really beneficial for our own mental and physical well-being. Tomorrow, I am sponsoring an exhibition by One Voice Wales, showcasing the incredible achievements of our town and community councils through the Local Places for Nature funding programme. Would you join me in encouraging Members and members of the public to attend the event tomorrow, to learn more about restoring biodiversity in public spaces within our local communities?

Thanks very much, Carolyn. I don't know how you keep an eye on so many things—you seem to be all over everything—but thank you very much for hosting that event tomorrow because I think it is something we should celebrate. I think everybody should have a look at what's going on in this space in relation to our implementation of the Local Places for Nature programme. The great thing is this is the fifth year that it's in place, and it's great that One Voice Wales is taking a lead on some of this. The projects are community partnerships, and that's the key thing: it's about the community getting involved. As I said, there are 20,000 volunteers, and this is really changing people's lives. So, it is something we should celebrate, and it's making a difference not just to those people, but also, clearly, to biodiversity. Just to give you an example, there are more than 2,400 pollinator sites, 800 food-growing sites, and 700 community orchards, as well as 86 therapeutic gardens for mental health and well-being. All of that is something to celebrate. We all need a boost, it's just coming up to Christmas, go and have a look at what's happening in your local environment in this space.

Ambulance calls were 18 minutes faster than the national average, and that was followed by a 20 per cent reduction in ambulance hours lost at Glangwili, compared to October last year. So, things are improving. We've got a long way to go; it is not easy to crack this nut. There is a real fragility when it comes to care in the community. I think the model in Hywel Dda, working with local authorities, is actually something—. If you haven't been to see it, it's really worth going to see how all of the different agencies are working together, to stop people from coming in in the first plate, look after them in their own homes, make sure that support is put in upfront to stop them from having to go, so that the cases that you've outlined that are absolutely urgent and do need to get to hospital actually manage to get through the system quicker.

Trefnydd, can I call for two statements today? The first is from the Minister with responsibility for skills in relation to apprenticeships. ColegauCymru and the National Training Federation for Wales published a report yesterday to show the impact of the apprenticeship funding cuts in Wales in this financial year. Those cuts, according to the report, resulted in a hit to the Welsh economy of over £50 million. We saw a massive reduction, a 30 per cent reduction, in health and social care apprenticeships, and a 20 per cent reduction in construction apprenticeships—two very important pillars of our economy, and obviously, from a health and social care point of view, very important for our public services as well. What's worse is that those cuts in apprenticeships seem to have had a bigger impact in deprived communities than elsewhere. I do think that we need a response from the Welsh Government to this report, and I look to you to procure that for Members from the Minister responsible. 

Secondly, I've been contacted by many farmers in my constituency regarding the calendar-based approach to slurry spreading and the impact that that is having on their land management. We all know that a science-based approach to the spreading of slurry is more appropriate and that there are weather conditions outside the current period during which slurry is prohibited from being spread that are suitable for slurry spreading. So, I think we do need to have a further discussion on this issue in order to move the Welsh Government's policy agenda to one that is backed by science and frankly not by a simple calendar approach, which isn't working.

Diolch yn fawr, Darren Millar. The Minister for Culture, Skills and Social Partnership has heard your question about apprenticeships. I think it would be helpful to have an update on the positive progress that's been made in terms of delivery of apprenticeships. I think you will also be interested that, yesterday, the Minister and I appeared before the Equality and Social Justice Committee, and it was really heartening to hear about the success of young Welsh people at the WorldSkills fair in Manchester last week, and how impressive it was. That was a cross-party committee in which people heard of the impressive ways in which our young people have gained those skills, and many through the apprenticeship route.

But also perhaps I could use the opportunity to congratulate Cardiff and Vale College, who had—. In fact, I know Luke Fletcher was hosting this. Many of us attended, because this was an example of innovation at Cardiff and Vale College with their junior apprenticeship scheme route. I'm sure the Minister for Further and Higher Education was interested in that as well. So, yes, there's been huge pressures as a result of 14 years of Conservative austerity policies, but we have invested, we've made this a priority, and I've given two examples of how we've been delivering on apprenticeships.

I'm afraid I have not got the knowledge in front of me here about the way in which slurry is spread, but I will be asking the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs to inform me and guide me, and also give you an answer on that point about the timing and the arrangements. I'm sure that this is something that the farming community are fully engaged in in terms of influencing, if we have any influence on how that is undertaken. But thank you for raising the question.

May I thank you, Trefnydd, for including today's statement following our request on storm Bert? It is important that we have opportunities as a Senedd. May I also request that we receive regular updates and opportunities now, given that the First Minister just said about her meeting with Natural Resources Wales next week? I would also like to request that the Government be very careful with the messaging around this, and I wonder if you could feed that back. To say in terms of the number of homes saved because of investment gives false hope and assurances to people. We don't know that as a matter of fact yet. Please can we be extremely careful with further storms that will be coming over winter? We need to make sure that everybody takes the steps to keep themselves safe. In terms of regular updates, regular opportunity to discuss this, I would also like to hear from Government in terms of preparations for storms in winter. We know that more extreme weather is becoming more frequent. I asked the Deputy First Minister last week in terms of how we are preparing. We have had updates from the Welsh Government, but given how frequently these storms are happening, I believe we need further information before the recess, because we don't know what's coming over the next few weeks and months.

I think it was very important, and there was no question that there needed to be an oral statement today on storm Bert. Of course, there will be ongoing questions, ongoing updates, ongoing statements, as we learn the lessons. Indeed, we understand the impact of this devastating experience that so many people went through at the weekend. I do think this is something where we all need to be mindful of how we address this, and of course we have the oral statement from the Deputy First Minister later on this afternoon, and to recognise the devastating impact of storm Bert on those who have been affected by it, and also those who were hit before—of course, we go back—after storm Dennis as well. But it is important that we recognise the role of the emergency services, particularly over the weekend, and local authorities.

I think something that hasn't come out yet is the role of the community, and the way we saw the community coming out, and the neighbours. I think the First Minister referred to people knocking on doors in their streets and communities. I know that many Senedd Members were also contacted in that way—Mick Antoniw, Alun Davies; I know Buffy Williams and you were too. Everybody responded, and volunteers came out.

But I think it's really important that we recognise that climate change is increasing the risk of flooding in our communities. NRW does offer support on what to do before, during and after a flood. That's available on their website, and we do encourage people who are concerned or affected by flooding to consult this support. I think this is a time where we do have to again remind everybody—. They will all be thinking, anybody across Wales, and in my constituency, which has been sorely affected by flooding in the past—. Always when it rains, you think, 'Is there going to be a flood?' We're very much aware of that. But fortunately, there were many who weren't affected by storm Bert. So, let's have the statement this afternoon and go from there.

I'm asking for two statements. The first relates to the M4 between Llandarcy at junction 43 and junction 38, which has only two lanes. I spend a lot of time when I am travelling between my home in Swansea and the Senedd in a traffic jam between those junctions. Will the Welsh Government consider banning lorries from using the outside lanes at peak times? Far too often, a slow lorry passes a very slow lorry, causing serious congestion.

The second is a statement on life sciences, which is a rapidly growing part of the world economy. This should include the growth of life science employment in Wales and the Welsh Government's strategy to increase the number of life science companies and the number employed to numbers similar to the south-east of England, which would increase gross value added and the median wage in Wales.

Diolch yn fawr, Mike Hedges. The issue about the M4 you of course know so well, as do those who travel along it to come and go through your constituencies to the Senedd and further afield. I'm very aware that this area that you refer to gets congested at peak times. The majority of this stretch of the M4 is subject to 50 mph for air quality particularly. I'm sure we can discuss this further. I understand that a traffic order would be required to restrict HGVs from using lane two—in terms of traffic flows, a traffic order would be required to restrict them. It’s been used in England, interestingly—and some of us may know this—on the M42, but on an uphill, two-lane section where there is no other speed restriction in place. But I can say, you’ve raised this question, it is being considered, and there may be opportunities for a modal shift, which could be developed with the south-west Wales regional transport plan engaging with the corporate joint committee, and also having an influence on investment in the strategic road network by the Welsh Government in our national transport delivery plan. So, you’ve raised it, and I will know it will then be considered.

And thank you for your question on life sciences. So, this is important in terms of the positive impact. If you look at life sciences in Wales, it comprises some 319 business sites, ranging from small and medium-sized enterprises to large blue-chip companies, as you indicated, with that turnover—a £2.85 billion turnover—and an increase on the year before. And it’s important to recognise that, as far as Welsh Government support is concerned, we are promoting Wales in the UK and overseas markets, and life sciences businesses are crucial in terms of new quality inward investment projects and jobs coming into Wales.

But I think it’s also important to look at this in terms of the fact that we have a dedicated relationship management team in each of the regions working on this. We have an export action plan for Wales, a programme for government commitment, and, indeed, of course, we have the Life Sciences Hub Wales, which works towards the mission of transforming the health and well-being and the economic well-being of the nation.

I call for a single Welsh Government statement on tackling fuel poverty in Wales. Tomorrow is National Energy Action’s Fuel Poverty Awareness Day, which I’m pleased to be supporting as chair of the Senedd’s cross-party group on fuel poverty and energy efficiency. In Wales it is estimated that up to 98 per cent of low-income households are living in fuel poverty. With energy prices set to stay high throughout the winter—well above pre-crisis levels—many households will struggle to keep warm and well. There’s an urgent need to improve the energy efficiency of fuel-poor homes in Wales, with energy bills that are permanently low.

At the joint meeting of the cross-party group on fuel poverty and energy efficiency and the cross-party group on housing last week, the discussion included the Welsh Government’s Warm Homes programme. There’s a need to significantly increase its investment, which is currently insufficient, to address the scale of the challenge in Wales, with opportunity to use consequentials from the UK Government’s Warm Homes plan to help to do this. I call for a Welsh Government statement accordingly.

Thank you very much for that question, and also for your stewardship in chairing the cross-party group on fuel poverty, which I regularly attend, and which I’m sure I'm probably going to attend in due course. It is also very important to recognise that this is something on which we’re working very closely, not just in terms of tackling fuel poverty through a number of initiatives, like, for example, the Fuel Bank Foundation funding. And, of course, last week the Fuel Bank Foundation came to the Senedd, and I was able to announce funding of £700,000 to the Fuel Bank Foundation—I announced that a couple of weeks ago—in addition to the £500,000 I’ve made available, which will meet many households’ needs, particularly those with prepayment metres and those who are off-grid.

But it is also important that we link this to the Warm Homes programme. Of course, Jayne Bryant, the Cabinet Secretary for Housing and Local Government is responsible for that programme, but is working very closely with me in terms of delivery. And I know that we’re going to be updating on this very soon. Can I just say, in terms of the Warm Homes programme, that this is something that is going to make, and is making already, a huge difference to people’s lives? It is a scheme that was launched on 1 April, and it is £30 million more that we’re investing to reduce the number of low-incomes households living in cold, damp homes. And I think it’s also important that we recognise that this is contributing towards achieving a net-zero Wales by 2050, and directly enabling a just transition. We've got a package of measures to insulate and decarbonise homes, leading to a reduction in energy bills, to move families and households out of fuel poverty.

I'd like to associate myself with the remarks of Heledd Fychan earlier.

Trefnydd, Ofgem has announced that the energy price cap will be raised in January. That will, without a doubt, push more pensioners into poverty at just the time when their winter fuel allowance is being cut so cruelly. I'd like the Government to make a statement, please, setting out how it thinks this shameful price hike by Ofgem will affect Welsh households, particularly pensioners on the brink of poverty. Now, I'd request your support in calling on the head of Ofgem to appear before a Senedd committee, so that they can justify this increase in customer bills—an increase that's coming at a time when we are already expecting up to 4,000 extra deaths in Wales because of Westminster's cut to the winter fuel allowance. We know our energy market is broken—it works for the benefit of shareholders instead of keeping people alive—but, sadly, we have a Government in Westminster that is making things immeasurably worse this winter. So, can that statement set out the likely effects of these two vicious policies being brought in together—a rise in energy bills and this caustic cut to the winter fuel allowance?

Thank you, Delyth Jewell, for that question. Following on from my response to Mark Isherwood about some of the measures that we're taking—bespoke measures—in Wales, like the support not just for the Fuel Bank Foundation, particularly helping those very-low-income households on prepayment meters and off-grid, but also our £30 million Warm Homes scheme, we were very disappointed with the energy price cap, not just the one that was increased in October, which is a blow to many households across Wales. I did meet with Ofgem, and, in fact, Ofgem also came to the cross-party group on fuel poverty.

It is crucial also that we influence energy suppliers—I met with energy suppliers recently—to say to them they need to do all they can to support their customers through this difficult time. They can do this with fair and affordable payment plans and emergency support, and many of them are investing in that way. And in fact, the Bevan Foundation has encouraged customers to engage with their energy suppliers in this way. But I'm also going to speak to Ofgem about the most recent rise that was announced, because, although it was less of a rise, it still is a rise in the price cap. It's disappointing, on top of the increase of 10 per cent on the previous price cap of £1,568. So, I will be raising this with Ofgem. But when I am with Ofgem, I want to raise with them—and I know you've called for this, Delyth Jewell—we should call for them to engage fully on calling for a social tariff, because that's something that we believe would protect the most vulnerable households.

Trefnydd, I'd like to call for a statement on outdoor safety, particularly in relation to rescue services. The cross-party group for outdoor activities met on Friday, in Llanberis, which is the busiest mountain rescue station in the whole of the United Kingdom. Last year they had over 300 call-outs, and they've already had more call-outs so far this year than the whole of last year put together. In their words, their service is not sustainable. It's completely volunteer-run, with no Government funding whatsoever, with each call-out lasting, at times, hours, with lots of people involved, often dealing with traumatic and sometimes, sadly, tragic situations. Of course, if they don't provide that voluntary service, the responsibility sits with police services. They say they're at breaking point. So, I'd like a statement outlining the Government's view on outdoor safety and, in particular, how it may be able to support rescue services here in Wales.

Thank you very much, Sam Rowlands, and thank you for bringing this to our attention as a result of the cross-party group on outdoor activities meeting in Llanberis and meeting with all those volunteers in mountain rescue. And they are all volunteers, they're dedicated, brave, committed, and we do recognise the role the mountain rescue plays across Wales in keeping people safe in our outdoor spaces. And, of course, that can be at all times of the day, in all weather conditions. They need a lot of training and support. It’s a highly professional volunteer rescue service.

Just in terms of how we can assist them further, there are different ways. I understand health officials are engaged with mountain rescue about funding to support elements of their work in the future, and they’re awaiting a business case from mountain rescue. Also, just looking at ways in which help can be given in terms of funding for protective equipment, technical access, Brecon Mountain Rescue has successfully got some funding from our community facilities programme back last year. So, there are ways in which—I’m glad you brought this to our attention—we can reach out to support.

Could I add my voice to the calls made by Darren Millar for a statement from the Government on the joint report released today by ColegauCymru and the National Training Federation for Wales on the impact of the apprenticeship cuts? Could I also as well ask for a debate in Government time on how we fund further education going forward? There are very clearly issues that need to be addressed, and I feel a debate in the Senedd would give ample time for Members to go through the different models that could be available.

I think the Trefnydd is right to want to focus on some of the positives, and, of course, the joint meeting between the cross-party groups on apprenticeships and further education did exactly that today. But what was clear in that meeting was that the positives won’t be around for much longer if we do not address the challenges that this report sets out. The report was very clear. The analysis measured the economic impact of losing nearly 6,000 apprenticeships in Wales. Darren Millar was right that, in the short term, this resulted in an immediate economic loss of £50.3 million in gross value added. But looking at the long-term impact, the total economic loss ranges from £158.8 million to £215.7 million. So, there’s a real crisis developing here in further education, and I feel a statement and a debate would allow this Senedd to look at it in more detail.

Thank you very much, Luke Fletcher. I think events like today are important, and reports. ColegauCymru—of course, we look to them and work very closely with them in terms of engagement and evidence from their members. We are fortunate to have the Minister for Further and Higher Education here and the Minister for Culture, Skills and Social Partnership. They’ve also heard the earlier question from Darren Millar.

It is important we look at achievements and the positives, but also recognise the huge impact. And it is an investment in skills, isn’t it, particularly, that we see through our further education colleges? We recognise that that route to apprenticeships is something that, of course, has always been a priority for this Government—a priority that, of course, was severely undermined this financial year, because of the 14 years of austerity and the £22 billion black hole that has meant that we have suffered as a result in terms of settlements. But now, of course, we look to how we can rebuild, and we look forward to discussing this in relation to priorities in the budget.

Trefnydd, earlier this month, I tabled a written question to ask how many people were working in the Welsh Government building in Merthyr Tydfil on the random date of Friday, 13 September. The answer was 16. The Welsh Government building in Merthyr Tydfil can apparently accommodate up to 450 people. I think it’s fair to assume that some of those 16 workers would have been part of the building security and maintenance crew. Could the Welsh Government therefore provide a statement on whether or not the cost of heating and cleaning Welsh Government buildings that seem to be largely empty is offering value for money for the taxpayer? Thank you.

Well, we have got a big change, haven’t we, as a result of the pandemic, and different ways of working? Hybrid working and flexible working have brought great benefits to our workforce, not just, indeed, in terms of the Welsh Government workforce, but our workforce here in the Senedd, our workforce and Members’ working arrangements, but also across all sectors, public, private and third sector.

Certainly, this is an issue for Welsh Government and our Permanent Secretary to look at in terms of estate. It is good that in Cathays, for example, we now have other users of the building, and that is also the case in terms of our other Government buildings in Wales, looking at the future, responding to these changes in working practice. I was a Senedd Member, and in Government, when we made these decisions to devolve out of Cathays, that we weren't just going to be a civil service in Cardiff and that we were going to have these offices, particularly in the Valleys communities, Heads of the Valleys, and Aberystwyth and Llandudno. So, we need to look very carefully at how we manage this in terms of the future opportunities for our workforce and for the local labour market and economies as well. 

Cabinet Secretary, can I ask for a statement from you regarding support for Welsh pensioners this winter? Just last week, I met with Age Cymru and pensioners from my region in south-east Wales, which was, quite frankly, one of the most grounding meetings that I've had to date in this job. I heard a story of a cancer patient who was fearful for her health and life, as she knows it is just above the threshold when it comes to money that she has in her account and will now not be able to afford to keep her heating on in the winter months. I also heard a story of a couple who'd worked their whole lives to enjoy retirement, yet now have higher bills and are having to give up everything they enjoy to be able to keep their heating on in the winter. The list, honestly, goes on, and stories were heartbreaking. Cabinet Secretary, just last week in this Chamber, you said, and I quote, 

'we continue to support all those at risk of falling into fuel poverty.'

But I can't imagine this Welsh Government has looked that far ahead, as, according to Age Cymru's research, by 2035, 45 per cent of households in Wales could be in fuel poverty. Now, we all know that 86 per cent of pensioners are either in poverty or just above the poverty line itself. So, they're not set to receive any more in winter fuel payments due to the decision of the UK Labour Government, and it doesn't seem a very compassionate measure from the party that is supposedly built on equality and fairness. So, Cabinet Secretary, you did mention to my colleague, Mark Isherwood, in your response, £500,000 and £700,000 that has been given by the Welsh Government. However, the best accountant in the world can even agree that this money isn't going to last forever. So, I'd like you to, please, outline the specific steps this Welsh Government will be taking to ensure that the shocking statistics that I've just shared here today will not become a reality, as, right now, the Welsh Government is letting down a generation that have worked their whole lives to contribute to our society here in Wales.

Well, thank you, Natasha Asghar. I have responded to questions this afternoon about ways in which we are supporting people who may be in danger of being in fuel poverty. And I also would say that I have worked very closely—and it's a real opportunity to work—with the new UK Government on these issues.  I've mentioned the fact that I met with the Minister for Energy Consumers and Affordability on 8 November, and discussed issues like, for example, calling for a social tariff to protect the most vulnerable households, because I think that's a really progressive way that we can support our most vulnerable, without having significant negative effects on other households. But, clearly, this is something where I think it's important that people do turn to the opportunities that we have through the Warm Homes programme, through take-up not just through the Fuel Bank Foundation, but also through the discretionary assistance fund. I think it's important that pensioners, particularly, can apply to the discretionary assistance fund, which, of course, is something where we have a real opportunity there to reach out when people are in particularly difficult circumstances in terms of emergency needs. But this is something where take-up of the pension credit, I think, is being addressed, and not just by local authorities. Yesterday, I was pleased to meet with all Welsh local authorities to talk about the Welsh benefits charter, to make sure that pensioners are—and many are—taking up the council tax reduction scheme. So, on all aspects of policy, we are working to ensure that pensioners are able to withstand the pressures in terms of the cost-of-living crisis, and to support them to enable them not to fall into fuel poverty.

I would like to raise a statement from the Cabinet Secretary for Transport and North Wales in both guises, really, regarding timescales for the repair of Llannerch bridge, between Trefnant and Tremeirchion, in my constituency. We finally have confirmation that the preliminary remedial work will begin on the Llannerch bridge project, following the bridge's destruction nearly four years ago to storm Christophe in 2021. It's a case of better late than never, so I'm pleased that funding has been provided by the Welsh Government to take forward design work on a replacement bridge, although I would like to make it clear that local news coverage today has been slightly misleading, as work is only just beginning on the design of a bridge not the construction, which we have no timescale for and, going by the general pace of local authorities, could still be over a year away. Construction of the bridge is also likely to far exceed the £750,000 provided so far, and we need confirmation that, once a design has been agreed, the funding for the construction will be forthcoming. I would see no reason why the Cabinet Secretary couldn't make a commitment as, if the funding for construction wasn't provided, the £750,000 provided for the design would be a total waste of taxpayers' money. So, can the Cabinet Secretary provide a statement outlining a timescale for the construction of the bridge, and can the Welsh Government make a commitment here today that the necessary funding will be provided for the construction of this bridge once and for all? Thank you.

In terms of the importance of the redesign and tackling this really crucial issue for north Wales and for the region and constituency, I think there's no question that the duration of physical works for phase 2 hasn't altered. We've listened to stakeholders and the local community and we've decided to reschedule the start date to March 2025. It will bring a host of benefits to the local community and the travelling public. It will particularly improve local business opportunities during the Christmas period, which was impacted last year, and then, of course, works will recommence, the same as before, and also are programmed to be completed in December, instead of the summer, of 2025. But, we will keep, obviously, all partners, key partners and stakeholders engaged and informed, and I'm sure that you'll be able to follow this up with the Cabinet Secretary for Transport and North Wales.

Trefnydd, I was very disappointed to see that the Welsh Government has pulled its statement next week on the United Nations International Day for Persons with Disabilities and instead will now provide a written statement, thus denying the opportunity for comment and questioning by Members of this Chamber. I believe that this is insensitive to those with disabilities, who already feel sidelined and ignored by this Government, and is ultimately a stark indication of what this Government actually thinks about them. As with everything, there are warm words but very little action. As you will know, I have had to ask several times in this Chamber for those with disabilities to even be mentioned in Government statements. So, I ask you if you can reconsider your decision and allow for an oral statement next week.

Thank you very much, Joel James. I'll be very pleased to issue a written statement on the international day of disabled people. I'm also very pleased to be holding and chairing a meeting of the disability equality forum on Thursday and, indeed, also addressing the Disability Wales conference, and meeting with the co-chair of the disability rights taskforce. So, I've got many engagements in terms of delivering, with a very busy business schedule for the Senedd over the next two weeks, to address this really important issue. I was glad to come before the Equality and Social Justice Committee yesterday for scrutiny in their all-important inquiry on the employment gap for disabled people. I hope the Welsh Government will be able to address, with the Minister for Culture, Skills and Social Partnership, the important evidence that's come from that inquiry.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Trefnydd, you'll be aware that I've raised the issue of the Withyhedge landfill site in my constituency on many occasions in this Chamber. You will also know that I've had grave concerns about this facility, where many of my constituents have had to suffer terrible odours, and some of the people I represent have suffered headaches, nausea, dizziness and watery eyes because of this landfill site. Now, even though things have improved recently, it's now been reported in the local press that Public Health Wales have said that its most recent risk assessment relating to air quality data collected at Spittal school monitoring station between 1 October and 3 November showed that there were occasions when hydrogen sulphide concentrations in the air were above the World Health Organization odour annoyance guideline values. When residents are actually exposed to odours at levels above the World Health Organization guidelines, then they can experience headaches, dizziness and watery eyes. I'm sure you'll agree with me that this is unacceptable, and you know that I've consistently called for this landfill site to be permanently closed. So, given this latest development, I believe it’s crucial that we have a statement now from the Welsh Government telling us what it’s doing to prevent these high concentrations, especially given that this was recorded at a primary school, and I’m sure you’ll agree with me that we cannot be exposing children to these kinds of odours.

Thank you, Paul Davies, for that question, and I can assure you that Natural Resources Wales are working closely with the local authority, Public Health Wales and Hywel Dda health board to address the issues of concern at Withyhedge landfill site. You will be aware, I’m sure, that there is a public engagement session in Spittal church hall on Thursday 5 December, and so I would encourage anyone with any interest to attend that session. NRW, Public Health Wales, the local authority and Hywel Dda will all be there to answer questions from the public.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Yesterday, the Visitor Accommodation (Register and Levy) Etc. (Wales) Bill was laid in the Senedd. The Bill provides a permissive power to local authorities to decide whether or not they want to introduce a visitor levy in their local areas based on their local circumstances. Doing so fulfils a commitment in Welsh Labour’s manifesto, repeated in the programme for government and the co-operation agreement. The power is to be drawn down by participating councils where they wish to be enabled to raise a modest levy on visitors staying overnight in visitor accommodation. The levy is rooted in the principle of fairness. In participating local authorities, the costs of maintaining the public infrastructure and services that make Wales an attractive destination will be shared by all those who use them and who benefit from them. The considerable bulk of these costs will continue to be borne by local residents, but visitors will now also make a small but fair contribution to the development and preservation of the characteristics that drew them to those areas as visitors in the first place. In doing so, there will be a collective effort to secure the long-term sustainability of the tourism sector and its significance to the Welsh economy.

Dirprwy Lywydd, given the constraints on council budgets over the last 14 years, which have placed such pressures on discretionary budgets in particular, a visitor levy would provide those participating local authorities with an important new revenue stream to support tourism-related costs. If all 22 local authorities were to introduce the levy, it could potentially raise up to £33 million each year.

Authorities interested in this power will be required to consult residents and businesses before making a decision to introduce a levy. Moneys collected will have to be held in a separate visitor levy account. An annual report will have to be produced to demonstrate to their communities how funds raised from the levy have been applied in their areas. Ensuring transparency in this way will be crucial in reaffirming the benefit a visitor levy can bring in the long term.

Now, Dirprwy Lywydd, consumer research, published alongside the consultation, amongst Welsh residents and UK holidaymakers has shown broad support for a visitor levy. Most respondents agreed that tourists should help cover the costs of maintaining and investing in destinations, especially in high-tourism areas. Many people who responded to our public consultation suggested a per person per night charge was the best approach for businesses, and we have followed that advice. However, to ensure fairness, we are proposing to set two different visitor levy rates, with a lower rate applied to stays at hostels and camping site pitches. The visitor levy rate is set in the Bill at 75p per person per night for people staying in hostels and on campsite pitches, and £1.25 per person per night for stays in all other types of visitor accommodation.

Now, we have kept the rate low in comparison to many levies overseas, and we have limited exceptions and reliefs in order to reduce complexity. As a new levy, we want consistency in approach across local authority areas and that is why we have set the initial rates on the face of the Bill.

Dirprwy Lywydd, despite all the work already undertaken to bring this Bill before the Senedd, we estimate that 2027 will be the earliest a visitor levy could be introduced anywhere in Wales. In the coming period, we will continue to work with businesses, local authorities and the Welsh Revenue Authority to ensure the visitor levy is a success. Developing guidance collaboratively will be an initial step in this process, and that was discussed at this morning's meeting of the visitor economy forum, which I was very pleased to attend.

Finally, Dirprwy Lywydd, as we developed this Bill through the process of consultation and continued engagement and based on the work led by the Welsh Revenue Authority, we received consistent feedback that we needed to have registration in place to support the levy. That advice has informed our decision to include a national register of all those providing visitor accommodation in Wales as part of this Bill. The register will provide valuable data to inform future tourism development and assist in the efficient collection of the levy where implemented. It will form the basis of the statutory licensing scheme to which this Government remains committed. We have also developed some additional registration and enforcement provisions that I intend to share with committees today to support Stage 1 scrutiny.

Llywydd, as we continue to promote our country as a world-class destination for visitors and the benefits that that brings, we must also take collective responsibility for managing the impact that tourism has on our environment and local communities. I hope Senedd Members will allow the Bill to proceed to Stage 1 scrutiny as an investment in Wales’s future, to help us create a sustainable and prosperous tourism industry and to support those communities that rely upon it.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for the statement. Dirprwy Lywydd, I make it clear from the outset that I and my group are opposed to this Labour-Plaid tax hike on our tourism sector.

As we all know, one in seven jobs in Wales relies on the tourism industry, which equates to almost 200,000 people. Clearly, this is an industry that must be supported, not exploited. The Welsh Government states that a visitor levy would follow the Welsh Government's tax principles, one of which is to deliver Welsh Government policy objectives, in particular supporting jobs and growth. But Labour's policy for supporting the economy by levying new taxes simply doesn't make sense. The Government's own impact assessment highlights the fact that, in the worst case scenario, there could be as much as a £60 million impact on the industry, resulting in, possibly, losses of hundreds of jobs.

Now, we know that businesses in the hospitality sector already have huge challenges, having to pay double the business rates that their counterparts in England do; they shouldn't be further disadvantaged by things like this. Now, the legislation will create another significant pressure on an incredibly hard-pressed sector. And I know this tax wouldn't arrive until as early as 2027, but it is seen as another drag anchor around the industry's neck. The tourism sector is still trying to build back from the pandemic, and, to make matters worse, they are faced with UK Labour hiking up their costs through the increase to employer's national insurance and its reduced threshold. If councils introduce this to the industry, it will bring the additional bureaucracy and administration of the tax, and that's another hidden cost and burden to those businesses.

And let's just look at the costs for the Welsh visitor. We talk about it being minimal, but £1.25 a night—so, a family with four children staying in a guesthouse would have to budget for around another £52.50. If that business is VAT registered, it will have to charge the VAT on top and that will take it to over £60 for a seven-day break. I would suggest that that could stop visitors deciding to holiday in Wales. Also, we see councils can lift the charge—councils can lift the charge—of the proposed levels to new proposed levels with Government permission. So, the cost to visitors in some parts of Wales could be greater. And as you know, Cabinet Secretary, Welsh councils are facing £560 million-worth of pressures—we heard from leaders earlier today—due to, mainly, the inadequate past settlements. Now, I'm concerned that there is a real risk that the tax will end up helping other struggling services and divert the money away from its intended purpose.

There have to be real safeguards put in place—and I know you've outlined some of those—to make sure that tourism uplifts aren't top-sliced from existing budgets for economic development, for instance. The Welsh Government cites examples of tourism levy across the world, but several of these have been implemented to deter tourists. You quoted Edinburgh, and I believe Edinburgh is considering bringing one in to deter tourists. So, with this in mind, what assessment has been made of the impact that this proposed tax will have on the number of overnight tourists coming to visit Wales? And yes, other countries use visitor levies as a way of raising revenue and for that money to be exclusively used to improve facilities for tourism use, and there is some merit in that argument. However, comparing other countries with ours could be like comparing apples with pears; other countries have different taxation regimes for their citizens, they may not have the equivalent of our council tax, for instance, which already makes provision for economic development and as such ought to be considering tourism. In Wales, it could be argued that this levy would be levelling double taxation on hard-pressed families for something that already should have been provided for.

I note that the legislation will compel the publication of reports on how much revenue has been collected and where it should be spent, and I do welcome this, at least. Cabinet Secretary, can you indicate how much the administration of this levy will cost and who will ultimately foot the bill?

Dirprwy Lywydd, I look forward to scrutinising this legislation in more detail going forward. It has to be said, though, that many people across Wales will feel that this is ill-thought-out and unnecessary legislation. I hope that my colleagues across the Chamber will see sense as this Bill makes its way forward.

Well, Dirprwy Lywydd, I do regret that attempt to catastrophise what is a modest measure that simply offers local authorities the opportunity to introduce a visitor levy where they choose to do so. I've sat through many lectures in this Chamber from the benches opposite about the need for us to devolve more powers and decision making locally, often portrayed here as an essential Conservative principle. Yet, offered an opportunity to do exactly that, we find that their reactionary tendencies very quickly overwhelm their principles. The Bill—

Can we avoid conversations across the Chamber, please, whilst we listen to the response from the Cabinet Secretary?

The Bill does exactly what I set out in my introduction, Dirprwy Lywydd. It offers local authorities a permissive power that they can draw down when they make an assessment that this would be the right thing to do in their local circumstances.

I was surprised to hear Peter Fox’s characterisation of local authorities as organisations that clearly aren’t to be trusted. As a former leader of a local authority, that would not have been, I think, his viewpoint when he was a member of a local authority in Wales, and it’s not my view either.

I think that the Bill strikes a proper balance. It provides safeguards on the face of the Bill. Local authorities will have to follow the procedures that I set out. They will have to consult their local populations and businesses. If they decide to introduce a levy, they will have to keep the money raised in a separate account for all to see. They will have to report annually on how those funds are used for purposes that are set out in the face of the Bill. The Bill is clear: the funds used can only be used for purposes of destination management and improvement. I think that that provides local authorities with the right level of discretion without the risk of those funds being siphoned away for nothing to do with the costs associated with tourism and its promotion in the future.

The Member said that many people across Wales will not want to support the Bill. But the irony of the Conservative Party position on the floor of this Senedd is that they believe that local people should bear all of the costs associated with tourism, and that visitors should bear none of them. And believe me, that is not a popular position, particularly among those populations who see the greatest impact of tourism in those communities.

They believe, and we believe, that it is simply fair that people who visit an area and who use the facilities of that area, and who expect that those facilities will be kept in good order—that’s what draws them to those places in the first place—make some small, modest contribution to ensuring that those facilities can be there for the future. Not only is it a right cause, Dirprwy Lywydd, it’s a popular cause, particularly amongst those populations who, otherwise, are left to pick up all of those costs on behalf not just of residents, but everyone who visits as well.

I welcome the introduction of this Bill in the Senedd because now we actually have something to discuss. I have actually been really concerned about the discourse around this levy, notwithstanding some of the genuine concerns that have been raised, which I'll come to shortly. If you had listened to what some have said in the run-up to this Bill—we have heard some of that here today—you'd swear that, in order to visit Wales, you'd have to remortgage your house because it would be so expensive. That simply isn't the case, is it?

On the cost to visitors, I think that 75p or £1.25 a night is reasonable. When you're already paying hundreds, sometimes thousands, to visit Wales, in accommodation costs and so on, an additional £1.25 a night won't factor into the decision of whether or not you'll come to Wales. I know that much has been said around international comparisons by both sides. We've heard reference to where the levy is being used to deter visitors. Well, let's actually look at the example of Venice. There, the levy was being used to influence people not to come to Venice. That was at €5 a day for day-trippers only, with the levy on overnight stays remaining. Well, the reality is it failed. They didn't meet that policy objective of reducing visitors to Venice. Instead, the first 11 days of the pilot period saw nearly 750,000 visitors registered; on the same days in 2023, there were around 680,000 entries. So, the numbers went up regardless of the levy being in place. This indicates that, if someone wants to go somewhere, they'll do it regardless of whether there's a visitor levy or not.

Now, in terms of some of those concerns that have been raised, we heard mention in the Cabinet Secretary's statement about ensuring that the funds raised through the levy find their way to actually supporting the sector. Transparency, I think, is going to be key in this process, and I'd genuinely be interested to understand how the Cabinet Secretary will enforce some of those things that he has set out, in terms of ensuring that money gets to the sector, to support it. How, as well, will he be bringing those businesses with concerns along with him on this legislation journey?

I think that an important point that Peter did raise around VAT was very pertinent. In countries where the visitor levy is already in place, VAT is significantly lower. So, I'd be interested to understand if the Government has also looked at other ways in which it could support the tourism sector. I've been an advocate for VAT to be lowered for hospitality in particular, but it would be interesting to understand what work the Government has done in that field.

If I could turn to the register of visitor accommodation. Could you give further detail on what the definition of visitor accommodation will be that would then qualify an accommodation to be registered? What happens, then, when an accommodation isn't registered? And finally, will the register be public and shared with local authorities? As I said earlier, I welcomed the introduction of this Bill, but now is the time to hammer out some of those details.

Dirprwy Lywydd, I thank Luke Fletcher for those questions. He's right that the cost to visitors in this Bill is at the modest end of the spectrum, and deliberately at the modest end. Peter Fox referred to tax principles here in Wales. Our tax principles are that any form of levy of this sort should be clear, it should be stable and it should be simple. It should be easy to comply with. And that's why we've set the level of the visitor levy as we have.

Dirprwy Lywydd, when Luke Fletcher mentioned Venice, I was reminded that I once had an opportunity to meet the finance Minister in the Dutch Government. He told me that he had previously been the mayor of Amsterdam, and that the single best decision he had ever made was to introduce a visitor levy to that city, and that he faced all the sorts of criticisms that we face here today, and that every one of those criticisms had turned out to be false. And I believe the same will be true here in Wales.

The enforcement provisions of the Bill are also designed to be simple, and they're also designed to be based on a high-trust relationship with our local authorities. I simply don't accept the characterisation of local authorities as organisations that are always on the lookout for ways to get around the law. The law will be clear, it will tell them the things for which they are able to use funds raised through the visitor levy, and there will be a reporting mechanism through which they can be held to account. That will, I think, ensure that they do just as we would expect. And, in the end, they face their electors, as we do here. They have democratic legitimacy of their own, and this Bill supports that by offering them a new opportunity that otherwise would not be available to them.

We will continue to work with tourism businesses. As I said, I was pleased to meet with the forum today. Businesses recognise that, if a levy is to happen, then their efforts are best directed towards making the levy work for them. And there have been many, many constructive conversations with the industry that have helped us to get the Bill to the position that is in today. 

As to the register, Dirprwy Lywydd, it will be public, it will be shared. The details are to be found in Part 3 of the Bill—that is the heart of the Bill. There are six separate Chapters involved in Part 3 of the Bill. They set out many of the details that Luke Fletcher has asked me about this afternoon.

A visitor levy is common across Europe. There are more than 60 destinations around the world where this type of tax is already in place. These vary from a nationwide tax in Iceland to various towns across the US. Some have been in place for a long time. France did it first in 1910, but most were introduced during the last few decades. On holiday in Italy, Greece and Spain, I have paid the tourist levy. The argument against it is that it would increase the cost of rooms and reduce visitor numbers. That does not appear to have happened in the countries I have just named.

As someone who stays in Gwynedd regularly, prices vary significantly. Staying in a chain hotel in Caernarfon, I have paid under £50 and over £100 per night for exactly the same room. Tourists add costs to the local council that are currently paid by the local residents. Why would a visitor levy affect Wales when it does not affect Spain, Greece and France, the three most visited destinations in Europe?

I agree entirely with the points that Mike Hedges makes, Llywydd, and it’s not just that I agree with him, but the research published as part of the preparation of the Bill, independent research by Bangor University that looks at the experience of visitor levies introduced elsewhere, bears out exactly what Mike Hedges says. There is no evidence that they act as a deterrent to the tourism industry, and there are countless examples of where a visitor levy produces funds that are reinvested in making sure that those places go on being attractive to visitors in the future. And that is what this Bill is designed to do. It is designed to allow local authorities to make sure that tourism, which is very important in those localities, goes on being sustainable on the one hand and successful on the other into the future. And I think the points that Mike Hedges has made this afternoon, pointing to evidence elsewhere, shows how it can be made to be a success.

First Minister—former First Minister, rather—when you first mooted the suggestion of a tourism levy, I was very angry, frankly, on behalf of the businesses in my own constituency that might be affected. And I'm afraid to say that I'm equally angry with this proposal today. One thing that we know is that visitors who come to places like Rhyl, Colwyn Bay, Llandudno, many of them are price-sensitive visitors. They are people who make a choice based on an extra £50 or £60. If someone comes on a holiday and it costs them an extra £84 for a fortnight for a family of four, that's quite a lot of money for those people who are just about able to go on holiday for that year, and people will choose to go to the coasts of the north-west of England rather than the north Wales coast, or they'll choose to go to the Lake district instead of Snowdonia. I'm very concerned about that.

I appreciate that you have taken some action, which will hopefully protect and reassure some people who holiday in my constituency. So, caravan owners, for example, are going to be exempt, which I appreciate. There are other areas where I think that you ought to look at exemptions. One of them is those places that people stay when they're on pilgrimages, very often informal accommodation in church halls. That at the moment doesn't appear to have been exempted, but I would appreciate if you could consider exempting those from these provisions. I think also we've talked a lot about the fact that these are—

You need to conclude, Darren, please.

I will. We've talked a lot about the fact that many of these levies are charged elsewhere in the world, but there's also a significant differential in VAT in most of those places. That isn't the case here in Wales, and I am concerned that if we're not careful, we will completely outprice Wales out of the holiday market. We know that visitor numbers were down last year, 14 per cent on 2019 in Wales, compared to just 4 per cent over the border in England. I think that's because of the messages, frankly, the anti-tourism messages that have been coming from this Government.

I'd just say to Darren Millar that there are many causes that we talk about on the floor of this Senedd where anger is a justified response, but a modest tourism levy is not one of them. Just in a very basic sense of proportion, the things that we talk about here that genuinely ought to be a source of anger, asking somebody to pay 75p a night to come and stay in Wales is not one of them. I'd much rather have a dialogue with him about sensible practical issues. I'm very happy to look at the point that he made about village halls. If we're going to make the tourism levy work, that's the conversation that's worth having. The other sorts of points he makes are so disproportionate to the modest measure in front of the Senedd that he ends up not being taken seriously when his other points are worth taking seriously.

Minister, I speak very briefly in order to support the proposal that is contained at the heart of this Bill. This is something that is entirely normal across the whole of the European mainland and elsewhere in the world. The hysteria we've heard from the Conservatives this afternoon is really misplaced. I've never seen them angry about poverty; I've only seen them angry about other things.

Let me say this, Cabinet Secretary: I think it's important that the levy raises funds that are reinvested into the fabric of the communities that support and sustain tourism. All of us who've lived in tourism hotspots, if you like, have seen the impact of tourism for good and for ill, in fact, and what we need to ensure is that the facilities exist to support and to sustain tourism, but also that tourists provide that investment in the communities they visit. So, I hope that what we'll see through this levy is greater investment in those communities, and the freedom for local authorities to take the decisions that they believe are best for their own communities. 

I thank Alun Davies for those important points, Llywydd. He's absolutely right: the purpose of the Bill is that any funds raised through a visitor levy must be retained and reinvested in those communities, and they must be reinvested in creating the circumstances that make those places attractive. For example, the Bill makes reference directly to supporting the Welsh language. We know that some of the highest concentrations of tourism happen in the parts of Wales where the language is at its strongest. One of the reasons people come to Wales and visit those communities is because they want to be somewhere with that particular cultural sense of place and purpose. The Bill will allow local authorities to reinvest, exactly as Alun Davies said, in circumstances and facilities that are attractive to visitors, but that allow those communities to go on being places that have a character of their own, and it’s that character that brings other people to visit them.

The thing about being a politician is that we’re here to serve those that we represent. We’re not here to pay lip service to these shocking policies that you’re bringing forward. A tourism tax in Wales is nothing short of a disgrace. It's £1.25 for hotels—that apparently now includes VAT. Would the Cabinet Secretary provide clarification? Hotels in particular are already seeing food cost increases, higher energy bills, staff wages up, a percentage of business rates relief withdrawn. This tax will see visitors thinking twice about travelling to Wales, and I’ve got to be honest, I think that’s something that Plaid Cymru wants—it was their payback for the co-operation agreement.

Too often we hear of references to other countries. Mallorca, for instance, has a much lower VAT rate, but even they are now thinking of withdrawing the tourism tax. The consultation on this, I understand, was overwhelmingly against the implementation of this tax, so do you not actually listen when you put these consultations out? People are so fed up right now with the Labour Government in the UK, and here, hence why we’ve got a petition—

Janet, you need to ask a question, please, and conclude. 

—hurtling towards 3 million people dissatisfied with you and your policy. Why are you not listening? And a very important point—

Janet, you need to conclude, please. 

I’ve heard that women and children using holiday accommodation whilst fleeing violence will have to pay this visitor levy, but I understand the charity, or they themselves, can then ask for it back. Do you honestly think—? I think that’s insensitive, expecting people who’ve come here, actually fleeing domestic abuse and violence, after all the talk about it here—. Why should they have to pay this, finance Cabinet Secretary? And—

Time, please, Janet. 

Do you not believe that this is an insensitive policy, for those people, but also for our businesses? Diolch yn fawr. 

Well, Dirprwy Lywydd, the Member can never see a top without wanting to go over it. And she, as usual, didn’t disappoint us this afternoon. Her conspiracy-minded ideas of how a visitor levy came about wouldn’t bear any examination. And let me give her an assurance that there are safeguards in the Bill so people who are placed in accommodation because of domestic abuse will not pay a visitor levy. So, let me set her mind at rest on that.

Surely the most important point Janet Finch-Saunders made was the first one. We are sent here by those whom we represent, and, believe me, the people who live in areas that have large numbers of tourists visiting them are very clearly in support of this Bill. If you were speaking on behalf of your residents, rather than your visitors, then there is no doubt you would be in favour of this Bill.

I listened carefully earlier this afternoon to an important contribution from another north Wales Member, Sam, when he talked about outdoor safety and mountain rescue. He pointed out that those organisations are very short of funds. In your view of the world, Janet, all the costs of mountain rescue and other facilities that are offered to tourists should be borne by people who live in those areas, but those people who visit them, those people who need—

I never said that. On a point of order, I never said anything of the kind.

You said exactly that. You said that people who visit areas should not make a contribution to the cost of the services that they rely on. Mountain rescue services, very clearly, very often go out to rescue people who are visiting those areas. Is it unfair, Dirprwy Lywydd, that those visitors should make a very modest contribution indeed to the costs of providing the service, which Sam quite rightly said was struggling to be funded for what they do?

Point of order.

I will take the point of order.

I'm sorry, Cabinet Secretary, but I have never uttered the words that you have just said that I've said here. You won't find them on the Record of Proceedings. I've never even mentioned those words. So, I would ask you to withdraw those comments. I have not—

The point of order should be addressed to me, not to the Cabinet Secretary.

It's what, sorry?

It should be addressed to myself as Chair.

Oh, I do apologise. But I have not used those words, today in my speech, or at any time in this Chamber since I've been elected. Diolch.

Thank you, Janet. I'm sure the Cabinet Secretary will review the words very carefully.

I'm very happy to review them.

As someone who represents nearly all the coastline of Wales, I understand the pressures that visitors can bring on local budgets. One example is street cleaning, waste collection, public toilets, and parking. Of course those visitors are welcome, and of course those businesses are supported by the tourism. But what I've heard here today from the Tories beggars belief, quite frankly. We're talking about a levy on the people who come, not the businesses, which they seem a bit confused about, and also the fact that the money will be ring-fenced into those communities who choose to charge this levy, which is another important factor here. We're talking about £1.25 a night. You won't buy a coffee for £1.25, unless they know something I don't. And yet, people will spend quite happily, and quite rightly, and I'm sure everybody's pleased about it, more than £1.25 to buy a cup of coffee, without even thinking that that's going to put them off if they buy one every single day. So, we've heard a lot here, but Barcelona and Venice are already charging €5 a night and it hasn’t prevented anything. And I think—

You need to ask a question now, please, Joyce.

Yes, and I will. When we're looking at the way to spend this, the area that I just talked about has environmental challenges. People come to those areas to see those environments in good order. And of course, here's an opportunity to answer some of the questions the Tories ask us about investing in those communities and in those environments.

I thank Joyce Watson, Dirprwy Lywydd. I take what she says particularly seriously on this Bill, given her own direct experience of working and living in a high-impact tourism part of Wales. I thought she captured very well indeed that sense of proportion that has been very absent in some other contributions here this afternoon. Of course visitors are welcome to Wales. The Bill is designed to make them even more welcome in the future. What do those visitors expect when they come to see the beautiful country that we are so lucky to live in? They expect beaches to be clean, they expect footpaths and trails to be properly maintained, they want to be able to use the visitor centre, if it rains they want to be able to go to the leisure centre locally as well. What this Bill does in its very modest way is to allow local authorities to collect that small contribution—cheaper, as Joyce Watson said, than a cup of coffee—towards maintaining the things that have attracted them to that area in the first place. I thank Joyce for the way in which she captured the essence of this Bill.

On the point of order, I want to make sure that everyone respects points of order and they listen to them, because it is important that we understand what the point of order raises and that the Record is accurate. I’m sure the Cabinet Secretary, as I said, will review the Record and if there are any inaccuracies he will seek to make sure they are amended.

Since the sustainable farming scheme’s 'Keeping farmers farming' consultation closed in March this year, I have been committed to listening to feedback and working with farmers and environmental groups to address concerns they have about the sustainable farming scheme. As Members will be aware, I established the ministerial round-table with key stakeholders to develop revised proposals for the SFS. Supporting the round-table, an official working group and the carbon sequestration evidence review panel have worked tirelessly to explore technical scheme design issues and the evidence on additional and alternative actions to sequester carbon that could be included.
 
This scheme is critical in securing a sustainable future for Welsh farming. Farmers make an important contribution to our economy, food production, and to our communities. As stewards of the land, they also have a crucial role to play in tackling the climate and nature emergencies. I have said many times since the round-table and the associated groups were established that we have been burning the midnight oil to make progress on this scheme. That has certainly been the case. It is because of the work of each individual involved in these groups and all the supporting teams that I can now publish a revised scheme that I strongly believe works both for the farming industry and for the environment. I’d like to put on record how grateful I am for the dedication and hard work of every person involved. Diolch yn fawr iawn i chi i gyd.
 
The changes I have made address the needs of Welsh farmers and meet the sustainable land management objectives that are set out in legislation. These include supporting the ongoing sustainable production of food, as well as our climate change and nature commitments. This is a scheme that delivers for farmers and for nature together, and that is crucial. The impacts of climate change are already with us, and many farmers across Wales are already seeing and feeling the effects on the land they care for year on year, from flooded fields to heatwaves impacting on crops and on livestock. This scheme will play a crucial role in securing a sustainable future for the sector.

Now, whilst the progress we have made collectively is significant, this is not the final scheme. The round-table has agreed that the scheme outline published yesterday will be used to undertake an updated economic analysis and impact assessment over the coming months to determine impacts on a range of agricultural, environmental and social aspects. In the scheme, we have retained the framework of the universal layer for all, with additional optional and collaborative actions for those who choose to do more. Having considered a range of evidence from experts and scientific papers, the executive summary of the carbon panel's findings has been published alongside the scheme outline. The summary provides a wide-ranging science and evidence-led foundation to inform the round-table discussions and many of the panel's recommendations on the SFS universal actions have already been incorporated.

I'd like to run now through some of the most significant changes to the scheme. Based on feedback, we have made significant changes to the majority of the universal actions to ensure that they are appropriate, achievable and recognise existing good practice taking place on farms across Wales. This means we have reduced the number of universal actions from 17 to 12. An important scheme change is that we have merged the animal health, welfare and biosecurity actions into a single simplified universal action to focus discussions with the farm vet on improved animal health and welfare outcomes. We have also moved the requirement for all farms to have wash stations to an optional action, recognising that the biosecurity needs of individual farms can be very different indeed.

Given the importance of the scheme in tackling the nature and the climate emergencies, we have maintained the requirement for farmers to manage at least 10 per cent of their farm as habitat. To help farmers meet this requirement, we are considering additional options to support farmers to create temporary habitats. These should be suitable for all farming systems and land ownership. So, for example, I believe it would be unreasonable for a landlords to deny a tenant access to the SFS on the basis of including a temporary habitat with, for example, an ongoing crop rotation. The management of existing wildlife ponds will be merged with the existing habitat maintenance universal action and will count towards the 10 per cent. We have moved the creation of additional scrapes to an optional action.

Throughout this process, Llywydd, we have listened very carefully to the views expressed, including by the carbon panel. As Members will know, tree planting and hedgerow creation are of critical importance to achieving our net-zero commitments. As such, the farm-level figure for tree cover has been removed and will be replaced by a scheme-wide target, which will be set after discussion with the ministerial round-table and a new universal action for a tree planting and hedgerow creation opportunity plan. We will set up a governance mechanism, which will include key members of the farming industry and environmental stakeholders, to ensure that the scheme-wide target is met. And, again, working in collaboration is key to ensure that we can achieve our goals and targets in the most positive way. 

The changes to the scheme mean that farmers who apply will be able to decide and map where they would like to add more trees and hedges on their farm, how many, and, if appropriate, get funding to support them through the optional layer of the scheme. We propose that farmers will complete this opportunity planned for their farm in the first year they enter the scheme and will need to demonstrate progress by the end of the 2030 scheme year. We intend to make this a straightforward process, so farmers will not need professional forestry guidance, but we will ensure that there is expert advice to help the farmer decide where is best to plant. The planting grants available are very flexible and they provide support for a wide variety of actions, including planting woodland areas, shelter belts, agro-forestry, orchards, individual trees and, indeed, new hedgerows.

The universal scheme remains focused on supporting farmers producing food and other sustainable benefits. The actions and the administration have been streamlined to operate through Rural Payments Wales Online as efficiently as possible, and to provide opportunity for existing and new and young farmers. In the scheme outline, we have also set out how we propose to work out the SFS universal payment. As well as costs incurred and income forgone, we still intend to include a social value to this payment. This will represent the wider benefits to society, which come from a sustainable agricultural industry, and we will publish the payment rates with the final scheme. Other changes include taking account of sites of special scientific interest—SSSIs—and common land rights in the universal payment. Further support for both will also be available as optional and collaborative elements.

I have been very clear with Members that this is not the final scheme. Whilst the progress we've made is significant, there is still lots of work to be done. In terms of the next steps, we will now use the scheme, published yesterday, to undertake an updated economic analysis and impact assessment over the coming months, to determine the impacts on a range of agricultural, environmental and social aspects.

I intend, Llywydd, to make final scheme decisions next summer, based on these further discussions at the ministerial round-table, and evidence, including the economic analysis and the impact assessment. This will be the earliest opportunity we have to provide details of the payment rates. Following that, I will publish a final scheme next summer.

I’m very pleased to provide this progress update today. I believe these changes will make it easier for farmers to participate and to benefit from the scheme, whilst also supporting us to meet the imperatives of tackling the climate and the nature emergency. Diolch yn fawr.

As I'm not quite sure, I'd better declare a relatable interest in this, due to family circumstances.

I'd like to thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for providing an update on the revised sustainable farming scheme, and, like you, I'd like to thank all those farming organisations and active farmers on that panel for all the time they have given to make this scheme probably be in a better place than what it was previously. However, there are still some challenges that still exist and some key issues that remain unresolved, and I'd just like to see some further clarification from you on behalf of those Welsh farmers and rural communities about the questions that I was asked yesterday.

I think the main issue that came through at the winter fair after your announcement yesterday was around financial certainty and future support, because this could be the best scheme possible that could ever be put on the table, but if there isn't a long-term budget, a secure budget, put in place to support the implementation of this scheme, then no-one is going to take it up. So, I need some assurance—I'm sure the farmers across Wales need assurance—that this scheme is going to be backed by an adequate budget and it's financially resourced to ensure economic stability for family farms. So, can you confirm, if you haven't already done so, or are in the process of doing so, the payment rates, what will be outlined, and can you confirm whether the payment rates will be in excess of income forgone? Because a lot of farmers I talked to yesterday were saying if everything was on income forgone, they're probably not going to go into the scheme. There has to be some financial benefit for doing the things that you want them to, and I'd be interested to hear that.

You also mentioned the social value payment. I think that's something that's welcomed, that we're actually going to see the social value of farming. So, I just want to know how that's actually going to be calculated and what measures are in place to ensure that it accurately reflects the value that farming does add to the Welsh economy and society.

I can't go through this without talking about tree planting, and I've always been an advocate for the right tree planted in the right place. That's what everybody's talked about, and I'm pleased to hear that farmers now will be able to map their own farms, where they think they can plant, and that's a positive step forward. I'm pleased that the 10 per cent tree-planting target has gone, because I think that was a major sticking point for a lot of people out there. I'd be interested to know, going forward, about the tree-planting plan that people are going to put forward. How is the governance going to work around that, and how is that going to be agreed with Government on individual farms? Because say, for example, a farmer says, 'I can do 2 per cent', but then perhaps Government or others say it could be 6 per cent. It'll be interesting to see how that negotiation is going to work, because if you want farmers to buy into it, they need to feel that, actually, what they're putting forward is being respected by Government agencies. And I'm just interested why the 10 per cent habitat figure is still in there if the tree-planting figure has gone. I'm interested why there isn't an overarching scheme target for habitat as well. And I just want to know as well what specific guidance and support are going to be provided for farmers to make sure that the habitat is feasible across various farming systems. You mentioned tenants, and I'll come on to that. But one thing I do want to ask as well is around pre-existing trees and hedgerows. I know that's something that has been a bone of contention for some time, and I'm not sure whether it's been decided as part of the round-tables yet—are existing trees and hedgerows going to be counted towards the overall habitat target, or are they going to be counted towards the overall tree-planting target? So, some clarity around that I think is very needed, for people to know that.

You predecessor in this brief said that if this scheme didn't work for tenant farmers, it didn't work for everybody, and I had a very constructive meeting yesterday with the Tenant Farmers Association around the scheme, and there is still some nervousness to make sure that if tenants want to go into this scheme, that they won't have no restrictions imposed upon them on landlords, especially in terms of tree planting, because we know that tree planting does devalue land. So, we need to make sure that, actually, if tenants want to do this, they're enabled to do it, so any support you can give around that would be interesting to hear.

One thing that I think I would like to see is an actual definition of an active farmer in this scheme, because we need to have that clear definition, because there were far too many people accessing agricultural schemes in the past who are not active farmers, and we need to make sure that money is actually going towards the people who produce food for this country and give us food security. I'm going to run out of time; I've got loads of questions.

Veterinary capacity is also another issue. I was very pleased that the universal actions were rolled down, especially on animal health and welfare and biosecurity; it's something that you and I have talked about in some of the meetings that we've had. If there's going to be 6,000 vet meetings happening across the country, there are not that many vets across the country to do that, especially farm vets, so it'll be interesting to know what support you're going to provide to that sector as well, to make sure that we do have the capacity to actually roll out these universal actions.

I know I'm out of time, but I've got one quick question, Llywydd, if that's okay. One of the key things that's very important to me and the Welsh Conservative group is food security. We need to make sure that any scheme supports our food and makes our farmers produce food. There is a worrying trend at the moment, Cabinet Secretary, about the decrease in livestock numbers across the country. I've met with Farmers Fresh who were talking to me, actually, about the critical mass of lamb and the critical mass of beef that is going through abattoirs at the moment, and, actually, the threat that abattoirs have got to close because we're not seeing the sheer volume of stock going through those abattoirs. So, it would be very interesting to know what support you're going to put in this scheme to actually make sure farmers keep farming, that they keep producing livestock as well, to make sure that we safeguard those jobs and opportunities, not just in agriculture, but those wider associated industries, because without those abattoirs, places like Merthyr, with St Merryn—if they close a couple of lines down there could be an awful lot of people, hundreds of people, losing their jobs. So, some assurances around that would also be very welcome. Diolch, Llywydd.

Thank you, James, very much, and thank you for the welcome for the point that we have got to, but it's not the finished article yet. But this is really significant progress. Let me just refer to a few of the many questions you asked there. First of all, in terms of budget, our intent is very clear on this. Having bolted down the BPS in the year that's just gone, having taken at a ministerial risk putting the guarantee for the BPS for this year ahead in the preparatory year, I think our direction of travel, for me, as the Cabinet Secretary, is very, very clear. But the discussions go on internally with the Welsh Treasury in terms of securing the right quantum of funding to make this scheme work. And the biggest argument in favour of that is that this isn't purely, if you like, an old EU-style agricultural support scheme; this is actually about viable farming, viable farm businesses. It is about good food production, with the highest animal welfare and environmental standards, and it's about tackling the nature and climate emergencies. That gives me the platform to stand on to make the strongest argument for the right quantum of funding.

The payment rates you asked about—those are exactly the work that we need to do now in the three, four months ahead, as I said in my opening remarks. So, we'll work through that through the ministerial round-table and with the support of the officials' group and others.

Social value will be embedded throughout the scheme. We'll bring forward further details now in the coming months on how that will work, but it's a commitment that that will be integral to the scheme.

Trees: on the point you made on the right tree in the right place, you're absolutely right. That could well be that, as I mentioned in my opening remarks, some farmers will indeed want to draw down funding, not only to map, but actually to draw down funding from the optional layer to go further than what was previously in the proposal of 10 per cent. There are farmers who've said that to me directly. There will be some farmers who'll want to do that for shelter for their livestock, for climate resilience on their land, or, alternatively, because they want to move into some form of agroforestry as well, so we'll make that funding available. We've got to work through the detail of how we do that in the months ahead, but it is the right tree in the right place, and that could help with things like tackling run-off that we've seen now in catchment areas, as well as things like helping tackle water pollution, because of planting in the right place alongside river banks, where it's appropriate as well. There will be a headline target scheme, just to be clear, so we'll bring that forward in due course as well.

I'm very seized by the way that we still have those overall objectives, which Conservative Members as well as all parties here say to me, about meeting the Climate Change Committee's recommendation on tree cover. We have to do that. The SFS needs to play its part within that as well. But the right tree in the right place. So, farmers understand, and the ministerial round-table understands as well, that this is part of the heavy lifting, as well as bringing forward a timber strategy and other aspects within the public forestry estate as well. This has got to have ambition behind the tree planting, as well as working with farmers. There will be governance that will help drive that ambition, to actually check progress on how we are monitoring that year by year, making sure that we are not just mapping but actually achieving what is set out in the planting on each individual farm as well, and we'll bring forward more detail on that. So, it's got to have ambition.

An 'active farmer' definition, yes. We've made it very clear—. I'll just briefly respond to you, but there's detail within what we've put forward. So, we'll be—. The focus on active farmers—. We'll set out a scheme eligibility criteria on those undertaking an agricultural activity. We want farmers with mud on their boots, to coin a phrase. So, that will likely be focused around the 3 hectares or 550 hours of farming—farming, yes, as opposed to investors, yes, absentee landlords and so on—and they have responsibility for the land for 10 months of the year.

But we've also made it clear within the scheme outline that we've brought forward our work with tenant farmers, that they are able to get into it as well. So, let me just touch on that finally, which is the aspect—. I'm very pleased. The Tenant Farmers Association are actually on the ministerial round-table, and their response has been one of—. It's not often you get to hear this sort of language, but I thank George and others for their contribution, when they say that they're delighted in the scheme being brought forward, that it's a very pragmatic approach, and they detail that

'the SFS will not require an action which the tenant cannot legally undertake.'

It's a huge step forward, they say, for the let sector of agriculture. They've welcomed the statement where the consent of a landlord might be needed by a tenant before participating in the SFS. We've dealt with that. It would be unreasonable for a landlord to deny access. That's a clear statement there. So, yes, we're definitely making sure this is right for tenants as well, as well as new entrants into the scheme as well.

Diolch yn fawr, Rhun, and thank you again for the overall welcome for the progress that we have undoubtedly made, and we've done that together with farmers of all shapes and sizes and diversity on the ministerial round-table, but also with environmental and wildlife organisations as well, and we'll continue to do that. I don't think anybody can accuse this process and these outcomes of being something where anybody has been at the periphery, and especially the farming unions and others. And of course, on that ministerial round-table, we also have independent farmers, we have tenant farmers, we have representatives of young farmers on there as well, alongside people like the Woodland Trust, the Wildlife Trust, the Nature Friendly Farming Network and others. They're far from being at the periphery of anything that we've done over the last few months, and neither will they be going forward. But thank you for the overall welcome.

Your questions to me are interesting, and let me take from them, let me extrapolate from them, some assumptions that, in the work that we now have to do to arrive at a whole-scheme target—sorry, an overall target— for the scheme for tree planting, you would welcome a level of ambition that is achievable by farmers but that will also help us in that climate-change piece, recognising where the advice of the Climate Change Committee is. I notice that you are nodding, and I really welcome that, because I think we've got difficult work ahead of us. Because we still need to bring people with us, but we have to recognise that high level of ambition that we've been set by the Climate Change Committee. It shouldn't all fall on farmers but the majority of land within Wales that could help us contribute—alongside the public forestry estate, alongside other opportunities—a significant part of that is farmland. So, I think that we need to work together to achieve what is that overall target, and then how we make it achievable, and line up, by the way, the payments alongside that, so that people will want to actually support that.

I'm also going to take from what you were saying—and thank you for your questions/comments—that you would support the need for governance in this place around the tree planting that can really robustly help monitor and evaluate progress towards that overall target. Can I just say, critical to this—? I welcome the way that this has been brought forward, because this means that all stakeholders have buy into it, are all committed to it, including the farming unions, but also everybody else as well.

Now, on that basis, everybody will need to work collectively, under that governance structure, towards that headline target that we have, to drive this. Now, what I can say, and I would say this to all colleagues, is that the potential here is that, rather than an individual farm 10 per cent element—which some could easily overachieve and some would struggle to get there—the potential within this of bringing people with us, if we have that collective buy-in, is that we could go far further, because some farmers that I've spoken to want to go further. Others would struggle. But that overall scheme approach, and everybody working towards it, with a robust governance structure, I think, will help us.

You asked the question of whether all the actions will be brought forward by May. Yes, absolutely. They will be. If we keep the intensity of the work that we've been doing, they definitely will be. And they will be brought through again in a very intelligent, a very well-crafted way, with everybody having input into them.

The BPS—you asked about next year. Look, we've got to be absolutely crystal clear: what we're doing is transitioning here from the previous funding, the BPS. We held it in place last year. They didn’t do that in England. We held it in place last year, and we're holding it in place this year. Our intention is then to move seamlessly to SFS funding in 2026. That’s what I am trying to argue for in the budget, but we've got a collective discussion going on across Welsh Government.

I was very pleased, by the way, in the settlement that came forward from the UK budget in terms of agriculture. But let me make it clear: we make our own decisions in Wales. I think that you would welcome this. So, the money coming across is great, but, actually, what we need is then to make our decisions on how we meet the objectives of this scheme as well. You're right in terms of Barnett. Barnett is not the way to go forward in the long term at all. We consistently make this argument and will continue to do so.

We will bring forward the economic analysis, of course, and that economic analysis will be really thorough. It will not be out of date. It will not be something that doesn’t reflect exactly where we've got to. So, in bringing that economic analysis forward, getting these details of the other actions on the collaborative and optional level will be critical as well. So, there is a bit of a schedule here to how we bring this forward. But it'll be accurate, it'll be up to date. So, I think that’s answered the majority of your questions, but thank you for your broad support.

Thank you very much for all the hard work that you and all of the other stakeholders have done in bringing the scheme this far. We absolutely have to take food security seriously. It's not the food security that James Evans has in mind, as I'm not sure we're ever going to run out of enough meat to feed the people of Wales. It's fruit and vegetables that we have to worry about.

I think that, with the rise in protectionism and the disruption caused by extreme weather, which we have seen this weekend, it means that the just-in-time procurement model simply doesn't work any longer. As, increasingly, children are demanding Welsh fruit and vegetables in their school meals, I was very pleased to see that you've got the—. Even if you haven't got three acres, so long as you are working 550 hours a year, that enables start-up horticulturalists to get going, like the Langtons, who started growing microgreens in their back bedroom, moved on to 3 acres of land near Crickhowell, and now have, I think, 60 acres of land in Ceredigion, including 250 fruit trees.

So, when you're talking about trees with stakeholders, please don't forget that orchards are a really important source of food, as well as providing all the other benefits of trees in terms of cover for animals. I just wondered what your strategy is for growing horticulture in this country, so that we can meet the demand that is widespread across Wales.

Jenny, thank you very much for, in your opening remarks, recognising the effort that's gone on. I would just commend all those who've put the incredible hours in to get this right to this point, and then those hours are going to have to carry on, I'm afraid, going past. People watching in from outside will be dreading this now, but it is paying dividends.

Can I just say specifically, in terms of growing our own fruit and vegetables, that this scheme is a step forward, significantly, in a number of ways? Including those farms that want to—. And we see them increasingly. You and I have been out and visited farms that are diversifying into that as part of their economic resilience, in addition to what they might do with livestock, traditional crops and arable crops and so on and so forth. But what we've also done is designed this scheme as a step forward to be accessible to all farming sectors and all farm types. This includes horticultural businesses that have been excluded from previous schemes because of entitlements, historically, or because of farm size. So, we've adjusted the eligibility criteria for SFS, we've taken it down to 3 hectares or 550 standard labour hours. That does mean that those who are involved in horticulture could also now consider whether this is the right scheme for them, but bear in mind that they would need to meet those universal actions across the piece. So, in particular, horticultural businesses can benefit from this and will now be able to apply.

We're also, by the way, working with the sector to understand the priorities they have for the optional and the collaborative actions as well, to see whether we could go further. And then, of course, is the piece outside of this with the wider support we have for horticulture within Wales as well. So, I think this is in a better place now to take that forward and make sure that we've got, as well as good agricultural production coming onto our local plates, that we've also got good horticultural production also on those plates as well, from local areas.

Diolch, Deputy First Minister, for the statement. I think in this statement is recognition that the Welsh Government had previously got the scheme wrong, and that it's not right yet. You've alluded to that in your statement today, that there's a lot of work to continue to be done. You and I were on the same television programme where you mentioned burning the midnight oil before you were appointed to Cabinet, and we will hold you to that. It's good that you're earning your ministerial salary in getting this right, because a lot of farmers' livelihoods depend on this.

So, focusing on two points around the specifics around financing, the annual budget for agriculture is £337 million, BPS £238 million. Can you confirm what the annual budget would be for this scheme, whether it will be higher or lower? You don't have to give a figure yet, alluding to what you said previously in your statement, but a figure on what the scheme will cost would be helpful for farmers to plan ahead. Secondly, the weighting of payments to farmers, how will they be divvied up? Will it be 50 per cent for the universal schemes and 50 per cent for the other two schemes, 60:40, 30:70? How will that play out? Because that is integral to getting farmers to sign up, because all the environmental benefits that are to be delivered through this scheme, including food security, first and foremost need farmers to sign up to the scheme. If the finances aren't there, if the money isn't right, farmers won't sign up to the scheme, and that's a loss for everybody. So, more detail on the finances, knowing what's to come in the future in May, ahead of the Royal Welsh in the summer and the final announcement on the scheme, some information around those finances would be most welcome.

Thank you, Sam. On both points, I can say that's exactly the work that we now have to do, so, both on the budget piece, which I've said in response to two of the previous submissions, and in terms of the weighting of the actions. We have four or five months ahead of us of going through the detail of where the weighting, as you put it, lies between universal, the optional and the collaborative elements. You're also right, as previous people who have contributed to the statement have said, that the budget is going to be an important piece of this. So, I can't pre-empt or forecast exactly where we'll get to on either of those elements. Certainly, the balance, the weighting between the options will be something for the ministerial round-table, with the support of the officials group, to bring forward the proposals so that I can consider them.

But I come back to the same point again, which is, fundamentally, you are right, this is exactly what I get paid for and the buck stops with me, and I will call the decisions, as I have done up to now. It's what we all get paid for, by the way, to represent our constituents and to get these things right, and I welcome, by and large, the broad cross-party support as well, which has got us to this point. So, you'll have to wait a little longer, Sam, for those details. As I laid out in my opening remarks, that's exactly what we now have as the next stages.

Thank you for the update. I am concerned to see the removal of the requirement for 10 per cent tree cover for each farm in order to participate in the SFS. That figure was reached as part of how the Welsh Government would not just reach its carbon reduction targets, but also its ambitious tree planting targets. We need to be planting far more trees right across Wales, and farmers are absolutely best placed to help us do that and be paid to do it.

As you've outlined, Cabinet Secretary, the proposal now is for a scheme-wide target. The original proposal would have been easy to monitor, easy to reward individual farmers for services that they provide on behalf of the taxpayer, and also easy to withhold payment if the contract agreement was not delivered. So, could the Cabinet Secretary outline how the scheme-wide proposal will be monitored? How will you know if it's been successful? How will payments be withheld if outcomes are not delivered? So, you could have a scheme to run on a catchment basis, for example. You could have farmers downstream delivering the required outcomes, and maybe one farmer upstream not adhering to the contract, or maybe a farmer isn't part of the scheme. So, how will that be monitored and measured? And what was the decision-making process and what scientific advice was sought around this proposed approach being able to deliver your carbon reduction targets, along with tree planting targets and nature restoration, in this fundamental change in approach?

Thank you, Lesley, very much indeed. Can I just thank you as well for the work you did in getting us to the point where we had a clear proposal that went out to consultation? But, of course, in consultation, that is a proposal as well, which people then respond to. As you know, we did have, I think, in excess of 12,000 responses to that, and those were from environmental organisations and from farmers and from wider Welsh society.

On the tree planting proposals, there was also interesting feedback from some of the environmental and wildlife groups on alternative ways of taking this forward that actually captured hearts and minds, and worked with behavioural science, as well as evidence on where carbon could be better sequestered. There's no doubt whatsoever that woodland and tree planting is the clear and obvious route to sequestering carbon and we're not walking away from the overall Climate Change Committee ambitions of 43,000 hectares planted by 2030.

We want, going forward, in terms of the governance, the monitoring, the evaluation, Lesley, and other aspects, to listen to not only the stakeholder group, the ministerial round-table and the existing stakeholders there, but now that we've set out the outline of the scheme, to listen to those wider stakeholders out there, including people like yourself, who've had experience, but also the wider Members here within the Chamber, to see how we can best now bolt this down, that the ambition we've set out, where, working with people, we could go above and beyond what was in the original proposals and how we make that happen.

The universal action will mean farmers will have to not only map, but show progress each year: mapping the first year, then show progress with the governance structure over it. There'll also be an optional level above, where they can go further with tree planting, and we will line up the funding accordingly to do that. But, Lesley, you and other Members of the Senedd, I'd be keen to hear ideas about how we can make this bite and how we can achieve together, but working with people, the ambition we have.

During the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee's sustainable farming scheme inquiry, the committee heard wide concerns that insufficient reward could result in a lack of scheme take-up. So, I hope very much that, Cabinet Secretary, you will take on board those concerns, especially with regard to payment methodology, to ensure that as many farmers as possible take up the scheme in 2026.

Of course, yesterday, you published an adapted scheme outline, following further development on the sustainable farming scheme. This is an interim position—you've made that quite clear—and it's not the final scheme. And you've also made it clear that you will now carry out an economic analysis and impact assessment of the scheme outline before making any final decisions. I appreciate that the final scheme is expected to be published in the summer of next year, ahead of the scheme starting on 1 January 2026, but can you tell us, Deputy First Minister, what you will do if the economic analysis and impact assessment of the SFS outline show worrying impacts for farmers and wider society, given the planned introduction in 2026? And are you, therefore, confident that, at the moment, you are still on track with your planned timetable for the scheme's development?

Thank you, and thanks to the members of the committee, and you as Chair, for your analysis during the summer. It is interesting that when it was published, when we were at the Royal Welsh, we were already making significant strides forward that, in some ways, pre-empted exactly what you’d heard from people, saying, 'Can you do this, that and the other?', and we were doing them by the time we met at the Royal Welsh Show in the summer.

In terms of the economic analysis, we will bring that forward and it will be a rigorous analysis. It will be a very clear and honest analysis of what the implications are, including where this will help militate against what we’ve seen over the last few decades, which is, in parts of agriculture and rural communities, a hollowing out going on. This is not a new thing that we have seen with the loss of jobs within rural communities, within agriculture. The trends have been there over many years in parts of the sector, with the consolidation of farm holdings and then that meaning fewer people putting their children into local schools, fewer people spending money in local shops and so on. That is not a new phenomenon. So, what I’m keen to do in this, by incorporating social value as well, is to make sure that this supports that type of farming—family-based farming—that is not only producing good food, but is also sustaining rural economies as well.

Do I have confidence that we can deliver those aspects by the summer? Yes. We simply have to. And we have the resource behind the scenes to do this. It will require a lot of work to do, but, previously, when I was urged to take a little bit of time and get this right—. We will do it, but we will bring it forward by the summer, and then farmers will know, as we go into the summer, what the scheme looks like, and they can assess then whether they want to take part in it, and we’re trying to make it as attractive and accessible as possible for farmers to be involved.  

I’d like to thank the Cabinet Secretary and all the stakeholders for getting this far. Nature doesn’t have a loud voice, we must get the balance right, and we ignore it at our peril. Eighty per cent of land is farmland, and we’ve lost 97 per cent of wildflower meadows over the last 50 years. Our rivers our heavily polluted and we have flooding from run-off. It’s positive that the 10 per cent for habit, the management of sites of special scientific interest and hedgerow restoration is embedded—I’m really pleased to see that. We need to make sure that advice is there for people to understand how to do those improvements properly for nature. I’d like to see increased investment in the optional and collaborative tiers of the scheme to encourage participation in creating ponds, planting trees and reducing pesticides, but I am aware that you’re still looking at this. So, I want to know how the proposed sustainable farming scheme will address the nature crisis and the 2030 biodiversity commitments agreed by the Welsh Government at the UN Convention on Biological Diversity meetings it has attended, and what advice to farmers and monitoring there will be going forward. Thank you.

Carolyn, thank you so much. You’ve reminded us that the importance of this scheme is not only for good food production and viable farm businesses, but actually for tackling that nature emergency that we have, as well as the climate emergency. And you are right, we absolutely have to make sure that we work towards those 30x30 targets and that we embed within this our ambition to achieve those targets, with the SFS as part of us doing it, because of the importance of the amount of land that we hope will be within this scheme and helping us deliver it.

So, within the outline that we brought forward, you’re right, we have hedgerows in there. It’s not just trees and woodland, it’s hedgerows, and we can do more with the higher level options, so, for example, in terms of thickening the hedgerows, growing the hedgerows, widening the hedgerows, and wildlife corridors as well. But there’s more. Certainly, maintaining and enhancing the valuable habitats is now within the scheme. That 10 per cent on every farm accessing the scheme—that’s within it. Much of the land, by the way, that we’re talking about has never been brought into a management agreement before. That’s a real step forward.

There’s also a universal action specifically targeted at one of our most valuable habitat areas, which is sites of special scientific interest. We got a consensus on that in the summer, and we announced that that would be part of it. That's a real step forward. There's the 10 per cent of farms in the scheme to be habitat managed, not to mention, of course, what we can do in the optional and collaborative action space, which will be available from 2026. For farmers who want to go further, we can line up the payments that would allow them to do that for the good of their farm and their business, but also to enhance biodiversity and restore nature within their farms. So, yes, we're committed to that 30x30, and committed, as is the ministerial round-table, to designing a scheme that can help us achieve that ambition.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Cabinet Secretary, I very much welcome the announcement that you're making today and that you discussed in the winter fair yesterday. I think the approach you're taking is absolutely the right one. We need to have a very strong focus on what our objectives and ambitions are. I think we've all struggled since the disaster of Brexit and the terrible impact that Brexit has had on agriculture, potentially worse than any other sector of the economy. But we've also struggled because we've had this false choice presented to us: either we have sustainable land management or we have food production. What we have to say is we want both, because my constituents know only too well after the last few days the importance of sustainable land management. And farmers will know that if they want to produce not just this year and next year, but far into the future, the land has to be farmed in a sustainable fashion.

I particularly welcome the points that you made on hedgerows and planting, such as shelter belts, which I think fit into the topography and the ecology of our country, as well as the commercial nature of agriculture. So I very much welcome the announcement you've made, but also the tone and the way in which you've gone about seeking this agreement, because I think it's time we bring people together, we bring communities together, not seek to divide, but also do so in a way that sets very clear ambitions for the future of agriculture, the future of food production and the future of our country.

Thank you so much for that. I'm a little bit intimidated now, having both you as a former agri Minister and another former agri Minister on the screen there both putting questions to me this afternoon. But can I thank you for that? Because I think embedded within this are the SLM objectives within the agri Act, all of them, bringing them together, not one more important than another, but all of them together. Similarly, what we need to do in terms of the food production piece, the resilient farms financially, as well as the nature and climate emergencies all together. And the approach we will take to deliver this is working all together.

It is a false dichotomy to put one against the other, to say farmers are over on this side and the environmental groups are on another. The ministerial round-table hasn't worked like this, the work we've done in the carbon group has not worked like this, the work we've done in the official group hasn't. We need to keep this going, because we know that if we're going to deliver on those multiple objectives, we have to do this on hearts and minds, and have real ownership of that right across the piece, not simply tell people from here, ‘Get on with this.’ We need to work with people and say, ‘We can make this work for you as a business’, but we can make this work also for all those wider imperatives that we need to do for nature and climate as well.

The benefit of this is that those farms who are most threatened at the moment by flooding, as well as heatwaves, their livestock productivity is threatened, their land is threatened, their soil quality is threatened—. If we do this right, then the measures we have within the actions that we've outlined and the more work to do will give them greater resilience going forward against climate change and give them greater financial resilience as well. So thank you for the comments, and we'll keep on trying to work in that way with all the stakeholders.

Dirprwy Lywydd, poor flow causes delays at the front door of hospitals for ambulance clinicians, who are unable to hand over the care of their patients to emergency department staff. And it causes delays in the community; ambulances queuing outside hospital mean fewer resources or slower responses to 999 calls.

In the context of this work, I hope it's helpful if I remind Members how ambulance responses are currently provided. When someone makes an emergency call to the Welsh ambulance service, it is dealt with by one of three 999 clinical contact centres in Wales. It will be answered initially by a non-clinical call handler who asks the caller a series of questions. The responses are then subject to a triage process, undertaken via the medical priority dispatch system. This generates a priority code, which is matched to the ambulance service’s clinical response model categories—either red, amber and green.

The target response time for a red call is for a response to arrive on scene within eight minutes for 65 per cent of calls. This target in this form has been in place since 2015 when the clinical response model was introduced, but draws on a higher level target introduced many years before that. Since 2015, the proportion of people identified as suitable for a red category response has risen markedly from between 4 per cent and 5 per cent to around 15 per cent today. This isn’t because we are seeing an overall increase in life-threatening injuries or illnesses. The rise is due to changes in the way the ambulance service assesses some types of calls, clinical decisions to move more calls into the red category, and increased numbers of people whose condition has got worse while they are waiting for an ambulance to arrive.  

There are currently no response time targets for the amber category, which includes people with serious but not immediately life-threatening needs, nor the green category, which covers calls where there is neither a serious nor life-threatening need. The latest performance figures show the Welsh ambulance service received just under 36,700 emergency calls in October, an average of 1,183 a day. Fifteen per cent of these calls—177 a day—were red calls. This was the second highest number of daily red calls to the ambulance service on record, a level of demand that is, frankly, becoming unsustainable.

Despite the fact that the category of red calls is now approximately three times the size since the target was set in 2015, in October just over half of red calls were responded to within the target time of eight minutes. The ambulance service is still off target, but this equates to the highest number of red calls responded to within eight minutes on record. Overall, we are seeing a trend of a declining number of green calls over time, while the number of red calls to the ambulance service has steadily increased. In September, the number of red calls was higher than the number of green calls for the first time.

Dirprwy Lywydd, I turn now to the action we are taking. A national group has been set up to review the appropriateness of emergency ambulance response measures and targets. It will consider the Health and Social Care Committee's recommendation in the context of our strategic priorities. This means a focus on measuring the quality and safety of the service, as set out in our NHS Wales health and care quality standards, and standards in our NHS Wales performance framework. The group will also consider the appropriateness of the national target in the context of the ongoing evolution of the trust's clinical model.

The evolving clinical model is based on reducing avoidable harm and improving patient experience and outcomes, through a greater provision of remote clinical screening and assessment. It will see the introduction of rapid clinical screening for most 999 calls immediately after the call handler initial assessment stage. The trust continues to work through these proposed changes, with a focus on delivering the right response in the fastest possible time, for those who need it most. Clinical leaders from health boards, the ambulance service and national programmes, together with senior representatives from the joint commissioning committee, will play a key role in this group. Evidence will also be sought from Llais and third sector organisations where that is relevant.

I expect the group to review the available clinical evidence and provide advice about the appropriateness of the existing national target as an enabler for quality outcomes in the context of UK and international clinical evidence; whether the broader performance framework for ambulance services is in keeping with the NHS Wales health and care quality standards; and whether recommendations are required for new measures and targets, based on what matters most to the public, the available clinical evidence, and how ambulance services are improving the way they manage people. I will update Members, Dirprwy Lywydd, as the work of this group progresses, and within the six-month timeline that the committee has requested.

Thank you for the statement today, Cabinet Secretary. I was pleased to be part of the Senedd's Health and Social Care Committee, which published the recommendations that you've referred to today. I certainly welcome your approach to the committee's recommendations as well, and I am also grateful to receive the briefing that you referenced today as from officials and staff from the Welsh ambulance service.

I'm sure we'll all agree in the Chamber here that ambulance response times aren't where they should be, and it's also fair to acknowledge that the most recent numbers show that 50.4 per cent of red calls received that response, which you mentioned, within eight minutes in October, which is an improvement on the numbers from September. But, of course, it is still well below the 65 per cent response time target for red calls to arrive within eight minutes, and, indeed, this target has not been met since the summer of 2020. We're aware, of course, COVID was rife at that point, but we all too often hear those horror stories of seemingly endless waits for ambulances and then endless waits when those ambulances actually get to hospital. There's certainly an inconsistency across Wales with both of those issues as well.

We heard of a reporter who waited eight hours with her father, who had a stroke, parked at Grange University Hospital in Cwmbrân, with upwards of 15 ambulances, or the injured rugby player in Carmarthenshire recently who waited for an ambulance for six hours, when the hospital was only a few miles away. I'm sure, Cabinet Secretary, you'd acknowledge that these are intolerable situations, not just for those impacted directly, but their families and healthcare professionals who are trying to support in those situations as well. So, I support much of your statement today because it's absolutely right that improvements are found, and that the appropriateness of existing frameworks are reviewed to understand where the right changes can be made and ensure that clinical evidence with best outcomes for patients is central for this review.

I do, though, think it's really important—and I hope you'll be able to respond on this point—that we have clear targets in place to ensure there's proper accountability and transparency, because, indeed, any potential changes to targets can be concerning in themselves, because, of course, meeting targets shouldn't be seen as a pinnacle, but a base from which to build, and any change in target system could be seen as Welsh Government trying to get out of achieving the high standards that the people we represent expect to be met. So, I'd appreciate, Cabinet Secretary, if you could outline your continued support of the right clear targets for the same purpose of both accountability, transparency, but also for performance improvement as well.

You mentioned in your statement, Cabinet Secretary, that a big part of the challenge remains within areas outside of the ambulance service's control. I would suggest most of the challenges remain outside of the ambulance service's control, and especially handovers at emergency departments, ambulances just sitting on the tarmac and unable to move patients on to the next phase of care. It's not what the ambulance service want to do, it's not what patients want to have, and I'm sure it's not what you want to see either, Cabinet Secretary.

Indeed, the chief executive of the Welsh ambulance service said in that committee meeting earlier this year that

'the single biggest challenge...which emerges from the pressure across the rest of the urgent and emergency care system, is one of handover delays at the emergency department.'

And as that quote demonstrates, tackling this will take a whole-health-system approach, including, of course, social care; it's not isolated just to ambulances. So, Cabinet Secretary, I wonder if you could expand on the plans that you have in formulating a plan with the Minister for social care to make sure the entire flow is functioning efficiently and effectively, so those ambulances aren't having to wait around for those handovers for unnecessary lengths of time.

So, to finish, Deputy Presiding Officer, I've said in this Chamber before about the importance of long-term thinking, and I think this is the perfect example of a policy area that really needs that. That link between health and social care is not just difficult for health systems here in Wales, but across the world, and I'm sure, Cabinet Secretary, you'd accept that this is a good place to start in your description and your statement here today, but there needs to be that clear, long-term plan, including investment in technology, workforce planning, collaboration across health boards and service providers, and an enhanced public communication, as well as monitoring of performances, so that we all can see the ambulance service that we want to see, that you want to see, and that the ambulance service wants to provide for residents across Wales. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

I thank Sam Rowlands for the questions and for taking the time to attend the briefing earlier today, which I hope he found helpful. I would associate myself with the phrase that he used in relation to the examples that he gave of those individuals being in intolerable situations, which is actually entirely the reason for the approach that I've set out in this statement.

I just want to say, I accept the challenge that he sets out, which is the need for a long-term approach. I think, in the context of the particular target that we're looking at, it was originally introduced 50 years ago this year, and the change in technology, in the range of services that can be provided in different settings, and in the blend and mix of demand over 50 years has obviously been enormous. So, I think, when we look at a target that's based on 65 per cent of a pool that, when the target was set in 2015, was a third of the size it is today, it's pretty astonishing that the level of performance is as it is. Obviously it is not sufficient, but if you look at the broad context for it, that suggests there is a high level of performance against a very challenging context. But the task that I'm describing in the statement today is how we can make sure that the current approach, the current set of targets that we set, continue to be appropriate.

I do want to say it's very important that this step is taken on the back of a specific recommendation from the committee. And I don't think the Member was saying this, but I just want to be clear: we cannot have a debate about targets where any attempt to look at a target comes with an inference that the Government is seeking to avoid accountability. I mean, that way lies madness. The health service is hedged around with dozens of targets. There is not a shortage of targets in the system. But if we are to have an honest discussion about performance in the health and care systems, we have to apply that rigour to how we look at the priorities that we set and the targets against which we measure performance. So, I think it's really helpful in this setting to be able to have an open discussion about that, and I hope that that's what he was inviting me to do.

I think he's right to say that, obviously, a number of the pressures the ambulance service is under, as it relates to the timeliness, if you like, of its response, is the product of other pressures in the system, and he is right to say that far too many ambulance resources as it were, both in terms of time and vehicle resources and human resources, staff resources, are tied up in delayed handovers, and we absolutely recognise that that needs to be a focus. We've reissued the guidance in relation to hospital handovers. We've provided, I think, this year, £180 million of additional funding to improve handover and flow. We continue to report on the targets that we set for the service, which enables you to hold us and health boards to account.

So, the work of this group specifically will be looking at the targets, but the Member will know that other work that we have under way, whether it's the Getting It Right First Time programme or the work of the performance ministerial advisory group, will have a bearing on this. And there's the 50-day challenge that we have set for health boards and local authorities and which is being grasped by the system. All of those have different impacts on handover and on flow, and so I think this is one piece of a much larger jigsaw.

The problems with the ambulance service are obvious for all to see. Only 50 per cent of emergency responses to red calls are arriving within eight minutes—far short of the 65 per cent target that, for practical purposes, has been ornamental for most of the past five years. These missed targets are of course a reflection of chronic handover delays; whereas the average handover period is supposed to be 15 minutes, the current average is in excess of two hours. The cumulative impact was 260,000 hours being lost to handover delays at emergency departments last year. The current Cabinet Secretary for finance suggested in the early summer that productivity gains could be achieved by cutting funding to the ambulance service. Does the Cabinet Secretary for health agree with his colleague, and is this something that we should expect to see in this year's budget?

These recurrent delays in response times are a symptom of a far wider problem, namely that the entire machinery of the healthcare system, all the way from A&E to community care, is clogged by capacity issues, inefficiencies and poorly aligned resourcing. How are ambulances expected to transfer their patients quickly when the availability of NHS beds has contracted substantially in recent years, and how are hospitals supposed to free up bed space when our social care sector is simply ill-equipped to meet current demand and is insufficiently aligned with the front line? The Cabinet Secretary said earlier in his response to Sam Rowlands that it was a high level of achievement in extremely difficult circumstances. So, we need solutions to those difficult circumstances, which we haven't had so far.

So, we desperately need a holistic approach to tackling this fundamental gridlock in the operation of the health system, appropriately balanced between the primary and secondary sectors. I appreciate this change won't happen overnight, so in the meantime, there needs to be a renewed focus on measures that could ease pressures in the short term. Patient offload departments, PODs, have been introduced in certain health boards, such as in Aneurin Bevan, to compensate for a lack of immediately available beds, providing a clinically safe area for ambulance patients to be transferred while awaiting formal referral to the hospital. Could the Cabinet Secretary confirm if we can expect further roll-outs of PODs across Wales, and whether this is something that the Government is actively recommending to health boards as a contingency option for peak-demand periods?

Finally, we know that rural communities are more likely than urban areas to face response delays. So, I'd be grateful for his views on how regional disparities in response times are being considered within the context of this taskforce review and the actions being taken by the Welsh Government in aiming to narrow this rural/urban gap.

I thank the Member for his welcome for the review. The reason the statement focuses on the review rather than the range of issues that the Member covered in his questions is because that's what we are announcing today, and that is what responds to the point that the committee specifically asked us to take into account, so I hope that he understands and appreciates the context for that.

I think the questions that the Member set out illustrates, I think, very well the interdependence of the system, and that, as I was saying in my last response to Sam Rowlands, this is one piece of a much larger landscape. And I think actually seeing the full picture is important.

I think what I would say on the point the Member makes in relation to bed space: I do think we have to, in the long-term lens that Members rightly encourage us to apply and which we see very much ourselves as the way of looking at reform in the health service—. I think if the solution to that continues to be the context of bed space, we will not fully be able to transform the service into the kind of service that we need in order to support people in the best way possible. So, actually, what we need to make sure—and his last question was I think aiming at this, really—is that the services aren't designed simply to draw people into hospital, and we need to make sure that more services can be accessed either in a primary setting, or very often in a community setting. And so the kind of initiative that he's talking about, and that's funded by funding that the Welsh Government has provided for the six goals programme is a good example of that. And he will have heard me say, probably ad nauseam, in the time that I've become Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care, that I think there is good innovation and good practice happening in different health boards. The task is to universalise those, and, actually, what I would say is that that challenge is being grasped, in the sense of people understanding where good performance is in the system and trying new approaches. And I think it is incumbent on us to encourage that, but also to recognise that that won't always succeed, and to allow space for people to learn from where those initiatives aren't always successful. I just think that's an important part of the culture that we need to try to nurture.

It is true to say that ambulance patient handover times are far too long. I'm not happy with that level of performance in the system. Reducing those delays is a key priority for the health service. It's set out clearly in our planning framework. As I mentioned earlier, we've published our new handover guidance. The NHS Wales Executive will monitor and audit compliance with that guidance throughout the course of the next year proactively to make sure it's being specifically followed, and, indeed, this comes on the top of the additional funding that we provided to the system this year in relation both to handover, but also to flow more generally.

I would say—he was inviting me to comment on the approach to reform in the ambulance service itself—I think we see good initiatives being undertaken by the ambulance service, recruiting new clinical navigators that enable us to provide more appropriate care to those people waiting for an ambulance. There has been funding to increase recruitment within the service specifically, so I think there is good practice in the ambulance service itself, but, as I think a number of the questions have been pointing towards, there are factors outside the control of the ambulance service that often are a considerable part of the challenge.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for your statement. Due to the number of concerns I've had raised with me by constituents recently, I arranged to meet with the chief executive of WAST last week. Clearly, ambulance response times are not where we would want them to be, and it is good to see the Health and Social Care Committee's report being given this level of recognition. Refreshingly, the chief executive stated he didn't want more money; he really focused on the positive actions he and the organisation have taken to improve efficiency. We spoke about the rapid clinical screening that you referred to in your statement. Having clinicians inside control rooms I think is absolutely right to target reducing harm and make sure people who are genuinely a red call receive the correct service. We do need the right systems in place.

Our paramedics, I'm sure, are frustrated when they can't do their job properly because of handover delays, so it is absolutely vital we get that end-to-end process with improvement. Patients don't want to be sitting in ambulances, waiting to get into emergency departments, but neither do they want to be sitting in emergency departments, waiting to go to the right ward. What they want is to go home as soon as possible. So, could you please outline whether this group will have a holistic approach—I think that's very much needed—and will also be looking at patient flow, which others have raised with you, alongside the appropriateness of ambulance targets? Diolch.

I thank the Member for that question, and I was very interested to hear the discussion that she had with the ambulance service itself. I think that focus on remote management of patients' needs, an increasing role for clinicians in the control room and in that triage process, the greater roles for advanced paramedic practitioners as well—so, there are a range of interventions happening within the ambulance service.

She's right to mention flow in hospitals as being a critical part of this, and absolutely right to say that we need to have a holistic view of what are often interconnected challenges in the health service. So, the role of this particular group will be to look at the target itself, but we will look at the work in the context of the Getting It Right First Time analysis that has been undertaken, and also the work of the performance group and other initiatives, to have that holistic picture about how we can improve flow through the system.

I think it's also worth recognising that it was the busiest October for attendances at emergency departments generally, and, actually, the level of admissions to hospital was down on last year, indicating that people are being treated other than by being admitted to hospital, despite the very significant increase in demand at emergency. So, that suggests to me that there are initiatives happening in the emergency departments that are beginning to bear fruit, but the challenge then remains the context in the hospital overall when flow isn't working sufficiently well. Those initiatives at the emergency department level aren't able to respond to that larger challenge.

Thank you for your statement, Cabinet Secretary. In 2021, at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, 55 per cent of ambulances in Wales reached life-threatening emergencies within the eight-minute target. Even during that crisis, response times were better than what we see today. By 2023, that figure fell to 50.4 per cent, and this year dropped to a shocking 48 per cent. But this isn't just about statistics, it's about lives at stake, families left waiting in fear while precious seconds tick by. Instead of improvement, we're witnessing decline. You say it's relative, so, Cabinet Secretary, can you tell us in concrete terms in which year, if any, you expect Wales to finally reach the modest target of 65 per cent of ambulances reaching emergencies within eight minutes? With today's numbers and challenges, you say it's relative. And things need to improve far more than where they currently stand. The system needs to get moving, so what timescales have you set that you feel will show a significant difference in response times from the decisions you're taking now? Thank you.

Well, the whole point of the statement today is to outline how we are looking at whether that target remains appropriate, and, if not, how best to make sure we improve performance. So, in a sense, the statement is the response to the Member's question. I do think it's important to say—. She describes the target as a 'modest' target; there are different approaches in different parts of the UK in relation to how ambulances are required to respond to the most immediately life-threatening situations for individuals. And she's absolutely right to say that we are talking about percentages and times, but, actually, this is about individuals needing support. There isn't really an equivalent in any part of the UK to the approach that we take in Wales, but you could say that the target over our border is—. Whether you'd say it was more or less modest is a matter of judgment, but it's about 90 per cent within 15 minutes. So, it's a very different approach. And so I think looking at different approaches in different parts of the UK and internationally is a really important aspect of this.

At the heart of it, though, is making sure that those people who have the most life-threatening needs get the fastest response, and so I think it's absolutely right that we should look at a category that has trebled since the target, even in its current form, was introduced in 2015, and look to see what's going on there. Because, naturally, if you're waiting as part of a pool of patients that is three times the size, then, if you're at the more acute end of that range of need, you're likely to be getting a less speedy response than if the target was more narrowly focused. So, that's why it needs to be a clinically led review. That's really what this is about: what are the clinical requirements of individuals and how can we make sure that we match the speed of response to the very most urgent needs.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Thank you for the statement. I welcome it, but I'd argue that it doesn't quite go far enough and stops short of the major surgery and investment that's needed within the ambulance service. This cannot be looked at in isolation, for the whole health system, with the lack of capacity in our hospitals, hinders the ambulance service when they're not able to offload patients.

The experience of a constituent over the weekend sums up how broken the system currently is. A man woke up in the early hours of Saturday morning, suffering from acute stomach and chest pains. His distressed wife called for an ambulance and impressed upon the call handler the seriousness of he situation, only to be told that there was no ambulance available. She was promised a call back from a clinician. In the meantime, she called her son for help and, fortunately, they were able to get to the hospital. When they arrived in the Health hospital shortly after 5 a.m., the man was immediately attended to by a cardiac team, who provided a gold standard of treatment and he was fitted with a stent within an hour. Excellent service once they got there. If they'd waited for the ambulance, or waited for the call back, that didn't happen until after 11 a.m., a full eight hours after the call was initially made. So, could I ask you, Cabinet Secretary, what can you say to that family about the person who had the heart attack over the weekend, and other families who've been let down by the service? Is this what we expect the ambulance service to be in 2024? How long before the outcomes are going to be better for our constituents? And are you confident that the approach that you're taking will work?

On that patient's experience, I'm very sorry to hear that and it's obviously completely unacceptable. What I hope they will hear me say today is that we are taking action to make sure that the way we measure the performance of the ambulance service enables those in the most acute need to get the fastest response. And I've accepted the recommendations that the health committee have made in full, because I think it's important for us to have that thorough review of how we measure performance. And the reason for that is, if the pool of people to which we require the ambulance service to respond most quickly has expanded as dramatically as it has, for reasons that, often, aren't about an increase in the number of people with life-threatening situations, then we have to test whether that remains appropriate, because the consequence of that could be that those with the most acute need are not getting the fastest possible response, and that's obviously what we want to see, and I know that's what the Member wishes to see as well.

I also want to make very clear my deep and heartfelt thanks to our emergency services, Natural Resources Wales, to our local authorities and the many others who have worked tirelessly to minimise the impacts on communities where possible. I know that many communities across the country have rallied together to work alongside key agencies and to support each other in the collective response efforts. This work, in the very hardest of circumstances, to minimise the impacts on communities wherever possible, is of the utmost importance.

Throughout the weekend and this week, my officials and Natural Resources Wales have been working very closely with local resilience forums, as well as with counterparts in UK Government, to ensure a co-ordinated response. The full details of impact across Wales are, of course, still emerging, and my officials remain in contact with local authorities. But, as of midday today, local authorities have reported internal flooding to at least 433 properties in total. That’s 125 in Rhondda Cynon Taf, 90 in Merthyr, 75 in Blaenau Gwent, at least 50 in Monmouth, 50 in Caerphilly, 15 in Torfaen, six in Powys, six in Carmarthenshire, three in Bridgend, three in Flintshire, two in Cardiff and one in Neath Port Talbot.

I know the impacts of storm Bert have been more widespread too, including on our road and our rail networks. The Cabinet Secretary for Transport and North Wales visited the north Wales traffic control centre yesterday to understand the impacts across the road and rail network and follow their work to get the transport network moving once again.

My thoughts are also with those residents affected by the landslip in Cwmtillery, which I know has been frightening for many people and for families. I have seen this slip up close. This incident absolutely highlights the importance of our work on disused tips and why we always need to be pushing to do more. Coal tip safety is crucial. I will shortly introduce legislation with the primary objective of ensuring safety and protecting people. The legislation will set up a new public body and introduce a consistent and a robust system of assessment, categorisation, registration, management, monitoring and oversight of disused tips in Wales. We will also continue to work closely with the UK Government following their recent announcement confirming £25 million for coal tip safety in the autumn budget. We are absolutely committed to improving coal tip safety across Wales, and this funding, along with the incoming legislation, are very important steps towards doing so.

I also know a significant number of customers in Rhondda Cynon Taf have also been affected by a boil notice issued by Dŵr Cymru. Dŵr Cymru are working as swiftly as possible to return service to their customers, and, in the meantime, I'm grateful for their work to ensure that alternative supplies are available. And I appreciate that an immediate priority for affected households will be some clarity around the emergency support that Welsh Government can provide.

In terms of any emergency funding support, in the first instance I encourage Members here to signpost their constituents who are experiencing a financial crisis with no other means of support to the Welsh Government's discretionary assistance fund. Under this fund, if an individual has experienced a flood in their home and is experiencing severe financial hardship, they may be eligible for an emergency assistance payment grant to help with essential costs after an emergency. And further information on the fund is available on the Welsh Government website.

But furthermore, the First Minister confirmed today that, as we did in the aftermath of storm Dennis, Welsh Government will provide funding to eligible local authorities to provide immediate financial support to those whose homes have been flooded. We recognise that there are many immediate practical needs for people in such awful circumstances, so we will be funding councils to provide grants of £500 and £1,000 to affected households. And to return to those customers in RCT impacted by Dŵr Cymru's boil notice, I welcome the confirmation by Dŵr Cymru that they will be offering £150 to all customers affected. Dirprwy Lywydd, as I walked in today, as an update for Members here, Dŵr Cymru has just announced support packages for businesses affected by the boil water notice of £300, and up to £2,500 discretionary funds where loss of goods or profits exceed this.

More broadly, I know that many people have questions around the forecasting of the storm events and the extent of the warnings that were put in place. Let me say that there is always an element of uncertainty in predicting the severity of weather events, but timely and accurate warnings based on how rivers are responding are crucial to helping people and businesses be as well prepared as possible. So, I have already said that we and agencies will of course be looking at what lessons can be learnt, including on flood warnings. Our local authorities, emergency services and Natural Resources Wales are of course currently very much in response mode. But once we move past the active response phase, it will be important for all partners to review the preparation for and the response to storm Bert, so that all lessons can be learnt and we can improve our response in the future.

The events of the weekend underscore why continued investment in flood infrastructure is absolutely critical, especially as climate change continues to make these extreme weather events more and more frequent. Indeed, since 2021, this Government has provided risk management authorities with nearly £300 million to invest in flood risk management in Wales. This funding is making a real difference on the ground and in communities. It means floodgates, culverts, trash screens and much more beside. This is why this year, despite immense pressure on public finances, Welsh Government has maintained our record levels of funding and has provided over £75 million to flood risk management authorities right across Wales. This includes, by the way, £9.7 million capital and £4.95 million revenue funding for local authorities, £22 million capital and £24.5 million revenue for Natural Resources Wales.

And whilst the impacts of storm Bert have largely centred inland, we are also prioritising investment along our coastline. On top of our annual flood programme, we invest approximately £290 million in new coastal defences from our coastal risk management programme. This will benefit over 14,000 properties in Wales.

In saying all of this, Dirprwy Lywydd, I recognise that this is going to be of little comfort to people whose homes and businesses were impacted over this weekend. But this impact is exactly why this investment continues to be so important.

Can I thank you, Minister, for being so quick to bring a statement here today? Sometimes in the past we've had to raise urgent questions when we've had incidents such as this, and I was about to submit one and I was really pleased when I heard that you were bringing a statement anyway. Thank you, it does make a lot of difference to everyone.

I wish to put on record my thoughts with all those affected, my prayers to the family of Mr Brian Perry, the gentleman who sadly lost his life in my constituency, and my thanks to residents who all got together and worked within the local community alongside our emergency services. With some areas recording over 100 mm of rainfall, the storm prompted severe flood warnings, including significant risk to life in parts of the country. And as mentioned last night, 80 per cent of the normal rain in November fell in a period of just 48 hours. And we know now, don't we, I think we're more mindful of these flooding incidents when they name them? I can remember Ciara and Dennis and other named floods that have affected our communities.

And when you mention the sadness of 433 properties affected across Wales, there are other properties and property owners who I know now, in my own constituency, who say, 'When we get heavy rain, we don't sleep; we worry that we're going to be next.' So, it's the impact on people who may have not been affected this time in terms of their property, but mentally and emotionally, it really does take its toll. None of us know here just when the next storm will come, how severe it will be and how it's going to affect our communities. 

In addition to the human cost, of course, the storm wreaked havoc on our infrastructure and our transport networks. Major roads and railway lines remain blocked by floodwater, fallen trees and landslides. Now, I know you mentioned about the £300 million and some of that is floodgates. I still worry about the flooding resilience that we do have in our local communities because, quite often, I will have residents saying to me, 'I want to buy my own floodgate. That's something I want to do to protect my property.' They never know—. I refer them to the local authority, who say, 'It's not something we do, give advice on floodgates.' And I just wondered whether part of these flooding forums and flooding resilience teams, whether all year round now there can be some kind of guidance, advice given to those home owners who want to do their own bit to try and protect their property.

Of course, the main rail artery was closed between Abergavenny and Hereford due to a landslip, and roads are similarly flooded in Wales. And then of course, we had the tragic landslide of the coal tip and everything. That, again, is something that I'd never thought I'd hear in this Chamber again, that there'd been such landslides like that. So, it emphasises the concerns we've raised in this Senedd in the past about coal tip safety. And again, there will be people now worried, 'Well, it didn't happen to me this time, how safe is the coal tip near where I live?'

The response to storm Bert has reignited calls for a dedicated flood agency and a comprehensive review of our own flood management policies. Now, you will be aware, Cabinet Secretary, that we on these benches have maintained that after such large incidents as this, we believe there should be an independent review because, at the moment, you're relying on local authorities, NRW and the section 219s, which take absolutely months and months and months to come to fruition. And people want answers to questions. They want to be sure when it starts raining again, like a heavy tap, that lessons have been learned from every single flooding incident. And I don't know how you can do that without an actual independent review.

The parallels with storm Dennis in 2020 are striking and concerning. And I know earlier that mention was made that the properties are going to get between £500 and £1,000. Well, I have to tell you, the kind of works needed on properties after severe floods is quite high. I mean, in 2021, £45,000 was spent on one house. We know that construction costs, we know that renovation costs, refurbishment costs are a lot higher now in 2024 than they were in 2020, and so I just wonder whether that kind of money is enough.

Janet, I'm going to ask you to conclude, because I have many Members wishing to speak.

Yes, I'm coming to the end. Storm Bert is a stark reminder that Wales cannot afford to delay, for without decisive action, it will be our Welsh communities who continue to bear the brunt of these horrific disasters. And I'm very happy to work with you, Cabinet Secretary, on any groups you want to get together, because I think this affects us all, and maybe we can work together on that. Thank you. Diolch yn fawr.

Janet, thank you very much indeed, and can I echo that message? Our thoughts go out to the family and friends of Brian Perry, who lost his life in north Wales, but also to those others across the UK who also, tragically, have lost their lives as well.

You are right in saying that the intensity of this was quite something to behold for anybody who was affected by this or who saw what was happening in our rivers, particularly in our narrow valleys, but in other parts of Wales as well. In parts of the south Wales Valleys, the intensity of the deluge exceeded storm Dennis in localities. That's why in places like the Taff running through the centre of Pontypridd, the river there was rising by 30 cm every 15 minutes at the height of this, and that, I suspect, will be one of the things that the agencies want to look at in terms of the warnings and the alerts. Because the speed at which that river was rising probably, I suspect, but we'll have to do this calmly, might well have been outstripped by the sheer rise of it, of that river.

You're very right, by the way, in terms of the community resilience piece, which strikes me as—. We tried—well, we've succeeded, we've maintained, over the last few years, record funding in flood investment, but that's not only big schemes, it goes down to the very local level. So, at local authority level, massive investment in, for example, gullies and culverts, video monitoring of those gullies, so you don't go out when it hits—and I'm looking at a former council leader sitting directly behind you—but you can see it in advance and you go out before; you see the weather forecast coming, and that meant that many properties were actually saved as a result of that. So, we learnt lessons the last time round.

It is also the investment in things like individual property resilience for householders and businesses. So, the First Minister and I were on Mill Street, one of the worst affected areas for businesses in Pontypridd, yesterday. I was there, actually, the morning after the floods happened and I saw the immediate aftermath. There was a coffee shop that was already serving, to some of the volunteers who were cleaning up outside, coffees and teas. Because, on the back of the lessons we learnt last time, they'd invested in simple things like a floodgate on their door that fitted properly, also raising the electrics up, so they were higher on the walls so it didn't short his electrics out, all his machinery was saved, and the type of flooring that you don't have to rip up again. So, they'd mopped up, and 24 hours later, when the First Minister and I went back, it was fully open for business. Now, there were other businesses along there that hadn't been able to avail themselves of the same things, so we need to look at those, and I know all our local authorities—. So, it's big and small investments.

The other piece, actually, is community resilience, making sure that every community is supporting each other. So, it's not only the agencies and so on, and the emergency response, but when we see rivers rising rapidly, when we see the threat coming, then literally working together. And I've seen that today, when I was up in Skenfrith, a community that has been devastated, but has worked together to take property up to the next floor, to help older people in the community to do it. Tremendous. That needs to be happening right across the piece.

But let me just say, I mean, some of the lessons that we learnt since the last event, if you look purely within the Pontypridd area, we've had big schemes, such as the Castle Inn bridge replacement, the Ynysangharad War Memorial Park footbridge replacement, which I saw yesterday, the Hopkinstown river wall repairs, the Berw Road river wall repair, the Castle Inn river wall repair,

river wall repair, Hopkinson pump replacement. We've invested the big stuff but also some of the small stuff. So, this is of no benefit whatsoever to those people who have had the tragedy of having their homes and businesses, but what we have done, I can guarantee, is we have saved hundreds of homes and businesses because of the lessons we learnt last time and the investment we made. Now, we've got to see what lessons do we learn this time and how can we go further.

The thoughts of everyone in this Chamber will be with the family of Brian Perry, who lost his life so tragically on the River Conwy. Dirprwy Lywydd, we all extend our sympathies to everyone who loved him.

In south Wales, hundreds of homes have been hit again by flooding, and the devastation caused by storm Bert has left communities in crisis. Alongside feelings of anger and fear, there is one of disbelief and horror that this could happen again, because so many of the streets and houses affected by this flood were devastated by storm Dennis just four years ago. We were assured then that lessons would be learnt, but here we are, hearing the same accounts of delayed flood warnings, inadequate preparation, and preventable damage. Why weren't those lessons learnt? Why did residents receive the flood warnings so late, when water was already in their homes? Did communication failures within any agency contribute to this failure to warn people of the destruction that was on its way? Because NRW monitors river levels and rainfall, it issues warnings. Something surely has gone seriously wrong. Flood defences and warning systems clearly didn't work well enough in every place. I'd ask what specific measures the Government has taken, please, since storm Dennis, to improve resilience and to set out why the Government thinks that those measures have not worked this time in every instance.

Emergency funding will be welcome, but what these communities need is a guarantee that that financial assistance will reach them with urgency, that infrastructure will be repaired and upgraded, that at-risk areas will receive investment to prevent this devastation happening again. Would the Government provide an urgent funding package for flood forums in at-risk areas? Now, I heard the First Minister say in the press that we can't protect every person's home. That will leave so many people in utter desperation, because many people can't move from these properties. Many people's homes, or their businesses, they can't get insurance because they're on flood plains. So, what support, please, can be given to those people who cannot leave these properties?

Finally, the coal tip that slipped at Cwmtillery should have sent shockwaves all the way to Westminster. We have warned them about the risk these tips pose to our communities, these tips that remind us how we were exploited. Now, only £25 million was promised to us from the UK Government in its budget for clearing those tips. That's a fraction of the £600 million that's needed. This weekend has shown that we no longer have the luxury of waiting for Westminster to find its conscience with these tips. Our communities cannot stand another near miss. It was a category D tip; we knew it was high risk, but it still wasn't secure against the storm.

Now, I commend the quick thinking of firefighters, who may well have saved people's lives. They certainly have saved people from injury and from pain. I commend everyone who's been involved in the clear up. But, I'd ask whether you are now reassessing how quickly we'll need to clear the tips, and if your Government will be demanding more from Keir Starmer's Treasury, because how else can we reassure people living in the shadow other tips that future storms won't bring them down too? 

Now, the First Minister said earlier that she'd requested £25 million from Westminster. The cost of clearing one tip at Tylorstown alone stands at £20 million, as I understand it. Now, if that's just the cost of addressing one tip, when we have hundreds of high-risk tips, I'd ask what assessment you are making at the moment about, given what's happened in recent days, how urgently we'll need to press for further funding from Westminster, and whether funding in full for this is what you'd ask for. Again, this was a storm that—lots of people are saying it's unprecedented, but it wasn't unprecedented, of course, but the destruction to

the destruction to the coal tip is something that people had not been expecting. We need to make sure that our communities and people in our communities feel safe. Diolch yn fawr.

Delyth, thank you so much, and again I'd echo the thoughts that you conveyed and the prayers you conveyed to those who've lost their lives here in Wales—Brian Perry— but also across the UK. And if we remember back across previous flood events, we have seen this before. When I was involved in the response to the Cumbria floods back in 2008, there were lives lost there of people who were involved in the emergency response, and it is deeply tragic, and the impact on their families is so significant.

You ask what lessons have been learned. In response to the previous question, I laid out that actually we have learnt significantly from the aftermath of storm Dennis, and not just the investment but also the working with local communities, so we have made many—a myriad—of investments, small and great. Some of those have been massive, hard engineering responses, which have helped by the way to protect many hundreds of homes that were previously flooded, so the scale of impact this time has been much less. That is no commiseration whatsoever to those who have been affected, but it has certainly meant that we have protected many more people in the south Wales Valleys and elsewhere as well. Some of those things, by the way, are not even seen. So, the investment that has been done by local authorities in things like gullies and culverts is hidden away, but having those gullies clear and the video monitoring on them and the teams going out well in advance of the weather hitting has meant that those homes haven't been flooded.

But you rightly raise the issue of the flood alerts. Let me be clear again: it wasn't just the Taff that rose just short of 0.33m every 15 minutes at the height of it, but other rivers as well. There are narrow river valleys, and there is an issue here as well about what we do wider up in the catchment, about holding the water back. But when it hits, it is coming straight down those valleys, and those rivers rise, and they fall, as we saw. They fall very rapidly as well. But in so doing, they damage properties all the way along. So, we do need to, and I'm glad that the Met Office and NRW have said that they will look at have they got the sensitivity right, and I think it's important they do that, to reflect the different topographies. So, if you look at places that have also experienced flooding, in the areas around Cirencester and so on, it's slow-moving rivers and many hours of warning that this is coming your way. In some of the south Wales Valleys and other parts of Wales, you were talking about change by the half hour, change by the hour. So, there is an issue to look at there. I'm glad they're going to look at it.

Just to say as well, the First Minister and I will be meeting next week, not only just with the local authority leaders, but also the flood resilience forum members, including emergency services, NRW and others—everybody involved. It's not that we have a full analysis of what lessons we learn going forward, but we'll be able to take stock right now and say, 'What do we now know?' so that we can act, and I think this goes to the heart of what we need to do. It's action—the same as we did after storm Dennis. 'What do we now do next?' But there is a hard reality here. Faced with the intensity of the weather incidents we're now having, and the frequency of them, and the sheer deluge capacity of them, I don't think we can honestly promise to everybody in Wales that we will always be able to foresee and to defend every single flooding incident. It's not a reality. What we can do is work with them, one to give them the resilience, and secondly to get people back on their feet very rapidly.

You mentioned about the aspects of the flood forum. We've already, curiously, in respect of an appeal that was made for investment in the national flood forum in Clydach Terrace—. We recognise the value of the national flood forum and how it can help with the resilience, and the emotional resilience as well, of people. We'll keep that under review going forward. Can I also suggest to people that they look at the NRW website, because that also contains advice and signage and guidance on mental health support by people affected by flooding, as well as how to prepare, but in the aftermath of it, where to actually seek advice and what to do as well?

I think there were other aspects—. In terms of Cwmtillery, there were over 40 homes evacuated. The response was very rapid. The agencies on the ground were exemplary in the way that they responded to it. Those people were in hotels that evening. They were displaced from their homes, but through the night people were working. I spoke to workers who had been there through the night trying to deal with that, and we're trying to get those people

trying to get those people back in their homes as soon as possible, but you are right: we have a shared obligation here in Wales; we will bring forward the legislation; we will add to them the scores of million pounds that we’ve already invested in Wales into the monitoring and the stability of these tips moving forward. But the UK Government has a role to play, and that £25 million, I suspect, we look at the first part of that instalment, we need to bring it down in a way that we can also spend it, and that’s important. We need to actually bring it in a way that we focus on the priorities, where the investment is, and spend that money, but we’ll continue to work with the UK Government to make sure that we have additional funding coming forward as well. This isn’t a wake-up call; we’ve had wake-up calls before and we need to work together across the UK now to make sure all our communities are safe in their homes at night.

Cabinet Secretary, I also thank all the emergency workers, council workers and all the volunteers who came out in Rhondda Cynon Taff to support residents and communities during the recent flooding. Can I also thank RCT Council for all the work and investment that they have they put in, some £100 million since the storm Dennis floods in 2020. I think investments in culvert renewal monitoring, the new bridges and flood walls clearly had an impact, and I think were it not for that active investment and engagement, many more communities and homes would have been affected; 1,500 homes flooded last night. In many of the areas, the improvements were effective, but sadly, this time, there were still 125 homes that flooded, and for them, this is no consolation and the impact has been devastating.

We do have more lessons to learn and we must now focus on helping those who are flooded to get back into their homes. So, I welcome the £1,000 grants that Rhondda Cynon Taff will be making, and of course I have urged Welsh Government to look at implementing a similar scheme for those residents and for local businesses, so I welcome your announcements of financial support so far.

I’m very glad that most of Pontypridd avoided the scale of the flooding experience last time, but not all, so we do need to look at Mill Street in Pontypridd. We need a new flood wall along the river in Sion Street and Berw Road, and we need to look at what happened in Egypt Street in Pontypridd. Nantgarw avoided serious flooding but it came close. We all recognise that climate change is here with a vengeance and there’s no absolute solution, but there are things we can and we must do to support and to mitigate affected communities. So, will the Minister please perhaps outline again the package of financial support that will be made available to residents, but also whether there will be any financial support that will be considered for local businesses, and what support there might be from for the local council in respect of ongoing capital projects and perhaps new capital projects that will be required from the lessons that we learned from the recent events? Diolch.

Thank you very much and thank you for the time that you spent with me as well, speaking with those affected in your constituency. And yes, Rhondda Cynon Taff have announced their own package of support, which is very welcome. I understand that Merthyr have also said the same. I’m sure that there will be other local authorities who will be similarly minded, but here in Welsh Government, I just want to note my thanks to the First Minister and the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Welsh Language who rapidly responded by putting in place a package indeed for those affected: £500 or £1,000, depending on whether they’re insured or not to try and recognise that but also a package for businesses affected as well to get them back onto their feet.

And going forward: indeed, we’ve maintained that record level of funding for communities to protect them against floods. We will keep that investment going. There are many projects in the pipeline already, but it won’t all be the huge ones that we see, although many of those within Pontypridd are actually saved properties, and saved householders, but it will also be those many small investments that actually keep the water flowing away from the towns, that people will never see, but actually local authorities are getting on doing because of the funding we’re putting in place. So, I would urge all Members to keep engaged with their local resilience forums which operate all the way across Wales, work with constituents, explain the priorities of those constituents so that those are reflected then in the investment that goes into your communities, because this won’t be the last time we see traumatic weather incidents.

weather incidents.

Sadly, I think we can all agree here that the flooding that we witnessed on the weekend has been particularly devastating, especially in my home town of Pontypridd, and I'd like to take this opportunity to express my heartfelt sympathies to all those families and businesses affected. I do not wish to make this political, and I am immensely impressed by the work that you have been doing, Cabinet Secretary, but it is now clear that the response from the Welsh Government after storm Dennis in 2020 was, indeed, inadequate and there has been very little learnt.

In the review that followed that flooding, RCT council was praised as having been successful in progressing post-event actions and recommendations, but I think that this is misleading, given the events that we have witnessed over the weekend, and will provide little comfort to the residents and business owners who have had their homes and shops ruined. Storm Dennis was categorised as a one in 100-year event and, since no flood defences had been found to have failed during that storm, it was therefore concluded that existing flood defence infrastructure at RCT11 remained in accordance with current indicative standards. Given that, in just four years, another storm has been equally as devastating, how will you now categorise storm Bert? Will you provide additional funding to upgrade flood defences in Pontypridd? And do you agree that a literature review of local government section 19 and Natural Resources Wales's reports into extreme flooding in Wales, commissioned by the last Welsh Government, were not appropriate and that what was actually needed was a more comprehensive inquiry to establish how flood defences could have been improved? Thank you.

Joel, thank you for that question, and my point of firm agreement with you is that the investment that we've put in and the properties that we have defended and protected and that have proven successful because of the lessons learnt after storm Dennis is of no solace whatsoever to those who have had their homes and businesses affected. But the reality is that we have protected hundreds upon hundreds of homes throughout Wales in the face of this latest trauma. That is a simple fact, Joel, and it's because of the lessons that we learnt.

The question was raised earlier on, as people have rightly said, about the flood alert system, for example. The flood alert we'll need to review to see how it worked and how it didn't work, and to learn lessons. But, actually, we've invested in probably the most up-to-date multimedia platform for flood alerts in the whole of the UK at the moment here, informed by the latest up-to-date weather systems from the Met Office. But, clearly, the responsiveness to rivers rising at the pace they did, something needs to be now looked at as to the sensitivity of those, as the agencies have acknowledged.

It isn't the question that lessons weren't learnt, we actually got on with it. And that's the key thing: when faced with these sorts of incidents, you then need to actually debrief, review, take forward your section 19 duty, which if Members aren't aware is a duty under the Flood and Water Management Act 2010. I seem to remember being up in Westminster at that time, when that was going through. It puts a statutory duty on authorities to investigate and to report on flooding incidents. But, as I say, we will be meeting with all of the flood resilience forum members next week to review a week on—because we have to give them time; at the moment, they're in the active response still—to see what lessons we can learn now early, and then take the actions, rather than spend months and months reviewing. I think that we can get very, very quickly to where the additional investment is needed in different parts of Wales and also the actions big and small that we need to take, and then get on with it. That's what we did after storm Dennis, that's what we need to do now as well. 

Thank you for today's statement. I'd like to associate myself with all the thanks given, but especially to those volunteers—people who are still out today, having taken time off work to support people in our communities. And thank you for acknowledging the trauma and distress of those affected. They are also angry, and it's very early days. We need more analysis. I am proud, through the co-operation agreement, of the investment that we were able to make, but I am concerned. I hope, like you, that many homes and businesses were saved because of that investment, but I do think that we need to be careful. You and I both know, in terms of Clydach Terrace in Ynysybwl, there has been no investment. They weren't flooded this time. We have to also acknowledge that the storm was different, and we need to better understand why some homes and businesses were impacted so badly last time, why Pontypridd didn't suffer the same level of flood this time, because what you outlined there is just rebuilding walls. There hasn't been further investment in Pontypridd itself to make the town safer. So, we need to better understand. So, I would like to urge the Welsh Government in terms of having caution there. 

In terms of questions, these are the ones posed by residents: for those who were refused flood gates for both businesses and homes and told that it was a once in 100-year event