Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru

I call the National Assembly to order.

The first item on our agenda this afternoon is questions to the First Minister, and the first question is from Paul Davies.

The Welsh Government is working to support the farming industry in Pembrokeshire so that it becomes more profitable and sustainable, and, of course, to ensure that farmers make a profit ultimately.

First Minister, the decision to exit the European Union is going to have a major impact on the agricultural industry, and it’s important that Governments at all levels work together to support our farmers in the future. But there is huge concern among farmers in Pembrokeshire at present about the possibility of introducing a nitrate-vulnerable zone. Because of the decision taken by the people of Britain, and Wales, to leave the European Union, can you tell us where this leaves the consultation that your Government intended to introduce on nitrate-vulnerable zones and whether these plans are to proceed?

That’s ongoing, of course, bearing in mind that the environmental law that has been transposed into Welsh law will remain in place although the UK is to leave the European Union. It will then be an issue for the Welsh Government to decide which laws should be retained ultimately and which would not be retained.

Many farmers in Pembrokeshire and elsewhere in Wales have already diversified into tourism. Given the vote taken on the referendum—and Paul has already mentioned the fact that there is so much uncertainty among farmers now—will the Welsh Government do more to promote tourism and to encourage more farmers to go down that particular route?

It’s true to say that we’ve supported farmers in doing that over the past few years through schemes such as Farming Connect and through the rural development plan. It’s very important that we ensure that all means of making a profit are presented to farmers in order to ensure that their farms are more sustainable.

One of our best known agricultural products in Pembrokeshire, and part of these nitrate-vulnerable zones, is potatoes of course. Pembrokeshire earlies have protected geographical indication status under the current European regime, which allows farmers and producers to sell their produce as something that is unique from a particular area. From what I understand, PGI goes along with membership of the European Union. Does the Government have any plans or any intention to introduce something similar for Wales as we exit the European Union?

It will be crucially important, but it’s uncertain at the moment as to what the situation is. If PGI status were to be lost, that would be a blow not only to Pembrokeshire potatoes, but to lamb. The lamb export market is extremely important, and one of the things that ensures that we can sell across the world is that we can give a guarantee to purchasers that the lamb is from Wales and of the highest quality. The same is true of potatoes. So, if we were to lose that PGI and protected designation of origin status, then we would have to ensure that we would have an equal status in Wales so that buyers could have the same confidence in our produce.

We remain committed to delivering a successful Cardiff capital region city deal. We have not yet had a response from the UK Government, however, in terms of them guaranteeing that the funding element of that deal that comes from European funds would be honoured by them, and that, of course, has a direct impact upon match funding for the city deal.

One of the key planks of the city deal is the metro, which could transform transport services in south Wales and the Valleys. As the First Minister has said, a sizeable amount of the project money has not yet been signed off. What opportunity would the First Minister have to negotiate directly with Europe about the continuation or obtaining the rest of that money?

As things stand, as soon as the United Kingdom leaves the European Union, then access to that funding will end. Now, I’m putting in place a team in Brussels to look at negotiating on Wales’s behalf in parallel with the UK, with the European Commission. But, if the European funding is not made up by the UK Government, then, clearly, that leaves a hole in funding and we will have to revise the plans that we currently have.

Before I come to a question, I was heckled by you last week, and you audibly called me a coward. I would suggest, in future, you behave in a more—

This is a question. This is a question. Ask a question, please, Mr McEvoy.

With respect, I would ask the First Minister to behave more like a First Minister.

Ask your question.

My question is coming now, but my statement remains.

I’ve just chaired a conference on the city deal—

Ask your question.

I am asking my question, with respect, Presiding Officer, if you’ll let me. [Interruption.] I’ve just chaired a conference on the city deal. [Interruption.]

Ask your question, Mr McEvoy.

I’ve just chaired a—

I think we know by now that you’ve just chaired something. Tell us what it is, and ask your question.

There were hundreds of delegates, from the third sector, from Government, yet there was only one person from a local business. My question is: why are local communities and why are local businesses not being included in the city deal? Small businesses are the backbone of this economy and yet their voice is hardly heard. Why is that?

Well, if he chaired it, I’m not surprised that very few businesses were there, I have to say. The reality is that businesses will be a hugely important part of the city deal, and we’ll work with local authorities and businesses to make sure that the benefits of the deal can be maximised.

First Minister, we’ve heard that the metro deal is central to this whole concept. Unfortunately, two weeks ago, I think we realised that there’s a great gulf between areas like Cardiff and the Valleys areas to the north, and this was reflected in the voting pattern. And the metro does give us a chance to integrate the economic future of these two very important parts of the south Wales economy.

I agree very much with that. The concept of the metro is designed to do two things, primarily. First of all, of course, to make it easier for those who have jobs in Cardiff to travel quickly into Cardiff, but also to attract investment away from the coast and further up the Valleys, and to get rid of that perception that our northern Valleys communities are hard to reach. We know that’s not true. We know, with the road schemes that have been put in place already, and we know that, with the metro scheme, we will be able to say to investors that our Valleys communities are connected to the wider economy of south-east Wales and therefore they are communities that should be invested in. And we’re beginning to see the fruits of that with the investment decision by TVR.

Questions now from the party leaders, and first of all this week, the leader of the opposition, Leanne Wood.

Diolch yn fawr. First Minister, the Westminster political system is in crisis, with skulduggery and backstabbing going on in both the Conservative Party and your own party in London. And this has had a major effect on Wales and on our country’s future. Would the First Minister be prepared to have a word with Welsh MPs to tell them to get a grip and to do their job, which is to hold the Conservative Government to account, and to make sure that Wales gets every single penny of the funds that we were promised in the event of a vote to leave the European Union?

Well, I’m not going to pretend to the leader of the opposition that things are stable at Westminster—that’s there for all to see. But I can say, as far as we’re concerned as a Government, we will fight for every single penny that Wales is owed, and I am absolutely confident that all those who represent my party at Westminster will do the same.

First Minister, I’m disappointed that you’re not prepared to show some leadership on this question. If you are not prepared to have a word with your own MPs, perhaps they’re prepared to listen to this message from me: voters in our constituencies want us to be their voice in this difficult time. They want us to tackle the racism that has risen in our communities, they want to get back to work, and they want to see us take our country forward. Now, the last thing they need right now is more division and more in-fighting.

In the public meeting that I did last night in Aberystwyth, First Minister, I heard from a young man whose family has a German background, and they are concerned about their future. They don’t know what rights they will have, they’re worried about reports in the press that their status might well be on the table in negotiations. Now, many children have been asking questions of their parents when they’re in this situation, and parents are finding it very difficult to answer those questions when so much is unknown. Now, I hope that you can cover this more comprehensively in the urgent question later on, but we need to be clear that EU citizens are a net benefit to Wales. We should all say that every single one of them are welcome here and that they shouldn’t have to leave this country if or when Brexit eventually takes place.

First Minister, what reassurances can you give to people living in Wales from other parts of Europe that you will champion them, their rights and their families?

In a way, that gives me the opportunity to answer the urgent question now, which I’m happy to do. I have written to the Home Secretary and I have said to her that, as far as the Welsh Government is concerned, we believe that EU citizens living in the UK should retain the right to do so after the UK withdraws from the EU. She and I are in the same position on that. I believe it’s utterly wrong to use EU citizens living in the UK as a bargaining chip in negotiations; it makes it sound as if they are hostages. They are not hostages; they are welcome in Wales.

I thank you for that answer, First Minister. Now, in a different meeting that I attended yesterday in Cardiff, I heard from a representative of one of the sectors that will be heavily affected by the Brexit vote. We were told that the further education and skills sector could lose £760 million of future funding if that money isn’t replaced. If and when that funding doesn’t materialise, the young people who are most affected will be those who are furthest away from the employment market. That’s just one sector of Welsh civic society, and it shows how important our EU membership is and the benefits that are there and that they shouldn’t just be discarded.

Do you agree with me that those voices from civic society deserve to be heard when the Brexit terms are negotiated, and will you draw up an official Welsh negotiating position, to be agreed by this National Assembly and sent to the incoming UK Prime Minister? And, if you are unable to hold the new Tory leader in Westminster to account for the promises that were made in the EU referendum campaign, can you tell us how those apprenticeship places, the training courses and the back-to-work schemes that are currently benefiting some of the most disadvantaged people in some of the most disadvantaged communities in Wales will be available to those people in the future?

First of all, she’s right to point out the funding gap that would exist. Secondly, she and I have discussed the issue of what the negotiating stance should be and I’m quite happy to share it with the Chamber: that is, first, that we will explore every possible avenue of benefit to Wales; secondly, I’ve already asked the economy Secretary to announce a series of measures to protect jobs and maintain economic confidence and stability and he has produced that. Yesterday, the environment and rural affairs secretary and I met key figures from Wales’s environment and agriculture and fisheries sectors to discuss the implications of the UK’s decision to leave the European Union. But, I have to say that there is a duty on those who called for the UK to leave the EU to ensure that the promises that they made in terms of funding for Wales are honoured. I have to say that the evidence of that now is getting thinner by the day. The question is: were the Welsh public told the truth before the referendum or is the truth emerging now?

The leader of the UKIP group, Neil Hamilton.

I’m sure the First Minister is aware that there is no question of EU citizens currently living or working in the United Kingdom being used as bargaining chips in any renegotiation, because their rights are fully protected under the 1969 Vienna convention. Can the First Minister confirm to me that that is the case?

Well, I can only quote what the Foreign Secretary has said and, indeed, the person who might yet become the Prime Minister, who has said that those rights are not guaranteed. Now, we need to have clarity and there needs to be a response from the current Home Secretary as quickly as possible in order that people can have assurance that, for many people who’ve lived in the UK for many, many years, they will not find their rights of residence removed. That clarity is essential.

Turning away from EU matters, the First Minister has rightly mentioned the prospects for employment in Wales following our leaving the EU, and he will be aware that the Welsh Government’s currently sitting on a decision in relation to the circuit of Wales. There was a problem in relation to this over the size of the guarantee that would be required for funding the project. Now I understand that that’s been reduced to less than 50 per cent of the total, so there doesn’t seem to be any reason why we can’t move swiftly to a decision to give this guarantee so that this huge job-making project can go ahead. So, could the First Minister please tell me where we’ve got to on this at the minute?

The economy Secretary will be making an announcement on the Circuit of Wales next week.

Oh, right. Well, I’m delighted to hear that, because it is vitally important for the whole of south-east Wales and, indeed, far beyond. This is the biggest regeneration project that we’ve seen in many, many years—£380 million—and I don’t expect that the First Minister can anticipate the Cabinet Secretary’s forthcoming announcement, but I hope he will accept from me that it is vitally important that the Welsh Government gives the go-ahead to this project.

All these factors will be taken into consideration. I assume I will have a heads-up before the decision is taken—I’m sure I will—but the economy Secretary, I know, will be making an announcement next week on the progress of this scheme.

The leader of the Welsh Conservatives, Andrew R.T. Davies.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. First Minister, you earlier alluded to the fact that you and the Cabinet Secretary for rural affairs met with the farming unions and other businesses from the rural communities yesterday. In questions, two weeks ago, the Cabinet Secretary said that she did not believe that farmers—and this is a direct quote—were

‘perhaps…the best people to run a business’.

Do you actually believe that is the case, that farmers aren’t the best people to run their own businesses?

That’s not what she said.

It’s a direct quote.

I can say that the event yesterday was hugely successful. We emphasised to the sector, first of all the environmental sector, that all those environmental laws that are already in Welsh law will remain. Secondly, as far as farming is concerned, just to emphasise the point, there is no such thing as British agricultural policy. It’s entirely devolved. So, there are opportunities for the farming industry to work with us as to what a future funding scheme might look like, what support they may want in the future—although, of course, that depends on the money being made available from the UK Government to provide that support. And thirdly, of course, in terms of fisheries, what should be done with Welsh territorial waters in terms of who should be able to fish in them and, secondly, whether Welsh boats wanted us to negotiate with other administrations in terms of obtaining fishing rights for them in other waters.

First Minister, the quote I gave you was a direct quote from the Record of Proceedings here and I do note that you didn’t distance yourself from that quote.

If I could also ask you a question on the letter that you released on the day of the referendum of 23 June in relation to the agreement that you have with the Liberal Democrats and, in particular, the assertion made by Kirsty Williams that the implications had significant budget implications over the nine education commitments that were made between you and the Liberal Democrats. What is the totality of the commitment that you have given in financial terms to meet the commitment that you made to the Liberal Democrats that brought them into Government? I do believe that’s a reasonable question because, as I said, the words that were quoted in the correspondence were ‘significant budget implications’.

Wherever there is European funding for a particular project, that project has to be looked at carefully when that European funding comes to an end. I thought that was obvious. That’s already been mentioned by the leader of the opposition. Unless that money is made up by the UK Government as promised, then it is clear, in the future, that some schemes will not be able to be funded in the way that we would hope.

He is very keen on quotes and quotations this afternoon. Let me just offer up some for him. On 2 March, Andrew R.T. Davies speaking on ‘The Wales Report’:

‘I can guarantee that a UK government would make sure that money would be re-distributed around the regions of the UK, otherwise it would be failing in its remit to deliver help and support to the nation’—

he means the UK by that—

‘it is elected to govern. Frankly we cannot continue with operation fear, driving people in to the ballot box because you are scaring them into voting one way.’

On 14 June:

‘Campaigners for a Leave vote have said money Wales gets from Brussels would be maintained by the UK government in the event of Brexit.’

I welcome that.

Andrew R.T. Davies said:

‘Today's announcement is hugely welcome and is further evidence that Wales would be better off out of the European Union. Despite the first minister's fantasy claims, we now know that funding for each and every part of the UK, including Wales, would be safe if we vote to leave.’

On 21 June, Andrew R.T. Davies told the ‘Herald’:

‘Wales could be as much as half a billion pounds a year better off if the UK votes to leave the European Union on Thursday…Senior Government Ministers have already pledged to maintain existing EU funding if we Vote to Leave’.

And additional funding—a Barnett share of £9.8 billion that Wales could receive if we left the EU. And, today, he told the media that it wasn’t about money, it was about outcomes. Now, the question for him is this: does he believe that every single penny that has been lost to Wales should be made up by the UK Government? Does he stand by his quotations—and he is keen on quotations today—or is he running away from them this morning?

It’s quite remarkable that you’ve wasted so much of your time—but I’m quite happy that you’re using my quotes because you’ve got so little to say, First Minister. I stand by my quotes and I’m quite happy to put that on the record. I’m quite happy to debate with you any time, any place, First Minister, on the benefits that I see, and the people endorsed that at the ballot box on the referendum on 23 June. I find it absolutely amazing, after two very clear questions—one to distance yourself from a Cabinet Secretary who has ridiculed farmers’ business acumen, and two, over the deal that you have struck with the Liberal Democrats to bring them into Government that, in their own words, has significant budget implications for your Government. I don’t think those are outlandish questions to put in First Minister’s questions because in the campaign you did say that for every new budget commitment that was made by your Government there would have to be cuts elsewhere. So, nine weeks now after the election, it’s not unreasonable for the leader of the Conservatives in the Assembly here to ask you the question, ‘Right, you’ve committed this money to the Liberal Democrats’ commitments; where are you getting that money from?’ It’s not to do with the Brexit vote. It’s a commitment you made prior to the Brexit vote because these discussions were prior to the Brexit vote. So, where is the money coming from to meet the significant financial commitments that you have agreed with the Liberal Democrats going forward? Could we have a simple, straightforward answer, or is it quite simply that you don’t know?

Can I quote a good Belfast phrase at him? He’s living in a world of sweetie white mice, because, I tell you what, if he thinks that somehow he can get away from the fact that he has failed the people of Wales today by saying he will not fight for every single penny to be made up to Wales—. He had the opportunity to declare his position—he failed to do it. He’s right to point out there will be budget difficulties. That’s true, because we will be losing EU money—£650 million a year is going to be lost to our budget as a result of Brexit. Now, if all that money is made up, as he promised—as he promised three times—by the UK Government, now that will help. Now, the question for him is this: will he stand by the people of Wales or will he run away from the mess that he’s created?

Over the past 10 years, a number of new primary care facilities have been opened across north Wales. Of course, they provide buildings of the highest quality for GPs.

There is a critical situation in my constituency, in the Waunfawr surgery, and I’d like to draw your attention to the terrible problems that exist there and ask you to intervene, as this matter has been going on for about 10 years now.

The surgery provides excellent care for more than 5,000 patients, but the building is completely inappropriate—there isn’t enough space, patient confidentiality is under threat and it’s not possible for the practice to take medical students or expand services. Ten years ago the health board said that improving the Waunfawr surgery was a priority, however the facilities haven’t improved at all. Do you believe that this dragging of feet is acceptable, and because the Betsi Cadwaladr University Local Health Board is in special measures, will you intervene in order to move things forward urgently?

The Member is right on the situation in Waunfawr—there are huge pressures there. I understand that the surgery itself is discussing this in very great detail with the health board. The problem has to be resolved as soon as possible—I understand that. Of course, there would have to be an application from the surgery in the first instance, but to do that, of course, it would have to be discussed with the health board in order to ensure that that application was the right one. But I know that the health board understands the situation and understand that they need to secure more space for the surgery ultimately. I understand that it was a shop at one time, but that 5,000 people are served there now—1,000 at the outset—so it’s clear that the problem needs to be resolved as soon as possible.

After the loss of dozens of community beds in north Wales despite bed occupancy levels of 95 per cent or above, NHS staff in north Wales told me that new community beds would take pressure off general hospitals and enable the health board to use its resources more efficiently. How, therefore, do you respond to the statement by GPs at the Royal College of General Practitioners’ event in the Assembly a fortnight ago that community beds add to the breadth of things a GP can do, and that local care in a GP unit in community hospitals, enabling them to then discharge people home, prevents the need to put people into general hospitals and assists secondary and primary care?

This does happen, of course, in many parts of Wales, particularly in parts of rural Wales. It's important, of course, that each health board considers the right model for its area. Now, I'm aware and I've seen examples myself of how this operates well. We should not, of course, use that as a reason not to ensure that people can go home with the right support as quickly as possible, but the model that the Member talks about already exists in many parts of Wales.

In 2016-17, we will provide over £600,000 of grant funding to support the modernisation of three libraries in Mid and West Wales.

I don't know whether the First Minister is aware that Powys County Council plans £0.25 million in cuts to the library budget between now and 2019, which will involve cutting half the local running costs of the library service and the possible closure of 11 branch libraries. Will the First Minister join me in regretting this sense of priorities, because libraries must surely be regarded as a vitally important part of the wider education service of this country?

It is a matter, of course, for local authorities as to how they organise their library services, though I am aware that one of the libraries that will receive money is Brecon area library in order to modernise it, but it is for local authorities to decide how to provide library services.

First Minister, as you’ll know, library services are a valued community asset, so much so that, in Narberth, and also in Newport in Pembrokeshire, local communities are working with Pembrokeshire County Council to keep libraries open as a community-managed resource in the face of Tory austerity cuts. Would you join me in thanking those volunteers for their efforts in supporting the remaining opening of those libraries and, in particular, to thank them in those rural areas that do need that extra support?

Yes, I would join the Member in thanking those people. I've seen an example of it myself in Briton Ferry, where volunteers are now running the library, and I know that the library service is—. Well, one of the stories I was told there is that people are now more likely to use the library—some people thought the library had closed years ago. And it's hugely important, then, that volunteers were able, not just to ensure that the library continued running, but also to ensure that knowledge about the library was more widespread in the community.

First Minister, during the week that we commemorate the hundredth anniversary of the battle of the Somme, it is vital that we celebrate the important role that county archives services play, particularly in helping today's generation keep in touch with their past. First Minister, I'm sure that you are aware that Carmarthen's archive is currently being restored, having been severely damaged due to poor housing in an inadequate building that allowed valuable documents to be covered with mould and have all sorts of other unfortunate things be visited upon them. Will you join with me in welcoming the restoration of this important cultural archive in Wales, and will you outline what your Government is doing to help other libraries, other valuable archives in Wales, to be restored and kept for the future of the nation?

Well, I can say that the example that the Member gives has been helped by funding from Welsh Government, and another example I can offer is the relocation of the rent archives in Ebbw Vale at a brand-new building, a hugely important resource, and a resource that is particularly accessible—part, of course, of the redevelopment of the old steelworks site.

We continue to invest in social housing, which will be an important element of our target of 20,000 affordable homes in this term, and we are supporting both local authorities and housing associations in order to meet that target.

Can I first of all thank the First Minister for that response? I believe in the importance of social housing; I have many of my constituents on the council house waiting list at the moment. I also want to stress the importance of ending the right to buy so that councils are able to build again without the fear that those houses will be sold very, very quickly. Can some of the funding currently given to housing associations to build new properties be given to councils to support council house building?

I'm keen to avoid this being seen as a competition between local authorities and housing associations. They're both crucial to the delivery of our new target. We want to see, of course, more ambition from local authorities when it comes to house building. It is difficult, because local authorities were prevented from building houses for so many years. But we are working with both local authorities and housing associations to develop a delivery plan.

First Minister, a cap on housing benefit at local housing allowance rates will apply from April 2018, but only to tenancies signed after April 2016. This reform is better intended to align the rules in the private and the social rented sectors, but it will lead to prospective tenants experiencing further issues of affordability if they are in receipt of benefits or require welfare support in the future. This is something that Community Housing Cymru are very animated about at the moment. In light of the UK Government’s decision, what plans does the Welsh Government have to ensure that continued provision of supported housing for some of the most vulnerable people in society?

We want to ensure, of course, that those who are most vulnerable do not suffer as a result of decisions taken elsewhere. I know the Minister is actively looking at the current situation in order to mitigate any impact on those most vulnerable.

First Minister, while we all agree that more houses are needed in Wales, my constituents in communities like Penllergaer, Pontarddulais and Gorseinon are not persuaded that the council’s draft local development plan reflects the need for provision of the right houses in the right places, to reflect the needs of people during different times in their lives. So, can you confirm firstly that, in building council houses, local authorities will be bound in the same way as any developer to give strong due regard to the concerns of local residents about locations? And, secondly, what are you doing at the moment to help councils look forward to providing more homes for older people when they’re planning council house building in the future?

Councils, of course, will be planning according to the demographic change. We know that, historically—for many, many decades—houses were built on the basis that they were going to house families. We know that there are increasingly more and more people who are on their own. They’ve been hit hard by the bedroom tax, particularly in rural Wales, where one-bedroomed accommodation is hard to find outside towns. In relation to the first point, of course councils are bound by their own local development plan and they must abide by that plan, just as any other developer would.

First Minister, during questions to the Cabinet Secretary last month, I was able to highlight a report from Sheffield Hallam University, which identified the disproportionate adverse impact of Tory Government welfare benefits cuts on poorer communities, with particular reference to limiting the local housing benefit to the local housing rate. Another proposal under the new arrangements is to raise the threshold below which payment is made at the shared accommodation rate—i.e. that’s the lowest rate—from 25 years of age to 35 years of age, effectively making it more difficult, if not impossible, for younger people to afford social housing. Can I urge the First Minister, in any discussions with the UK Government on this issue, to caution against this change, which is already resulting in some Welsh social housing bodies questioning if they can continue to provide social housing for that age group?

It’s part of a theme where, the younger you are, the more you have to pay. If it comes to housing benefit, if it comes to access to housing, if it means getting your foot on the mortgage ladder, there’s never been a more difficult time. I had it easy in my generation, as did my parents, but now it’s much, much more difficult for young people. I think we have to make a point that more needs to be done to help young people to get into accommodation. That means not discriminating against them because of their age. We see it in the same way with the minimum wage. Surely if somebody does a job of work, they should be paid the same rate regardless of their age.

We are in regular dialogue with anchor companies and the economy Secretary met with Airbus last Friday. We will be writing to key companies in Wales, including the anchor companies, with a view to holding a business engagement forum focusing on issues raised by the result.

Thank you, First Minister. As an Assembly Member in north-east Wales, many of my constituents are employed in large workplaces like Airbus. The vote to leave the EU has not only created uncertainty for these people and their families, but also the many hundreds employed via the supply chain reliant on the aerospace site. Can the First Minister assure the workforce and their families that this Government will fight both for their future livelihood and the industrial jewel in the crown of north Wales?

I can give that absolute assurance. I know how important Airbus is as an employer in Wales. I know, particularly at Broughton, the thousands who are employed there will be uncertain about the future, as are all manufacturers in Wales at the moment. They are waiting to see what the outcome of the negotiations actually is, particularly over access to the single market. If we do not get access to the single market, there are immense difficulties for our manufacturers and we will work hard to make sure that companies like Airbus continue to benefit from access to a market of 500 million people.

Following on from that point, has the Welsh Government had an opportunity to make an initial analysis at least of the relative merits of the various—a rather bewildering array, possibly—Brexit options that have been mentioned: Norway, Switzerland, Canada and Singapore, even, bizarrely? Particularly because of the importance of preservation of access to the single market, as he’s just said, has he come to the conclusion, as have many in the business community, that EEA EFTA possibly looks the least-worst option on the table at the moment?

Given that that would ensure access to the single market, and that is the only model that’s currently on the table, the answer must be ‘yes’. But, of course, we have to accept that that would involve free movement of people and, of course, we know that many, many people voted on that issue, above the issue of jobs, actually—I heard it on the doorstep—in the referendum a week last Thursday. The difficulty is: at this moment in time, there’s no model that’s being proposed that would allow access to the single market without there being free movement of people as well. Norway haven’t done it; Switzerland haven’t been able to do it. It is simply the EEA model. The reality is that the UK Government has no real idea of what kind of model might work in the future, which shows the uncertainty of the times that we’re living in, which is why we want to provide as much certainty as we can, from a Welsh Government perspective, and, secondly, why certainty needs to be provided as soon as possible at UK level.

First Minister, as a constituency Member in Aberconwy, I’m only too well aware of the valuable importance of Airbus in Broughton with the jobs—6,000 jobs—that they provide. I know in a statement after the referendum result they did say that they are really looking to constructively work with the UK Government to provide support for their workers and, indeed, to carry on with their operations here. How will you, as First Minister, and your Welsh Government provide the assurance that they probably need right now? Have you been to visit? Have you come up to north Wales and visited Airbus in order to have those senior management level talks, so that they do receive that assurance that you will be working equally as hard as the UK Government to support them?

I met with the president of Airbus in the week of the referendum. I know that the Cabinet Secretary has also met with Airbus. I have regular meetings with Airbus to listen to their concerns. All manufacturers are saying to me that they are concerned about access to the single market. They are European operations, and if the UK is outside of the market they sell in, there are consequences for investment in the future. It doesn’t mean that they could close them overnight—of course it doesn’t—but if you are an international company, you’re more likely to invest inside a market than outside it. That’s why it’s hugely important that we continue to have free access to the single market, tariff free. I cannot imagine what our Welsh lamb farmers will do if a 15 per cent tariff is imposed on the lamb that they produce and that is sold in the European market, which is why—of course, steel as well: the steel tariffs would be even higher—it’s vitally important that, regardless of the other issues, bearing in mind the way that people voted, access to the single market without tariffs remains.

Would the First Minister confirm that, and I’m not implying in any way that you were involved, during the 1970s, France and Britain co-operated to build Concorde? I believe it was called ‘entente cordiale’, well before we became members of the EU. The inference of this is, of course, that matters at Airbus will continue unabated and that this debate now is another example of scaremongering, which we had both before Brexit and is now carrying on after Brexit.

I can absolutely assure the Member I had nothing to do with Concorde—its maiden flight occurred when I was two, so I can say that. [Laughter.] But, bear in mind, of course, that Concorde was an example of UK and French co-operation that was a failure, actually. As a project, it didn’t work—it never worked on a commercial basis. He has to bear in mind that the UK was desperate to join the common market in 1973—desperate to join—because the UK economy was in a weak state. This idea that, somehow, the UK was forced against its will to join is just simply wrong—it was desperate to join for many, many years. Of course there’ll be co-operation; we understand that. All of a sudden, the drawbridge isn’t going to be pulled up, but we have to understand that we are part, at the moment, of a market of 500 million people. If we have to pay a price to enter that market, then our manufacturers will pay a price to enter the market and, ultimately, there’ll be a price in terms of jobs. That’s the last thing, surely, that anybody wants to see.

It’s right to say that EU directives have driven much of our air-quality legislation and we will look at these on a case-by-case basis once we have agreed the negotiating position for withdrawal, but local air-quality management is driven by the Environment Act 1995.

Thank you, First Minister. European environmental protections must not be sacrificed. There is no doubt that we cannot afford a future UK Government to weaken these limits. While the regulations remain outside the EU, we will lose the vital enforcement that EU law provided. Air pollution and climate change are serious issues, not just for this generation, but for future generations. Following the referendum result, will the Welsh Government do all that it can to enshrine these environmental protections and ensure that these rules are enforced?

As I said earlier on, what is already transposed into Welsh law will remain in Welsh law. It’s a matter then for the Welsh Government and, of course, the Assembly to decide which laws should then remain. But, it’s worth pointing out that it’s been European incentives that have enabled the UK to clean up its act. The UK had a bad reputation, environmentally, as a source of acid rain. I grew up in Bridgend, where the River Ogmore literally ran different colours, according to what had been thrown into it upriver from some of the factories and, of course, the mines that existed upriver. So, it ran red, green, black—name any colour. It doesn’t happen now; it’s a river you can see the bottom of, now. The Taff, as we know, has a salmon run that goes up it, which would have been unthinkable 30 years ago as the river was so polluted. Much of that drive has actually come from Europe, in order to make sure that the UK caught up with the rest. What I want to make sure is that we don’t lose the drive that has existed for the past 30 years.

Both Conservative and Labour Governments have recognised the need to legislate to improve air quality by introducing measures to control and reduce pollution. Many of these measures were passed before we joined the European Union, for example, the Clean Air Acts of 1956 and 1968. Does the First Minister agree that it is inconceivable that any future UK Government will take action to reverse any current EU regulation in place to regulate air quality in Wales?

I don’t think it’s inconceivable, given what I’ve heard about fracking and opencast mining; I don’t believe it is inconceivable. The Clean Air Act came in because people were literally dropping dead in London because of toxic fogs in that city. There wasn’t much choice other than to introduce legislation at that stage. But, certainly, in the 1980s, our rivers were still—. There was a river in Yorkshire that would catch fire, if you threw a match into it; we had rivers in Wales that were hugely polluted; our beaches weren’t clean; our air quality was very, very poor. All that has improved hugely over the past 30 years, and we have been driven in that direction, actually, by the European Union; otherwise, we wouldn’t have done it ourselves. I intend to make sure that the environment the people of Wales have come to enjoy, the environment that people have come to deserve, will remain that way in the future, and will not go back to the days when I was a young lad, when the rivers were polluted, when there were tips everywhere, until they were cleared away, and people expected things would remain that way. That’s not so; we are a country now where we can be proud of our environment.

First Minister, given that the pollution created by shipping is 260 times that produced by all the world’s cars and that action is required on a global level instead of a continental one, what discussions has the First Minister had with the International Maritime Organization and others in an effort to seriously address the global air pollution problem?

The reality is, of course, that international trade is such that it means that goods will move around the world. We are hugely reliant in Wales on exports. The last thing we would want to do is to restrict our ability to export. Of course, we want to source as locally as possible, where that can be done, and our procurement strategy reflects that.

It would mean that £650 million per annum would be lost in terms of Government spending, including £260 million in farming subsidies.

Thank you, First Minister, for that answer. Since 2007, EU projects have created 11,900 enterprises and some 37,000 jobs. This EU funding has helped 72,700 people into work, helped more than 229,000 gain qualifications, and has funded 56,000 people into further learning since 2007. Under the current £1.8 billion EU-supported programmes, more than £700 million of EU structural funding has already been committed, and that is just 40 per cent of the total allocation for the 2014-20 period. So, can the First Minister state what actions the Welsh Government can take—and we’ve already heard earlier about R.T. Davies’s pledges and guarantees on this front—to ensure that the leavers’ pledge that Welsh funding will not be affected is kept, unlike the other broken promises that we’ve heard of putting an extra £350 million into the NHS? Thank you.

The difficulty is that those who’ve advocated some of these pledges have run away from them: throw a brick through the window and let other people pick up the pieces. I expect those people who made those pledges, and who may well be in Government in London in the next few months, to keep to those pledges. That was a vow that was made to the people of Wales and, indeed, in other countries and, indeed, regions of England. I cannot think of anything that would bring politics more into disrepute if politicians say on the one hand, ‘Every single penny will be guaranteed’, and then turn around and say, ‘We didn’t mean that’—‘We didn’t mean that’. That would mean a breach of the most fundamental pledge made to the people of Wales, and the people of Wales will hold those people to account.

And, finally, Rhun ap Iorwerth.

Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. I’m pleased that the Government has given a commitment to develop a business plan on the dualling of the Britannia bridge. We’re expecting some developments there soon, I believe. But that is a project that we could have expected to have made a bid for European funding for, as a contribution towards its cost, because of the importance of the A55 as part of the European transport network. May I ask the First Minister what his view is on the possibility of losing that source of funding now, and will he give a commitment to put pressure on the UK Government, if that funding source is lost, to ensure that that funding is provided, perhaps as part of some Marshall plan for the Welsh economy, as we’ve mentioned as a party?

Well, the Marshall plan funding came from the United States, but I understand the point you’re making, and I’ve said it a number of times, namely that every penny lost should be made up by those who promised that that would be the case, that that would happen. We’ve heard from those who argued that we should leave the European Union: they said that there would be tons of money available. Well, let’s see where that money is for Wales, and ensure that the people of Wales can decide how that money is spent. But, of course, all we’ve heard is people withdrawing from that pledge or that vow. I am, as is he, of course, strongly of the view that we should fight for Wales and not fight against Wales, and that’s what we’ve heard in this Chamber from some people today.

Thank you, First Minister.

We now move on to the urgent question that I have accepted under Standing Order 12.66, and I call on Simon Thomas to ask the urgent question.

Well, in order to repeat the words I said earlier, I’ve written to the Home Secretary to ensure that she will confirm that the United Kingdom will allow European Union citizens to remain within the United Kingdom on a permanent basis, those that are here already. And, of course, it’s quite wrong to see these people as people that should be discussed and debated. It’s important that that guarantee is given now.

Thank you for that confirmation, First Minister. I do hope that you will publish the letter that you’ve written to the Home Secretary, as well as her response to that letter. Despite what we’ve heard in the Chamber today, a spokesperson on behalf of Theresa May said yesterday, in explaining the position expressed in the Commons:

nid ydym ni eisiau datgelu ein sefyllfa negodi ar y cychwyn.

To me, that sounds as if EU citizens are being treated as chess pieces and are being moved around for political reasons. There are 67,000 people from European Union nations living in Wales, 500 of them doctors in our health service. We can’t afford to lose these people, and they are part of our families, they’re part of our communities, and part of contemporary Wales. It is disgraceful that these people are treated in the way in which they have been over the past week because of an election within one party that’s a minority in the House of Commons.

We must send a robust message from Wales that these people are welcome in our communities, that we want them to stay, and that we will continue to welcome them and do everything we can to demonstrate that. There was an event on the prom in Aberystwyth on Saturday—I don’t know if you saw that; it didn’t get a great deal of attention, but there were 400 people there, standing firmly alongside refugees, and people from other nations, and everyone who has come to live in Wales.

I saw that event and once again I can confirm that that’s extremely important, because I’ve heard people talk about this. I was in Llanelli—as were you, of course—last week, listening to people’s concerns there, and I heard the same thing in Swansea. It’s exceptionally important that there is confirmation and affirmation from the United Kingdom Government that people here already can remain. Some people say that they can stay anyway, but we haven’t heard that from the United Kingdom Government, the people making these decisions. This is not a matter for discussion; this is something that we need an assurance on now in order to ensure that people can still believe that there is a welcome for them in Wales and in the United Kingdom. That’s not the case at the moment, and he and I, of course, have heard evidence of that over the past few weeks.

I spent part of yesterday morning trying to remove a racist slogan from somebody’s front door, and, unfortunately, these sorts of incidents are not isolated. What do you think the Government can do to try and tone down the levels of hatred that this Brexit vote seems to have unleashed, as well as ensuring that we get the full co-operation of local authorities, the police and the voluntary sector to ensure these things are stamped out and are deemed to be unacceptable?

My comment last week was quite simply this: all countries have their idiots and Wales has its share, unfortunately. I was too generous to these people in the way I described them I believe now, but there we are; I have to be diplomatic in my job as best I can. The reality is that I heard people who were very afraid last week—people who’d lived in the UK for generations, actually, but, because they looked different, therefore they were a target. We have been in contact with the police and crime commissioners to make sure that the police are aware of what’s happening. The police are certainly very keen to emphasise the fact that people should report hate crimes; they will, of course, then take action. And the message has to be got out there that we will not accept this kind of hatred in our society; we cannot be tolerant of intolerance. What has been let out of the bottle is going to be difficult to control, but it must be controlled for the good of our society.

Thank you, First Minister.

The next item on our agenda is the business statement and announcement and I call on Jane Hutt.

I’ve one change to today’s business. The statement on housing and homelessness has been withdrawn. Additionally, Business Committee has agreed to postpone tomorrow’s short debate. Business for the next three weeks is as shown on the business statement and announcement found among the meeting papers available to Members electronically.

With all the sort of political turmoil over the last few weeks, the ending of the PCS museum strike may not have received the attention that it deserves, and I want to pay tribute to the staff at the museum, who fought for years, it’s turned out, to protect the weekend pay of the lowest paid workers. I’m glad the Welsh Government was able to intervene to help end the strike.

However, would the leader of the house arrange for a statement by the Cabinet Secretary for the economy about the relationship between the Welsh Government and the bodies that it totally funds, such as the museum and the library, to set out what is the relationship between the Government and the management at those bodies? I think it would be helpful to understand the parameters that operate.

I thank Julie Morgan for that question. I know she has raised this on a regular basis in support of ensuring that there was a resolution to the national museum dispute. Of course, the Welsh Government offered support and also facilitated discussions to bring the parties together and to bring the dispute to an end, and, indeed, provided some additional funding to the national museum to assist with the costs of meeting an enhanced pay offer. That’s obviously recently been agreed with PCS members.

I think the question about whether the Cabinet Secretary can bring clarity to the relationship is very helpful. We do have, in fact, a framework document, which sets out our funding arrangements between sponsored bodies and the Government, but the Cabinet Secretary will clarify this, I think, helpfully in terms of not just the national museum but other sponsored bodies in terms of funding arrangements.

May I ask you, business manager, and in your role as leader of the house, for a statement by the Minister for the environment? There was an event held, as we’ve already heard, with environmentalists and farming and agricultural interests yesterday, and it was very interesting to hear that it is the Welsh Government’s intention to develop a specifically Welsh agriculture and fisheries policy. As we are facing a summer of shows and rural events, it would be very positive if the Government could consult on such a policy. You don’t have to have the policy written before the summer, just the principles, or even a clean state and just asking for ideas. So, if we could have either an oral or written statement from the Cabinet Secretary on the intention to develop such a policy and how that policy will proceed—.

And, secondly, could I also ask for a statement by the Cabinet Secretary for Education on the Estyn report published today on pupil attainment for children in receipt of care: it shows that there has been some progress, but we are still a long way behind in terms of children in care, with 45 per cent of them not being in employment, education or training post 16. I’m sure that everyone would agree that that is not acceptable in Wales, and that we do need to make significant improvement in that area. So, it would be good to hear, again either orally or in written form, from the Cabinet Secretary for Education what the Government’s response to that report is, and what steps need to be taken in order to change the situation.

Ar nodyn mwy cadarnhaol, a allaf ofyn am ddatganiad gan y Gweinidog—nid wyf yn hollol siŵr o hyd pa Weinidog sy'n gyfrifol am chwaraeon cymunedol, efallai mai’r Gweinidog dros les ydyw neu efallai mai dirprwy ydyw, pwy a ŵyr, ond, beth bynnag, ddatganiad gan y Gweinidog sy'n gyfrifol am ochr gymunedol chwaraeon? Gan ein bod i gyd yn dymuno'n dda i Gymru yn y rownd gynderfynol nos yfory. Mae'n beth gwych i'w weld.  Y diddordeb hirdymor mewn pêl-droed y mae hyn wedi’i achosi—gan fy mod i’n siarad fel un o ddilynwyr y bêl arall, ond, er hynny, mae’r diddordeb i adeiladu ar hyn yn mynd i fod yn wych. A wnaiff hi ymuno â mi i gondemnio, yn y modd gorau posibl, y rhai hynny yn UEFA sy’n dymuno difetha’r hwyl ac sydd wedi dweud na ddylai tîm Cymru fynd â'u plant ar y cae ar ddiwedd y gêm? Ni allaf feddwl am neges fwy cadarnhaol y gallai tîm Cymru ei hanfon na chael merched ifanc a bechgyn yn cicio'r bêl o gwmpas ar ddiwedd gêm bêl-droed ryngwladol. Pan ydych chi’n gweld yr hyn y mae’r chwaraewyr eraill yn ei wneud yn gorymdeithio o amgylch eu hamrywiol ddilynwyr o wahanol fathau a'u nwyddau gwerthadwy, mae gweld chwaraewyr Cymru yn canolbwyntio ar eu teuluoedd ac ar bobl ifanc yn cymryd rhan yn neges wych iawn, iawn. Gallwn adeiladu ar hynny yng Nghymru, rwy'n siŵr. Credaf y bydd datganiad, ar ôl i ni ennill y rownd derfynol, gan y Gweinidog cyfrifol, yn gosod y naws gywir ar gyfer haf o chwaraeon yng Nghymru.

Diolch yn fawr, Simon Thomas. In response to your first question, as you’ve said, and as has been acknowledged this afternoon, the First Minister and the Cabinet Secretary for Environment and Rural Affairs, Lesley Griffiths, did meet yesterday key figures from Wales’s environment and agricultural sectors, particularly focusing on the implications of the UK’s decision to leave the European Union. As has already been said by the First Minister, it included farming union leaders, rural businesspeople, as well as representatives of environmental bodies, sharing their thoughts and challenges and opportunities. I know that the Minister will want to follow this up in terms of a statement to clarify not only the discussions but the next steps in terms of developing that Welsh Government policy response.

In response to your second question, following the Estyn report, the fact that this is—. Of course, we always welcome the publication of the report and I know the Cabinet Secretary will particularly want to focus on the points that you make in terms of progress, but also where more can be done, particularly in relation to the educational attainment prospects of looked-after children. The Cabinet Secretary will respond accordingly with a statement.

I think all our Cabinet Secretaries, all of the Welsh Government and, indeed, the whole Assembly will be wishing Wales well. Those who are lucky enough to be there to not only enjoy tomorrow but, of course, the final, when it comes, I’m sure, on Saturday—.

I think it’s very important that we actually see how our Welsh team have been such tremendous role models, as you said, Simon Thomas, and the way in which they have engaged young people and families; it has been very much a family supporters expression, hasn’t it? We can see that and we’re very proud of it. It has put Wales on the world map, because of not only the talent of our Welsh players, but also the spirit and the ethos in which they have played. So, I’m sure we wish Wales well, but also look to the legacy. I know that we will all want to congratulate and thank and recognise what they have demonstrated, not just winning the championship, but how they’ve done it.

Leader of the house, can I ask for two statements from the education Secretary? Last night, I had the pleasure of attending the Gwent Music summer showcase concert at St David’s Hall, with music from schools right across south-east Wales. This regional collaboration across schools should be celebrated and promoted, I’m sure you’ll agree, and so any additional support, financial or otherwise, from the Welsh Government, would be very much appreciated. So, I wonder if we could have a statement from the education Secretary on what is being done to support programmes such as Gwent Music showcase across other parts of Wales.

Secondly, this lunchtime, I visited the British Council event in Tŷ Hywel, which I know a number of Members went to, which was trying to promote the teaching of modern languages across Wales. There has been, as I’m sure the Cabinet is aware, a drop-off in the teaching of foreign languages across Wales in recent years, rather than the increase that we would like to see, and I think, comparative with England, the situation is worse here. So, could we have a statement on what can be done to try and arrest this decline in the teaching of modern foreign languages in schools across Wales, so that Welsh pupils are just as able as pupils from across the rest of the UK—including Scotland, where they’re ahead of the game—in making sure that we are not insular but looking out to the world and able to compete on the global stage?

Thank you, Nick Ramsay. I’m sure the Gwent Music showcase was a tremendous display of talent and skill, but also of the professional expertise and commitment that went in from the music and education professions. And, of course, it would have been a partnership, I’m sure, with local government, as well as schools, and I know the Cabinet Secretary will be very interested to see the outcome of that in south-east Wales.

Of course, the other event that you mention is very important—the British Council event that you attended. We are working with the British Council, and also language institutes and universities across the world, to arrest and reverse the decline in the take-up of modern foreign languages. In fact, I recall an event in my own constituency, in Bryn Hafren school, which is taking the lead—in each consortium there is a lead school—when ‘Global Futures’ was published last year. That is a five-year plan to improve and promote modern foreign languages. So, I’m sure the Cabinet Secretary will want to update on how that is being delivered, but the British Council, and their language institute, is a key player in that ‘Global Futures’ development.

We are a very welcoming people in Wales, known for our hospitality and warmth. So, I wonder if the leader of the house may share my disappointment that, despite our very best efforts on the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee, which I now chair, following on from the expert stewardship of Mr David Melding, the Secretary of State has so far declined our invitation to come and give evidence on the Wales Bill. Now, despite the cautious welcome given to parts of this latest Bill, significant concerns are still being expressed by leading constitutional and legal experts on the potential roll-back of devolution, and the Secretary of State, quite frankly, is the only one who can respond to these concerns. So, I wonder if the leader of the house could, perhaps, together with our Presiding Officer, in seeking to safeguard the interests of the Assembly and the people of Wales, use their influence and good offices to encourage the Secretary of State for Wales to come and visit us, pointing out that it’s not just desirable and reasonable, but actually essential and indeed helpful to good scrutiny that the Secretary of State for Wales accepts our warm and polite invitation to come home to Wales.

Of course, Huw Irranca-Davies, and others in this Chamber, will have the opportunity to extend that invitation again very visibly and vocally tomorrow afternoon, in the Queen’s Speech debate. I can understand your disappointment that the invitation to the Secretary of State for Wales has been declined, because it is so important, and in our mutual best interest, to progress with the Wales Bill. But I await the invitation to be posed yet again tomorrow afternoon, I’m sure more openly, in the Queen’s Speech debate.

I wonder whether we could have a Government update statement, leader of the house, on an issue that I’ve raised before. This is the issue of—. This Chamber makes legislation and the Government makes policy, on the basis of taking children’s rights into account; obviously, we’ve committed to the due regard principle in taking the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child into account. Unfortunately, most of the delivery that is done on the back of our legislation and policy is by public bodies, which are not committed in exactly the same way, and successive Ministers have been kind enough to acknowledge that there is a potential gap there, where a failure of policy aims could take place. I think it would be a reassurance to all of us here in the Chamber if we could have some update on progress of work done by the Welsh Government, speaking with public bodies, to ensure that the policy objectives of this place are not undermined by competing pressures on local authorities, for example, when it comes to deciding how they should take children’s rights into account in making their own decisions.

Well, I’m sure that the Minister for communities and children would welcome that opportunity to clarify how seriously the Welsh Government takes its commitment to the UNCRC, to ensure that children’s rights underline all our policy objectives, and, indeed, financial and budgetary purposes and objectives as well. That is part of our strategic integrated impact assessment, and, of course, it accompanies draft and final budget papers from the Welsh Government. But it is for the Minister for communities and children to, again, respond to this in terms of, I’m sure, an update, and he will be open to questions and opportunities at committee and at oral Assembly question level.

I’d like to request two Government statements, please, Secretary. Firstly, in the light of the Office for National Statistics report on avoidable mortality in England and Wales last week, whether we might have a statement on public health and the preventative health agenda, which is one important aspect of dealing with avoidable mortality, and perhaps setting us firmly on a more proactive health agenda, rather than reactive. I wonder whether we might have a Government statement that sets out the current Government’s thinking on that preventative health and public health agenda.

Secondly, I wonder whether we might have a statement on community-focused schools. I think it’s very important that we take forward policy effectively and consistently across Wales, because I think, at the current time, there are some very good examples of community-focused schools, but it is quite patchy. I’m very interested in, and I think Members here generally would be very interested in, the mechanisms and actions that can achieve consistently community-focused schools, right across Wales. Because I think it’s well recognised that achieving a partnership between home and school, and community and school, is the most effective way forward if we are to improve educational standards. We spend a lot of money on our school buildings, and to see them—some of them—lying idle at evenings, weekends, and holidays is not a good use of public resource. Also, in terms of widening access to sport, physical activity and cultural activities, it’s very advantageous if we can have that community-focused school approach in that regard as well. And, finally, I think it’s extremely important that we ensure that not just the twenty-first century schools programme—important though that is—but also, in terms of our existing school stock, we have a community-focused approach. Without that, we wouldn’t have the consistency of approach that I believe we need, across Wales.

Well, the Member for Newport East does raise some very important questions, particularly looking at that recent ONS survey. It did present the latest figures on avoidable mortality for England and Wales, and it did show those 2014 figures for the first time. But the Cabinet Secretary for Health, Well-being and Sport did make an oral statement recently on the headline messages from the Welsh health survey, which is our way of looking at the overview of the state of the nation’s health. They, of course, have a strong bearing on how we address those figures from the ONS report. But also, I believe the commitments that we’ve made in our manifesto do build on the very strong platform that we’ve put in place to implement appropriate public health interventions.

On to your second point about community-focused schools, this is something where there’s no question that we have to use our school facilities not only to benefit pupils’ families but also the wider communities. We also need to look at this from the perspective of community use of assets. You’ve mentioned sporting facilities, but also co-location of key services. Quite a lot of our initiatives, like Flying Start, are also located in our school premises, but we also know, in terms of adult learning initiatives and school facilities, and indeed their grounds and sports facilities, of course—we need to use to the fullest extent. The previous Minister for Education and Skills did ask the Public Policy Institute for Wales to provide a review and advice on how school facilities can be used more extensively, so I would draw the Member’s attention to their report, ‘Increasing the Use of School Facilities’, which was published last March. I know that the Cabinet Secretary is considering this report and its recommendations.

I just wanted to ask a business question based on the fact that I wanted to have a statement on Government involvement in the setting up of fanzones across Wales, especially in light of the semi-finals. I’m getting quite a lot of messages as we speak here today of people who haven’t been able to get tickets for the Principality Stadium—fans who’ve followed the matches throughout the tournament. I was wondering whether we could have a statement on your involvement as a Government, and also to see whether you would appeal to Cardiff Council to open Cooper’s field as well as the stadium so that those people are not losing out, and also condemn those people today who are selling on free tickets. This is a free event and should not be made as a profit for those people who want to support the Wales football team in the semi-finals. I would urge you to take urgent action given that this is happening tomorrow, and perhaps we could have a statement from the Minister.

This is something where, of course, we want to ensure that people can attend those local fanzones. They’ve become extremely popular. It’s obviously for the local authorities to ensure that arrangements are made, and to actually provide funding support for them. Also, of course, fans can enjoy the game by supporting local businesses, pubs and restaurants as well. But I think on the point you made—the very concerning point about how people try to exploit on these occasions in terms of selling on free tickets—we’re going to have a strong statement, which we’re making, I think, as a result of your question today. The Cabinet Secretary will share that with me. I think the message, of course, overall—and responding earlier on to Simon Thomas—is that wherever you watch the game, let’s get behind Chris Coleman and the boys and do our best to cheer them on for another famous win.

I endorse Nick Ramsay’s comments about modern foreign languages, where we heard that those most likely to be adversely affected were pupils in the more disadvantaged areas. I call for two statements, the first on bullying. Today is Stand up to Bullying Day as part of the Stand up to Bullying campaign, aiming for individuals, local communities, schools and businesses to stand up to bullying and ensure their pupils or employees are provided with effective support to tackle the problem. We regularly hear in this place—in this Chamber, in committee, and in our own casework—of people who are still being bullied on the grounds of sexuality, impairment, condition or other factors. I know it’s something previous Welsh Governments have given much attention to, but we see figures here: that 68 per cent of young people polled knew of somebody who had been cyber bullied and 81 per cent reported bullying as commonplace in schools, admittedly UK and not Welsh-specific figures, but meriting a statement accordingly.

Finally, a Welsh Government statement, if I could call for this, on digital communications in the context of Ofcom’s digital communication review, which concluded that reforming Openreach was critical to improving the telecoms market in creating a more independent and customer-centric service within BT. I ask this because, and in the context, of the letter that’s gone to the chief executive of Ofcom from the communication network’s industry coalition representing millions of broadband customers, and who will be charged with delivering the next generation of digital networks. We hear every week in this Chamber Members raising issues about broadband and mobile connectivity in their own areas, and, clearly, this will be critical to that agenda.

Thank you, Mark Isherwood, for drawing attention to the Stand Up to Bullying Day, the focus today that, I know, we would all share. Indeed, I know that the Cabinet Secretary for Communities and Children is looking at the policies—it’s something that, actually, is shared across the Cabinet; the education Secretary, of course—in terms of tackling bullying. We have a week’s focus in November, usually, on tackling bullying. I think you mentioned cyber bullying, but, also, we know we are greatly concerned that some of the rise in hate crimes could also have a bearing on children and young people as well, and we need to make sure that we are monitoring that and responding to it appropriately. It is very important that we are now, again, focusing on that and that the Cabinet Secretaries with appropriate responsibilities are looking at this very carefully.

I think we have to, in terms of your second point, recognise that not only is the Welsh Government at the forefront in terms of delivering on our digital infrastructure in terms of superfast broadband, not only delivering it with our money, but also, of course, delivering it thanks to the funding from the European Union, of course, so much threatened now in terms of Brexit, but obviously recognising it is a partnership that is near to reaching, of course, its target, and it will be right at the forefront in terms of Wales leading the way.

And finally, Andrew R.T. Davies.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. Leader of the house, is it possible to have a statement from the economy Secretary in relation to business rates. The incoming Government was very clear in its manifesto commitment that it was going to be making a commitment on business rates, specifically to uplift, obviously, the margin that businesses, or the threshold, should I say, that businesses would be captured by the business rate regime. The summer show season, eisteddfods—call them what you will—are all happening over the next eight weeks. Many Members will be engaging with businesses and organisations, and some sort of understanding of the Government’s thinking about how it’s going to take this commitment forward, and, indeed, the level of threshold that the Government will be bringing forward, I think would greatly inform the dialogue that Members will be having at events throughout the summer. So, a statement before the recess would be greatly appreciated.

Well, of course, Andrew R.T. Davies knows that the non-domestic rates, business rates, were fully devolved on 1 April 2015. Now, Welsh Government is responsible for all aspects of management of the non-domestic rates pool. And, of course, that includes risks associated with balancing income reliefs and payments. So, revaluation of non-domestic properties is currently under way and will come into effect on 1 April 2017, and this will update, of course, valuations of non-domestic properties. But, it is for the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government to respond to this point, and I’m sure he will be providing updates.

Thank you, Minister.

We now move to the next item, which is item 3: motion in accordance with Standing Order 17.2T in respect of Committee for the Scrutiny of the First Minister. I call on a member of the Business Committee to move the motion—Simon Thomas.

Formally.

Formally. As there are no other speakers on this item, the proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? As there are no objections, the motion is agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

The next item on our agenda is motions to agree membership of committees. There are 13 motions under this item and they will be discussed together. I call on a member of the Business Committee to move the motions—Simon Thomas.

I move.

I therefore call on Mark Reckless to speak.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. I understand no-one has ever objected, previously, in the history of the Assembly to the establishment of the committees. However, UKIP are not beholden by that prior consensus. We intend to vote today against the establishment of the policy and legislative committees on the basis agreed by the other business managers. The reason we do this is that equality, 4:4, does not constitute party balance. The secretariat of the Business Committee initially advised us that it did not constitute party balance. What changed on that—[Interruption.] I’m back. On that, nothing changed.

However, the other parties did a deal with Labour to give way on that point in exchange for some plum committee chairmanships, particularly in respect of Plaid, who chair not just the Finance Committee but two policy and legislative committees. Thanks to that, the combined opposition will not be able to amend Bills against the Government. That great victory of Leanne Wood in Rhondda, which reduced Labour from equality 30 in the Assembly to just 29 against 30 of combined opposition, and with no longer a Liberal Democrat group and with the Liberal Democrat Member only entitled to one committee place were she to wish to take it up, that is a very substantive change in what this Assembly is because we cannot amend legislation in committee were the opposition to be united on any particular course against the Government. That has been given away, I would assert, in return for a number of plum chairmanships.

UKIP will not be party to that deal. We will, however, treat the arrangements agreed by others with respect. We will chair our committee in a considered way on the basis of the evidence and we will contribute to all committees to the best of our ability. Thank you.

I note at the end there that UKIP are opposing the membership of the committees but are taking up the chairmanship of a committee, which has been very beneficial to them. The fact that—every Member must know this—we have an Assembly with 60 Members, 29 from the Government and 31 from the opposition, means that you cannot replicate 29 and 31 on committees of eight. You have to go to a system called D'Hondt. We beat D'Hondt last week in the Belgium game, but we don’t want to go there, I don’t think. D'Hondt would have meant that UKIP, in fact, did not have a member on every committee. It would have, in fact, meant that UKIP often did not have a member on committees. Now, Plaid Cymru support—

Will the Member give way?

Certainly, I’ll give way.

D'Hondt wouldn’t have meant anything of the sort. Even on a committee of seven, UKIP would have had one member according to D'Hondt.

You’re simply incorrect. You’d have 0.7 member. That’s what D'Hondt would have worked out for you. On a smaller committee, you would not have had a member—for example, public accounts or finance, which you have members on.

Will the Member give way again?

Not now. I’ve responded to your question. Plaid Cymru’s response to this has been very clear. We want to see political balance across the committee structure. We think it’s very important that opposition Chairs are in charge of vital committees such as finance and public accounts, and we think it’s equally important that we have arrangements on policy and legislative committees that actually deliver workable Welsh law. At the end of the day, the committees are there to scrutinise and to undertake several stages of legislation, but all legislation comes back to this Assembly, where we have a job of work to do. If we do unite as an opposition, we can vote down the Government on all legislation, and I’m sure we will if we can reach agreement on those issues. But what’s very important, I think, is we have workable committees and good, effective Chairs, independently elected for the first time. This is a big step forward for the strengthening of this Assembly as a proper parliament, and it’s in that spirit that Plaid Cymru has agreed to these arrangements. It also means, yes, what have been described as ‘plum committee Chairs’—I would more describe as important, political chairships—are in the hands of opposition parties, and I think that is important as well, particularly when we come to scrutiny of finance and health. These are all things that will revitalise, I hope, the way that our committees work in the Assembly. For that reason, I ask the Assembly to support them so that we move on with our committee work.

I propose therefore that the votes on the motions to elect members to the seven policy and legislation committees are grouped unless there are any objections to that. The proposal, therefore, is to agree the motions for elections to the seven legislation and policy committees. Does any Member object? [Objection.] I will, therefore, defer voting on these motions until voting time.

I now move to motions to elect members to the other six specialist committees. Unless there are any objections, I propose that the votes on the motions to elect members to the six specialist committees are grouped. The proposal is to agree the motions. Does any Member object? As there are no objections, these motions are agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

We now move to item 5, which is a statement by the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government on tax devolution and the fiscal framework. I call on the Cabinet Secretary, Mark Drakeford.

Thank you, Llywydd. In 2018 the Welsh Government, at a national level, will raise its own money to spend on public services for the first time in almost 800 years. This will happen when stamp duty land tax and landfill tax are devolved. This marks an important step in our devolution journey and will be a significant change in the way in which public services are funded.

My predecessor, Jane Hutt, began the process of preparing for this change with the introduction of what is now the Tax Collection and Management (Wales) Act 2016. This legislation was passed unanimously by the fourth National Assembly. To realise the potential of these devolved taxes in full, the Welsh Government will introduce two further Bills. One will be on the land transaction tax and anti-avoidance of devolved taxes and the other will be on the landfill disposals tax.

The Welsh taxes will be fair, and we will ensure that they are as simple as they can be. They will provide stability and certainty to taxpayers and will support jobs and growth. I will focus on our commitments to the well-being of future generations in the development and implementation of our tax policy.

A draft of the land transaction tax and anti-avoidance of devolved tax Bill is published today. This is a long and technical Bill. By publishing a draft of this Bill, I hope that it will give Assembly Members, interested stakeholders and the public time to familiarise themselves with the aims and the structure of its provisions before it is introduced into the Assembly in the autumn.

The public consultation on both the land transaction tax and the landfill disposals tax highlighted the desire for consistency with current UK taxes. Llywydd, I want to be clear: we will not change anything for change’s sake. Our proposals are designed to ensure that the situation becomes more efficient and effective and to ensure a focus on Welsh needs and priorities.

Lywydd, ers diwedd yr ymgynghoriad ar ein deddfwriaeth arfaethedig, ynglŷn â threth trafodiadau tir, rwy’n ymwybodol o'r newidiadau y mae Llywodraethau’r DU a’r Alban wedi eu gwneud i’w trethi eu hunain, yn enwedig y dreth ychwanegol ar ail gartrefi. Ymgynghorwyd ynglŷn â'r newidiadau yn y DU yng Nghymru a Lloegr eleni, ac ar hyn o bryd mae'r ddeddfwriaeth ar ei ffordd drwy Senedd y DU. Byddaf yn cyhoeddi ymgynghoriad technegol am ddull polisi Cymru i sicrhau bod trethdalwyr, asiantau a rhanddeiliaid ehangach yn cael cyfle i gyfrannu eu barn ynglŷn â sut y gallai hyn weithio yng Nghymru, gyda'r bwriad o gyflwyno hyn yn ystod y broses o graffu ar y dreth trafodiadau tir a’r Bil gwrth-osgoi trethi datganoledig.

I droi yn awr at y dreth gwarediadau tirlenwi, defnyddir elfen ar dreth bresennol y DU i gefnogi cronfa cymunedau tirlenwi. Yn ystod yr ymgynghoriad cyhoeddus ar ddisodli’r dreth honno yng Nghymru, cafwyd amrywiaeth eang o safbwyntiau ynghylch yr hyn a ddylai ddigwydd i'r gronfa ar ôl datganoli'r dreth. Mae'r gronfa wedi chwarae rhan bwysig wrth gefnogi cymunedau sy'n agos at safleoedd tirlenwi ac rwy'n falch o gadarnhau y prynhawn yma fy mod i’n bwriadu sefydlu cynllun cymunedau treth gwarediadau tirlenwi i barhau â'r gwaith gwerthfawr hwn yng Nghymru.

Lywydd, bydd Aelodau'n ymwybodol fy mod yn ddiweddar wedi cadarnhau fy mhenderfyniad mai Awdurdod Refeniw Cymru fydd yn arwain y gwaith o gasglu a rheoli’r dreth trafodiadau tir a’r dreth gwarediadau tirlenwi a byddant yn gweithio'n uniongyrchol gyda Chyfoeth Naturiol Cymru ar gydymffurfiad a gorfodi'r dreth gwarediadau tirlenwi. Byddwn yn cynnal ein perthynas adeiladol a chadarnhaol gyda Chyllid a Thollau EM i ddatblygu sgiliau, arbenigedd a gallu o fewn Cymru ym maes gweinyddu treth. Rwy’n disgwyl i Awdurdod Refeniw Cymru ddarparu gwasanaeth o safon uchel i alluogi trethdalwyr Cymru i dalu'r swm cywir o dreth ar yr adeg gywir, yn ogystal â bod yn gadarn ynglŷn ag osgoi talu trethi. Yn yr hydref, bydd y broses o benodi cadeirydd Awdurdod Refeniw Cymru yn dechrau. Bydd y cadeirydd yn gweithio ochr yn ochr â chyfarwyddwr gweithredu Awdurdod Refeniw Cymru i greu'r tîm arweinyddiaeth cywir. Rwy’n rhagweld y bydd y bwrdd llawn wedi’i sefydlu chwe mis cyn i'r awdurdod ddechrau ar y gwaith o gasglu a rheoli trethi datganoledig Cymru.

Ar ôl i’r trethi datganoledig gael eu cyflwyno, bydd rhan o gyllideb Llywodraeth Cymru yn y dyfodol yn dibynnu ar refeniw trethi datganoledig. Gan na fydd Llywodraeth y DU yn cael y refeniw hwnnw mwyach, gwneir gostyngiad cyfatebol i grant bloc Cymru. Bydd y fethodoleg ar gyfer cyfrifo hyn wedi’i nodi mewn fframwaith cyllidol newydd i Gymru, a drafodir â Phrif Ysgrifennydd y Trysorlys ac rwy’n credu y dylai fod gan y Cynulliad hwn y pŵer i’w dderbyn neu ei wrthod. Bydd y trafodaethau hyn yn ystyried sut y dylai'r addasiad i grant bloc Cymru adlewyrchu datganoli llawn treth dir y dreth stamp a threth tirlenwi a sut y dylai weithredu os caiff treth incwm ei datganoli’n rhannol. Yn rhan o'r trefniadau newydd, byddaf hefyd yn ceisio cael eglurhad manwl o sut y defnyddir y llawr cyllid ac am gynnydd yn ein terfyn benthyca cyfalaf.

Lywydd, yn ystod y tymor diwethaf, roedd consensws cryf yn bodoli ar draws y Cynulliad hwn am yr angen i sicrhau bargen ariannu deg i Gymru ochr yn ochr â'n cyfrifoldebau cyllidol newydd. Mae’r consensws hwnnw wedi bod yn fantais ymarferol yn ein trafodaethau â’r Trysorlys. Bydd fframwaith cyllidol synhwyrol yn paratoi'r ffordd i gyflwyno cyfraddau treth incwm i Gymru—penderfyniad yr wyf yn glir y dylai ddal i gael ei wneud gan y Cynulliad Cenedlaethol.

O ystyried y ffaith bod treth teithwyr awyr wedi’i hepgor o Fil Cymru, byddwn yn parhau i bwyso am, o leiaf, ddatganoli treth teithwyr awyr pellter hir uniongyrchol i Gymru. Byddai hyn yn sicrhau cydraddoldeb â Gogledd Iwerddon.

Presiding Officer, taxes fund the Welsh public services that we all rely on. The devolution of taxes will provide Wales with the opportunity to take a more rounded, integrated and long-term view of its finances. The ability to raise taxes provides Wales with an opportunity to involve people in decisions about the levels and extent of raising revenue and also about decisions about how that money is to be spent, and I look forward to hearing Assembly Members’ comments this afternoon. Thank you.

May I also thank the Cabinet Secretary for this statement? It’s right to say that it is a historic statement. The Secretary follows in the footsteps of Richard of Mold, who was the last treasurer of Llywelyn ap Gruffudd in 1283. However, it wasn’t possible for the Owain Glyndŵr parliament to raise taxes, because it’s quite difficult to raise taxes when at war, but at least the Secretary isn’t facing that difficulty. But he does make a fundamentally important point, of course, namely that the essence of democracy—the national democracy that the people of Wales have voted for twice—is the ability, of course, not only to make laws, but also to raise taxes and, in so doing, ensuring that there is real accountability for the services that we offer from the point of view of our society and the future that we can create together for our nation.

Nawr, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet, fel yr ydych yn ei gydnabod yn eich datganiad, un rhan hanfodol o ddatganoli treth, a gwneud hynny’n llwyddiannus, yw fframwaith cyllidol clir ac ymarferol. Un peth a fydd yn allweddol i hyn, ac, yn anochel, y cur pen mwyaf mewn trafodaethau gyda Thrysorlys y DU, fydd y ffordd y caiff grant bloc Cymru ei addasu i adlewyrchu trosglwyddo pwerau codi refeniw treth i Lywodraeth Cymru. Mynegodd Llywodraeth flaenorol Cymru bryderon am yr addasiad a wnaethpwyd ar ôl datganoli trethi annomestig. Mae peryglon datganoli treth incwm yn rhannol yn glir. Byddwch yn ymwybodol o astudiaeth gan Ganolfan Llywodraethiant Cymru a ddangosodd fod y dosbarthiad incwm gwahanol iawn yng Nghymru o'i chymharu â Lloegr yn golygu y bydd methu ag amrywio'r trothwy, er enghraifft, yn peri anawsterau mawr. Ac felly gallai mecanwaith anghywir gostio cannoedd o filiynau i gyllideb Cymru bob blwyddyn.

A wnaiff yr Ysgrifennydd roi rhai manylion pellach inni am safbwynt Llywodraeth Cymru ar addasu grant bloc a mynegeio, yn enwedig pa fecanweithiau penodol y mae’r Llywodraeth yn eu ffafrio; sut y mae'n bwriadu ymdrin â thwf gwahaniaethol yn y boblogaeth, mewn ffurflenni treth, mewn twf economaidd; pa weithdrefn sy'n cael ei chynnig ar gyfer sicrhau cytundeb ynglŷn â pha un a yw newid treth yn ymarferol; sut i wahaniaethu rhwng effeithiau gradd un a gradd dau; a pha broses apeliadau neu drefn datrys anghydfodau fydd ar waith os yw Llywodraethau’r DU a Chymru yn anghytuno?

Bu llawer o sôn am yr egwyddorion dim niwed a thegwch i’r trethdalwr sy'n tanlinellu fframwaith cyllidol yr Alban, ond onid yw Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet yn derbyn, yn achos Cymru, un o rannau cyfansoddol tlotaf y Deyrnas Unedig ar hyn o bryd, y dylai fod Llywodraeth y DU yn barod i ganiatáu nid egwyddor dim niwed, efallai, ond egwyddor bonws treth a fyddai’n caniatáu i ni yng Nghymru elwa’n anghymesur ar newidiadau treth fel math o bolisi rhanbarthol? Yn benodol o ran treth incwm, a fydd Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet yn gofyn am gymaint â phosibl o hyblygrwydd ar ddatganoli treth incwm, gan gynnwys y pŵer i addasu lwfansau a throthwyon a chreu bandiau newydd?

Mae'n sôn am y trafodaethau â’r Trysorlys; a allai ddweud ychydig mwy am ein sefyllfa yn y broses honno? A yw eisoes wedi cael cyfarfod ar lefel weinidogol, a sut y bydd yn bwrw ymlaen â’r broses honno dros yr haf?

Parhaodd y trafodaethau rhwng Llywodraeth yr Alban a'r Trysorlys am fframwaith cyllidol yr Alban am oddeutu 11 mis. Un feirniadaeth i'r trafodaethau hynny oedd y diffyg tryloywder. Rydych yn dweud yn eich datganiad—ac rydym yn croesawu hyn—y dylai fod gan y Cynulliad hwn y pŵer i dderbyn neu wrthod fframwaith newydd. A allwch chi hefyd roi sicrwydd inni y bydd gan y Cynulliad ddigon o gyfle i gyfrannu at y trafodaethau hynny a chraffu arnynt, a chytuno ar yr egwyddorion sylfaenol ymlaen llaw? Mae hyn yn gwbl hanfodol o ystyried ein profiad o fformiwla Barnett, a gafodd, wrth gwrs, ei chyflwyno heb ymgynghori ar ddiwedd yr 1970au, ac nad yw erioed wedi ei diwygio er gwaethaf ei hannhegwch amlwg.

I thank the Member for those comments, and I thank him for informing me that some things are very difficult to do here, but not quite like doing it in a state of war.

Cyfres o gwestiynau pwysig iawn gan Adam Price, a’n man cychwyn ni yw'r un lle y dechreuodd yntau hefyd—sef bod atebolrwydd democrataidd yn ymwneud yn gryf â bod sefydliadau sy'n gwario arian yn gyfrifol am godi arian yn ogystal. Fodd bynnag, mae cael y gyfres gywir o gytundebau i Gymru yn gwbl hanfodol. Fel arall, bydd yr egwyddor sylfaenol honno o atebolrwydd democrataidd wedi’i erydu'n angheuol os cawn ni ein dal yn gyfrifol am ganlyniadau penderfyniadau nad ydynt yn cael eu gwneud o fewn y Cynulliad Cenedlaethol hwn. Yn yr ystyr hwnnw, mae’r Aelod yn llygad ei le i ddweud bod y methodolegau a fydd yn sail i'r fframwaith cyllidol yn gwbl hanfodol, y bydd yn rhaid inni fynd i’r afael â chwestiynau fel y rhai a gafodd eu hateb yng nghytundeb yr Alban am newidiadau yn y boblogaeth a bod yn glir, fel yr wyf yn ei gredu, na allwn ni fod yn gyfrifol am newidiadau yn y boblogaeth sy'n cael eu sbarduno gan benderfyniadau nad ydynt yn perthyn yma yn y Cynulliad Cenedlaethol.

Rwy’n cytuno ag ef bod modd o adolygu’r system yn annibynnol yn bwysig iawn. Mae’r Alban wedi sicrhau adolygiad annibynnol yn 2021 i wneud yn siŵr bod y system yno’n gweithio yn y ffordd a fwriadwyd ac ni fyddwn yn disgwyl dim llai i ni yma yng Nghymru.

Cyn belled â ble y mae trafodaethau â’r Trysorlys wedi’i gyrraedd, rwyf wedi cael un drafodaeth hyd yn hyn yn uniongyrchol â Phrif Ysgrifennydd y Trysorlys. Mae gennyf gyfarfod wedi’i drefnu gydag ef ar gyfer 21 Gorffennaf ac yn fy nhrafodaeth wreiddiol ag ef, gwnaethom gytuno ei bod yn debygol, i mi, y byddem yn cyfarfod bob mis yn ystod yr hydref er mwyn cadarnhau rhai o'r manylion y bydd y fframwaith cyllidol priodol yn dibynnu arnynt. Rwy’n gobeithio na wnaiff hyn gymryd cymaint o amser ag a wnaeth yn yr Alban, ac rydym yn ffodus ein bod yn dilyn yr Alban o amgylch y llwybr hwn ac rydym wedi bod yn ffodus iawn bod ein cydweithwyr yn yr Alban wedi cydweithredu’n helaeth â ni, i’n galluogi i elwa ar eu profiad a chael rhywfaint o fewnwelediad i'r trafodaethau a ddigwyddodd.

Rwy'n meddwl bod llawer yng nghytundeb yr Alban sy'n rhoi man cychwyn da iawn i ni ar gyfer ein trafodaethau wrth i ni ddechrau arnynt yn yr hydref. Mae'n hanfodol i mi bod gan y Cynulliad Cenedlaethol gyfle i barhau i graffu ar y darlun sy'n datblygu yn y trafodaethau hynny, yn rhannol oherwydd yr hoffwn wneud yn siŵr fy mod yn gallu ateb unrhyw gwestiynau sydd gan Aelodau, ond hefyd oherwydd y pwynt a wnes i yn fy natganiad sef ein bod, yn y Cynulliad diwethaf, pan oeddem yn gallu cytuno ar rai pethau craidd pwysig a oedd yn bwysig ar draws y Cynulliad Cenedlaethol cyfan, bod hynny yna'n cryfhau ein siawns yn sylweddol o gynnal y dadleuon hynny y bydd yn rhaid i ni eu cael ar ben arall yr M4.

Cabinet Secretary, I’m pleased to see that you’re carrying on with your predecessor’s enthusiasm for the first Welsh taxes in 800 years. I suppose it’s a bit too much to expect the public to be enthusiastic about paying taxes, but at least the enthusiasm is with you with a mind on history and the thirteenth century indeed.

This does, indeed, represent a fundamental change in the devolved settlement. Firstly, I support your desire for Welsh taxes to be as simple as possible. I’m pleased that you are carrying on with the policy that taxes here should only differ from those across the border and other parts of the UK if absolutely necessary. How are you going to ensure this simplicity and what have you done to reassure stakeholders that the tax regime that develops in Wales will be as simple and straightforward as possible?

I appreciate the legislation process for taxes such as LTT will be complex; I’m sure you agree that it’s important that we get this right. You did touch on this, but what are you doing to draw on experience of tax devolution in Scotland? As you said earlier, they have made some mistakes there, such as developing the legislation for Revenue Scotland way after they started the process of developing individual taxes. They learnt a number of lessons; have you learnt those lessons—well, you clearly have, because you’ve done it the other way around—but what other lessons has the Welsh Government learnt, and, indeed, what can we teach Scotland in this area, Secretary? I’m sure that there are things there—this is a two-way process.

I’m pleased you intend to maintain a constructive relationship with HMRC. How confident are you at this early stage that HMRC will be fit for purpose in the Welsh context? Scotland, initially, were going to rely very heavily on HMRC, but as things transpired and developed, they relied on them less, and I think they gave Revenue Scotland a lot more of the role that HMRC were originally going to take because of cost reasons and efficiency reasons. Do you envisage the Welsh Revenue Authority having a similar wider responsibility in future in taking on some of that responsibility itself?

You’ve mentioned, towards the end of your statement, the fiscal framework. As you know, and as I’ve told you in the past, you have cross-party support on the development of a proper fiscal framework. I think there’s general agreement that we cannot go on as we are, particularly with the imminent devolution of these taxes to Wales.

I’ve spoken repeatedly and asked you questions about my concerns over block grant reductions in the wake of tax devolution, including income tax devolution. Can you update us, as Adam Price asked you, on any discussions with the Treasury on mechanisms of calculating the block grant reduction in the first year and, also, the options for indexing future reductions? These clearly aren’t discussions that are the talk of pubs across Wales, but these are very important to getting tax devolution right.

In terms of future reductions, firstly, how will inflation be taken into account? With the decision to leave the European Union and costlier imports, there is general consensus that there’s a risk of higher inflation over the medium term. So, the indexing for inflation becomes increasingly important, even more so than it was before. Secondly, you already mentioned the issue of population change. The Scottish Government has dealt with this and there is an agreement with Westminster that any detrimental change in population will not be borne by the Scottish proportion of income tax, but by the UK as a whole. Are you seeking similar assurances from the Treasury? I’m more than happy to make that case with you. This is a good example of where we do need to see equity across the UK. Yes, we all agree with the need for fiscal accountability and the need for Welsh Government to bear the risk associated with the fiscal decisions that you take, but you should not have to bear the risk associated with UK decisions as a whole. We need to entangle those two.

Finally, Presiding Officer, you mention the need for some kind of future mediation if the amount of money we get through the Barnett formula and fiscal framework is not what the Welsh Government feels that we should be getting. I’m casting my mind back to some of the Finance Committee evidence sessions from the last Assembly. There was a suggestion that we could develop a UK body that would deal with mediating problems like this, so that it wouldn’t be simply a case of a bilateral discussion between you and the Westminster Government. What are your thoughts, in the future, on some kind of body that could provide that mediation? Would you like to see a return to the quadrilateral discussions that your predecessor had a number of years ago, before they were replaced by bilateral discussions? I think the quadrilateral discussions, from my discussions with Jane Hutt, were very useful in moving forward.

I thank Nick Ramsay for those important questions. My starting point is the same as his. We want the system to be as understandable and simple as possible, albeit that some of these matters are inherently complex and are the province of people who are experts in the field. I believe that the journey that we are on should begin with as little difference as necessary between the system we have already and the system that we will create, while building in sufficient flexibility to our system to allow for differentiation in the future, should Welsh policy needs require us to move in that direction. In the short term, it is very important that those people who work the system day in, day out see the system that will replace it as recognisably the one that they are used to, in order to be able to go on providing a smooth service to members of the public, but we want to have, inherent in the legislation that we will bring forward, the ability for that to develop and mature.

As far as lessons that we have learned from Scotland, as I said to Adam Price, we’ve been very fortunate, I think, in the level of assistance that we’ve been afforded by colleagues in Scotland and continue to be afforded. One of the lessons that we’ve learned from Revenue Scotland underpins the decision that I published in the written statement on Friday to make the Welsh Revenue Authority the lead on the collection and management of land transaction tax and landfill disposals tax, and on compliance and enforcement of land transaction tax. A year ago, we thought that the balance of arguments was slightly in favour of allowing HMRC to go on doing that on our behalf. But, Revenue Scotland’s first-year experience, I think, gives us confidence that it’s possible for us to take on that tax more directly ourselves. I think that’s a good investment in building up the system that we will need for the future. We need to continue to have constructive relationships with HMRC in the meantime because there is expertise there that we will need to draw on. We have good offers from HMRC of seconding staff to us in Wales, in the short run, to help us build up that expertise, and a continuing dialogue with them to assist us in setting up our systems here.

Nick Ramsay has very regularly and effectively raised the whole issue of the fiscal framework on the floor of the Assembly and the need for a block grant adjustment mechanism that protects the position of Welsh taxpayers and people who rely on Welsh services. The first year is not the problem, as he implied. You simply substitute what we will have or what we would have had in subsequent years, but we have to make sure that the mechanism is robust enough to take account of inflation. I would certainly expect that we will have a similar system to that which they negotiated in Scotland on the issue of population, but there are other differences. Adam Price referred to the work of the Wales Governance Centre on the differential impact that raising the tax threshold has in Wales compared to other parts of the United Kingdom. We will have to negotiate those matters over the autumn as well.

On the issue of future mediation and the need for an impartial adjudication system, in Scotland they’ve agreed on using the Office for Budget Responsibility and the Scottish Fiscal Commission. We don’t have a commission of that sort here in Wales and I will be considering over the summer how we might mobilise a Welsh-specific form of expertise to match the independent advice that will continue to come from the OBR.

As far as the quadrilaterals are concerned, I certainly think it would be beneficial if they were revived. I’ve said that to the Chief Secretary to the Treasury already. In the meantime, I will meet finance Ministers from Scotland and Northern Ireland next week to make sure that we continue to share experience and expertise that we can collectively put to work in our negotiations with Whitehall.

I’m grateful to the Cabinet Secretary for his statement. As he says, these matters are inherently complex, and legislation is inevitably technical. This was brought home to me, at least with respect to this Assembly, should it be necessary, when seeking to familiarise myself with the procedures, at least to a degree. I watched, on the Parliament channel, his predecessor ably introducing the Tax Collection and Management (Wales) Bill—now Act—and I’m sure he will continue to undertake the role with similar ability.

I welcome, in particular, his statement that there will be no change for change’s sake, and now that he wishes to see—at least, initially—as little difference as possible between the system in Wales and the current UK system to which we are part; and a through-train approach that, at least for practitioners, I’m sure will be welcomed. I wonder whether I can ask him particularly about how that may affect the land transaction tax. He mentioned in his statement that this had been consulted on on an England and Wales basis and was currently going through the UK Parliament. Does that imply that he is happy with that approach, or may he be seeking to make changes to the applicability and basis of that tax when it is introduced expressly for Wales?

Second, I just wanted—. Towards the end of his statement he said that a sensible fiscal framework will pave the way to the introduction of Welsh rates of income tax. I was a little puzzled. He then said that he was clear that decision should continue to rest with the National Assembly. Is it not the case that, currently, that decision rests ultimately with a referendum of the Welsh people, and that he and the Conservative Government in Westminster are both seeking to change those arrangements to evade any such referendum? Well, perhaps after the decision 11 days ago of the Welsh people to vote against membership of the European Union, he isn’t so keen on referendums, but should we not at least accept that that is the current position, which he and the other Government at the UK level now seek to change?

I thank Mark Reckless for those questions. My message today about no change for change’s sake is based on the very clear message that came from stakeholders during our consultation on the land transfer tax. They were very strongly of the view that we needed a smooth transition from the existing law to the new law and that changes—and there will be changes that we will introduce—would be just the ones that are necessary while allowing the scope for greater changes in the future.

What I said in my statement—I apologise if I didn’t make this quite clear enough—was that, since we consulted on our land transaction tax proposals, there have been changes in Scotland and at the UK level that weren’t known at the time of the consultation, and I drew attention in particular to the additional rate on second homes, which only became part of the Scottish and UK landscape after our consultation had closed. I think Mr Reckless asked me whether that was a policy that I supported. Let me say that it’s a policy that I find attractive, but which we have to consult on. And so, I’m not coming to a conclusion until we’ve had the consultation, and I tried to say in my statement that we will publish a document for consultation over this summer, and then I’ll come before the National Assembly with conclusions once we’ve had the benefit of that.

As to Welsh rates of income tax, I was referring to the proposed change in the Wales Bill and simply trying to make the point that if there is to be no referendum, there needs to be some substitute mechanism for that, and, for me, that is that no transfer of income tax responsibility should be made to this National Assembly without this National Assembly’s explicit agreement.

Taxation exists to pay for public services. It’s very important if we are to have high-quality public services that we have a taxation system that works. It’s not there primarily as a means of economic development; it’s there to get money for services that we all rely on.

The two taxes proposed to be devolved on 1 April 2018 raise limited income. The policy intention is to continue to reduce landfill, and thus landfill disposals tax, by increasing recycling. In fact, the Government would probably consider it a success if landfill tax brought in no money whatsoever. While land transaction tax is highly volatile and cyclical, the amount of tax raised is small enough not to materially affect the Welsh Government’s expenditure. It will, however, be critical to get a fair deal on this tax to ensure no detriment and to set the principles for any future taxation that is devolved.

I agree with Nick Ramsay about the importance of mediation. If I could just mention the money we didn’t get from the London Olympics, the Treasury acted as judge and jury, and we got roughly the same amount of money that I believe we should have got for Swansea, never mind for the whole of Wales.

I am nervous on the devolution of income tax. We know that it fell by £400 million between 2007-08 and 2009-10. Even the biggest critics of the Welsh Government probably wouldn’t blame the Welsh Government for that fall, yet, if income tax were devolved, they would take the hit. Any change to the way that Wales is funded should give protection against reductions caused by actions outside the control of the Welsh Government and the Welsh Assembly. There must be ‘no detriment’ written in there, and not for the short term, but for ever.

I have a question. If you think specifically back to Silk, there was talk about the devolution of the aggregate levy. That’s something that seems to have been on the back burner for a long time. It’s not a particularly large sum of money, but I think it is a tax that is easily, I hope, devolved. Can the Minister give any further information on the devolution of the aggregate levy? And will the Minister commit to make keeping the funding floor the key aspect of any negotiations, so that we have it if the amount of money coming into Wales goes up, or if the money that has been spent goes up, so that it’s not just there when the money is going down, and to ensure that ‘no detriment’ is written into the whole system, so that we don’t lose out? Will the Minister continue to push for some form of mediation; someone to adjudicate between the Welsh Government and the Treasury? I don’t know if I’m allowed to say this, but I don’t trust the Treasury to be fair. [Assembly Members: ‘Oh.]

Controversial. [Laughter.]

Controversial—yes, indeed. Mike Hedges is right, of course, that the purpose of raising taxes is to pay for public services. We also try our best to align taxation in a way that promotes objectives of public policy, and that’s why we have a landfill disposals tax. There is some inherent volatility in these taxes. The best estimates prior to 23 June were that they would raise around £300 million a year, so it’s not an insignificant sum, and, if we didn’t have it, we would certainly feel the effect of it in our public services. That’s why the ‘no detriment’ principle is so important in the negotiations.

On aggregates levy, we continue to be in discussions with the UK Government on that matter, but I think the broader points that Mike Hedges made are very important, that our discussions with the Treasury are not narrowly focused on these two pieces of legislation. They have to be part of that bigger pattern of negotiations in which the funding floor, securing that as a permanent part of the landscape—borrowing limits, which I mentioned in my statement, are part of that wider landscape too, and, while we concentrated this afternoon, and we’ll be taking through the National Assembly in the autumn, these two very important pieces of legislation, our discussions with the Treasury are on a broader canvas than that.

Like the earlier speakers, I think we need to move with caution on this, not least because, as you say in your statement, every tax we get, every power we get devolved, appears to lead to a similar reduction in the amount of the block grant, and that could actually lead to a greater burden on Wales than we currently get from the mildly redistributive system that we have, even if it’s not perfect. So, I think we need to avoid perverse incentives, and, obviously, the landfill disposals tax does that, but it can also be used to tackle perverse consequences. I was struck by the intention of San Francisco to levy a very modest 1.5 per cent payroll tax on the high-tech companies—global companies like Google, Amazon and Uber, not known for their enthusiasm for paying taxes anywhere in the world. But, if successful, that money could be used to provide affordable housing for low-income families who’ve been displaced by these very same successful tech companies who have made it impossible for people to go on living in the city.

So, I think we have to realise that, if the austerity policies of the UK Government continue, there will continue to be pressure on us to find new ways of boosting the public sector revenue, particularly if we see a reduction in public sector grants coming from central Government. So, do we have the powers in the future, were we so minded, to adjust the land transaction tax to become a land value tax, which might more adequately reflect the good fortune of those who benefit from well-connected communities and excellent services to pay more as a vehicle for reversing the well-known inverse care law, as well as tax avoidance? Perhaps you could give us some indication of the direction of travel that the Government might be suggesting we move in.

Thank you, Jenny Rathbone, for those questions. She’s right to begin by warning us of perversities and unintended consequences that can flow from even the best motivated policies. But I do continue to believe that the basic principle that any tier of government that expends public money should also be responsible for raising part of that money is the right one. And then we have to work hard to make sure that we do it in the correct way. I thank the Member for Cardiff Central for referring to the San Francisco experience, which I don’t know enough about, but will look forward to learning more about that.

I think she points to another of these wider contextual matters that Mike Hedges raised, which is that, alongside all of this, if the Wales Bill succeeds, then this National Assembly will have new powers to propose new taxes here in Wales. And the recent Bevan Commission report rehearsed land value taxation as one of a number of possibilities that could be tested in that new regime. Personally, I have long been something of an enthusiast for land value taxation. What I do feel is that, if those new powers come to Wales, it will be important for us to think through together some examples of new taxes that we might be able to propose in order to test out the new machinery that the Wales Bill envisages and to see the best way in which we could use those new powers for the benefit of individuals and services in Wales.

May I welcome the Cabinet Secretary’s statement and, particularly, his comments on the fiscal framework, and the commitment that this Senedd will have an opportunity to discuss and to agree or otherwise the framework in due course? In looking at the agreement between the UK Government and the Scottish Government, it is clear that it’s the result of a great deal of work, and I’m pleased to hear that you’ve had some collaboration in relation to that for our arrangements. But it doesn’t have the impact of legislation. Does he agree with me that a statutory basis to the fiscal framework would provide greater guarantees to Wales in terms of a commitment to adequate funding and the broad principles that underpin that commitment, and a mechanism to dealing with any dispute or disagreement, should one arise?

Thank you very much to Jenny Miles. Just to say, I was eager to appear before the Assembly before the summer with a statement, just to have an opportunity to discuss things together and provide an update to Assembly Members. On the experience in Scotland, it’s on the agenda for the meeting I have next week with the Minister from Scotland to press ahead with those discussions that we’ve had with them and to learn from the experiences that they’ve had. The best way to be clear that in our hands, and in the hands of the National Assembly, is where the final choice rests to accept the framework and to be content with the framework—that’s vital. The best way to do that—well, that’ll be part of the process that we’re going to have in the autumn of discussing everything with the Treasury Secretary in London.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary.

We now move to the next item, the statement by the Minister for Lifelong Learning and Welsh Language on the ministerial taskforce on the Valleys. I call on the Minister, Alun Davies.

Thank you, Presiding Officer.

The south Wales Valleys have a strong and proud history. We powered the industrial revolution, we drove the development of the Commonwealth and we were instrumental in all the advances of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The closure of the ironworks, steelworks and the pits has had a long and lasting impact on the Valleys communities, stretching from the English border to Carmarthenshire.

Lywydd, mae ein cymunedau yn y Cymoedd wedi ysgwyddo baich effaith dirwasgiadau olynol a dirywiadau economaidd. Maent wedi bod ar flaen y gad o ran arbrofion Llywodraeth y DU i ddiwygio lles.

Fel y dangosodd canlyniad refferendwm yr Undeb Ewropeaidd y mis diwethaf, mae llawer o bobl sy'n byw yn ein cymunedau yn y Cymoedd heddiw yn teimlo eu bod wedi’u gadael ar ôl a’u gadael allan. Nid dim ond pleidlais yn erbyn aelodaeth o'r UE oedd hon; roedd hefyd yn bleidlais lle dangosodd pobl eu bod yn teimlo'n ansicr am eu lle yn y byd, eu rhagolygon swyddi, eu hawliau cyflogaeth, a'u dyfodol.

Yn unol â maniffesto'r Blaid Lafur, ac ymrwymiadau a wnaethpwyd yn y cyfnod cyn etholiad y Cynulliad, rwyf heddiw’n cyhoeddi y bydd Llywodraeth Cymru yn sefydlu tasglu gweinidogol ar gyfer y Cymoedd. Ein bwriad fydd canfod dull newydd o fuddsoddi yn nyfodol ein Cymoedd a fydd yn ymgysylltu â chymunedau lleol ac yn eu grymuso, ac yn adfer ymdeimlad o obaith a dyhead.

Rydym eisoes wedi gweld buddsoddiad strwythurol sylweddol yn y Cymoedd, gan gynnwys gan yr Undeb Ewropeaidd. Bydd y tasglu yn adeiladu ar y sylfaen hon, gan weithio gyda phobl sy'n byw yn y Cymoedd, busnesau lleol, llywodraeth leol, y trydydd sector a sefydliadau dinesig i hyrwyddo'r Cymoedd fel rhanbarth i fuddsoddi ynddo ac fel lle i fyw, i gydgysylltu buddsoddiadau presennol yn well, ac i ymdrin â phroblemau hirdymor. Bydd yn gweithio'n agos gyda rhaglenni prifddinas-ranbarth Caerdydd a dinas-ranbarth bae Abertawe a bydd yn ceisio harneisio potensial tirwedd unigryw ac amrywiol y Cymoedd.

Gan ddefnyddio gwybodaeth y sector cyhoeddus a gallu Llywodraeth Cymru i weithredu fel catalydd, bydd y tasglu gweinidogol yn cyfarwyddo ac yn arwain y gwaith o adfywio a sicrhau twf cynaliadwy yn y Cymoedd. Blaenoriaeth gyntaf y tasglu fydd gwrando ar yr hyn sydd ei eisiau ar bobl yn y Cymoedd ar gyfer ein dyfodol. Byddwn yn dechrau sgwrs fanwl am wella ansawdd bywyd, datblygu economaidd ac adfywio, effeithlonrwydd busnes a chystadleurwydd, cyflogaeth a sgiliau, ac, yn olaf, datblygu cynaliadwy.

Bydd y tasglu yn gorff gweithgar ac ystwyth ac nid yn gwango biwrocrataidd. Bydd ganddo nifer bach o aelodau craidd a bydd yn galw ar gyfraniadau gan eraill yn ôl y gofyn. Bydd pob Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet a phob Gweinidog yn rhannu cyfrifoldeb dros wella bywydau pobl sy'n byw yn y Cymoedd. Byddaf i'n cadeirio'r tasglu. Bydd ei aelodau'n cynnwys Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros yr Economi a’r Seilwaith a'r Gweinidog Sgiliau a Gwyddoniaeth. Bydd ganddo hefyd nifer bach o gynghorwyr arbenigol allanol. Byddaf yn rhoi'r wybodaeth ddiweddaraf i'r Aelodau am y penodiadau hyn maes o law.

Mae'n bwysig ein bod yn cydnabod bod y broses o arallgyfeirio economi'r Cymoedd eisoes wedi dechrau. Mae diwydiannau newydd yn cael eu cefnogi ac mae'n rhaid inni barhau i adeiladu ar hyn a sicrhau bod pawb yn elwa, gan greu cyfleoedd newydd mewn cymunedau lleol a sicrhau bod manteision mewnfuddsoddi’n cael eu cadw a'u rhannu yn y Cymoedd.

Mae'r materion a’r heriau sylfaenol sy'n effeithio ar Gymoedd y de yn deillio o goctel gwenwynig o dlodi ac amddifadedd. Bydd y tasglu’n ymateb i’r ystod honno o ddangosyddion economaidd-gymdeithasol negyddol sydd wedi rhoi cynifer o'n cymunedau yn y Cymoedd ar waelod tablau cynghrair iechyd, cyfoeth a lles. Er ein bod ni wedi gwneud cynnydd pwysig yng Nghymru i leihau diweithdra a nifer y bobl sy'n byw mewn cartrefi di-waith, mae rhannau o'r Cymoedd yn parhau i fod â lefelau uchel o anweithgarwch economaidd, lefelau uchel o amddifadedd, a lefelau uchel o ddiweithdra. Mae hyn, yn ei dro, wedi cael effaith ar gyrhaeddiad addysgol ac iechyd hirdymor.

Mae effaith diwygiadau lles Llywodraeth y DU, o gyflwyno'r dreth ystafell wely i doriadau mewn budd-daliadau anabledd, wedi cael ei theimlo gryfaf gan gymunedau yn y Cymoedd. Er na allwn ddadwneud y diwygiadau hyn, gallwn wneud mwy i gefnogi pobl a'u helpu i chwilio am waith urddasol, medrus ac ystyrlon. Byddwn yn gweithio gyda phobl i ymateb i'w hamgylchiadau a'u profiadau yn y byd go iawn. Mae’n rhaid i’r ymagwedd hon gael ei hategu gan fynediad at swyddi, mynediad at wasanaethau o safon uchel a mynediad at gymorth i wella cyflogadwyedd. Rydym yn gwybod bod llawer o bobl a chymunedau yn teimlo wedi’u difreinio, yn ddigalon ac nad ydynt yn cael digon o sylw. Rwyf am i'r tasglu siarad â’r cymunedau hyn a’r bobl hyn, a gwrando arnynt, i ganfod pam y mae pobl yn teimlo eu bod wedi’u gadael ar ôl gymaint gan yr economi ehangach a’r gwleidyddion hynny sydd wedi’u hethol i'w cynrychioli.

Drwy'r tasglu, hoffem weld twf cynaliadwy sy'n ychwanegu gwerth economaidd i'n cymunedau yn y Cymoedd. Rydym am i gyfoeth aros yn yr economïau lleol hynny lle y mae’n cael ei greu, nid llifo i ffwrdd i gymunedau pell, cronfeydd sicrwydd neu gyfrifon banc tramor. Rhaid i adfywiad parhaus Cymoedd y de fod â’i wreiddiau mewn ymagwedd at bolisi economaidd sydd â’r prif amcan o ddileu tlodi. Gallwn helpu i wella safonau byw, iechyd a lles teuluoedd a chyfleoedd bywyd plant drwy sicrhau bod swyddi gwell ar gael i bobl yn nes at adref. Bydd y tasglu’n gweithio ar draws adrannau Llywodraeth Cymru, gyda'r economi, addysg, iechyd a thai, i ysgogi camau i ddiwallu anghenion y Cymoedd wrth iddynt ddatblygu.

Lywydd Dros Dro, nid wyf yn bychanu'r heriau sydd o'n blaenau, yn enwedig o ystyried penderfyniad pobl Prydain i geisio ymadael â’r Undeb Ewropeaidd. Fodd bynnag, ceir brwdfrydedd i gydweithredu a chydweithio, fel y gwnaeth cenedlaethau blaenorol, i ateb heriau heddiw ac i roi dyfodol ffyniannus a diogel i’r Cymoedd. Byddaf yn rhoi’r wybodaeth ddiweddaraf i Aelodau'r Cynulliad wrth i waith y tasglu ddatblygu. Diolch.

Thank you, Minister. Bethan Jenkins.

Diolch. The background to this statement here today, I believe, is a manifesto commitment that the First Minister made in April. But, when he announced this taskforce, he said it was being done, and I quote:

‘to challenge the relentless pessimism that we hear from Plaid Cymru…in the Valleys. To listen to them, you’d think that nothing ever happened here. Well, it’s our job to put them right’.

But, I think it’s less about putting us right than talking to the people of the area and trying to empower them, and their communities, to make decisions for their own lives. How do we know this? As you’ve already said, Minister, it’s because of the referendum result. In spite of billions of pounds of European money flowing into the Valleys, many people looked around them and asked whether their lives had been materially improved.

Of course, we can always point to projects here and there, but has all that money dealt conclusively with the legacy of post-industrialisation? Has is brought an end to high unemployment and an unwell population? Has it really delivered economic opportunity and reduced crime and other anti-social issues? The answer is that it has not. We are still stuck with these issues, as we were 20, 30 or 40 years—or half a century—ago, and it isn’t good enough.

So, the first thing this taskforce needs to be concerning itself with, in my view, is outcomes—how you will measure the success of your efforts. Why not start with the fundamental question: how has this or that policy or initiative improved the lives of the people of the Valleys? It seems to me to be the most elementary question, but probably the most important question here. So, I’d like the Minister to say how outcomes will be measured. I would also like to know whether the criteria for measurement will be decided independently rather than by the Welsh Government, because that’s rather like marking your own work, and, as I’ve already said, people in the Valleys aren’t really buying it at the moment.

I’d also like to know how you intend to start this conversation with people. We’re talking about engagement post Brexit and people being annoyed with politicians. How do you want to talk to people other than the usual suspects? We have to engage with people in their communities if they now tell us that they feel that politicians are distant. How are you going to make sure that that changes in terms of the future?

I’m pleased that the terms of reference refer to delivering opportunity rather than combating poverty. We’ve had the latter for as long as I can remember being an Assembly Member, and it hasn’t worked. I’m firmly of the view that if we really want to deliver jobs, then many of the other issues will look after themselves if we focus on the economic prospects of people in these areas. So, I would like to understand—. I know that Communities First doesn’t just exist in south Wales, but if you are going to be launching this new taskforce, how, then, does it marry into schemes like this and other anti-poverty initiatives that may interweave or conflict with what you are doing in this new initiative?

I think that, rather than seeking—going back to what I was saying at the start—to shoot the messenger, the Welsh Government needs to take a hard look at itself, because it’s not just Plaid Cymru that’s saying that not enough is being done. The Communities, Equality and Local Government Committee reported in June last year, saying that, by the Welsh Government’s lack of progress in reducing poverty, particularly given its long-term commitment investing in the issue, there was deep concern there. So, we need to look at, instead of putting blame on people, treating the symptoms of poverty and tackling the root causes of poverty.

I’d like to know whether, in the wake of the referendum, as you mentioned Brexit at the beginning, the Welsh Government has reviewed the effectiveness of European money that has been spent in the south Wales Valleys area. After all, if it is the provider of funding, rather than deliverer of its intended purposes, then the EU can only shoulder some of the blame if that funding does not lead to significant and measurable improvement. Or, to put it another way, new pavements or a walkway in a town centre won’t deliver jobs in and of themselves—it’s what goes in and around that that counts.

Lastly, I’d like to know what this taskforce will do to break the link between poverty and poor educational attainment. In this party, we’ve pushed for community-focused schools with strong links to families and the wider community, and I think that the Welsh Government must deliver its own manifesto pledge to pilot a new model of community learning centres, providing extended services from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m., with childcare, parenting support, family learning and community access to facilities built around the school day. There is cross-party support for such a proposal, and we have also pledged to turn schools into community hubs so that they can be open at weekends, they can be open to the community, as opposed to just open at school times, and we can then engage on a wider basis in terms of eradicating poverty in Wales. I don’t disagree with the setting up of this taskforce, but I don’t either want it to be just another piece of work that sits on a bookshelf somewhere and gets forgotten about; I want people in the Valleys areas who feel, often, quite disenfranchised and disengaged to become part of the debate in the future so that we can make devolution work for them and we can make the future of Wales be part of their conversation, not just ours as politicians.

I’m grateful to the Plaid Cymru spokesperson for her response, and I agree with much of it. I certainly agree with the points that you made on outcomes, rather than simply counting what we’re doing. I think all too often in Government, there’s been a temptation to count all the actions that we take and then to declare that a great success because we’ve done a lot. What actually matters is the impact of those actions on the people and communities that we represent. Certainly, I very much agree as well that it would be useful were many of these outcomes to be defined, if you like, not simply by Government, but by others as well, who take a more independent view of this.

When I look at these issues, I don’t simply look at a series of statistics, I understand and appreciate the lives that people live and the impact that our policies sometimes don’t have on those people, and the need to actually make a difference. So, I was very, very clear, I hope, in making this statement that we want to see the eradication of poverty as a key driver for what we do, not simply something that we do when we’re sitting here in Cardiff Bay, or sitting in various taskforces or committees elsewhere—in Cathays Park, or wherever we happen to be—but that we look at all the actions we take as a Government, with the Government acting as a catalyst, bringing people together, and that we establish the eradication of poverty in the south Wales Valleys as a driver of policy, and that that is the benchmark that we take and that we make for all other policy interventions.

The reason why the Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Infrastructure and the Minister for Skills and Science are joining me on this taskforce is to focus in on those wider economic issues and on how we can ensure that we have the human capital and we invest in our human capital to ensure that we do meet those objectives. I certainly will be bringing in my colleagues from across the rest of Government, as necessary and as needed, and bringing in the expertise that we need from elsewhere outside of Government. But, I want to ensure that this taskforce is not, as you put it, something that sits on shelves, wherever they happen to be, but is a taskforce that brings people together to achieve very real results, and we have the opportunity here to do that.

I’m not sure I do completely agree with you in the criticisms that you made about the investments made by the different European programmes. I think they have had a very real impact, and I’ve seen in my own constituency the changes that have been made, both from the building of the A465 Heads of the Valleys road to the renewal of Ebbw Vale, if you like, at the Works site—the investment in the railway, the investment in the college, and the investment in apprenticeships and Jobs Growth Wales, which are having a very real impact on people’s lives. What I’m concerned to do is that we focus in on substance and not simply PR, that we focus in on making real changes, and not simply cosmetic changes, and that we focus in on changing life opportunities for people. That is a very different ambition, and a very different vision from, perhaps, what we’ve seen at different points in the past.

You mentioned the anti-poverty schemes that are already in existence, and we will be bringing together those schemes and we will be reviewing how those schemes are working today and how they will work in the future. The Cabinet Secretary for Communities and Children will be looking at some of those issues, and I expect to join him in reviewing how some of those anti-poverty programmes do work.

Let me finish on this point: you talked about how we engage as politicians and Ministers, and I think you’re absolutely right to focus on that and on our failure, sometimes, to communicate our messages. I was anxious to make this statement before recess so that we can get started on this work as soon as possible. I don’t see this as being simply an exercise in consultation, as perhaps we’ve done at other times in the past; I see this as wishing to stimulate a rich and in-depth and honest discussion with people—the people that we both represent in different parts of the south Wales Valleys. I want to listen actively to what people tell us, because when people talk to us—and we’ve all had conversations on doorsteps over the last few weeks and months—many people have spoken to me about the environment in which they live, whether it’s litter on the streets of Ebbw Vale or whether it’s weeds growing in the streets of Tredegar, or whether it’s fly-tipping above Nantyglo. And these are things which matter to people; it affects their own place, it affects their perception of who they are and they are things that we want to address. So, yes, we will address the large-scale challenges facing us, but we also need to address the places in which we live, and I would never underestimate the importance of that to people, wherever we happen to live in the Valleys.

Can I just remind Members that we’re already halfway through the time allocated to this session? I’d be very grateful if all Members and, in fact, the Minister himself, could keep questions and answers short in order to maximise broad scrutiny of the Government. Thank you very much. Mohammad Asghar.

Thank you very much, acting Deputy Presiding Officer. I also thank the Minister for his statement today. According to the Office for National Statistics, one in eight children in Wales are living in long-term workless households. Many of these children live in the south-east Wales Valleys. Research shows that children living with long-term unemployed parents do less well at school and are at higher risk of being unemployed in later life. Children from better-off families enjoy better health and have higher skills than those from poorer families. So, any strategy to break the cycle of unemployment, poor health and well-being, poverty and lack of educational achievement is to be welcomed. Given the focus on promoting economic development and regeneration, it is vital that the business community is fully engaged with this taskforce. So, can I ask the Minister: what discussion he has had with the private sector for their input into this taskforce?

Similarly, collaboration with the third sector, local authorities and community groups will be important in this case. What consultative procedure with these groups will be adopted by this taskforce?

The aims of this taskforce cross many ministerial boundaries. What targets do you intend to set, and how will you monitor progress across Government in meeting these targets? How will the taskforce co-ordinate its work in conjunction with existing strategies such as the skills agenda in Wales?

Finally, Minister, I know that you intend to chair this taskforce. May I ask what consideration was given to adopting an independent chair with business experience from the private sector to drive forward this initiative? You mentioned a couple of areas in the south-east Wales Valleys. The Minister should know that I travel virtually every week to those Valleys, and they are deprived areas not for jobs only, but since coal and steel have gone—and continuous Labour Governments have been ruling this country. So, nothing has been done so far. There is great potential, Minister, if you start just thinking of certain market towns like Tredegar, Ebbw Vale, Merthyr—they were booming areas in the 1970s and 1980s, and, somehow, there are derelict buildings there now. So, have you thought about it—whether these closed shops can be, you know, reinvigorated so that they can resurface in this part of world with new money and new people to invest in it to make sure our Valleys come to their full glory, where they were only 30 or 40 years ago? Thank you.

I would very gently suggest to the Member that perhaps he reads the statement before he writes his contribution to it. If you had read or listened to my statement, you would have known that we will be consulting with all the different parts of the community that you have listed in your questions. And let me say this to you: it’s a bit rich for any Conservative spokesperson to come here to this Chamber and wring their hands and cry their crocodile tears about the poverty that they’ve created on an industrial scale in these communities.

Let me say this to the Conservative spokesperson: the impact of welfare reforms on communities up and down and across the south Wales Valleys is absolutely extraordinary. I am seeing, in my own constituency, a loss of around £60 million from the pockets of some of the most vulnerable and poorest families in that community. We are seeing that taking place at the moment. You can shake your head, but it’s absolutely true and we’re seeing the impact of it. We’re seeing the impact on those families, on the children whom he cried his crocodile tears about, and we’re also seeing the impact, then, on local businesses and local communities. We are seeing those impacts today, and what this work is designed to do is to alleviate and mitigate the difficulties and the problems, the crisis and the chaos that has been caused by the United Kingdom Conservative Government.

Let me say this: we will, as I’ve said in answer to Bethan Jenkins, be establishing very clear targets. Clearly, the skills Minister is on the taskforce, so she will be fully engaged with this agenda. But, I think, if the Conservatives wish to contribute positively to the work that is being done, they need to start by recognising where we are today and the role that they have played in creating the economic decline that is affecting the people and communities of the Valleys of south Wales.

Before I just ask my question of the Minister, I just wanted to note, and note that this Chamber notes that the UKIP AMs that have been lauding their representation of the Valleys throughout the Assembly elections and have been telling Labour how out of touch they are with the Valleys—

Could we move to questions, please?

[Continues.]—have not even bothered to stay in this Chamber for the discussion on the very future of those Valleys that they seek to represent.

But, can I welcome the statement from the Minister? There’s no doubt that the post-Brexit initiative will now be even more important to the Valleys’ communities of south Wales, as we’ve said. And I’m not going to stand here and repeat everything that’s been said. I agree with a lot of what Bethan Jenkins has said and, clearly, what the Minister has said. There is so much to address; it is a huge agenda and I’m very grateful to the Minister for what he’s setting out.

So, I want to focus on just one particular area that I believe is hugely underutilised in the Valleys, and that is promoting our environment and tourism, including our industrial heritage. I’m very pleased, therefore, that that is a key component of the taskforce agenda. Often, Wales is thought of as being heavily reliant on its natural beauty when we’re looking at developing tourism, and it’s certainly the case in my constituency of Merthyr Tydfil and Rhymney that it is blessed with areas of natural beauty. But, of course, it’s extremely rich in its industrial and trade union heritage. We have, for example, the Winding House, the Cyfarthfa Industrial Heritage Centre, the Ynysfach Iron Heritage Centre, and, as we know, Merthyr was at the heart of political reform and the development of trade unionism in the nineteenth century. So, will the Minister confirm that, where the ambitions of the taskforce talk about promoting our environment and tourism, this will very much include our industrial and trade union history, which should be a key part of any strategy, recognising that promoting aspects of our heritage can play a significant role in creating jobs and supporting regeneration?

I’m very grateful to the Member for Merthyr Tydfil for making those points. I think the people of the Valleys of south Wales will take their own view on those Members who appear at election campaigns promising the earth and then when it comes to doing the work, disappear off, whether they’re on holidays or elsewhere, but we’ll allow others to make that judgment—[Interruption.] Oh, here they are—the television’s working in the tea room, obviously. [Laughter.]

The Member makes some very important points in terms of tourism. My little son has enjoyed his ride on the mountain railway in Merthyr and it’s important, I think, that, sometimes, we recognise all that the Valleys have to offer. We live in a part of the world that’s absolutely spectacular by anybody’s estimation. Also in my friend’s constituency, of course, you have that great mountain bike centre, which I drive pass and I’m always tempted to go in on my bike—I’ll do that some point this summer. Also, of course, we have the rich industrial heritage across the way in Blaenavon with Big Pit telling the story of the industrial revolution. I think, sometimes, we don’t fully understand and recognise ourselves that it was the Heads of the Valleys that were the first industrialised community in the world, that we led the development of iron and coal and that, by doing so, we created a community and a culture that is unique and which is something that has not just exported fantastic economic and industrial processes to the world but has also exported a culture to the world as well. That is something that we need to be proud of and it’s something that we will continue to promote, especially today, of course, when we celebrate the sixty-eighth birthday of the national health service. When Aneurin Bevan told Parliament he was going to ‘Tredegarise’ the United Kingdom, he certainly did and he created something that we are all deeply proud of and, on this side of the Chamber, will always nourish and will always defend.

Short questions and answers now, please. Adam Price.

I welcome the statement, and I think he’s right, I think, to connect this with the expression of alienation that crystallised for so many in our communities in the ‘leave’ vote. I’m just wondering whether this is an opportunity for a fundamental rethink, because the pattern that we saw, of course, was heavy ‘remain’ votes in metropolitan areas, and in the old coalfield communities across England and Wales a vote against—communities that feel that they haven’t been connected in to the, sort of, urban prosperity. Not a trickle down, perhaps, but a trickle up has been the model—the concentration of prosperity in the cities, which somehow we would try and connect with the Valleys. Do we need a new model now of economic development? And, as well as the taskforce, could we actually create a more long-term structure, looking at a development corporation for the Valleys? You know, strategies are great, but without structures, you cannot get long-term delivery.

I completely agree with the points that Adam Price has been making. I think this is an opportunity to rethink some of those approaches. I’ve always been very taken by the deep place study on Tredegar, of course, which was published two years ago now. I think we do need to look at that holistic approach to economic development sitting alongside environment, sitting alongside social and sitting alongside energy and community policy as well. I don’t believe that simply by creating work here in Cardiff we solve the problems of unemployment in Merthyr Tydfil or in Glynneath. So, we do need to look hard at how we do that. I very much welcome any contribution the Member would wish to make to that work. Whilst I’m not completely sold on the idea of a development corporation, I recognise that structures and plans and pious hopes will not be made real without a determination and without a means to deliver that vision. I would very much welcome any conversation across the Chamber on how that might be achieved.

I concur with the comments that have just been made that it’s a fundamental rethink that we need in terms of investment strategy but also that long-term durability of investment and turning the thing on its head so that we do see the investment flow into the Valleys.

But I would like to suggest two things. One is that the metro, for me, has always been more than the metro as currently perceived. If we’re going to have real connectivity, it has to be metro plus. It has to be things to do with connecting those communities that will never be on light rails or old-fashioned heavy rails. It is the superfast buses connecting communities—not just up and down, but across communities; it is universal ticketing; and it is affordability as well.

I would also like to say that we need to rethink, to pick up on the idea posed by Adam Price there, how we not only connect people so that they can travel out of the Valleys but come into the Valleys, and that means putting the investment into small businesses and microbusinesses that are rooted in those Valleys and then how we put that long-term investment to grow and grow and grow them with deep roots in those Valleys. Too long we’ve been telling our youngsters, ‘If you want to get on in life, you need to move out.’ Let’s flip it on its head and say, ‘If you want to get on in life, you can stay here and have a prosperous future.’ But my question to the Minister is as simple as this: will he make sure that, in doing so, he doesn’t chuck the baby out with the bathwater, with things such as Flying Start, apprenticeship schemes—although how we are going to sustain the funding for them now with our decision in recent days, I don’t know—with things like the Sony concept there, bringing schools and young people in to teach them about digital industries, driven by the private sector down in Pencoed—how do we build on those sorts of things, and will he be engaging directly with the leaders of local authorities, including those in my areas in Bridgend and Rhondda Cynon Taf?

The answer to the question is ‘yes’, ‘yes’ and ‘yes’. I absolutely agree that this isn’t about throwing babies out with bathwater; this is about building on firm foundations. The Flying Start investments that we’ve made are a key part of that. I’ve seen some of the work that’s been done by Sony in Pencoed and I think that’s a fantastic model for what we want to achieve in the future. A key philosophical basis for the deep place study was about the investment in small businesses, local business, local economy and not simply relying on some major investments alone, although we recognise the work that that can achieve.

In terms of the overall points you make about transport and the metro, I absolutely agree with you. The Valleys have always been north-south, and we need to make sure that they’re east-west as well and that people are able to access work, social opportunities and public services wherever they happen to live, and that means having a robust transport system that isn’t only dependent on rail but is dependent on the interrelationship between rail and bus and other means of transport to ensure that people are able to access all of the opportunities and services available to them.

I’m going to take two more questions as the first question took so long to deal with. David Melding.

Thank you, acting Presiding Officer. I particularly agreed with your emphasis on economic inactivity because this, unfortunately, is one of the main drivers for our relatively low GVA and, indeed, our falling GVA in the last 20 years or so under Governments of both parties in terms of who’s been in power in Westminster. Economic inactivity is not the same as unemployment. Obviously, they often do overlap but they’re not the same things. We’ve had a real problem with people just leaving the labour market completely in our poorer areas and I think we need to focus on this. Secondly, an awful lot of public services that are consumed in deprived areas are done to people and don’t fully involve people, even in terms of employment. I think we need to look at how much of local delivery involves local people. Finally, I think citizens in these areas need to be able to reshape some of their public policies. Obviously, the core that needs to be delivered is unlikely to change in any part of the UK, but there may be particular needs and preferences and we should listen to them. They may not be the same as ours; they may make different decisions.

I’m grateful to David Melding for the points he makes. I absolutely agree with the points made on economic inactivity. I hope these are some of the issues that the future generations Act is designed, or will be designed, to address because we do have issues of inactivity in valley communities. But as you say, they’re not simply the result of unemployment but other reasons as well, and we do need to look at those reasons. We also, of course, need to look at the casualisation, if you like, of the economy, where people are not being able to access high-quality, full-time permanent jobs but are working on zero-hours contracts, working on reduced-hours contracts, working part-time work and are unable to actually sustain the family in a way that they would seek to do. So, there are a number of different challenges there in terms of that wider agenda, and I certainly agree with David Melding that we need to be able to do that.

I was very impressed with the work that TUC Wales did in terms of Better Jobs, Closer to Home in terms of looking at creating work within the Valleys communities and how public procurement can help with that. I think that’s a point that’s been made by Plaid Cymru in the past as well. It’s certainly an issue on which I believe the Government should place considerable emphasis.

Finally, just to test the patience of the Presiding Officer, the issue about listening to people is absolutely essential. That’s why I wanted to make this statement today, prior to recess, so that I can spend some time in the summer listening to people, because very often what we hear on the doorstep isn’t what we hear and what we read from journalists and from politicians who think they know best. I think it’s incumbent upon all of us to not just listen but actively seek to listen and to hear what is being said to us, and not simply to do it as an exercise to tick a box.

And then, finally and briefly, Rhianon Passmore.

I’ll be brief. Thank you. The Valleys communities have indeed borne the brunt of the impact of Tory recessions and Tory economic downturns, without a doubt. Swingeing welfare cuts have already been discussed. In my community, the immoral acts within the bedroom tax have caused huge and great disadvantage. In terms of cutting straight to a question—thank you, acting Presiding Officer—tourism hubs within the city region’s connectivity agenda are absolutely essential in terms of releasing the potential of our beautiful landscapes within the Valleys communities and, so, would the Minister agree with me in terms of how important it is, for instance, that the Cwmcarn scenic drive in my constituency is actually regenerated and rejuvenated as a true vision of what we can do with Valleys communities, and what we can do in terms of regeneration of our Valleys communities?

I absolutely agree. I think the Cwmcarn forest drive is a fantastic resource for all of us, and not just for those of us who live in the Valleys. I know the Cabinet Secretary is in her place and has heard the points that you’ve made. And, certainly, the work that I believe that NRW has been involved with will ensure that Cwmcarn scenic drive is available for people in the future. It’s a very good example of how the environment and the geography and the landscape of the Valleys are something that can provide, not simply enjoyment and pleasure for those of us who live there, but also can ensure that we have an economic impact, and one that we need to harness and use for the future. Thank you very much, acting Presiding Officer.

Thank you.

Item 7 has been withdrawn.

So, we’ll move straight to item 8, the statement by the Cabinet Secretary for Environment and Rural Affairs on exotic animal disease threats, bluetongue and contingency planning, and I thank her for her patience in waiting to be called.

Thank you, Chair.

Animal disease outbreaks are devastating for all concerned and can have wide and costly consequences for animal and public health, the economy and the environment. Ensuring a state of preparedness for an incursion of an exotic notifiable animal disease, therefore, is a priority. Suspicion of an exotic notifiable animal disease, such as foot and mouth disease or bluetongue, under the terms of the Animal Health Act 1981, must be reported to the Animal and Plant Health Agency for investigation. There have been 137 such reports between April 2015 and 20 June this year.

If an exotic notifiable animal disease outbreak occurs, the significant costs for Government are unbudgeted and are considered as a contingent liability. Policy responsibility for animal health and welfare was devolved to the Welsh Government in 2005; however, it was not until 2011 that the associated budgets were devolved. The potential for heavy, unbudgeted costs for dealing with a disease outbreak would place an unexpected pressure on unrelated programmes and services provided by the Welsh Government. It is, therefore, vital that surveillance activities and contingency planning are in place with the aim of preventing, detecting, managing and eradicating disease quickly to minimise the impact on the livestock industry, the rural community and the wider economy.

Contingency planning provides the systems and structures necessary to manage and eradicate an animal disease outbreak. The Animal Health Act 2002 required contingency plans to be produced for FMD, Newcastle disease and avian influenza, which should be reviewed and updated regularly. The Welsh Government has had robust contingency plans in place since 2003, which are regularly tested in exercises and disease incidents. The ‘Welsh Government Contingency Plan for Exotic Animal Diseases’ sets out the procedures, processes and structures that would be used in a disease outbreak. The plan is reviewed annually and republished as necessary. It has recently been reviewed and was republished last month. Such reviews take account of lessons learned from UK and local exercises, as well as real-time events. Contingency plans were last used for outbreaks of avian influenza in England and Scotland in mid-2015 and early 2016. England, Scotland and Northern Ireland also maintain contingency plans and, in addition, the ‘United Kingdom Contingency Plan for Exotic Notifiable Diseases of Animals’ provided a strategic overview of the structures and systems necessary to deal with an outbreak of disease in the UK, demonstrating how the Governments would work together in an outbreak.

The early detection of disease is essential for animal and public health. By long-term planning and taking a joined-up approach to developing our contingency planning, we can help create the healthy, resilient and prosperous Wales we are striving for with the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015. Surveillance is undertaken on a Wales and England basis by APHA, along with Welsh Government veterinary advisors, who also horizon scan the global animal disease situation to identify any risks to the UK. The Welsh Government and the other UK administrations have specific legislation and disease control strategies for dealing with diseases such as bluetongue, rabies, FMD, classical swine fever and equine diseases.

Bluetongue is a notifiable disease that can affect ruminant species, including sheep, cattle, deer, goats and camelids. There are 26 strains of the bluetongue virus and it has no human health implications and does not affect meat or other animal products. BTV is mainly spread by adult infected midges biting an animal susceptible to the disease. The BTV strain 8 first reached the UK during 2007 from mainland Europe and the UK was not declared disease free until 2011.

BTV8 is currently circulating in France with over 288 outbreaks reported as at 1 July. France is continuing to confirm cases, primarily identified as a result of surveillance. The key aspect of the threat to the UK is the location of the outbreaks, which are currently in the central and south-west regions. If the situation changes and outbreaks are confirmed further north, nearer to the English coast, then the risk to the UK would increase accordingly.

There are two key ways that BTV8 might arrive into the UK: through infected midges or through the importation of infected livestock. A qualitative risk assessment, published in February, considered the likely incursion of BTV8 into the UK. Given the strong movement and import controls, the risk of an infected live animal introducing the disease into the UK was considered to be low. Infected midges are considered the most likely route and the risk of an incursion into the UK was considered to be 33 to 60 per cent in July and 60 to 80 per cent in September.

France has applied the restrictions required by EU rules. Animals in a restriction zone are banned from leaving, unless accompanied by a veterinary health certificate that confirms they are vaccinated against BTV or naturally immune. Animals imported into the UK from a restriction zone are restricted on the holding of destination until post-import testing for signs of disease are completed. APHA also carry out risk-based post-import testing of animals imported from free areas within France.

Government is continuing to work closely with the livestock industry and veterinary profession to ensure they are reliably informed. The situation in France is being closely monitored and consideration is being given to the risks and mitigation measures if BTV8 reached the UK. The National Farmers Union has launched an industry campaign—joint action against bluetongue, or JAB—to inform and support the livestock industry by raising awareness of the disease and the actions they can take to protect their animals. Discussions with vaccine manufacturers indicate they intend to make available BTV8 vaccine supplies over the summer.

In advance of any outbreak or incident, Government will ensure all relevant agencies and partners will be able to communicate effectively and appropriately regarding the risk. Our key messages are: there are robust disease surveillance procedures in place; livestock keepers should consider, along with their vet, the best protection for their animals, including whether vaccination is an option that would benefit their business; farmers who import or move susceptible species should carefully consider the risks and the health status of animals when sourcing stock, particularly from mainland Europe; farmers are strongly encouraged to be vigilant, monitor their stock carefully and report any signs of disease.

The risk of incursion of bluetongue is difficult to predict as it is highly dependent on the level of disease on the continent, the proximity to the UK and the weather. I am, therefore, confident we have the structures in place to enable us to take swift and decisive action in the event of an outbreak of an exotic notifiable animal disease in Wales. We will continue to work closely with operational partners and stakeholders to monitor the current situation and minimise this risk.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. Simon Thomas.

Thank you, temporary Deputy Presiding Officer, and I thank the Cabinet Secretary for her statement today. It’s appropriate, I’m sure, that she should set out before the summer some of the steps that Government will take in order to deal with these exotic animal diseases. They’re called ‘exotic’, but they’re not as exotic now, given the impacts of climate change. We’ve already seen a number of examples of bluetongue in Wales, and some of the other diseases as well, which are either imported or spread by midges.

So, further to that statement, can the Minister tell me what consideration has been given to a vaccination campaign to deal with bluetongue specifically, because climate change seems to be driving this disease far closer to us here in Wales during the summer months? I understand that there is a very effective vaccine available, and, as was stated, that the farmers’ unions have been considering disseminating information about this vaccination, but do we need to go a step further and encourage more vaccination by farmers? Has the Government actually modelled the cost of vaccination against the cost of an outbreak of this disease in Wales—against the impact on the industry as a result of falling prices because of such a disease, because that’s what tends to happen when a disease outbreak takes place?

A second question arising as a result of the statement is one on the ability and capacity of the veterinary system to deal with this. The Minister mentioned in her statement the Animal and Plant Health Agency. Of course, since the cuts to laboratories in that agency, stopgap measures have been put in place –that’s how I would describe them—with some private companies and veterinary practices trying to fill in the gaps, with the British Veterinary Association warning that we may miss some warnings as a result of losing these laboratories. So, what discussions has the Cabinet Secretary had with the veterinary profession on ensuring that there is sufficient notification and plenty of testing facilities for bluetongue and the other diseases mentioned in the statement?

The final point arising as a result of that, of course, is: what discussions is the Cabinet Secretary now having with the wider profession on the fact that around half of the vets that we rely on in the UK were trained in the European Union—in other places in the European Union? I will mention this here, and you’d expect me to mention this, that we don’t have a veterinary school in Wales. There were exciting proposals by Aberystwyth University to try and fill some of that gap immediately, if not the whole gamut, but as we await support to achieve that dream we are reliant on vets who have been trained in other European nations and who make a very valuable contribution to us here in Wales. You, Cabinet Secretary, attended the British Veterinary Association dinner recently, as did I, and I’m sure that this was raised with them—how important these vets are and how important it is that we, as we have done a number of occasions today, confirm that not only are EU vets welcome here but that we much appreciate the work that they do in keeping our livestock healthy and in helping us to tackle diseases such as these exotic diseases that you mentioned.

Diolch, Simon Thomas, for those questions. In relation to vaccination, I mentioned there is a vaccine available and it is the only effective tool to protect susceptible animals from bluetongue. The best time to vaccinate is early in the year, before the warm weather comes, which I know we’re still, perhaps, waiting for. That will then provide protection. So, I think that sort of work was done earlier in the year, but, obviously, as we go through the summer, that vaccination is still applicable if farmers would want to do that.

I mentioned that vaccinations would be made available by manufacturers, and, actually, two vaccine manufacturers have stated that they will be intending to make their vaccinations available from this month, so that’s a discussion that the chief veterinary officer and her advisers are having.

In relation to capacity, I think now that we have so many more vets going out to farms to test for TB, for instance, I think once those vets go onto the farm, they’re doing extra work, if you like, because they’re engaging with farmers and talking about biosecurity and what farmers can do to protect against diseases. So, I’m very happy with the capacity that we have at the current time. I think you raise a really important point about veterinary surgeons that we have from the EU, and, as you say, we very much appreciate their work and they are certainly very welcome in Wales.

I was very pleased to make the announcement regarding the MOU at Aberystwyth University, and the facilities that are being put in place there—not a complete veterinary school, but I think an important first step that we can build on.

Can I also thank the Cabinet Secretary for her important statement this afternoon, but I hope that the Cabinet Secretary will attach the same importance to tackling another disease, which is, of course, bovine TB, and bring forward a statement on the Welsh Government’s policy in dealing with this terrible disease before the autumn, given it’s having a huge negative impact on our farming industry?

Now, exotic animal disease threats are extremely delicate matters that need to be treated effectively and efficiently, and it’s important that the Welsh Government has robust contingency plans in place to respond to any outbreaks, particularly in relation to the threat of the bluetongue virus, which most of her statement refers to today. I appreciate that contingency planning has developed significantly over the years, but it’s worrying to see that almost 300 outbreaks of the bluetongue virus have been reported in France since July, and that the likelihood of the virus spreading into the UK is increasing. It’s crucial that any contingency planning is co-ordinated with other Governments across the UK so that differing policies don’t hinder each other or even escalate problems. Therefore, perhaps the Cabinet Secretary will tell us what specific discussions the Welsh Government has had with the UK Government and, indeed, other Governments regarding the bluetongue virus threat to ensure that animal disease threats are addressed in a joined-up manner across the whole of Britain.

I appreciate that the Welsh Government doesn’t have direct control over imports into Wales, and that policy direction for border control is decided at a UK Government level, however, I’d be grateful if the Cabinet Secretary could confirm if the Welsh Government does have any involvement in the monitoring of animal imports and products, and more specifically in relation to the process of post-import testing, which she refers to in her statement this afternoon. Also, whilst I’m pleased that discussions with the vaccine industry have taken place, perhaps the Cabinet Secretary can tell us a little bit more about the release of a potential vaccine for the bluetongue virus. The Member for Mid and West Wales touched upon the potential cost analysis of vaccination, but perhaps she could just give us an indication of the potential costs of vaccination.

Of course, in the event of any disease outbreak, we can expect to see restrictions in place and that in itself raises some serious questions. I appreciate that the Welsh Government’s contingency plan for exotic animal diseases is part of a wider strategy regarding animal welfare, and therefore I hope the Cabinet Secretary will tell us in her response how the Welsh Government protects the welfare of animals affected by movement restrictions during an emergency outbreak. It’s also important that there is a constant dialogue with local authorities and local operational partners, such as police forces. These local partners are at the front line when dealing with animal disease threats and the public response to them, and it’s important that communication is delivered effectively to those at an operational command level. Therefore, perhaps the Cabinet Secretary will tell us how the Welsh Government engages with local authorities and the police to ensure that they are constantly receiving real-time updates regarding any animal disease threats. I’d also be grateful if the Cabinet Secretary could tell us what type of local field work is undertaken at a local level, how that information is collected and monitored, and how that work feeds in with strategies for exotic animal disease threats at a UK level.

I welcome that the contingency plan for exotic animal disease is reviewed annually and republished as necessary, because it’s important plans of this nature are constantly reviewed in order to be as effective as possible. Therefore, in closing, Acting Deputy Presiding Officer, can I thank the Cabinet Secretary for her statement this afternoon? It’s of critical importance that we get this right and that robust contingency plans are in place should there be an outbreak of an exotic animal disease. I don’t doubt the Welsh Government’s commitment and sincerity on this matter, but there is always more that can be done, and so I look forward to hearing more about the Welsh Government’s action in this area in the Cabinet Secretary’s response.

I thank Paul Davies for his series of questions. Just picking up on your first point regarding the TB eradication programme, I have committed to bringing forward a statement in the autumn on the way forward. We will continue to have a science-led approach and, over the summer, there is a significant amount of work going on in relation to our programme.

I used the example of bluetongue to illustrate that we do have very robust plans in place for dealing with these diseases. You mentioned the increase in the number of cases in France, and that’s why we are monitoring it very carefully. The chief veterinary officer is in constant touch with the other veterinary officers in the UK; she receives a monthly report in respect of these diseases. Obviously, if there is an incursion from infected midges from France, those farms at highest risk are likely to be along the south coast and the south-east of England at the beginning of an outbreak, but our message is that farmers in other parts of the country shouldn’t be complacent, they should remain vigilant for signs of disease, and carefully consider the risk of sourcing animals from outside the UK.

You asked about cost analysis, as did Simon Thomas, sorry, and I didn’t answer that. What I did mention was that vaccination really should be done at the beginning of the year before the weather gets very warm, and I’m not aware if that cost analysis was done at the beginning of the year, but I will certainly write to both Members to clarify those points.

In relation to contingency plans, it’s really important that we do have those robust plans in place, and I’ve had a contingency walkthrough, if you like, of what would happen if we had an outbreak with the chief veterinary officer and her advisers. It is really important that we do include stakeholders such as local authorities and police, et cetera, and, you know, maybe Public Health Wales, for instance, depending on what sorts of outbreak there are as we go through, because they can obviously provide assistance to us.

I’ve been very reassured that all the fora are in place—the resilience, the civil contingency plans are there, in place, should we have such an outbreak. I was very reassured when I looked at the list of notifiable diseases when I came into post that it’s many years since we’ve had some of the specific diseases in Wales. By the increased help with biosecurity with our farmers, we certainly hope to keep that the case.

I think the principle of infectious disease control—and this applies to all diseases and this is the message that we give to our livestock keepers and farmers—is that you keep infection out, you find it quickly, you stop it spreading, and, if you do have it, you stamp it out, and that’s certainly the message that we will be taking forward on all of these diseases and our contingency plans.

Okay. Thank you.

I’d like now to call on the Minister for Science and Skills, Julie James.

Thank you, Acting Deputy Presiding Officer; how nice to see you in the chair. We’ve seen significant improvements in the employment rate in Wales over the last Assembly term. Between February and April 2016, the employment rate was close to a record high figure at 71.9 per cent, and is well above the rate of 65 to 67 per cent experienced in the mid to late 1990s and the early years of the 2000s. To put this in context, there are now nearly 1.5 million people in employment in Wales. This success is the continuation of a longer term trend. The employment level in Wales has increased by 18.7 per cent since devolution, compared to a 16.5 per cent increase for the UK over the same period. That’s an extra 227,000 people in work in Wales since the start of the Assembly.

Whilst employment policy remains a non-devolved area, the Welsh Government’s contribution to this disproportionately strong performance through our skills and employment programmes and our investment in the economy should not be underestimated. Over the last Assembly term, we successfully delivered a number of innovative programmes that responded to the challenges of the economic climate we found ourselves in. Our Jobs Growth Wales programme is one example. Launched in April 2012, it responded quickly to the exceptional recessionary pressures that saw almost a quarter of young people in Wales between the age of 16 and 24 unemployed. The programme sought to offer young people with limited or no experience of work a foot in the door with an employer, and the chance to gain six months’ experience of real work with an expectation that they would be kept on after support from Jobs Growth Wales had finished. Sixteen thousand, three hundred young people in Wales have taken part in Jobs Growth Wales since 2012. For Jobs Growth Wales, 75 per cent of the young people in the private sector strand of the programme that completed a six-month opportunity either sustained their employment or entered further learning. I don’t know of any other similar programmes that can boast such figures.

Since the start of the ReAct II programme in October 2008, over 28,000 workers whose careers were interrupted by redundancy received Welsh Government support to gain new skills and return to work quickly. This good work has continued with the launch of ReAct III last year. However, the economic climate has changed and our suite of employability support needs to adapt to reflect the new environment within which we are operating.

Wales still has significant employment challenges around our skills levels, around the spatial concentration of unemployment and inactivity, and with the ongoing threat of redundancies within some of our key strategic industries. Our employability support needs to modernise to respond effectively to these challenges. A growing body of evidence is suggesting that our current suite of programmes is too complex and fragmented, making it difficult to develop a coherent pathway to employment for a jobseeker and resulting in support that can sometimes be inflexible in responding to individual need.

There are broader changes too to policy at UK level, which will have a significant impact on the delivery of skills training for unemployed people in Wales. The introduction of the Department for Work and Pensions’ new Work and Health Programme in 2017 presents an opportunity to more effectively align the breadth of employment support on offer to individuals across Wales. Our active involvement in the commissioning of this new contract will ensure that lessons are learned from current Work Programme delivery and that the needs of the Welsh labour market as a whole are incorporated in future programme design. This new programme will be significantly smaller than DWP’s existing Work Programme and will mean a greater volume of individuals seeking to access Welsh Government support. We are working with DWP to estimate the impact of these changes both in terms of the number of people to whom we will need to offer support and the type of assistance required. Both of these factors will require changes to our own employability programmes.

We outlined in our manifesto that we would create a new employability programme to support individuals of all ages to find good quality employment. We want this support to be tailored to individual need and, where appropriate, aligned with emerging job opportunities in local communities. Our aim is to bring together the activities from our main employability programmes, Jobs Growth Wales and ReAct, traineeships and our new Employability Skills programme into a single employability support programme that will better meet the needs of those requiring support to gain, retain, and progress within work.

The new programme is being developed using the most recent evidence and research into the delivery of effective labour market programmes. It will be informed by evaluations of the Work Ready, Jobs Growth Wales and ReAct programmes, the Skills Conditionality pilots, which we conducted with DWP, and the traineeships evaluation and review. We have a wealth of evidence available to us on what works.

Our new programme is anticipated to begin delivery from April 2018. Between now and then we will conduct a series of pilot activities with further education colleges and our existing network of work-based learning providers to test the capacity and willingness of the sectors to innovate and respond flexibly to the needs of individuals and employers, and with Careers Wales, Jobcentre Plus and local authorities to test assessment, referral and job-matching processes. We also intend making changes to some of our existing programmes to enable us to transition smoothly to delivery of our all-age programme.

Our new Employability Skills programme will reflect a different approach to delivery with a greater focus on a work placement and a continuation of support once an individual secures employment. We will continue to deliver Jobs Growth Wales until March 2018 but at a lower rate of wage subsidy, reflecting the improved economic climate and the findings of the evaluation, whilst continuing to recognise the importance of young people gaining their first foothold in work. This is a demanding timetable and a complex programme of work, but I am confident that it will result in a programme more fit and flexible to respond to the labour market challenges and opportunities we face, both now and in the future. Diolch.

Thank you. I’m going to call Llyr Gruffydd, spokesperson for Plaid Cymru.

Thank you very much, acting Deputy Presiding Officer.

Diolch i chi, Weinidog, am eich datganiad. Rwy’n croesawu'n fras y cyfeiriad teithio yr ydych yn ei amlinellu yma. Byddwn yn dweud, wrth gwrs, er eich bod yn dweud bod diweithdra yng Nghymru wedi gostwng—ac rydych yn creu darlun arbennig yn eich paragraffau agoriadol—rydym yn ymwybodol, wrth gwrs, bod llawer o'r swyddi newydd sydd wedi eu creu yn rhai rhan-amser, yn ail neu'n drydydd swyddi, yn gontractau dim oriau ac ati, a bod diweithdra hirdymor, wrth gwrs, yng Nghymru, yn parhau i fod yn ystyfnig o uchel, sef 32 y cant o'i gymharu â chyfartaledd y DU o 29 y cant. Felly, mae angen inni fod yn ofalus, rwy’n credu, o ran y darlun yr ydym yn ei greu, ein bod yn dweud y stori gyfan.

Nawr, nid yw polisi cyflogaeth, wrth gwrs, wedi’i ddatganoli ac rydych yn dweud wrthym yn eich datganiad na ddylai cyfraniad Llywodraeth Cymru i berfformiad anghymesur o gryf Cymru gael ei ddiystyru. Wel, byddwn yn dweud, wyddoch chi, rhowch y pwerau i ni a gallem wneud yn well fyth. A byddwn yn gofyn i chi a ydych chi’n cytuno â mi yn hynny o beth, Weinidog, ac efallai pa sylwadau yr ydych chi wedi eu gwneud i Lywodraeth y DU ynglŷn â chael mwy o gymhwysedd yn y maes hwn fel y gallwn wneud gwaith gwell na'r hyn sy'n digwydd ar hyn o bryd?

Wrth ddwyn ynghyd Twf Swyddi Cymru a'r rhaglenni eraill yr ydych yn sôn amdanynt mewn un rhaglen, tybed ai'r bwriad yw creu un brand gyda nifer o wahanol gynigion oddi mewn iddo neu nifer o fathau o gynlluniau sy'n gweithredu o fewn y rhaglen honno, neu ai'r bwriad nawr yw symud at un cynnig sydd â'r hyblygrwydd i ddiwallu’r ystod eang o anghenion sydd gennym ni yma yng Nghymru.

Mae'r matrics a ddarparwyd gan y Llywodraeth yn ddiweddar o’r rhaglenni a gymeradwywyd ar gyfer y gwahanol lwybrau at gyflogadwyedd, rwy’n credu, yn adrodd ei stori ei hun. Bu pryderon am gymhlethdod a dyblygu hefyd, wrth gwrs, rhwng rhaglenni Llywodraeth Cymru a rhaglenni’r Adran Gwaith a Phensiynau. Rwyf yn gofyn, efallai, i chi ddweud ychydig mwy am sut yr ydych am sicrhau bod y sefyllfa honno'n cael ei gwella. Ond, yr hyn yr wyf yn ei ofyn yw: a yw datganiad heddiw yn gyfaddefiad, mewn gwirionedd, bod y pryderon hynny yn iawn? Rwy’n credu i chi ddweud bod cyfeiriad at ddarnio gwasanaethau. Mae llawer o bobl wedi bod o’r farn eu bod yn eithaf gorniferus, yn eithaf cymhleth i’w defnyddio a bod y symleiddio hwn yn gydnabyddiaeth bod hynny'n gywir. A yw efallai’n awgrymu bod Llywodraeth Cymru wedi lledaenu ei rhaglenni ychydig yn rhy eang yn y gorffennol, o bosibl, hefyd, o ran darparu adnoddau? Mae hwn yn ffactor pwysig yma, wrth gwrs, oherwydd hoffwn eich clywed yn cadarnhau wrthym y bydd y cyllid cyfan—cyfanswm y cyllid yn cyfateb i swm y rhannau o'r cynlluniau presennol. Neu, a ydych chi'n disgwyl, mewn gwirionedd, y bydd rhyw fath o arbedion ariannol trwy ddod â rhai o'r rhaglenni hyn at ei gilydd?

Rydych yn dweud wrthym y bydd y rhaglen newydd sydd wedi ei chynnig yn cael ei llywio gan dystiolaeth ac ymchwil diweddar, gan werthusiadau sydd wedi'u cynnal, ac y byddwch yn cynnal cynlluniau arbrofol a phrofion ar wahanol ddulliau. Nid wyf yn gweld y gair 'ymgynghori'. Byddwn yn tybio ac yn disgwyl mai eich bwriad yw ymgynghori â rhanddeiliaid a chyflogwyr ac eraill.

Rydych yn gobeithio gweld y rhaglen hon yn cael ei chyflwyno o fis Ebrill 2018. Wel, mae angen iddi gael ei chynllunio, mae angen iddi gael ei threialu ac mae angen cynnal profion arni. Rwy’n tybio y bydd proses dendro ar gyfer rhyw fath o gorff darparu, a bydd angen rhywfaint o amser paratoi arno, byddwn yn tybio, er mwyn gallu dechrau gweithredu erbyn mis Ebrill 2018. Felly, efallai y gallech ddweud ychydig wrthym am y broses yr ydych yn gobeithio ymgymryd â hi i gyrraedd y dyddiad dechrau hwnnw ym mis Ebrill 2018, yn enwedig, wrth gwrs, o’i gosod yn erbyn y cefndir o adael yr Undeb Ewropeaidd. Bydd yna effaith enfawr ar y sector hwn yn arbennig—ac yn ariannol yn enwedig, byddwn yn dychmygu—o ystyried ei ddibyniaeth ar gyllid Cronfa Gymdeithasol Ewrop yn y gorffennol. Mewn gwirionedd rwy’n cwestiynu yn y fan yma a ydych chi’n dechrau ar y newid hwn ar y rhagdybiaeth y bydd y cyllid sy'n cael ei ddarparu ar hyn o bryd gan yr UE yn cael ei ddarparu gan Lywodraeth y DU. Fel arall, byddai rhywun yn cwestiynu sut y gallwch ddatblygu a dylunio eich prif raglen cyflogadwyedd newydd i Gymru heb, i fod yn blwmp ac yn blaen, syniad o ba lefel o adnoddau sy’n mynd i fod ar gael i chi.

Thank you for that series of questions. In my usual format, I’m going to answer the last one first and work backwards, just that’s because how my brain works.

In terms of the overall funding programme, yes, we are going to assume, because we’ve been told on many occasions, that the funding shortfall that falls to Wales as a result of the Brexit agenda will be made up by the UK Government. As we heard earlier, in First Minister’s questions, we have been promised this many times and we’re going to assume that that’s the case until we’re told differently. I will comment this, though, and I said this in my apprenticeship statement a couple of weeks ago: it’s not just money that we get from the EU, we get research opportunities, we get exchange opportunities, our young people have the chance to learn from other people who are undertaking vocational programmes and traineeships and apprenticeships. I very much hope that, in the negotiations that we now embark on with the EU, these cultural and learning opportunities, in which Wales has been very much a leader and a beneficiary of the joint learning that has been undertaken, can continue to happen. It very much isn’t just about the money in these things. It’s very much about what works.

In terms of some of your other questions, I can assure you there is no question of financial savings in this. This isn’t about the budget overall. This is about the skills tracks programme. I think you held up the paper version of that. It looks a bit like a tube map. The idea is to make it a much more simple thing to navigate as both a recipient of one of the programmes or indeed as an adviser—perhaps a parent if you are at early ages, or a partner, and so on—advising somebody through the programme. So, that’s an interactive map that you’re looking at there. You should be able to click on the node and it should tell you where you are, and you should be able to follow fairly swiftly through to get yourself to the right thing.

You’ve heard me say many times in the previous Assembly that the difficulty with employability programmes is that you do not want, under any circumstances, to arrive at a one-size-fits-all. People are individuals; they require individual support. Often a one-size package doesn’t fit them. So, this is about tailoring those packages. The employability programmes have been very successful, but people who are further away from the job market need a different range of support, both to get them into those employment opportunities and actually to keep them there. It’s not just about getting the job and then walking off; it’s about keeping them in that job and making sure the support mechanisms are in place to maintain them there. From simple things like the fact that your first month in work is sometimes the most expensive month you’ll ever experience—you haven’t had a salary and you’ve got all the expense. So, it’s something simple like that, right through to all of the difficulties of navigating through family life, work and so on if you’ve been unemployed for a considerable period of time. So, this is about tailoring a set of successful programmes to harder-to-reach individuals as the economic emphasis closes.

Now, we don’t know what the outcome of the European Union negotiations might be, so the other thing is to be flexible in the face of uncertainty. So, this is about making the programmes as flexible as possible to respond to an uncertain future. It may be that we have some growth, in which case we need to respond to harder-to-reach individuals; it may be that we have redundancies and so on, in which case we need to respond with, effectively, short-term crisis management, as with ReAct. So, these programmes are being designed to be as flexible as possible within the constraints that they operate in.

The last thing I want to say about that is that it’s not one brand, except that we’re calling it Employability Skills strands. There will be individual programmes in there, but the idea is to make them flexible, allow people to move to and fro. We are having some difficulty in negotiating with the DWP because they themselves have changed the parameters of their programme and the goalposts have moved, to mix my metaphors all over the place. The goalposts have moved quite significantly over the last six months. We are in close negotiation with them and with the various city deals around Wales and with the regional skills partnerships to make sure that we have a coherent offer that matches together with the UK Government’s offer and so on.

To answer your first question last, in terms of devolution, we would like some more powers around how to assess people and how to get them onto the programmes, but you will know that we have long said that we will not accept some of the less—in my opinion—effective results with the DWP’s programmes, like mandation and sanctioning, for example. So, it is around what we can negotiate in order to keep our employment programmes open and acceptable to everybody.

Thank you. We are now halfway through the allocated time, and we’ve got three speakers. I call Dawn Bowden.

Thank you, acting Presiding Officer. It’s a very brief question. Minister, in addition to the support for apprenticeship programmes, European structural funds did provide for discrete training towards vocational skills and qualifications, and such qualification-focused training is currently provided both in our further education colleges in Wales and through private learning providers. This training is clearly an important element in ensuring that there’s a suitably trained and skilled workforce for businesses looking to set up in local communities. A prime example of that would be the Tenneco-Walker arrangement in Merthyr, which required skilled welders when setting up the new factory there, in Merthyr Tydfil. Would the Minister agree with me that, should pressures on funding for such schemes arise in the future, any funding should be prioritised towards further education colleges to deliver this crucial training, rather than being channelled towards private learning providers to maximise the moneys kept within the system?

Well, we have a complex system of contract arrangements in place to provide work-based learning via a system of main contracts and then subcontracts; and actually, it’s quite a complex picture. Sometimes the further education colleges are subcontractors to the main contractor and vice versa. What I am able to confirm to the Member is that we do prioritise very much the needs of qualification-based learning based on particular employment opportunities, as identified through the regional skills partnerships. We keep the way that we fund those very much under review, with a view—as I said on the previous question—to being as flexible as possible, to be as responsible as possible, depending on what happens. It’s a very complex and detailed question and the acting Presiding Officer is going to be very cross with me if I answer it in detail. So, I’m more than happy to have another discussion with you elsewhere.

I would never be cross with you. I’d now like to call Mohammad Asghar, spokesperson for the Conservatives.

I thank the Minister for her statement today. On behalf of the Welsh Conservatives, I give a broad welcome to the aims and objectives contained in this statement today. Improving the skills of the Welsh people will lead to a more prosperous society, with higher rates of employment and a lower level of poverty, and it will reduce inequality in Wales. We know that the skills of the Welsh workforce lag behind not only the more prosperous regions of the United Kingdom, but also the world’s leading advanced countries. So, can I ask the Minister how she will encourage collaborative working between all aspects of the education system and the business community, and promote more choices for learners?

Unemployment rates in our most disadvantaged areas remain stubbornly high. Apprenticeships are best suited to people who learn best in a practical setting. Will the Minister expand on her plans to prioritise investment in our most disadvantaged areas to develop employability and help people into jobs? For the Welsh Government’s strategy to succeed, it must have the confidence of employers. Can the Minister assure this Assembly that the views of businesses were taken into account when formulating her policies, and will she increase support for businesses in Wales? Businesses have expressed concerns in the past about the levels of literacy and numeracy of working-age adults. How will the Minister address this problem here?

Finally, Deputy Presiding Officer, I would like to know how the Minister proposes to monitor progress towards her aims to ensure she delivers the highly trained workforce needed to reduce poverty, encourage businesses to grow, and to regenerate our most deprived communities in the Valleys and Wales.

Thank you very much for that series of questions. I think the issue around employer confidence is an interesting one. We had an extensive consultation over the summer—last summer—with employers on our apprenticeships programmes, which was completely upended by the announcements at UK level of the apprenticeship levy, which cut straight across that. Members who were here in the fourth Assembly will remember my consternation that we had to stop that consultation while we figured out what on earth was going on with the apprenticeship levy, and I’m sad to say that we’re still in a position where we’re not quite sure how much money, if any money, will come to the Welsh Government as a result of that levy. So, that has caused a considerable amount of unease, shall we say, with employers, because it hasn’t been possible to provide certainty, either at the UK level or at the Welsh level. Indeed, we’re in a series of correspondence and meetings with various Ministers, trying to sort that out. So, I agree with him that employer confidence could be higher in that system, but I don’t agree with him that the Welsh Government is in any way responsible for that. Indeed, I would ask him to look to the Government at UK level—controlled by the Conservative Party, I think—and ask what added value this apprenticeship levy has actually wrought into this system, because, frankly, I can’t see it.

In terms of our own programmes, they are highly sought after by our employers. We have one of the highest completion rates in Europe, at 86 per cent. Some of our providers are up in the 90 per cent completion rates. That’s how we monitor progress—by completion rate, and then employment following the frameworks. We also have flexible frameworks so that employers who require—. For example, very recently, we had a shortage of people with long-distance lorry driving skills. We were able to put a framework in place to fill that gap very swiftly, and that’s proved very successful. We have a very flexible programme that allows us to respond to that sort of demand.

In terms of the skills overall, the Member will remember that we have discussed many times in this Chamber our need to move to higher skills, away from base-level skills and apprenticeships, and that our programme now embraces an all-age apprenticeship system, which allows people to progress to higher-level apprenticeships right up to degree and postgraduate level—very much sought after by some of our prestigious employers, such as Airbus, GE Aviation, and so on. A large number of them; those are just two. We’re very proud of that and we’ll be continuing to do that. We’re also looking at the essential skills programme very carefully to ensure that it’s accessible to those people who still need the essential skills that the Member pointed out.

And the final speaker in this debate will be Jenny Rathbone.

Thank you, acting Presiding Officer, and thank you, Minister, for your statement. I think your approach is entirely sensible. If we have less money to work with, then it’s very important that we eliminate duplication of effort. Therefore, I welcome your proposal to create the Employability Skills programme, bringing all these other different programmes together. I particularly pay tribute to the Jobs Growth Wales programme, which has been really significant for many, many of my constituents in really giving them the leg up into successful careers that, without that first taste of work, they might not have made it and they could be not having a successful work life. I welcome your reassurances about the importance of giving individual support depending on individual need.

Of course, it’s really important to recognise that, if people have been outside the labour market for a period of time, some people become agoraphobic and need a lot of work to persuade them to get back into society as well as into the rigours of work. I wondered how well we continue to ensure that our schools and colleges are completely focused on ensuring that all individual needs are met, because I was shocked recently to identify somebody who has clearly been on the autistic spectrum all their life and it was never spotted in either their schools or their colleges—it’s only now being identified. So, we need to make sure that individual learning needs are identified early on, because further education colleges do a fantastic job for people who’ve fallen between the cracks in the school education system and they give new hope to people who’ve not had a successful school career. But we surely ought to be preventing that sort of thing happening overall.

I’ve been to a couple of conferences recently where people have been saying, ‘What’s going to happen to training if we’re going to lose all the money coming from the EU?’ Well, obviously, we have to make sure that the Welsh Government is ensuring that the Westminster Government delivers on the promises made by the ‘leave’ programme, because we continue to need that training. But we also I think we have to ensure that businesses, trainers and Government are saying, ‘Well, we’ve got to keep going in any case’, because we can’t possibly not meet the gaps in skills that we’re going to need for the transformative programmes we must have, like the metro, like the smarter energy programme—tapping into our wealth of sustainable energy—like our sustainable housing programme, so that we build the houses of the future that generate energy rather than leaking energy. For them, we need people with very detailed skills.

So, I think the challenge for us is both to ensure that we create the skills that are required by businesses, both across the public as well as the private sector, but we also retain them for Wales because, otherwise, we’re simply creating the skills that other parts of the UK need and we’re subsidising them and that’s obviously not fair. So, I think it’s a difficult balance, but I welcome your statement and hope that we can continue to make to progress despite less money.

Thank you very much for those questions. I’d just like to say that I’m working very closely with my colleagues, the Cabinet Secretary for Education and the Minister for Lifelong Learning and Welsh Language, in ensuring that the transition stages between all areas of education are as seamless as possible and that we pick up individual learner needs at those times so that we correctly identify them. This is for two reasons: one, to benefit the individual concerned, but also so that we don’t spend money needlessly several times and before somebody gets themselves into the right tracks. That’s a very expensive way of going about it.

We’re also working closely, all of us across Government, on making sure that vocational education takes its rightful place in schools and colleges in order to ensure that people go that right route in the first place and don’t go into higher education and then go back and start an apprenticeship programme where that’s inappropriate. So, we’re doing a lot of work across Government on those two aspects and I have no doubt one of us will be bringing a statement back to say how we got on with that in the autumn term. But it’s a very important point.

The other thing to say is that those companies that train in Wales do a lot of training, but we still have a stubborn number of companies that don’t do any training. We’re doing a little bit of an evangelical programme to make sure that companies that don’t currently train understand the need for it. I want to share what seems like a little bit of a trite saying, but it really says it all. If you say, as you rightly said, ‘What happens if we train people and they leave?’, the question you ought to ask is: ‘What happens if you don’t train people and they stay?’, which is a much more important question for most businesses. That’s the mindset that we want to get into our businesses: that, actually, a well-qualified and engaged workforce is more loyal, more productive and more likely to benefit your business than a low-skilled, unproductive workforce that you’re desperately hanging on to until they can desperately find somewhere else to go—that’s not the picture of the economy we’re trying to paint.

Indeed, we have several companies that are shining beacons of training. I recently visited Admiral, which has a fantastic programme of employability skills, but also just life skills, that they offer to their employees. They have exemplary retention and productivity levels inside the company as a result of that. Dŵr Cymru is another—there are several examples of that. We learn from those experiences all the way through.

So, I think that what I’m really announcing today is a comprehensive programme to pull our things together to make them more easily navigable, to persuade people that training is the right way to go to make sure that we meet the skills needs of the future and to ensure that people who have specific learning difficulties and needs are picked up in that programme as they go by putting the right identifiers in the system.

Thank you very much.

We’ll now move on to agenda item 10, to debate the ‘Together for Mental Health’ delivery plan, and I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Health, Well-being and Sport to move the motion—Vaughan Gething.

Thank you, Chair. I formally move the motion for debate, and I’m pleased to present the Welsh Government’s second delivery plan in support of our 10-year mental health strategy, ‘Together for Mental Health’.

Since the launch of the strategy in 2012, there’s been significant progress across a number of areas. Much of that progress can, of course, go largely unnoticed, but every day across Wales we see evidence that change is happening, making a difference to individuals whose lives are affected by mental health problems.

One significant area where this has happened is in the implementation of our groundbreaking legislation, the Mental Health (Wales) Measure 2010, and it’s fair to say that this was passed with cross-party support in the third Assembly. Implementing it has made real improvements to the care and support that individuals receive and in delivering a genuinely co-productive approach that places the needs of service users at the heart of service design and care and treatment planning, and that is something that we should be proud of.

Since April 2013, over 100,000 people have been assessed by local primary mental health support services that were established under the Measure, with over half of those having gone on to receive treatment in those services. Waiting times for assessment and treatment in primary care have continued to improve.

We’ve also seen the third sector taking a more active role in the way that mental health services are shaped and delivered through recent years. It is a good example of prudent health and care principles in practice. For instance, the Alzheimer’s Society’s dementia friends initiative is increasing the understanding of dementia and helping to tackle the stigma, and Bipolar UK offers a range of practical support to people affected by bipolar disorder.

We’ve continued to spend more on mental health services than on any other part of the Welsh NHS, and funding increased to over £600 million in the last year. In the past year alone, we announced over £22 million of new funding aligned to our priority areas for delivery over the next three years. That includes over £5.5 million for older people’s mental health care, which will support, amongst other things, the establishment of a multidisciplinary older adult psychiatric liaison service to help with quicker and more appropriate discharge from hospital and, hopefully, to reduce readmission rates. Also, £1.5 million is being invested in developing accessible community perinatal mental health services across Wales, which should help to improve mental health outcomes for women with perinatal illnesses, their babies and their families.

In child and adolescent mental health services, to support our together for children and young people programme, a further £7.6 million has been allocated to fund new community services for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and autism, and better access to crisis services and psychological therapies. So, we’ve made real progress over the last year, including reducing out-of-area placements for Welsh children, and new services are starting to establish themselves well after a period of successful recruitment into those services.

The changes in CAMHS are the most significant for many years. By ensuring appropriate resources are available, we will help to achieve timely access to services and the right outcomes for children and young people. All of these commitments are built into the delivery plan to ensure there is a continuing focus on these key areas. Our new delivery plan also commits us to further improving access to talking therapies. Significant steps have been taken to improve the provision of psychological therapies in Wales, with an additional investment of nearly £2 million in adult services last year, and more than £1 million this year. More evidence-based psychological therapies are being provided locally than ever before.

The past three years have shown us that, while delivering our ‘Together for Mental Health’ strategy has been challenging, it has also been achievable, but, of course, there is much more to do. So, the draft delivery plan for 2016-19 that we’re debating today contains a number of ambitious new objectives, including resilience building and improved support for our young people, particularly those at risk of adverse childhood experiences; further addressing and preventing suicide and self-harm; and a new strategic action plan for dementia; implementation of the crisis care concordat to ensure appropriate support is provided to individuals in contact with criminal justice agencies; and a range of actions to ensure services are provided in a safe, timely and effective way that supports the dignity and respect of service users; and there is a continued emphasis on ensuring that service users and carers are able to influence the shape of mental health policy and services across Wales.

We know that stigma and discrimination continue to be major challenges. That’s why, in recent years, we’ve supported, together with Members across the Chamber, the Time to Change Wales campaign, increasing knowledge and understanding about mental health problems and getting people to start talking about mental health. Our new delivery plan places even greater emphasis on tackling stigma and discrimination.

Respondents to our consultation have welcomed the life-course approach that we’ve adopted in the plan, but have pointed out that some issues apply to people of all ages, for example loneliness and isolation. Respondents also made suggestions as to how the plan could be strengthened, including using the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014 as a lever for cross-sector commitment and delivery, and building in the delivery role of the third sector and considering the physical health needs of people with mental health illnesses.

We’re giving careful consideration to all of the consultation responses, and the final version of the plan will incorporate many of the helpful suggestions that we have received, and, of course, I look forward to considering the comments made in this debate today. We also participate in an international benchmarking exercise on mental health services, and any relevant findings from that process will be incorporated into the final version of the delivery plan, which we intend to publish later this summer.

I trust that Members from all parties will recognise our shared achievements to date and appreciate that we haven’t taken soft options in setting our objectives for the three years ahead. Not all of the ambitions we’ve set out will be easy to achieve, but I’m confident that real progress can be made in the next phase of delivery.

I’ll briefly deal with the amendment now. The Government has no problem with the amendment and will support it. I acknowledge that an integrated demand and capacity planning model to understand where services should be provided or modernised where resources are allocated is helpful, and I don’t see this approach as being in any way contradictory or an alternative to a ring fence that sets a minimum level and not a ceiling, as endorsed last year by an independent review. So, I’m happy for us to support that amendment. But I do look forward to hearing the views of Members from across the Chamber in today’s debate and, again, I can confirm that what gets said today will be taken into account as we finalise the delivery plan for the next three years.

Diolch. Rwyf wedi dethol y gwelliant i'r cynnig. Galwaf ar Angela Burns i gynnig gwelliant 1 a gyflwynwyd yn enw Paul Davies.

Diolch, Lywydd. Minister, thank you very much for bringing forward this debate today. I have read the delivery plan with a great deal of interest and I concur with you on the Government’s overriding objectives—what you’re trying to achieve in terms of improving mental health delivery here in Wales. I don’t think anyone would quarrel with your objectives and much of your methodology.

You’ve touched, yourself, on how we are fighting this stigma at present, and that goes through all areas. It’s not just the stigma of one person against another person, but cultures can be inherent within organisations that can stigmatise people who have mental health issues. There’s no doubt that we definitely need more equality of entitlement to treatment between mental health and physical health, and this is one of the areas where I really would urge you to consider further how Welsh Government might be able to bring this forward.

I’m loath to mention the NHS in England, because I know that looking anywhere across the border tends to be a great anathema to many people here. However, within the NHS in England they have put forward a parity of esteem concept and it’s being introduced, in which equal rights for people with physical and mental health difficulties have been adopted, which has gone some way to acknowledging mental health needs, particularly of people with medical conditions. I wonder if it may be useful looking at that, and I’m sure other countries will also have very similar ideas, to see if we may be able to adopt any of those and move them forward in our own health service here.

I’ve got five sort of key areas I’d like to talk about, and I’m absolutely delighted that you are adopting our amendment. I did note what you said—ring-fencing isn’t about this as the maximum but rather the minimum—but sadly a lot of organisations will use at as, ‘Phew, as long as we’ve just spent what we have to, then no more’, and you do see it throughout Wales; you see it in a lot of organisations. They’re all hard-pressed for money; they’ve all got a lot of competing claims on a finite resource, and mental health does quite often come off as a cinderella spend in some of these organisations. So, we believe that an integrated demand and capacity planning model would be a much better way forward. It would also be a very good way of then being able to explore truly the demand, because mental health issues have a great many different shades of grey to them. And if you start to include, for example, young people with learning difficulties, which are very often as a result of some kind of mental health distress, then that also should fit into the bigger brief of mental health. So, delighted that you’ve agreed to accept that amendment, but I would like to be able to bring this debate back to the Chamber in six or eight months to find out how the Government are going to make that work and bring that forward.

I’d like to pick up on performance measures. In order for the strategy to be delivered effectively, we need to have an outcomes-based approach that is supported in parallel by a suite of these new financial indicators. We need to have greater public reporting by LHBs, local partnership boards and public service boards. I’d like to understand, Minister, what your report or your delivery plan doesn’t say, which is that in the many areas where you already have put targets in, how well you’ve achieved against them. So, for example, out-of-area placements for children and young people reduced below 2013-14 baseline by 10 per cent every year, so we need to have some kind of report that comes back out so we can measure where we are. And when we’re talking about how we do reporting, let me just pick another one, which is one where you virtually say it was just slightly woollier, where it’s saying that one of the measures of outcome would be to have feedback. How do you define ‘feedback’? Who collects it, who measures it, and who actually gets to see it? Is it going to stay within the organisations? Will it be sent forward to Welsh Government? There are so many indicators that have been nominated here; an awful lot of them don’t have hard cases attached to them in terms of where they get reported, who sees that reporting and who can take action. So, I’d urge you, Minister, to pick up on those.

I’m sorry; I’m galloping through this, because five minutes isn’t a lot to talk about such an important subject. CAMHS in-patients and waiting times; I think perhaps I will just say on this issue that I can see that the Chair of the new Children, Young People and Education Committee is present, and I’m absolutely sure that she will look forward to examining what is happening with CAMHS waiting times for young people and children, because although your report talks of it very successfully, we know that the Shillabeer review is not delivering everything that it should do, and we need to pick that up more.

And finally, Presiding Officer, I suspect I’ve run out of time completely to wind up, but I just wanted to say to you that the whole area of mental health delivery is so very important. If we just look at our young people, 23 per cent of all young people who attend at schools in Wales have some form of mental health impediment. It stops them from learning, it stops them from being successful, it stops them from having the lives that they should have, and when you start from that very level all the way through to people with autism, people with Asperger’s, people with syndromes that are recognised and have pathways, we have to help them because that is such a great percentage of our population who are not being the citizens they could be, and not having the help that they could be. So, anything that you want to do to improve mental health services in Wales, I’m absolutely prepared, and this party is prepared, to try and support you, but we do want credible outcomes, credible performance measures, and credible reporting back to the Assembly. Thank you.

Can I say at the outset that there has certainly been, I think, an improvement in mental health services since the mental health Measure was introduced, but, without a doubt, there are a number of areas where we need further improvement? I also welcome the update from the Government on their delivery plan; it seems to be a step forward from the last plan. There are definite actions here, and a timetable is noted as well, for implementation, and also—very importantly, I think—there’s specific reference in the plan to who is responsible for the different actions.

But, on the other hand, there are major questions remaining in terms of several aspects, including how progress is measured. For some indicators the target is very definitive. For example, a 100 per cent of girls who were identified as having serious mental health problems are offered appropriate support during pregnancy. That is good, but in other areas there are not so prominent improvement targets.

There are specific points, I think, that arise from the availability of talking therapies. A report by Gofal, the mental health charity, notes that far too many people are still being offered treatment by medication rather than other types of treatment and support. And even though they welcome the work that has been done by health boards to expand the provision, they believe that much more needs to be done to expand the range of treatments available. Specifically, they feel that people fail to be offered talking therapies because provision is not available in some areas, or because waiting lists are too long—that is, it’s not for clinical reasons.

I’ll also mention another area that Gofal thinks has inadequate attention, and that is eating disorders. They are very disappointed, they say, after working with the cross-party group on eating disorders to recommend a number of ways forward and specific actions that could be taken, as well as how to measure performance, that there was a big deficiency in the strategy in terms of tackling problems in that area.

If I can move on to an area that I know concerns many of us here in the Chamber—and we’ve just had a reference here to it—namely mental health services for children and young people specifically. We are very concerned here as Members because we do hear consistently from far too many constituents who share their concerns. I received a letter recently from the chair of governors of Cemaes Primary School in Ynys Môn. I’ll read from it: ‘The board of governors of Ysgol Cemaes has asked me to write to you to express our serious concerns about the child and adolescent mental health service. We have a number of children in primary school who need support and our understanding is that there is a waiting time of six months to access the service. We feel that this is quite unacceptable, and it does raise significant questions about the commitment of the national health service in Wales to the well-being and welfare of our children.’

It says it all; the people who are—

Ie wrth gwrs.

Thank you for taking the intervention. Would you also acknowledge that one of the issues with having such long waiting times for CAMHS services is that those young people are then thrown back onto local services provided by county councils, people like the disabilities team, the team around the family, and it puts them under immense pressure and takes them away from the people who should be their primary responsibility?

I think you’re absolutely right, and that there are further consequences as well to longer waiting times, as well as just passing the buck, if you like, to other parts of our public services.

Mae hi’n berffaith amlwg, rydw i’n meddwl, fod hyd amser aros yn gwneud gwahaniaeth i’r canlyniad yn y pen draw. Mae’r arolwg gan Gofal yn dangos perthynas glir iawn rhwng yr amser y mae rhywun yn aros am driniaeth a’r canlyniadau yn y pen draw. Yr hiraf y mae rhywun yn aros, yn ôl eu harolwg nhw, y lleiaf tebygol ydyw y byddan nhw yn dod i ganlyniad cadarnhaol o ran eu lles a’u hiechyd meddwl. Felly, nid mater o bobl yn gorfod aros yn amyneddgar am wasanaeth sydd yn mynd i fod cystal yn y pen draw ydy o; rydych chi’n aros am rywbeth a fydd, o bosib, yn methu â dod â chanlyniadau cystal yn y pen draw.

Cwpl o faterion eraill gwerth eu nodi cyn cloi: yr angen am therapi un i un i lawer o bobl sydd, ar hyn o bryd, yn cael cynnig therapi grŵp. Mae yna le i therapi grŵp, ond mae yna bobl ar hyn o bryd sydd yn cael cynnig therapi grŵp oherwydd nid yw’r adnoddau ar gael ar gyfer therapi un i un. Mae’r angen am apwyntiadau y tu allan i oriau gwaith yn bwysig iawn. Mae angen rhagor o apwyntiadau felly, yn enwedig lle mae llwyddo i gadw cyflogaeth yn un o’r allbynnau mae rhywun yn anelu amdano fo yn y pen draw. Hefyd, wrth gwrs, mae’n bwysig iawn i ehangu’r gofal a’r gefnogaeth sydd ar gael drwy gyfrwng y Gymraeg.

I gloi, mi fyddai Plaid Cymru—rydym wedi nodi droeon—wedi trio sicrhau ein bod yn cynyddu mewn termau real yr arian sy’n mynd i mewn i iechyd meddwl. Mi fyddem ni wedi sefydlu clinigau ‘residential’ ar gyfer anhwylderau bwyta ac wedi trio bod yn arweinydd byd-eang yn y maes hwnnw. Ydyn, mae adnoddau’n dynn—rydym ni’n sylweddoli bod adnoddau’n dynn—ond rydym yn sôn am faes yn y fan hon sydd, ers blynyddoedd lawer, wedi methu â chael yr adnoddau cywir i sicrhau ei fod yn cael ei iawn le o fewn ein gwasanaeth iechyd. Felly, oes, mae yna gamau positif ymlaen yn y strategaeth ddiweddaraf gan y Llywodraeth, ond mae yna ffordd bell i fynd.

I would like to thank the Welsh Government for tabling this important debate today. With one in eight people in Wales currently seeking medical help for mental illness and an estimated one in four of us experiencing mental health problems at some point during our lifetimes, it’s clear that we need to give mental health a far higher priority. We therefore welcome the fact that we are today debating the Government’s mental health strategy.

As the Welsh Government’s 10-year mental health strategy enters its second phase, it falls to us to ensure that delivery of the strategy matches its aims. Unfortunately, Gofal’s report, which was released this week, highlights the fact that delivery does not always match ambition. We must ensure that your new delivery plan actually delivers improved outcomes for the thousands of people in Wales suffering from mental health issues. The delivery plan for 2016-19 identifies children and young people’s mental health as a priority area, and we totally agree with you on that.

Young people referred to CAMHS have to wait much longer than adults have to wait. The target waiting time is a shocking 112 days and around half of all referrals exceeded that target. We therefore welcome the commitment in the delivery plan to reduce waiting times to 28 days for routine referrals and 48 hours for urgent referrals. When the former Health and Social Care Committee undertook post-legislative scrutiny of the mental health Measure, it found that children and young people were not benefiting from the Measure. Since the committee undertook its review, the Welsh Government announced it was reviewing the CAMHS service, and on this side of our party, we look forward to the review’s conclusions.

However, if we are to take the pressure off our acute services, we need to improve access to other psychological therapies. Early access to talking therapies, such as cognitive behavioural therapy, is proven to improve recovery and reduce the need for more acute services. Mind recommends that the maximum waiting time from referral to the first treatment should be 28 days, and when someone presents with a mental health emergency, the wait should be even shorter. However, waiting times across Wales are much longer; in some parts of Wales the average waits are around 11 months. This is unacceptable. People in distress should not be made to wait months for treatment. We wouldn’t leave someone in severe pain for that length of time. Why should mental health be any different to physical health? We must work with patients also to eradicate the stigma attached to mental health issues.

Of course, if we are to improve mental health services, we must ensure that the correct funding is in place. We welcome the Welsh Government’s commitment in the delivery plan to maintain the ring-fencing of funding for mental health. However, the level of funding appears insufficient. Mental health problems account for around a quarter of all health problems, yet we are spending just 11.4 per cent of the NHS Wales budget. In England, where the mental health budget is not ring-fenced, they are spending 11.9 per cent of the NHS budget on mental health.

One LHB, Aneurin Bevan, routinely spends over 17 per cent more than its ring-fenced allocation.

PricewaterhouseCoopers, in their review of the financial ring-fencing arrangements for mental health services in Wales, state that the ring-fenced allocation is not based on a robust assessment of healthcare needs. Cabinet Secretary, it is clear from all evidence that we need to spend more on mental health services in Wales. We understand that there is a pot—a small pot—and it has to be equalled in the services we provide, but we are asking that this is one priority that we do need to spend more on.

We welcome the fact that additional moneys have been targeted at priority areas in the delivery plan, but we would ask that you consider increasing the ring fence. I look forward to working with you to deliver your mental health strategy, but also to holding you to account to ensure that the strategy delivers real improvements to the mental health of the people of Wales. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

I’m pleased to have the opportunity to speak today. We know that one in four of us will be affected by a mental health problem in our lives, so it is vital that we give this delivery plan the attention and scrutiny that it deserves. I just wanted to make some brief remarks today on two parts of the plan. The first relate to my previous calls for a well-resourced, comprehensive and outcome-based dementia strategy for Wales, which is something that I’ve called for previously when I led a short debate on this in the Chamber, back in January. I’m delighted that the delivery plan includes the commitment to have a dementia strategy for Wales and I’m looking forward to hearing more detail from the Welsh Government on that, but I did just want to pick up on a few points related to that.

We know that there’s been fantastic progress in turning Wales into a dementia-friendly nation and I welcome what the Minister said about continuing to focus on that today. There are over 20 established dementia-friendly communities currently in Wales and I’m very proud that my constituency in Torfaen was the second in Wales to achieve dementia-friendly status. Whether it is businesses or local health services, right through to Big Pit National Mining Museum, I have seen this initiative make a huge difference to people’s lives. When you consider the numbers of people that are being diagnosed now with dementia, and the need to actually find a way through the challenges that that presents to us as a society, I think this is one of the most powerful things we can do to actually combat what can be a counsel of despair in the face of dementia. So, I’m delighted that the Welsh Government are continuing to focus on that.

The other area that I wanted to talk about was diagnosis rates, which are clearly absolutely vital, because it’s at that point when a patient gets the diagnosis, which is inevitably a devastating one for families, that they can start to come to terms with it and plan for what lies ahead. Of course, we know that dementia diagnosis rates in Wales are the lowest in the UK at present. I very much welcome the commitment in the delivery plan to look at a 50 per cent target for GP dementia registers and the stepping stone this provides for gradual yearly increases, but I do think that there is a lot more work to do. Fifty per cent would not be enough for illnesses like cancer and we should be, I think, aiming far higher than that with dementia. I’m aware that the Alzheimer’s Society has called for targets of around 75 per cent in each LHB by 2021. Even if you look at other parts of the UK, such as Northern Ireland, where the rates are 64 per cent, I think that we could be aiming higher. So, I know that the Minister is committed to increasing targets annually and I would be interested in further detail on how we plan to grow that target going forward.

Of course, diagnosis is meaningless without the right support in place afterwards. In fact, a diagnosis can make it harder to cope without the right support in place. The other area that I wanted to pick up on today was the need for named support workers. At the moment, only 39 per cent of patients in Wales get a support worker. I’m delighted that the delivery plan identifies the need to improve this, but I do believe that the suggested one support worker per two GP clusters needs urgently looking at again. This was a point that I made in my short debate. The Alzheimer’s Society have estimated that would be around 32 workers for the whole of Wales, but, at the current diagnosis rate, we would need around 370 to meet needs, and as many as 650 workers if we are to get diagnosis rates up to 75 per cent. So, I hope that that is something that the Welsh Government will be able to look at.

I very much welcome the commitment in the delivery plan to continue to drive improvements in adult mental health wards, based on the outcomes of the spot checks. But I also hope that the Welsh Government will continue to work hard to include the adult mental health wards in the Nurse Staffing Levels (Wales) Act 2016, which is a commitment that was given by the previous Minister to do as soon as is practicable. I think that’s vitally important.

Just finally, then, turning to children and young people, I very much recognise the points that have been made about the CAMHS service, and it’s something that I’ve raised many, many times in committee myself. I hope that the new committee will continue to have a focus on that. We’ve seen good progress by the Welsh Government, but we cannot afford to let up for one moment in that area. We’ve got to continue to have the resources, but also to drive it forward politically, and I hope that the Government and the committee, working together, can continue to drive improvements in that area. Thank you.

I consider it a privilege to participate in this important debate, and I thank the Cabinet Secretary for bringing the issue before us, dealing with ‘Together for Mental Health’. Of course, some of us are old enough to remember the mental health Measure brought forward by Jonathan Morgan, the former Member of this place, some years ago, which has brought much of this work forward, with a particular emphasis there on early treatment, and, as doctors, we are strong believers in that. It is crucially important that treatment is provided at an early stage, and this whole issue of waiting lists is entirely contrary to that fundamental principle.

Ultimately, we want to see more health professionals on the ground who can deal with these problems. As a GP, I would hope that I could refer a patient with mental health problems directly to talking therapies, but that isn’t the case at the moment, and it can take some months for my patients to see someone who can provide CBT and so on, and that situation must change. Even if we diagnose people at an early stage, if they then have to wait six months or longer until they get treatment—

Do you share my concern, the concern expressed to me by the charity Mind Cymru, that the Welsh Government action plan has been created on the back of insufficient evidence because mental health data such as waiting times for talking therapies are not being collected sufficiently?

There is a point there, yes, but, at the end of the day, we need more therapists, because we need more people to deal with the situation that currently exists, because waiting lists in this area are entirely unacceptable. And also, in dealing with drugs and alcohol and the abuse of those substances, we do need more professionals in this area, because there are also lengthy waiting lists in those areas, and that has major implications for mental health.

In speaking briefly about mental health problems among children, it’s very difficult in the Swansea area to refer a child to the CAMHS service. I’ve tried on a number of occasions, and, basically, they can’t be seen at all. This is crucially important point: in many areas, there is simply no service available, or that individual is just referred back into the education system, as we’ve already heard, and when they need to see someone who works in psychiatry that simply isn’t acceptable.

In terms of looking at this whole issue of mental health, there is a risk that we look at mental health in isolation. Well, it can’t be looked at in that way, and we’ve already heard that it’s a part of how we look at a person in a holistic manner: the psychological, physical and social aspects as well as the spiritual aspects. All of those things come together to actually make you healthy or otherwise, and every principle related to mental health must also be considered in physical terms as well as the social aspect of this.

In terms of co-ordination and collaboration across various services, we’ve heard a number of examples of this already, but I will just mention the police, because, in the context of some of the most serious problems we have in critical situations, when people have critical mental health problems where the police come into the process, it is very difficult on occasion to find a safe place for the treatment of these individuals. That, therefore, brings an overlap with the police and health services, and it would be far easier to deal with the whole situation across the board if the police service too were to be devolved to this place, because we are making policy here and discussing mental health services again this afternoon, but there are many aspects of mental health that are dealt with by our police forces, and they are currently not accountable to this place, and they should be. We should take every opportunity to ensure that the police service is also devolved to this place so that, when we deal with all of the health services available, the police should be part of that discussion.

But, fundamentally, what we want as doctors is early treatment for our patients, and that means more provision of health professionals, talking therapists and so on and so forth on the ground, so that we can refer our patients to them directly.

Thank you for giving way. I agree with you totally and I have no arguments, but do you also think there’s a need to train the doctors that are already in place because some of them have a lack of understanding sometimes on some of the issues people come to them with? So, it’s the training of those already in place, as well as more.

Yes, I would agree, because the whole system is under pressure. We could all do with far more time to deal with patients, and, once I’ve decided that I am going to refer a patient elsewhere, I want that patient to be seen, because what happens if you have to wait six months is that you go back to that GP, who’s already under enough pressure, and we can’t make any alternative provision. That’s why we have to tackle waiting times and employ more people in this area. Thank you.

It would be remiss of me not to start by welcoming the work that this Government has done and their commitment to improve mental health and mental health services, whether that be through increased funding for services, support for campaigns to end stigma, or the mental health Measure. But, as the Cabinet Secretary’s alluded to, and it should always the be the case in everything we do in politics and public life to achieve better outcomes and a better Wales, while much has been done, there are always ways in which we can build on this.

The draft delivery plan, and the outcome measures outlined in it, are a positive progress to be welcomed, but there remains scope for the Welsh Government to collect consistent outcome data across all mental health services, and serious consideration should be given to the performance measures put forward by the Wales Alliance for Mental Health—measures that capture patient experience, patient outcomes, clinical outcomes, and views from professionals.

Today, I wish to specifically focus on aspects of the ‘Together for Mental Health’ strategy that relate to the workplace in Wales. The recent recession and related threats to job security have not just placed financial pressures on workers in Wales, but have also been hard on people’s health and well-being too. Research by the mental health charity Mind reveals that one in 10 have resigned due to job stress, one in four have thought about it, and one in five people take a day off due to stress. In addition, Gofal highlights that trade union reps have reported that colleagues are approaching them on a much more regular basis to talk about mental health problems and to ask for information and support. Promoting mental well-being in the workplace and preventing and tackling mental health problems is made more prescient in the current economic climate, with low wages and job uncertainty—uncertainty that I feel could increase as a consequence of the unchartered waters we now find ourselves in post Brexit, and this can impact on mental health. Therefore, accessible support systems within the workplace and work environment are important. This can be done through Government and businesses measuring mental health problems in the workplace, and supporting trade unions, particularly equality works. I know that a lot of the right-wing press and politicians would have you believe the rhetoric of ‘these evil trade unions’, but the reps on the ground are amazing people who give their time voluntarily, and, in this instance, offer a link between worker and support services, as well as helping raise awareness and understanding of mental health in the workplace.

I’m sure that the Cabinet Secretary agrees with me that trade union reps play a vital role in promoting good mental health and well-being in the workplace, and may often be the first point of contact for workers who are experiencing mental health problems. The draft delivery plan sets out a number of actions relating to the workplace—actions that again could be built upon in order to better assess the impact of the strategy on workplace mental health and well-being in the public sector. Specifically, the recommendation of the mental health charity Gofal that surveying public sector staff regarding their mental health and well-being, and actively seeking out, understanding and responding accordingly, could see an overall improvement in staff mental health and well-being.

Finally, the importance of recognising and supporting mental health and well-being at work demonstrates all too clearly the need for mental health and well-being to cut right across the work of this Welsh Government. If we are really to deliver on the promise of ‘Together for Mental Health’ there needs to be exactly that—not solely a health strategy, but working together to place mental health as a priority for all Government departments from economy to education, housing and beyond.

I agree with the closing comments there of Hannah Blythyn that this is not just a question of looking at mental health issues; it’s a question of looking at it in terms of the broader physical health and, indeed, workplace well-being and health as well. I think you hit the nail on the head there, Hannah.

It’s over three years now since this strategy was published, and warmly welcomed at the time, as with many strategies before and since, but with the caveat that we see real outcomes and improvements beyond the words. I was looking through the Mind briefing that was e-mailed to Assembly Members and I noticed that there is concern that the strategy does not give enough of a role to the voluntary sector. The third sector can play a crucial role in giving a voice to people with lived experience and enable them to be heard. I would go further, actually, and say that the voluntary sector is probably the most suited to raising the profile of mental health issues and reaching out to those communities across Wales. I think it has a nimbleness and a localism to it that you can’t really create in the traditional mainstream channels. Those channels have their place, but the voluntary sector has its particular place.

Will the Member give way?

Of course, Lee.

Thank you very much. I just want to agree strongly with your comments and apply them particularly to the pressure facing CAMHS. The number of referrals to CAMHS has increased dramatically, but often CAMHS are unable to give the support that families need, and the resilience and tools they need. This is where the third sector in particular could come in with extra support for families.

Yes, I quite agree with you, Lee. In fact, I was listening to Dai Lloyd’s comments earlier, and Dai was talking about shortages across the board. You mentioned the shortage of therapists, and it struck me as you were speaking, Dai, that yes, there is a shortage of therapists, and I wonder whether this is an area that the Welsh Government could look at in terms of campaigning to recruit therapists, because a number of therapists that I’ve spoken to have said that they only found themselves going into that line of work accidentally after they were told, ‘You would be good at doing this’. They would never have thought of it before. So, I think that there’s an area—. This isn’t about money; this is about actually persuading people that they would be good at doing an area like that. So, I think this an area that the Welsh Government really could make some headway in. There are problems here across the rest of the UK as well, so if you really want to make a mark, Cabinet Secretary, then please look at recruitment of therapists and how you can campaign to get those into that job.

I was recently asked to host an event in my home village of Raglan on behalf of Time to Change Wales, the first national campaign to end the stigma and discrimination faced by people with mental health problems. I became aware of the existence of this group—going back to knowledge of these groups—purely through bumping into one of their champions, Bev Jones, who happened to live in my village. I bumped into her in the street, and through subsequent meetings we bonded, became friends, and she really raised the profile to me of the campaign Time to Change Wales, and indeed mental health issues in general, which I wouldn’t have been aware of before. It struck me how much we rely on people within this field, and often through accidental meetings, to increase our knowledge of what’s going on out there, which in our job as Assembly Members is vital to being able to help other people and to direct them on the right pathways.

As the Time to Change Wales website says, the campaign is needed because although mental health problems are very common, it can still be a taboo subject. Time to Change wants to improve knowledge and understanding about mental illness and, most importantly, to get people talking about mental health. This campaign, one of a number, is an example of how far we have come over the last few years, and how across Wales there are organisations and groups of volunteers who, through their hard work and dedication, are helping to deliver on the aims of ‘Together for Mental Health’.

A final few words on the development of Wales as a dementia-friendly nation. This topic was broadly covered in Lynne Neagle’s comments earlier. Again, I’m lucky; my home village of Raglan in Monmouthshire has helped lead the way in this field—don’t get the idea that everything is going on in my village, but a lot is—with the designation of, initially, the Raglan project a couple of years ago, and that’s morphed now into the wider Monmouthshire project, and that is reliant on local networks, local people. I know Mark Drakeford, in your previous role as Minister for health, in fact, visited that project in its early days. You would have seen how local volunteers are helping to deliver on the Government’s aims and are complementing the mainstream health channels to do that. Local people looking after each other in the first instance. It’s a great example of how community can work, with community looking out for community, people looking out for people.

There is a lot of good practice out there, in conclusion. Some of it is due to the actions of Government, some is in spite of the actions of Government, and that’s, of course, the UK not just here. Let’s keep the pressure up for some real change in mental health provision so that people across Wales are able to access the best services at the times in their lives that they need it most.

Can I thank the Cabinet Secretary for presenting the Welsh Government’s ‘Together for Mental Health’ delivery plan today? It’s most welcome. The last Labour administration introduced measures that saw a significant increase in funding for mental health services and stated that people who receive these services should have both care and treatment plans in place. Although we know that more needs to be done in this respect, I think we’d all agree it is the right way to be moving.

As we’ve heard, mental health problems affect at least one in four people in Wales, and it’s often linked to poverty, both as a cause and a symptom. Undoubtedly, poverty increases the stress and worry that can lead to poor mental health. For those suffering from mental health problems, securing and retaining employment and coping with day-to-day financial challenges can be a major hurdle.

The decision of the last administration to both increase and ring-fence spending on mental health funding provides the opportunity to increase access to support, enhance pathways and improve outcomes for service users.

The mental health delivery plan will be a vital component in achieving these outcomes, but I’d like to focus on one particular area, that of the mental health first aid programme, which is a key programme in the ‘Together for Mental Health’ strategy in raising awareness, particularly in the workplace.

Through their involvement in local partnership boards, it’s clear that public bodies have a role in this regard by co-ordinating strategies to ensure the implementation of the plan. They also have a role as employers in taking the lead on providing mental health awareness, both in respect of the day-to-day service delivery and amongst their own staff.

Local education authorities also have a crucial part to play in raising awareness around mental health issues amongst children in schools, including working to end the stigma that we’ve heard so much about surrounding mental illness and tackling any intolerance and bullying around that.

It’s true that most of our public service employers do provide counselling services for their staff, but, often, these don’t go as far as providing additional support to help them identify if their mental health is at risk or to provide further support services for those who do identify that they’re experiencing mental health problems.

However, it is to be welcomed that an increasing number of local authorities, health boards and other public services in Wales are starting to recognise the benefit of providing mental health awareness training, often in partnership with their trade unions. My own union, Unison, for example, has developed a comprehensive training package in this area for its members. There are also some excellent examples of major companies, like Admiral and Dŵr Cymru, who provide comprehensive mental health awareness training for their employees, not only to help them in their engagement with customers, but also to support colleagues in the workplace. These companies see raising awareness around mental health issues as a key part of their health and safety obligations.

I hope, therefore, that, in recognition of the importance of the delivery of this strategy, more public bodies will look to embrace mental health first aid programmes and provide awareness training, both for their workforce and for the delivery of their services.

Can I firstly commend the Government on its approach to the delivery plan, and in particular the extensive formal consultation and the engagement with stakeholders, carers and users of services?

As many people have mentioned today, one of the most significant contributions to the improvement of mental health services was the passage of the Mental Health (Wales) Measure 2010 and, in particular, I want to refer to the increasing ease of access to primary mental health assessments.

It goes without saying that timely access to assessments is crucial in terms of the prior diagnosis and ongoing treatment of mental ill health. Targets for those assessments have been challenging, but progress in meeting them has been very good in many parts of Wales. But there’s clearly been an increase in demand. No doubt, part of that has been caused by the availability of better access, and so that’s obviously to be welcomed, but it seems to me that an increase in people presenting with potential mental illness is also a result of the increasing pressures that people face in leading their lives—financial worries, relationship breakdowns, other health conditions and so on. So, the question of access to an assessment and the capacity to meet increasing demand, even if current performance is encouraging, is going to be vital.

One of the changes brought in by regulations under the Act was to change the eligibility for those entitled to undertake a primary assessment, in particular by withdrawing entitlement, for example, from psychotherapists. During consultation, under the regulations, concerns were raised in relation to that change, not least since some of those practitioners provide NHS services to patients at different points in their journey, as we’ve heard today. It’s obviously essential that those providing services are properly trained, that their expertise and experience is current, and that they operate within a recognised ethical framework. The Government has indicated it would look again at the issue of eligibility to provide assessments. So, in the interest of ensuring that we have the right levels and the right types of capacity to meet what is surely going to be an increasing need, I’d welcome an indication of whether the Government’s intention is still to bring forward proposals on the issue of eligibility, and if so, within what sort of timescale.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for health to reply to the debate.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. I’d like to thank Members for the constructive manner in which everyone’s engaged in today’s debate, and also for this Chamber continuing to prioritise issues around mental health. I’ll try and deal with a range of the comments. I’m pleased that so many people spoke and made so many points, but I won’t have time to deal with all of them. As I said earlier, the calls that Members have made will be picked up and we’ll consider them as we take forward the final delivery plan.

Angela Burns started. I was very pleased to hear you acknowledge the issue about stigma, both in the workplace and wider society. This Chamber has a part, actually, in making sure that these continue to be addressed. I’m not somebody who’s going to pretend that it’s gone away because we’ve run a couple of events. In terms of the profile this has within the service, it’s an issue that regularly gets raised both with me and with my contact with other parts of the service. For example, last week, it was a specific issue that was raised in my own meeting with the vice-chairs of all the local health boards. So, it’s definitely something they understand is a ministerial objective and a priority for us. They also understand the point about the parity of esteem. I know it’s recently been talked about in a different way, but it’s something that we’ve been interested in and are keen to press on the service here for some time. So, that is very much part of what we expect to see delivered. In many respects I think we’re ahead of NHS England in the way that we deal with mental health provision and our waiting times stand as an expectation. The challenge for us is to not simply say, ‘We’re better than England’, but to look again, as we are doing now. What can we do better? What should we do better? And again, I’ll make this point, as I have done several times, about funding: we already spend more than the ring fence on mental health services. It is absolutely not to be seen as a minimum, but I’m happy to look at the work we committed to do earlier on.

It’s worth noting that, in terms of outcomes against objectives and indicators, of course we’ll publish information, but if I can just make this point at the outset: that over 90 per cent of service users in local primary and mental health services have been very positive about their experience. So, we do take their experience seriously and it’s not something that we take for granted.

A number of similar points were made by Rhun ap Iorwerth in his contribution, particularly the points—and a number of other Members made the same points—about a focus on talking therapies. Many members mentioned the same sorts of points, in particular on waiting times, where we have more stringent standards than in England. In fact, we’re seeing progress being made because we are recruiting to those services. Again, a point that Dai Lloyd made about the recruitment of people into the service: that’s why I mentioned in my earlier remarks that we spent £3 million last year on recruiting more people into the service for both adult and children’s services, and we’re spending an extra £1 million this year too. So, there’s no rowing back or a failure to recognise the need to have a different staff mix as well, but also to spend some of our resources on additional recruitment.

I’ll deal with the CAMHS point that a number of Members mentioned as well, because we do recognise the need to both improve access to the specialist CAMHS service and, at the same time, to ensure that we have a conversation with referrers and with families about referrals into that service, because children and young people themselves have recognised that a number are inappropriately referred in, and they’re actually in significant numbers. In this Chamber, you will have heard the previous Minister make this point on several occasions, and so part of what we have to do is to make sure there are other alternative referrals for people who don’t need the specialist support. That is, to look at the different range of alternative interventions and support available. For example, a school counselling-based service, what Families First do—all the different interventions that are needed there to support people who need some form of help and support, even if it isn’t at the specialist CAMHS end.

Will you take an intervention?

I’ll just finish this point. That was taken forward in the recent Together for Children and Young People programme, and the conference that I spoke to remotely—I couldn’t attend there on the day. This is something we have to work through at both ends is the point that I’m trying to make. I don’t mind who intervenes first. [Interruption.] Well, Angela Burns I heard first, and then I’ll deal with Rhun, to see if he wants to say the same thing or different.

Thank you, and I do take the point that Rhun made and that you’ve answered, however, where it falls down is in a place like this: for example, an urgent referral for CAMHS if a child is presenting with self-harm and has said they’re going to kill themselves. If that child is autistic, then they don’t get that help, because CAMHS say that that is not one of the disorders that they deal with. I’ve got this as an ongoing case in my constituency, and it’s absolutely a ridiculous situation, where a child fulfils one set of criteria, but, because they happen to have a particular disorder, they’re excluded from the CAMHS process, and so they’re then pushed back into social services. That’s the kind of clarity that needs to be brought to the situation.

I think there’s a point about seeing the whole person, rather than one particular condition, but if you write to me on that particular issue, I can offer something more helpful on it.

I’ll try and make some progress. Again, the UKIP spokesperson made a number of constructive points. The only thing that I would say in particular is, on the call for more money, I have indicated we’re investing more money. We’re investing more money than ever before, and we’ve continued to invest. The challenge isn’t the call for more money; the challenge always is where we find it and where we choose not to spend it as well.

On that point specifically—and it’s a general point on funding—funding for CAMHS does seem, on the face of it, to have gone down over the past few years. Could you give clarity on whether that is a coding issue of where exactly funding for treating 16-year-olds plus lies within the health service, or whether there has been a deterioration in funding for young people?

As I said, we announced significant additional investment last year of £7.65 million, and I indicated that in my opening remarks as well. So, I don’t accept that there has been a reduction in funding for CAMHS; that isn’t the challenge that we face. In fact, we wouldn’t have been able to recruit new people into the service to do something about addressing long waiting times—certainly not finished yet—without that additional investment in staff.

I’d better make some progress. In particular, I wanted to recognise the points made by Lynne Neagle in, again, a very well-constructed contribution about dementia in particular, and highlighting us being a dementia-friendly nation and having dementia-friendly communities, and the impact that has on individuals across that community, both in understanding, but also a better life experience as well, and also in particular for highlighting the scale of the challenge. I can say that we expect to have the new dementia strategic action plan by the end of this calendar year. But, on diagnosis, we’ve seen rates improve, and I expect us to reach 50 per cent by the end of this year as well, and then set our new level of expectation.

I’ll just deal with a number of the points that Dai Lloyd mentioned. On policing our practical relationships, it is something we work hard at, and we recognise we need to continue to do so, as well as your point about training for staff and the broader point about the mix of staff that we have.

Nick Ramsay, apart from mentioning Raglan at several points and opportunities, I’m delighted that you also recognise the challenges across the UK, but also the way that we take advantage of the life experience of people and the impact of volunteering as part of maintaining a good level of mental health and well-being.

I do, finally, want to mention the points raised by both Dawn Bowden and Hannah Blythyn, in particular looking at indicators and mental health issues in the workplace. Not just from my previous life as a lawyer, but my previous life as a shop steward for a trade union, I recognise the role that trade union representatives do have to play in helping to create a more positive workplace and actually take up action where that doesn’t happen. It is an important role that is sometimes not highlighted. But I went, myself, on mental health first aid awareness training and I’ve made sure that my own staff have undertaken that training for the particualrly stressful and difficult roles they do from time to time as well. That may be a point that individual Members may wish to consider for themselves.

Finally, I just want to deal with, not all of the points Jeremy Miles made, but to finish on this point, and it’s about engagement, because your recognise the points about the responses that people have made and how we deal with the demand profile at a time of economic uncertainty and not wanting to sit back. We had 137 responses to the consultation, and the responses and the way we engage are genuine. I can say that because those responses will have changed what we end up doing in the final plan. So, we will take account of what people say and what we need to do to deal with the demand that we have now and what we expect in the future, and to make sure that we come back not just to say that we’ve coped, but that we’ve improved the situation so that outcomes have continued to improve across Wales. I look forward to speaking more in this Chamber at another time about mental health action here in Wales.

The proposal is to agree amendment 1. Does any Member object? [Objection.] As there is objection, I will defer voting on this item until voting time.

The next item on our agenda is the debate on renaming the National Assembly. Before I call upon the First Minister to move the motion and open the debate, I would like to make a brief statement.

The Assembly has become a very different place to the one elected in 1999. It now passes laws and agrees taxes, as well as holding the Government to account and providing a focal point for democratic discussions on issues that are important to the people of Wales. It is therefore appropriate for us to give serious consideration to the renaming of the institution.

The Wales Bill currently being considered in Westminster, and possibly as we speak, gives the Assembly the power to change its name. In order to achieve this, a Bill must be submitted in accordance with the arrangements of our legislative process, and two thirds of our Members will be required to support this legislation. Therefore, securing cross-party support for any such proposal is vital.

If the motion is agreed today, the next steps will be to consult soon on what the name should be. There are several possibilities, and many associated terms stemming from that choice. We must also consider how soon the change should be made, and consider how we communicate the change clearly and how it should be symbolised. The name should continue to inspire confidence and pride among the people of Wales.

I will discuss these matters further with my fellow Commissioners at the earliest opportunity, and I will notify the Assembly of the next steps at the outset of the autumn term. For today, I look forward to hearing Members' initial comments on the renaming of our National Assembly.

To propose the motion, I call on the First Minister, Carwyn Jones.

Thank you, Llywydd. There’s nothing that I can add to that, of course, I must say.

You can sit down [Laughter.]

Therefore, may I say that I agree entirely with what you had to say? So, I would just like to add, therefore, that the Government’s view on the amendments is that we don’t oppose them in principle, but, at the moment, of course, we must ensure that the question of what this institution should be called should be an open question. Although the amendments don’t create a situation where we would have to change the name of the Assembly to ‘Senedd’ in both Welsh and English, I think people would expect that to happen if we were to support these amendments this afternoon. Therefore, I have nothing to add. I would just move the motion formally and inform the Assembly of the Government’s stance on the amendments.

I have selected two amendments to the motion. I call on Bethan Jenkins to move amendments 1 and 2, tabled in her name.

Thank you, Llywydd. I’d like to speak to these amendments. I think that I will start the debate here today, but I won’t perhaps push it to a vote, so that we can have a debate on this change of name in the Assembly and then allow the Presiding Officer to consult widely on the situation.

First of all, I’d like to welcome the opportunity to discuss this issue and the open wording of the motion—a motion that gives us an opportunity to carefully consider the name of our democratic national institution. Each and every one of us believes that, as an institution, we should be an exemplar and an inspiration to the nation in terms of our innovative policies and legislation and in our use of our unique national language.

In 1997, we gained devolution on the basis that we would create a new kind of democracy that would reflect the values of Wales, not a forum to follow the practices of our nations without question. During the last decade and a half, you could perhaps argue that we have concentrated too much on our status as an institution rather than on ploughing our own furrow. Over a period of 17 years, we have tried to build an institution that is respected, having separated the legislature from the Executive and renamed ‘Secretaries’ as ‘Ministers’, and then reversed that decision. Politicians in Scotland decided to call the ‘Scottish Executive’ the ‘Scottish Government’ in 2007, and, in 2011, we followed suit. It’s as if our confidence stems from, and depends on emulating others. We seem to have to look over our shoulders for guidance.

Raymond Williams, in 1975, said that the true symbol of a new Wales would be, and I quote,

‘a time of new and active creation: people sure enough of themselves to discard their baggage; knowing the past is past, as shaping history, but with a new confident sense of the present and the future, where the decisive meanings and values will be made.’

So, let us plough our own furrow, let us be self-confident enough to discard our mental baggage and to take this opportunity to be unique by adopting an official, monolingual Welsh name for our Senedd.

Consider the institutions that we, as a Senedd, support and which have monolingual Welsh names, from Chwarae Teg to the Urdd, from Merched y Wawr to the Mudiad Meithrin. If we want to nurture our children as Welsh speakers, then let us nurture our democracy in the same way. Our national anthem unites us as a nation—and that’s perhaps why I am a little hoarse today—with Welsh verse, and, when the crowd sings, the nation is united. It unites people whatever their background or their first language. In discussing our anthem, we should bear in mind that moment when the Welsh football team wore T-shirts with the word ‘diolch’ on them—our national football team, on a global stage, confidently using the Welsh language. Shouldn’t we do likewise?

Before I conclude, I would like to deal with some possible counter-arguments against this suggestion. Some of you may believe that we should retain the name ‘National Assembly’, and I do have some sympathy with that argument. It’s a name that’s used across the world, from Cuba to France, but I would like the Llywydd to consider the word ‘Senedd’ because it is already used widely on the ground. There has been a misleading report in the press, claiming that ‘Senedd’ refers to the Westminster Parliament. As many of you will know, ‘Senedd’ refers to a national legislature, not only to the UK Parliament.

Finally, I know that some have argued that this building’s name is ‘Senedd’ and that we should have another name for our legislature. There is one simple answer to that, of course, and that would be to rename the Senedd ‘Senedd-dy’, if we so choose. But I don’t see that there’s any major problem in having the same name for the building and the institution. I see no particular problem there and I think it’s relatively easy for people to understand that. The word ‘Senedd’ is based in Latin, a language that unites our continent in all its diversity. As we, against the wishes of many in this Senedd, decided to turn our back on the European Union, let us take a step that would strengthen another European union, by renewing and reinforcing an ancient cultural union. Thank you.

I welcome the Government moving the debate this afternoon. I will most probably replicate the First Minister in keeping my comments brief, because I think the Presiding Officer, in her introduction, highlighted the process that was available to this Senedd, or parliament, or Assembly—call it what you will, because there’s going to be a discussion about that.

But, some years ago, I obviously put my name to the renaming of this institution, because I do think what’s important is that people in the community actually understand the function of the legislature vis-à-vis what the Government does. And if I had a pound for every time people had criticised the Assembly for this, the Assembly for that, because, in a lot of people’s minds, they’re still back to that corporate body, where everything was run from the Assembly in the early days, and people still do not make the distinction between what the Government does and what the legislature does on their behalf and in their name.

I do think that any renaming has to be able to be taken on board by the electors who put us here to act on their behalf. And I have no objection, obviously, to the amendments that are put down today, but I do think they need to be considered in the full, because I don’t see why we couldn’t have ‘Senedd’ and ‘parliament’, because, obviously, for people there is a complete understanding of the word ‘parliament’, in the way that UK democracy works, and, over time, I think the word ‘Senedd’ could be readily taken on board. But, for a lot of people, the way this institution has developed—and, in particular, its legislative capacity, its tax-raising capacity, going forward, once the Wales Bill is passed, and, ultimately, the function of Government—

Will you give way?

Yes, I’m happy.

Do you think that if you just put it in Welsh though, you wouldn’t even have the problem of people potentially misunderstanding whether it was the UK Parliament or the Welsh parliament? In Welsh, then, it would be unique in and of itself, or would you disagree with that?

Well, as I’ve said, from my point of view, I haven’t got a problem with it because, obviously, I work in this environment and I fully understand the meaning of the word Senedd in the context that it’s used in the Welsh language, but, obviously, for many people who aren’t familiar with the way the legislature works, the Government works here, and if you take Scotland, for example, the reference is to the Parliament in Scotland, despite, obviously, Scotland having its own language and, obviously, the promotion of that language. And I do think that any renaming needs to have at the heart of its process the ability, obviously, for people to easily understand where responsibility lies and where function lies, and, as the Presiding Officer indicated in her opening remarks, that responsibility will now come to us via the Wales Bill, and that ability for us to rename this. There is a discussion that some Members clearly think that the National Assembly should continue as it is, and I do welcome the opportunity for the discussion and consultation that the Presiding Officer referred to that will happen in the coming months. From our point of view, we have a free vote on this, because, obviously, it’s not a political issue; I don’t see it as a political issue, to be honest with you. It’s for us as Members to try and reflect on our work, reflect on the communication with members who have put us here of the communities and our electorate, and, ultimately, reflect the new dynamics of the legislature, the relationship with the Government, and the relationship with the communities, whether they be in north, mid or south Wales. So, I welcome this initial debate, but, obviously, there’ll be many other debates around this issue.

Like everybody else, I welcome this debate, although I wonder, amongst the public at large, whether they might regard it as a bit of kind of pretentious navel-gazing and they’re not too bothered about what we call ourselves—as far as I can tell, they’re highly critical of what we do in this place. But, several of us, of course, have been Members of Parliament in another place, and I personally welcome the fact that we now have the chance of creating a real parliament there, instead of the one that we’ve had for the last 40 years. But, as and when the Wales Bill passes and tax-raising powers are devolved to this institution, there is, of course, a serious argument for calling ourselves a parliament, because taxation and representation have traditionally gone together in the minds of people who support democracy.

I’m personally rather attracted by the idea of the ‘Senedd’ as a name, and I enjoy being an ‘Aelod o’r Senedd’, and I wonder whether that would make us senators, ultimately, and how that could be regarded amongst the public at large. As Bethan Jenkins pointed out, the origin of this goes back to ancient Rome, and it meant, of course, that if you were an old person, you were regarded as automatically wise, and this is a theory that I’ve grown to approve of—the older I get, the wiser I think I must have become. But I wasn’t impressed by her argument in relation to the Assembly because it’s called that in Cuba and in France. Those are not my role models in either case.

But we welcome, in our party—and we will have a free vote on this as well—a national debate on this topic, and I’m sure that, following the referendum, there will be an equal amount of public interest in our exercise of what we’re going to call ourselves. So, we certainly have no objection to the Presiding Officer and the Assembly Commission considering the implications of this change and, indeed, consulting as widely as possible, and then we’ll come back and debate the issue in a real sense.

I welcome the fact that we’re having an opportunity to discuss this issue. Throughout my political life, I have campaigned for a parliament or a ‘senedd’ for wales, and although we did formulate an Assembly, I think the rationale for calling it an Assembly in the first place was to make it subordinate in some way to what was thought to be the real Parliament in Westminster. It’s true that I, too, served in that Parliament in Westminster, and it’s still true—it happened three times over the last weekend—that people come up to me and always ask me, perhaps as an icebreaker, but they always ask me, whether I miss Westminster, ‘Do you miss Parliament?’, and I have to tell them that I am in a Parliament—I’m still in a Parliament. But this concept that parliament is superior to an assembly is part of the fact that we live in the British isles, and it’s great to think that ‘Assembly’ is used in other nations, but the fact is that we share a joint heritage across the British isles that is a parliamentary heritage. If we want this place to have the same status as the Parliament in Westminster, the Parliament in Scotland and the Assembly in Northern Ireland, then I do think that we should call ourselves a ‘Senedd’ or a ‘Parliament’. Just as the Welsh Government have proceeded to become ‘the Welsh Government’, although I think that the official name is still ‘the Welsh Assembly Government’, according to the legislation, we can start to call ourselves a ‘Senedd’ or a ‘Parliament’ now.

Now, should that be bilingual or monolingual? Well, I’m open-minded on that. Personally, of course, I would be perfectly happy if we called ourselves a ‘Senedd’, as happens with the Dáil in Ireland; it would be quite acceptable for me, as a Welsh speaker, to do that, but I do think that we should consult on the issue, and the proposal from Bethan asks us to consider that. So, I’d be more than happy to support that, but we should consult—we should listen to what all the people have to say about how they wish to refer to this institution. But I do think that we are a Parliament—we have the right to legislate and we will be levying taxes in ensuing years—so, can we call ourselves a name that actually recognises the status of the institution?

What we have here with the National Assembly is, in some way, a bit of a marketing problem. Turnouts for the elections are considerably lower than those for the Westminster version. Politicians in Wales frequently observe that much of the Welsh electorate is often entirely ignorant as to which matters are devolved and which are not. The problem is essentially that the vast majority of people in Wales are not cocooned in a political bubble, as we tend to be here. We need to be careful before we change its name that we are not about to distance people even further from the political body that is supposed to serve them.

Let’s look first at the proposal that the Assembly should begin to call itself a parliament. Well, that’s fine, theoretically, once tax-raising powers take effect, but we haven’t got there yet. The position of UKIP is slightly complicated because many of us have opposed the consent for tax-raising powers without the promised referendum, as my colleague Mark Reckless explained earlier today.

But even casting the taxation issue aside and assuming that the powers were being implemented, would it not make sense to defer the renaming of the Assembly as a parliament until perhaps the beginning of the sixth term in 2021? I would suggest that this would be more cost-effective than doing so in midterm, and we would not be prejudging the outcome of the tax issue.

On to Bethan’s amendment, or amendments, she wants the term ‘Senedd’ to be used exclusively rather than ‘Parliament’, because she says this term is already widely understood and widely supported. Well, here we come back to the political bubble, or at least a cultural bubble. Bethan is from a Welsh-speaking background or a bilingual background, and in her social circle ‘Senedd’ may well be a well-used term. Alas, if I started talking about the ‘Senedd’ in the Wetherspoon’s pub—[Interruption.]

I use ‘Senedd’ all the time in my social life.

Okay, well, maybe it’s not even that, but that perhaps emphasises my point. If I started talking about the Senedd in the Wetherspoon’s pub in Canton, few people would know what I was on about.

Would the Member give way?

Yes, sure.

I’m trying to be helpful, perhaps save you from yourself. I was struck by my own Facebook page, which is not within a cultural bubble, and I posed the question of people’s views on this. There was scepticism, like you say, that we should be discussing this at this time, but the consensus was to use the bilingual term ‘Senedd’ as it was inclusive and already in use. So, though not scientific, I didn’t take that as a reflection of any cultural bubble but a common sense feeling this was an already ingrained and embedded term.

Okay, thanks, Lee; can I carry on? Right, the cultural bubble. The point is we are in a political bubble—I’m in it myself now as well—but we have to remain in some contact with the real world out there. [Interruption.] Okay, thank you. In the Wetherspoon’s pub in Canton, few people would know what I was talking about if I started talking about the ‘Senedd’, and I can tell you that from experience.

Bethan has mentioned the Urdd, Chwarae Teg and Merched y Wawr. Yes, but the problem is most people outside the Welsh-speaking colony of Pontcanna—most people in Cardiff—don’t know what these things are. On that basis, I fear that we need to kick this term ‘Senedd’ into the long grass. By all means use it informally as the Welsh translation, but please not as the principal name of this political institution. Otherwise, we are further distancing the Assembly from the majority of the people of Wales. Thank you.

I now call on the First Minister to reply to the debate.

I was, basically, going to say very little, but after that, I feel I should respond. On the timing issue, I’ve spent, now, 17 years in this place and people always say it’s never the right time for something. The reality is that the Welsh Assembly Government was established as a name and concept before it existed in law. When the legislature and the Executive were formally separated, so it existed. The name ‘Welsh Government’ is now fully in use, yet, it doesn’t actually exist in law, it’s still the ‘Welsh Assembly Government’, but we dropped the name ‘Assembly’ after 2011, and people have accepted that as normal.

I’m open to what the institution should call itself. For me, ‘National Assembly’ has never really worked; people don’t understand it in what I can describe as the common-law world. Yes, it is in use in other countries; in France, it is the ‘Assemblée Nationale’, I know that. But for us, I think it’s important that we have an institution that people understand. People do understand what a Parliament is; I’m not saying that that should be the only option on the table, but they understand what it means.

I listened carefully to what Gareth Bennett said; I can assure him I live in a street in Bridgend, my kids go to a local school and I shop locally—I don’t live in a bubble. I spend my time in a town where I grew up, with people I grew up with, and, certainly, I spend my time in the local community. I do object to the suggestion that Welsh people living in Cardiff are a colony—a colony. If somebody stood up in this Chamber and described people in Ceredigion or in Gwynedd, who are English speakers, as a ‘colony’, there would be uproar and I ask him to reflect on that fact. It makes it sound as if people in Wales who speak a certain language don’t belong in our capital city, and that is a wholly wrong remark and something that he needs to reflect on. I’m not sure that he meant it that way, but it will be highly offensive to a number of people. It’s not just him who has the right to live in our capital city; all Welsh people and people from around the world have a right to come here, to be welcomed here and to contribute to our economy.

He also makes the point that tax-raising powers are not being devolved; they have been devolved. Business rates are devolved; they are a tax. Landfill disposals tax and land transaction tax are in the pipeline and being taken through the Assembly; they are already devolved. There was never a suggestion that there would be a referendum before they were devolved. So, the devolution of partial income tax varying powers is a natural development in that way.

He makes the point again about timing. For me, I think it’s important that people get used to a new name, if that is the conclusion of the Assembly, well before the next election, so that people know the name of the institution they’re actually voting Members into. So, apart from that note of discord that we heard from the last speaker, I don’t think anybody else in the Chamber argued against this motion, but, of course, there will be a fuller debate as to what the name should actually be in the months to come.

Thank you, First Minister. In moving the amendments, Bethan Jenkins mentioned the fact that she didn’t want to proceed to a vote this afternoon. Could I just confirm that that’s correct in relation to both amendments?

Yes, it’s fine.

And I will agree to that, if there is no objection to not proceeding with those two amendments. There is no objection.

So I will move on to ask whether there is any objection to the motion. If there is no objection to the motion, then it is accepted.

Now, we move on to voting time. The first vote this afternoon is on the motions to elect Members to the seven policy and legislation committees and I call for a vote on the motions. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 47 and against five. Therefore, the motions are agreed.

We move on now to a vote on the ‘Together for Mental Health’ delivery plan, and I call for a vote on amendment 1 tabled in the name of Paul Davies. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 38, abstentions six and against eight. Therefore, the amendment is agreed.

We move on, now, to a vote on the motion as amended—the motion in the name of Jane Hutt.

Could I open the vote? Close the vote. In favour 47, abstentions 1, and against 0. Therefore, the motion as amended is agreed.

That brings proceedings to a close this afternoon.