Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru

I call Members to order. 

The first act this afternoon is the nomination of First Minister. I invite nominations for the appointment of First Minister. Carwyn Jones.

Llywydd, under Standing Order 8, may I nominate Mark Drakeford as First Minister of Wales?

Are there any further nominations? Janet Finch-Saunders. 

Diolch, Llywydd. On behalf of the Welsh Conservative Assembly group, I am proud to nominate Paul Davies AM.

Any further nominations?

On behalf of the Plaid Cymru, I nominate Adam Price as First Minister of Wales. 

Any further nominations? There are none. As there are now three nominations, I will conduct a vote by roll call and invite each Member present to vote for a candidate. I will call each Member in alphabetical order. Please clearly state the name of the candidate you support when I call your name, or indicate clearly that you wish to abstain. In accordance with Standing Order 8.2, neither the Deputy Presiding Officer nor I are permitted to vote. And that brings us to the roll call, and the first name, Mick Antoniw.

Mark Drakeford.

Rhun ap Iorwerth.

Adam Price. 

Mohammad Asghar.

Paul Davies.

Gareth Bennett. 

Abstain. 

Hannah Blythyn.

Mark Drakeford. 

Dawn Bowden.

Mark Drakeford. 

Michelle Brown.

Abstain.

Jayne Bryant. 

Mark Drakeford.

Angela Burns.

Paul Davies.

Hefin David.

Mark Drakeford.

Alun Davies.

Mark Drakeford. 

Andrew R.T. Davies. 

Paul Davies.

Paul Davies.

Paul Davies. [Laughter.]

Suzy Davies.

Paul Davies. 

Mark Drakeford.

Mark Drakeford.

Dafydd Elis-Thomas.

Mark Drakeford. 

Rebecca Evans.

Mark Drakeford.

Janet Finch-Saunders. 

Paul Davies.

Russell George.

Paul Davies.

Vaughan Gething. 

Mark Drakeford.

John Griffiths.

Mark Drakeford. 

Lesley Griffiths.

Mark Drakeford. 

Llyr Gruffydd. 

Adam Price.

Siân Gwenllian. 

Adam Price.

Neil Hamilton.

Abstain. 

Mike Hedges. 

Mark Drakeford. 

Vikki Howells. 

Mark Drakeford.

Jane Hutt.

Mark Drakeford. 

Mark Isherwood.

Paul Davies. 

Huw Irranca-Davies.

Mark Drakeford.

Julie James. 

Mark Drakeford. 

Caroline Jones. 

Abstain. 

Carwyn Jones. 

Mark Drakeford. 

Helen Mary Jones. 

Adam Price. 

Mandy Jones is not present. Steffan Lewis is not present. Dai Lloyd.

Adam Price. 

Neil McEvoy.

Adam Price. 

David Melding. 

Paul Davies. 

Jeremy Miles. 

Mark Drakeford. 

Darren Millar.

Paul Davies. 

Eluned Morgan. 

Mark Drakeford. 

Julie Morgan.

Mark Drakeford. 

Lynne Neagle.

Mark Drakeford. 

Rhianon Passmore. 

Mark Drakeford. 

Adam Price. 

Adam Price. 

Nick Ramsay. 

Paul Davies. 

Jenny Rathbone. 

Mark Drakeford. 

Mark Reckless. 

Paul Davies. 

David Rees. 

Mark Drakeford. 

David Rowlands. 

Abstain.

Jack Sargeant. 

Mark Drakeford. 

Bethan Sayed. 

Adam Price. 

Ken Skates. 

Mark Drakeford. 

Lee Waters. 

Mark Drakeford.

Joyce Watson.

Mark Drakeford. 

Kirsty Williams. 

Mark Drakeford. 

Leanne Wood. 

Adam Price. 

We will now pause for the clerk to confirm the result of the vote. 

Talk amongst yourselves.

The result of the vote is as follows: Mark Drakeford 30 votes, Paul Davies 12 votes, Adam Price nine votes, with five abstentions. As he has received over half of the votes cast, I declare that Mark Drakeford is nominated for appointment as First Minister of this Senedd. In accordance with section 47(4) of the Government of Wales Act 2006, I will recommend to Her Majesty the appointment of Mark Drakeford as First Minister. I invite Mark Drakeford to address the Assembly. Mark Drakeford. [Applause.]

Llywydd, thank you very much.

Could I begin by thanking all those who have supported my nomination here this afternoon? And particular thanks, of course, are due to my immediate predecessor, Carwyn Jones, for putting my name before the Assembly, and for the help that he has so consistently offered over many years, but especially over the last few days of transition.

It is, as you all know from yesterday's proceedings, an enormous privilege to lead a political party here in Wales, and even more so to be nominated and elected as First Minister in the National Assembly. I am absolutely conscious both of the opportunity and of the responsibility that comes with this position. And in that context, could I thank those Members, in all parts of the Chamber, for their generosity since Thursday of last week? I really am very grateful for all the messages that I have received.

Today, Dirprwy Lywydd, quite rightly, parties have put forward their nominations for First Minister, and we have carried out that essential democratic process—an election. In the many elections in which I have been involved, almost all of those who have taken part do so because of the contribution they seek to make to the Welsh public service, and, certainly, all those who have been nominated today live in that essential tradition.

Dirprwy Lywydd, when I was elected as leader of the Labour Party last week, I said that I wanted to be a beacon of hope in a darkening world. Today is not a moment for partisan remarks, but the skies around us have darkened even further in the days that have followed. A species of madness has descended on the Conservative Party, in which significant numbers of its Members of Parliament appear to believe that our country's future is best secured by heaping a leadership contest onto the burning platform that Brexit has become. I really do believe, Dirprwy Lywydd, that here, in a much newer and very different institution, things really are done differently and almost always that things are done better.

Yesterday, we talked a lot about the class of 1999. And those of us who were, in different ways, involved from the earliest days of the National Assembly will remember that it too was intended to be a beacon of hope in Wales, a place where old and discredited ways of doing politics could be set aside, and a different recipe developed, in which the things we agree on would be as important as the things on which we differ, and in which the matters that unite our nation would be given some priority over the matters that threaten to divide us. Now, I am not talking about a politics drained of passion or of fundamental beliefs. I believe in a politics that is committed and driven by the sort of society we want to help create—diversity, solidarity, community and equality—on this side of the Chamber, but where we conduct that politics with respect and with a focus on our common humanity, where we recognise that the way in which we conduct ourselves makes a difference in a fractured and uneasy world—a kinder sort of politics.

Dirprwy Lywydd, I thought of that a good deal yesterday when Carwyn mentioned our organ donation legislation. On that long evening when we debated the Bill here on the floor of the Assembly, we were a beacon of hope in lives where hope was in very short supply. But we conducted that debate, I believed, in a way that matched its subject: passionate on all sides of the Chamber, but with no doubt that every contribution was motivated by wanting to make the best possible difference. The Bill we passed was better as a result of that debate, and the Act that we've put on the statute book has gone on to change lives here in Wales and to inspire change beyond our borders, and that's the sort of politics that I believe we all would want to see more of here in this National Assembly.

Dirprwy Lywydd, the first time I came into this Chamber was not as all of you are, here by right of election; I came in here first in the wake of the then First Minister, Rhodri Morgan, who was making his first visit here as the Chamber became ready for occupation. Any changing of the guard is a time for reflection, as we found yesterday, and my old friend and mentor has been much in my thoughts in recent times. He wasn't an easy convert to this new building. Those of us who were here at the time will remember that, as its foundations were being put in place, the original building—Tŷ Hywel—would sway from side to side under the impact of the pile driving and a not-very-reassuring announcement would be made over the tannoy, advising those of us on the upper floors not to be alarmed because the building was designed to sway about. 'They're knocking up a new lean-to' was what the First Minister of the time was apt to say to visitors as this happened.

He became a convert, I believe, to the place where he spent so many hours, and where, the next time I am here, it will be to answer your questions. You will have seen perhaps amongst the many attractions of being First Minister, that that opportunity has not been the one that most immediately appealed to me. And that, I think, is at least partly because of those long years in which every Tuesday was dominated by preparing the then First Minister for that ordeal. The day would begin by Rhodri going through the formidable file you have all seen, identifying those places where more or better information was required. We would then attempt, usually unsuccessfully, to guess where Nick Bourne or Ieuan Wyn Jones, or latterly Kirsty Williams, would be trying to make trouble later that day. Rhodri would disappear; I would be left to try to find the missing information from teams at Cathays Park, who were, inevitably, on leave, on a training day or had deserted to the Wales Office, before Rhodri returned to absorb, in that astonishing blotting-paper way he possessed, everything that had been assembled for him.

Despite all of that meticulous preparation, how easily it could all go wrong. Like the Llywydd, I have no intention of writing any memoirs, but if I did, then the Tuesday when the BBC started reporting in the One O'Clock News, and with less than half an hour to go before FMQs, that a group of Welsh Government civil servants had been 'discovered', as the BBC put it, at a bonding session in a sauna in Llandovery remains seared in my memory. [Laughter.]

On those occasions when there was clearly trouble ahead, Rhodri would set off for the lift, and I would set off back to my desk. On those days, the then First Minister would pause as he left the room and offer this wise advice: 'Tin hat on', he would say, and then he would set off for this Chamber. So, if there are any family members of mine in the gallery still wondering what I need for Christmas—[Laughter.]—you’ve heard it this afternoon. I look forward, suitably hatted, to seeing you all on the first Tuesday when we resume in the new year. And, in the meantime,

Merry Christmas to you all. [Applause.]

Well done, and many congratulations, Mark.

Right, we go back to the agenda now. That’s enough excitement for today, so we go back to the agenda, and item 1 is questions to the Assembly Commission, and the question today is from Julie Morgan.

I was pleased to announce the names of the first Members of the Welsh Youth Parliament last week—a very special occasion. And I’d like to take the opportunity to thank the hundreds of candidates—over 450 of them—who stood for election, and the thousands of young people who registered and voted in a campaign that was without doubt extremely successful. Best wishes to the 60 new Members.

I thank the Llywydd for that response, and I congratulate the Commission on the work that it’s done to get the Youth Parliament off the ground. I think it’s an absolutely wonderful achievement that we’ve now got the Youth Parliament. I’m due to meet the newly elected Youth Parliament Member for Cardiff North, Betsan Roberts, soon to congratulate her. So, I think that’s very exciting for all of us Assembly Members here as well.

In my constituency, many of the schools were involved with the voting process, and I know that it was a very good turnout, and, was, you know, very—it did engage very well. But there were some schools that didn't appear to engage so much. So, I wondered if there were any plans to reach out to some of those young people who are not yet aware of the Youth Parliament, and also wondered if there were any ideas about how you are going to reach out to individual young people, particularly individual young people who belong to particular groups.

Thank you for the supplementary. Like you, I’ve been keen to meet the young representative of Ceredigion. In fact, I did meet him, Caleb Rees, and I’m sure that other Members will be looking for opportunities to meet their counterparts, those young people who are looking for our jobs. We need to watch our backs; we’ve got young people now wanting to become parliamentarians of the future, and I think that that’s great.

To respond to the issue about engaging with all schools, all young people, in Wales, I think there was a huge amount done to engage with as many young people as possible in the short period of time we had in the run-up to this first-ever election. There will be a longer period of time now to engage with young people in preparation for the next election in two years’ time, and, crucially, the work that these young parliamentarians will do with their peers and the young people they represent in their Youth Parliament. Those young parliamentarians will first of all meet regionally with young people also from their areas, listen to views from their various regions in Wales, and represent those views in the first formal meeting of the Youth Parliament here in late February.

And the point that you make about also ensuring that we include and reach out to young people from less advantaged backgrounds—the work that our partner organisations, youth organisations, have done in electing and choosing 20 additional members of the 60, I think that’s broken new ground as well. And the mix of young people that we have in the first Youth Parliament is, hopefully, a true reflection of the wide array of young people that we have in Wales. We can learn from the experience of holding our first election, and we can support our young people in allowing them to find their voice in Wales, and then that this doesn't become a one-off—this is permanent and for the future.

I also have met my Cardiff Central representative, Gwion Rhisiart, and I'm very impressed with the three priorities he has, which are to understand better the importance of apprenticeships and job opportunities for young people, focusing on school transport, including active travel, and also the opportunities for the speaking and learning of Welsh in English-medium schools—very excellent priorities. I think—. Obviously, this is a work in progress, and a very important work in progress. I think it'll be very important in due course to get the exact figures of how many people voted, what proportion of the potential electorate, and also the numbers cast for each of the candidates—there were 20 candidates in my constituency—because I think that is part of the way in which we can educate young people on what they have to do, and No. 1, they have to ensure that people are registered to vote, because otherwise, obviously, they're not going to be able to vote for them.

Well, like your representative in Cardiff Central, Caleb from Ceredigion also had local transport as one of his key priorities. His other two were the need for a people's vote and independence for Wales, so slightly different choices there. [Interruption.] Well, it could be many.

But young people will find their own voice and will come here and make their own mark, and it's important for us, I think, as an Assembly to make sure that we allow them to define the way that they work and how they prioritise any issues that they want to prioritise. Over 20,000 young people did register to vote. We need to make sure that more people are registered for the next election. Turnout is something that we also want to work on for the next election. It was an electronic election, but there were some opportunities for within-school voting as well, and that proved to be particularly useful in terms of ensuring that there was turnout. We will have learnt a great deal in how we ran this election, and we can review that and take the views of the young people themselves who were involved in it to consider how we develop on this for the future.

Thank you.

Item 2 is topical questions. We have one selected this afternoon. Angela Burns.

Thank you for the question. Cwm Taf Local Health Board is working in partnership with Interserve on the refurbishment of Prince Charles Hospital. The Welsh Government monitors the project in consultation with the health board.

Thank you for that answer. For those who may not be aware, Interserve were awarded a £25 million contract by Cwm Taf university health board to deliver part of a redevelopment there. Now, I have four questions I'd just like to quickly ask you about this issue, Cabinet Secretary. We know that, in Westminster, your party has called for a—admittedly unlawful—temporary ban on Interserve bidding for public contracts, but it's not the case here. You obviously don't agree with that decision and I wondered why that might be, and if you could perhaps expand on that.

In February 2018, in the wake of a profit warning by Capita, shares in Interserve slid by almost 20 per cent, and this was after a fall of 30 per cent the previous October. So, Cabinet Secretary, for me that is a sign of a company that's not in robust financial health. Were these financial problems taken into account, do you know, when either you and/or the health board awarded this contract to Interserve for the Merthyr redevelopment? Now, Interserve have negotiated a rescue plan going forward, which is very welcome, because an awful lot of people depend on them for jobs. But can you provide guarantees today, Cabinet Secretary, that there are plans in place to ensure that the work undertaken at Prince Charles is not going to be disrupted, and that you have mitigation against anything else untoward that may happen to Interserve? The UK Government have made the decision to continue to put contracts with or to maintain current contracts with Interserve, but what they say is they have a very robust monitoring mechanism in place, and they've got plans in place of a further crisis with Interserve. So, could you outline again for us today whether or not you have such a contingency in place here to protect our valuable investment?

Thank you for the questions. On the slightly mischievous suggestion that there should be a ban on future contracts, well, we'll take a prudent approach to anybody bidding for a future contract within the national health service or any other major capital challenge where the Welsh Government is seeking to award a contract. And, obviously, the challenges around the financial health of this company would be a factor in taking into account any future choices.

What we currently have, though, is that Interserve have already completed phase 1A of the refurbishment in Prince Charles Hospital, and this work is required because of a fire safety notice— so, undertaking that work and removing asbestos from the building. They've been awarded the next phase—phase 1B—and that was ordered several months ago, before the concerns were as sharp or as highlighted as they are now. So, they're continuing work that is already under way, and it is the point that that work is being undertaken in phases and resource being delivered in phases. We're not paying all of this money upfront and taking a huge risk with either the public finances or indeed with the work being undertaken.

It is the case that our 'Designed for Life' building framework agreement is in use and that does allow for us to both monitor the work that's been done and also, potentially, to move to an alternative supplier on that framework if any company should fail to meet their obligations. And that has happened in the past on smaller contracts, either part way through the delivery of a project, or, indeed, having won a tender. For example, a project in Ceredigion—the Cardigan Health Centre—after the initial award on 'Designed for Life', there was a need to relook again at who that person was, because the initial bidder couldn't meet the obligations they had undertaken.

So, yes, there is monitoring, yes, there is a plan, yes, there are obvious mitigation measures being considered by both the health board and the Government should Interserve fail to meet their obligations. But, at this point in time, the best information I have, and the health board have indeed, is that we expect Interserve to meet their obligations. But, obviously, it is a matter we'll keep under close review.

As soon as I'd read the report yesterday, I contacted the chief executive of the health board directly for information. I was already aware, of course, that Interserve were a contractor undertaking work on the refurbishment of Prince Charles Hospital. I've seen their work first hand as they've completed the first part of phase 1, and we're now moving into the second part of phase 1.

Now, the health board assured me, in light of the market uncertainty that was brought to their attention some weeks ago, that they had fully assessed the risk to proceed with Interserve as the contractor, who, of course, had already won and been awarded the contract for this second phase of the refurbishment and rebuild. So, my supplementary question to you, Cabinet Secretary, is whether, in your view, bearing in mind what the health board have said about how they have identified the risk of either not awarding the contract and retendering and the delay of the works for possibly another 18 months or so—. Having assessed all of that risk, they've decided to proceed, and I just wanted to ask you whether you are satisfied that there is no significant change in risk from the health board proceeding with the works as originally planned, and whether you're satisfied that they've taken adequate steps alongside the NHS shared partnership to manage that risk.

'Yes' is the simple answer, because I've actually discussed this matter yesterday with the chief executive of NHS Wales, so this is a matter that was on my mind before the topical question, because I am obviously concerned to make sure that the works are safe and that there is adequate monitoring of the risks and that risks are still acceptable, both to the public purse and obviously the delivery of the much-needed work that is being undertaken. No-one should be blasé either about the risks or indeed about the potential to simply up sticks and move somewhere else; there would be significant delay and it would affect the ability of the health service to meet its obligations, as well, of course, as the workers and uncertainty around their employment. So, yes, we will continue to monitor the performance of the contract, we will continue to be concerned about the financial health of the company and making sure that we protect the value that the public obviously want us to have oversight of to make sure that the appropriate works are delivered. And I recognise, as the local Member, that you will continue to keep a close watch on this matter too.

I have to say that I concur with the Cabinet Secretary's colleagues in London and with the union Unite in their very firm suggestion that it is not appropriate to be letting major new contracts to this company while they are in such a fragile financial condition. I appreciate what the Cabinet Secretary has said about this being phase 2 of an ongoing project and it may not be appropriate at this time for him to intervene, but can I ask the Cabinet Secretary whether he will give consideration to giving further guidance to the health boards as to the due diligence that they should undertake when they are looking at companies to which they are letting these massive contracts, which, of course, as he's rightly said, are hugely important and hugely significant with a lot of people involved in working in them? Obviously, Dirprwy Lywydd, all of us in this Chamber will want this contract to be successful and will be devoutly hoping that the company is sufficiently financially robust to be able to carry it through. But, again, as I say, I concur with the Labour Party in London and with Unite; I am frankly not sanguine.

To be fair, I think the responses that have been given today, and indeed the information provided directly by the local Member in setting up her questions, reinforce that this is not a new contract, this is a contract that was awarded several months ago. It is a contract on which the health board has already looked again at the potential risks involved in continuing with the work or not continuing with the work with Interserve itself. And, of course, financial health and due diligence are already a feature in the awarding of contracts under the Designed for Life building framework agreement. Of course, it'll be a matter on which, both centrally here within the Government as well as within the health board, there will be proper monitoring of the ability of the company to deliver on the works they have undertaken and contracted to do. New awards for new contract bids—of course there will be appropriate due diligence, and of course it'll be a factor where people will understand if you look at Interserve and any other potential contractors that this is about managing the risks that we have and that we understand and then see the work completed to make sure it provides good value for the public and a good place for people to receive and deliver healthcare. 

Thank you very much, Cabinet Secretary. 

Item 3 on the agenda is 90-second statements. The first one today is from the Llywydd, Elin Jones. 

It is exactly 100 years ago this week that the post-world war general election was held on 14 December 1918. The Parliament (Qualification of Women) Act 1918 had only just received Royal Assent on 21 November 1918. The Act gave women over the age of 21 the right to stand for election to the House of Commons. In that general election on 14 December, one Welsh woman stood for election, and her name was Millicent Mackenzie. She stood for the University of Wales seat as a Labour candidate. She won 20 per cent of the vote and lost to the Liberal Sir Herbert Lewis. Only one woman was elected as an MP in that 1918 election, Constance Markievicz, and as a Sinn Féin candidate she did not take up her seat in the House of Commons. 

Who was Millicent Mackenzie, the first ever woman to stand for election in Wales? In addition to being a candidate in that election, Millicent Mackenzie was a professor of education at the University College of South Wales and Monmouthshire, as Cardiff University was then known. She was the first female professor in any UK chartered university. She was a highly respected educational academic and a trainer of teachers. Millicent Mackenzie was also a leading suffragette in the Cardiff area, culminating in her standing in the 1918 election. Such is the lack of prominence of women in our history, I had not heard of Millicent Mackenzie's name until January of this year. But, we must not allow this pioneering woman's name to be forgotten during the next 100 years. As 27 women AMs in this Senedd, we thank you, Millicent, and we stand on your shoulders. Millicent Mackenzie.

I want to use this opportunity to congratulate the community of Llangollen on securing the status of being a plastic-free community from the Surfers Against Sewage organisation. The thanks go to the untiring work of volunteers such as Mair Davies and groups such as Friends of the Earth in Llangollen. This was the first community in north Wales to secure this recognition, but I’m pleased to say that others, such as Denbigh, Prestatyn, Rhyl, Conwy, Bangor, Caernarfon and Anglesey, have all started on that journey too. They have a five-point plan to reach their aim: the establishment of a community steering group, starting a programme of education in schools for non-plastic schools, getting the town council's commitment, working with local businesses, and to work with local community groups in order to reduce the disposable plastics that they use.

As part of the programme, local businesses have pledged to reduce plastic use in a wide variety of ways, from ditching the straw, to changing to paper bags, bulk buying, refilling containers, removing single-use serving items, ditching plastic cutlery and the removal of plastic packaging. There have also been a variety of events in the town to help reduce plastic, from coffee mornings to litter picks and group talks to empower others to make the change. And, of course, there's been buy-in from public and civic organisations such as the town council, Cittaslow Llangollen, the chamber of trade and local schools. Indeed, I recently visited Ysgol y Gwernant in the town, and the pupils there spoke very passionately about how they wanted to tackle the use of single-use plastic. So, congratulations to Llangollen, and let's hope that many other communities across Wales follow their example in becoming plastic free. 

On 11 December 1282, on a very cold day in Cilmeri, Llywelyn ein Llyw Olaf or Llywelyn ap Gruffydd, prince of Wales, was killed. With his death, by the hand of Stephen de Frankton, one of the soldiers of Edward I, Wales and its people lost their freedom. There followed seven centuries of fighting against oppression, in a striving for self-determination, autonomy and the freedom to be an independent nation. Today, Llywelyn continues to be a crucial part of our nation’s history and our nation’s memory. In him was the spark of a civil Welsh nation and a hope for a better future for our nation. The independent spirit of Llywelyn and the 18 who stood with him until the very end remains in all of us today who are willing to stand up to injustice and for independence for Wales. We will remember Llywelyn by honouring his vision by marching forward towards the creation of a new independent Wales where everyone is free. Thank you.

Item 4 on the agenda this afternoon is a debate on International Human Rights Day, and I call on the Leader of the House and the Chief Whip to move the motion—Julie James.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Human rights are relevant to every one of us every day. Monday 10 December, International Human Rights Day, marks 70 years since the United Nations general assembly adopted the universal declaration of human rights. This was a vital milestone document to safeguard against a repeat of the atrocities committed in world war two. It proclaimed inalienable rights to which everyone is inherently entitled as a human being, regardless of race, colour, religion, sex, language, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. 

A distinctive approach to human rights has been woven into the Welsh devolution settlement. The Government of Wales Act 2006 requires the Welsh Government to act compatibly with the European convention on human rights. This is reflected in our domestic law by the Human Rights Act 1998 and also with its international obligations, including the seven UN conventions signed and ratified by the UK state party. Put another way, human rights are in our DNA. The principles enshrined in the declaration of human rights are as relevant today as they were in 1948. 

We are living in difficult and uncertain times, where austerity is falling disproportionately on those least able to bear it, impacting directly on their human rights. Individuals and families are losing their homes and going without food. We know only too well that levels of poverty across Wales and the rest of the UK are too high. Professor Alston, the United Nations special rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights, stated after his visit to the UK that the responsibility for this rests squarely with the UK Government and its austerity and welfare reform policies. He said

'There are few places in government where these developments are more tangible than in the benefit system. We are witnessing the gradual disappearance of the postwar British welfare state behind a webpage and an algorithm. In its place, a digital welfare state is emerging. The impact on the human rights of the most vulnerable in the UK will be immense.'

The Equality and Human Rights Commission's report, 'The impact of welfare reform and welfare-to-work programmes', published in March, told of the potentially devastating impact of the UK Government tax and welfare reforms on people with protected characteristics. It predicted that nearly half of all households in Wales will lose out from the reforms and that the largest impact will be felt by people on the lowest incomes, including women, certain ethnic groups and households with children. The EHRC's 'Is Wales Fairer? (2018)' report also found that the most disadvantaged groups in Wales are falling even further behind the rest of society. 

Globally, many of the underlying values and principles of human rights are being undermined, and in some countries completely ignored. Our political discourse has become blighted by divisive narratives, driven by those who seem determined to create tensions between communities. Social media, in particular, is far too often a haven for racism and xenophobia, with individuals using the concept of free speech as a defence, with an expectation that they can write whatever they please without consequence.

Wales has a long history of compassion, tolerance and respecting and welcoming others. I know that a country that values diversity and enables our various communities to participate equally will be stronger as a result.

It is always the most vulnerable whose rights are denied first—the poor, women, racial and ethnic minorities, lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender plus people, children, single parents and disabled people. It is simply unacceptable that here in the UK in the twenty-first century one in five women are victims of sexual violence, one in four women are victims of domestic abuse and two women a week die at the hands of their intimate partners or former partners. We also have stubborn and persistent gender pay gaps in Wales, and far too few women in the most senior roles.

Our intersectional approach to phase 2 of the gender equality review involves working across different equalities strands, including race, disability and age, aiming to ensure that no-one is left behind. We recognise that women and girls who experience multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination are often excluded from progress. We will soon have a clear road map for achieving gender equality in Wales.

Turning to disability, let me start by highlighting the disability employment gap. In Wales, just 45 per cent of working-age disabled people are currently in employment, compared to 80 per cent of those who are not disabled. This is just one example, although a very important one, of the obstacles facing disabled people. Our new framework, 'Action on Disability: The Right to Independent Living', is rooted in the social model of disability, and sets out how we will tackle some of the key barriers identified by disabled people themselves. These include transport, employment, housing and access to buildings and places. Disabled people must have access to the same opportunities as everyone else.

Race is another crucial issue. Seventy-five per cent of hate crimes in Wales relate to race or religion—that reflects thousands of vile examples of verbal, physical and online abuse being inflicted every day on innocent people because of their appearance, and we know that many such incidents still go unreported. Our black, Asian and minority ethnic groups are still not adequately represented in our media, in politics or in our workplaces. We are working hard to change this. Our BAME projects are essential to making Wales the inclusive-to-all and welcoming country we know it can and should be.

Gypsies, Roma and Travellers are amongst the most marginalised in our society. They experience discrimination, inequality and a lack of opportunities, perpetuating the negative views and misconceptions that fill the narrative around them. Recent research by the EHRC showed that 44 per cent of the general public openly admitted to being hostile towards these groups. To illustrate this, comments under a recent Wales Online article about a Gypsy and Traveller community funeral in Cardiff included calls for the residents to be moved to Auschwitz and burnt out of their camp. One person posted a picture of a Nazi soldier with the caption, 'Get the gas.' These comments, which are not an isolated case, remained visible for several days, causing great distress to the Gypsy and Traveller community. We must be clear: we cannot and will not tolerate any such actions or statements seeking to encourage such extreme and abhorrent views. 

Will the leader of the house take an intervention?

Of course.

A fine speech so far, but would she reflect that the leader of UKIP in Wales, Neil Hamilton, is not present in this Chamber to listen to your free speech, yet he felt it was appropriate for him to share a platform with Tommy Robinson last week in the name of free speech? Would she express disappointment in that?

Well, indeed—a point well made. 

We must be resilient in the face of extremists. Together, we must continue to build a strong and diverse society, where people of every race, faith and colour are valued for their character and their actions. We all want to help create a peaceful and harmonious country, where our children and future generations can thrive. 

'Prosperity for All' sets out the Welsh Government's vision for Wales as a vibrant, welcoming and cohesive place to live and work—a country we can proud of, which is outward looking and where people of all backgrounds are respected and valued. This vision underpins our new 'Nation of Sanctuary—Refugee and Asylum Seeker Plan', which sets out cross-Government commitments to provide equality of opportunity, reduce discrimination and promote good relations for people seeking sanctuary in Wales. 

Every local authority in Wales showed leadership in response to the Syrian refugee crisis by agreeing to resettle families in their area. A United Nations delegation visited us following the first resettlements, and was very impressed with the welcome that had been provided by Welsh communities. Individuals in Welsh communities have led the way in coming together and forming community sponsorship organisations, who have themselves been able to welcome refugee families with minimal Government support. A fantastic example of wanting to contribute to the communities that have embraced them was the election of a Syrian refugee to the Youth Parliament last week from my own constituency. I'm very proud of that, Deputy Presiding Officer. This shows that leadership and a commitment to equality can arise anywhere, but the experiences of those who migrate to Wales remain very mixed, even when they have been here for many years or decades. 

Earlier this year, the Windrush scandal exposed tragic examples of individuals being forgotten as policies are developed. Thousands of British subjects and citizens have faced insecure immigration status, despite previous assurances that they are part of Britain. Some were deported and others have been denied healthcare, lost their jobs or been unable to return to Britain. The full extent of the scandal is still being explored, but the public outrage, including from Wales, demonstrated the public's commitment to fairness. I would like to hope that such a policy would never be developed in Wales, but we must be vigilant and redouble our efforts to put people at the centre of our policy making.

This is especially important with the uncertainty affecting our society as a result of Brexit. No-one feels this more than the 80,000 EU citizens who live in Wales, and the smaller number of Welsh citizens currently living in the EU. We have a responsibility to these members of our community. We need to use every tool at our disposal in the coming months to ensure these individuals are reassured that we value their contribution to our economy and our community, supported to apply for settled status and do not experience additional barriers in the future. 

Last month saw the anniversary of the passage of the Human Rights Act 1998. To mark this, the Counsel General was asked to deliver the Eileen Illtyd memorial lecture on human rights 2018, 'A Human Rights Act for Wales?' In his lecture, which I was privileged to attend, the Counsel General said that

'a piecemeal approach to human rights protection may well not capture the same benefits that a dynamic and comprehensive approach could bring.'

I want to reiterate that we are acutely aware of these questions, and are committed to looking at ways of strengthening rights and protections in Wales. 

Members will also recollect our recent debate on the option to incorporate the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in Welsh law. Since then, I've been reflecting on these issues, taking into account calls from a variety of stakeholders for the Welsh Government to take action to safeguard equality and human rights in the context of Brexit, and do more to embed international treaties in Welsh law. In my recent discussions with, among others, the Equality and Human Rights Commission and the Future Generations Commissioner for Wales, I've been clear that it is not a matter of whether we will do something, but what action will be most effective. 

In consequence, I've asked officials to consider the potential impact of a range of actions, including new legislation enacting the socioeconomic duty in the Equality Act 2010, and strengthened regulation. A crucial question is how any such action would relate to the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015. This work will be linked to phase 2 of the gender equality review. To move it forward, we will be convening a seminar early in the new year to engage with key stakeholders and scope the work that will be needed in more detail.

In the face of unprecedented change, we must, and will, be proactive, ambitious, forward thinking and continue to do whatever is within our powers to ensure that Wales remains a modern, inclusive place to live and work. Our clear goal, Deputy Presiding Officer, is to strengthen and build on these rights for the future. Diolch.

Thank you. I have selected the two amendments to the motion, and I call on Leanne Wood to move amendment 1, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. 

Diolch. I move the amendment. 

As we celebrate 70 years of the adoption of the universal declaration of human rights, it's important that we examine the threats to human rights that currently exist. So, our amendment is timely because, as has already been said this afternoon, just this weekend we saw yet another example of how there are political movements that seek to reverse the human rights protections that we have. A Member of this institution was a speaker at a pro-Yaxley-Lennon march in London, and used that platform to echo an anti-Semitic theory that the French President was an agent of a foreign power. This was a march where those attending wheeled a hangman's noose and called for the Prime Minister to be hung in response to the Member's speech. This, of course, in a climate where an MP was murdered in recent history for campaigning for remaining in the European Union.

I want people in this Chamber to compare and contrast what has happened to the organisers of that march, and think about what the consequences would have been had there been a march of British Asian people shouting death threats at MPs. It's likely that such a march would have resulted in several arrests and the speakers would be looking at convictions for offences under anti-terrorism legislation and lengthy jail sentences. Or what if this march were where people were protesting about inaction on climate change? Would we have several undercover police spying on those attending, with a licence to pursue deceitful sexual relationships in the course of that work? Instead, the main organisers are likely to continue picking up lucrative salaries from the wealthy individuals who have been financing their political movements and enjoying the freedoms that they would deny to others.

Compare and contrast the way the British state has treated far-right political movements and other political movements and you will see why our amendment in the name of Plaid Cymru is needed this afternoon. Another example, of course, is the way that anti-terrorism legislation has been used to convict protestors in Stansted who tried to stop people being deported to face torture and death as part of the UK's actual immigration policy. This all takes place within the context of Brexit, of course; Brexit itself being a political project financed by the wealthy who seek to water down the protections available to workers, environmental regulations and the role of the European Court of Justice in holding Westminster Governments to account when they violate human rights.

The Scottish Government is going to be ensuring that Scottish law has a framework for protecting human rights written into all aspects of law, and my colleague Siân Gwenllian has had an encouraging response from the Welsh Government when calling for something similar here. So, I'd be interested in an update from the Welsh Government on your thinking on that area.

Seventy years on from the adoption of the universal declaration of human rights and it's important that we renew our efforts now at protecting and enhancing those rights from those political forces that want to take them away.

Thank you. I call on Mark Isherwood to move amendment 2, tabled in the name of Darren Millar.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Human Rights Day two days ago marked the seventieth anniversary, as we heard, of the universal declaration of human rights, a milestone document that proclaimed the inalienable rights that everyone is inherently entitled to as a human being, as we heard from the Cabinet Secretary at the beginning, regardless of race, colour, religion, sex, language, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. It is in fact the most translated document in the world, available in more than 500 languages.

As the chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission said on the sixtieth anniversary,

'I want to...say something about one of the UN's founders—Winston Churchill....Churchill's primary motivation',

he said,

'for supporting the codification of our rights as citizens was his desire that we should never again witness anything like the grotesque abuse of power by the Nazi state.'

He went on to say that

'Churchill's vision was about a society that should be allowed to live free to achieve.'

We will be supporting Plaid Cymru's amendment, although we are conscious that there is a meeting point between the far right and far left.

I move amendment 2, noting that the UK Government recognises that all rights set out in the UN declaration of human rights are of equal importance and welcoming the action taken by the UK Government in prioritising tackling modern day slavery, defending freedom of religion or belief, ending inequality and discrimination, and promoting democracy. In September 2017, the Prime Minister convened world leaders at the UN General Assembly to launch a call to action to end modern slavery—one of the great human rights challenges of our time. The UK Government has doubled aid spending on the issue to address the root causes, strengthened law enforcement capacity in transit countries, and provided money to support the victims.

A year on from this, the Prime Minister's call to action, positive endorsements have been received from over 80 countries. At October's north Wales modern slavery Forum, organised by Haven of Light and attended by Wales's anti-slavery co-ordinator, we heard that modern slavery was alive in business, agriculture, hospitality, criminal activity and sexual exploitation. The UK's former Independent Anti-Slavery Commissioner, Kevin Hyland OBE, now advises international bodies, including the UN, on human trafficking and modern slavery.

Freedom of religion or belief matters because faith guides the daily life of more than 80 per cent of the world's population, and because promoting tolerance and respect for all helps to build inclusive societies that are more stable, more prosperous and better able to resist extremism. The freedom of individuals and organisations to discuss, debate and criticise, or to hold governments to account, is an essential element of a successful society.

All people should be able to live with dignity, free from all forms of violence or discrimination, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity. The UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office appointed its first special envoy on gender equality last year, who works to promote gender equality at an international level, including action to target sexual violence in conflict and unequal access to education. Last month, the UK hosted a historic conference for female parliamentarians from around the world. The UK Government works with like-minded partners at home and abroad to promote democracy as the best long-term guarantor of stability and prosperity, and hosted the Commonwealth heads of Government meeting in April to further promote the shared value of human rights, democracy and inclusion that are enshrined in the Commonwealth charter.

Disabled people around the world suffer discrimination. We must protect their rights and transform their lives. In July, the UK Government co-hosted its first ever global disabilities summit to encourage international action. As the Cabinet Secretary knows personally, because she spoke there, as honorary president of the North Wales Association for Multicultural Integration I was also pleased to speak at the annual celebration of International Integration Day at the Temple of Peace on 9 October. And I will now look forward to attending the Wrexham Town of Sanctuary launch on 1 February, with music from a Syrian refugee choir, recognising Wrexham as a place where people are proud to offer sanctuary to those fleeing violence and prosecution.

Leaving the EU does not affect our rights under the European convention on human rights, or ECHR, as this comes from the Council of Europe, not the EU. The UK Government has clearly stated that the UK is committed to membership of the ECHR and that withdrawing from it would run counter to its vision of a global Britain. The ECHR is—

Are you winding up, please?

—both British and Conservative in origin. It was advocated by Winston Churchill and drafted by former Conservative Home Secretary, David Maxwell Fyfe. Well, in the seventieth year since its adoption, the UN declaration on human rights remains a powerful statement of hope and aspiration for us all. There's been great progress since 1948, but it's a dangerous world and there's still much more to do.

Julie Morgan.

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer, for calling me to speak in this very important debate. As other speakers have said, it's 70 years since the universal declaration of human rights was adopted by the UN General Assembly, which gathered in Paris on December 10, 1948. And it was voted in by 48 votes to none with eight abstentions, and Eleanor Roosevelt, the chair of the declaration drafting committee, called it a Magna Carta for all mankind—and womankind, of course. And I think it's quite significant, actually, that one of the abstainers was Saudi Arabia, and when you think about human rights in relation to Saudi Arabia recently with the issue of the journalists and women's rights in Saudi Arabia, I think that's quite significant that they did actually abstain.

I'm very pleased that the leader of the house said in her address to us that human rights are in our DNA, because I think there is a tendency to think of human rights as maybe being something a bit distant from our ordinary everyday life, maybe something a bit intellectual, something to do with charters and conferences and people sitting around in important rooms and discussing human rights, but I think that what we have to do as politicians is bring home the fact that they are what absolutely affects us in our everyday life. And something like a staggering abuse of human rights then brings it home to us, which, of course, as has already been mentioned—the Windrush scandal. I mean, that was something, I think, that did absolutely illustrate to us all how this had been going—. This abuse of human rights had been going on secretly, quietly, nobody knowing, and these terrible things had happened to people who had contributed so much to our country. You're aware of human rights on occasions like that, but, obviously, it does affect us, all of us, in our daily lives.

I was very pleased on Monday evening to go along to a meeting organised by Helen Mary Jones, setting up for renewing the human rights cross-party group here in the Assembly. And I'm sure Helen Mary will probably speak about that later on if she's called. But I just thought that was a very good initiative, and I'm very pleased to give it my support. And we did have a speaker there from Just Fair, who I thought brought out some really important points. And one of the points that he did bring out was that it's so important that you make human rights part of our everyday experience.

And, of course, the leader of the house has already mentioned another group very close to my heart—the Gypsy/Roma/Traveller group, who are discriminated against on a daily basis. I think if you are a Gypsy/Roma/Traveller, and you go out and about your ordinary day, you accept discrimination on a daily basis. I think it is one of the last respectable ways of causing abuse. And that, I think, is a great task for the Government to try to redress that issue, and I know the leader of the house is doing that. But I think we have to make a huge effort. 

But, in any case, I think we have made progress in Wales. We have made progress on children's rights, with the Rights of Children and Young Persons (Wales) Measure 2011, and it's been very important, I think, the consultation that we have had with children over many different issues. I'm particularly glad that we did consult children about Brexit, to ask them what they felt about Brexit, although I think, of course, we were mocked for doing that by some politicians. But I think it was so important because it's so important that equality and human rights protections are safeguarded and enhanced during the Brexit process and afterwards. So, I know that the Welsh Government will be vigilant about any loss of human rights that will happen during this process. I think it's also very important, because young people were denied the opportunity of taking part in the referendum—16 and 17-year-olds didn't have the vote—and, although, of course, we voted, their future was affected more than any of us. So, I think it was very important, for that reason, that we did actually consult children. And we do know that children are very concerned about human rights. I think Young Wales did a consultation with children, which showed that secondary school students were concerned about the environment, opportunities to study abroad, human rights and health and well-being, and young people, of course, have expressed in that consultation their frustration that they were denied a say in a vote that will affect their futures. 

There is a lot more to do, and I agree with the Equality and Human Rights Commission's recommendation in its report 'Is Wales Fairer?' that the Welsh Government should enact the socioeconomic duty, which would bring poverty and equality together and help tackle one of the biggest drivers of inequality in our country—poverty. So, I hope that is something that the Welsh Government will do, but I think it's obviously very important that we have to look at how that does fit in with the future generations Act. 

Helen Mary Jones. 

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I'm very pleased and grateful to you for allowing me to make a brief contribution to this debate today. As others have already said, this is undoubtedly a time when human rights are under threat. Goodness only knows what will become of the shambles that is the Brexit process, and how that will affect our rights and our ability in Wales to access those European protections. But what we do know, Dirprwy Lywydd, is that the whole debate around Brexit has allowed some individuals to feel that they have the right to express some particularly poisonous attitudes, and the dreadful spike in hate crime that we saw here in Wales immediately after that vote is testimony to that. And we know that there are elements in the UK press that have undermined the concept of human rights, that have made it seem something that is irrelevant, that is precious, that, as Julie Morgan has said, is something that isn't relevant to our everyday lives. And in the cross-party group, which I'll refer to again, it was very heartening to hear our speaker talk about human rights not being a matter about the left and the right of politics, as it's too often sometimes portrayed in elements of the British press. It is about basic rights that should be accessible to us all. 

I was very pleased—and I am grateful to Julie Morgan for mentioning it—to be invited in this context to help re-establish the cross-party group on human rights in this place. I was asked to do so by Associate Professor Simon Hoffman of the Hillary Rodham Clinton School of Law at Swansea University, an expert in the field who I know is known to many in this Chamber. Simon convenes the Wales human rights stakeholder group, a group of over 20 organisations, coming at the issue from various perspectives, and bringing a great potential wealth of expertise that I think that we can use. I was very grateful to Julie for being there on Monday, and I'm also grateful to Jayne Bryant and to Darren Millar, who have joined the group, and I hope that other Members will feel able to do so as our work progresses. As Julie Morgan has said, we met this Monday, here in this place, on international Human Rights Day. And we agreed to work together towards new, made-in-Wales comprehensive human rights legislation, incorporating the appropriate UN conventions into Welsh law.

I've been very grateful, as the leader of the house has mentioned, for the very positive way in which she responded to my proposal to incorporate the disability convention. And I'm sure that she will be having similar discussions with Darren Millar around his legislative proposal on the rights of older persons. And I was very interested to read the Counsel General's remarks, to which the leader of the house has referred today. And I'm very grateful for the whole spirit in which the leader of the house has addressed this issue in the months since I've returned here, and I very much hope—and I'm sure from what she said today—that, regardless of any changes in particular individuals' roles, the Welsh Government will continue to take this positive and extremely unpartisan approach. The cross-party group looks forward to working with the Welsh Government as this agenda is moved forward here in Wales, supporting, and challenging, where that's appropriate. And that group, as I've already said, provides an excellent reservoir of expertise, which I'm sure the Ministers in charge will want to avail themselves of.

Deputy Presiding Officer, I hope that Brexit can be reversed, and I hope that the human rights protections afforded to us by being part of the European Union, and the access that that provides to European courts, can be retained. But whether or not that is achieved, I trust that we can work together to ensure that the vital international conventions are enshrined meaningfully into Welsh law. Diolch yn fawr iawn i chi.

As everybody has said, the universal declaration of human rights is up there with the Bible—it's one of the most translated and published documents in the world, and it is available in more than 500 languages. It was crowd-sourced long before the internet. It was drafted by representatives from around the world, with different legal and cultural experiences, but they had the shared trauma of war. Like the NHS, with which it shares a birthday, the declaration was born out of a determination to build a better and fairer world. But it wasn't a lofty aspiration. It underpinned the formation of the postwar, rules-based global order. And just as that internationalist political architecture has come under increased attack from resurgent nationalist and authoritarian forces, so too have human rights. It's the job of parliamentarians to defend them, not to share the stage with right-wing bullies, who would take away the rights of others. And we must go further. Because in response to this century's big challenges—mass migration, climate change, huge wealth inequality—human rights must be strengthened, not weakened, extended, not reined in.

That brings me, inevitably, to Brexit. Brexit, of course, has important implications for human rights in this country. We shall see what happens this evening in Westminster. The UK Government has legislated to incorporate EU laws concerning protection against discrimination and workers' rights, but it chose to discard the EU charter of fundamental rights, which guarantees protection in employment, equality and privacy. What might that mean, for example, for pregnant women, working parents and people with disabilities? I have no doubt that our current rights will come under attack from the usual right-wing, red-tape brigade and deregulation fanatics.

And one final point: international Human Rights Day also marked the end of the 16 days of activism against gender-based violence. I've been campaigning with the Women's Institute—both here and in Aberystwyth, and across the region—within those two weeks, pushing the respect agenda into all communities. And the White Ribbon campaign asked people to pledge to never commit, condone or remain silent about violence against women. But that message is undercut if, when people do come forward, the police fail to act properly. So, I was a little bit dismayed last week to learn that, according to the Criminal Justice Inspectorates, 8,400 crimes have not been properly recorded by Dyfed-Powys and Gwent police. And I want to focus on Dyfed-Powys as it covers most of my region. Of the 3,300 reported crimes not recorded annually, 1,500 are violent crimes, 70 are sex offences, seven are vulnerable victim cases and 66 are cases of domestic abuse—nearly a quarter of all reported crime. In many cases, victims will only be able to access support services when a crime is recorded. So, this is a serious failure, and I expect the police leadership and police and crime commissioners to get a grip and to stop letting down the victims of abuse. Within this country, they have a fundamental human right to protection. Thank you.

I'd like, just for a few moments, to speak about the wonderful opportunity that I think Wales has to continue to lead the way in its approach to human rights. I was very privileged to sit on the committee that considered the children and young people's rights Measure back in 2011. I have to say that that was a milestone, I think, for this National Assembly in demonstrating its commitment to the rights agenda, which has been so important in putting children at the heart of a rights-based approach to policy making and decision making, not just by the Welsh Government, but, of course, also by other public authorities. 

As Helen Mary Jones quite rightly referred, I've been very fortunate enough to win a ballot here in the National Assembly to try to bring forward another piece of what I believe will be groundbreaking legislation in order that we can continue to move the rights-based approach into the area of older people's rights. Wales has led the way when it's come to older people's rights. We were the first nation in the UK to appoint an older people's commissioner, and I think it's fair to say that we are regarded globally as a great place for people to grow old. But we have an opportunity, I think, in order to embed those rights further into Welsh law. We already have incorporated them, of course, into the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2006, which, of course, the leader of the house will remember very sharply, I think. 

But I think they've been embraced by those local authorities that had duties under that Act and they've been embraced by the Welsh Government. And that's why I've been very pleased to see the extremely positive responses that I've received so far from the older people's commissioner, from Age Alliance Wales and Age Cymru, and a whole host of other older people stakeholder organisations, to the proposals for an older people's rights Bill. I would very much welcome a response from the leader of the house today to provide an update, really, on the work that I know has already been going on in terms of trying to make older people's rights real. 

We must never forget that we have over 800,000 older people in Wales. We are an ageing society and we should celebrate the role that older people play and the contribution that they make to our country. But it seems to me that ageism is still one of those things that, very often, we laugh about and that we accept and seem to tolerate in a way that we don't with other protected characteristics such as race, gender and sexuality. I think that that's something that we need to deal with as a nation. So, I think that embedding older people's rights further into Welsh law, helping to communicate and promote those rights to older people, and indeed to all public services and everybody across the country, is an important way of helping people to realise those rights and to be able to access them. So, I do hope that I can work closely with the Government, whoever the appropriate Minister may be, perhaps in the coming weeks and the new year, to help get this piece of legislation onto the statute books. 

But I also look forward to working with the cross-party group on human rights. I was delighted that Helen Mary Jones has led the charge on re-establishing that group and I look forward to engaging with it and the Welsh Government to promote this rights-based agenda, which I think we've done very well with to date.

It's been 70 years since the United Nations universal declaration of human rights was adopted, and we've come a long way in the last seven decades, but we haven't come far enough. For millions of people around the world, those universal promises and protections are nothing but a distant dream. The 30 articles that we hold so dear have little meaning to the people in Yemen or Venezuela, Syria or South Sudan, Somalia or Saudi Arabia. Men, women and children who struggle and fight each day just to stay alive do not enjoy the rights and protections drafted following the horrors of the second world war and the Holocaust. Many are forced to flee their homes and their former lives in search of safety, faced with journeys that are often as dangerous as the one they hope to leave behind as they cross the Mediterranean, or Mexico, in pursuit of a safe haven.

But it is not just those in war-torn regions that are denied basic rights; we see human rights abuses in western civilisation. In the so-called land of the free, US citizens are denied basic rights, human rights, on a daily basis, and it is evident that members of the BME community do receive harsher prison sentences than white members. The US has a leader who is hostile to refugees and he thinks it is okay to forcibly break up families and imprison children whose only crime is to flee famine, war and persecution. Some families are not reunited and despite this, he is sometimes idolised by some people on the far right who hope to emulate him.

Closer to home, our wheelchair users cannot travel together for any distances and be companions on a train or bus because our infrastructure is not equipped to ensure that equality. Also close to home, just down the road in Swansea, in Cardiff, we have a homeless epidemic, where men and women, many of whom are ex-forces, are denied their article 25 rights. Rather than ensuring these poor unfortunate souls have a right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of themselves and of their families—including food, clothing, housing and medical care—some politicians are concerned with ensuring homeless people do not make their high streets look unsightly. In a park in Swansea the other day, I came across a person sleeping behind the bushes, hidden from view, wrapped in a blanket, ashamed to be homeless, and at that moment in time I felt ashamed to be a politician.

We also have politicians and entire political parties who attack people based upon their religious views or their choice of dress, and seek to pit communities against one another and make celebrities out of people who spread racism, bigotry and misogyny online. And we have a right—we have to stand up to these people: people who want to see this document torn up, people who would love to see legally binding human rights removed, people who put petty nationalism before humanism.

On 10 December 1948, the majority of world leaders had the foresight to see that our future did not lie in more warfare and division but that recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world. We have to defend these rights from those who would see them torn up and diluted, not just from the likes of Bashar al-Assad, Vladimir Putin, Tayyip Erdoğan or Kim Jong-un, but from the likes of Gerard Batten and Tommy Robinson—Gerard Batten, who obviously thought that a woman's place was not in politics. Hopefully, it won't take another 70 years before all 7 billion of us who share this planet enjoy the same inalienable rights ratified by world leaders on 10 December 1948. I will be supporting both the amendments, Rhun, and will acknowledge that extremism in any form, whether it be extreme left, extreme right—anywhere—is not conducive to our environment and society. Because we are all equal regardless of the colour of our skin, the religion we follow, our sex, our physical ability, our economic situation or the country we live in, and the sooner everyone accepts that, the more peaceful our planet will be. Diolch yn fawr.

It is important, today of all days, that we, as the National Assembly for Wales, acknowledge International Human Rights Day on Monday, 10 December 2018. Seventy years on since the adoption of the universal declaration of human rights, the advancement of social justice and equality was one of the core fundamental reasons that I, and, I know, others in this Chamber, entered political life, and it is why the progress and maintenance of social justice and equality of opportunity is at the bedrock of all that I do as the Assembly Member for Islwyn. In fact, fighting the ideology of the far right and BNP was fundamental to my personal journey. It was a Labour United Kingdom Government that was an original signatory to the European convention on human rights and it was a Labour United Kingdom Government that enshrined it into our law, with the passing of the 1998 Human Rights Act.

But it is, indeed, as others have said today, a sad day when the leader of the UKIP group smiles and encourages the former leader of the English Defence League and BNP member at a recent rally—and his real name, I believe, is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon—now advising UKIP.

Last year, the UK Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, addressed the United Nations in Geneva. Jeremy Corbyn outlined in that address the problems that our common humanity faces. He stated, and I quote, that the growing concentration of unaccountable wealth and power in the hands of a tiny corporate elite, a system many call 'neoliberalism', which has a sharply increased inequality, marginalisation, insecurity and anger across the world. We know that challenges such as these threaten the advancement of social justice, and, now more than ever, we have to confront these challenges head on. It is therefore saddening to see, every day, the growing queues at food banks across the UK and the increase in evictions and homelessness. It is saddening to see, every day, the continuing financial and time sanctions inflicted on the discredited universal credit—our most vulnerable claimants affected—the cuts to child benefit, the cuts to tax credit thresholds, the travesty of the personal independent payment assessments and the strategic dumping of the UK welfare support net for our most vulnerable, despite the strategic and far-reaching mitigations of our Welsh Government. The recent UN report into poverty and human rights in Britain follows a further damning rights report into how the UK treats its disabled. No-one here should be proud of that. It states that the application of the UK social policy welfare system drives poverty, creates homelessness, disempowers women, the disabled and children, and fundamentally breaks human rights, and, further, that the dangerous ideology driving universal credit, which puts financial resource into the hands of the main, male breadwinner, often, drives domestic abuse and sexual violence, is mysoginistic.

It is therefore important, then, as we contemplate the UK human rights agenda and our place in world, and the implications of whatever Brexit is, on this day of all days, that we do all, I hope, in our power to protect the human rights we have now to safeguard them for the future and enshrine them in our constitution for the future of our children's rights now and for the years to come. Thank you.

Thank you. Can I now call the leader of the house and the chief whip to reply to the debate? Julie James.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I'm very grateful to all Members for their reflections and insights on this important anniversary day. Turning to the amendments, we will be supporting amendment 1. The Welsh Government is strongly opposed to all forms of extremism, including far-right extremism. In 'Prosperity for All: the national strategy', we set out our ambition to work with communities, the voluntary sector and local services to counter the threat of extremism and hate crime in all or communities.

In October, I had the privilege to meet with Sara Khan, the lead commissioner for countering extremism. We discussed the developing role of the commission and how it can support our ambition in Wales to tackle all forms of extremism, including far-right extremism—the most prevalent form of extremism in Wales. While in Wales, the commissioner also met with a number of our stakeholders as part of our evidence gathering. This will help inform a better understanding of extremism and how it may be countered. 

We do have an effective mechanism for engagement at senior level through our CONTEST and extremism board Wales. The board is co-chaired by the Welsh Government and the Wales extremism and counter-terrorism unit. The members include the chairs of our regional boards and also senior key representatives of other key partner organisations. Members will be pleased to know that the board commissioned a report on far-right extremism in Wales. They will be considering the findings of this report together with any recommendations from the commission at a future meeting. Despite the extensive work both across the Welsh Government and with our partners, we know that there is no room for complacency. The recent stories in the media about far-right extremism being present right on our doorstep illustrate the need to stay alert to the threat, and all Members, I think, mentioned that threat here today. We will continue to work with our partners and through our established structures to better understand and address these risks.

Turning to amendment 2, although we question whether it’s a priority for the UK Government, the Welsh Government welcomes any action to tackle modern slavery, to defend freedom of religion or belief, to end inequality and discrimination, and to promote democracy. For this reason, we also support amendment 2.

We strongly encourage the UK Government to step up its efforts in all these areas, as there is clearly far more to be done to truly prove it is a priority for the UK Government. In terms of the issues raised, Leanne Wood said quite a lot that I—. Well, actually, everything she said I completely agree with, but there’s quite a lot that we're already doing, and I’ll be sure to update Members about the outcome of the board and it’s commissioned response to far-right extremism. That was mentioned by a lot of Members today, so I’ll be sure to make sure that Members are fully informed on that as it develops.

I was delighted to hear Mark Isherwood and Darren Millar’s strong support of human rights, despite the fact that the abolition of the Human Rights Act 1998 has featured in two Queen’s Speeches. I think it does demonstrate that politics is different here in Wales, and I was delighted to see that support. If only the UK Government would go as far as the Welsh Conservatives have felt able to do, we would all be much better off.

Many Members—Julie Morgan, Helen Mary Jones, Joyce Watson, Caroline Jones and Rhianon Passmore—all mentioned what happens when human rights are ignored, and I think I can do no better than to quote the Counsel General’s speech at the Eileen Illtyd memorial lecture. He said that human rights should be seen as the practical, the basic, the mundane even, rather than be limited, or imposed, or alien. We need a response that portrays human rights as the mundane tools of justice in

‘“small places, close to home”, not the liberal pronouncements of distant marble halls’.

I think all Members today, Deputy Presiding Officer, have underlined the need for us to understand that human rights are basic rights, basic needs that we all have, not something to be used as a weapon, but rather as a shield and a right to dignity and responsibility. I’m so pleased that we’ve had this debate today, Dirprwy Lywydd, and I thank all the Members for participating so freely. Diolch.

Thank you.

The proposal is to agree amendment 1. Does any Member object? Therefore, amendment 1 is agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

The proposal is to agree amendment 2. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Okay. So, we defer voting under this item until voting time.

We now move on to item 5, which is the debate on Stage 4 of the Childcare Funding (Wales) Bill, and I call on the Minister for Children, Older People and Social Care to move the motion—Huw Irranca-Davies.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I move the motion formally.

I’m very pleased to open this Stage 4 debate on the Childcare Funding (Wales) Bill. We introduced this Bill to the Assembly in April because we wanted to create a simple, once-for-Wales process to check a person’s eligibility for the childcare offer. What we have before us today is a Bill that is going to enable us to do just that.

During the passage of this Bill, we’ve gathered valuable evidence and we’ve debated in some detail matters of detail, matters of current and future policy that are beyond the parameters of this narrow Bill, but I’m really grateful to members of the Children, Young People and Education Committee for participating throughout in this debate and for their thorough scrutiny of the Bill. I’d also like to place on record my thanks to the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee and the Finance Committee for their valuable input, and I’m grateful to key stakeholders as well for the written and oral evidence provided, which has helped to inform and develop our thinking.

I’m grateful also to all three committees particularly for those recommendations during Stage 1 that quite rightly made us reflect on the drafting of the Bill and which ultimately led to Government amendments during Stage 2 and Stage 3. May I also thank all Assembly Members for their engagement and their observations during the Stage 3 proceedings only last week. 

Now we've seen this Bill evolve over recent months and I consider it to have been considerably improved thanks to the input of stakeholders and Assembly Members. What we have in front of us today is a Bill that imposes a duty on the Welsh Ministers to provide funding in respect of the offer, leaving beyond any doubt this Government's commitment to the offer. We have responded to calls for greater clarity of purpose by passing amendments that make it clear who we consider to be eligible children for the purposes of the offer. And we've built into the Bill a provision that will require the Welsh Ministers to review the effectiveness of the Act and the arrangements for the administration of the offer and to publish a report. I'm also pleased we've been able to address some minor technical and drafting inconsistencies along the way.

Could I also extend my thanks to the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, the Secretary of State for Wales, the Home Secretary and the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions for their support in developing this Bill. I am particularly grateful to HMRC officials for having worked so closely throughout and so constructively with my officials during the pre-introduction and the scrutiny stages. I'm pleased that we are now in a position where all the necessary Minister of the Crown consents are in place, and I look forward to working with UK Government departments and with the Secretaries of State as we develop subordinate legislation to give effect to this primary legislation. I'm also delighted to be able to help steer this Bill through its final stages and onto the Welsh statute book.

My final thanks, Dirprwy Lywydd, go to the unseen and often unsung small heroes in the offices and corridors of Cathays Park and Tŷ Hywel—the policy and legislative and other officials and advisers who do so much to bring forward our legislation, aided and sometimes brought forward despite the challenges posed by Ministers and others. They know that our approach is to reach out and to work constructively with AMs and others to start with a good Bill and to shape an even better piece of final legislation. I believe we have, all of us, done so, and I therefore commend this Bill to the National Assembly for Wales.

It is a pleasure to speak in the final stage of the Childcare (Funding) Wales Bill. However, this is one of a long succession of Welsh Government-led Bills that have simply just not cut the legislative mustard. Following along the food theme, my colleague Suzy Davies has frequently said that this is a Swiss-cheese piece of legislation—that there are too many holes in what is a framework Bill, outlined in entirely permissive, uncertain terms.

I have looked back at the contributions made throughout every stage of the Childcare (Funding) Wales Bill, and there are persistent themes that keep cropping up. I would hope that this is the last time that we as Assembly Members, scrutinising as opposition and cross-party groups, come across the same concerns in future legislation going forward. We again see before us a sound policy implemented through swiftly created legislation but without the necessary scrutiny mechanisms, through the continual use of secondary legislation. This Bill was at Stage 3 before we even saw a copy of the report of the first year of early implementer authorities. It was also at Stage 3 before the duty to fund the offer was finally applied by the Ministers. Welsh Conservatives wholeheartedly support the policy of funded childcare in Wales. Indeed, we had it within our own manifesto. But there is too much left to secondary legislation and an administrative scheme that is outside of our input or an appropriate level of scrutiny powers.

Furthermore, two key policy areas are left off the face of the Bill, potentially leaving it as an empty vessel. The offer itself, while written all over the explanatory memorandum and promised by the Minister throughout stages 1, 2 and 3, is not here before us. The age of the qualifying child is also absent, again left to promises and the administrative scheme. Essentially, leaving these two important areas off the face of the Bill gives us no clear baseline to start from. We need to start from a point of certainty, even if it is to be amended in years to come. We do not accept the Minister's reasoning that leaving essential elements to secondary legislation would provide more flexibility. Instead, we have argued throughout that there must be a trade-off between flexibility for the Executive and the right for scrutiny by the legislature. Our amendments at Stage 3 would have provided this balance.

The Minister has further stated that this is merely a technical Bill, which should not include wider policy areas. It is not. As drafted and amended, it goes beyond that narrow intention. As I have noted during Stage 2 and Stage 3, the primary purposes of the Bill have been clearly outlined within the explanatory memorandum—to support the Welsh economy and to support a number of additional purposes, including increasing employment and improving the social well-being of children. If this Bill was merely a mechanism for HMRC to assess applications, why say all that in the explanatory memorandum?

Throughout evidence we have heard that the Bill's primary aims could have been further bolstered through a number of necessary amendments, including provision of wrap-around transportation, extending the offer beyond working parents, and to prevent barriers to taking up the offer, such as additional charges. To place these on the face of the Bill would have given parents and childcare providers a clear signal that Welsh Government would be under a duty to enable more families to access the offer. I would have left it there had the review clause to this Bill been sufficiently drafted to include the powers of the legislature so we could review it at a later date. However, nowhere does it say 'independent' or 'to lay before the National Assembly for Wales'.

Now, we know the Minister's commitment to an independent evaluation at Stage 3, but, at the very least, we would have expected that any report should be available for the Assembly, as the legislature, to scrutinise and to approve. It is unclear from the review clause drafted by the Minister whether an independent review would happen under a future Welsh Government in five years' time, as well as the role of our Assembly in designing that review. The Welsh Government needs to answer these questions, not its own, for our constituents to have confidence in its eventual findings. For all of our efforts to ensure that the Bill had a review clause that would have covered the concerns raised by not one committee, but two committees, about the Bill, or at the very least a sunset clause, all of these have been unceremoniously rejected by the Minister. It is, therefore, very disappointing that the National Assembly for Wales—yes, this legislature—has been dismissed yet again.

My colleague Angela Burns warned the Welsh Government during the final Stage of the Public Health (Minimum Price for Alcohol) (Wales) Act 2018 that future Assembly Members will view it poorly if credible, consistent and outcome-focused evidence to enable proper scrutiny is not collected. Welsh Conservatives abstained from that Act during Stage 4, purely on the basis that it included a sunset clause. Therefore, we again issue this warning on overuse of skeleton Bills. You have rejected key areas that need to be reviewed, including the operation of the administrative scheme, whether the Act has any effect on increasing employment, in line with its aims, and the capacity of the childcare workforce to deliver this offer. Minister, you are an Assembly Member as well as a—[Interruption.]—as well as being a Minister in this Government. You need to convince your own constituents that you have not just listened to scrutiny as a Minister, but— 

[Inaudible.]—please.

Llywydd—Deputy—while we are supportive of the offer, and the use of HMRC to assess applications, it is for these reasons that Welsh Conservatives reject the motion. We will not be supporting it. Diolch yn fawr.

Thank you very much. Llyr Gruffydd, as a member of the Children, Young People and Education Committee, as my predecessor, scrutinised this Bill in detail, and I, as a current member of the committee, have had an opportunity to scrutinise it also. We, as Plaid Cymru, tabled a number of amendments in order to seek to make the Bill more meaningful, but we were very disappointed that those were rejected. We are of the view that the Bill discriminates against some of Wales’s poorest children. Children whose parents aren’t in work don’t qualify for 30 hours of free childcare, and the children of parents in education and training don't qualify either. And the aim of our amendments was to include children from those families in this provision. I believe that omitting them does discriminate against them and that that is unfair, it is wrong and counterproductive.

Evidence demonstrates that giving the best start in life to young children is crucial to their development, and attending care placements of high quality is one of the best ways of giving that best start to children from poor families. I am aware that there are other schemes available, but those schemes are non-statutory. Some rely on your postcode rather than need, and there is confusion and lack of awareness about the nature and availability of this provision. There has been an opportunity lost to include an important cohort in legislation—an opportunity that would have meant that we wouldn’t have needed to have parents who are seeking work or are in training and education find their way through the whole plethora of schemes available, and that everyone would be able to access childcare under simple legislation that would include all. We therefore believe that the Bill is deficient as a piece of legislation and is contrary to the principles of equality and the principles of the well-being of future generations Act, and we will therefore vote against the legislation today.

Thank you very much. Can I call on the Minister for Children, Older People and Social Care to reply to the debate?

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. Well, look, I'm a fairly easy going and generous minded person, but I'm slightly disappointed by the Conservative and Plaid Cymru response to what I think has been a constructive approach to the passage of this Bill. Can I just say, in voting against this Bill, it is voting against what we already know from the pilot areas is putting £200 to £250 a week into the hands of households—predominantly, by the way, women in those households, often those in the lower socioeconomic groups within our communities? You are voting against that.

I'd say to the Conservatives: you are voting against something that is not wholly dissimilar from what you had in your manifesto. But, actually, this Bill is not to do with the policy offer and I think—[Interruption.] Just a moment, Suzy. This is not to do with the policy offer per se. This is, I repeat once again, a narrow, technical Bill to actually enable HMRC to deliver eligibility and applications into the scheme and to lift the burden off local authorities who are currently doing it under the pilot schemes. Local authorities are asking us to take this burden off them. Now, of course, there is a wider debate around not only current but future direction of policy, but to vote against what is delivering a success story right across Wales in all areas that are piloting this, as witnessed by the fact that we have those areas that are not currently within it queuing up to say, 'Can we be part of it?'—well, you are doing a disservice to your constituents.

If I can just finish on this: it's been described as a Swiss-cheese framework—[Interruption.] Sorry, I will come back, but it's been described as a Swiss-cheese framework Bill. A framework Bill indeed does not fill in all the gaps, but it is appropriate in response to committees, which have said, 'Can we get the balance right between the flexibility of this Bill to actually change in future?', hence why it is underwritten not only by regulations but by an administrative scheme so that we can flex it as we learn from the pilots. So, I'm a little bit—. As an easy-going fellow, I'm a little bit upset at the slightly begrudging, as we approach Christmas, response. Suzy, I'll give way.

Thank you for giving way on that. I think you know what I'm about to say, Minister. When it comes to the policy—you say this is a technical Bill; the explanatory memorandum expands that beyond that by some considerable margin. If you were so confident in this policy, which you say is being shown in the pilot areas, it should have gone on the face of the Bill, and then we would not have to just rely on trusting the Government; we could have relied on a piece of legislation that would enforce it. 

Well, Suzy, I thank you for that. But, again, you've missed the fact that, in response to Stage 1 and Stage 2, we brought forward Government amendments to put a duty to fund this childcare offer, and the details then that you are requesting will follow, because of that need for balance and flexibility, within the regulations and also the administrative scheme. Now, if you put it on this Bill, if HMRC turn around tomorrow and decide that, as part of the eligibility, they change conditions with DWP, we would have to come back to primary legislation. So, I do understand you keep on having the argument, 'Let's put everything on the face of a narrow, technical Bill', but I think we have it right here. Now, there was somebody—Llyr.

Thank you. I appreciate you accepting this intervention. I just wanted to have it on record, actually, that our concerns in relation to this proposed legislation reflect those of the children's commissioner. So, it's easy enough for you to stand here and say that we've got it all wrong; it's not just us, and I am surprised that you're taking such a dismissive attitude to some of the comments that the children's commissioner has made. 

Well, Llyr, far from dismissive. I think I've made it clear at committee and elsewhere that the discussion about where we go in future in terms of the wider childcare offer—not, by the way, in terms of the points that were raised by Siân previously, which are to do with parents who are in education and training who would not automatically fall within this offer, but I went through in detail at previous Stages exactly where there was already provision, and the fact that we were going to look at not only bringing that provision together but enhancing that provision for longer in terms of the future as well. So, I'm not dismissive of that at all. In fact, I've engaged with that thoroughly.

But this comes back to the point made by Suzy and others a moment ago. Within the explanatory memorandum for this Bill, we referred to the offer. It's necessary to do that, even though it's a narrow, technical Bill. We referred to the wider offer. But this offer does not stand on its own within Wales, it stands alongside Flying Start; it stands along with what we do with Parents Childcare and Employment, PaCE, for parents who are in work and in training; it stands alongside Families First, Children First and many other initiatives. And there is, indeed—. As I've said to you previously, Llyr, far from being dismissive, I think there is a wider piece of that seamlessness that we need to aim towards within Government, but this is, ultimately, a narrow, technical Bill to put in place HMRC and to lift the burden off the shoulders of local authorities, who are currently doing it. 

So, with those remarks, finally, Dirprwy Lywydd, could I ask Members to support the motion, support this Bill at Stage 4? And I look forward, then, to bringing forward subordinate legislation during 2019.

Thank you. In accordance with Standing Order 26.50C, a recorded vote must be taken on Stage 4 motions, and so I defer voting on this motion until voting time. 

We do intend, now, to have voting time on the Government business that we've just discussed. Unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, I am going to proceed to voting time. Okay.

So, we're now on to voting, and we're going to vote on the debate on International Human Rights Day. I call for a vote on amendment 2, tabled in the name of Darren Millar. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the amendment, 45, no abstentions, nine against. Therefore, amendment 2 is agreed. 

I call for a vote on the motion as amended, tabled in the name of Julie James. 

Open the vote. Close the vote. For the amended motion, 52, two abstentions, none against. Therefore, the amended motion is agreed. 

I now call for a vote on Stage 4 of the Childcare Funding (Wales) Bill and I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Huw Irranca-Davies. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion, 30, no abstentions, 24 against. Therefore, the motion is agreed. 

We now move to item 6 on our agenda this afternoon, which is the debate on a Member's legislative proposal: waste prevention and recycling, and I call on Jenny Rathbone to move the motion. 

David Attenborough has galvanised the British public to focus on the amount of plastics ending up in the ocean, imbibed by our sea life and ending up in our stomachs if we eat fish. So I'm glad the UK Government is considering a tax on plastic packaging, targeting those that contain less than 30 per cent recycled material or that are difficult or impossible to recycle, such as plastic straws, black food trays and single-use cups for hot drinks. Whilst these largely unnecessary items, like plastic straws, have attracted publicity, they are the tip of a very large iceberg. Taxing plastic straws or cotton buds out of existence isn't going to solve the scandal of plastics in our oceans. Our aim must be to eliminate waste of all sorts altogether. 

We in Wales can and should be very proud of our success in reusing, recycling or composting nearly two thirds of the 1.5 million tonnes of municipal waste we generate every year, but there's no room for complacency. Four years ago, Wales exported thousands of tonnes of materials overseas for recycling, including 4,000 tonnes of plastics. Much of it went to China, which has now banned much of our material from being imported from the UK, and it's ending up in other countries with even less coherent processes for dealing with it.

The Environment Agency is now investigating exporters who've made false claims on thousands of tonnes of non-existent plastic waste, and a £50 million industry appears to have been penetrated by criminal gangs. Self-reporting invites fraud and error, and there's clearly inadequate oversight of what's happening to our waste. We simply cannot tolerate our rubbish being dumped on desperate developing countries, who don't have the technology to do anything useful with it. Instead, it's left to leak into rivers and oceans.

So, I would argue that the Welsh Government recycling targets for councils are unsustainable if they are based on fragile export markets. No doubt there's a market for aluminium, at £1,000 a tonne when I last looked at it, but other items are simply difficult to recycle—simply, there isn't a market for them. So, we need to move to a circular recycling system. Relying on recycling is masking unsustainable manufacturing practices, which the council tax payer is having to pick up the bill for. In terms of the three Rs—reduce, reuse and recycle—we need to put much more focus on reducing and reusing materials.

The landfill disposals tax will, I hope, tackle the unnecessary disposal of eminently reusable materials—particularly, the higher rate tax for unauthorised disposals should serve as a financial deterrent to illegal waste activity, which is particularly a feature of the construction industry, because those fly-tippers will be taxed twice over, and so they should be.

Of course, the construction industry is the UK's largest user of natural resources. As almost 90 per cent of construction waste is inert or non-hazardous, it can and should be reused, reclaimed and recycled. I would expect the landfill disposals tax to ensure that that will now happen. But, that, in turn, will make it even more difficult for local authorities to meet their recycling targets by weight, and that is why we need to look at a different strategy.

Legislation is needed to tackle the issue of packaging, particularly plastic packaging, that we generate, which is feeding the 8 million tonnes dumped into the ocean. In the Netherlands, for example, many goods are packaged in a clear plastic-like material that's made of starch and is biodegradable. German companies produce ready meals in biodegradable packages, whilst in Wales we already have universities producing packaging from recyclable material, but manufacturing industries are only using them in niche markets rather than adopting a systematic approach.

In Germany, the Closed Substance Cycle and Waste Management Act 1996, introduced 20 years ago, compels manufacturing companies to design wasteful packaging out of their processes. It has created a vibrant waste industry that is amongst the world leaders, and this is something that I think that we could be doing in Wales too.

We need to embed extended producer responsibility into all these packaging items, so that the manufacturers pay for what is currently being paid for by council tax payers. This extended producer responsibility would focus manufacturers on lifecycle thinking, making them have better access to secondary materials for their own supply chains, and also would have social benefits, like tackling litter, such as cigarette butts and chewing gum, that would save councils millions of pounds every year.

Of course, we do have some models of extended producer responsibility already, which is EU law, in things like electrical and electronic goods, batteries and cars. But, outside of the EU, Japan has taken EPR a lot further. It has extensive laws that cover the lifecycle of products from various industries, and requires manufacturers to use recycled materials and reusable parts in new products.

So, we could use the landfill disposals tax community scheme by providing grants to develop, for example, bottle-deposit schemes. Glass, of course, is 100 per cent recyclable and can be used again and again. That also can be applied to plastics, too, as they have done in Norway, where there's a deposit and return scheme in place that ensures that 97 per cent of all their containers are recycled. 

So, I hope that Members will consider this as an effective form of legislation. 

I have many speakers and this is a half hour debate. Therefore, contributions will be no longer than three minutes, and we'll try and call as many speakers as possible, with the exception of the Minister, of course. David Melding.  

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. I commend the Member. I know she has a passionate interest in this area, and is amongst the most authentic and early voices, indeed, in urging better public policy. I completely agree with the basic concepts of the circular economy, and packaging, in particular, is a real challenge, and we need to rethink. I'm old enough to remember when you used to go to the fruit area and just take a bag in, an old Hessian bag, and there was nothing around the fruit and the veg—it was just weighed and piled in. And it does need a different outlook to do that, but it's this slower food movement coming to slower shopping, perhaps.

I also want to commend the Welsh Government in terms of its initiative in the summer on making us a refill nation, just looking at drinking water, where we access water, having more free points where water bottles, preferably non-plastic ones, can be refilled. I want to commend Llantwit Major, which I believe is the first town to adopt this on the coastal path route. Other councils have looked at schemes. I know Penarth Town Council were doing this, and encouraging various shops and cafes to be part of the scheme. What I think there is really interesting is that town and community councils can be in the lead, and that's, I think, very innovative.     

Can I also commend the British Heart Foundation? I recently visited their furniture store in Canton, where they take in donated furniture and clean it up, re-upholster it and make it ready for reuse. I was amazed when I went in there by how professional that service was, how good the products are and how reasonably priced. So, it can meet many social objectives in allowing people access to good-quality furniture at a tenth of the price, often, of what they would pay retail. Obviously, for that charity, they can get some of their core messages across as well. So, I thought that was a very, very innovative model. 

Finally, to come in under three minutes, I believe the Commission took up plastic-free July. I know the Welsh Government has been looking at this as well—how we can eradicate single-use containers, and that's, I think, now at a pace, use of straws, and the like. So, there are many, many little wins that I think we should be making individually, and encouraging wherever we work, whether it's out there in the private sector or other public agencies, to adopt these sorts of policies, and it will add to big shift in our performance in this area. But well done, Jenny. 

Thank you, Llywydd. And may I also welcome this motion from the Member and say that myself and Plaid Cymru will be fully supportive of this? Indeed, Plaid Cymru tabled a similar motion ourselves last year, so it’s no surprise that we will support the principle today. We do need urgent action in order to prevent plastics from further polluting our rivers, seas and environment. It’s important in this context, too, that we remember the principle that the polluter pays.

The polluter pays principle, of course, which means that if you create the waste, then you should be the ones who pay the cost of dealing with its consequences. And in this case, I think it's right that we should introduce extended producer responsibility, and require the companies who are responsible for producing so much of our waste to contribute to the costs of treating that waste. We've all heard from the Marine Conservation Society how, if we don't change things by 2050, we could have more plastic than fish by weight in our seas, which is a very sobering thought. 

Now, there are serious concerns, of course, regarding where our recycled plastic waste goes, and we heard some of that in the opening contributions, so I won't repeat it. But it does remind us, and increasingly show us, that rather than just recycling, we have to prevent the use of plastics, particularly single-use plastics, in the first place. And action should be taken at all levels of Government, with the aim of achieving zero waste.

We believe this should include a levy on single-use plastics to work alongside a deposit-return scheme for bottles and cans, in order to prevent waste from occurring in the first place, and to reward reusing and increasing recycling where that is necessary. The carrier bag levy, of course, was first introduced in Wales, and it shows how a small step can make a big, big difference. And deposit-return schemes have also been found to be very effective. In countries with such schemes in place, of course, we've seen high levels of bottle recycling: over 90 per cent in Norway, Sweden and Finland, and 98.5 per cent in Germany, which are levels at the moment that we in Wales can only dream about. 

As stated in Eunomia's report on options for extended producer responsibility in Wales, if the Westminster decides against implementing a deposit-return scheme or a beverage container tax, the Welsh Government could still bring about a Wales-only deposit-return scheme. The Welsh Government has stated that it intends to work with the UK Government on a Wales-and-England basis on measures to tackle waste, but, of course, we're still waiting to see how far measures from the UK Government will go in this area. Yes, it's welcome news, as we've heard, that there will be a tax on single-use plastics, as announced in the 2018 UK budget, however it's disappointing, as far as I'm concerned, that there won't be a tax on disposable cups, and we await the outcome of their consultation on extended producer responsibility.

If the UK Government isn't ambitious enough in its plans to stop plastic pollution, then the Welsh Government should take the lead, as it did with the carrier bag charge. And I'd like to ask the Minister, therefore, what discussions she's had with the UK Government on this issue recently, and what progress we can expect to see, because if it's clear that the UK Government won't be introducing the radical changes that we need to tackle this problem, then the Welsh Government needs to commit to introducing its own legislation. We need behavioural change at a pace and scale that we haven't previously seen in order to tackle this problem. In Wales, we can and we should go further and faster than the UK Government on this, especially when we have a clear consensus across this Assembly Chamber. And, so, I am pleased to give my full support to this legislative proposal.

I also support the motion. I agree that it is the producers of the packaging that need to be responsible for their part in the creation of the vast amounts of waste that end up in the bin every year. For too long legislatures have been content to burden householders with the responsibility for recycling and waste disposal of packaging, even though they have almost no control over what most of that waste is because they don't choose the packaging they receive.

The EU landfill directive did nothing to reduce the use of packaging, and actually very little to reduce the waste going to landfill. Whilst the fines on councils slowed the rate of rubbish going to UK landfill sites, we all know that much of it was shipped to China, creating huge carbon emissions from the container ships used to carry all that waste across the globe to be dumped in landfill there. When we see images of thousands of plastic bottles in the ocean, we can apportion a fair amount of blame for that to the EU landfill directive. However, that's an argument for another day.

I'm entirely in favour of a system that holds manufacturers responsible for the disposal of the packaging they use, but we seem to be behind the curve on this. This proposal helps us to catch up, but, ideally, we should be ahead of the curve. Just a couple of days ago, Walkers started an initiative that allows and encourages customers to return empty crisp packets to them. And, for a while now, Costa has accepted not just their own used disposable coffee cups back for recycling, but also those of any other coffee outlet. These initiatives have come about to appeal to customers in response to demands from the market. They can't have come from any Government initiative because there haven't been any.

A packaging tax is not the answer in my opinion. Its cost will simply be borne by the consumer. We have to introduce proper legislation to deal with the scandals that see an online retailer send a tiny book in a huge box, or where a toothbrush is sealed by a manufacturer in a huge rectangle of near-bullet-proof plastic that requires a saw to open it.

I would like to see this proposal encompass more than just food packaging, and take the opportunity to address some of the significant concerns about food waste in the environment. For example, nothing is being done in this proposal, or elsewhere, to tackle the food waste that sees 86 million chickens—more than one chicken for every person in the UK—being thrown into landfill every year. That's a shockingly high figure. That contributes as much greenhouse gas emissions as 290,000 cars a year, according to anti-waste charity WRAP. And in coming up with that figure, WRAP took into account the cost of rearing, feeding and transporting the live birds, along with the releases of gases if they're placed in landfill. It's also been estimated that UK households throw away 34,000 tonnes of beef every year—the equivalent of 300 million beef burgers. In fact, the average family throw away £700-worth of food every year. That's an awful lot of waste that isn't addressed by this proposal. And perhaps there's going to be another one in the pipeline, and maybe you'll tell us about it, if so.

Neither does this proposal address the issue of packaging for non-food items. We're probably all familiar with the mountain of polystyrene and cardboard that accompanies a new washing machine or tv, or actually most goods, which has been used by the retailer to ensure safe arrival, but then it's down to the consumer, via their council tax, to deal with it. I hope this proposed Bill will eventually include action to tackle the excess packaging of those non-food items, and also the immoral level of wasted meat. Turning back to the packaging issue—

You do need to bring your comments to a close now.

Just one more line.

Very quickly.

Perhaps an obligation on retailers and manufacturers to take back the packaging they choose to use in their business may focus their minds on whether the packaging that is currently being used is really essential. And that's it—thank you.

You can tell a good Bill proposal, by they way, by the number of people who want to speak. Jenny Rathbone has recognised that local authorities are at the front line when it comes to delivering the success that has been the Welsh Government's recycling policies over the last 10 or so years. But I do need to draw the Chamber's attention to a plant in my constituency, called Bryn Compost, that has had difficulties. I know it's not directly related to packaging, but it had food waste recycling that had in-vessel composting rows that were creating odours for the nearby community. They then moved to an anaerobic digester facility, which reduced the odours, but those things continued to cause great outrage in the community, to the extent that people stopped recycling their food waste, in protest. And I have to say, it was a protest I supported because of the strong odours caused by the problems. But that was a short-term resolution to the problem.

The reason I'm bringing this to the Chamber's attention—we're still working on those problems in that area—is because we need to look at the technology that we use, but also the regulation, and this is what this Bill is about: it's about regulation, and effective regulation, and changing the way you regulate. I think, therefore, if you are putting the onus on the private sector, who create the waste, to deal with the waste, you can only then support that. In order to address those public concerns, two things: you need to get public buy-in, which I think this Bill would achieve, but also you give the power to the public sector to regulate the private sector. That's one of the problems we had in the Bryn Compost situation: the Natural Resources Wales regulator didn't have enough power. And I think, if this Bill is to be successful, you've got to have that regulatory statutory power behind it. But I would like to give it a welcome, and recognise that it does achieve those two things.

Just a few quick points. I really welcome this proposal and congratulate the Member on bringing it forward. I agree, it's very difficult to go much further with recycling—we've got to reduce, reuse, and recycle. I'm very pleased that the Member mentioned the deposit-return scheme issue, as did Llyr Gruffydd. Because I think that it is a bit of a no-brainer, really, that we should bring in a deposit-return scheme. And I'd also like to ask the Minister whether there is anything that she can say to update us in relation to what is going on in working together with England about bringing in a deposit-return scheme. I had some dealings with the Llangattock Litter Pickers, who gave statistics—which I'm sure the Minister and the Member have seen—about the number of plastic drinks bottles, which are easily the biggest component of any litter that is collected. So, that's the one point, that I'm very pleased about the deposit-return scheme, and wondered whether we could have a comment about that.

And then the second point is really—Hefin David referred to it—that we need public buy-in. I do think that there would be public buy-in for this bit of legislation. I know the Minister has visited my constituency, where we launched plastic-free Rhiwbina, along with our MP, Anna McMorrin, and that has spread to different parts of the constituency. And last week I went to Llysfaen Primary School, where they've got an eco committee who have got a whole list of proposals that they would like to bring in, and one of them is about reducing packaging. One of their commitments is to try to ensure that their parents don't buy food that is heavily packaged. So, I think there is that wish and that goodwill there, so I thoroughly support this proposal.

I call on the Minister to contribute—Hannah Blythyn.

Diolch, Llywydd. Can I first thank Jenny Rathbone for bringing forward this proposal and everybody who's contributed to this debate? I think my colleague Hefin David was correct that you can tell the strength of a proposal by the amount of people who want to contribute to it. It's such a shame, on this occasion, that we do only have a short amount of time to discuss it. But I'm sure that this is something that will be revisited in this Chamber in the not-too-distant future. 

You're absolutely right that packaging, particularly plastic packaging, is a really high-profile issue at the moment and one that we know that we need to take action on before it's too late. I welcome the opportunity to have this debate today to take forward people's ideas on how we can tackle that in Wales.

We've been working closely with the UK Government on reforming the producer responsibility regime for packaging—so, extended producer responsibility. We know that currently producers contribute around 10 per cent of the end-of-life packaging costs, which is unjust, unfair and fails to incentivise these producers to use more recycled content or easily reusable packaging that can be reprocessed. As other Members have also pointed out, it also places the cost of the burden of managing our packaging waste onto our local authorities and citizens. So, on this EPR, which we will be consulting on jointly for England and Wales, that will also include modulated fees in it, which would actually help to contribute to local authorities as well, to redress that balance.

I think you've been clear from the outset, as I have, that it's one of the things we see—. Julie Morgan mentioned plastic-free Rhiwbina and we're seeing communities across the country taking action and the onus is on Government to take action too, but also on all of us as businesses, producers, and retailers as well. So, I want to see reform and change to the current regime, ensuring that producers take more responsibility.

Last month, I met with my Scottish Government counterpart to collectively press for that reform, and that the increased revenue generated will properly flow into Wales and other parts of the UK. And I'm obviously happy to update Members in more detail, I'm just conscious of the short amount of time that I've got to speak today, but I'm happy to update Members further on that as we progress. This will obviously enable us to drive further and faster in terms of our recycling.

Alongside this, Julie Morgan and others mentioned deposit-return schemes. We'll also consult on a deposit-return scheme as well for England and Wales, but as you've already said, we're open to doing this as well separately—to consulting Wales. 

I'm keen specifically to making sure that the joint consultation takes into account the specific set-up that we have in Wales. We're the only nation that has statutory targets—so, making sure that that fits into the regime that we already have and complements and builds on that success as well. 

We'll also be consulting on Part 4 of the Environment (Wales) Act 2016. As a Member across the Chamber said, we take responsibility as households now with our recycling, and businesses need to do the same and separate their waste for collection, as we have been doing for years now.

On the basis that there's imminent significant activity in this area, the Welsh Government will be abstaining on this motion today, but the proposals are sound and I think it is an excellent proposal. As environment Minister, I place a strong focus on waste management and on building on the record that we already have on recycling. As the Member said, recycling is just one end and it's actually about looking at reusing, reducing and how we start to tackle things at the start of their life as well as at the end of their life.

David Melding mentioned—I didn't catch the name of the venue in Canton, the reuse place. I've visited a number of reuse places in the last few months and I'm pleased that the Welsh Government have been able to commit funding to support those sorts of initiatives as well, because as you said, not only does it have environmental benefits, but you see the broader social and economic benefits that these initiatives bring. You can find some amazing bargains as well—I actually had a look through the vinyl in the last place I went to while I was there.

We were talking about the circular economy, and the circular economy is key. I want us to be the most circular nation in the world when it comes to our economy, so that we're not only investing in our environment, but investing in the prosperity of our country and our people as well. I think it's one of the things we've been working on long before it became quite a fashionable term, but it has actually now solidified in the areas the Member has suggested as well, and in the work that we're doing in investing with Welsh businesses to help them to try and move to a more sustainable alternative as well. 

Ultimately, we want to see people recycle, we want to see non-necessary packaging reduced to an absolute minimum and make sure that any recyclate is able to be reprocessed and recycled. So, in concluding, I just want to reiterate my welcome for this proposal put forward today, which resonates with the Welsh Government's strategy towards zero waste and our pathway towards a more circular economy in Wales. Diolch yn fawr.

Jenny Rathbone to reply to the debate. 

Well, I'm very pleased that Members from across all four parties have supported this proposal. I didn't look at food specifically, because I think a lot of it is to do with getting the public on side and getting them to eat real food at all. So, I haven't addressed food waste, and I haven't yet worked out a way in which we could apply EPR to food waste, although it's a very interesting area. The 86 million chickens thrown into landfill I'm still reeling from.

We clearly have very large support for the deposit-return scheme and also for extended producer responsibility, and I think we need to move on that quite quickly. In the meantime, whilst we get these deposit-return schemes up and running, I do think that there is a role for Government to ensure that all local authorities are separating their glass from the rest of their recycling, because, at the moment, all the glass is doing is contaminating the recyclables with shards of glass, because, obviously, in the compacting that is what happens.

So, thank you very much indeed for the support and I hope we can move forward on legislation.   

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

That brings us to our next item, which is the  Member debate under Standing Order 11.21 on the living wage. I call on Jane Hutt to move the motion. Jane Hutt.

Diolch, Llywydd. I'm pleased to open this debate on the real living wage following Living Wage Week last month. I'm delighted at the cross-party support for this individual Member's debate today. The real living wage is based on the cost of living and is voluntarily paid by over 4,700 UK employers who believe that a hard day's work deserves a fair day's pay. The real living wage differs to the UK Government's national living wage, which is based on a target to reach 60 per cent of median earnings by 2020, and is not calculated according to what employees and their families need to live on. But a real living wage meets the costs of living, not just the Government minimum. 

A year ago, I joined the real living wage leadership group here in Wales, chaired by Professor Rachel Ashworth, dean of Cardiff Business School. This group liaises with the Living Wage Foundation, which is at the heart of the real living wage campaign in Wales. Our group in Wales includes representatives from the public, private and third sectors, including Guy Leach, managing director of the Welsh construction company Knox & Wells Limited, and Mari Arthur, chief executive of Cynnal Cymru, responsible for the accreditation of real living wage employers in Wales.

I've used the opportunity over the past year to raise questions with Cabinet members regarding progress and the delivery of the real living wage in Wales as a key factor in addressing in-work poverty and low wages in pursuit of a fairer society and more productive economy. In my questions to Ministers, I've sought to identify the avenues by which the Welsh Government can encourage employers in Wales to adopt the real living wage. The latest figures show 174 employers in Wales across the public, private and third sectors pay their employees the real living wage, which stands at £9 an hour, compared with the UK Government's national living wage hourly rate of £7.83. 

The Welsh Government led the way in the public sector and has been an accredited living wage employer for the Welsh Government civil service since 2015. Mark Drakeford secured the real living wage for the Welsh NHS workforce as a result of negotiations during his time as health and social services Minister. The Welsh NHS has paid the real living wage since January 2015. Local authorities have signed up to the real living wage, with Cardiff Council moving towards becoming a real living wage city, including public, private and third sector employers, as well as themselves as an authority. I was delighted to attend the launch of the Living Wage Week in November with the former First Minister, Carwyn Jones, announcing the updated rate at the Bigmoose Coffee Co. in Cardiff, a charity that provides employment and support to homeless people in the city and pays the real living wage.

I'm also pleased with the progress in the Vale of Glamorgan, where I've been campaigning as Assembly Member for many years to secure the real living wage for employees and people working directly for the Vale of Glamorgan Council. I'm pleased that the Vale of Glamorgan Council is due now to pay the real living wage to those who are working directly for them, benefiting around 4,000 staff across council departments and schools from 1 April next year, and I think that's a very welcome move. Indeed, Barry Town Council also pays the real living wage in my constituency, as do many private sector and third sector employers.

I'm also pleased that the management at Cardiff Airport has agreed to pay the real living wage to all employees from next April. This motion today is directed across the Welsh Government to engage all Cabinet members who have some influence over local government and public services, economy and infrastructure, finance via the economic contract and ethical code, education for higher education, further education and schools, health and social services and, of course, equalities.

Addressing low pay will directly and positively impact on the gender pay gap and the often inequitable pay of disabled people and black, Asian and minority ethnic people in Wales. The Women's Equality Network said they want

'Businesses to commit to paying staff a living wage (as calculated by the Living Wage Foundation) and to facilitate flexible working practices.'

And the Equality and Human Rights Commission recently reported on disabled people's financial circumstances, highlighting how the disability pay gap still persists, with disabled people earning less per hour on average than non-disabled people.

I've referred in the motion to the work undertaken by Cardiff Business School on the living wage employers' experience across the UK. The central finding of the report is that the real living wage has been a positive experience for the majority of employers, supporting their claim that there is a business case for becoming a real living wage employer. Indeed, 93 per cent of employers feel that they've benefited from accreditation—reputational gains enhancing their employer brands, improving relations with customers and clients and upgrading human resources management. And, importantly, in terms of the strength of our code of practice on ethical employment, access to contracts or funding are cited as a positive outcome.

So, I'd like to see the Welsh Government move to change the commitments expected of employers securing grants and contracts from 'considering' paying at least the real living wage to a real commitment with a timescale for achieving this outcome. This will require support and resources in order for this to be achieved both within the Welsh Government and external agencies. I think that, in Scotland, we can see lessons learnt about the positive impact of this investment.

So, I would ask the Welsh Government and our new First Minister to include the real living wage as a key priority in the Fair Work Commission brief and to steer a cross-Government co-ordinating group to set milestones for this Welsh Government to work to and achieve. I look forward now to hearing Members' contributions.

I'm pleased to support this motion. Funded by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, what was then called a 'minimum income standard' was first calculated and documented by Loughborough University's Centre for Research in Social Policy in 2008. This was a UK average and did not include variations inside and outside London. Following a campaign by Wrexham-based TCC, Together Creating Communities, the Assembly introduced a living wage on the basis of the minimum wage plus 15 per cent for cleaning and contract staff in 2006. Six years ago today, the Assembly formally announced that it had become an accredited living wage employer.

The Cardiff Business School report 'The Living Wage Employer Experience' notes that the living wage has influenced UK Government policy, quote,

'most notably with the 2015 announcement of the national living wage'

and evidence of real living wage employers having a human resource motivation. The real living wage is the only UK wage rate voluntarily paid by over 4,700 UK businesses, over 3,000 of which have gained Living Wage Foundation accreditation, which believe that their staff deserve fair pay. These employers pay the real living wage, higher than the Government minimum and the London living wage in London. Over 180,000 UK employees have received a pay rise as a result of the living wage campaign, and the living wage foundation states that it enjoys cross-party support. The rates are calculated annually by the Resolution Foundation, on behalf of the Living Wage Foundation and overseen by the Living Wage Commission set up in January 2016, using a formula based on what happens to living standards from one year to the next in both London and the UK. The commission provides a transparent decision-making forum to resolve specific judgments about how to incorporate policy changes and new sources of data into the calculation. It also advises on how to manage extreme year-to-year variations from general rises in living costs.

The current UK living wage outside London is £9 an hour and £10.55 in London, but average earnings in Wales are lower and have grown slower than in other UK nations. According to the Bevan Foundation, 300,000 employees in Wales are paid below the voluntary living wage. Their 2016 'Fair Pay' report shows that the living wage would benefit Wales's employers, employees and their families, and the wider economy with minimal risks. They state that the benefits for Wales's employers include increased productivity, improved staff recruitment, attendance and retention, and reputational enhancement, with very modest impacts on wage bills, although varying with the size and sector of the organisation.

They add that the benefits for Wales's employees include more cash, more time and increased well-being, although the extent of the gains depends on employee working patterns, welfare entitlement and other household arrangements.

The wider economy, they say, benefits from increased tax and national insurance revenues and savings on benefits. Modelling of the impact on total employment suggests that, at worst, there's a very small risk of very limited job loss, and, at best, some increase in employment. 'Importantly', they say,

'many households may find that they're able to have slightly income without working additional hours, be more financially secure and maybe less reliant on benefits. The gender pay gap is likely to narrow due to the overrepresentation of women in Wales's low-paid workforce, and individual well-being and financial independence can also be strengthened.'

As a certain former Mayor of London said,

'It is a win-win scenario for the workforce and employers alike.'

'Importantly', he said,

'this isn’t just about economic dividends, but the immeasurable improvement to quality of life and workplace morale.'

The Welsh Conservatives believe in aspiration and that hard work should be rewarded with fair pay. Our workforce is the most valuable asset we have, and anything that undermines their efforts is damaging to our economy. It's vital that people get the wages they're entitled to.

Yes, we support the national living wage, which stands to benefit 150,000 working people in Wales by 2020. However, we also recognise that the real living wage can provide clear benefits in terms of productivity and absenteeism. We have, therefore, long supported action to build on the national living wage to further support public sector workers, and every large business should also aim to pay the voluntary living wage, and we should work with small businesses to explore how they can achieve this on a sustainable basis. Anything that can further improve the living standards of the hard-working people of Wales should be explored. Diolch yn fawr. 

I'm pleased to rise today to support this motion and was very glad to see it tabled by Jane Hutt in the first instance and supported by so many colleagues. Like, I'm sure, many in this Chamber, I feel very angry that so many of our fellow citizens work so very, very hard and are still poor. I object to people's taxes being used to subsidise bad employers who ought to be able to pay wages without people working full-time having to depend on benefits. And, of course, it is particularly women—often women working a number of part-time jobs—who are affected by low wages, and it is on women's experience that I particularly want to focus today.

It's clear the living wage policy has been a success and, clearly, expanding it has been an important part of the Government's economic and tackling poverty strategies. But, still, an estimated 26 per cent of employees in Wales are paid below the real living wage. That means just over a quarter of our fellow citizens effectively living in in-work poverty. And we mustn't confuse the actual living wage, the real living wage, and what is called the living wage—what is the statutory minimum.

Now, a disproportionate number of those 26 per cent are women, particularly part-time workers and those under 30, and women face many additional economic penalties. The pay gap between women and men—we sometimes call it a gender pay gap, but, actually, it's a sex pay gap, and it's quite important, I think, to use the correct legislation, as it is referred to in the Equality Act 2010—on a median hourly, full-time basis, excluding overtime in April this year, was 7.3 per cent in Wales and 8.6 per cent in the UK. Now, that's, sadly, not because women in Wales are paid any better; it's because men in Wales are paid slightly worse.

In Wales, the gap has increased by 0.9 percentage points, and, in the UK, it's decreased by 0.5 percentage points, so we could argue that, here, we are at risk of travelling in the wrong directions. As Members of the Chamber will know, regulations under the Equality Act place a requirement on all private and voluntary sector employers with 250 employees or more to publish information on their sex pay gap. Following the first round of reporting this year, and based on over 10,000 employers reporting, just over 78 per cent reported that they paid men more than women on average, and, of course, this is focusing on full-time pay, and it doesn't look at the part-time work penalty that we know women suffer from.

We also know that a frighteningly high percentage of new mothers report having negative or possibly even discriminatory experiences, either during pregnancy and on maternity leave, or on their return to work from maternity leave. It's clear that the Government needs to take—the Welsh Government—more action on this, though what they've done already is welcome. Tackling low pay and discrimination against women in the workplace has to become more of a priority, and I very much hope the work that's being done, led at the moment by the leader of the house, will help to contribute towards that.

The minimum wage policy, as I said, has had some successes and it's enabled a discussion of the living wage to become more prominent, but it remains the case that, in Wales, an estimated 8 per cent of jobs pay the legal minimum wage, and some of them less than that. That's leaving a great many of our fellow citizens working very hard and staying very poor. We know, from the Low Pay Commission's work, that over half of those low-paying jobs are concentrated in three sectors: retail, hospitality and cleaning and maintenance. If you take those employed in the private sector, that would also include carers, but because we have, for example, introduced a living wage in the health service, carers, as a whole, don't show up, but, if you take the ones employed by the private sector, they belong there. So, we can't, in my view, have a meaningful discussion in this Chamber about low wages, poverty and economic exploitation without including sex discrimination in the debate.

We must tackle segregation in employment; we must tackle maternity payment penalty and straightforward sex discrimination. I would go further and say that we can only—only—tackle low wages if we eliminate the sex pay gap, and many of our economic problems would be substantially reduced if we were able to do so. So, I'd like to associate myself with some of the comments that Jane Hutt has made about practical things that the Welsh Government could do. For example, if it announced that it and other public-sector organisations in Wales would only use living wage employers for cleaning, maintenance, hospitality and care, what a signal that would send to those industries, and what a huge impact it would have. So, I hope that the Government will support this motion; our hard-working fellow citizens deserve no less from us. We will not tackle in-work poverty unless we tackle sex discrimination in the workplace, and I believe that there is so much more that we could do.

It seems we've come a long way since 1997, and listening to Mark Isherwood list the benefits of a living wage, wouldn't it have been great for him to have been around in the mid 1990s to try and persuade the Conservative Government to introduce a national minimum wage? They were dead set against it—absolutely, categorically, dead set against it. The national minimum wage, according to them, would destroy our economy. They've now changed their minds, and it's good that it's been the Labour Party that has created that change. But, having said that, the work of Government must continue, and that's why this motion is so worthy of support, and the fact that the real living wage is what we should be paying throughout Wales, as Helen Mary Jones has said.

I just wanted to draw attention to Educ8, the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales, and Wales Co-operative Centre in my constituency, who are all accredited living wage employers, and Caerphilly council, who are not an accredited living wage employer, but pay the real living wage.

I'd also like to focus my comments on the Cabinet Secretary's policy for the foundational economy and the economic action plan, and particularly the work that that the Centre for Research on Socio-Cultural Change in Manchester—CRESC—has done. They've highlighted the fact that, if you have a focus on the foundational economy, it will also focus on low-wage, low-tech employment, and that is particularly the problem in northern Valleys communities and many of the communities in the northern part of the constituency that I represent. It is a particular problem, and that is partly because the environment is dominated by small firms and, particularly, micro firms. That's not to say that all micro firms are low-wage employers, but they do have a tendency—there is a bigger proportion that has a tendency—to that direction. We often talk about human resource practices in small micro firms as 'bleak house' in that it's not the paradise that you might think; you don't get the freedom that you might think, working in a small firm.

But I do want to draw the Chamber's attention to the Federation of Small Businesses's report that was produced and launched today, 'A Skilful Wales', in which they also highlight that micro firms are also more likely, by 53 per cent, to be using and paying the real living wage than firms employing more than 10 people. So, there is a good picture; it's a complex picture, but there is a good picture in the foundational sector.

So, a policy focus on the foundational economy that the Cabinet Secretary now enthusiastically espouses gives the Welsh Government those levers in the areas that they've chosen as sectors—that's care, food, retail and tourism. Their significance as providers and employers means that the Welsh Government can gain leverage on economic and social outcomes in those foundational sectors. Specifically, CRESC suggest that the Welsh Government should break with the idea of creating a generic business environment with non-standard policies that are adapted to sectoral characteristics and specific business requirements, recognising the complexity of the foundational sector, and even those four sectors that the Government have chosen—recognising the complexity and using what governmental power there is to leverage in influence in those sectors. 

In food, for example, this might involve negotiating with suppliers on formal commitments on sourcing, training and living wages. CRESC argue that the Government should encourage responsible business by promoting continuity of ownership for SMEs. One of the problems is that when our SMEs get to a level of success they're then bought by other organisations that may not have the same altruistic motives with regard to their human resource practices. So, public procurement can also play an important part, where Welsh Government uses its procurement powers to boost the foundational economy by requiring contractors and suppliers to pay the living wage.

We can create a policy environment that supports the foundational economy and locally based SMEs and then embed within that a culture of paying the living wage in those companies. It has the potential to be hugely beneficial to SMEs if you pay the living wage, as has already been outlined—the benefits to an organisation of doing so—and we can create that right policy environment. There is an example that we've talked about before, in Preston, with the anchor organisation, but also talking about the supply webs that exist across the northern Valleys, enabling those to grow, expand, and then eventually pay the real living wage in those organisations.

I’m very pleased to be able to support the motion. We have come a long way, as Hefin David just said, from the arguments back in the 1990s about the value of the minimum wage at that time. It does say something about our understanding now that the party that did oppose the minimum wage back then has now introduced some kind of minimum wage themselves, although it’s not the minimum wage that those of us who want to go further want to see. But we do understand, don’t we, the value to the broader economy of giving more money to people for their hard work.

Tackling unemployment was the aim previously. We understand now that better jobs and better pay—that’s what the Welsh economy needs. And it’s a concern for me, and I have repeated it here many times, that the Welsh Government still places too much emphasis on the fact that unemployment, yes, is quite low in Wales at present. It’s a good thing, but we can’t rely on that as a sign of where our economy is going.

But given that we do understand and do support the principle of a minimum wage or, rather, a real living wage, we need to look at what the Government and the broader public sector in Wales can do. It needs to put its own house in order, certainly, and there is very good work that’s been done over the years in pushing the living wage out across the public sector, but we are still waiting for some staff in Cardiff Airport, for example, to get that wage, and we’re still looking across the public sector and seeing that there are gaps that need to be filled, and we have to put our own public services’ house in order as well.

And, yes, we do need to use procurement processes, as Hefin David and Helen have mentioned, to ensure that those who do provide services in the public sector are recognised and are chosen because they are companies that do pay the living wage.

Now, according to the annual study of KPMG for 2018, Wales is one of the three parts of the UK that have the highest rates of jobs earning less than the living wage. So, we know that this is a very acute problem for us here in Wales, and we’ve heard reference already to some of the sectors where those problems are particularly acute: in hospitality, catering, retail, art and leisure, and also in agriculture, health and care and so forth—far too many jobs paying less than the living wage. The Government has to push out this message that help is available—and we have to ensure that the help is available—for companies and bodies to be able to receive the living wage accreditation and persuade them of the great benefits, which were shown in an analysis by the Cardiff Business School, which certainly shows that there is no evidence of living wage employers trying to get that money back in other ways. Ninety-three per cent of those who took part in the survey feel that they have had great benefit from having the accreditation for the living wage, benefit to their reputation as bodies, often, making it easier for them to recruit and making it easier for them to retain staff. Some said that the accreditation had led to them offering more training to their staff, so therefore giving them a pay rise and upskilling their staff. So, the knock-ons are very obvious. And there's evidence, then, of companies moving workers from part-time to full-time roles, from temporary contracts to full-time contracts, and introducing new ways of working, because they are thinking differently about the ways in which they do pay their workers and appreciate their staff.

But there is a broader economic impact, of course, in ensuring that our workers have more money to spend within their local economies. I think the recent report by the Smith Institute estimated that, if you paid the living wage to those who are not on the living wage in the Cardiff area only, you’d have about £24 million in additional funds being paid as wages that could be spent within the local economy. That must be something that we should be pushing for across Wales. I support this, and my party supports this, because it is beneficial for individuals. And what’s beneficial for individuals is beneficial for families, and what’s beneficial for families is beneficial for communities, and the well-being of communities builds our national well-being. So, yes, we have gained a lot of ground in the area of the living wage, but there is a long way to go, and I wish to see the Welsh Government doing more to ensure that Wales becomes a real living wage country.

A few speakers have already said that we’ve made a lot of progress but we’ve got a long to go, but I think very significant progress—and I’d like to mention it, because I was there—was the passing of the minimum wage legislation, which was introduced by the Labour Government that went in in 1997—part of its great reforms. I think that was the beginning that has led now to this campaign. And I congratulate Jane Hutt and Mick Antoniw and others for bringing this forward today, because I think this is a real bread-and-butter issue, as our new First Minister has said. It's about the money that workers have in their pockets after the bills are paid. It addresses in-work poverty, as others here have said today. At one time, we thought if you had a job, that was it; you were out of poverty. Now we know that in-work poverty is one of the hardest issues to address, so bringing in a real living wage is absolutely vitally important to all our citizens.

There are now 175 employers in Wales accredited by the Living Wage Foundation who've signed up to pay the real living wage. Of course, it does particularly affect young people if they're under 25, because the gap between the lower rate national minimum wage and the real living wage is greatest for those in the 18 to 25 age group. That does amount to quite a significant—nearly £3,200 a year, which is an awful lot of money. I'm very pleased, as Jane Hutt mentioned, that Cardiff council was an early supporter of the real living wage, signing up in 2012, and we know that there are a lot of third sector organisations who pay the real living wage, such as Women's Aid, Chwarae Teg and Mind. I'm also pleased that there are 96 private sector employers in Wales paying the real living wage, and in Cardiff, Jane Hutt mentioned the Bigmoose Coffee Company, where the living wage week was launched; PR firm Freshwater, the law firm Darwin Gray, the Cardiff Window Cleaning Company and IKEA, who all pay their staff a fair day's pay for a hard day's work. So, I think we want to congratulate those private sector employers and encourage them, because, obviously, part of this campaign is to encourage private sector employers to do this.

I think a lot of speakers today have highlighted very clearly why employers should bring in the real living wage rather than the UK Government's national living wage. There are moral reasons. We want people to have enough money to live on. But, obviously, there are sound business reasons as well, and several speakers have already mentioned the Cardiff Business School's employer experience survey of 840 employers, carried out in autumn 2016, and I think speakers have highlighted the real benefits of introducing the real living wage, and I won't repeat those.

But I think paying the real living wage is so important to those who are in low-paid work, because it can be the difference between making ends meet and going under. I think we all know the terrible stress that so many families are under at the moment. Particularly, we see people in our surgeries, and the austerity has hit so many families so hard. As a country, we have too many workers who are on low wages, and I know that in Wales we have a particular issue, because a report by the Resolution Foundation showed that people in Wales have the second-lowest increase in wages in the UK after the north-east of England. Compared with a leap in London of wages of 18 per cent, wages here have gone up just 4.5 per cent.

So, I'd like to welcome the First Minister, Mark Drakeford's, manifesto commitment to promoting equality through the fair work agenda and the real living wage, as well, of course, as closing the gender pay gap. Like him, I believe that the most effective way out of poverty and the best route to fulfilled lives, which of course also means your health and your well-being—it means everything that you do—comes through the creation of worthwhile, properly rewarded employment. And the Welsh Government does have a great opportunity to spread the living wage through our supply chains, which would help create prosperity throughout the country.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Transport, Ken Skates.

Diolch, Llywydd. Can I begin by thanking Jane Hutt for bringing forward this important, and I think very timely, debate and motion this afternoon? Jane has been a tireless campaigner over many, many years for greater workers' rights in Wales, both in and, it's fair to say, out of Government and today, again, makes a powerful, compelling case for a living wage Wales, along with many other Members across this Chamber. Can I thank all Members today who have contributed to the debate, the discussion?

I think it's fair to say that there is ample evidence now in existence to show that more equal societies are most certainly more happy societies, more contented societies, and that employers that pay well tend to achieve higher productivity rates. And within the foundational economy, as we've heard, there is a particular issue with low wages, but it's also in the foundational economy that we see a higher proportion of women in employment, which, in turn, contributes to the gender pay gap that we tragically have in our society and must get to grips with. And that's why we are focusing more than ever on what we can do to support better wages and higher quality work in the foundational economy. It's why the Valleys taskforce work has centred greatly on the role of the foundational economy, and it's why the Welsh Government is happy to support the motion this afternoon, because making Wales a more equal nation, a nation where everybody has access to fair work that pays a living wage and where all workers can develop their skills and careers, is a fundamental objective of this Welsh Government. 

It's also why we developed the economic action plan and put, right at its heart, the new economic contract. And I firmly believe that now is the very best opportunity for us to implement such a radical policy, with unemployment and economic inactivity at historic low levels. Were unemployment to be significantly higher, it would be far more difficult to implement an economic contract that asks so much more of employers. And the contract sets out a very clear expectation that businesses should clearly demonstrate their commitment to fair work if they wish to access Welsh Government funding. Where organisations are receiving and spending public money, I think it's only right that we expect them to sign up to our code of practice on ethical employment—

Will you take an intervention?

I will in a moment, yes—on ethical employment in supply chains and do all that they can to make sure their own workers and the workers within the supply chain are employed fairly. And I'd like to give way to Helen Mary Jones.

Thank you very much, Cabinet Secretary. I'm wondering if, in those guidelines, you can include looking at how segregated the workforces are in companies, because we know that that is the basis—. While we carry on paying the men who fix our cars more than women who look after our children, we're still going to be stuck in this place. So, in the revised guidelines, could you perhaps take a look at how monitoring the segregation might work?

More than happy to do that because, as the Member said, it's more prevalent in certain industries and in certain sectors, and I'm pleased that we will be reviewing all of the guidelines, and I think that segregation is a key feature that we must take a closer look at. I'm also pleased to say that the work of the Fair Work Commission looking at the definition of fair work is reaching a conclusion. It will conclude in the spring of next year, and we'll be looking at how we can take this agenda further.

To support the implementation and adoption of the real living wage, we're going to look at options that include using our own powers and levers to achieve the goals that I think everybody has supported today in the wider workforce, and Professor Edmund Heery, the main author of the Cardiff University report that we have discussed today, is, I'm pleased to say, a member of that commission.

The code of practice on ethical employment in supply chains now includes a commitment to consider paying the living wage to all staff, and encouraging suppliers to do the same. So far, 150 organisations have now signed up to the code, including all of our police forces, health boards and universities; 14 local authorities have signed up and others are expected to do so soon; 84 private businesses in a wide range of sectors and 17 charities are also on board. It's a good start, but we wish to see that number rise dramatically. I think it's encouraging to hear about Cardiff council's ambition to be one of the UK's first living wage cities, and it's not only larger public bodies that are becoming accredited—Barry and Brecon town councils are also doing so, and that's a huge credit to them. 

I'm also pleased that the code of practice has been of great interest outside of Wales as well. For example, the UK director of labour market enforcement included a recommendation on the Welsh code in his last annual report. He could see the benefit of using public expenditure as a lever to address non-compliance with labour laws and minimum wages. So, I think that we are ahead of the rest of the UK in many respects and certainly in asking public bodies and smaller businesses and charities to publish anti-slavery statements as part of their commitment to this code. Only large businesses are obliged to do this under the Modern Slavery Act 2015. But, we shouldn't just look at wages in isolation from other aspects of fair and lawful work. This is something that Helen Mary Jones talked about in relation to sex discrimination, and it's also something that Julie Morgan touched on in relation to age discrimination, and, in particular, the challenge that many young people face.

We've covered a spectrum of practices in the code from criminal through unlawful, unethical and on to the positive practice of paying the living wage. There are no clear cut-offs between these categories, and the important thing is that we carry out more due diligence. If you don't know, for example, how workers are supplied in your supply chain, how do you know that no-one is being exploited? An organisation is not doing the right thing if it pays the living wage but funds this by cutting other benefits or by moving people to less secure contracts.

So, as I said earlier, there is undoubtedly more that we can do and more that we should do through the economic action plan and the code of practice. They represent, I think, a big departure from our previous approach to dealing with business. We're already committed to reviewing the effectiveness of the code early next year, and we've accepted the UK director of labour market enforcement's recommendation that we will review it. All of the code's commitments, including the one on the living wage, will be reviewed. We'll look at the impact it's already having and what is needed to promote it and to encourage organisations to follow through on their commitments. We'll also look at whether it needs to be strengthened in places, and we will do this in partnership with public sector employers, with businesses and with trade unions.

I'll be looking hard, if returned to this role, to where the economic contract can go next and which partner organisations we can ask to start using it, because it was always my intention when I penned the economic contract to roll it out eventually across all public, private and third sector organisations in receipt of public support, and to incorporate—subject to the recommendations, of course, of the Fair Work Commission—the living wage into the economic contract. A living wage Wales is not an aspiration, it's a destination that we will get to. I have no doubt that the commitment shown in this Chamber today will help us along the way. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Mick Antoniw, to reply to the debate.

Thank you, Llywydd. I'm grateful for the opportunity to sum up in this important debate. I welcome the contribution that everyone has made. Every contribution has been well intended and has been supportive of the concept, because it is a concept that flows so easily off the tongue when we talk about living wages. The reality is somewhat different, because where I do disagree is I don't think we really have come a very long way. In fact, I think we've been going backwards.

Living wage is one aspect. I much prefer the concept of Wales not a living wage nation but a fair work nation, because wages are one aspect of those components that provide the ability to have a decent standard of living. The fundamental principle that if someone works a full week's work they should be able to have a decent quality of living, a decent standard, to be able to go on holiday, to be able to go enjoy some of the social and cultural things in their lives—that clearly isn't the case at the moment.

I know, when Mark Isherwood spoke, he was being very well intended. I know he believes it from his heart. But, let's face it, the reality is that the Conservative Party have never believed in the concept of a real living wage. The cruellest con trick of all was to call the minimum wage a living wage when in fact it wasn't a living wage, so we then had to start engaging in that debate of demystifying it and saying, 'What we're talking about now is a real living wage, that is, a wage that enables you to live properly.'

When you look at the history, when you look at all the examples of what's happened recently, the spates of legislation that have discriminated and put restrictions on trade unions, where we know that the biggest cause of the restriction of the distribution of wealth amongst working people has been the diminution of collective bargaining—you can see that data all over Europe. The less collective bargaining there is, the greater the poverty, the greater the inequality that actually exists.

Let's look also at what the Tory agenda has been on every aspect of legislation where we've talked about quality of wages and quality of work. They opposed the Agricultural Sector (Wales) Act 2014 to protect farm workers. They opposed the Trade Union (Wales) Act 2017. They opposed the implementation at UK level of section 1 of the Equality Act 2010. They opposed the European Union social chapter. They opposed the inclusion of the European charter of fundamental rights. They have opposed, at UK level, a crackdown on the enforcement of the minimum wage. We have in Wales 19,000 people—estimated—who are not even being paid the minimum wage. Where are the 19,000 prosecutions to actually enforce that? And they've also brought in and then opposed themselves their own policy of bringing workers onto boards of directors of large companies so workers can have a say. 

What I'd much prefer is a move forward to the International Labour Organization definition of what is decent work, and this is their definition:

'Decent work sums up the aspirations of people in their working lives. It involves opportunities for work that is productive and delivers a fair income, security in the workplace and social protection for families, better prospects for personal development and social integration, freedom for people to express their concerns, organize and participate in the decisions that affect their lives and equality of opportunity and treatment for all women and men.'

I believe we have to actually go much further than the sort of voluntary approach that's being adopted. Of course I welcome the work of the fair work commission, I welcome the work of the Living Wage Foundation and the positive results that have been achieved from that, but I'm very, very pleased that we now have a First Minister who is committed to actually legislating in this area, because I believe that is the only way forward—legislating for a social partnership Act, an Act that will actually provide a mechanism to ensure that our £6 billion of procurement only goes to those companies that are prepared to commit themselves to ethical standards, and that those companies that get that procurement then take the legal responsibility for the supply chain, all the way down, so you don't have the sub-contract system where everyone takes a cut of the profit and, at the end of the day, it's the workers who get less and less.

And I'm glad also that we have a First Minister who is now committed to the implementation of section 1 of the Equality Act. This is something that the Tories have refused to do at UK level. It has been implemented in Scotland and there is no reason at all why we should not now commit to the implementation of that, using procurement for socioeconomic objectives. And I'm very pleased that we now have a First Minister who is also committed to that. 

So, whilst I welcome this resolution, I welcome it as far as it goes, what I say is that it does not go far enough. We now have to move into the new will; that is, creating a specific right to decent and fair work, if you work within Wales. I want to see Wales become a fair work nation, not just a living wage nation or even a real living wage nation. There are so many factors to that. Of course there are restrictions, that's why we do need a Labour Government in Westminster and we need the sort of agenda now being promoted by John McDonnell to re-establish employment rights, but fundamental employment rights as at the core of business. Do we work for business purely to make profits, or do we actually work so that we can have a decent standard of living? The balance has gone wrong within our society and we have to restore that balance at UK level, but there is also much we can do at Wales level, and I very much look forward to a developing legislative agenda to actually do what we can within Wales to ensure that Wales becomes a fair work nation. Thank you. 

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

That brings us to our next item, which is the UKIP debate on sewer blockage, and I call on Gareth Bennett to move the motion. Gareth Bennett.

I'm pleased to move today's UKIP debate. As our motion states, there are around 2,000 incidents of sewer blockages in Wales each month, or around 24,000 a year. Recently, there has been coverage in the media of fatbergs, where fat, oil and grease combine with rags and other material in the sewer to clog up the network. There have been tv programmes describing fatbergs the size of a London bus. Indeed, Members will have noticed the extensive work going on in Mermaid Quay, just along the bay, where Welsh Water are having to replace the sewer because of precisely this problem. 

Most incidences of sewer blocking, however, are caused by wet wipes. Items such as baby wipes and cosmetic removal wipes account for at least two thirds of sewer blockages, according to Welsh Water. In fact, the Water UK sewer blockage study, carried out last year, puts that figure even higher, at around 90 to 95 per cent.

Sewer blockages and the resulting flooding are not pleasant. In fact, when sewage enters a property, such as a home or a business, the results are at best extremely distressing and at worst completely devastating.

A large majority of these incidents are, however, completely avoidable. The simple truth is that most of these wipes contain plastic material, such as polypropylene or polyethylene fibres. They do not break down when flushed down the loo, and it is these wipes that, as we have heard, cause up to 95 per cent of sewer blockages. If we were able to eliminate sewer blockages caused by these wet wipes, that would be almost 23,000 fewer incidents every single year.

Of course, part of the problem is that many people don't know that these products simply shouldn't be flushed away. We applaud the work undertaken by water companies so far to increase awareness, but this is a problem that isn't going to go away until we start taking greater action.

The Welsh Government are already undertaking some work on extended producer responsibility. In May, the Minister said that the work to date included six types of food and drink packaging, including drinks bottles and cans and single-use coffee cups. Point 3 of our motion asks the Government to extend that work to include products like wet wipes and cotton buds. We think that companies that produce these items should have greater regard for the entire lifecycle of their products, including end-of-life disposal.

Similarly, EDANA, or the European Disposables and Nonwovens Association, have developed a flushability test and a code of practice for manufacturers. This says that wipes that cannot be flushed should have a clear logo on the packaging, warning consumers that the product should not be disposed of down the loo. Of course, it's not binding, so point 4 of our motion calls on the UK Government to take this one step further and legislate to make this a requirement.

There's been much discussion in the Chamber about recycling, plastic taxes, disposable coffee cups and the like. Wales led the way on the plastic carrier bag charge. It may not have been universally popular immediately, but people soon got used to it, and reusing plastic bags is now second nature to most people. There needs to be a significant culture change from manufacturers and consumers to reverse the growing throwaway culture in our society that is causing this issue of sewer blockage, which we're talking about today, and also causing many other environmental problems. So, we ask Members to support our motion today. Diolch. 

I have selected the three amendments to the motion, and I call on the Minister for Environment to formally move amendment 1, tabled in the name of Julie James.

Formally?

Formally.

I call on Llyr Gruffydd to move amendments 2 and 3, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth.

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. I'll start by referring to St Asaph in my region. Many of you will know St Asaph—a very small, perfectly formed city, famed for its cathedral and its music festival. But I was quite taken aback, actually, in 2014, when St Asaph was revealed as Wales's sewage-blockage capital—you don't see that on the road sign when you drive in, clearly. [Laughter.] But, the fact was that Welsh Water had actually been called out to deal with 134 blockages in the two years up to 2014 in St Asaph: 71 blockages were reported in 2013-14, and that was up from 63 reports in 2012-13. Those incidents had led to seven incidents of flooding near homes or businesses, and we've already heard how nasty that can be. But, of course, St Asaph is only one community, and we have hundreds, if not thousands, of communities in Wales. So, you multiply that up and no wonder that companies such as Dŵr Cymru are dealing with around 2,000 blockages a month.

Dŵr Cymru, in response to the situation in St Asaph, launched a major campaign to reduce the blockages. The Let's Stop the Block campaign is one that many of us are now familiar with, I'm sure, which aims to transform customers' behaviours when it comes to putting things down the toilet, and disposing of fat, oils and greases as well, of course, which is a major contributor. So, that campaign included interactive lessons with Welsh Water's education team; there were fun community events; competitions; advertising; posters were going up, explaining to residents what they shouldn't put down the toilet; and the company even visited homes and businesses directly to talk to residents and to talk to businesses to explain to them and to share with them some useful hints and tips on how they could stop the block.

We've already heard how everyday items, such as cleaning wipes, sanitary towels and cotton buds, are being disposed of, along with fat, oil and food scrapings, and, of course, this is creating havoc. The city council in St Asaph worked diligently as well, trying to explain to people that everybody has a role to play. Now, that's a clear message that we need to share in this debate—that everyone can help and do their bit, either by reducing their use of single-use items such as wipes, or that they just think before flushing or putting anything down the toilet or down the sink, that they dispose properly of wipes, buds, nappies and, of course, that you dispose of fat, oil and grease in a safe way.

But, of course, it isn't just local residents and citizens who have a role to play. Welsh Government as well has an important role to play in this respect, and we've already heard about the need for clear labelling of non-flushable products, which would be a great help, of course, because we do need that significant culture change not only from citizens, but from manufacturers as well, so that we can reverse that growing throwaway culture that we have in our society that's causing this and so many other environmental problems as well. Legislation around flushability tests and product labelling is certainly seen as part of the solution, as we've seen with the plastic bags levy, which was mentioned earlier, and cigarette packet health warnings as well, which we know is changing people's attitudes in that particular context, and having a major positive impact when it's done well.

I would say there is a slight irony here in that UKIP are bringing this motion forward but, of course, we know that the EU Commission are proposing a single-use directive, which is currently at a draft stage. That includes the requirement to boldly and clearly label wet wipes and other products we find in our sewers as 'Do not flush'. If we end up leaving the European Union—and it's getting a bigger and bigger 'if' every day, if you ask me—then, clearly, we as Wales should look to introduce our own regulations to ensure that all such products are labelled properly. 

I'll speak very briefly to the amendments. I'm slightly disappointed with the Government's amendment that we note the work that the Government and other companies are doing. Of course, the time for noting stuff has passed. I think the time now is for decisive action. Plaid Cymru's amendments refer in the first instance to the need for awareness-raising campaigns, but campaigns of a scale that reflects the size of the problem, which isn't the case at the moment. And our second amendment urges us to proactively consider a levy to reduce the use of disposable materials. We've seen it work in other contexts. It would reduce waste, reduce blockages and generate revenue as well, to either tackle the problem directly or to pay for awareness-raising campaigns. 

I hope it doesn't transpire that the biggest blockage to sorting out our sewerage is the Welsh Government's reluctance to act.

I welcome the opportunity to contribute in the debate this afternoon. In the environment committee, we have looked at this particular issue, taking evidence from Dŵr Cymru and other organisations over the engineering problems that this waste issue causes, but also the financial problems as well, and the public awareness. Lots of these blockages quite clearly happen under our feet in the sewers that go right the way through our cities, our towns and our villages, but then it's the engineering works that we see going on that very often are the first time we realise there's a problem.

And there is much that we can do, and we will be supporting the UKIP motion this afternoon. We'll be supporting the Government's amendment and Plaid Cymru's amendment 2, but we will be abstaining on amendment 3 because sometimes we do just reach for taxation levers. I appreciate there are many good examples that do show that taxation and penalising people can actually have that change that we require, but we do think there's quite a bit more work still to do on that. Again, I do appreciate the amendment does say 'explore', but in the field, in particular, of people with disabilities, for example, and other special cases, I do think there's a need to understand more about their demands and their needs when we're talking about wet wipes, because if you go back 10, 15 years ago, most people probably didn't think of this as a problem at all, as such—it was part of everyday life.

But much like the recycling agenda that we've seen across the country—. I visited a recycling depot on Monday, and it was just fascinating to see how that recycling process is undertaken and how there is virtually nothing that can't be recycled now. There is an end use for it, whether it be black bin bags going into energy use, or whether it be the blue bin bags, in this case—it was in Carmarthenshire, this particular site was—and all the contents that were in that bag were to put to some form of recyclable commodity that had a value to it. If you'd said to someone 20 years ago about the recycling agenda, they'd have looked at you completely dumbfounded that you could turn that waste into value and, actually, we just chuck it all in the bin and someone comes along once a week, picks it up, takes it away and it someone else's problem. In fact, as you came in—[Interruption.] I think John's watching the football, is he? Who's winning, John? [Laughter.] [Interruption.] Get in the support. Actually, it's not quite five o'clock yet, and I don't think a certain individual's on their feet in the House of Commons yet. They will be shortly. [Laughter.]

But going back to the agenda item that we're talking about here, it is really important that we do make progress because this is a big, big issue when it comes to costs that have to be diverted into re-engineering our sewage and dirty water system when that valuable resource could be put into many other beneficial uses. There's only so much you can spend in the waste water treatment system, and if that money's going into something that we as consumers can make a difference over, then surely that makes perfect sense.

Plastic bags—[Interruption.] I know it's a brilliant speech John, but—

All I'll say is three strikes and you're out. [Laughter.]

It's off, Llywydd.

I well remember being on the first Petitions Committee in this institution, and we had the plastic bag charge come forward then. And, actually, if you went to a supermarket 10 years ago and you asked for a plastic bag you were expecting to receive that, and actually it was rather odd if you didn't get a plastic bag. Today, if you stand at that counter and ask for a plastic bag, you are looked on, I wouldn't say with disdain, but curiosity because we know the damage that plastic bags do, and it's a source of great pride that people actually take their own reusable bags to the supermarket. And so, on this particular debate, I do think we need to create that change in culture, that throwaway culture that we have at the moment, and it is around public awareness in particular and information about the damage that wet wipes and plastics in particular do cause to what isn't a visual problem but a problem that's happening under our very feet and depleting our valuable infrastructure.

I would draw the Chamber's attention to the actions of the UK Government and the UK Government's commitment in this particular field. It does have a commitment to eliminate all avoidable plastic waste by 2042. It has launched a consultation in particular around this particular area to see what action can be taken, and in particular around labelling. So, it's not just the European Union, as Llyr pointed to; the UK Government are actually taking great steps in this particular field via the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and Michael Gove.

And so I very much hope that the Welsh Government will be working hand in glove with the Welsh Government and other Governments across the UK, because it's not just in Wales that we need to see that change; it's across the whole of the United kingdom that we need to see that change. And where there is best practice, that best practice can be enrolled here in Wales. So, we have no hesitation on these benches today in supporting the UKIP motion that has been brought here and supporting amendments 1 and 2 but abstaining on amendment 3.

Plastic pollution and littering from flushed wipes are on the rise. Last year, the Marine Conservation Society recorded that over 14 wet wipes were found per 100 metres of coastline, a rise of 700 per cent over the last decade.

Most people have seen or will have heard of the massive problem of plastic polluting our oceans, and the problem obviously isn't confined to cotton buds and wet wipes, as we heard in the debate earlier. The use of wet wipes has increased dramatically, and there's been a huge growth in the number of these products being sold, with major advertising campaigns from manufacturers and the cosmetics industry further increasing demand.

Turning to the amendments, Labour's amendment is simply complacent, and it demonstrates that Welsh Government are looking at symptoms rather than causes. These wipes and other items are in the sewage system in the first place because people put them there. Unless Welsh Government find ways to get the message through to the public that these items should go in the bin rather than down the toilet, the problem is only going to get worse. The water companies can tell Welsh Government what the extent of the problem is, but they can't control what people put down the toilet and, therefore, into the public sewer. To be fair, neither can Welsh Government, but they are in a much better position to educate the public than the water companies. It's for that reason and the fact that it would cancel out our call for more work on extended producer responsibility that we are unable to support amendment 1. We will however be supporting amendment 2.

Turning to amendment 3, proposed by Plaid, regarding the exploration of new taxes to reduce the use of consumable materials, I think everyone in this Chamber can probably agree with us that the waste created by humans shouldn't end up in our environment. It's all about finding the appropriate solution, and that could be a combination of measures, but I question how effective new taxes would be at reducing the use of items like wet wipes and cotton buds. These aren't high-priced items, where even a very high tax would increase the price sufficiently to reduce usage significantly. True, some people will be priced out of buying these items, but do you really want to price out the very people who might need them the most and may be on a low income? We don't want to do that, which is why we'll be voting against amendment 3.

In my view, Welsh Government and the water companies need to adopt a two-pronged approach. At the same time as educating the public about the costs and consequences of flushing away items that belong in the bin, Welsh Government and the water companies need to work with the manufacturers of these items to create alternatives that won't block sewers on the way to the treatment plant, even if they are flushed down the toilet. Thank you.

I call on the Minister for Environment, Hannah Blythyn.

Diolch, Llywydd. Can I start by thanking Members for bringing forward this debate and everyone that's contributed? Nothing screams Christmas more like a debate on sewer blockages, but, in all seriousness, though, we know that a significant rise in the use of wet wipes and other hygiene products in recent years has resulted in an increase in the flushing of such items down the toilet, where they end up in the public sewer network, causing the blockages and problems that we've discussed here this afternoon.

No matter what it does say on the packaging, most of our personal healthcare and beauty products should not be disposed of down the toilet. Wipes and other so-called 'disposable' products are the main cause of sewer blockages and emergency call-outs to sewage pumping stations. The results are often, as we talked about today, costly in maintenance, repairs, flooding and environmental pollution. More than three quarters, 80 per cent, of sewer flooding in England and Wales is due to blockages in sewers and blocked sewers, costing Dŵr Cymru Welsh Water around £7 million per year. And Gareth Bennett mentioned the fatberg that Dŵr Cymru have been dealing with just around the corner in Mermaid Quay as an example of what can happen.

To help improve the resilience of the sewer system, the twenty-first century drainage programme, supported by Welsh Government and made up of over 40 organisations, developed a framework for drainage and wastewater management plans. These plans will provide the basis to more collaborative and integrated long-term planning by companies relating to sewerage, drainage, flooding and protection of the environment. Water and sewage undertakers have agreed to prepare a pilot drainage and wastewater management plan by 2022, and we will encourage them to include robust approaches to increase the resilience of the sewerage system against any blockages.

But, as we've discussed today, part of the challenge is awareness and around educating the public on what not to put down the toilet or drains. The twenty-first century drainage programme recognises that a change in behaviour is needed to reduce blockages and pollution, including raising public awareness about the most environmentally friendly types of hygiene products and how to correctly dispose of them. Water companies themselves recommend only flushing the 'three Ps' down the toilet. That is: pee, paper and poo.

A recent campaign to improve public awareness and stop—I'm glad people sniggered. [Laughter.] A recent campaign to improve public awareness was 'Let's Stop the Block' by Dŵr Cymru Welsh Water. Much of these targeted messages are needed if we are to see a difference, and one of these campaigns I experienced when I was—. They showed an eco-summit during the Volvo Ocean Race and it was aimed at secondary school students and it was aimed at educating them what you can and can't put down the toilet, and they'd done it in a way that the toilet was the desirable nightclub that everybody wanted to get into and the bin was the less desirable nightclub. But I won't go into detail of what was let in each nightclub at this point, but you can watch it online, if you want to see.

The Water UK wipes and blockage study recommended that polyethylene and polyethylene fibres should not be included in any product labelled as 'flushable' and there should be requirement to clearly display the 'Do not flush' logo on the front of packs of all non-flushable wipes. However, more work needs to be done with the industry, such as a recognised test to determine whether or not a product is truly flushable. 

I support the principle of legislating to implement the changes needed in this area if necessary, feasible and appropriate. Extended producer responsibility is a means of addressing this through producers bearing the full net cost of the end-of-life management of the product and its packaging. It can be used to drive up recycling rates, promote the use of recyclable materials, and, to some extent, to pay for litter clean-ups. Llyr Gruffydd, regarding your contribution that the European Commission is currently considering including a requirement to extend EPR for wet wipes plus a range of other non-packaging items and the proposed directive on single-use plastics—it's a complex area and it would be premature to take this forward until the directive is made at this stage, but, clearly, it's something that we can revisit and look into in the future.

Members will be aware that the Welsh Government is considering the potential for a disposable plastics tax as part of its work to develop new taxation powers. The Cabinet Secretary for Finance held an Assembly debate last year to begin a national conversation about the opportunities that new taxes might provide for Wales and announced his intention to test the Wales Act powers with a vacant land tax proposal, while considering options around possible disposable plastic taxes. The Welsh Government is now assessing the detail of the UK Government's approach to possible single-use plastics taxation measures to consider the best way forward for us. It's important that the Welsh Government continues to play a part in the processes of engagement, policy development and the implementation for any taxation measures in this area. Any new tax proposal would need to go through the same process as the vacant land tax proposal, where we need the permission of both the Houses of Parliament and the UK Government. In seeking the devolution of the necessary powers, we would need, for the potential of such a tax, to help achieve our ambitions for Wales. However, taxes are not the only solution and not a panacea; they're part of a wider landscape of regulatory and other levers being considered to change behaviours, and they're not the only option for making improvements on the issues created by plastic waste.

As the amendment recommends, we will continue to explore the potential for disposable plastics taxes, and, most importantly, what will be central to the approach taken in Wales will be to ensure that the right steps are taken on improving Wales's role in leading the waste agenda. The Welsh Government is concerned about the environmental damage caused by wet wipes and cotton buds and welcomes the Water UK report. More detailed work needs to be done to explore legislative options that can be taken forward by the National Assembly to address this problem in Wales. The Welsh Government will be taking this forward next year and working with the UK Government and the water industry to develop practical options to flush this out.

Neil Hamilton to reply to the debate.

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. Well, it's been an interesting, informative and enlightening debate, and UKIP has brought this debate forward in a spirit of consensus at this time of year, when the spirit of goodwill should suffuse us all, and it seems to have done so. Even though we can't accept all of the amendments, at least we managed to avoid the 'delete all', which usually is the preamble to all the amendments that are put down to our own motions. So, I can welcome that, at least. In the era when I was growing up as a small boy, of course we didn't actually throw away a lot of waste; I was always taught not to leave anything on my plate, so we didn't actually put fat down the sink, or anything of that kind. These are problems of modern life and a developing economy.

I'd like to thank all those who took part in the debate, and I thank Llyr Gruffydd for the information that St Asaph is the waste blockage capital of Wales, and that certainly was news to me. But it does, I think, illustrate the extent of the problem—even a small place like St Asaph can have a big problem of this kind. I shall certainly draw Nick Ramsay's attention to the problem of putting baby wipes down the loo and so on, as he can, I think, point the way forward in his own household, and hence to the rest of Wales. But Llyr Gruffydd referred, in the course of his speech, to an EU directive, and I sensed a kind of joshing in the way that he spoke about that, as though UKIP shouldn't be supporting anything that the EU is in favour of. But, of course, we're not against everything the EU does, just that we want to do it for ourselves, and as he rightly pointed out, we would be able to take our own measures in Wales, if and when we ever do leave the European Union, and UKIP would be an enthusiastic supporter of such a measure.

Andrew R.T. Davies made a good point, I think, that because this problem is largely unseen, it's beneath our feet—or the effects of it, anyway: the development of fatbergs in sewers and so on—we don't actually think about it until the problem is exposed by the need to unblock the sewers and, therefore, the roadworks and excavations that are required to do so. And it's timely, therefore, that we should have this debate. He pointed out what the UK Government is doing in this respect as well, and that anything recyclable should be recycled, but the end date of 2042 does seem quite a long way away—I shall be 93 then, if I survive so long—and I wonder whether that timetable is perhaps a little too dilatory.

I'd like to thank John Griffiths, also, for his contribution to the debate today. Although it was inadvertent, at least it lightened the points that we were all putting forward. Michelle Brown I think made some very interesting points as well. I was interested, in particular, in the figures that she produced from the Marine Conservation Society—that there are 14 wet wipes per 100m of coastline, and that's a 700 per cent rise in 10 years. If nothing is done about this, clearly this rate of increase is going to continue. But I do agree with her, and, indeed, with Andrew R.T. Davies, that a tax is perhaps not the best way to tackle this problem, and, in particular, how effective could it be? If the items that are going to be taxed are actually relatively cheap, it would need to be a very significant increase in tax to have any effect upon human behaviour, and that would bear most dramatically upon those on low incomes, which is something that we should all bear in mind when we propose taxes to try and change behaviour. We have to weigh up the competing interests that are in contradiction with each other. Hannah Blythyn played a very straight bat, I thought, very well, as the Minister, and I will certainly remember one phrase in her speech, anyway, about pee, paper and poo being the only things we should put down the loo. I think that comes in the class of 'too much information', but maybe it was right for her at least to insert one memorable phrase into the debate today.

So, I think everybody will agree that this has been a useful exploration of the issue, and I'm sorry that the Government can't be bolder in its aspirations, because deleting our motion, which calls on the Welsh Government to widen work on extended producer responsibility beyond food and drink to include consumable items such as wet wipes and cotton buds doesn't seem to me to be in itself a controversial aspiration, and merely to note Government's work to explore options doesn't really go far enough. So, of course, we can't support amendment 2, because it's not bold enough. There is a problem of externalities, which needs to be addressed, and the Government is in the best place to do so.

So, on that note, I think I will draw my remarks to a close. And this is the last time I shall speak in the Assembly before Christmas, so I'd like to wish everybody a merry Christmas and a happy new year.

The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? [Objection.] I will defer voting until voting time.

And this brings us to voting time. Unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, I will proceed to the vote. And the vote is on the UKIP debate on sewerage blockage, and I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Gareth Bennett. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 15, no abstentions, 35 against, and therefore the motion is not agreed.

Which bring us to amendment 1. I call for a vote on amendment 1, tabled in the name of Julie James. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 39, no abstentions, 11 against. Therefore, amendment 1 is agreed.

Amendment 2. I call for a vote on amendment 2, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 50, no abstentions, none against. And therefore amendment 2 is agreed.

Amendment 3. I call for a vote on amendment 3, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 35, 11 abstentions, four against. Therefore, amendment 4 is agreed.

Which brings us to a vote on the motion as amended.

Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 46, four abstentions, none against. And therefore the motion as amended is agreed.

The next item is the short debate, if I could urge everyone to leave the Chamber quietly and quickly.

Please leave the Chamber quietly. I call the short debate, to be proposed by Andrew R.T. Davies.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. It’s a pleasure to move the short debate this evening. I’m just checking to see if John has got his phone on or off for my last contribution. It’s a pleasure also to give a minute of my time to Angela Burns and Bethan at the end of my contribution. And to highlight the importance of this debate, we will be having a short video presentation at some point, when the TVs come on. But, first and foremost, let me apologise to Members for keeping them away from their Christmas parties—I know most groups are heading off for their Christmas parties tonight.

However, I’m delighted to bring forward this rather timely debate, particularly ahead of the festive period when we so often are reminded of the Dogs Trust's famous slogan that a dog is for life, not just for Christmas. For those of you who are unaware of the Lucy’s law campaign, this was inspired by Lucy, the Cavalier King Charles Spaniel. She was a victim of the puppy farming system and used for breeding for many years with no regard for her health or welfare. The driving force behind Lucy’s law has been to call for an immediate ban on the sale of puppies by pet shops and other third-party commercial dealers who participate in this trade to make a profit. Third-party sellers are dealers, people who do not breed the dogs and kittens and who operate as middlemen or women between the breeders and the buying public. Lucy’s law has been driven by a passionate group of campaigners and has captured the support and attention of people right across the country, including politicians and many high-profile celebrities, such as Ricky Gervais, Brian May and Rachel Riley.

As a dog lover—I have two back at home, at the ranch in the Vale of Glamorgan—it is a campaign that has certainly captured my attention, and I'm so pleased to be associated with it, and also to have met Linda Goodman and the C.A.R.I.A.D., Care And Respect Includes All Dogs, group. I’d also like to pay credit to all the volunteers who have been involved in this grass-roots campaign, who have worked so tirelessly in getting this issue on the agenda for so many. Indeed, the success of this campaign is demonstrated in the petition that is before the National Assembly’s Petitions Committee, which has secured a very significant number of signatures. Over 9,000 people have put pen to paper so far, and we were of course fortunate to have the C.A.R.I.A.D. launch here at the Senedd back last year.

Lucy’s law has undoubtedly captured the hearts of so many people across the nation, and this short video for Members provides a little insight into the campaign as we seek to stop kittens and dogs from being used as breeding machines here in Wales. [Interruption.] As if by magic.

Regrettably, Wales is now renowned as a hotspot for some of these despicable practices, with a significant number of puppy farms situated in the counties of Carmarthenshire and Ceredigion. In fact, rural south-west Wales has the biggest concentration in the whole of the United Kingdom of commercial dog breeders, and it is a sadly widely known fact that it has been churning out puppies in terrible conditions. Irresponsible breeders contribute to a chaotic start in life for many pets, where output volume is more often prioritised over welfare, and this leads to serious health problems and a lack of socialisation for puppies and kittens. Dogs have a critical socialisation period between five and 12 weeks, and many struggle to cope with life as a pet if they have not been introduced to the experiences in this time, a requirement that is very difficult to meet within a shop environment.

The commercial market in kittens differs slightly to puppies. The vast majority of third-party sales of kittens occur from physical high-street pet shops. Cat breeding, unlike dog breeding, is not regulated, and pet shops can be an inappropriate environment for kittens. Young kittens sold in pet shops are not always provided with adequate space, an appropriate environment or pen design, a comfortable temperature, or receive the necessary veterinary care and enrichment.

Like nearly every other aspect of modern life, the internet has in many ways fuelled this horrific trade, and has become the shop window of choice for advertising of young pets to be rehomed to potential owners. In 2017 alone, nearly 35,000 adverts for dogs and cats were posted, therefore unlicensed and therefore uninspected traders can sell puppies, kittens and other animals without any checks. The Lucy's law campaign has vigorously lobbied politicians of all colours for the implementation of a ban, and its aims go some way to eliminating a market that depends and is sustained on puppy farms right across the UK, Ireland and Europe. Such a ban would help to eliminate the inevitable physical and psychological damage caused by selling puppies and kittens hundreds of miles away from the place of birth. A ban on commercial third-party sales would amount to a legal requirement that only breeders would be able to sell puppies in the course of a business. It would of course not impact on non-commercial activities, including the rehoming of puppies and kittens through charities and sanctuaries, as they are not done for profit. Nothing would change there.

And, as a Conservative, I was of course delighted to see the UK Government lead the way on this, firstly back in February with its initial call for evidence, and secondly in August, when Michael Gove announced a consultation on the proposed banning of the commercial third-party sale of puppies and kittens. Obviously, with animal welfare devolved as a responsibility to this institution, this announcement only related to England, and it is vital that Wales follows suit. I was therefore pleased to hear the Cabinet Secretary commit a couple of weeks ago to the launch of a similar consultation. This was a welcome move and it is imperative that we now follow this through, because animal welfare is one of those issues that continually rears its head in Members' postbags. Indeed, there's barely a period in the year where some significant issue regarding animal welfare isn't captured by the public's imagination, and, as an institution, we are now in a place where we can act upon those concerns and tackle them through the implementation of legislation.

The Assembly, and, in turn, the Welsh Government, now enjoys a vast array of responsibilities and powers in regard to legislation and regulation in this particular field, and particularly when you compare it to where we were some 20 years ago. As an Assembly, and as a Government, it is imperative Wales capitalises and uses these levers efficiently, proactively and imaginatively to ensure our reputation as an animal-friendly nation is protected. Because let's be honest—there is a problem with activities such as puppy farming here in Wales. Indeed, a ban on such grotesque activity makes perfect sense from an animal protection point of view, and would be a stark improvement on the current situation, with far more people and groups able to enforce a ban—not just local authorities, but also the RSPCA and the police. The enforcement of a ban is backed by numerous animal groups, such as the Dogs Trust and Cats Protection, and should prove far easier and far cheaper than a licensing system that is strangled with bureaucracy and a lack of resource.

Opponents of this course of action often cite that this ban would force the trade to go underground, but I have to say that is folly. The idea that prospective loving pet owners would embark on a trawl of the dark web is extremely far-fetched, and is in a different sphere altogether to the comparisons made to those individuals who seek guns, drugs, ammunition on the deep, dark web. In my view, a ban is an essential first step towards ending this practice of farming dogs or kittens for profit, with little or no regard for their welfare or their fitness as family companions. Stress, increased risk of disease, poor breeding practices and irresponsible selling tactics are all associated with methods of third-party selling. And the importance of taking such action was reinforced to me on a recent visit the Cardiff Dogs Home. It is, of course, an award-winning dogs home, but you couldn't help be touched by the faces of those animals seeking companionship and a loving home. Indeed, on this visit, I was informed that there are currently in the region of 9 million dogs across the United Kingdom—more than sufficient to supply the demand. There is simply no need for this additional commercial activity.

And to close, for me, the implementation of Lucy's law in Wales is vital if we are to address the damage that has been done to the reputation of Wales, which continues to be acknowledged as the puppy-farming hub of the United Kingdom. That's wrong, and it serves as an unwelcome strain on our great nation of animal lovers.

A ban on third party sales will ensure the nation's much loved pets get the right start in life and that people who have complete disregard for pet welfare will no longer be able to profit from this miserable trade. I pay tribute to Lucy's law's campaign, spearheaded by Pup Aid, C.A.R.I.A.D. and the canine action group—Canine Action UK—who have fought so tirelessly in this quest.

Wales should lead the way on animal welfare. There is nothing stopping us becoming the most animal friendly nation in the world. And as a first step in this crusade, I implore all Members to support this noble and noteworthy campaign.

Thank you to Andrew R.T. Davies for bringing this important debate and for the significance of Lucy's law, which is one of the main reasons why I was calling for an animal abuse register for Wales, because we know that we want to try and ensure that animals are protected, and I think this would have been a clear way forward, but the Cabinet Secretary was minded not to carry forth that idea. I've met with Cats Protection recently, and they're calling for regulation of cat-breeding activity or the number of litters bred annually, to ensure they are bred with good welfare standards. Some pedigree cats being bred have a high incidence of genetic disease, and a preventative strategy here in Wales would ensure that we promote cat welfare, and we would then promote positive actions in this particular area.

It was astonishing to hear that some pet shops encourage irresponsible breeding because they advertise that they buy kittens and, therefore, people are actually breeding kittens to sell for remuneration. So, I think that these types of activities need to end and we need to support organisations like the Cats Protection and others that Andrew R.T. Davies has already mentioned here today, to support animal welfare here in Wales and to ensure that we do the best that we can for animals here in Wales.

I'd like to thank Andrew for bringing forward this debate. Our friendship with dogs has run across millennia and this is no way to treat them. In my constituency of Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire, I am sad to say that puppy breeding is at an all-time high, and I have made it my business to get down close and personal with some of the people who do this. And I've been to puppy farms where the owner will actually say that they think they're doing a good job. And as a pet lover I walk in there and my heart does stop, because you're talking about dogs in very small cages being constantly asked to reproduce, reproduce, reproduce. It's no life for the puppies—as Andrew said, they don't get socialised—it's no life for the breeding bitches or indeed the breeding dogs.

But it's not just the puppy farms that I've been to. I also went, under disguise—I know, I'm not easy to disguise—to a rancid one, and I cannot tell you the shock and the horror that I felt when I went there. The barns with the holes in, the disuse, the rubbish, the filth, the stench—it was utterly, utterly appalling. And those sick puppies are now going to be sold to some family somewhere who are going to buy them in good faith.

And the last point I'd like to make, Cabinet Secretary, of course, is importation. Because I have also been present when a traveller's caravan was opened, that had just rolled off the ferry, at Pembroke. It was opened and I thought, 'Oh my God, what is that on the floor?' And then I realised it was seething with puppies, and they are shipped in. And they're shipped in because they make money and they're shipped in because they're a cover for other things that come in underneath them.

We have to stamp it out—it's cruel, it's inhumane. We should be better than that, and we have that opportunity. And, above all, I'll go back to what I said at the very beginning—they have become, in the heart of the nation, one of our best friends. The old turn to them when they're lonely, the kids turn to them to grow up as a playmate. Most of us have had an experience of dogs and cats. They're pets, we've loved them, we've brought them into our homes—we should treat them like family, not like this.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Energy, Planning and Rural Affairs to reply to the debate.

Thank you very much, Chair. Thank you to Andrew R.T. Davies for bringing forward this short debate today, and to Bethan Sayed and Angela Burns for also speaking. As Andrew referred to, I've already announced a consultation will be launched on this issue early in the new year, because I think all three speakers are absolutely right, this is something that we need to do.

I just want to clarify that this consultation will be about the third party sales of both puppies and kittens. Andrew, you mentioned breeding in the debate title, but those who breed the animals would not be third party sellers or dealers, they would be breeders, and it's really important to clarify that point. I think the fact that the title is slightly inaccurate does highlight the real complexities of this issue. 'Wales to ban commercial third party sales of puppies and kittens'—I think that sounds great, but there are so many factors to consider in this process. It would be foolish just to chase that solitary headline, because I do think we can do better here in Wales.

Nothing stops the movement of pets bred in Wales into other parts of the UK and vice versa. So, if we only looked at one step in the chain, I think it would really be a lost opportunity to make a very lasting and effective change. We must also ensure the welfare of animals at breeding establishments is not compromised as a result of any well-intended changes. The consultation process is absolutely key to this, and I don't want to pre-empt its outcome by discussing any detail of that today. The consultation will seek views and ask for evidence to help us paint a full picture of the supply chain of puppies and kittens, where in the chain there are welfare concerns, and also how a change in policy or legislation could address those concerns.

So, as I say, I don't want to speculate on the direction that the process of the consultation will take us. I don't want to discount any options available to us, and I've made it very clear I'm committed to addressing the concerns associated with third party sales. I absolutely stand by this and I can say today the 12-week consultation will be launched on 22 February, just to reassure all Members that that's what we will be doing. I really encourage Members to ensure their constituents put forward their responses to the consultation.

As a Government, we're also working with charities and welfare organisations, so I really do think you are pushing an open door. As you said, Andrew, we've had cross-party lobbying about this. I was very pleased to speak at an event hosted by Eluned Morgan around Lucy's law earlier this year. I think you're right, we can do better than this, animal health and welfare is a postbag that we always have full as AMs, on many different topics. So, we will be launching the consultation, as I say, on 22 February, and I very much look forward to bringing forward, I hope, a ban—I don't want to pre-empt the consultation, but I agree it's something we need to take very seriously here in Wales. 

Thank you very much, and that brings today's proceedings to a close. Could I wish everyone a merry Christmas and a happy new year? Please enjoy.