Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru

I call Members to order. 

I would like to welcome a new Member this afternoon, Delyth Jewell, who is the new Member for the South Wales East region. We look forward very much to your contributions here in the Senedd, on behalf of the people of south-east Wales, and all the people of Wales. I call on Delyth Jewell to say a few words. [Applause.]

Diolch, Llywydd.

'All I have, I would have given gladly not to be standing here today.'

Not my words, but those of President Johnson to Congress when he had taken over from that other statesman, Kennedy. 'All I have'—I do not quote these words out of a lack of gratitude in coming to this seat, nor indeed from a lack of determination to do the best I can, but rather I quote them in a sense of profound sadness at the loss of my friend. That loss is something that unites us.

Wales is in mourning. Gwent is in mourning, for what Gerallt described as 'Y gwrol un a gâr wlad', in reference to that other man on the horizon—Saunders. The sheer scale of this loss is difficult to put into words. Steffan was so proud that he was from south-east Wales, the area of Dic Penderyn, S.O. Davies, Phil Williams. Now, Steffan stands shoulder to shoulder with those giants, and we follow in their footsteps and urge them to reach out to us and to place us on their shoulders.

In preparing for this address, I thought about the hours I spent with Steffan on a sponsored walk across South Wales East in 2016, and about that wonderful walk organised by his sister, Nia, and Rhuanedd, last year. Steffan brought people together always. Not just a giant, but also a friend.

I've spoken about giants and I think it's fitting because this place has always seemed like a place of magic to me. Things come into being here that didn't exist before—yes, laws, but also ideas, alliances. It's long been a dream of mine to be here, not ever in these circumstances, but a dream all the same. Yeats taught me that in dreams begin responsibilities. I have a responsibility to the people of South Wales East to do the best I can, to my party and group, and I have a responsibility to Steffan. I do not bear it lightly. I know I must give all I have for him. I know that, no matter where in this Chamber I sit, many of you will think of me as being in Steffan's place, and I don't mind that. In fact, I will consider it an honour. For although I am this Chamber's newest member, in Steffan's place, I've been given the best seat in the house. 

I am in Steffan's place, but I will never replace him. I hope you will let me share it with him. Diolch. [Applause.]

Questions now to the First Minister, and the first question comes from David Melding. 

Diolch, Llywydd. Actions to respond to the changing mental health needs of young people are being taken across the Welsh Government, in schools and colleges through the youth service, in the workplace and in the NHS, and through partnerships with third sector organisations and others.  

First Minister, last week the UK Government announced one of the largest mental health trials in the world to find out what can be done differently to improve young people's mental health and well-being. Three hundred and seventy English schools will take part in these trials, testing different approaches, while nine areas will trial new ways of ensuring children entering care get the mental health support that they need at that particularly vulnerable time. Schools in England will also deliver mental health education from 2020, something that Samaritans Cymru have said Wales should do also. I realise you're developing best practice and improving services, and I welcome that, but will you also be looking at these initiatives in England, to see where that evidence emerges and where their best practice emerges too, and also share what we develop here in Wales with our English colleagues?

Well, Llywydd, absolutely we will be keen to learn any lessons that there are from new initiatives elsewhere. It's part of the joy of devolution that we are able to try things differently in different parts of the United Kingdom and then to share the learning between us. As the Member says, we already have a whole-school approach to mental health here in Wales. Eleven thousand, five hundred and fifty eight children benefited from the school counselling service in the last year for which we have figures. And anything that we are able to share with others, from our experience, we are very keen to do. But, equally, it's always seemed to me that the sensible approach to devolution is to regard it, as we've said many times here, as a form of living laboratory in which experiments that are carried out elsewhere are available to us all, to draw any learning.

First Minister, I'm sure that you'll agree with me that it's very important, when we're designing services for anybody, but particularly for young people, that we hear their voices in that process. I'm sure that you will be aware that our Youth Parliament has already identified mental health and mental health services as one of their priorities. And I would like to invite you to commit today as a Government to working with the Youth Parliament, taking very seriously the suggestions that will come from them, and ensuring that, as we improve services for the mental health of our young people in Wales, those young people's voices are right at the centre. As they would say, 'Nothing about us without us'.

Well, Llywydd, I'm completely committed to developing our public services with the voice of the user in the centre of the way that we think about those services and try to develop them into the future. There are some groups in the population we have to work harder to make sure that their voices get heard, and the voices of young people who have a mental health condition are certainly in that category. I had the opportunity to meet with a group of young people using mental health services, brought to the Senedd by Helen Mary Jones, when I was the health Minister, and greatly valued that opportunity and the insights that those young people were able to provide to us. And in the field of mental health, that is particularly important, Llywydd, because we know from the most recent figures in England, for example, that there has been a six-fold reported increase amongst children and young people saying that they have a mental health condition over the last two decades. Yet, clinical diagnosed mental health conditions amongst that group of people is up only marginally. So, there is something to learn here from the message that young people are conveying to us when they report themselves having a mental health condition. And meeting those young people face to face is amongst the best ways that we can make sure that we learn those lessons.

We're always tempted to look far afield for the very best possible examples of how to improve our services in terms of child and adolescent mental health. But, of course, back in the autumn, the health Secretary, Vaughan Gething, and I were delighted to be in Jayne Bryant's constituency, attending the launch of £13.4 million of funding through the transformation fund at the Serennu Centre, for a more joined-up approach of child and adolescent mental health services. It's very place based, very community focused, drawing on all the resources, all the capabilities of that area, to support and nurture our young people. It's early days yet, but if that was to prove its success—and I have no doubt that it will, partly because of the work that's been done by the Children, Young People and Education Committee pushing this agenda—if it proves that it works, will the intention be then to roll that out not just across that region, not across south-east Wales, but actually to use that as the model that we roll out across Wales so that all of our children and young people have the very best mental health support?

Well, the model, Llywydd, that Huw Irranca-Davies points to is certainly one that we want to develop further, because it provides for a differentiated approach to mental health. We're absolutely used to differentiated approaches in physical health. If you have a cold—as I do—you need a paracetamol; if you have influenza, you need a different sort of answer; and if you've got pneumonia, then you could end up in an intensive care unit. We understand that different levels of need require a different sort of response. It was certainly one of the lessons in the Children, Young People and Education Committee's 'Mind over matter' report. Having a service of the sort that Huw Irranca-Davies has described, when there is a spectrum of different services available, able to provide that tailored support and tailored reaction to the need of our young people in the mental health field, is a model that we are very keen to see more generally used in Wales. 

I thank Llyr Gruffydd for the question. The UK Government should take a 'no deal' Brexit off the table and seek an extension to article 50. In that way, both the financial and legislative impact on Wales could be eased. In the meantime, we press ahead with correcting deficiencies in law derived from the European Union. 

Thank you for that response. There is a perception, certainly, that the Welsh Government has now become overly reliant on allowing the UK Government to legislate on our behalf. So, can you confirm that the Government's policy is that this place should legislate on behalf of Wales unless there are specific reasons for not doing so, and not, as some are suggesting, that there is an over-reliance on Westminster legislating on our behalf? That's important, because it cuts out an important scrutiny role that we as Assembly Members have in the context of that legislation. Bearing in mind that the Dáil is looking at sitting six days a week to deal with the situation that could arise, and that Westminster, of course, is talking about sitting during half term, do you anticipate that this Senedd will need to sit more often in order to cope with the legislative programme that will be necessary in the face of a 'no deal' Brexit?

I thank Llyr Gruffydd for that supplementary question. I would just state that our policy is the policy that he has set out this afternoon—that the responsibility to legislate is in the hands of the Assembly. We want to see the Assembly dealing with those particular responsibilities unless there is a specific reason that we can't do it in that way. Of course, Brexit does create the context where that specific reason arises.

What we're doing is the same as they are doing in Scotland. Where the House of Commons can do things that are entirely technical and that don't change our policy at all, because there is insufficient time for us to redo things that they do, then we say, 'Well, we're content for them, with our agreement, to legislate.' But, if policies change, then we bring them to the floor of the Assembly, and that's what we've done. There are more things to do with regards to statutory instruments, with regard to exiting the European Union, and there are more to come to the floor of the Assembly. So, when policies change, we come here and we give opportunities, importantly, for the Assembly to scrutinise what we suggest.

In the context of exiting the European Union, where there are so many things to do, when the changes are only technical in nature, then we give the House of Commons the opportunity to do so on our behalf, as they do in Scotland. Just to come to the final question, I can foresee a situation where we will have to allocate greater time on the floor of the Assembly to deal with the impact if we are going to exit the European Union.  

First Minister, we know from the rural affairs Secretary that the delay in her Government's response to 'Brexit and our land' will push that response into the summer. One thing that the Minister's committed to is obviously bringing a Welsh agricultural Bill forward. We have two years roughly left of sitting in this institution. Can you confirm that there is no delay in the Government's intention to bring such a Welsh agricultural Bill forward, even though the consultation to 'Brexit and our land' has been pushed into the summer now, because, to give that Bill a fair run and be consulted on and implemented, it is vital that the time is put aside in Government business time for us to consider the merits or not of the case that the Government will be making in that Bill? 

Well, Llywydd, I understand entirely the points that the Member is making, and the importance of them in ensuring that an agriculture Bill of our own for Wales can be brought forward in a way that offers the Assembly the time it will need to consider such an important Bill. Andrew R.T. Davies will, I think, be happy to recognise the fact that we have been able to work closely with the UK Government in relation to the Agriculture Bill, which is currently going through the House of Commons, that, as a result of the agreements we have now reached with the UK Government, we are confident that that Bill will provide Welsh Ministers with all the legislative tools we need to deal with the immediate impacts of leaving the European Union and there will be no gap in the statute book for Wales as a result of those agreements. But, as he says, the Minister has made it clear that, through the 'Brexit and our land' consultation and the continuing dialogue that she has with farmers' unions and others, it is her intention to bring forward an agriculture Bill for Wales. And, given all the uncertainties of the world that we live in, it is our intention to do that during this Assembly term.

We now have questions from party leaders. The leader of Plaid Cymru, Adam Price. 

Diolch, Llywydd. Natural Resources Wales directly manages 80 per cent of Wales's forests and regulates the remaining 20 per cent. As a body itself, it produces 800,000 tonnes of timber each year. Yet, astonishingly, as we heard yesterday from the chief executive of NRW, no-one on the current board has either knowledge or experience in timber or forestry. In their report into the problems at NRW's forestry division, the auditors Grant Thornton referred to a merged entity without a single organisational culture and an isolated forestry function beset by serious failings including poor governance, poor people management, poor budgeting and an audit culture that was not so much dilatory as entirely non existent. The board of NRW must accept their share of the responsibility for this grim state of affairs, and indeed the former chair resigned. But, since it was your Government that appointed them, do you also accept your share of the blame in creating a board that so patently was simply not up to the task?

Well, Llywydd, I think the Welsh Government has recognised the need for the board of NRW to be strengthened. That's why we have a new and distinguished interim chair of the board. That's why the board has been reinforced by, I believe, five new members appointed by the Minister, including members with experience in land management. It's to that board that we must now look to take the actions that are necessary to address the findings in the Grant Thornton report and to work with the Public Accounts Committee and others to make sure that the deficits that have been identified are put right, and that this very important organisation that does very necessary and important work across Wales every single day is able to get on with those important duties, confident in the culture that it has and in the structures that are there to support it. 

It does beg the question why it's taken six years and four separate reports for these deep failings to be uncovered in this way. Now, the standard response we've heard from the Government in situations like this is that this is an autonomous body for which you only have arm's-length responsibility, but you do have direct responsibility for your own Government's strategy for forestry and woodlands. Almost a decade ago, you adopted the ambitious and widely lauded target of planting 5,000 hectares of new woodland every year until 2030. You only managed an average of around 500 hectares a year, so you dropped the target to 2,000 hectares. Now, you've raised the target back up to 4,000 hectares. But can the First minister tell us how far short of the previous target you have fallen over the last four years?

Well, Llywydd, I am aware that we've not reached the targets that we intend for woodland and for tree planting here in Wales, and that is something that I personally am very committed to addressing. In the campaign that was held during the autumn for the leadership of my party, I put forward a proposal for a new national forest for Wales. That's an idea I'm very committed to making sure that we take forward during the rest of this Assembly term and beyond in order to be able to make sure that the woodland of Wales is able to make its contribution both to climate change and decarbonisation and to the other things that ideas of that sort can bring to those parts of Wales whose future are most likely to be affected by Brexit. 

I think the idea of a national forest is all well and good and to be welcomed, but you have to ask the First Minister: you've been part of the furniture in this institution in different shapes or forms—part of the furniture whether it's made out of Welsh wood or not—and where have you been in terms of these targets? You weren't able to answer, and there's a very good reason, maybe, because you used to publish an annual report on the 'Woodlands for Wales' indicators; you stopped, and I think I know why, because, in the last four years, you've achieved an average of just 200 hectares a year of new woodland planting—just 10 per cent of the target. Can you think of another area of public policy, First Minister, where you've underperformed as badly as this? It's the worst four-year figure since modern records began in 1971. NRW hasn't produced any new woodland at all since it was created six years ago. Scotland has produced 10 times as much new woodland in that period. Restocking rates in Wales are the lowest they have been since 1990.

Now, to some this may seem like a particular problem in a relatively small sector. It's nevertheless an important one to the rural economy, significant in the national scale in terms of our climate change reduction strategy, but, First Minister, doesn't this deep failure at the heart of Wales's biggest public body tell a much larger truth that sums up 20 years of Labour Government—glossy strategies, ambitious goals, but no delivery and no accountability?

Llywydd, the Member moved from an important specific point to a general point that simply cannot—he cannot construct his general point on the specifics that he identified. On the specifics, I agree with him that woodland in Wales is a genuinely important part of what we do, that we do have to do better in it, that there are very good reasons why it is particularly important now to put a focus on that part of what we do; I'm personally committed to making sure that we do that.

The general points that he makes about NRW are being taken forward through the Public Accounts Committee and will be picked up in a debate here in the Assembly, and there will be a statement from the Minister on forestry on 12 March, as we currently plan it. That is an example of a Government that is prepared to grasp these issues to make the difference that is needed to be made, and that is the story of Labour Government here in Wales.

Leader of the opposition, Paul Davies.

Diolch, Llywydd. First Minister, do you agree with the Association of School and College Leaders Cymru that the severe funding crisis in Welsh schools is having a detrimental effect on our young people?

Where I agree with them is when they point to the fact that the austerity imposed on Wales by his Government is having the effect that they regret, and I regret the fact, and regret every day, that we are unable to invest to the extent that we would like in our schools, in our hospitals, in housing and in all the other things that we would like to do in Wales. But the association that he points to—and I've seen their letter—puts their finger on where the blame lies, and it belongs with him and with his Government.

First Minister, you need to stop giving excuses and start taking responsibility. You are responsible for education here in Wales, and, First Minister, this open letter to your education Minister is a damning reflection on the way your Government has managed education here in Wales. Despite having £1.20 to spend on education here in Wales for every £1 in England, we still see a significant shortfall in school budgets, which is actually undermining hopes for future reform.

Now, according to the NASUWT, we know that pupils in Wales receive £645 less per head than pupils in England, and schools in Wales are facing a collective shortfall of £291 million in their budgets, and £450 million of education funding never reaches the classroom. So, why have you chosen to provide schools with what has been described as a totally inadequate level of funding, which has pushed schools to crisis point?

Llywydd, the last time that Paul Davies's party was prepared to say to the public in Wales where they would take money from in order to fund the many things that, week after week, they tell us need to be done, it was the education budget that they chose as the main sacrifice for the rest of their plans. So, I don't think that we will be taking too seriously the crocodile tears of the Member on this matter this afternoon. In fact, the Institute for Fiscal Studies has made it clear that the gap between funding in Wales and in England has narrowed to a point where it scarcely exists. And here in Wales, we have—[Interruption.] Here in Wales, we have a deliberate policy of passporting on to education in Wales all the money that came to us from his Government for teachers’ pay. We look forward to making sure that we have money from his Government to cover the increase in teachers’ pensions that they have introduced, and we will continue to do that, just as we ensure that the money that goes to local authorities and to improvement consortiums is then passed on, in turn, to schools.

First Minister, the facts are absolutely clear. As you know, for every £1 spent in England, your Government can spend £1.20, and you cannot deny those facts, given it was you—it was you—who agreed this fiscal framework with the UK Government in the first place. So, is there any wonder there is a crisis in our schools when they have received consistent cuts to their budgets by your Government?

Now, let’s look at the figures, shall we, First Minister? We know that, between 2010-11 and 2018-19, gross budgeted expenditure on schools has received a real-terms cut of 7.9 per cent. Now, this inability to support our education sector has seen a significant number of teachers leave the profession. Having seen a drop of just 29 pupils since 2010, figures by the NASUWT, again, reveal that there are over 1,400 fewer teachers working in Wales during that period. What will it take—[Interruption.] What will it take, First Minister, for your Government to realise that our schools are facing a crisis and that this failure to make education a priority will have serious consequences for our future generations? And will you now start listening to our teachers and to our educational professionals to start giving our schools and our children the support that they deserve?

Llywydd, the Member asks for facts, and let me give him 888 million of them, because that is the number of pounds less that we have to spend on public services here in Wales today as a result of his Government since the year 2010—£880 million less. Every one of those pounds is a fact that we could be using to spend on public services here in Wales. If he believes that teachers in Wales do not understand that the problems that they face in the classroom are the result of the decisions that his Government has made and that we have to deal with every day, then, really, he needs to get out a bit more and speak to the people who understand this at the front line.

Leader of the UKIP group, Gareth Bennett.

Diolch, Llywydd. First Minister, a fortnight ago, you restated the Welsh Government’s intention to legislate on removing the defence of reasonable chastisement. I won’t ask you if you’re still intending to bring in a smacking ban, since what you said last time was quite clear. You stated that you were determined that the ban would get through the Assembly during this Assembly term and get on to the statute book. Given that this legislation is likely to be widely unpopular, why are you so intent on creating a new law in this area?

Well, we will bring forward a new law in this area, Llywydd. It was part of the Labour manifesto. It’s part of the manifesto on which my party is elected. We believe in keeping those promises to the Welsh public and we will bring forward a Bill, which it is then for the Assembly to scrutinise and to debate. My party will be committed to seeing that Bill on to the statute book, and we look forward to working with others in this Chamber who share that ambition.

Well, I thank you for your clarity on the issue. Now, the results of the official consultation on the smacking ban showed that opinion was fairly split on this. Half of the respondees felt that legislation would protect children’s rights, but half felt that it would not. It seems that, at best, the smacking ban is a law that will split the Welsh electorate down the middle. Now, this is the Assembly’s own consultation. All of the opinion polls conducted before this have shown a strong view against the smacking ban. I wonder if your Welsh Labour Government has thought enough about how the smacking ban is going to be policed. How will it be enforced? Will we have children informing against their own parents? And, if we do, who will be able to verify whether the claims are true or not? We could be heading into some kind of imitation of Stalin’s Russia of the 1930s, when perfectly law-abiding parents got sent to prison camps because their children were encouraged to whisper allegations against them to their schoolteachers. Is this the kind of scenario you want to occur here in Wales? 

Well, Llywydd, I recognise nothing in what the Member has said about the proposal that we will bring forward. We will bring forward a proposal to remove the defence of reasonable chastisement. No adult can be hit in this country, and such a defence mounted; why should a child be allowed to be hit and then that defence brought forward? This is the position that exists already in countless countries across the globe, countries where none of the entirely scaremongering possibilities that the Member identifies have happened, and none of which we expect to see happen here in Wales. 

Well, I'm sure, First Minister, you appreciate that we live in a time when we've had a whole catalogue of historic sex abuse claims made against people, some of them against perfectly innocent people. Many of these historical sex allegations have turned out to be pure delusion, but I'm sure plenty of innocent people have been caught up in them. If the state encourages children to start making allegations, then we could have a whole new catalogue of wrongful prosecutions. Are you really sure your legislation is going to be robust enough to prevent this possibility? 

Llywydd, where abuse takes place, we want people to speak out. If it happens in the home and children have a story to tell, then we want to encourage a position where they feel confident to come forward and make their stories known, just as we do in situations where people who have suffered in the past and in silence now feel able to come forward and tell their stories. On this side of the Chamber, and I think in many parts of this Chamber, that is regarded as a sign of progress, and a sign that things are better today than they were in the past when people were fearful, and felt unable to have their stories heard. I'm sorry that that view is not shared in all parts of this Chamber.       

Can I thank the Member for the question, and say how much I look forward to answering what must be his first question to a First Minister since the very first year of devolution? And the answer to his question is that, at best, modest progress was reported on this matter at the last Joint Ministerial Committee plenary in December. The inter-governmental relations review commissioned in March 2018, when the Member represented Wales at the JMC, is yet to produce a report. 

I thank the First Minister for his answer. Does the First Minister share my concern that the current arrangements for dispute resolution are inadequate, because we know that the UK Government is the arbiter of disputes, despite frequently being a party to those disputes? And if he agrees with me on that, what kind of system would he like to see in its place?  

Diolch, Llywydd. I entirely agree with Carwyn Jones that current arrangements for dispute resolution are inadequate, like so much of the inter-governmental machinery in the United Kingdom. It will come under greater pressure in the future as a result of Brexit, and as report after report of select committees at the House of Commons and the House of Lords and committees here have reported, the current machinery simply cannot bear the weight of the issues that Brexit is producing for the United Kingdom. What we need, then, is a set of arrangements that are based on principles, parity of esteem, parity of participation, the principle that disputes are always best avoided where they can be. Those principles should lead to a set of rules, and those rules should have within them an element of independent expertise and arbitration.

Llywydd, Members will be, I think, glad to know that in the work that is being carried out under the JMC plenary, and that the former First Minister helped to get started, Wales is taking the lead in drawing up the principles for future inter-governmental relations. And as we saw in the inter-governmental agreement, if you get those principles right, then the practicalities of a dispute resolution system are always likely to be more robustly put in place.

Disputes, generally, centre on money and power. First Minister, you're generally thought to have had a fairly successful record at negotiating the fiscal framework with the UK Government to resolve the funding coming to Wales. Your predecessor, I would say, did a good job negotiating with the UK Government about the powers of this Assembly and the devolution settlement in the Brexit context. Doesn't that show that the essential mechanism for resolving disputes will generally be that of negotiation?

Well, I thank the Member for what he said and I don't disagree with him that negotiation is always going to be the main way in which disputes are resolved. What we are talking about in this question, in the way that the former First Minister put it, is what happens when negotiation runs out of road. And you do have to have a set of arrangements in place in order to deal with the point at which attempts to resolve disputes—by avoiding them, by resolving them, by negotiating them—don't get you to the end point. And as Carwyn Jones said, we cannot have is a system in which the body that is responsible for resolving the dispute is a party to that dispute. That's what happens at the moment. It's not acceptable now, it's certainly not acceptable in the long run. When negotiation runs out, then you have to have a mechanism that is genuinely independent and commands the confidence of all the players involved in it.  

In your view, First Minister, is time pressure and the pressures of work in dealing with the additional legislation emerging from Brexit—is that all a sufficient excuse to take powers away from our Senedd here in Wales and take them back to Westminster?

Well, Llywydd, just to restate: as I've said many times, there is no single power that has been taken from this Assembly to Westminster. Everything that comes to Wales after Brexit is going to come here, and it's only with the agreement of this place that powers will be able to move anywhere else. We haven't agreed to anything moving, and nothing has moved.

And in the report that was published only last week, Llywydd, into the matter that was a subject of controversy on the floor of this Assembly, the UK Government, in its second three-monthly report, confirmed what I've just said, that not a single power has left this Assembly. Not a single use has been made of the mechanism that is in the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 to deal with powers returning and there is no intention on the part of the UK Government to use that mechanism, because we are able—we have demonstrated an ability to resolve matters that lie between the component parts of the United Kingdom on the basis of agreement, as the Welsh Government said we would be able to from the very beginning.

I thank the Member for the question, Llywydd. The Welsh Government’s sustainable social services third sector grant scheme provides £7 million each year to third sector organisations, delivering 32 projects that support vulnerable children, adults and older people in Wales. This grant is in place from April 2016 to March 2020. 

Thank you very much for the answer, Minister. Family Fund is a charity that provides grants to families on low incomes who are raising disabled or seriously ill children in Wales. Earlier this month, Family Fund announced that they had insufficient funding to help families and were no longer able to accept applications until April 2019. One reason for the predicament is that their funding from the Welsh Government's sustainable social services third sector grants scheme was cut in 2016 from £2.5 million a year to less than £2 million over the next three years. Does the First Minister accept that this funding cut is having a detrimental effect on projects and initiatives that support his Government's strategy for social services in Wales, especially for disabled and seriously ill children?

Llywydd, I want to recognise the important work that the Family Fund does in Wales and will go on doing in Wales as a result of the £0.5 million every year that it receives through the sustainable social services grant. Some Members here will recall that, back in 2016, we developed a set of rules that said that no one organisation could receive more than 10 per cent of the total amount available in that grant, and that's exactly what the Family Fund receives. It receives the absolute maximum amount available under the rules of the sustainable social services grant scheme and, indeed, in the first year of the scheme, we provided the fund with an additional £400,000 in that year in order to smooth the transition from the amount of money it previously received to the amount we are able to provide under the new grant arrangements.

And part of the reason why we decided that no one organisation could receive more than 10 per cent of the total sum available was because we wanted to allow other organisations with equally important projects to get funded as well. So, amongst the 31 organisations that the social services grant now funds are Learning Disability Wales, Carers Wales, the All Wales Forum of Parents and Carers of People with Learning Disabilities, and the Family Action programme, which provides practical, emotional and financial support to families. So, the work that the Family Fund does is very important, but we're now able to complement that with a whole range of other services working in the field that the Family Fund also operates.

I thank Mark Isherwood for that. Llywydd, I want the principles of co-production to animate the approach of the Welsh Government in its work with the third sector and others. In order to achieve that, we work closely with the Co-production Network for Wales, Academi Wales and the Wales Audit Office, who encourage co-production through training, events and online resources.

Diolch. I've also worked for many years with the Co-production Network for Wales. I was in fact the only politician, I think, invited to their official launch—[Assembly Members: 'Hear, hear.']—which was well worthy of support. Last Friday, I once again visited a small charity, an autism charity supporting families with children on the spectrum, which is having to devote a massive amount of volunteer time to applying for tiny grants, often not being successful. I routinely visit equivalent small charities doing wonderful work, co-producing solutions with families and with community members that work, and yet millions are going into the Welsh Government statutory provision or the integrated autism service and other top-down programmes that are not reaching the organisations on the ground that are making that real difference. 

Given that the interim evaluation of the IAS last March identified the failure of co-production because of a top-down approach as being a significant problem, how can you, and will you, personally intervene to drive your understanding of co-production, which I know is deep and meaningful, so that we can actually start to begin to do this right and ensure that what funding is available—and there's a lot out there—is going where it can make a real difference rather than into county halls where it doesn't always reach the places that could make that difference, so badly needed?

Llywydd, I thank the Member for that question. This Government is committed to making sure that we work with a plurality of third sector organisations, recognising the very important contribution that they make to public services and the ability that they have to form an interface with the citizen that regards the users of our services as assets and people who have strengths that they can bring to bear on the services that are provided. I wanted to thank the Member for pointing out last week in First Minister's questions a report to which he referred, which I had a chance to look at over the weekend, and which does provide some practical ideas in the contracting sphere as to how small organisations can have a better chance of making the case for funding from public bodies. The place where I depart from Mark Isherwood, in relation to co-production, is that I sometimes think he describes it as a way of replacing the state as though it is a mechanism for moving things away from public services and replacing them with the work of others. I've never seen it that way myself; I see it as a way of augmenting, supplementing, influencing, shaping the work of others, but not of supplanting it.

I thank Nick Ramsay for that. A national framework of action was launched in 2017 to promote the care and support for people who are deaf or living with hearing loss. It commits the Welsh Government, health boards and local authorities to work together to improve services, including support for the families of deaf children. 

Thank you, First Minister. I'm sure you're aware of the recent news story that Ros and Josh Hannam from Monmouthshire are having to pay £6,000 for sign language classes to help communicate with their deaf daughter, Lola. The couple have received funding through the local authority's sensory and communication service, but are having to fundraise to make up the shortfall themselves—valuable time that would otherwise be spent with their daughter. Debbie Thomas from the National Deaf Children's Society has said that parents of deaf children currently face a postcode lottery when it comes to funding for these sign language classes that are so crucial to helping their social and educational development. Can I ask that the Welsh Government's review—because I know you've committed to one—of the British Sign Language funding takes place as swiftly as possible so that all deaf children, regardless of where they live, get the best possible start in life?

I'm very happy to confirm to the Member the timetable for that review. We expect tenders for the work to be received by 25 February, that the contract will be awarded early in March, that the field work will take place between March and May and that advice to Ministers will be received by the end of June of this year. So, I think that is a pretty rapid turnaround for a very important piece of work. To agree, Llywydd, with what Ramsay said, this is a piece of—the responsibility for these services lies with local authorities. I have seen figures that show a very wide range of charges that are imposed by different local authorities in Wales, and the point of the review is to try to make sure that we have a service that is fair, equitable and co-ordinated, and where people don't feel that they are at the mercy of the geography of where they happen to live.

Can I join with Nick Ramsay in talking about the importance of sign language, not just to parents but also to siblings—an opportunity to be able to talk to other members of the family? I said last week, it's the first language of many deaf people.

Following on from what Nick Ramsay said, it's not only just about cost, it's about availability, and there is a serious problem of having people who are capable of teaching sign language. If we made it free to everybody who wanted it, in many cases, it wouldn't make a huge difference because there aren't enough people to teach it. So, what can be done to increase the number of people able to teach sign language so that more people can learn how to talk to their siblings, so parents can talk to their children, so we've got a situation where equality exists?

Well, Llywydd, can I thank Mike Hedges for that very important follow-up question? This National Assembly formally recognised BSL as a language in its own right as long ago as 2004. And he's right that it is every bit as much a language as any other language for many of the families who use it, and there is a shortage of interpreters and tutors here in Wales.

The review will look at that issue as well. It will look at existing provision, it will consider costs and access, but it will also look at ways in which we can improve the flow of people properly equipped and able to provide the sorts of courses that Nick Ramsay referred to and which his constituents are hoping to be able to use.

The Welsh Government identifies and provides support to schools through a partnership of local authorities and the four regional consortia. Following the most recent categorisation outcomes, it's encouraging to see that more primary schools need fewer days of support in the coming year.

Thank you for that response. A few weeks ago, I met with a number of headteachers in the Swansea area, and in their own words, they said that the situation was reaching crisis point in terms of what's happening in primary schools in that particular area. Morale is very low—those aren't my words, but theirs. What are you doing to work with schools, in the context of the current very difficult financial climate, to ensure that they are able to operate effectively? They've told me that the grants system is too complex, that the formula is something that's difficult to understand, and that they concerned that they can't care for the most vulnerable pupils, given those financial problems. So, what can you tell me today so that I can take a positive message back to those headteachers?

Well, Llywydd, I think that we do have a positive message to feed back to teachers and headteachers in Swansea.

In the report that was published only a week or so ago, which showed how schools were faring in relation to the additional support that they need, in the Swansea area, part of the ERW consortium, far more primary schools moved towards needing fewer rather than greater hours of support. Twenty-nine schools in that area moved in a positive direction, whereas only four schools were categorised as needing more support—a ratio of more than 7:1 of schools moving in the right direction. That is a tremendous tribute, isn't it, to those people who lead education in that part of Wales and the work that teachers in schools do? So, while I recognise that out there on the front line the pressures of nine years of austerity are absolutely real and are felt every day in the work that people do, the positive message I would want to give to those headteachers is that, together, through the actions they are taking, they are succeeding in providing a better education for the children who are in their schools today, and I hope that they will take some confidence from their own success and that that will give them some of the strength and the resilience they need to deal with the undoubted difficulties that all public services in Wales face.

Finally, question 8—Lynne Neagle.

I thank Lynne Neagle for that. The UK Government’s own economic analysis, published in November, concluded that reducing migration from the European Economic Area to zero would reduce UK gross domestic product by almost 2 per cent. The impact of ending freedom of movement would be felt directly in Welsh businesses, universities and public services.

Thank you, First Minister. Would you agree with me that it would be a very serious mistake to leave the EU without any clear idea of the destination? And, will you make it clear to any Ministers from the UK Government, or, indeed, anyone with significant influence over Brexit, such as the leader of the opposition in Westminster, that supporting a blindfold Brexit would be an unacceptably high-risk policy?

Well, we're certainly not in favour of a blindfold Brexit, and have not been since the very earliest days after the referendum. The Member knows, I know, very well the prospectus that the Welsh Government set out in that immediate aftermath: a Brexit that is shaped by the needs of the economy and jobs here in Wales; a Brexit that has a clear destination in terms of membership of a customs union; dynamic regulatory alignment with the single market; and a fair movement of people regime. That is the sort of Brexit, if we are to have Brexit, which does the most it can to mitigate the impact on the Welsh economy of leaving our closest and most important market. And I take every opportunity, as do my Cabinet colleagues, to advocate for that form of Brexit at every opportunity that comes our way.

Thank you, First Minister.

The next item is the business statement and announcement. I call on the Trefnydd to make a statement—Rebecca Evans.

Thank you. There are no changes to this week's business. Draft business for the next three weeks is set out in the business statement and announcement, which can be found amongst the meeting papers available to Members electronically.

Organiser, could we have a statement or response to the Minister's commitment to do an environmental impact assessment on the Barry incinerator? This commitment was given by the Government back last February. We are in February of 2019 now—that's 12 months, believe it or not—and we still haven't had a response from the Minister as to whether she is going to carry out this assessment or insist that Natural Resources Wales carry out this assessment. Many residents, not unreasonably, are very concerned about this, and they see that the Government has turned their back on them. In particular, the previous First Minister indicated that such a decision would have been made by November of last year. It cannot be still sitting on someone's desk waiting for a decision to be taken. Surely, the decision has been taken. Can we now have that decision communicated so we know whether an environmental impact assessment will be undertaken?

Thank you for raising this issue. I know that this matter is clearly a very complex matter that is requiring some detailed consideration. I will ensure that you receive a more comprehensive and complete idea of when a decision will be made.

Trefnydd, you'll be clearly aware of the announcement last week of plans by the UK Government to develop a west Wales parkway rail station on land at Felindre, Swansea, within your Gower constituency. Now, the proposal, as you know, which would make use of the Swansea district line, will bring about improvements to passengers in west Wales by delivering shorter journey times to Cardiff and London—being as electrification has gone—reducing the journey by up to a quarter of an hour, with scope for greater journey savings if line speeds are increased. It could also help with congestion issues on the M4 around Swansea and Port Talbot, and the main commuter arteries into Swansea.

Clearly, though, these east-west rail improvements cannot be looked at in isolation. You'll be aware that the Welsh Government has previously commissioned a feasibility for a Swansea bay and western Valleys metro. South-west Wales is crying out for improved public transport, and rail needs to play a key part in that. As well as seeing services to Swansea and Neath stations protected, we also need to see other routes being brought back into use—the Amman and Swansea Valley rail route, for example—and ensuring quality transport links to the Neath, Dulais and Afan valleys. The Welsh Government has been quiet on the UK Government's west Wales parkway proposal, and I would therefore be grateful if the Minister for transport would bring forward a statement on what discussions he is having with the UK Government, and how he sees the west Wales parkway interlinking with the wider challenge of developing further rail and tram infrastructure within the region, as part of the Swansea bay metro.

Thank you very much for raising this issue. I know that the economy Minister has responded to those proposals by the UK Government, but he'd be more than happy to recirculate his response to that, whilst also providing an update on the feasibility study with regard to the west Wales metro proposals.

Trefnydd, I would like to request three statements today. First of all, I'd welcome a statement from the education Minister on the next steps that the Welsh Government will take to tackle bullying in schools. The 'Respecting others' consultation is due to close later this week, but after many years in the classroom, I am still concerned that we do all we can to deal with this issue. In particular, I'm concerned about our approach to tackling LGBT+ bullying, as we know, for example, a higher rate of Welsh LGBT+ young people experience bullying than anywhere else in the UK, according to recent statistics. As February is LGBT History Month, I hope that this is something that we can make real progress on.

Secondly, Rhondda Cynon Taf cabinet has approved a policy of setting fixed-penalty notices for up to £400 to tackle fly-tipping. To my constituents, like to people throughout Wales, fly-tipping is a real concern, so it would be good to see the council using these powers that have just been made available to them by Welsh Government. Could we have a statement setting out how Ministers are prioritising action against fly-tipping, in particular assessing the efficacy of changes in terms of fixed-penalty notices?

Finally, it was really positive to read the statement that over 150 employers have now signed up to the groundbreaking code of practice on ethical employment in supply chains. This is a welcome step, but could we have an update in the Siambr from the Minister for economy on other interventions the Welsh Government could take to promote good employment practices? I am thinking in particular here of the ways in which the economic contract can be used to encourage more businesses in Wales to sign up.

Thank you very much for raising those three issues. On the first, regarding bullying, as you say, the recent consultation is just coming to an end, and I know that the Minister will have more to say on that in due course. But it is worth reflecting at this point that our new curriculum will lead the way on LGBT+ issues, and will provide teachers with the opportunity to teach Welsh LGBT+ history. The first draft of the new curriculum will be published in April, and there will be a full-scale consultation within the education community and the wider public on that. 

You quite rightly raise the issue of transparency in supply chains, and the Minister was listening to your comments and he has indicated that he would be happy to bring forward a statement exploring the work that's being done, particularly through the economic contract. I can tell you also that you know that we've launched the ethical employment in supply chains code of practice, aimed at making those supply chains more transparent and preventing exploitation of workers by ensuring that they are treated fairly at every stage in the supply chain. And this is very much a first for Wales and a first for the UK, and I'm very pleased that we now have 159 organisations signed up to the code so far, and we obviously would expect all organisations, businesses and third sector organisations who are in receipt of public sector funding to sign up to that code. 

And, finally, you raised the issue of how Welsh Government is seeking to ensure that the correct penalties are paid for fly-tipping. Well, it is a criminal offence, punishable by a fine of up to £50,000 or 12 months imprisonment if convicted in a magistrates' court. And this can attract an unlimited fine and up to five years of imprisonment if convicted at a Crown Court. The Welsh Government is proposing to introduce new fixed penalties to help local authorities deal with household waste duty of care offences, and this additional enforcement tool will aim to reduce the amount of domestic waste being passed to unauthorised waste carriers. 

Minister, may I ask for a statement from the Welsh Government on the eligibility criteria for social housing in Wales? My constituents, Mr and Mrs Harradine, and their four children, rent a house from Newport City Homes. For the last three and a half years, the house has been suffering from damp and mould growing all over the property. This is affecting their health and their children's, who have developed asthma and bronchitis. Health visitors and a doctor at the Royal Gwent Hospital have written to the housing authority, stressing that the condition of this house is causing health problems in the children, but all in vain. No action has been taken by the local council or city council, you can call it. They desperately need to move out, but because both parents are in employment, they are not considered as a priority by the city council. Please can we have a statement from the Minister on what guidance can be given on the eligibility criteria for social housing, since it appears that threats to people's health are not considered serious enough to warrant being rehoused as a priority? 

Thank you for raising this case with us in the Chamber. I'm sure that you've taken up the specific case with the appropriate residential social landlord and/or the local authority. And I'd certainly recommend that you write with further details of that case to the housing Minister, who will be able to provide some further background on the detail of social housing eligibility criteria. 

Trefnydd, I just wanted to ask for a debate on the Welsh Government's definition of 'local' in relation to housing development. I know you can't comment on local cases, but I'm sure you're aware of the issue with regard to housing development in Pennard, and Swansea Council has defined 'local' as Mumbles. Now, I know of an instance of a young woman who moved home because she'd lost a child to a heart condition. She now wants to reapply for the council house that she lost because of the fact that she moved home, but she may not be able to move into the surrounding area because of this definition of 'local'. This planning permission is one of many where people are debating and not understanding the definition of 'local and affordable', so that people can utilise that to the best of their ability so that they can stay in the area where they want to stay. So, I'd like a debate in Government time so that we can have these definitions thrashed out here, so people locally can also engage in a more positive way with the planning process.

My second request for a statement would be for an update on the legislative programme of the Welsh Government, be it in a written or an oral form. We heard from the Welsh language Minister last week that she was dropping the Bill in relation to establishing a commission. I heard through social media the former Minister said there was a timetable for that legislation, but it's not something the committee that I chair were aware of. So, if there's one thing that the Government Minister knows and something else that the Assembly doesn't know, then I think we should all be made aware of the clear timetable that your Government has, so that we can all engage as positively as we can in scrutinising that programme and knowing where in the timetable that will happen.

Thank you very much for raising both of these issues. I would suggest that, on the specific issue that you refer to in Pennard, in the first instance it would probably be most appropriate to raise the issue regarding the definition of 'local' and the definition of 'affordable' with the housing Minister, in order to have the full information in front of you, in order to be able to share that with constituents.

I'm sure that the First Minister answered some questions today with regard to the legislative timetable, and the impact that Brexit might be having on our considerations there, and, of course, the First Minister does make an annual statement on the legislative programme. But if you have specific questions regarding Bills, I'm sure that the appropriate Minister would be able to respond to those concerns.

I have two questions. One is, firstly, in relation to Superfast Cymru and the previous roll-out scheme. I've been made aware of a very concerning issue relating to this. The delivery of superfast broadband, as part of the Superfast Cymru scheme, has been achieved, of course, through the handing of the contract to Openreach. However, I'm given to believe that Openreach then sub-contracted to Telent, who have then sub-contracted to Wavetec Limited, which has ended up employing individual contractors, including a constituent of mine, working freelance, and is still doing so, to help build the fibre network. Having been shown a copy of an aged creditors' breakdown by my constituent, I understand that he is now owed thousands of pounds and has not been paid for services rendered to Wavetec since the end of November. Trefnydd, would you be able to liaise with the responsible Minister and explain to me why Superfast Cymru has resulted in such a protected contract, which has seen several subcontractors in the chain, which is now resulting in my constituent facing financial hardship? That's No. 1.

And then, No. 2: will the Trefnydd explain why the Welsh Government does not deem it necessary for the Planning Inspectorate to consult with all the interested parties when new material or planning policy updates come forward during the course of the Planning Inspectorate process? Now, the reason I ask this is that, last week, the Planning Inspectorate approved a residential development, comprising of 110 dwellings, in Llandudno Junction. This, in my opinion, and others', was despite breaching a number of planning policies, and over 1,300 objections submitted. Due to the delayed process following the inquiry in September, where the actual decision breached its own ministerial target deadlines, the introduction of 'Planning Policy Wales', edition 10, had to be considered. Whilst the local authority and the appellant were consulted, all other interested parties, including myself, as the democratically elected Assembly Member, were not allowed to give further information forward, based on the interpretation of 'Planning Policy Wales'.

Now, subsection 47(7) of the Town and Country Planning (Referred Applications and Appeals Procedure) (Wales) Regulations 2017 states an appointed person needs to notify those involved in the inquiry about new material to allow them to make representations about new evidence, or to ask to reopen the inquiry before making their decision. However, the new material excludes Welsh Ministers' policy. This is wrong and undemocratic. So, would you agree with me that Welsh Ministers' policy should be subjected to the notification representations request to reopen provisions in the same way as any other type of new material? And, if so, would you be prepared to consider my proposal to change this flawed legislation, and the regulations, so that all interested parties are allowed to be part of the actual planning inspectorate process and regime?

Thank you very much for raising those questions with me today. On the issue of broadband, if you would share with me the details of your constituent's specific circumstance, I'd be happy to explore that with the Minister and let you have the outcome of that. 

Your questions regarding 'Planning Policy Wales' and how it intersects with existing planning applications, and so forth, is probably best directed to the Minister with responsibility for planning. 

Trefnydd, I wonder if I can have perhaps updates on statements from the Welsh Government on two areas. One is obviously steel. Last week, we had a wonderful debate here in the Chamber on steel making in Wales, and the implications of the future for steel making and the challenge it still faces. Yesterday, we heard that Swansea University was going to be the lead university in a £35 million-project to look into the steel process to ensure that steel can become sustainable in Wales and the UK. Could we have a statement and an update from the Welsh Government as to what actions the Welsh Government is taking to work with the university sector on the steel research and development agenda to ensure that the money that's already invested in things like the Steel Institute in Swansea University continues to develop steel making and the processes so that steel making in Wales, particularly in my constituency in Port Talbot, is going to be something that is sustainable for the future? [Interruption.] I'll wait until the answer comes back. 

On the second one, we know about the Banksy issue in Port Talbot. I visited it on the very first day it was identified, before it became known as a Banksy. But we've also since then had the Ame72—three different pieces of street art: two on the back of Taibach rugby club on doors, and one on the door of a garage in a lane a few houses down from the rugby club. It's clearly becoming an issue—street art and the culture of street art. The individual I spoke to, and the previous owner of the Banksy, highlighted the need to ensure that we had somewhere to keep this street art. But there's also a concern that we don't become an area for graffiti, rather than street art, and so we actually create a culture of street art. Can we have a statement? I thank the deputy Minister for his response earlier, last week, on the previous requests, but we need to look at what is the Welsh Government's position on street art. What does it see as street art and the future of street art? How will you work with councils to ensure that street art can take place whilst not becoming over-intrusive in people's lives? Some people may think that street art is wonderful, others will consider it graffiti, and there are some that are graffiti—there's no doubt about that. But we need to ensure a culture of street art within our areas to ensure that it survives. So, can we have a statement on what the Welsh Government sees as the future of street art, and, also, how we can ensure that when it is there it is preserved and secured and not allowed to be vandalised?

Thank you very much for raising those issues. Certainly, Welsh Government very much welcomes yesterday's announcement of that additional £10 million of funding from the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council for a £35 million research network aimed at reducing carbon emissions from the UK iron and steel industries. It really is excellent news, and I would like to congratulate Swansea University on the work that it's done to bring that funding to Wales, and it certainly builds on the investment that Welsh Government has made in the establishment of the Steel and Metals Institute in Swansea, which was opened in February of last year. The Minister for Economy and Transport has indicated that he'd be happy to bring forward a joint statement with the Minister for Education to respond to the points you raised in your contribution. 

On the matter of the Banksy artwork and street art more widely, Welsh Government, of course, channels its investment in the arts through the Arts Council of Wales, which is there to support a wide variety of art forms, including all forms of visual art, so that would include street art. It's also able to provide funding for individuals and it does so extensively, mainly through the funds it receives from the National Lottery.

On the specific issue of the Banksy artwork, as you know, we're meeting the security costs prior to  the removal and relocation of that to another site in Port Talbot. Talks are continuing between Welsh Government, the new owner and the local authority to ensure that a suitable new location is found as soon as possible. Indeed, I understand that there some discussions just this week on that, and the new owner has committed to ensuring that the new art will be displayed in Port Talbot for a minimum of two years, which I think is very welcome, and I know that the Minister is giving thought more widely to the future for the celebration of contemporary art here in Wales

Finally, this week the UK Government has admitted that the huge rise in the numbers of people reliant upon food banks is partly, at least, due to the roll-out of the disastrous universal credit. We also know that welfare reform is partly responsible for the steep rise in street homelessness as well. So, surely, after admitting this, the UK Government cannot carry on with it. So, will you agree to write the UK Government to make the case that their benefits reform is causing great harm, and will you tell them in the strongest possible terms to scrap universal credit now?

Figures recently released show that less than one in five complaints of sexual harassment in Wales's public sector have led to a dismissal. Non-disclosure agreements are also being used to silence complainants in sexual harassment and domestic abuse cases. These figures show exactly why we need the new Time's Up network that I've been involved in setting up. The new network aims to give voice to those experiencing sexual harassment and abuse in Wales and aims to change the situation. So, how can these unfair dismissals be stopped? Can the Welsh Government give a statement on what it's doing to curb the corrosive culture that persists in our society, and, specifically, can you tell us what can be done to prevent complainants from losing their jobs?

I've been contacted by two separate people complaining about the difficulties trans people face accessing healthcare in Wales: one whose personal experience dates back to the period 2008-12, but another who has a more recent experience confirms that matters have not changed in the intervening seven years. It's not acceptable, is it, for someone to have to go to Scotland to self-refer themselves to a gender identity clinic because of such a long delay in getting a referral from Wales—a delay that saw this person attempting suicide because of the toll it took on their mental health. It's not clear why people can't self-refer in Wales or why they have to go through community mental health teams when that provision doesn't exist elsewhere. On moving back to Wales, the man who contacted me was refused a repeat prescription of HRT and told they would have to start the process from scratch, despite being on HRT for two years and having had a mastectomy whilst in Scotland. Clearly, this was unacceptable then and it's unacceptable now. Now, I understand that there are proposals to bring Wales in line with Scotland's more progressive approach to trans people. So, can the Welsh Government please give an update to this Senedd on the progress with the new gender identity service for Wales and how the specific inequalities that I've talked about can be ended?

And, finally, the former leader of UKIP in the Assembly over the weekend described his former party as an 'anti-Muslim party'. Now, we have, for a long time, recognised this truth in Plaid Cymru, including when that former AM was the leader of the party in Wales. So, will you join me in condemning any hate-based party that singles out or treats people differently on the basis of their religion, their language, or because they belong to a minority? And will you agree with me that this politics has no place in Wales and anyone pushing a dangerous or discriminatory agenda ought to be ashamed of themselves?

Thank you very much for raising those issues. I will refer to them in the order in which you raised them. The first was universal credit, and Welsh Government has consistently and regularly raised the issue of universal credit and our multitude of concerns about it with UK Ministers. I know that the Minister for housing has recently written to the UK Government again on this issue and she would be happy to provide a—

The response came in the summer.

She'd be happy to provide a copy of that to you and put a copy in the Library alongside the response that the Minister has received.

On the issue of sexual harassment in the workplace, clearly, this is of huge concern. So, it would be remiss of me not to mention that this week is Trade Union Week, and membership of a trade union can provide individuals with huge emotional support but also the legal support that they might need in order to take forward complaints of this kind. But, clearly, this kind of behaviour has no place in the workplace or anywhere else more widely I would suggest as well.

Your question about accessing services for trans people—the Minister has indicated that he will be bringing forward a statement when the new team comes into place around April of this year. I would completely agree with you on the issue of any hate-based party being extremely dangerous. Politics that is centred around discrimination and hatred towards people because of their religion, their language or their minority status of any kind clearly has no place in Wales.

Trefnydd, this morning alone, I've received over 40 complaints by e-mail and social media about traffic congestion on the A467 leading to junction 28 of the M4. The Welsh Government said junction 28 road improvement works have been completed for a number of months now, but the situation is worse than ever before. Commuters are facing significant delays in all directions and I've raised this on many occasions with the Minister, officials and Costain, and unfortunately this is not an isolated incident. In fact, it occurs daily and can't simply be attributed to teething problems.

My constituents and people travelling down from the Valleys and east of Newport are being seriously affected, making them late for work, school, exams, appointments and extending journeys home in the evenings. The tailback at peak times reaches the slip road and inside lane of the M4. Commuters and local residents have been incredibly patient while the works have been carried out, but it doesn't appear to be an improvement by any stretch of the imagination and it's already adding to high air pollution and congestion in the area.

One of my constituents, who lives in Rogerstone, told me that he works in the Orb steelworks and what should be a 15-minute journey to work is taking him well over an hour. Another managing director of business told me that it's causing stress to his workforce and customers have told them that they've given up on getting there. Another has just told me that they have to leave an hour and 10 minutes earlier than their shift in a company in Tredegar Park, and that's for a 20-minute journey.

So, please can we have an urgent statement from the Minister for Economy and Transport on what is being done to resolve this issue as well as details of what markers are being used to measure how the project is delivering against its intended objectives?

Thank you very much for raising this issue. I know that you've already had a meeting with the Minister for Economy and Transport to discuss the congestion issue and to provide the Minister with some of those very detailed personal experiences that your constituents are experiencing on this stretch of road. I'm aware that you were provided with an update on a proposed way forward from Welsh Government, outlining the action that the project team are taking in order to try and resolve issues that you described. The Minister has indicated that he'd be happy to provide an update to all Members. 

I thank the Trefnydd. 

The next item is a statement by the Minister for Health and Social Services on unscheduled care winter delivery. I call on the Minister to make his statement—Vaughan Gething.

Thank you, Llywydd. I am pleased to update Members on the delivery of unscheduled care services this winter. I'd like to begin by paying tribute to the hard work and dedication of thousands of our health and social care staff this winter. I've had the opportunity to see front-line staff across Wales delivering services for people whilst under pressure. I've talked previously about the planning process for this winter, which included leaders from local health boards providing assurance to the Welsh Government about their readiness. The local plans were agreed in partnership between health and local government. I've supported local organisations through an extra £39 million, provided earlier than before, based upon findings from our 2017-18 review and feedback from clinicians.

I'm pleased to report improvements have been made following this additional investment and lessons learnt from previous winters. I am confident that, without these, the winter we have experienced so far would have been much tougher on staff and had a negative impact on patient and staff experience. Emerging evidence tells us that the number of lost hours for patients waiting over an hour for ambulance handovers decreased by 30 per cent, comparing December 2018 to December 2017. 

Hospitals across Wales reported considerably less time spent at the highest levels of escalation in December 2018 and January 2019 when compared to December 2017 and January 2018 respectively. When hospitals did experience those increased pressures, this winter they recovered and de-escalated quicker, and that is a real indication of improved resilience of front-line services.

Hospitals have admitted fewer people over the age of 85 as emergencies this winter, compared with the previous two winters. The average length of stay for patients admitted as emergencies in December 2018 was at its lowest for over six years. There has been a continued reduction in the number of delayed transfers of care, and improvements have been made in waiting times; the number of people waiting over 36 weeks for elective care at the end of November 2018 was 41 per cent lower than November 2017, and now all health boards are in a better position than they were last year. 

I'm also pleased to update Members on a number of collaboratively delivered initiatives between the Welsh Government, local health boards, the Welsh ambulance service and third sector organisations that are already making a positive impact for people this winter. The Welsh ambulance service has collaborated with St John's on a falls assistance initiative, responding to 773 people who have fallen this winter. Over 85 per cent of those calls included patients over the age of 65. Patient feedback indicates 94 of people were satisfied with the response provided.

Since mid December, local health boards have been working with the British Red Cross to support over 14,000 patients in eight emergency departments across the country. The pilot aims to improve staff well-being and patient experience. It supports patients and their families in emergency departments and transports patients home. The home transport includes helping to resettle patients by connecting them again to community services. That has been especially helpful for lonely people. 

The Hospital to Home pilot, delivered in collaboration with Care and Repair Cymru, is focusing on improving housing quality to support reductions in delayed transfers of care, prevent admissions and reduce readmission rates. Collaboration and integration with the third sector is a key facet of 'A Healthier Wales', and I'm encouraged to see further progress being made here.

We're also trialling new integrated models of care this winter by deploying pharmacists into emergency departments. Again, early indications are positive. Dedicated pharmacists are now working as part of a multidisciplinary team, with some hospitals already reporting seeing up to 100 patients a week, to help support the safe and efficient delivery of care to patients in the emergency department.

However, this winter has also been difficult for services and staff across health and social care. There have been occasions where patients have waited longer for advice, care or treatment than we or health and social care staff would like. Winter stomach bugs such as norovirus place additional strain on our NHS, and since October 2018 there have been 103 gastrointestinal outbreaks in hospitals and care homes across Wales.

Members will be aware that the last flu season saw the highest number of GP consultations and flu cases in hospitals since the 2009 pandemic. We've increased testing following the roll-out of Welsh Government-funded rapid flu tests for patients in emergency departments across Wales. This winter we have seen a higher number of flu cases confirmed in hospitals compared to the same time last year.

Despite a record number of attendances at major emergency departments, performance against the four-hour access target improved at seven out of 13 hospitals. However, it is clear that performance in particular at three sites is simply not good enough, and that has affected the national overall performance picture.

Looking forward to the medium term, we're overseeing a number of programmes to support the sustainable delivery of unscheduled care services. The new primary care model will provide a 24/7 response, with the 111 service being a key component. As the 111 service rolls out over the next two to three years it will improve access through better signposting, clinical advice and treatment using a free-to-call number and other digital opportunities. There'll be greater regional and national working to meet the demand for critical advice and treatment at peak times, and 111 will be available nationally by 2022.

The amber review implementation programme, which I've highlighted to Members in a previous statement, is well under way and expected to run until November 2019. I will update Members on progress on that programme over the summer. A quality and delivery framework for emergency departments is under development and includes the piloting of new measures developed alongside clinicians over the past year. This'll be the first phase of wider work to develop clinical outcome and experience measures across the unscheduled care system.

Building on an in-depth review into how we discharge people with complex needs from hospitals, we will substantially increase focus on preventing unnecessary admission and reducing delays in hospital transfers of care for older people in 2019-20. I will also provide an update on this ‘home first’ approach in the summer. This reinforces our need to work across our whole health and social care system.

And finally, we will launch a policy framework for unscheduled care to describe our policy expectations for local health boards and NHS trusts in the summer 2019. I will, of course, provide further detail upon its release.

Thank you, Minister, for your statement and for the advance copy that you provided to my office.

Clearly, there has been progress in some areas, and I’m very pleased to see that, because, my goodness, we needed some progress on this very important matter. Because, as you quite rightly said, whilst performance against the four-hour target has improved at some hospital sites, at others it is woefully inadequate, including, most seriously, in north Wales at two of the hospitals, which are at the bottom of the league table in a health board that, of course, is currently in special measures and under your direct control.

Can I give you an example of the sort of care that is being provided at Glan Clwyd Hospital? This is from an e-mail that was sent to me by my constituent, John Cook, about his son Gareth Cook, who, unfortunately, had occasion to need some attention in the emergency department there back in November. He attended three times in a single week, largely because, at the first of those attendances he was turned away inappropriately, and at the second attendance he was also turned away inappropriately, because of bed pressures in the hospital. He comments, and I quote:

'I have mentioned the lack of basic hygiene, privacy and respect for patients arising from the appalling conditions. To illustrate this point, I refer to patients vomiting within touching distance of one another. Gareth recounts an experience of sharing a four-chair bay with three others. Included in this group were an elderly blind person and a younger man who was an alcoholic and clearly disturbed. In the middle of the night, this alcoholic introduced a pair of scissors and was prodding the blind man awake.' 

In addition to that, there are scenes described of two elderly gentlemen, one 94 and the other in his 80s, spending days—not hours, days—on chairs, sharing a single one-bay bed with three others, all, again, within touching distance of one another.

Now, clearly, these are unacceptable descriptions of the sort of care that both you and I and anybody else in this Chamber would want to be seeing provided, but I am very concerned that that’s the sort of care, unfortunately, that many people are witnessing in our hospitals, particularly in north Wales. But I know that those sorts of scenes are not confined to there, and I want to know what you're doing to address those sorts of concerns, because it seems to me that a large part of the problem is the bed capacity in our hospitals, which is keeping too many people in our emergency departments for too long.

Because we know that the figures on the 12 plus-hour periods that people are spending in our hospitals are actually getting worse. They got worse in December, and they were worse in November than they were 12 months previously. So, whilst I appreciate that there is progress being made in terms of transfers of care, and that there has been some progress in terms of some of the other targets, clearly, people should not be spending more than 12 hours in an emergency department unless there is an exceptional circumstance that requires them to be in there.

You made reference to the extra cash that has been invested this winter. I’m pleased to see that cash going in. I’d be very grateful to know, Minister, how that cash was divided by health board area, because it seems to me that it’s not always been targeted at the level of greatest need, where the biggest problems are manifesting. So, it would be interesting to know if you could give us a breakdown in your response today.

I’m very keen also to hear a little bit more about these collaborations that the NHS is developing with the Red Cross, St John’s Ambulance, and Care & Repair Cymru. It’s wonderful that those collaborations have started. I know that patients, certainly in my neck of the words, really value very much the support that the Red Cross have been giving, and I think that’s working extremely well. But, clearly, I think what we need to know is: are these going to be permanent features within our health service in the future and, if so, are appropriate regimes in place to ensure that there's proper scrutiny of those new systems and arrangements, and are they being properly paid for?

Can you also tell us what the situation is in terms of the take-up of the flu jab by front-line healthcare workers? You made reference to the flu season in your statement, and we know that it started a little bit later this year than it has in previous years and, of course, there's always the opportunity that it will gather momentum again. Now, we've had just around half of our front-line healthcare workers in the past actually receiving their jabs. That's clearly not good enough. We need to get a higher take-up rate amongst front-line health professionals, and I'd be grateful if you could tell us whether you're going to introduce new targets, new measures that can prompt and encourage people to take the opportunity to protect themselves in order to protect other people.

And just finally, can I ask you on the whole subject of the ambulance service and its targets—? We know that there have been some welcome changes in terms of the intelligent targets that have been set now for the ambulance service, but one thing that rings in my ears on a frequent basis is the concern that some people who show symptoms of a cardiac attack, a heart attack, are not being regarded as the top category of calls, and don't stimulate an ambulance to be able to respond to them within the eight-minute call time. I think that is a concern for a lot of people. Some people, sadly, have lost partners, lost family members as a result of that target. I'd be grateful to know if you could tell us what you're doing to review that particular arrangement in terms of the cardiac care in the future. Thank you.    

Thank you for the series of questions. I'll begin with your last point, because it was covered in the amber review. There was a review of the conditions in the different categorisations, in red, amber 1 and amber 2, and your personal view is not supported by the clinicians who undertook the review. We're taking a proper evidence base as to the categorisation of healthcare conditions, but also to look at improvement within the amber category in any event. And as I said in my statement, I'll be reporting back to Members this summer on the progress being made in delivering that and, of course, I'll expect to report again at the end of the implementation period for the recommendations made in that review. As I indicated in my statement, that work is due to carry on until November of this calendar year.

On your broader point about the flu jab, again, I expect that, as part of the wider review into this winter, we'll look again at the overall success of persuading the public and our staff to take up the opportunity offered by protection from the flu jab. We'll look again at the most successful parts of our system, both for employees as well as the ability to persuade people to take up their flu jabs, whether at GP surgeries or at pharmacies. In fact, this morning I had to call into my own general practice, and the wall was plastered with posters about getting your flu jab for those people at increased risk. So, certainly, the information being provided there in both languages was very, very visible, and I know that it's something that has been discussed and will be discussed again with employers about the success, or otherwise, of persuading staff to take up the flu jab in each part of our system. And you'll know that this winter, of course, we've rolled out the opportunity for staff in residential care to receive the flu jab from the health service as well, so I'll be open and transparent about success and what measures we propose to take at the end of this winter as well.

On the Red Cross, I'm glad that there's broadly a welcome for it, and it's been very, very warmly welcomed by staff and by people who are engaged in the service themselves as well. It is a pilot, and it's a pilot that is due to run at the end of March, and we will then evaluate it to understand the impact that it has had. We will then—I will then have to make a decision about whether to recommission that, whether it will be a regular recommission, whether it will be a seasonal recommission if the evidence supports it in winter, or whether it's a regular part and feature of our system. We will need to understand from the Red Cross about their ability to supply that service, should the evaluation show that it's of the sort of value where we would want to sustain it. 

On your broader point about money, I confirmed in a previous statement that of the share of the money that's gone out, north Wales had the highest share of the moneys announced. I'll happily recirculate to Members the share of that between different health boards and their partners.

On your broader point about the experience of care when you started off your contributions and comments, I would not try to say that the picture that you paint from your constituency is one that I would wish anyone to have in any emergency department in any part of the country. And the challenge for us is not just understanding that that has taken place, but our ability to do something different about it. Now that, for me, isn't just about the front door, and we regularly rehearse this—it isn't just about ambulances and the front door. And actually, it isn't always about bed capacity. And one of the interesting things about the conversation with the college of emergency medicine has been their focus on, yes, wanting more staff, but actually, their other big focus has been about wanting more resource to go into social care, because they recognise that the medically fit people within any of the hospitals almost always equal the pressure they have at the front door, and actually being able to get those medically fit people out of the hospital requires the support of social care and the third sector for that to be able to happen.

Now, for me, the frustration is how fast we're able to move, bearing in mind the demand that we continue to see coming through our front door. We know that we have managed to support more people outside of emergency departments this winter. If we hadn't taken those measures, we'd have more people in our emergency departments. We need to do progressively more each winter just to keep pace with the demand that we know exists in our whole system. But it isn't just emergency departments that see that pressure, our colleagues in primary care do as well.

So, if you want to provide me with the details from your constituent, I'll happily make sure they're looked at, but the focus will be on the whole system and, in particular, how we support people to leave a hospital and be supported, so they're not readmitted and they're not returning to hospital without having had the appropriate support and care outside of our hospital system.

I'd like to thank the Minister very much for his statement and, in doing so, join him in valuing the excellent work that our staff are doing, sometimes under very difficult circumstances. I'm sure that we all appreciate the efforts they make, often under very difficult circumstances, as I've said.

It is, as Darren Millar said, positive to see some trends. I'd like to ask the Minister for a little bit more detail about some of the headlines that he mentions. So, the statement mentions that hospitals across Wales reported considerably less time spent at the highest level of escalation in December last year and January this year. That's obviously good to hear, but I'd appreciate some more detail from the Minister. Perhaps he could write to Members, because 'considerably less time' is quite a vague term and it would be interesting to know whether that improved performance was consistent across all the hospitals in Wales, were there variations, and if there were variations, what accounts for them and how those might be addressed.

So, a further question of detail around delayed transfers of care. Again, it's very pleasing to hear that there has been a reduction, but it would be helpful, from the point of view of scrutiny, to know a reduction from what to what, and again, whether that performance is consistent across the whole of the service or whether, as we might suspect, there are substantial differences. And again, if there are differences, what accounts for those. And I should stress, Dirprwy Lywydd, that I'm not expecting the Minister to have all of this at his fingertips, though I'm sure he will have some of it. But it would be useful to have that level of detail.

I also welcome the engagement of the third sector, where it's appropriate, to help in this area of work. I would, though, put it to the Minister that it's very important that we ensure that these third sector services once—. As I appreciate the Minister said to Darren Millar, some of these are pilots, and we need to see whether they're working and then whether Government wants to commission them on an ongoing basis. But it is very important when we are engaging with the third sector that it's done on a sustainable basis and that the funding pattern is enough for the organisations to be able to sustain themselves as well as to provide the particular service. I have, for example, been in some discussions with a hospice at home service in my own region where the funding that they're being offered from the health board is on a standstill basis, despite the fact that nursing salaries are, rightly, being increased. So, I think it would be helpful for the Minister to take a look at how the service as a whole is engaging with the third sector and is it doing so in a way that makes those services, which are much appreciated, as Darren Millar has said, truly sustainable.

The Minister's statement made references to the accident and emergency situation, but it's at a fairly broad level, though I appreciate we have discussed this already. But the reality is, isn't it, that we had almost 4,000 people—3,887—waiting longer in major A&E centres last December, and that was more than in previous years. The Minister rightly highlights that the figures are skewed by particularly poor performances in particular places—Darren Millar made reference to the north—and I'd be grateful if the Minister can say a bit more today about what he and his officials are doing to address that performance in those three centres where we know that there are really serious issues.

Finally, Deputy Presiding Officer, it is fairly obvious to state that winter does come every year, and yet we do seem to hear that we are to be surprised by certain things like influenza and norovirus, and I wonder if the Minister can assure us—and I look forward to seeing the policy framework for unscheduled care, because I think it's very useful to have a national policy framework—. But will the Minister ensure that, in that framework, we take into account the fact that these pressures do come every year? Some years, they're worse than others; some years flu is worse, some years norovirus is worse. But we do need to understand that there will always be those additional pressures. So, can the Minister assure us that that policy framework will take into account that variation in pressure so that we're not looking for emergencies when, in fact, what we've got is just the weather and this being Wales? Thank you.

If I can deal with your last point first, we recognise that this being Wales and the weather vary in terms of the pressures that they drive. Cold weather tends not to produce a big spike in admissions at the time; it's actually roughly a week or so later when the cold weather produces the impact in terms of the additional number of people going in. We know that the first week of January is almost always a point of really large pressure right across primary care and the hospitals. There are parts that we really can predict and those that we can't accurately. We know that, as more of us live longer, we can expect there to be more pressure across the whole system and, in particular, through winter. That's why one of the encouraging things with the difference this year is the number of over-85s falling in emergency admissions terms, and that's really positive, but it does show that we need to do even more to support people in their own homes, and it's why there is such an understandable, not just direction of policy but a range of people across primary care and social care who are saying that they actually need to not just talk about the way we want more to be done there but how we actually resource those teams to deliver the care that we want to see delivered locally and sustained locally as well.

On your broader point about the three centres with particular challenge, there is a mixture of support and challenge. The support that is provided, not just in monetary terms but actually in advice from officials here has to be complemented with challenge at board level, and that absolutely happens. It's part of the conversation I recently had with health board chairs and trust chairs and chief execs last week. We went through their emergency department performance and in particular focusing on those areas where they recognise they have real and significant challenge, and there is the peer leadership and clinical leadership as well. There is a limit to what politicians demanding answers can actually do to help practice on the ground and indeed the broader whole system about how effective relationships are between health and social care and the third sector, because actually getting those relationships right is just as important as the clinical leadership in any emergency department.

So, there is never one single answer to resolve all of these issues, but you raise a point about the third sector, and actually the sustainability of those services, of course, matters to us as well as the third sector. When we're commissioning a service from the third sector, we want to know that the organisation is robust and able to deliver its service. We have key indicators about the service so they understand we're spending public money wisely, and the third sector don't take issue with that. They want some certainty about the future, and there's a limit to how much certainty we can provide. When you're living year to year on budgets in national Government, it's hard to give people the longer term funding cycles that they would want themselves, but actually we had a very constructive conversation with the third sector in Wales on exactly this topic around health and social care just a few weeks ago when I and the Deputy Minister met with the group convened by the Wales Council for Voluntary Action to look at all those people engaged in delivering and working around the health and social care sector.

And the encouraging point for the third sector to take is that, when you look at the way that 'A Healthier Wales' is not just written and what's in the language in it but actually the WCVA, the Welsh Local Government Association and the NHS Confederation here in Wales—the three key partners who co-produced that strategy—. So, they're absolutely at the start of the conversation, not being tagged on at the end. And they are also part of our regional partnership boards across the country. There's always third sector representation there. So, it's never a perfect point in time; there will always be a need to challenge and discuss what we're doing, but they're absolutely part of the conversation and part of the future as well.

On your two more detail points—on delayed transfers of care, yes, there are variations between health board partnerships. We publish those with the figures on a regular basis. I can say that the last two years have had the lowest levels of delayed transfers of care in the last 13 years since we started collecting these figures, and 2018 had a third lower delayed transfers of care than in 2006. So, actually, we are making real and sustained progress, and there's a positive comparison for Wales compared to England, where delayed transfers are moving in the opposite direction.

And on your point about the highest level of escalation, well, for those who aren't health geeks, we have four levels of escalation: level 1 being the lowest, level 4 being the highest—you may know this, others may not. And for the time we spent at level 4 for this January compared to last January, there is nearly a 12 percentage point difference. And, equally, when departments have been at level 4, they have de-escalated down to level 3 or lower on a much quicker basis as well. So, that is something that isn't because the Minister has said, 'You must do this', it's actually because there is greater grip and performance, and that is because our staff are in a better position, and it's also because the whole system in those areas is in a better position to deliver.

Could I echo both the words of the Minister and others who've contributed so far in response to this statement about the incredible work that people do in different disciplines, both within health and within social care and third sector partners as well? And it's to one of those particular organisations that was mentioned in the statement that I want to address some questions and some remarks. And that's one that began, actually, in my own area in Bridgend, back in 2013–14, I think it was, which is the Bridgend care and repair support that was given to the hospital to home initiative. And it proved its worth very, very quickly way back then—the ability to have much more rapid discharge from hospital to a safe, secure environment with wraparound care, but also to prevent too early readmissions as well by providing that right support of wraparound care at home. Now, of course, as the Minister mentioned, it's having some interesting pilots now—it's been extended well beyond that area to six different areas in south and west Wales, and we're waiting to see the results. But I will just draw the Minister's attention to the performance report of April 2017 to March 2018, which looks at some of the quite compelling results already at that point: around about 1,500 referrals that have been through this particular initiative. Within that, one of the notable successes of the service, even in that early period, was the speed of that service to respond quickly to referrals from health professionals, accessing the service, particularly for discharge. The average speed of the service was one day from referral to completion of work in order to rapidly get somebody back to their home environment. But in addition to that, of course, it's the other services that come with it, including not only the full home assessment visits and the falls risk assessments, using the FRAT tools, the healthy homes check, but a full welfare benefits check as well. Over 230 patients had their weekly income increased during that: a total increase for the whole cohort of £657,000 in that one year's annual report. So, the impacts are massive, and when you hear the health professionals' testimonials about what this is doing—from occupational therapists, from physios and others—the impact on people's lives, as well as preventing early re-admissions, as well as early discharge, is significant.

So, could I ask the Minister—in this quiet revolution that we're trying to do within health and social care, and all the partners within it, which needs, I would say, to be a continual revolution, constantly seeking improvement—how do we move from pilot funding? This was originally the integrated care fund, now it's got some transformation funding and so on in there—if it proves itself, does he agree with me that what we then need to do is make this normal, make this part of core business? If this sort of approach we see here in front of us works, and saves money by being more preventative, then, surely, that should be part of the core business of our health and social care and well-being services. And, secondly, perhaps I could ask him, and I'm sure he'd be up for this, at an appropriate moment, would he accept an invitation to come and see the work that is being done by Bridgend care and repair in their hospital to home service? Because I think he, like me, would be simply blown away, not only by the results but by the professionalism and the commitment of these people. They've been doing it for a long time—they know their stuff. So, please, come and see it; they'd be delighted to see you and to see first-hand the results that they're delivering on the ground and the quality-of-life improvements they're making for their clients as well.

Thank you for highlighting the success of that particular area of work, and, again, the ideas come and they are supported, but, actually, people need to deliver them and to make the difference. And it is encouraging to hear to hear the level of detail and the numbers of people that are benefiting and benefiting rapidly from the new service—that point about a rapid discharge and supporting people to leave, but then the support they need to stay in their own homes safely and securely and as independently as possible. And I just want to pick up that this is about partnership between third sector, housing and different groups of staff who occasionally get talked about, particularly the therapists—occupational therapists and physiotherapy support as well. It is absolutely my ambition to understand which models of care and support have the greatest prospect of making the greatest difference, and the ability to be scaled on a much wider level. I've been really clear that I don't want to keep on funding micro projects that are not transferrable to other parts of the country. I'm interested in a broader not just debate, but a broader change in practice and to take on best practice so that it becomes standard practice—not something you point to that stands apart from everything else, but, actually, that is the way to deliver business on a standard basis to make the sort of transformation that we all wish to. In principle, I'd be very happy to take up his offer, and, if he'll write to me, I'm sure that we can sort out a convenient time and date in the diary.

Like everybody else, I'd like to thank the Minister for this statement and to express my own appreciation to NHS staff for the tremendous job that they do, often in very difficult and stressful circumstances. And can I start by echoing what Helen Mary Jones said in her questions earlier on, asking the Minister for greater transparency in statements of this kind? I know I'm knew to this brief and therefore don't have the degree of background knowledge that others might possess, but I have found it quite difficult to understand what is actually going on. The statement is fine, as far as it goes—under the emerging evidence section, we hear that hospitals have considerably less time spent at the highest level of escalation; that there are fewer people over 85 treated as emergencies; that the average length of stay for emergencies was at its lowest for over six years; that there's been a reduction in the number of delayed transfers of care. But without statistics, we're not really able to evaluate exactly what these statements mean. And although I've spent a bit of time with my researcher today trying to find out what the situation was last year in detail, I found that some statistics were found on the StatsWales website, others were on the NHS Wales website and others were held by CHC Wales. And sometimes, the tables are not always made user-friendly, forcing the user to create a table for every month within every year, making the deciphering of multi-year trends, therefore, extremely difficult. I wonder if it might be possible, in the digitised version of these statements, to provide links to the information sets that will actually put meat on the dry bone of the generalised statements. I realise that this isn't always possible, but where it is known in advance for some time that there is going to be a statement or a need for a statement on certain areas, it shouldn't be beyond the wit of man to set up a system that enables us to do our jobs better in the Assembly of providing scrutiny, in a constructive way, which is what these exchanges should be about.

I wonder if the Minister can perhaps provide a little more information about some of the statements that were made. In relation to lost hours for patients waiting over an hour for ambulance handovers, it's very good news that there's been a decrease by 30 per cent year on year, but patients waiting over an hour, according to the A&E patient experience review a short time ago, in January of last year, showed that at that stage 30 per cent or so of people were waiting for an ambulance for more than an hour. So, a 30 per cent reduction still means there's a very substantial number of people who are having to wait for more than an hour, and 10 per cent last year had to wait for three hours or more for an ambulance. So, I wonder if the Minister can tell me whether the improvement that is alluded to here has been pretty even throughout the time periods that people have to wait for, or is there still a specific problem in certain areas? Again, fewer people over 85 are treated as emergencies; well, out of 80,000 or so admissions last year, 5,000 of those were over-85s—not surprisingly, it's a significant number. But what has been the pressure this year? Is it related to the weather and perhaps fewer people getting diseases that would otherwise make them have emergency admissions, something over which the Government has no control, and for which they can take no credit, or does it show a real improvement within the system? Again, the average length of stay for patients admitted as emergencies last year, if they were 75 to 84 years old, was seven and a quarter hours, and, for 85 and over, eight and half hours. So, I wonder whether we can show meaningful improvements, because we just say that the average length of stay was the lowest for over six years, but what is the difference that we're talking about here? Is it something that is a very substantial reduction or not? These are all important issues, which are difficult to evaluate in the way in which this statement is made.

I accept that there have been improvements made as a result of the efforts that the Welsh Government has made in the last year; it would be difficult not to, given the extra resources that have been provided, and given the low base upon which we start in many cases. And the Minister, importantly, did say that a small number of hospitals are actually distorting the picture for the whole of Wales. I wonder, therefore, the extent to which Betsi Cadwaladr in particular is still underperforming and dragging the whole system down with it. I note from, particularly, the patient pathways, waiting for more than 36 weeks—in the statistical bulletin that was published last July, about half of those cases were in Betsi Cadwaladr's area. We will need to have Betsi Cadwaladr doing substantially better than the average if we're to make any real difference to these alarming figures. So, I wonder if the Minister is able to tell us whether he thinks that Betsi Cadwaladr is making enough progress towards improving the system for the whole national health service in Wales to appear in a better light. 

Turning to your final point first, I've been very clear that Betsi Cadwaladr need to do substantially better on both unscheduled care and planned care as well. They make up about half of the numbers of people waiting more than they should do for 36 weeks. Their 26-week percentage isn't where it should be either. The revised plans they've provided me with, with new scrutiny from the chair and the reinvigorated board, give me some greater confidence, but I have made it clear that they will need to deliver the performance improvement they set out before I will come here and give the sort of assurance that you and other Members will look for. And making that difference in north Wales will make a difference to the people of north Wales and the picture across Wales as well. And the same in unscheduled care as well.

And it's about the appropriate balance between support and challenge, because I think, as I said previously, the easiest thing for me to do is to say it is somebody else's fault and I expect them to do better, when, actually, those staff need to be supported as well. And that's why the peer leadership and the clinical leadership really matters, and why the whole system support and engagement matters as well. I want to see people stay within the system, and, actually, I have some more cause for optimism about the next few months and where we'll get to after that, but I'm looking for that to be made real. And I fully expect to have questions to answer about that, not just through the winter, but through the rest of the year, whilst performance figures remain as they are. 

On your broader points about the level of detail, well, we always make a choice about what's in statements. If I'd provided particular statistical figures through the statement that are linked to it, then I'd have been spewing out a range of figures and not giving analysis. There is a balance, and, in an answer to a question from Helen Mary, I gave some more figures, and I have to tell you that, in terms of the length of stay for emergency admissions, there has been a 3 per cent reduction this winter compared to last winter, and, on emergency admissions for over 85s, there has been a 7 per cent reduction—so, a real and material reduction in percentage terms. The challenge is to sustain that, not just through the winter but through the rest of our year, and to do what I said in response to Helen Mary about making sure that we actually deliver on having the adequate resource within primary care and social care to deliver more care closer to home and keep people out of hospital when they don't need to be there. There is more to do in the way we engage professions in doing that, and, actually, the pharmacy pilot is a really important part of this year, not just in the community provision, and actually asking people to go the pharmacy first, but in having pharmacists within the emergency department, because, as we regularly rehearse—and David Melding regularly does when he talks about community pharmacy, and others—a significant number of hospital admissions are about medication errors. So, the more we can do in having appropriate pharmacy support, the better for the whole system. 

And, on your point about ambulance waits, well, I start with the recognition that too many people still wait too long—not just an hour, but there are some waits that are still just too long in any event, on an individual level. But the 30 per cent improvement is real, and it includes Betsi Cadwaladr as well—they have made real improvements in reducing the number of, if you like, lost ambulance hours too. That's part of the challenge about our system, that we're doing better on the ambulance end in a sustained way—that isn't transferring through the whole system, though. There is still more to do, but, again, we should not lose sight of the fact that this is the fortieth consecutive month that the Welsh ambulance service has met its target for red calls, despite there being a larger number than ever of the life-threatening red calls as well. And that is a significant tribute to the ambulance service trust.

And, on your final point about the level of demand that comes in and what that might be, well, actually, this isn't simply about numbers. The portion of numbers changes. We categorise patients who come into emergency departments as either minor, in terms of minor injuries and minor ailments, or major, where they're really significantly ill. And, actually, it's the case that, in winter, we tend to see more people in the major category; they tend to be older. Actually, this winter, the percentage of our major patients, so the people who are most ill, has shifted again. So, we're actually seeing even more people who are actually very, very unwell, and need to be in a hospital for treatment. And, actually, more and more of those are getting there themselves—they actually are either walk-ups or people who are being driven there by friends and relatives—as well as the record numbers that are being transferred by the ambulance service. There is more to do about how we're able to cope with that changing picture in demand. That's the context for us to deliver, but I recognise Members will expect me to be accountable for the whole system, and for the whole system to be able to recognise and address the pressures that exist within our population.

Thank you, Minister.

Item 4 on the agenda is the Developments of National Significance (Specified Criteria, Fees and Fees for Deemed Applications) (Wales) (Amendment) Regulations 2019. And I call on the Minister for Housing and Local Government to move the motion. Julie James.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I'm pleased to present these regulations to the Assembly for approval. On 1 April, further energy consenting powers under the Wales Act 2017 will be commenced. These regulations are the first in a suite of statutory instruments that set out how we will implement these new powers. The Wales Act raises the upper devolved limit for the consenting of generating stations from 50 MW onshore only to 350 MW on and offshore. It also devolves the consenting for associated overhead electric lines up to and including 132 kV to the Welsh Ministers. These regulations expand the scope of the developments of national significance, or DNS, process to capture these newly devolved powers. The DNS process already captures onshore generating stations of between 10 MW and 50 MW. Were these regulations not in place, planning applications for these newly devolved, nationally significant projects would be made to local planning authorities for determination, rather than Welsh Ministers. This would result in a situation where smaller planning applications for generating stations of between 10 MW and 50 MW would be consented by the Welsh Ministers, and larger, more significant generating stations consented at the local level. These regulations prevent this situation from arising.

Furthermore, without intervention, overhead electrical lines may require consent from two or more local planning authorities. Each link to the grid, regardless of scale, is important national infrastructure, hence it is my intention for these decisions to be made by the Welsh Ministers, to simplify decision making for developers and communities. In a related reform, these regulations also remove the majority of energy-storage technologies from the DNS process, for decision at the local level. It is a key aim to decarbonise the energy industry in Wales and to develop low-carbon technologies, which are often small in scale and have minimal environmental impacts. No storage projects have yet been consented through the DNS process; evidence suggests that the cost and timetable for decisions is seen as prohibitive to making an application. This change removes those barriers, while promoting our Government's decarbonisation agenda.

And, finally, the regulations also make a number of consequential amendments relating to fees for these new applications and deemed applications. Subject to the approval of these regulations, I also plan to lay further statutory instruments that make consequential changes to the DNS process to accommodate these new powers. The changes in these regulations were widely supported in the consultation published by the Minister for Environment, Energy and Rural Affairs last year.

Thank you. There are no speakers to the debate. So, therefore, unless you've got anything else you want to add, we'll move to the vote. So, the proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Therefore, we will defer voting under this item until voting time.

The next item is the debate on the police settlement 2019-20. And I call on the Minister for Housing and Local Government to move the motion. Julie James.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I am today presenting to the Assembly for its approval details of the Welsh Government's contribution to the core revenue funding for the four police and crime commissioners, or PCCs, in Wales for 2019-20. 

But before I do so, Deputy Presiding Officer, I'd like to pay tribute to all those who serve in our police forces for the work that is done by police forces across Wales keeping our communities safe, maintaining the highest standards of duty, dedication and, at times, bravery, in maintaining the community safety matters that are within the settlement for this place. 

Members will be aware that the core funding for the police in Wales is delivered through a three-way arrangement involving the Home Office, the Welsh Government and council tax. As policing policy and operational matters are non-devolved, the overall funding picture is determined and driven by the Home Office. The established approach to setting and distributing the Welsh Government component has therefore been based on a principle of ensuring consistency and fairness across England and Wales. 

As outlined in the final police settlement announcement on 24 January, the total unhypothecated revenue support for the police service in Wales for 2019-20 amounts to £357 million. The Welsh Government's contribution to this amount, through revenue support grant and redistributed non-domestic rates, is £143.4 million, and it is this funding you are being asked to approve today. 

As in previous years, the Home Office has decided to overlay it's needs-based formula with a floor mechanism. This means that for 2019-20 police and crime commissioners across England and Wales will all receive an increase in funding of 2.1 per cent when compared to 2018-19. The Home Office will provide top-up grant totalling £4.1 million to ensure that both Dyfed-Powys and North Wales Police meet the floor level.

As you will be aware, for 2019-20, PCCs will have the additional pressure of funding the increased costs of pensions. We've repeatedly called on the UK Government to fully fund the increased costs associated with changes to pensions, which are estimated to cost PCCs in England and Wales around £330 million. The Home Office has allocated an additional grant of £143 million specifically to help with these increased pension costs, and £7.3 million of this has been allocated to PCCs in Wales. This was above what was expected at the time of the UK budget in 2016.

PCCs also have the ability to raise additional funding through their council tax precept. The UK Government has doubled the precept flexibility to allow PCCs in England to raise their council tax precept by £24 in 2019-20, estimating this will raise an additional £500 million. Police and crime commissioners in Wales have the freedom to make their own decisions about council tax increases, and are not subject to the limits that apply in England. In settling their element of council tax, I expect each PCC to act in a reasonable manner and to take account of the pressures on hard-pressed households.

We appreciate that difficult decisions are necessary in developing plans for the coming years. The Welsh Government is committed to working with PCCs and chief constables to ensure funding challenges are managed in ways that minimise the impact on community safety in Wales. As part of this, the Welsh Government in its 2019-20 budget has made provision for a further year of funding for the 500 additional community support officers recruited under the previous programme for government commitment.

The Welsh Government has maintained the same level of funding for the delivery of this commitment as in 2018-19, with £16.8 million earmarked in the budget for next year. The full complement of officers has been deployed since October 2013, and they are making a positive contribution to public safety across Wales. One of the main drivers behind this project was to add visible police presence on our streets at a time when the UK Government is cutting back on police funding. The research suggests Wales has not seen the same decline in officer numbers that has been seen in England, and our additional officers are successfully dealing with low-level crime and anti-social behaviour.

Llywydd, the motion is to agree the local government finance report for police and crime commissioners that has been laid before the Assembly. If approved, this will allow the commissioners to confirm their budgets for the next financial year, and I therefore ask Assembly Members to support this motion today. 

All police forces in Wales will receive a real-terms increase in 2019-20, up 4.9 per cent in Gwent, 5 per cent in south Wales, 5.3 per cent in north Wales and 6.1 per cent in Dyfed-Powys. The UK Home Office, as we heard, is continuing to overlay its needs-based formula with a floor mechanism and all police forces in Wales and England can expect to receive the same 2.1 per cent increase in revenue support again, as we heard, with £357.3 million total Government revenue support for Welsh police forces in 2019-20, combining £213.9 million Home Office funding with the £143.4 million Welsh Government funding referred to by the Minister. 

Of course, the third element—the council tax police precept—is increasing by 6.99 per cent in Gwent, or 32 pence per week for the average household, which will help fund 40 new officers; by 7 per cent in north Wales, or 38p per week for the average household, which will enable the recruitment of 34 additional officers and six staff; by 10.3 per cent in south Wales, with promised investment in front-line policing; and by 10.7 per cent in Dyfed-Powys. The increases in south Wales and Dyfed-Powys mean a 46p per week rise for the average household. With the South Wales Police Federation stating, in 2016, that the council tax precept gap with the other Welsh forces has now been closed, we must ask why their increase this year is noticeably higher than Gwent and north Wales. When Dyfed-Powys previously imposed the highest increases in Wales, it blamed the preceding funding freeze there, although the outgoing Welsh Conservative police and crime commissioner had stated that he had delivered more officers on our rural beats for more time for less money.

The UK Government has, since 2015, raised its contribution to overall police funding in line with inflation, including specific areas such as cyber crime, counter-terrorism and tackling child sexual exploitation. Prior to then, it also had to contend with £545 million-worth of cuts to the police, inherited from Labour's final budget in 2010, to be made by 2014.

The crime survey for England and Wales provides the best overview of long-term changes, with the latest estimates showing no significant change in theft offences, and computer misuse crime down 33 per cent. For crime types thought to be well reported and accurately recorded, police-recorded crime data can help identify short-term changes, and the latest figures show a mixed picture—for example, an increase in robbery offences alongside a decrease in the number of offences involving firearms. 

Figures published last week show that although homicides in England and Wales increased 3 per cent in the year ending March 2018, trends in homicide are affected by the recording of exceptional incidents with multiple victims, such as the terrorist attacks in London and Manchester, and the figure is still below the peak in March 2008.

The crime survey for England and Wales assessment found that the level of lower harm violent offences, for example, violence without injury and assault with minor injury, is stable. The latest Office for National Statistics release on crime in England and Wales, for the year ending September 2018, states that over recent decades we've seen continued falls in overall levels of crime, but in the last year there's been no change. As this states, the crime survey is the most reliable indicator for long-term trends, and police-recorded crime statistics do not always provide a reliable measure of levels and trends.

There has been no change in commonly occurring types of violent crime. Although assault admissions increased, they were still 33 per cent lower than in 2008. At last month's North Wales Police briefing, we heard that north Wales is still one of the safest places to live, that they were focused on prevention, but that crime is evolving to cyber, child sexual exploitation, modern slavery and domestic violence. They told us that they were having to detain too many people under the Mental Health Act 1983 because other devolved agencies were not there for the people concerned, and that ambulance availability and response times were resulting in them being used as a first point of triage, despite not being efficient paramedics.

There's also continuing concern about the Welsh Government's handling of the apprenticeship levy, with Welsh police forces denied access to the £2 million they contribute annually for training. Despite receiving more Treasury net funding than previously for this—an extra £600,000 Home Office funding for police training in 2018-19, and £400,000 promised for police training—the Welsh Government still has missing cash from previous years' contributions that should be addressing this gap.

The motion before the Senedd this afternoon seeking approval of the Government's financial police settlement to 2019-20 reminds us yet again, in a very practical sense, of the inadequacies of the current constitutional framework in terms of policing and justice. Overall policy and funding responsibilities lie with Westminster, but essential elements of police funding in relation to matters such as community safety, which would be the responsibility of the communities department in England, form part of the Welsh Government's responsibility to which it is accountable to this National Assembly. Yet justice, in its broadest sense, isn't the responsibility of this institution, and scrutiny arrangements are underdeveloped.

Turning to the settlement itself, this follows the overall direction of the funding settlement agreed in Westminster last month. As your predecessor's written statement reminded us back in December when the initial proposals were published, the whole formula is based on the principle of ensuring consistency and fairness across England and Wales. However, we know that if Welsh policing was funded on the basis of population, as is the case with other devolved services, police forces in Wales would be better off by over £20 million per year. I fail to see how the Welsh Government can stand by when the system ensures such unfairness for Wales and Welsh policing forces. So, I'd be grateful if you could tell us how this is consistent with the Welsh Government's position in favour of the devolution of policing and justice. Surely, the current arrangements are the opposite of fair and consistent.

Given the complexity surrounding where policy and funding responsibilities rest and, often, the false distinction in the separation of power and responsibility between Wales and Westminster, I'd be grateful, as well, if you could provide clarity on some detailed matters in your reply. In particular, funding for community support officers is half funded by the Welsh Government. Are you able, Minister, to provide assurances that this will continue, and, if so, for how long, as these officers are the bedrock of our community policing system? SchoolBeat officers are also funded by the Welsh Government. They provide school liaison and are very important for restorative justice. Will she provide assurances on future funding for those? Two billion pounds has been allocated to the NHS in England for mental health, with a particular emphasis on reducing the demand on policing. What assurances can she give us that this settlement will reduce similar pressures on Welsh police forces?

It has to be said that it cannot either be acceptable or sustainable for the funding for policing and community safety in its broadest sense to be split between two Parliaments and two Governments in this way. It makes absolutely no sense. It's disappointing to have to report to you, Minister, that your Labour colleagues in Rhondda Cynon Taf council just a few weeks ago voted down a Plaid Cymru amendment calling for the devolution of police to be able to overcome some of these anomalies. I wonder if the Minister has a view on her colleagues voting against Labour Party policy in this way. Surely, now the time has come for us all to agree that Wales's policing policy, like Scotland and Northern Ireland's, should be set here in our national Parliament, not in the capital city of another country, far removed from where police forces are actually carrying out their work. Would the Minister agree?

Thank you. Can I now call the Minister for Housing and Local Government to reply to the debate? 

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Well, a number of issues were raised there, two or three worthy, I think, of some continued discussion. The first is on the devolution of policing. I entirely agree with Leanne Wood: I think it makes no sense at all for a blue-light responder not to be devolved to Wales, and we've called repeatedly for the devolution of policing in and of itself as well as part of criminal justice transfers, but I think policing in and of itself should be devolved. There are a number of issues around the split responsibility; she highlighted several of them. It's a continued conversation and it's one that the PCCs in Wales are on board with as well, and I can't find anything to disagree with in what she said there.

We have continued to protect the funding for community safety because of the way the devolution settlement is at the moment. I said that we were continuing to fund the community support officers in this next budget. We are looking for a comprehensive spending review at the end of this year, but our intention is to continue to support the community support officers, although I'm not in a position to absolutely, categorically say we will until we see what the comprehensive spending review—if it ever happens—actually brings alongside it.

I think, in terms of Mark Isherwood's contribution, the only thing I really wanted to raise was to reiterate my remarks in my opening statement around—. If he's very concerned about the funding challenges that the PCCs are currently struggling with, then he should be lobbying hard to get the whole of the pension provision covered off in the settlement, which it certainly isn't at the moment, and which is the No. 1 problem for police forces, and indeed in a large number of other areas. The UK Government seems not able to comprehend that if you devolve terms and conditions for people then their pensions come with them, and that that funding ought to flow. So, like in all other devolution conversations, we welcome the devolution but we would also welcome the attached funding to go with it, which we certainly haven't had.

He mentioned in particular the apprenticeship levy, and that is, of course, a classic example of the UK Government not devolving the money to go with its policies—[Interruption.] It did not. It took the money out of a departmental budget and put it into a separate place. So, the overall amount that we got was pretty close to zero. [Interruption.]

Deputy Presiding Officer, I've set out, with previous ministerial hats on, the issue around apprenticeship levy funding: it's very plain that the UK Government did not provide additional funding for Wales to cover off apprenticeship levy funding for the police, or for any other devolved area, in fact. The figures are very plain for all to see. 

Deputy Presiding Officer, community safety is a top priority for this Government. While the settlement is better than some may have expected, it still presents challenges, as I've said, and we are committed to working with PCCs and chief constables to ensure these challenges are managed in ways that limit the impact on community safety and front-line policing in Wales. Continuing to work in partnership to identify and take forward opportunities is important, as is demonstrated by the successful deployment of our 500 community support officers. 

Given that no debate in these days is complete without a mention of Brexit, I should also like to take this opportunity to draw to Members' attention additional funding of almost £0.5 million for police work with partners through the local resilience fora for a possible 'no deal' Brexit. This comes from our £50 million EU transition fund, which we've used to support public sector bodies, voluntary sector bodies and businesses. We're not spending Welsh Government money to fund things that are properly the responsibility of the UK Government, but as we have always recognised, the police forces have an important role in preparing with partners for the implications of Brexit, and in particular the possibility of a 'no deal' Brexit. We are pleased to support them through the local resilience fora.

Deputy Presiding Officer, I commend this settlement to the Assembly. 

Thank you very much. The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Therefore, we defer voting until voting time. 

We now move to item 6, which is a debate on the substance misuse annual report, and I call on the Minister for Health and Social Services to move the motion—Vaughan Gething. 

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I'm pleased to open today's debate on the substance misuse annual report 2018. Tackling substance misuse is a priority for the Welsh Government and a significant area to focus upon if we are to meet our ambitions for a healthier Wales. It is a major health issue that affects individuals, families and communities. Our overall aim continues to be to ensure that people in Wales are aware of the dangers and the impact of substance misuse and to know where they can seek information, help and support if they need it. We remain committed to tackling the harms associated with substance misuse.

I'm pleased that we have recently been able to back up this commitment with extra resources. Last month, I announced an extra £2.4 million of funding for the next financial year for our seven area planning boards, who are responsible for commissioning local front-line services. That is an increase in funding of over 10 per cent. This additional funding, at a time of continuing austerity, means we are now able to support the area planning boards with extra money to meet future challenges. This additional investment takes our annual funding for substance misuse to over £50 million. 

In Wales, our approach to dealing with substance misuse will continue to be rooted in health-focused harm reduction. The recently published evaluation of our 10-year strategy, together with the independent health inspectorate review of services, both recognise that overall progress has been made, and this has been achieved against the challenging backdrop of the ever-changing nature of substance misuse. 

That said, we recognise there will always be more to do. We're supporting some of the most vulnerable people in our society and we will continue to face challenge. As we reach the end of the current strategy and delivery plan period, we're turning our attention to the areas on which we need to focus to reduce the harms associated with substance misuse over the next few years. We're currently engaging with area planning boards and other front-line partners and service users themselves to co-produce priorities for the next plan. 

I've already indicated to area planning boards the priority areas to be considered for investment in the coming financial year. These include support work on co-occurring substance misuse and mental health conditions, and work on supporting children and families. In particular, I want them to work with those on the edge of care. There will also be a need for continued focus on work to reduce drug-related deaths, looking at support for those who may be homeless or have housing issues. We have seen real progress on waiting times against our targets. In 2017-18, 90.9 per cent of people starting treatment were seen within 20 days, compared to 86.7 per cent in the year previous. And I would like to take this opportunity to thank those providing these essential front-line services for their achievement.

I'm also pleased to report that we're continuing to see positive outcomes for those in treatment: 86.5 per cent of people reported a reduction in their substance misuse treatment in 2017-18, up slightly from the year before. Whilst these improvements are welcome, there is clearly more work to do across the agenda. For example, the data shows a rise in alcohol-related specific deaths from 388 in 2016 to 419 in 2017. That emphasises how important it is that tackling alcohol misuse remains a priority for the Welsh Government, as both alcohol and drugs remain major causes of death and ill health.

The Public Health (Minimum Price for Alcohol) (Wales) Act 2018 is a crucial part of responding to what is a major public health issue. This legislation will focus on reducing alcohol consumption amongst hazardous and harmful drinkers. It will also help to reduce the negative impact of alcohol misuse on our hard-pressed public services. Minimum unit pricing will form part of and complement our wider substance misuse work. We're already working to tackle the excessive consumption of alcohol through better education, prevention and treatment services to support the most harmful drinkers. We will also continue to support families of those who misuse alcohol.

Turning to drug-related deaths, the small overall decrease in 2017 is welcome, but 185 drug misuse deaths is still far too many people dying needlessly within our communities. I'm particularly concerned about regional variations that exist and I'm clear that we must work with our partners to focus significant effort upon this. My officials continue to work with partners in a number of areas to try and reduce drug-related deaths further. Our groundbreaking WEDINOS—Welsh emerging drugs and identification of novel substances—project continues to play a key role in reducing drug-related deaths, with the analysis of a range of drugs. Testing substances enables us to examine the chemical compound of the substance, but then crucially to disseminate widely the risk factors involved when individuals take them. The distribution of naloxone, a drug that temporarily reverses the effects of opiate overdose, has been a key strand of our harm-reduction approach for a number of years, and will continue. A total of over 19,000 naloxone kits have been distributed throughout Wales since 2009, with 2,186 reported uses. This is available in every community drug treatment service, along with all prisons in Wales. Given its success, we'll work closely with areas of Wales to further expand the provision of naloxone, especially in relation to those who are not engaging in treatment. For example, our officials have been working closely with police custody suites, accident and emergency departments and community pharmacies to ensure that naloxone is available for hard-to-reach individuals who don't normally engage with services. The complexity of this agenda can be seen when we consider the rise in other substances such as image and performance-enhancing drugs. This reflects major pressures that exist in today's society in terms of body image, and where substances are misused to the detriment of the individual's health and well-being.

Information and education are key elements of our strategy, and we continue to support DAN 24/7, a free and bilingual substance misuse helpline providing a single point of contact for anyone in Wales who wants further information or help relating to their drug or alcohol issues. During 2017-18, there were over 5,000 calls to DAN 24/7, which marks a 26 per cent increase on the previous year. Traffic to the website has also increased by 92 per cent during the same time frame, with the DAN 24/7 interactive website receiving over 145,000 hits. DAN 24/7 played a part in numerous information campaigns over the last three years, in line with our continuing harm-reduction approach.

In terms of recovery from substance misuse, and reintegration into society, being able to support employment is hugely significant, but we know that people often face numerous barriers to working, including a lack of education and skills, particular mental health problems and low self-confidence. Our European social fund-supported out-of-work peer mentoring service is a unique approach in Wales, tackling these key employment barriers through a single service. It provides free, long-term support from trained mentors who have personal experience of substance misuse or mental health problems. And since its launch in August 2016, over 4,200 people recovering from substance misuse alone or from substance misuse combined with mental ill health have enrolled in the service.

In total, we’re investing £17.3 million, including £11.6 million of European social fund support, to support the delivery of the out-of-work peer-mentoring service. This will allow us to support over 14,000 people in their recovery journey by summer 2020. I’m keen to build on this work, and my officials are currently liaising with the Welsh European Funding Office to extend the service until 2022 and to provide more support to more people. Substance misuse is a major cause of people being sick, losing jobs, or feeling unable to get into work, and this service contributes to our commitment to supporting people, to break down the barriers that ill health places on employment.

Turning briefly to the amendments, we'll not support amendment 1 by Darren Millar, as the latest statistics on drug-related deaths show they're falling, not rising. Also, on residential rehabilitation, it’s essentially a matter for area planning boards, in line with clinical guidance and input from service users, to decide what is the most appropriate intervention when commissioning services, whether tier 4 provision or, for example, community rehabilitation.

We won’t support amendments 2 and 3 from Rhun ap Iorwerth. It should be recognised that the Healthcare Inspectorate Wales report looked at people’s experiences at the time of the review. However, officials monitor waiting times rigorously through our published statistics, and over 90 per cent of people, as I have recounted, are seen within our target of 20 working days. However, we will continue to focus and work with partners on the issues raised. And, as found in a recent evaluation, we're making progress on issues that are complex and challenging.

We will support amendment 4 from Rhun ap Iorwerth. Substance misuse is regarded as a health matter, and the harm-reduction approach is something that has been a focus of our work on substance misuse for the past 10 years. As opposed to criminalising individuals, there should be a strong focus on rehabilitation with a harm-reduction focus. I look forward to hearing Members contributions during the debate.

Thank you. I have selected four amendments to the motion. I call on Mark Isherwood to move amendment 1, tabled in the name of Darren Millar.

Diolch. Well, according to its substance misuse annual report 2018, the Welsh Government’s 10-year substance misuse strategy, published in 2008, sets out a clear national agenda for tackling and reducing the harms associated with substance misuse in Wales. It adds that it has commenced work to develop substance misuse priorities going forward from 2019. But the July 2018 Healthcare Inspectorate Wales's 'Review of Substance Misuse Services in Wales: Joint Thematic Report' referred to in amendments 2 and 3 identifies:

'However, people found it difficult to get the treatment they needed from substitute prescribing, detox, rehab and counselling services, because of long waiting times and a lack of capacity in services',

adding that

'There can also be long waits (months in some cases) to access counselling and relapse prevention programmes in some areas',

and that

'The difference between the national statistics and the experiences people have reported to us need to be further explored'.

We will be supporting amendments 2 and 3 accordingly.

The latest official—the latest official—ONS figures report that deaths related to drug misuse in Wales 2015-17 were up 15 per cent on the previous two years, and 32 per cent since the start of the Welsh Government’s strategy in 2008—not down. Alcohol-specific deaths in Wales were up 8 per cent on the previous year. Public Health Wales also reports an increase in alcohol deaths of over 7 per cent in 2017. I therefore move amendment 1, regretting the increase in deaths related to drug misuse and alcohol-specific deaths in Wales.

Amendment 1 also calls on the Welsh Government to address the need for tier 4 residential drug and alcohol rehabilitation in Wales. As the Healthcare Inspectorate Wales review states,

'The availability of Tier 4 detox and rehab services was inconsistent across Wales…a number of areas do not have their own in-patient detox and/or rehab facilities. Depending on where people live, they may need to travel considerable distances for treatment in another area of Wales or in England.'

During the second Assembly, independent reports on tier 4 residential detoxification and rehabilitation services in Wales were leaked to me after being buried by the Welsh Government. These found that the whole service was underfunded and identified numerous reports of people reoffending so they could be detoxed in prison, and of hospital admissions because of the unavailability of in-patient detoxification and residential rehabilitation. They call for a substantial increase in capacity, and for the development of three drug and alcohol detoxification and rehabilitation units across Wales, working with third sector providers.

A further report commissioned by the Welsh Government in 2010 reinforced this, and the then Welsh Government stated that it was taking forward work on the development of three units at Brynawel, Ty'n Rodyn and Rhoserchan. Well, Rhoserchan and Ty'n Rodyn have since had to close, and Brynawel states that its continued provision of these services is under threat. As Brynawel states, it appears that gaining access to a residential rehabilitation placement for someone living in Wales is a postcode lottery. 

After I wrote to the health Minister about this, he replied that the all-Wales substance misuse residential rehabilitation framework, implemented in April 2015, was developed for use in conjunction with the Welsh Government tier 4 ring-fenced funding of £1 million awarded to area planning boards annually in order to purchase residential rehabilitation placements. Brynawel, therefore, asked whether this £1 million is still ringfenced, what assurance the Minister could give that procedures are in place to ensure that local authorities are complying with their responsibilities in relation to drug and alcohol assessments for residential rehabilitation, and whether the Minister could confirm the number of community care assessments for residential rehabilitation conducted in 2017-18 by local authority, because the experience of providers is very different to the picture painted by the Minister.

Having closed Ty'n Rodyn in Bangor, CAIS has made alternative provision in Lancashire and at Parkland Place in Colwyn Bay, which currently caters for individuals seeking quality residential rehabilitation and who have the means to pay for it personally. They state that although they would be considering statutory referrals shortly, it remains to be seen what the take-up will be. Welsh Government policy has therefore forced charitable providers in Wales into both the private sector and England. These providers tell me that there is acknowledgement across the board that the tier 4 residential rehabilitation framework did not deliver the anticipated benefits for commissioners and providers, that many authorities did not fully engage with the pathway, resulting in referrals to non-framework units, many outside Wales, and that they are not even sure the framework exists at the moment.

Despite blood, sweat and tears over too many years, Welsh Government has returned us to groundhog day once again.       

Thank you. Can I call on Leanne Wood to move amendment 2, 3 and 4, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth? 

Diolch. I move the Plaid Cymru amendments, but I want to use my contribution today to focus on amendment 4 in particular. 

Now, this debate is timely because just last week, the UK Government announced its intention to conduct a review into drugs policy, including treatment options. Unfortunately, they pre-decided not to consider the questions of decriminalisation or legalisation as part of that review. Now, I'm of the view that limiting their review in that way is short-sighted, and it may well exclude some potentially effective solutions.

Let's take a look at the picture in Portugal, where they've done the unthinkable. Portugal is seen as the trendsetter for switching from the war on drugs to a harm-reduction model, which started in 2001, and, as a result, we now have enough data to evaluate. It's not complete decriminalisation. It's no longer a criminal offence to possess drugs for personal use. It's still an administrative violation, punishable by penalties such as fines or community service. The specific penalty is decided by the commissions for the dissuasion of drug addiction, which are regional panels made up of legal, health and social work professionals. The vast majority of those referred to the commissions by the police have their cases suspended, effectively meaning that they receive no penalty. The commissions' aim is for people to enter treatment voluntarily; they don't attempt to force them to do so—that would be counter-productive.

The main aims of the policy were to tackle the severely worsening health of Portugal's drug-using population, in particular the people who inject drugs. In the years leading up to the reform, the number of drug-related deaths had soared, and rates of HIV, AIDS, TB and hepatitis B and C among people who inject drugs were rapidly increasing. There was a growing consensus among law enforcement and health officials that the criminalisation and marginalisation of people who use drugs was contributing to the problem and that a new, more humane legal framework could be better managed.

As well as decriminalisation, Portugal allocated greater resources across the drugs field, expanding and improving prevention, treatment, harm reduction and social reintegration programmes. The introduction of these measures coincided with an expansion of the Portuguese welfare state, which included a guaranteed minimum income. Therefore, it's likely that decriminalisation alone was not the sole reason for success—it was more likely to be as a result of a combination of policies across all departments, focusing on harm reduction and public health. The Portuguese experiment has been a huge success—levels of drug use are now below the European average; drug use has declined among those aged 15 to 24. Lifetime drug use among the general population has increased slightly, in line with trends in comparable countries. However, lifetime use is widely considered to be the least accurate measure of a country's current drug use situation. 

So, why would we not do this? And why would we not at least make a start on what can be done today? There's a clear public health reason for providing a safer environment for people to use drugs, such as safer injecting zones. These sites allow drug users to inject illicit drugs under the supervision of medical professionals who could intervene in cases of overdose. Providers on site would also be tasked with directing users towards treatment as well as ensuring clean needles and hygiene to prevent infection. This is something that we can do now, and it is something that will save lives. Now, I know the solutions that I've proposed here today will not be supported by everyone, but when we see an increase in problems faced by people who use illegal drugs unsafely, surely this is something we have to consider. 

I'll close my contribution this afternoon by sharing a memory, and it isn't a pleasant memory. During the mid 1990s I worked for the probation service, and, in one year, we lost more than a dozen young people to heroin in a small, local probation office. And I remember one particularly harrowing case, where a young woman who had come out of prison had her toddler cling to her body for a whole weekend when she had died. It was absolutely awful. Now that was before we had this Senedd. We have this institution now and surely it's incumbent upon all of us to make sure that something like that doesn't happen again. We can, and so we should.

I think this is a useful moment to have a look at what we're achieving and what we're not achieving. The threefold increase, nearly, in hospital admissions because of the use of illegal drugs is obviously a cause for concern, and we know that people living in the most deprived areas of Wales are six times more likely to be admitted for drug misuse than in the least deprived areas.

I was puzzled by amendment 1, because it links together drug misuse and alcohol-specific deaths in Wales and there has actually been a reduction in deaths from drug misuse. It's only 4 per cent and, obviously, each death is a tragedy in itself, but, nevertheless, it's important to understand trends.

One of the concerning issues is opioid misuse amongst the older population increasing, and that, if you like, mirrors the use of alcohol in excessive quantities by older people as well. And so there are some clear messages there about things that we're going to need to think about in terms of how we— 

Will you give way?

Yes.

Have you looked at the latest published ONS figures, which do show that the figures, on the latest published figures, go up? That's the Office for National Statistics figures.

I haven't, I'm afraid—I've only been looking at this report. So, I appreciate that you may have better figures, but the figures in this report show that there's been a reduction. If you think that, since then, there's been a massive increase in the number of drugs deaths, then that obviously is a matter that we need to take very seriously.

I think—. The landscape has undoubtedly changed in the last 10 years since we launched the drugs strategy. My constituency in particular has suffered considerably from the rise of county lines—people who target the vulnerable, who use those people in order to make very, very large sums of money. So, austerity has created a vacuum that's being filled by criminal gangs. They're coming in from large cities like London, Birmingham and Liverpool and exploiting children and young adults, often with violent coercion, to get them to deal in drugs. And this is pretty terrifying, not just for the people who are involved but for whole communities who may be innocent bystanders who suddenly become victims.

So, drug-related violence in Cardiff has rocketed. Two years ago, three young men stabbed to death another young man, Lynford Brewster, in broad daylight on an estate in Llanedeyrn, in full view of several witnesses who endeavoured to save this young man's life. A year ago this week, a man was shot in the face in a flat in Roath where three others visited him. Happily, he survived, but it must have been terrifying for all the other people living in this block of flats. And a few months later, just two blocks away, another drug dealer, on this occasion, was stabbed through the heart following a drugs deal that had just been completed. Elsewhere in Roath, another resident got himself involved with a cocaine gang because he'd got himself into debt over marijuana, and he was allowing his house to be used to ratchet up £70,000-worth of deals over a small period of time.

Last June, we had to use the resources of the police to arrest people in raids over five days. Hundreds of police were deployed in something called Operation Red Jet, with chainsaws being used to break down the doors of dealers and hundreds of items, including knives, swords and a machete being confiscated—all that resource being spent by our police forces on attempting to deal with a problem that has, frankly, started to get out of control. So, I want to just use the remaining part of my time to urge people to think about prevention and, in particular, to ensure that schools are adequately dealing with this matter and also that youth services are available, particularly in the most vulnerable communities, so that there are trusted adults that young people can turn to if they start to become involved in being asked to sell drugs, because, otherwise, the consequences for young people are very, very serious and it can generally ruin their lives. So, I think we must emphasise the prevention aspect of this to try and ensure that more young people aren't ruining their lives, either by being drug takers but also being drug dealers.

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this debate today, and I'm going to focus particularly on alcohol. The report shows some positive changes that have happened over the last 12 months and areas where we certainly could be doing more to help prevent harm from substance misuse, particularly as the report states that the number of alcohol-related deaths rose by 7.1 per cent in 2017, compared to the previous year, and I think that that is a cause for concern. Alcohol is the most widely used substance cited in this report and, arguably, the most harmful on an individual, family, community and societal level. It causes harm through ill health, both physical and mental, it causes accidents, and it is the basis for much violent crime. But I was alarmed to learn recently that Drinkaware, an alcohol education charity that works with public health bodies to raise awareness about alcohol use and responsible drinking, is supported by donations from the drinks industry. Last year, the UK Government's adviser, Sir Ian Gilmore, resigned over Public Health England's decision to work with Drinkaware for their Drink Free Days campaign, and that campaign urged drinkers between the age of 45 and 65 to have regular days off drinking. He said, and I agree, that it was incompatible for a body that is putting out public health advice to be funded by the alcohol industry. And I have to say that I would go as far as to say that I think it's unethical.

Of course people have the right to choose how much they drink, but I do believe that the alcohol education information that they receive should at least come from an independent source, particularly at a time when people already receive so much conflicting advice through social media and other sources. So, I did some very brief research this morning—it didn't take me long—and, on the Drinkaware website, it says, quite clearly, and I quote, that they're:

'funded largely by voluntary and unrestricted donations from UK alcohol producers, retailers and supermarkets.'

I therefore have to ask if the Welsh Government thinks that working with those and taking any of their research seriously is a move that we ought to be taking, particularly in light of what I've just said. And I am aware that they did some research into social norming in relation to drinking practices among students in 2009-10 across universities in Wales, and that research was supposed to be published in 2012. Now, call me a sceptic, and I am in this case, but how are we supposed to rely on that evidence when that evidence is clearly being paid for, and bought, by those people who are actually selling alcohol? I hope, Minister, that we don't rely on evidence that is supported and funded by people who are promoting their industry at a huge cost to society.

I would like to thank the Minister for tabling this debate, and I acknowledge the progress that has been made. However, we have so much more to do.

Substance abuse affects every section of our society; 34 per cent of men and 28 per cent of women drank more than the recommended limits on at least one day during the last week. Adults living in households in the highest income bracket are twice as likely to drink heavily as adults in the lowest income bracket. Older people tend to drink more frequently than younger people. Young people are more likely to take drugs than older people. One in five 16 to 24-year-olds have taken illicit drugs during the last year compared with just over 50 in the 55 to 59-year-old bracket.

Middle-aged males are more likely to be addicted to prescription-only painkillers, and women are more likely to be addicted to over-the-counter medication. The number of people being referred for treatment for substance misuse has continued to rise, and the number of deaths related to drink and drugs are at a record high. Mental health teams are reporting a rise in the numbers of patients taking new psychoactive substances, and NPS use is endemic in the prison population, where up to 90 per cent of prisoners have some form of mental health problem. It is therefore essential that we have the right policies in place in order to reduce the harms associated with substance misuse. We need to address the massive rise in cannabinoid abuse. We need to address the reasons why there has been a drop in the number of people assessed by specialist substance misuse providers. And we need to address the reasons why there are such long waits for counselling services across Wales.

There is a correlation between substance misuse and mental ill health, yet we have increasing waiting times for mental health treatment. The waits for talking therapies have ensured that anti-depressant prescription rates are the highest in western Europe. GPs in Wales prescribe enough anti-depressants to give every member of the population 19 days’ supply. This needs to be addressed as part of the Government's substance misuse strategy urgently.

I will be supporting most of the amendments before us today. There is a vital need for tier 4 residential drug and alcohol rehab in Wales—a need that is underestimated by the official statistics. I will be abstaining on amendment 4, because having worked in the prison service, I can say that we never saw people imprisoned for drug use; they were imprisoned for dealing or for committing serious crimes to feed their habit. I agree with the sentiment behind the amendment, but decriminalising drugs sends out the wrong message. Whilst in prison, drug addicts receive first-class treatment—treatment that should be available outside the prison environment. Prisoners get admitted to a rehab unit, are subject to ongoing support and testing and have one-to-one mental health support whenever needed. Perhaps if that sort of treatment option was available to the wider population, we would not see so many drug-related offences being committed. So, I believe that better treatment rather than decriminalisation is the answer. Diolch yn fawr.

Thank you. Can I now call the Minister for Health and Social Services to reply to the debate—Vaughan Gething?

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I'd like to thank Members for what has been a largely constructive and considered debate on the substance misuse annual report for 2018. There is agreement across the Chamber that this is a challenging area, with complex problems to address. Our commitment to substance misuse services is critical, and, as I say, has been demonstrated by the additional funding—a 10 per cent uplift in the budget—even in these most difficult financial times; we are faced with continuing austerity.

I do need to deal with the comments from the Conservative speaker in this debate. Yet again, you have Conservative politicians complaining about funding choices made as a direct consequence of austerity. Every Minister in this Government has had to face awful choices; things that we would want to carry on funding, with real value to the public—we had to make choices between them because of a direct consequence of Conservative austerity—a policy that Mark Isherwood and his colleagues have campaigned for in three successive general elections. My message is clear, because we're not going to make progress on this: take responsibility for Tory austerity, take responsibility for what you have done and don't lecture people about budgets, about choices that are made because of your choices.

Now, Mark Isherwood made a few—. I think actually, Leanne Wood's contribution—I didn't agree with everything that she said, but there is a need for a considered and grown-up debate on the issues that she urges; a debate with the police, with the Home Office, with politicians, but above all, with the public as well, about what we expect. Now, we don't have all the powers to do as Leanne urges, but we have had a look at the evidence in Europe and within the UK. We've had a look at medically supervised injecting facilities, and the former independent advisory panel on substance misuse looked at this and it published a report. We published it on the Welsh Government website in 2017. Despite the evidence considered in the report, they recognise that there are still concerns about the compatibility of medically supervised injection facilities with current criminal law relating to the misuse of drugs. This is an area that is a matter for the UK Government and the enforcement is with the police. The report concluded that based on the evidence available, they cannot currently recommend that medically supervised injections are implemented in Wales, but they do recognise that further work needs to be undertaken in this area to look at the potential feasibility within Wales. So, it is not a door that is permanently closed forever, but it is, I think, a recognition of where we are and the different division of responsibilities. We will, though, continue to look—

Will you take an intervention?

I will.

Do you accept that you need to move a bit faster on this to prevent further deaths?

The reality is we don't have the powers to introduce the facilities that I know you genuinely wish to see created here in Wales. I can't create the facilities that I don't have the powers to address. That's why I say there has to be a genuinely grown-up conversation about what we can do, what we will do with our powers, as well as that conversation with the Home Office and the police.

Now, I recognise the comments made by Joyce Watson and Jenny Rathbone—in particular Joyce Watson's comments about the funders of research and how we engage with them. We know from the minimum unit pricing Bill—as it then was—that the value and the robustness of some of that evidence funded by particular actors in this field did not stand up to the most robust scrutiny. But we do need to continue to engage with retailers about their conduct and their behaviour, the way in which they promote alcohol, in particular, and the way in which we have alternative messages about giving people informed choices to make. 

Now, in concluding, I do trust that Members will again join with me in thanking everyone who works on this agenda and the progress that we are still making. Tackling substance misuse requires commitment from across Government and partners who deliver front-line services, to ensure we reach and support everyone in need to get the right and appropriate level of support. [Interruption.] I will briefly.

Thank you very much, and my apologies, I wasn't here for the very opening speech there. Could I ask him—? I've written to him with a series of questions around the support that Brynawel House actually provides. I wonder, in view of the fact that, with some closures now of rehab centres in Wales, Brynawel House is the only Welsh rehabilitation centre on the Welsh Government's all-Wales framework, and the only rehab on the Wales mental health and learning disabilities framework, what discussions, what support Welsh Government and partners—commissioning authorities—can give to Brynawel House to ensure its sustainability.

We've had regular conversations with Brynawel House and with the commissioners of services, to highlight the range of services that are already available, not just in alcohol and drug rehabilitation, but also in the developing area of alcohol-related brain damage. So, there is a continuing conversation for us to have. I do not wish Brynawel to cease to exist. I think it is a useful facility. We need to make sure that its services align with not just our strategy. but that the commissioners actually commission the care that it provides. And all of that care, the services that we continue to fund, will continue to have harm reduction at their core. The additional funding that I have indicated will help to support that work.

In this complicated area, we do need to work closely together. I look forward to working with Members across the spectrum, despite our differing views on a range of subjects, but generally to make sure that we continue to have a positive direction of travel here in Wales to help people in need with appropriate support wherever we can.

Thank you. The proposal is to agree amendment 1. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Therefore, we defer voting under this item until voting time.

I now propose to go to voting time, unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung. No.

Therefore, we go to voting time, and the first vote this afternoon is a vote on the Developments of National Significance (Specified Criteria, Fees and Fees for Deemed Applications) (Wales) (Amendment) Regulations 2019. I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Rebecca Evans. Open the vote. Close—[Interruption.] Yes, okay, all right then. Close the vote. For the motion 35, two abstentions, nine against. Therefore the motion is agreed.

We now move to vote on the debate on the police settlement, and I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Rebecca Evans. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 38, one abstention, eight against. Therefore the motion is agreed.

We now move to vote on the debate on the substance misuse annual report. I call for a vote on amendment 1, tabled in the name of Darren Millar. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 20, no abstentions, 27 against. Therefore amendment 1 is not agreed. 

I call for a vote on amendment 2, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 20, no abstentions, 27 against. Therefore amendment 2 is not agreed. 

I now call for a vote on amendment 3, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 20, no abstentions, 27 against. Therefore amendment 3 is not agreed. 

I call for a vote on amendment 4, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 35, 12 abstentions, none against. Therefore amendment 4 is agreed. 

We now call for a vote on the motion as amended, tabled in the name of Rebecca Evans. 

Open the vote. Close the vote. For the amended motion 36, two abstentions, nine against. Therefore the amended motion is agreed. 

And that brings today's business to a close. Thank you.