Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru

I call Members to order. 

And the first item on our agenda this afternoon is questions to the Minister for Economy and Transport, and the first question is from Neil McEvoy. 

Yes, of course. We continue to invest in a modern and integrated public transport system in Cardiff, which includes local bus services, active travel and the transformational south Wales metro. Integrated public transport is, of course, key to promoting a modal shift from the personal car to more sustainable modes of transport.

Minister, in the last week, we've seen extreme flooding in areas of Cardiff, no doubt made worse by the concreting of fields for Labour's disastrous local development plan, and the culling of trees and woodland also. Over the summer, roads were closed for building work for Labour's local destruction plan—because that's the correct term really—and the first of thousands of very expensive houses are already being built. But there's no sign of the metro—no sign of it—and there's no extra public transport provision at all, it seems. But there is an extraordinary level of congestion and resulting air pollution right now. Does your party regret giving over our countryside to corporate developers to make a packet, and do you accept that it was highly irresponsible to give the go-ahead to build these houses without any—any—public transport infrastructure in place? 

Can I thank the Member for his question, and just correct him on the assertion that no provision has been made for active travel and integrated travel within the Cardiff area? The metro programme is already being advanced. Rolling stock is on order. Plans are being pursued, with the latest Welsh transport appraisal guidance study concerning the north-west corridor. And, in terms of active travel, I'm pleased to say that we as a Government have awarded £5.5 million to Cardiff Council in the current financial year to help deliver active travel improvements across the city. This includes £2.9 million for eight strategic schemes, and an expansion of the incredibly successful Nextbike scheme.

In addition, we are taking action to combat what I call the 'carbon canyon', which is the concentrated air pollution area in this city. We are identifying means, with Cardiff Council, of reducing the use of the private vehicle within the city, and just this week I have been in discussions with my officials about how we can embark on an unprecedented campaign to replant trees as we face the ash dieback problems. It's my belief that more trees—I'm sure that we would agree entirely—do have to be planted across Wales, and in particular in our urban areas. Now, I'm a passionate believer in careful land management within urban environments that sees more green spaces created, and more trees planted, and that's a key component of 'Planning Policy Wales', which is being adjusted, and I think it's absolutely essential as well that local authorities pay due regard to the need for green spaces. It's not just good for the environment, it's also good for mental health and well-being. 

Minister, I hear what you say about public transport, and it's very important that we invest in good models of public transport, especially the experience that people get to make that change from the car on to buses. I was in the village of Creigiau recently, and whilst there are bus stops in the village, it was raised with me that they cannot get bus shelters or dropped kerbs for disability access. Now, I appreciate a lot of that work is undertaken by the local authority, but when you make grants available to local authorities, do you make checks on the overall experience that's available to users of public transport when issuing those grants? It's one thing having a nice new bus that might look nice and shiny on the road, but if there's no disability access at the bus shelter, or if people are expected to stay out in the elements when it's raining and pouring down, people will revert back to their car. So, do you not agree with me that it's important that we look at the overall experience that passengers get, and, where money can be invested, it needs to be invested in bus shelters and dropped kerbs to make disability access the norm rather than an exception?

I'd agree entirely with the Member. The experience that a member of the public has at a bus stop is just as important as the experience that they have on the actual bus. And I'm pleased that we've been able to support local government in Wales, in this financial year, with enhanced bus-related infrastructure that includes modern, fit-for-purpose bus stops. The Member will also be aware of the White Paper that was published recently concerning the future of public transport in Wales, specifically bus services and the creation of quality partnerships that will lead to enhanced service provision, and enhanced provision within bus stops and along routes, including, for example, free Wi-Fi not just on buses but potentially at bus stops.

Thank you. In line with our economic action plan, we remain committed to supporting small businesses throughout Wales. And the development bank is assisting with its bilingual advice service and financial support for businesses to start and grow. Furthermore, the Business Wales accelerated growth programme provides specialist tailored support for businesses with significant growth potential.

Thank you for that. And I do understand your drive and ambition to help small businesses in Wales. But, of course, last week, the shadow Chancellor, for the shadow bench, stated at your conference that he'd introduce a 32-hour week within a decade if Labour come into power. Now, how does this equate with your desire to encourage small business growth, as employers will have limited capacity to employ more staff, but their working hours will reduce? I've been in receipt of a number of telephone calls on this issue, so clarification on what the Welsh Government would do, or how you might manage the situation, will be something that I think small business owners will be raising more and more in the future.

Well, I'd say, first and foremost, the proposals are ambitious. They are right as well, in my view, but they're not without challenge, which is why a 10-year period has been presented as a transition for a reduction in the working week. What is most important within the UK economy right now is the twin challenge of a lack of inclusive growth—i.e. a lack of fair growth, and regions, therefore, being left behind—and a lack of productivity. And it appears to me, based on international expertise, that the productivity challenge can be addressed through reducing the working week, as we have seen in France, where productivity improved as a consequence of reducing the working week to four days. I believe that we can apply the same model within the UK and we can achieve the same outcomes as France has enjoyed.

Minister, small business is the backbone of our economy and needs a low tax, red-tape-free environment in order to thrive. However, the biggest barrier to growth currently is poor infrastructure. According to the Federation of Small Businesses, a majority of businesses in Wales have found they're affected by Government making decisions on infrastructure. It's not just the Government's failure to deliver the promised M4 relief road, but it's the state of the road network and poor public transport links. So, Minister, how does your Government plan to address the FSB's concerns over the next 12 months?

Well, the FSB report, I think, was incredibly helpful and we'll be considering it very carefully. I would say, in terms of ambitious programmes for infrastructure, the £5 billion rail franchise, the transformational south Wales metro, the north Wales metro, which is making great strides, the development of a south-west Wales metro as well, all demonstrate that this Welsh Government has huge ambition for public transport and the infrastructure that's required to underpin it.

Questions now from the party spokespeople. The Conservative spokesperson, Russell George.

Diolch, Llywydd. Can the Minister tell me when Wales can expect to have a reliable rail service?

Wales has a reliable—[Interruption.] Wales has a reliable rail service. However, that service is not without faults, and that is something that Transport for Wales have admitted to. I think if we look at, historically, the problems associated with underinvestment by the UK Government, we'll understand that the lack of decent signalling and the lack of major infrastructure improvements have contributed to a lack of reliability not just today but in many years previous.

Minister, there'll be many people across Wales who will not agree with you that we have a reliable rail service. You have great aspirations, which I would welcome and agree with, but passengers want to know when they can expect a rail service that is reliable now. Passengers want to see improvements now, not just in the future. But this is what you told the people of Wales last year, and I'm quoting you here,

'Let me be absolutely clear: in the coming months and years, we will deliver groundbreaking transformation of transport across the country'.

I'm sure that you will agree that we are not seeing that transformation and we're not seeing an acceptable level of service. This summer, we saw an unacceptable level of delays, cancellations, short-form trains. On the Cambrian line, which serves my own constituency, only 61 per cent of trains arrived on time between June and July, with many others being cancelled. There is a shortage of drivers, resulting in further cancellations, and, according to Transport for Wales's own website, 2019 was going to see an increased capacity on the Valleys lines. However, according to their own statistics, only 81 per cent of trains arrived on time between June and July. Is this the groundbreaking transformation that you had in mind? 

Well, let me just repeat some of the groundbreaking measures we've already undertaken as a consequence of us letting this franchise agreement. We have put in orders for £800 million of new trains—more than 130 trains and light rail tram units. Last week, or the week before, I announced £194 million of improvements for stations. Compare that to £600,000 that was spent in the previous 15 years. Halton curve services have begun in the north, and I'm delighted to be able to tell Members today that, next week, I will be detailing how we will be achieving a 10 per cent increase in capacity at the end of this year on the rail franchise network. Members will be interested as well to hear more about the four-carriage trains that are going to be introduced on peak Valleys lines services, which will provide more space for commuters every week. We're going to be introducing—and I'll detail this next week, again—more modern trains with more space and onboard passenger information systems, accessible toilets and free Wi-Fi, and I'll be detailing improved long-distance services between north Wales and Manchester, as well as a much improved journey time between south Wales and north Wales.

But I would add that this has not been a journey without challenge, but much of the challenge relates to the infrastructure that is outdated or is not fit for purpose, and that is not a responsibility of Transport for Wales or the Welsh Government; that remains a responsibility of UK Government. If we are to address that problem, we need to have responsibility for infrastructure and funding devolved to the Welsh Government.

And the Member does pick up on the important point of reliability on the Cambrian line over the summer. Well, of course, much of the problem with the Cambrian line over the summer relates to the signalling equipment that is utilised on the Cambrian line. That is the responsibility not of Transport for Wales but of Network Rail—i.e. UK Government. We are hoping that this will be overcome, but, of course, it's been a challenge not of our making. 

Well, thank you, Minister. You've referred to the Cambrian line. Well, trains are being pulled off the Cambrian line to be used in other parts of Wales. That isn't the responsibility of Network Rail; that's the responsibility of Transport for Wales and yourself. 

Now, last autumn, we saw huge disruption across the rail network, and we saw at one point the fleet reduced from 127 trains to just 86. Now, we know that we expect autumn weather every year in the way it comes to us, but I would have thought that our rail services would have been reliable enough during the warm and dry period this summer, which hasn't been the case. So, that does bring, of course, the concern for where passengers are going to be left this autumn. So, considering the appalling delays and cancellations over the summer, can you assure the people of Wales, and commuters, that this autumn will not be anywhere near the level of disruption that they saw last year?

Can I thank Russell George for giving me an opportunity to address this very serious issue? If we go back to the autumn of last year, we'll all recall that there was a very serious problem with what are called 'wheel flats' caused by the lack of wheel-slide protection on trains. It was a unique problem for the rolling stock fleet that we adopted from Arriva Trains Wales. Now, the Member identifies, rightly, that trains were withdrawn from the Cambrian line and many other lines over the summer holiday period, in order to have wheel-slide protection kits fitted to them. Scores of trains over the summer had wheel-slide protection kits applied to them as part of our £40 million upgrade of the existing fleet, which will be in operation while we await the new trains, which will be delivered from 2022 onward. So, I'm pleased to be able to say to Members today that those trains that were not fitted with wheel-slide protection kits last year, which were not operating as a consequence of that or which did suffer from wheel slide, now have that vital kit applied to them.

Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Rhun ap Iorwerth.

Thank you very much, Llywydd. Will the Minister outline the Welsh Government's preparations for industry 4.0?

Can I thank the Member for his question? He'll be aware of the report that Professor Brown conducted for us on this, which we have now published and we will be responding to it accordingly. But alongside this work, the implementation of the economic action plan continues with the economic contract driving inclusive, fair growth and behavioural change within business settings, and the calls to action designed to futureproof businesses. And as part of the calls to action, we're investing heavily in the industries of tomorrow and in the components of those industries, such as automation and artificial intelligence, which will drive productivity and jobs growth.

I look forward to the full response on Professor Brown's report. What he saw was that too many Welsh companies are locked into low-value parts of worldwide chains and, actually, that there's little scope for higher value roles in areas like research and development and international procurement.

Now Professor Brown further argues that the Welsh workforce, as a result, will be exposed to quality-cost competition as companies seek to automate less valuable parts of their chains. We know that automation is happening and that it will accelerate, so the window for taking action to prepare for that is narrowing. So, what preparations are Welsh Government making to provide retraining opportunities, for example, for those who are and will increasingly be affected by automation?

I'm pleased to be able to tell Members today that the implementation of our plans for individual learning accounts has been commenced and this programme is now being rolled out. What it enables individuals in work to do is to have financial support in order to undergo training and retraining specifically to address the challenges that industry 4.0 will present, and the need to ensure that they are fully equipped to take full advantage of the new jobs that will be created in the transition to an automated society. 

One thing that Professor Brown identifies is that gross value added measures are a very good indication of how prepared an economy is for automation. And the report highlights the sheer scale of the challenge for Wales in particular in preparing the workforce for advances in automation because of a failure to increase our GVA. And if we look at GVA figures by region, then it's very, very uncomfortable reading for you, as Welsh Government, I'm sure. 

London produces 33 per cent more than the UK average. You've been in your role now since 2016. It's very fair now, after that amount of time, to assess how successful the steps you have taken have been in increasing GVA. It's not a good story to tell. So, how prepared can we be for automation when our GVA under your leadership, as economy Minister, is still lagging so far behind?

Well, let's just look at the facts, the figures. Since 2004, Welsh productivity growth has been fourth highest of all the UK regions and nations. The fourth highest. We are coming from an incredibly low base, I would admit that, but since devolution we've performed incredibly well, especially in recent times. If you look at some of the other measurements supplied to the economy, such as gross domestic product, which recently showed Wales outpacing the UK average, we are performing very well indeed. But, of course, we have Brexit looming and that could lead to a contraction in the economy.

Against this backdrop of uncertainty, we are investing in facilities that are designed to drive productivity, such as the advanced manufacturing research centre, which will open in November in Deeside. That facility alone will have a GVA contribution of something in the region of £3 billion and will drive innovation and the diffusion of innovation across the aerospace and automotive sectors in particular. But we're also investing very heavily elsewhere, for example, in the National Digital Exploitation Centre, which, again, is designed to drive innovation and skills development across the Welsh economy. There are a plethora of enterprise hubs and facilities similar to enterprise hubs that we've been able to fund across Wales, designed to encourage and support entrepreneurs to grow their own businesses and to share experience with other entrepreneurs.

I'm confident that with a record number of businesses in existence, with unemployment at a near-record low, with employment at a record high, and inactivity at a record low, the Welsh economy and the Welsh workforce are well placed to meet future challenges. But that's not to say that Brexit will assist. If anything, Brexit is going to be a major challenge that we are going to struggle to overcome, unless we get the financial support through the Kingfisher fund and other funding resources from UK Government.

Brexit Party spokesperson, David Rowlands. 

Diolch, Llywydd. Minister, outside of the UK, the European Union is now officially a low-growth economic region. Even the once-mighty German economy is now stagnating because, unlike the UK, where a large percentage of our business base is taken up by small and medium-sized enterprises, Germany's economy is dominated by large multinational corporations and it is heavily dependent on its export markets. Does the Minister not agree with me that should a ludicrous tariff war follow a 'no deal' Brexit the German economy will be far more damaged than that of the UK?

I'm more concerned with the UK economy rather than the German economy. The German economy has been referred to as a low-growth economy. I always struggle with the idea of a low-growth economy being a poorly performing economy if that low growth is sustainable. It's my firm belief that we shouldn't be chasing, as Greta Thunberg recently put it, this fairytale of eternal high growth. Growth has to be sustainable. And if you look at the market of the EU, it's still a market to which we send the majority of our exports; it is a sustainable market for the UK to be part of. So, whilst we can become obsessed with other economies around the globe, let's just look at our own and focus on what we can do to improve the UK economy and the Welsh economy. We have certain levers here in Wales to improve the Welsh economy, but, ultimately, the UK Government must decide on a course of action that will benefit the economy of Wales and the UK, and that course of action will not lead to any net benefits if the UK Government decide to drive us off a cliff at the end of October.

I thank the Minister for his answer although, of course, I wouldn't particularly agree with his conclusions. Yesterday evening, Minister, I had a very interesting conversation with an Italian bartender. [Interruption.] I shall say at this moment that I was quite sober when I had this conversation—well, at least I wasn't inebriated. But having holidayed many times and being a lover of the Italian way of life, I expressed my surprise at the fact that, for a country that always seemed in economic turmoil, no more so than now, the way of life seemed far superior to that enjoyed in the UK.

I was extremely surprised by his answer, Minister. He told me that far from being a contented and happy population, there was a huge underbelly of discontent, based mainly on a lack of well-paid jobs and commercial opportunity. This contrasted with the UK where, when he arrived some five years earlier, he said he could not believe the job opportunities and pay levels enjoyed by most of the population. He was talking here of Wales, actually, Minister. By the way, having looked at the continued residency regulations, he had no fears about deportation. He went on to say that a growing number of Italians were completely disillusioned with the EU, and applauded the UK's Brexit vote. They now saw the EU as a stifling influence on the Italian economy and resented the EU's political interventions in the country's affairs.

Whilst I acknowledge that this is just one individual's opinion and experience, does the Minister not think it is time we cut the shackles of the Brussels political ambitions and looked out to a world of high economic growth, where some countries' growth levels are five times that of the EU, and where we already enjoy £300 billion-worth of exports?

I'm delighted that you've been engaging with the Italians of Cardiff Bay. I imagine, given you're a Brexit member, he only thanked you when you left his bar if you gave him a very big tip. If we look at the Italian economy, we'll see similar trends there as in the UK. You have some high-performing regions within Italy, primarily in the north, and then you have parts of Italy that are really struggling, where young, talented people feel that they have no choice but to leave, and they're primarily in the south. I don't know where your Italian bartender came from in Italy, but of course he chose Wales and he's happy here, and I'm glad that he is here, and long may he stay here because he sounds—based on the experience you had—a very good member of the community and a hard-working person, which is not the way that the Brexit Party portrays foreign nationals on a normal basis.

I think what's important is that we recognise that Wales should be and always has been a very welcoming place to foreign nationals. Whilst we enjoy the company of Italians and many other European citizens here in Wales, many European countries enjoy the presence of British people, and I'm really concerned that the rhetoric that we hear now across the UK, but primarily from some of the right-wing elements of the media, give the impression to the outside world that we are looking inward, that we are no longer welcoming and that we resent the presence of foreign nationals in the UK. That is a very, very dangerous position to be in. And we alone as a Welsh Government cannot combat the impression that I'm afraid is emerging across the globe of the United Kingdom as a little England. We need the UK Government to behave far more responsibly in the messages that it sends out about what sort of country we want to be in the twenty-first century, and I want us to be an internationalist country.

Yes, delighted to do so, because Transport for Wales will introduce new light-rail metro vehicles, or tram trains, on the Rhondda line from 2022. These will include free onboard Wi-Fi, power sockets, electronic passenger information, and they'll include air conditioning and increased storage capacity for bikes.

But, so far, no toilets. Minister, I wish I didn't have to keep raising the train service in Wales with you, but things are getting worse. Services are being taken off the timetable; carriages are being taken off peak-time services on the Valleys lines. Now, I catch the train regularly and the peak-time experience is more often than not uncomfortable and bordering on unsafe. This is not just my view; it's the view of the train guards that are tasked with placating angry passengers and trying to maintain safety. It's an unacceptable situation that shows no sign of being solved within the next two months either, as rolling stock will not come on stream until early December.

I had a message just this morning from a mother whose child was left stranded on a station and ended up being late for school because of the overcrowding. Minister, someone is going to get hurt unless this situation is resolved. Do you share my concerns about these overcrowding issues, and if not, why not? And what do you have to say to those passengers who have to continue to endure these appalling conditions for at least another two months? And can you note, Minister, I'm asking you here about trains and not stations? 

Of course I share the concerns of passengers, of course I do, but let me give the Member just some detail about what's going to be coming very soon—yes, in December, but that's the soonest that we can get the new rolling stock on the lines with the December timetable change.

You've been in charge of the railways a long time now.

Let me give some facts and figures to the Member that she can no doubt, and will no doubt, promote to the media and champion. First of all, by the end of 2022, there are going to be 400 more seats on services from Treherbert to Cardiff in the morning peak, and 300 more seats from Cardiff to Treherbert in the evening peak. Journey times are going to reduce from one hour to 50 minutes, and by December—the end of December—we will have increased capacity by 10 per cent through the introduction of additional rolling stock, which is incredibly hard to source right now, given the state of the industry across the UK and, indeed, further afield.

But the Member raises the important question of toilets on tram trains. You know, you as leader of Plaid Cymru made a statement in support of tram trains. You said that, 

'Plaid Cymru has put forward an exciting vision for the future of Wales’ transport infrastructure, that includes investing in new light rail networks'.

Your economy and transport spokesperson has done so. 

Not without toilets though. You've still got to have toilets on them. 

Your current leader has talked about the need for light-rail tram trains. Can you identify—? Leanne Wood, can you identify a single light-rail tram-train on-street system on the planet that has accessible—?

Germany. Munich.

Germany and Munich. Yes, right, Germany and Munich—

I've got photographs on my phone. Do you want to see them?

Their trams would not be legal here because of the persons with reduced mobility compliance. They have to have toilets that can be accessible by disabled people. Are you saying that you would run tram-trains in Wales that disabled people could not access? Because that is shameful, if that's your position.

They're not going to have toilets, full stop, though. Disabled—

Surely, when you said that tram-trains should be operating in Wales, you didn't understand what they actually were. That is surely the position, because no single tram-train is currently available with disabled access toilets on board.

We are introducing significant investment so that disabled people are able to access, step-free, every single station on the metro network—every single one. And we are introducing a huge amount of investment to ensure that we have universally accessible toilets at stations within the metro area. Furthermore, Llywydd, it should be noted, because I think Mark Barry got it absolutely right this morning in the Western Mail when he said that there is misrepresentation of this situation concerning toilets. It should be noted that every single new train—more than a 110 of them—every single train on the Wales and borders franchise, and on those metro lines that won't be operating tram-trains, will have fully compliant accessible toilets.

What's important, again, in a follow-up to my first question to you about buses, is the overall experience when it comes to the rail network. When I was in an earlier mode of a transport spokesman for the Conservative group, I always remember speaking to Network Rail, saying that a lot of the CCTV cameras that sit in stations are not court compatible, i.e. they cannot be used as evidence against vandalism or any other anti-social behaviour. Can you give a commitment today, Minister, that any CCTV upgrades—and I hope there'll be many CCTV upgrades on stations—will be court compatible, so that if vandalism or anti-social activity does happen at our stations, people will feel the full force of the law and have the consequences?

I'll give that undertaking, as part of the £194 million station upgrade. We are keenly looking at improved security, and as part of that we're going to be introducing more CCTV facilities that can be utilised by the police and court prosecutions. But I'll happily provide more information to the Member.

Well, as part of our plans for a fully integrated public transport network across Wales, we are fully committed to public transport for disabled people that removes barriers to travel, that empowers people and that promotes rather than inhibits independent living.

It was November of last year when there was a picture of you in the local paper, The Leader, announcing investment to improve disabled access to Ruabon station, in your constituency, of course. It’s almost 12 months since then, and that investment hasn’t yet happened. Constituents tell me that they feel that they’ve been misled in that regard. So, can I ask you whether you regret being vocal in the local papers that there was going to be investment, when that clearly hasn’t happened? And do you take responsibility for the failure to implement your pledge?

Well, quite the opposite. We've made available £10 million as match funding for the UK Government's Access for All programme. We nominated 15 stations for the Access for All programme. We were pleased, of course, that seven of our 15 were accepted, but eight were not—Ruabon was one of them. However, I can tell the Member today that we will be progressing, again, with the latest round of Access for All nominations, and those stations that were not included in the last priority list by the UK Government will be put forward again. But in addition to this, we've also announced that there'll be £15 million of funding available for stations across the Wales and borders franchise to improve accessibility, and we'll be looking at those stations where disabled passengers at the moment face the biggest barriers in terms of accessing services.

Ruabon station I'm more than familiar with because it's my local station, and I was bitterly disappointed, therefore, that the UK Government decided not to utilise the money that we, as a Welsh Government, were putting forward for improved facilities. But I do hope that in the spring, when they put out the call for additional nominations, that they will accept Ruabon station.

Minister, many of our railway stations have been inadequate when it comes to disabled access for a considerable length of time now. I know, as you've said, you've been trying to address this. You've just mentioned the list of Access for All stations. Abergavenny station was on the list, I believe, that was put forward by the Welsh Government, and I think was successful following discussions that you had with the UK Government Department for Transport and the hard work of local campaigners, including the local county councillor Maureen Powell—I know all have been in touch with you. I wonder if you could update us on the current status of Abergavenny station. It's clearly an important station locally, for me as the local Assembly Member, but also an important part of the network in Wales as a whole. So, where are we with the upgrade of that station and the implementation of disabled access?

Well, I'd happily write to the Member with details of the work that's been undertaken as we develop plans to make it step-free, and it will be a wholly step-free station. But I'll also happily update Members on the other six stations and the work that's been undertaken to draw down UK Government funding, through the Access for All programme, as soon as progress can be made and I can report back.FootnoteLink

Minister, I've been contacted, obviously, by a number of disabled people for whom access to railways does relate to, often, the availability of toilets, and I'm aware of the comments you made in the answer to the last question. Where the issue seems to arise now is that what you seem to be saying is that, certainly on heavy rail, there will be toilets, but that, as with buses, on light rail, it would be effectively contrary to regulations. It would be illegal to actually do that, therefore it is not legally possible to do. Could I ask, then, that what we actually have is a briefing that sets out clearly what the regulatory framework is and why it is, because at the moment my understanding until now, and I'm sure of others, was that this was a matter of cost or whatever, whereas in actual fact it seems there are other reasons? It's very important that we have an understanding of the basis of the decision making.

There are numerous reasons why toilets can't be fitted to light-rail tram-trains. One of the reasons, of course, is the additional weight and lack of manoeuvrability if you install such facilities. Another includes the risk of discharge on streets from those toilets if you don't carry enough tank capacity. There are also issues with manoeuvrability—the whole point of having those light-rail solutions is you can accelerate and decelerate quicker, that you can go around sharp bends and that you can go up and down steeper inclines. Having somebody in a toilet when you do that can be very dangerous indeed.

But, of course, there's also the challenge of compliance, as Mick Antoniw says, with PRM legislation, and by the end of this year, all of our trains, all of our rolling stock, have to be PRM compliant. We have not been able to identify a single system on the planet that is PRM compatible—not a single system. If one becomes available, if science can be defied and it's possible to put a disabled access toilet into a tram-train, and have it operate safely on-street, i.e. so that the driver can see through the carriageway, then, of course, we would adopt that technical solution. But as of today, there are no such solutions available.

We're working with the Valleys taskforce to maximise the economic benefits resulting from the dualling. This includes challenging targets during construction of sections 5 and 6 for training and employment, work packages for local businesses, spend with Welsh companies and engagement with local schools.

Thank you, Minister. My question follows on from a question that I asked the Deputy Minister on this topic in Plenary just before recess. My constituency contains two villages that border the Heads of the Valleys road, both of which suffer from terrible broadband. In fact, I had an e-mail from a constituent in one of those villages just last night saying that the 3MB connection is what they could get on a good day. Those villages are Penderyn and Croesbychan, a hamlet of Llwydcoed. It's my understanding that when the construction process goes ahead, Openreach will be laying new cables alongside the road. And so, what I would ask of you is: would you be willing to have a dialogue with Openreach to see if community benefits can be brought? It seems like the ideal time to actually finally lay good infrastructure to those villages and a cost-effective way of doing so.

I think the Member is absolutely right. Vikki Howells identifies two villages where broadband connectivity is currently poor. We will take up this matter with Openreach on her behalf, but I can assure the Member that, as we progress the A465 supplementary infrastructure along the route, we'll include spare ducts across the A465 that could be utilised for improved broadband services. If I may say so, could I also thank Dawn Bowden for chairing the sub-committee of the Valleys taskforce that is looking specifically at the benefits of the investment in this transport infrastructure?

Absolutely. In line with our economic action plan, we remain committed to supporting small businesses across Wales. Our Business Wales and the Development Bank of Wales both offer bilingual advice, support and financial support.

Minister, one way that the Welsh Government could better support small businesses in Pembrokeshire is by tackling the various infrastructure issues that they face, including roads, public transport and digital infrastructure. I'm sure you're aware of the recent report by FSB Wales that found that 63 per cent of Welsh businesses have been affected by poor infrastructure. That same report went on to call for greater cross-party working to address those problems. Can you therefore tell us what the Welsh Government is doing to better tackle some of the infrastructure issues in Pembrokeshire, so that small businesses in my constituency can actually compete on a level playing field with other businesses across Wales?

The Welsh Government is investing very heavily in infrastructure within the Member's region, including investment in the upgrades to the A40—crucially important—with the proposed bypass around the northern side of Llanddewi Velfrey. In addition, the Deputy Minister has already outlined proposals for dealing with some of the hard-to-reach areas concerning digital connectivity. I think it's fair to say that it's our view that there should be a public service obligation pursued for broadband provision, similar to that which exists for the Royal Mail. It's appalling that we live in the twenty-first century and there is no such obligation to provide a basic minimum broadband speed to all premises across the United Kingdom.

Yes. A study commissioned by Transport for Wales into enhancing the frequency of rail services along the Maesteg rail line was submitted to the Welsh Government in the summer and officials are currently considering the proposals.

That is really good news to hear, because he knows how keen local campaigners have been, and I've been, to chase progress on this. We recognise that this will not be an overnight fix, but to increase the frequency will not only be good for passengers along the north-of-Bridgend line, but actually along the whole of the main line, because it could actually relieve pressure. We're very much looking forward, I have to say, to the introduction of a Sunday service—sometime in the autumn, in December, I understand. This itself will be the reintroduction of a service that we lost probably four or five decades ago, and we've been cut off on Sundays ever since. So, that will be a huge impact as well.

But I wonder: does he have any idea how he will take these studies forward, how he will engage with the local authority, with me and other campaigners on the increased frequency? Because whilst we are looking forward, I have to say, to the new carriages coming in, because all those refurbished carriages—. All those people who know anything about railways have been telling me that those refurbished carriages will not only introduce new and extended capacity, but the quality of them will be quite something, compared to what we've currently got. But having, particularly at peak times, better frequency will be not only good for people in Maesteg, but in Pontyclun, Llanharan, Pencoed and everywhere along the main line.

Huw Irranca-Davies is a fantastic, strong and passionate advocate for improved services on the Maesteg line; of that, there is absolutely no doubt. I'd happily meet with him and the leader of the local authority to discuss how we take forward the study that's been received by my officials. They're working already with the local authority, with Bridgend council, to discuss the findings before proceeding further with this work. But I am delighted to say that the first Sunday service will coincide with the national timetable change, which is 15 December. I can inform Members today that the sale of tickets will begin around eight weeks before journeys, which means that tickets will be available near the end of October for that new Sunday service.

Minister, you may also recall previous correspondence between us regarding delayed prioritisation of a passing loop for the Maesteg-Bridgend line. The last time that I looked at this, you explained that it was going to be deferred to the 2018-19 budget from the previous year's budget. This has been put back for several years already, so perhaps you can explain the delay. But you may also remember my disappointment about the low priority for the Valleys in my region, including the Llynfi, in the transport proposals they're getting through the Cardiff city deal. I don't think the Government and the city deal working separately convinces me of any strategic vision or delivery plan for this part of my region, and so I'm asking who's responsible for bringing these strands, including on the Valleys taskforce, together so that we get a clear picture for this part of my region.

Well, that sort of responsibility should rest in the hands of TfW as delivery partner, but I'm pleased to say that TfW are, with regard to the Llynfi passing loop, already carrying out an early technical assessment of the re-use of that particular loop, and, in addition, improvements at Tondu station. But I'd happily meet with the Member to look at additional services and infrastructure improvements that could be made in her area.

Finally, question 8, Russell George.

Yes. Our national transport finance plan, which was last updated in May of this year, sets out our transport investment proposals here in Wales.

Thank you, Minister. You'll be aware of the real issues around Dyfi bridge in Machynlleth. It's a real pinchpoint on the A487, and you'll be aware, when the bridge is closed, there's a 30-mile round trip for commuters on a diversion. The bridge has been closed again during the recent bad weather, and there is concern that there's not sufficient monitoring taking place. There is CCTV in the area, and I'm also told the flood barrier gates on the trunk road should have been open much earlier than they were. So, there are some real practical issues, I think, that need to be resolved. But also you wrote to me last month to say that the Dyfi bridge project had seen a number of changes to its scope on the development phase, and that you required the final costs before being able to make a decision. I wonder if you could update me on that—because this is particularly exercising people that live in that area of my constituency—in terms of the current situation and the new bridge moving forward.

I do wish to move forward with this project at maximum speed. Can I thank the Member for attending a recent meeting where the Dyfi bridge was discussed and where my officials were able to provide a briefing to Members and also to the local authority? I'll certainly ask officials to examine the potential of improved monitoring at the bridge, and a revised cost estimate for the construction scheme will need to be agreed with the early contractor, as the project has seen a number of changes to scope in the development phase. But once I've received an indication of final costs I will be in a position to determine whether or not to publish the orders for this scheme. I wish that work to be undertaken as swiftly as possible, and I anticipate that I'll be in a position to be able to make a decision by the end of this year.

Thank you, Minister.

The next item, therefore, is questions to the Brexit Minister, and I call on Russell George to ask the first question.

To date, there have been over 37,000 users of the Business Wales Brexit portal, with over 52,500 page views.

Can I thank the Counsel General for his answer? In a response from the economy and transport Minister yesterday, there does appear to be relatively few businesses that have sought business advice from the Welsh Government's official Brexit portal. In what ways is the Welsh Government looking to engage with small and medium-sized businesses particularly, particularly businesses who may not be members of other bodies as well, to help them realise the challenges and opportunities that Brexit brings? I wonder how many people are aware—or rather small and medium-sized businesses are aware—that the Brexit portal actually exists also.

I thank the Member for that question. We do all that we can, clearly, to communicate the advice and guidance that is available. As I think the Member's question implicitly acknowledges, there are many businesses, because they don't have full active membership, if you like, of trade associations and so on, that may be harder to reach. We have taken every opportunity, I think, when we meet with the stakeholders with whom we have relationships who are themselves parts of broader business networks—to take the opportunity to make sure they are highlighting the availability of advice in their networks. Clearly, we meet regularly with the representative bodies, but, equally, we’ve met with professional business advisers like lawyers and accountants, to whom perhaps smaller businesses may be quicker to turn for advice. So, we’ve sought to cascade information out through those networks as well, and also, in addition to that, looking at the networks that we have through arm's-length bodies, such as the Development Bank of Wales, Careers Wales and so on, to make sure that they are communicating information to their network of businesses. But I would say that any Members who are happy and keen to disseminate those sources of advice, I would urge you to do so in your own networks and in your own constituencies as well. I thank the Member for the question.

I plan to visit Brussels in the coming weeks for various meetings with the EU institutions, which will build on the meeting with Michel Barnier that the First Minister had in June, and meetings I held in Strasbourg in March. Our Brussels office also maintains good relationships across the EU institutions.

Thank you for that answer, Minister. I noticed yesterday that you said that we needed a referendum before we had a general election. Do you not believe that European officials would appreciate a general election so that we can have a Government that will deliver on the referendum of 2016, and any muddying of the water by yourself or other Welsh Government Ministers when they meet European officials merely clouds the situation and makes it more challenging?

Well, I’m sure the Member doesn’t seek to imply that Welsh Government shouldn’t take any opportunities to stand up for the people of Wales and represent their interests in any context in which they can. There is a real advantage to us in going to Brussels and representing the views of the Welsh Government and Wales. He will know that the Joint Ministerial Committee (EU Negotiations) mechanism exists to provide devolved Governments with the ability to have some oversight over the negotiation process. He will also know, from following the proceedings in the Assembly last week, that the UK Government have decided they won’t share with us the technical papers that they’re sharing with EU institutions, which means that we don’t have as much information about those negotiations as I’m sure he would wish us to have, so we can discuss that in the Chamber here to the extent that’s appropriate. It’s also important to go so we can hear from EU institutions direct what their concerns are, but I will just say very clearly to the Member that we take great care not to undermine the UK Government’s position in any way, but we will always take the opportunity of standing up for the people of Wales and their best interests.

Questions now from the party spokespeople. Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Delyth Jewell.

Diolch, Llywydd. Minister, why does your newly published Brexit White Paper, ‘A brighter future for Wales', make reference to national identification cards? The document states, and I quote:

‘Some have argued that a national ID card might be a price worth paying to address concerns about so-called "uncontrolled" migration from the EEA.’

Is this the Welsh Government’s view—that you want billions of pounds to be spent on documentation that presumably people will have to pay for, and that would curtail their civil liberties simply to address what you admit are unfounded concerns? If this is not the Welsh Government’s view, and I hope it isn’t, why make reference to ID cards in this document at all?  

Well, the Member has raised this point before, as have Members of her party, and I will just say that, in relation to a matter as sensitive as this, I think it's—you know, we shouldn’t go out of our way to look for points of division where none exist. The document to which she refers really builds on the principles of 'Securing Wales’ Future', which, obviously, was co-authored with Plaid Cymru, and indeed it further builds on the paper ‘Brexit and Fair Movement of People’, which her party also welcomed. The document does not say that ID cards are the Welsh Government’s policy—it simply says that some have argued that there are benefits to it. But I think she must see that in the context of a broader discussion in that paper, which establishes very clearly that the policy we advocate is within the boundaries, within the parameters, of freedom of movement as exercised by other EU member states.  

Thank you, Minister. There are many things in the document that we do agree with, but I would urge the Minister to see that language in the context of the Home Office's hostile environment policy. The introduction, or—. Talking about national ID cards isn't the only aspect of this document that would also cause concern to non-UK EU citizens in Wales who are already feeling threatened. The document advocates tracking migrants using national insurance so that their economic activity could be monitored—with a view, I presume, to make it easier to collect evidence that could lead to deportations. The Trefnydd yesterday denied that the document advocated forced deportations. I would ask you how this squares with the inclusion of sentences making reference to the legitimate removal of migrants and benefit tourism. Given that your Government has published a plan to make Wales a nation of sanctuary, which we welcome, and that you've in the past criticised the UK Government for their disgraceful hostile environment policy, do you now believe it was a mistake to include language in this document that has the potential to cause further distress for EU migrants living in Wales?

Well, I know the Member has a party conference at the end of the week, but I do think that this is not an appropriate line of questioning to be pursuing. I refer her to the point that I made—[Interruption.] I refer her to the point I made earlier, which is that this policy document builds on the language that we used in 'Brexit and Fair Movement of People', which says, in effect, that jobseekers would be asked to register in order to ensure that people seeking to work do so in a reasonable amount of time, which is what happens in other European countries, and, where that is not the case, or if they don't have a genuine prospect of employment, we should be able to ask them to leave the UK. That is the language in 'Brexit and Fair Movement of People', which your Brexit spokesperson agreed was a pragmatic approach. So, I think it's very important that we shouldn't seek to look for divisions in relation to this issue.

She will also know that, in relation to EU citizens living in Wales, the Government has taken a number of steps in order to support them in seeking to register for settled status within the UK Government scheme, including funding Citizens Advice to provide advice to them, funding a specialist immigration law service, Newfields Law, to deal with complex cases, seeking the extension of digital assistance centres across Wales so that it facilitates EU citizens seeking support, and also working with a range of charities and third sector organisations to raise awareness. 

Thank you, Minister, and those things are all things that we do welcome, which is why I would really urge you to remove the references to legitimately removing migrants, benefit tourism and ID cards from this document. And, if you were to do that, then my party would be very willing to discuss it further with you and to look at voting for it, if you intend to hold a vote.

I'd like to turn finally to something we have in common. We both want a second referendum with 'remain' on the ballot, and I also have noted, with reverence, that you agree with Plaid Cymru rather than elements of your own party that there should be a referendum before an election. I would welcome that.

We've said we'd be willing to support Jeremy Corbyn to have a first shot at being caretaker Prime Minister to secure an article 50 extension and deliver a referendum—that's only fair, but it doesn't look like he'll have the numbers for that at present. So, Minister, I'd ask you, in these circumstances, would you then support someone else to be caretaker Prime Minister, an elder statesperson perhaps, to go to Brussels to secure that extension—[Interruption.]—or indeed yourself—and then to immediately call a general election? Or would you rather risk no deal than support anyone but Corbyn to be a caretaker PM?

I realise, from comments that are being made from sedentary positions by your colleagues, that this is a Westminster issue, but I'm sure you'll have an opinion on this matter, given your strongly held views that 'no deal' would be a disaster that must be averted at all costs.

Well, firstly, relating to the points that she raised on the document, I wish that she had raised those points before the document had been published; we would have been happy to engage in detail in relation to those in order to seek an agreed position with Plaid Cymru. But, on the broader point that she makes about parliamentary arrangements, I'm not going to be answering questions here about the Welsh Labour position in Parliament. Those are questions for Parliament. I'm happy to answer questions in relation to Welsh Government policy here in Wales. 

Conservative spokesperson, Darren Millar.

Minister, can you clarify what your policy is on Brexit?

I'm very, very happy to do that. I'm normally—. We are normally criticised for providing so much opportunity in the Chamber for describing our Brexit policy, but I'm very happy to do so. Our position here is that we seek to remain—that Wales should remain part of the European Union, and we think the matter should be put back to the people in a referendum so the people can give their opinion, and in that referendum the Welsh Government will advocate they vote to remain members of the European Union.

I'm very grateful for that response. Of course, you could have outlined three potential responses, because the Labour Party has adopted, it seems to me, three policies. Of course, we all know that Jeremy Corbyn did, and then didn't, want a general election, and then he wants to hold conversations with the EU in order to get a deal that he might or might not support in a second referendum. The Welsh Government's position seems to be that it also wants a general election, but not quite yet, and then it wants to hold a second referendum, and no matter what deal comes back, including if that deal is supported by a Labour Prime Minister, you will campaign against it and to remain in the EU. And then, of course, there's you, as the Brexit Minister for the Welsh Government, who said just yesterday, in contradiction to both the UK Labour line and the Welsh Labour line, that you thought it would be ideal to have a second referendum before a general election, in spite of the fact that, earlier this year, at the Welsh Labour conference, you said that a second referendum isn't the best solution. What a complete and utter shambles your policy actually is. Given the fact that you have a menu of choices that you appear to be putting before the British electorate, how on earth can anybody trust you to deliver anything on Brexit?

Well, I'm always happy to provide a platform for the Conservative association of Clwyd West to assess their potential candidate for the next general election, but I would just remind him that I'm not going to engage with the political badinage that he so enjoys. I would just invite him to recall that Boris Johnson was against a referendum and against an election, and is now in favour of an election and voted both for and against Theresa May's deal. So, I think, when he wants to look for confusions and a menu of options, he should look somewhat nearer to home. 

I didn't quite catch what position you're taking today, in contrast to the position you had yesterday and the position of the Welsh Government and the UK Labour Party. What I will say is that, unlike the Labour Party, at least my party's got a very clear position, and that is that we want to get Brexit done. We want to deliver Brexit without any more dithering or delay, by 31 October, so that we can move on and focus on people's priorities across the country, like sorting out the mess that you've left in terms of our national health service here in Wales, raising standards in education after a decade of stagnation, and putting more police on our streets. The people of Wales have already voted, of course, on this matter, in June 2016, and, in fact, they already had a second vote as well, because they endorsed that position and the position of party manifestos, both in your party and my party, which said that they would deliver on the Brexit referendum and deliver Brexit. So, they've already had two opportunities to express a view. So, instead of being like a beast with three heads, I think it's about time that the Labour Party got behind the efforts of the UK Government to deliver a Brexit that works for the UK and works for Wales. Will you therefore adopt the position that I think your party needs to take, and that is to work collaboratively with the UK Government to deliver Brexit rather than trying to thwart it?

Might I just gently suggest that I think at the heart of his party's problem is the confusion between a slogan and a policy? Simply repeating 'Get Brexit done' is not going to get anyone anywhere, and if he thinks there is going to be money left to invest in the health service, in schools and in the police service after a 'hard deal' Brexit, I think he's living in cloud-cuckoo-land. 

Parliament has resumed sitting, as it should have been all along. Meanwhile, I continue to take every opportunity to speak up to protect Wales's interests, which are best served by remaining in the European Union. Later on today, I expect to be speaking to the Brexit Secretary, and I will also be attending the Joint Ministerial Council on European negotiations in the coming days.  

This Brexit-created failure in the constitution suggests that when the courts need to intervene, the constitution isn't working, and the truth is it hasn't been working for some time. Therefore, would the Minister agree that we need a written constitution, a reinvigorated federal state that is the United Kingdom, with Wales as an equal partner within that state, with a protected role, and the principle of subsidiarity being core to the new constitution, that meaning decisions made at the relevant level for the nature of that decision being made? Will he support that view, and will the Welsh Government support that view?

My personal view is that I agree with much of what the Member has said in his response. It goes to the heart of the fragility of the existing constitutional settlement, I think, when you can see the reliance it has on political parties in Westminster, and the UK Government currently, abiding by unwritten conventions. And in fact, the failure to do so—so frequently in the course of the last few weeks—has exposed significant weaknesses in our constitutional arrangements. It ought not to be the case that the Supreme Court should have to intervene on such a basic matter of constitutional propriety. It should never be the case that any Government should call the rule of law into question, like Boris Johnson has done in relation to the attempted prorogation of Parliament. It really lowers our standing, actually not just within the UK, but internationally, to see that sort of proceeding arrive at the Supreme Court. I absolutely endorse the principles that his question implies, that the constitution of the United Kingdom should be based on two principles—one of equality between the nations of the UK, and the principle of subsidiarity. It it those two principles, by the way, that have secured support within the European Union for membership broadly across the continent, and we would do well to be inspired by those principles here in the UK as well.

We are working closely with the third sector. We commissioned the Wales Council for Voluntary Action to undertake research into the impact of Brexit on the sector, and this has culminated in the 'Empowering Communities in the Context of Brexit' report, which was published by the WCVA on 20 September.

Thank you. I'm sure, Minister, that like me you've seen the letter that was sent by numerous third sector organisations, including very many from Wales, to the Prime Minister, warning of the grave concerns about a 'no deal' Brexit. The letter says a 'no deal' Brexit would be detrimental to civil society and the communities that we work with. The uncertainty, the predicted economic shock, the prospect of legal uncertainty, as well as the regression in rights and standards, present a profound risk to the values civil society stands for. Do you recognise the description in that letter? Do you recognise there is a particular risk to our most deprived communities arising from a 'no deal' Brexit? And what more can you do as a Welsh Government to ensure that, should the Tory Government proceed on this reckless course of action, we are as well prepared as we possibly can be?

I thank the Member for that important supplementary question. When you have organisations like Tenovus, Children in Wales, the Migrants' Rights Network, the Irish Congress of Trade Unions—when you've got bodies like that raising the alarm, which is what they do in that letter, I think it's incumbent on us all to sit up and listen to that. I was in an event organised by Charles Whitmore, who I think was party to the letter, a few months ago, in Belfast, actually. I think the impact of Brexit on civic society, and the role of the third sector, hasn't sufficiently been on the agenda across the UK. We have done what we can here to support third sector organisations, partly through the European transition fund. But I think the reason the letter is so powerful is because these are organisations working on the front line in people's lives, often working with vulnerable people—and we are absolutely concerned about the cumulative effect of a number of detrimental impacts that would flow and impact on them in the context of Brexit. One of the things we are trying to do in relation to securing the resilience of the third sector in the event of leaving the European Union is to include them very directly in the work of designing the replacement for structural funds here. There's a steering group, which is convened by Huw Irranca-Davies, and they have a central role in that. That principle of partnership between the third sector and other sectors, which has underpinned the work we've done during our membership of the European Union, needs to survive as and when we leave.

The Welsh Government has been working tirelessly on a cross-party basis since 2016 to protect Wales’s interests. As a result, the National Assembly has passed motions that rule out a 'no deal' exit, support the UK remaining in the EU, and support a second referendum to achieve that aim.

Thank you, Counsel General, for that reply. Does he not recognise the potential dangers of using Wales as a political pawn in the games that he's playing with Plaid Cymru? There's a great deal of suspicion about the way in which the Welsh Labour Party is cosying up to Plaid Cymru in advance of the 2021 election, which I think they're anticipating losing and, therefore, are now looking for support from Plaid Cymru. He recently said that

'the UK is a voluntary association of nations'

and that if Brexit goes ahead,

'any sensible government would have to reassess Wales's place in a changed UK',

clearly doffing his cap in the direction of independence. The First Minister has recently said that Wales's support for the union's not unconditional, and, at the Welsh Labour conference this year, there was a fringe meeting called 'Labour for independence' and the former First Minister graced it with his presence and spoke at it. And Vaughan Roderick from the BBC said recently that fringe meeting would never have been allowed a few years ago, and Welsh Labour would not have accepted the invitation to a YesCymru meeting a couple of years ago. Will he commit Labour unambiguously to continuing within the United Kingdom and breaking off this dalliance with Plaid Cymru, which is giving an unnecessary credence to the possibility of independence? 

Well, I'm not sure where this fits in to discussions with the opposition parties. These are debates that all mature parties would expect to have in a devolved context. I've been absolutely categorical: I believe, the Welsh Government believes, that the best future for Wales is as part of a UK that is flourishing and reformed. The pressures that have come from Brexit have exposed fault lines in the UK constitution that my reply to Hefin David's question earlier attempted to draw out. I would just say to him that the biggest threat to the union is the kind of 'no deal' Brexit that he himself is an advocate of. He and others are taking a wrecking ball to the constitution, and those of us who have a much greater commitment to the future of Wales are seeking to do what we can to strengthen the constitution to deal with some of those consequences. 

The Welsh Government has been working to plan and prepare for the harmful impacts and implications of Brexit, and in particular a 'no deal' Brexit, on the economy, public services and communities of Wales, including working with the local resilience forum to assess the implications of delays at ports in Pembrokeshire.

Well, Minister, as you will be aware, there are two ports in my constituency—Fishguard and Milford Haven—and both of them are strategically important for the local economy, and, indeed, for the national economy. A report by the External Affairs and Additional Legislation Committee in the Assembly into the effects of Brexit on Welsh ports showed that Wales hasn’t taken advantage of the funds available in the past that were linked to the trans-European transport network. Indeed, Ian Davies from Stena told the committee that little in terms of funds had been accessed, and nothing of great significance over the past 15 years. Now, given that connectivity with Welsh ports is crucially important for their success, can you give us the latest updates as to what the Welsh Government is doing to meet recommendation 12 made by that committee that made it clear that the Welsh Government should make clear commitments on developing infrastructure for the future, including highways?

We, of course, are collaborating with the ports in Pembrokeshire in the specific context of Brexit to ensure that we keep an overview on the impact on the ports of Brexit. We’ve been collaborating, as I mentioned previously, with the local resilience forum that has been discussing plans for waiting areas if alternative arrangements were required in the future for those ports. But, as regards the Member’s specific question about that specific recommendation, I will ensure that I write to him with an answer.FootnoteLink

I refer you to the oral statement given by the Minister for Housing and Local Government yesterday on preparing our public services in Wales for a 'no deal' Brexit. Other Ministers and I also gave oral statements on 'no deal' preparedness.

Back in February, the Wales Audit Office reported that specific and detailed political scrutiny of Brexit preparedness has generally been limited within local authorities in Wales. Unfortunately, in many councils, that still holds true today, with elected members having had very little in terms of Brexit discussions. Is this not something that worries you, particularly as we could be facing a 'no deal' scenario in the not too distant future, as I'm sure you're aware? If so, what guidance is the Welsh Government giving to local authorities to ensure that elected members are having these discussions on the potential local implications within their respective areas and responding accordingly?

Well, I thank the Member for that important question. I was with the Minister for Housing and Local Government this morning at the Partnership Council for Wales, at which the Welsh Local Government Association and several individual councils were represented. He refers to the report in February from the auditor general, which related to a period of research, which somewhat, necessarily, predated that report. 

I think it is fair to say that the quality of scrutiny amongst local councils generally in relation to matters related to Brexit has improved markedly over that period, and he will, perhaps, have seen the follow-up report that the auditor general published on Friday of last week, which commended public services in Wales, local government, Welsh Government and others for continuing to step up the preparation work. And I think it referred specifically to matters relating to the scrutiny of Brexit appearing more frequently in the intervening period on the agendas of cabinet and other scrutiny committees in local councils.

He'll also perhaps recall that, in March, Grant Thornton commissioned a diagnostic review in relation to preparedness and that an update of that review has been requested. And some of the work that we have funded in relation to local government has had a specific focus on scrutiny for the reason that his question implied, because it's an important aspect of democratic accountability in relation to this vital issue.

While we believe Wales’s interests are best protected by remaining in the EU, I continue to highlight the vital importance of the full involvement of the Welsh Government in the development of UK negotiating positions on withdrawal issues and any future relationship with the EU.

You’ll be aware, of course, of the warnings—and we heard some from the agricultural sector over the summer—of the possibility of civil unrest as a result of the circumstances arising from a ‘no deal’ Brexit. So, can I ask you what preparations and discussions you’ve had with the relevant authorities in light of those possibilities, because the closer we come to a ‘no deal’ Brexit, then the closer, I would think, we come to that possibility?

That is a very important question. Of course, we must ensure that arrangements are in place to deal with such occurrences, wherever they occur and in whichever context. But I acknowledge the reference that the Member makes.

As regards specific examples, we have no information on that at present, but the civil contingencies process collaborating across the whole of the United Kingdom is in place, and that is one of the examples where the networking is at its strongest across the UK. And he may have seen that we referred to those recently on the general preparedness, which we published in that paper. But I assure the Member that this is always one of the priorities, to ensure that joint arrangements with local resilience forums and the other services are in place to ensure that we monitor this and are ready to respond as the need arises.

In 'A brighter future for Wales', we set out in detail the evidence that shows that Wales’s best interests are protected by remaining in the European Union. I continue to take every opportunity to call on the UK Government to legislate for a second referendum to achieve that aim.

Counsel General, in the light of what we now know about everything that has happened on Brexit, what the implications would be for the Welsh economy, do you agree with Jeremy Corbyn's position that it is absolutely right that that choice should now be given back to the people to take a decision in the form of a second referendum?

Absolutely. We've been very clear, haven't we, as a party that our position is this matter should be put back to the people. When we speak to Welsh voters here in Wales, we will be advocating that they vote to remain. We advocated that position in 2016. We didn't manage to persuade people then, but I think it is clear in what's happened in the three years since then and the cavalier way in which those people who voted for leave have broken the promises made to the people of Wales in the referendum, that we will continue to advocate the position for 'remain'. We think, as I know that he also feels passionately, that Wales's interests are best served as part of the European Union. 

I welcome the unanimous, clear and unambiguous judgment of the Supreme Court. It's only right that Parliament is sitting at such a crucial time for Wales and the United Kingdom and its constitution.  

Thank you, Minister. Following the Supreme Court's ruling, the Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, has apologised to Her Majesty the Queen, but has still not apologised to Parliament or the people of Wales or the United Kingdom. Minister, may I applaud the decisive action of the Welsh Government to act as an intervener in this case, and can the Minister outline the consequences and implications that the judgment will have on the National Assembly for Wales and how it operates within the legal framework of the United Kingdom?

Well, I thank the Member for highlighting that particular aspect, because the judgment of the Supreme Court expressly refers to the work of the National Assembly in the reasoning that Lady Hale gave in what is an important judgment. It amazes me that some Members in this Chamber still seem to think that intervening in the Supreme Court proceedings was not an appropriate action. The rationale for doing so, I would remind Members, is because we in this Chamber and in committees of this Assembly have spent time passing motions, debating, passing secondary legislation that are predicated on the ability of Parliament to legislate in relation to Brexit, and the Prime Minister's attempt to suspend Parliament had the effect of preventing it from sitting to complete its work. So, we had a very direct interest in the outcome of that judgment, and so I absolutely welcome the clarity of an unanimous 11-justice decision and the beneficial impact that has on our work here in the Assembly. She will know, I know, that the prorogation of Parliament, had it actually taken effect, would have had the effect of causing primary legislation that we required to be passed to protect the interests of Wales to fall. We know now as a consequence of that judgment that not only was the action unlawful but that, in effect, Parliament was never, in fact, prorogued. 

Despite a meeting of the JMC(EN) on 12 September and a meeting with James Duddridge MP on 23 September, we've not received any details of the proposals, including the non-papers that have been discussed with the EU. I continue to call for these to be shared with Welsh Ministers, but I plan to have a conversation later today with the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, I hope, on this topic. 

I thank the Minister for that response. Indeed, James Duddridge appeared in front of the External Affairs and Additional Legislation Committee only last week, and he was very courteous and tried to give as much information as he could, but it was clear from his responses that the level of engagement on these critical issues with the Welsh Government—. It was simply not a matter that he deemed important enough to actually pick up the phone, come to a meeting or discuss this with the Welsh Government, and yet, at that time, one of the options that was being mooted, that was being rumoured, was indeed the reintroduction of some sort of customs barrier, some sort of line down the middle of the North sea that would affect not only Liverpool, but places like Milford Haven, and so on. Now we hear that what's on the table is the idea of possible customs posts that are not right on the border but within a few kilometres of the border in Northern Ireland, which goes to the heart, I have to say, of the Belfast agreement and the peace process. So, does it disturb him and the Welsh Government that the UK Government does not take it upon itself to discuss these matters in detail with its devolved partners within the United Kingdom, because the implications are not only for the UK Government; the implications, whether it's on the peace dividend that we currently enjoy, or whether it's on trade and tariff borders and where those impact particularly on ports, will impact all of the devolved nations and regions, not just England? 

The Member makes a very, very important point in his supplementary question. The JMC(EN) exists to provide the UK Government and the devolved Governments an opportunity to come together to seek to agree some aspects of the oversight of these negotiations. It seems to us, fundamental to that, that that should involve, at the very least, a process of sharing sufficient information for that process to be meaningful rather than apparent. And I think the failure to agree to share those non-papers is very, very disappointing in the context of those terms of reference. I can assure the Member that that is a point I made in exactly those terms directly to James Duddridge at the meeting I had with him, and I've subsequently made that point to the Secretary of State himself as well.

In relation to the speculation, I think, that we've seen so far in relation to the possible proposal with regard to Northern Ireland, the Government's position is very clear: if we are going to leave, it is better for us to leave with a deal. So, we wish the UK Government success in seeking to negotiate a deal because that is better than a 'no deal' situation, but what I would say is that it feels to me very late in the day to be making an initial proposal of this sort. I would also say that it's not likely to be productive to do that in the context of setting an ultimatum on a matter that is so important. And so, we would have made those observations had we had an opportunity to engage, as the Joint Ministerial Committee structures suggest we should have.   

The Welsh Government has worked continuously since 2016 to plan and prepare for Brexit, and to achieve the best possible outcome for Wales. We've particularly focused on preparations for 'no deal', and we published our action plan on 16 September. 

Of course, the UK Government's requirement to seek an alternative deal is only because Labour voted down the previous deal three times in the House of Commons. How do you respond to the statements made earlier this month by the Irish sea south trade director for Stena Line, the port authority at Holyhead, a Mr Davies, who, when asked if there'll be disruption, said, 'Yes, I think there will be for the first day or two just because of uncertainty, but this will be very short term. The traffic flow through Holyhead as it stands, and with the plans in place, I don't foresee any problems. There is the Welsh Government emergency plan on the A55—I don't see it being used myself'? 

I thank the Member for that point. I don't think I heard a question, but—

'How do you respond to the statement by—?'

Oh, forgive me. Yes. Well, just to make the obvious point, the initial response is that many people voted against the deal, including Boris Johnson and half the parliamentary Conservative Party, so I think the prospect that we had a deal in the bag that the Labour Party is responsible for scuppering I think is particularly risible. The question needs to be asked what the proposed renegotiation is of the deal that the Prime Minister proposes, because he will find that he has a hardcore rump of European Research Group members who are going to be hard to placate in any version of this agreement.

But I think, on the point about the port of Holyhead, he will know from the statement that the Minister for transport made in the Chamber yesterday that we've been working with the port to ensure that we have plans in place in order to manage disruption as best we can in the event that there are tailbacks. He will also know that we are looking at those in the context of information that has been provided more recently from the UK Government to ascertain that we have arrangements in place. But I would just say to the Member, obviously, we very much hope that the arrangements are not required and that, if they are required, they work effectively, but I think the broader point, which his question misses, is that a huge amount of resource, energy and financial resource is being committed across this Government and other Governments across the UK to prepare for a 'no deal' Brexit, which is perfectly within the gift of his own Prime Minister to rule out.  

Thank you to the Minister for answering all of the questions this afternoon.

The next item would have been the topical questions, but no topical questions were received today. 

So, the next item is the 90-second statements, and the first statement is from Vaughan Gething.

Thank you, Llywydd. October is Black History Month. It is a time to celebrate the achievements of black people and people of colour for our contribution to our country.

We recognise remarkable people from our past and our present who have made a real difference, sometimes without the recognition that they deserve. In Cardiff South and Penarth, we are lucky to have a number of role models to recognise and celebrate. Two such people are from Butetown: Billy Boston and Betty Campbell. Billy Boston is the son of a west African father and an Irish mother. He was overlooked by the union game. I have no doubt that his colour explains why. He is, however, recognised as one of the greatest ever British rugby league players. There's a statue of him on Wembley Way and in Wigan where he played most of his rugby. Sadly, his home city has not yet provided him the same recognition.

Betty Campbell was the first black headteacher in Wales. I knew her; I didn't always agree with her. But despite our well-advertised differences, her historic achievements are undeniable. Following a public vote on hidden heroines, Betty will be the first woman to be honoured with a statue in the capital city. There are many more figures to learn about and celebrate from across our country. I hope that Members across the Chamber take the opportunity to promote Black History Month, to remember our difficulties and our struggles, because this is not just black history, it is an essential part of the history of Wales and the wider world. 

This week has seen the forty-fifth anniversary of the opening of Swansea Sound, Swansea's independent local radio station. I would, first of all, like to congratulate them on their forty-fifth anniversary. For those people living in the area, it's well-known just how important that institution is for our part of south-west Wales, which is Neath Port Talbot, Swansea and Carmarthenshire.

It began broadcasting on 30 September 1974, as the first commercial radio station in Wales, the seventh in the United Kingdom, but the first to broadcast in both English and Welsh. In 1995, the station was split into two separate services because of battles over frequencies, and the two stations are Swansea Sound, which continued as it was previously, and The Wave, aiming at a younger listenership, which probably left me out. 

Swansea Sound has had a large number of presenters over the last 45 years, many of whom have gone on to national broadcasting, both in Wales and in London. It has also had some very long-serving broadcasters, such as Kevin Johns and Steve Dewitt, both of whom are incredibly well-known in the Swansea area.

It's been involved in organising events and campaigns, such as, every Christmas it raises money for charity and it organised an event at the Liberty Stadium for veterans, which was attended by several other Assembly Members from Swansea. The highlight of the Swansea Sound week for politicians is the Sunday morning phone-in with Kevin Johns. I don't think there's any local Member representing that part of south-west Wales who hasn't been on Swansea Sound, and one or two from outside the area. With the opportunity to answer questions from the public as they phone in, it's been a huge success, and I'm looking forward to the next 45 years, but I think somebody else might be making this speech. [Laughter.]

This Thursday, on 3 October, we will celebrate the one-hundred-and-sixtieth anniversary of the Pryce-Jones mail order store and the one-hundred-and-fortieth anniversary of the opening of the Pryce-Jones Royal Welsh Warehouse. A celebration organised by the heritage hub for mid Wales at the grade II listed Pryce-Jones Royal Welsh Warehouse in Newtown will mark the life of Sir Pryce Pryce-Jones, who was the pioneer of mail order home shopping.

Pryce-Jones had a draper's shop in Newtown and came up with the idea of dispatching goods to his customers by post using the railway. His drapery business was so popular, he dreamt up the mail order catalogue so that those who couldn't travel to his Newtown shop could buy his goods. I'm told that Queen Victoria and Florence Nightingale were amongst the patrons, and his Welsh flannel was sold to customers around the world.

He is also credited with the invention of the sleeping bag and was the MP for Montgomeryshire on two occasions. Tomorrow we will see two plaques unveiled by the entrepreneur's great-great-grandson, David Pryce-Jones, and the High Sheriff of Powys, David Lloyd Peate, to mark the pioneer's contribution to the heritage of Montgomeryshire and the world birthplace of mail order.

Today, over 200 people took part in the annual Cycle on the Senedd, and they were joined by cross-party Assembly Members and, indeed, a couple of Ministers too. They did so because they believe that the Active Travel (Wales) Act 2013, that groundbreaking law passed by this Senedd, can help solve many of the most pressing problems facing Wales. But they also did so because they want to see the ambition of that groundbreaking legislation to make walking and cycling the most natural ways to travel in Wales a reality. And yet, the sad truth is that since we passed that Act, the number of people walking and cycling in Wales has actually declined. They believe that when the active travel Act is really properly funded and backed by a comprehensive evidence-based strategy, we'll see that breakthrough that we need. And these outcomes are vitally important.

More people getting about on foot or bike instead of in cars would help us to achieve all seven of our national goals set out in the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015. It's all about displacing car journeys with walking and cycling, cutting carbon emissions, reducing air pollution, improving health, and promoting equality by providing a much more affordable form of transport. And it helps our economy by reducing congestion and it aids community cohesion by increasing social interaction.

It was inspiring today to see people from all over Wales take part in the ride from the wonderful Pedal Power centre in Pontcanna. I'm delighted that so many Assembly Members of all parties joined us on the steps of the Senedd today, and some on the cycle across Cardiff too, to demonstrate their support for more and better active travel.

This is a real demonstration of their faith that this institution will deliver on the promises made when passing this world-leading piece of legislation, and we look forward to next year's event being even bigger and better and hearing of the progress made on making Wales the best country in which to cycle and to walk too.

Now, a motion to elect Members to the Committee on Assembly Electoral Reform. I call for a member of the Business Committee to formally move the motion. Caroline Jones.

Formally.

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

The next item, therefore, is the Standards of Conduct Committee report, report 02-19. I call on the Chair of the committee to move the motion. Jayne Bryant.

Diolch, Llywydd. As Chair of the Standards of Conduct Committee, I formally move the motion.

The committee considered the report from the National Assembly for Wales Commissioner for Standards in relation to a complaint made against Leanne Wood AM regarding the use of unparliamentary language. The Standards of Conduct Committee gave the commissioner's report careful consideration, and our report sets out the committee's judgment as to the sanction that is appropriate to this case.

The facts related to the complaint and the committee's reasons for its recommendation are set out in full in the committee's report. The motion tabled invites the Assembly to endorse the committee's recommendations.

Leanne Wood.

I may have a reputation for being robust in my response to trolls and bullies online, but I don't normally engage in language that some may consider to be unparliamentary. This is the first time that I've called someone 'an arsehole' on social media, and whilst I can't promise that I won't swear on social media ever again, I can understand why, on receiving a complaint, the standards commissioner felt unable to be seen to be condoning the use by an Assembly Member of what he considers to be an offensive word.

However, this case raises a number of questions. The case that follows this one is arguably similar if you just take this question as an Assembly Member's use of unparliamentary language on social media. But because the Member in that case has chosen to issue an apology to the Llywydd, there is no censure for him. I, too, was offered a chance to apologise in order to avoid a censure, and the committee, in fairness, had a lot of sympathy with my position on this when I addressed them. But it would not be honest or right for me to issue an apology, because this is much more than a case of just swearing on Twitter. I, along with countless other women who are active in politics, regularly receive trolling, abusive tweets and general nastiness on social media on a daily basis. Sometimes, it's co-ordinated; undoubtedly, it's rooted in misogyny. 

The context, therefore, where a well-known online misogynist bully, who describes himself as a blogger, issued a snide passive-aggressive tweet, a thinly veiled attack on my colleague Delyth Jewell before she'd even started in her role and before she was in a position to properly defend herself, after I had seen this person issue attack after attack on mostly women, but others, including disabled people, gay people, trans people and so on, usually from a right or far-right perspective, calling people names like feminazi, socialist handmaids, woke, Nietzscheists, virtue-signalling snowflakes—terms that those who pay attention to such matters will know are straight out of the far-right play book. 

These types of attacks are personal, but they are also political, and the timing, after our group had experienced such a horrific loss just that week, well, enough was enough. I decided that the best way to stand up to that bully was to use language that he was sure to understand. It's not language that I would normally use, but sometimes, when standing up to bullies, you have to deploy whatever strategies you deem necessary.

There is something very wrong with an organisation's complaints procedures when the people standing up to a bully, and so often we are women, people of colour or LGBT people calling them out, and then we are the people who get the complaints, and we are the people who get censured.

Take the case of Naga Munchetty. Just last week, Naga was censured by the BBC for questioning Donald Trump's racism. People have to be able to call out and robustly challenge this growing scourge that comes with increased support for far-right parties. Sometimes, panels and procedures don't get it right, and as at the BBC, there are mechanisms in place to reverse poor or wrong decisions, and we have an opportunity to do something similar here. The mechanism exists here through Members' votes. Will we do the same?

I feel I have to make Members aware that this is the third complaint made to the standards commissioner that I'm aware of about me in the last year. Prior to this, I'm only aware of one complaint ever since my election to this place in 2003. Thankfully, the commissioner has deemed that the other two complaints do not warrant any further action.

For one of those complaints, there were 37 separate complainants, all about the same thing, coincidentally after a far-right politician had tweeted the complaints procedure information and encouraged his followers to complain. Well, that little ruse seems to have been seen through and dismissed as vexatious, and I am grateful to the standards commissioner for that. It is dangerous to have far-right politicians in the mainstream almost directing their bands of followers to bully, troll and intimidate people online and to make official complaints, yet that seems to be what's happening.

I don't need to outline the impact of online bullying and trolling, or how it is used to silence women and minorities, because the support statements in the report from Women's Aid and GlitchUK, the charity that's been set up to tackle online abuse, outline all that very well, and I'm grateful to those organisations and everyone else who has written in support on this.

A lot has been said about Members being almost obliged to support the committee's recommendations for a censure, that somehow the committee, the commissioner or the process will be undermined were Members to disagree with the censure recommendation. What is the point of AMs having a vote on this if all we can do is rubber-stamp what a committee has already decided?

I am grateful to the Plaid Cymru group for backing me and the principle that we have to differentiate between those who bully and those who stand up to bullies. I know that there's solidarity from other benches in this Chamber for me as well and I'm very grateful for that. I hope this afternoon that Members will feel able to vote in line with what they honestly believe to be right on this question. Diolch yn fawr.

I have very many speakers who've asked to contribute to this 15-minute debate. I have enough speakers to last an hour. Most of you can expect not to be called in this debate, which was scheduled for only 15 minutes. Andrew R.T. Davies.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. I rise as a member of the standards committee and speak to the report, obviously, that's laid before the Assembly this afternoon. It is, without question, unparliamentary language that the report refers to. I have a huge amount of sympathy for the situation that Leanne presented to the committee—that she and other Members across all parties face here. Only this week, for example, in the renaming of this institution, I've been told to go back to England, the place where I'll feel more at home than Wales, because I'm not Welsh because I don't speak Welsh. There's a mute button on my social media. I can mute people. I do not use unparliamentary language on social media. That's not to say it might not happen in the future, because that spark might go on and, one night, one day, something might be said that will really enrage me.

But it is a fact that this report, and I think the Member agrees with this fact—that none of the facts are contested in the report, and the report is accurate. Each Member in this process is afforded that opportunity. It is a fact that it is a cross-party committee that has brought this report to the Chamber, and Plaid Cymru's Member on that committee supported wholeheartedly the report. So, it is a little surprising to see that, as a group, now, you are dissenting from the Member's position, which she took in that committee meeting. That is a statement of fact. [Interruption.] Well, if I could just finish, I'd be grateful, as I didn't interrupt when you were standing.

I think the points you made on the wider issues of trolling, and also the abuse that politicians and members of society across the board face, is something that is a phenomenon in the modern age. Twenty or 25 years ago, there wasn't social media, there wasn't the intrusion into our homes, where you can switch your phone on and get that abuse in your home. No-one should have to put up with that. But it is a fact that this institution set up a standards procedure that is clearly defined and that has a commissioner at its heart, who presents a report. That report then comes to the committee with the outcome of the standards commissioner's investigation. That's what we're discussing here this afternoon. I appreciate the Member used the term that is in question here—the word—and I am trying to avoid using it because I do not believe that it is right to use it in this Chamber. Frankly, if it isn't right to be used in this Chamber, then clearly it's not right to be used on a platform when engaging with members of the public.

It is a fact that the complainant in this particular case is not the blogger that you referred to—I don't know whether there is an association with the blogger—but a third party. The Member cited the blogger in this particular instance, whom the word was used against, but the complainant was a third party—it was not that individual. I don't know who the complainant was because we weren't privy to the name; it was not released.

Don't you think they've got mates?

I'm just making the point that it was a third party. [Interruption.] Well, I don't know whether the person was a mate or not, but it could have been someone not associated at all. But that's an important consideration that this Chamber needs to reflect on.

There are three things that need to be reflected on with this report that's before us today. One: is the report contested for its accuracy? No, it's not. Two: is that word, associated with this report, suitable to be used in this context, in the Chamber or on a public platform that is Twitter? I would suggest not. The third and final outcome is: do we need to do more about trolling and social media activity in general? Of course we do. But we shouldn't mix the two together with the report that is before the Senedd this afternoon, and the wider issues that this report and publicity around issues that are raised in this report, which are raised on a time-by-time basis and that come up virtually every day of the week now.

I do hope that the Senedd will have the confidence to endorse this report, which has gone through full scrutiny, cross-party support and the rigour of the standards commissioner's office and investigation—which this Assembly itself, and the Members within this Chamber, elected to establish—and the rules that govern his investigations.

The refusal of any Assembly Member to accept the findings of the standards committee is completely reprehensible, because it means that the code of conduct becomes obsolete. We would, in fact, practice being a ruleless Assembly. We must remember that the whole of the Assembly voted to introduce this code of conduct. I also find the comments on social media with regard to the standards commissioner totally unacceptable. Sir Roderick simply gathers evidence and decides whether he believes the behaviour of a Member breaks the rules contained in the code of conduct guide. It is the standards committee—

Will the Member take an intervention?

—that decides whether to agree with this finding. Yes, of course.

The only question I have is, procedurally, the committee brings a report to this Assembly in the same way as any other committee would do, so that the Assembly as a whole can come to a decision. Surely you have to recognise that we're all within our right to vote whichever way we wish to vote on this.

Well, of course. There was an opportunity for the Assembly Member to talk to the committee and to explain her views, and we took those views into account before we made a decision. But it's the standards committee that decides whether to agree with his findings and, if so, set the level of sanctions that it feels are appropriate. It is also important to note that the Member agreed with the factual content of Sir Roderick's report. By refusing to accept these sanctions, a Member is ignoring the decision of a cross-party committee—in this case, a committee that included a Plaid Cymru Member who agreed to the sanctions being imposed. Whilst I am willing to accept that there was a level of provocation from the person who was subject of the comments, and there is no doubt that there was extreme provocation from that person, provocation cannot be a defence for breaking the Assembly's code of conduct, particularly on social media. The committee was satisfied that the language used was inappropriate conduct for an Assembly Member, and it took into account the provocation aspect of the case in setting the level of sanction imposed. Refusal to accept such sanctions leads to anarchy in the Assembly procedural rules. I urge the Assembly to endorse the report.

There is an attempt to make this debate about one word used by Leanne Wood. It is, after all, the simplest thing to do, but then it is simpler to arrest someone who steals a loaf of bread than ask why they are hungry. It is simpler to jail a woman moved to violence than address decades of coercive control. It is simpler to censure a woman of colour than listen to her call out everyday racism on tv. And that is what happens every day, because it is simpler not to rock the boat, not to lift the lid, to say that the system must be respected. It would be simpler to just say that Leanne should not have used that word, give her a slap on the wrist and then move on. That's what most people want to happen. It would be simple and wrong. When you are dealing with people, prejudice and politics, systems don't always fit. You need to inject a bit of judgment and humanity. You also need to be able to take the long view. So, it isn't Leanne's choice of words that I want to focus on today, it's the double standards at play, the context of the situation and the words, the attitudes and the actions that prompted her anger.

'"Women's rights and international development". God help @Plaid_Cymru".

These are the words that really give context to today's debate. This is the ancient, entitled, misogynistic attitude that runs like a torrent through the heart of this discussion, and through the heart of Welsh politics. The world view has not shifted as much as we would like to pretend in this place. It has not shifted in this place as much as we often pretend. As recently as last year, an Assembly Member, not a blogger or a commentator, but an elected Member, produced a sexist, deeply insulting video about a woman he works with. A councillor in my own borough, who actually chaired the safer communities committee at the time, repeatedly referred to refugees as 'rapefugees' on Facebook; 5,000 refugees died in the Mediterranean the same year he made those remarks, hundreds of women and children fleeing persecution. The friends and colleagues of the Prime Minister say he has a woman problem. He refers to Muslim women as 'letterboxes', an intervention that preceded a 375 per cent rise in Islamophobic incidents. The Prime Minister used the death of Jo Cox to make a flippant point about Brexit, an outburst that moved MPs to tears, not because they are women or weak, but because they mourn their friend and feel genuine fear for their own safety. The Prime Minister's own words are being used in death threats against women MPs.

Can I tell you the two things that connect the Prime Minister, the councillor and that Assembly Member? They are all men and none of them were censured. And are we really getting ready to censure Leanne Wood for a one-word outburst—a politician whose opinions on gender issues and immigration have earned her death threats and daily abuse that require police intervention? Really? She’s the bad guy in all this? Here’s the third difference between Leanne’s one-word offence and that of the three men I mentioned: hers was an entirely instinctive response, a human response to someone known for sexist views who is attacking a new, young, female colleague shortly after the death of a much-loved friend and colleague. It was not a planned intervention designed to provoke outrage, hatred or division.

The lesson here seems to be that as long as you invest money and focus-group your intolerant language, and choose a message carrier in trousers, then you’re free to say what you like, unchecked by the authorities. It simply does not make sense, measured against anything and everything we claim to hold dear in this Assembly. If the result of the policy is nonsensical, then surely we should not shrug and blame the process—we should change the policy and the process to match the reality being faced by too many women. And can I say to Andrew R.T. Davies: most of the abuse I get online is not even repeatable here or—[Interruption.] No, I haven’t got time. Here or any anywhere else.

I've asked twice for an intervention.

And we should not ignore the backdrop to this inconsistency, and that is the tone set by journalists and commentators of a certain age, gender and class. They are wonderfully quick to claim that equality’s a done deal, despite all evidence to the contrary. There is a belief amongst this class that feminism in the UK is anachronistic, and as for women’s rights, well, ‘God help us all’, to misquote a certain blogger.

Next week we welcome Julia Gillard to Wales, the former Australian Prime Minister. Most of the people in this Chamber won’t need reminding about her famous speech on misogyny, sexism and double standards in 2012, a speech that helped rewrite the dictionary definition of misogyny to include ‘entrenched prejudice against women’. Men and women from this Assembly will be queuing to meet her when she’s here, rightly so—she’s a brilliant politician. But ask yourself before you meet here whether you’ve met the challenge she set in 2012, that there should be no place for sexism, no place for misogyny, no place for double standards.

Now, Leanne Wood is not a political ally of mine, but I have never felt closer to her than throughout this episode. Her reaction was human, instinctive and protective, and it is those three characteristics that continue to bind women from all parties together in this Chamber in the face of dehumanising threats and abuse. I know that we won’t all vote the same way today, but I cannot believe that we don’t at least feel the same way. I commend Leanne for standing her ground. This is no time to be punishing women who, when they are abused, threatened and insulted, say ‘No more’, no matter how impolitely they may say it.

I want to remind Members of the context surrounding all of this. Context is everything in a case like this. When our friend and colleague Steffan had passed away in January, nobody, including me, wanted to think about what would come next. We wanted to grieve for our friend. And I had decided that I wouldn’t say anything in public, on social media or otherwise, until after his funeral. Events meant that I had to be returned quite swiftly, but I did not want to take the oath until the funeral had passed. So, when my name was announced on Twitter, I didn’t say anything about it. I was already feeling tremendous guilt and grief. A few very vocal accounts on Twitter immediately responded to, I think, the BBC's short article, making assumptions about what a disappointment of an AM I was already going to be, and that was because the first line of my personal Twitter biography noted that I worked in women’s rights and international development. My job at the time had been to be a women’s rights campaigner for ActionAid. It was a job I was very proud of having. But that one line was enough to infuriate some people, and to assume that that was all I was going to be interested in. I didn’t feel like I could answer and speak up for myself in the circumstances. Leanne did what she did, in large part, to support me. Leanne was also grieving for her friend, and she could see how ill-judged, insensitive and cruel the timing and the tone of those messages about me were. So, I was incredibly grateful to her then, and I'm still grateful to her now, for sticking up for me when I couldn't do that for myself. So, I will be voting against this censure. I hope other Members will do the same.

Jayne Bryant, the Chair, to reply to the debate. 

Diolch, Llywydd. I'd first like to start by thanking all Members who've contributed to this debate today, and I'd particularly like to thank Leanne for saying her words as well. I think some of the complexities around implementing a standards regime are apparent from some of the views that we've heard today. So, I think it might be worth setting out a few facts on the system to start with. An independent standards commissioner is appointed through an open and transparent appointment process. The commissioner uses the code of conduct and supporting guidance, including the dignity and respect policy, voted on by the whole Assembly, to investigate the complaints. If he finds that a complaint has breached the code, that complaint, and the commissioner's report on why he found a breach, is brought before a cross-party committee. The committee's role is to take into account the report of the commissioner and decide if a—and, if so, what—sanction is to be given.

The committee's role is quasi-judicial. We cannot, and do not, make decisions on party political lines. We've been given the responsibility by this Assembly to uphold the highest of standards, and we're all incredibly mindful of that. I, and the committee, have a huge amount of sympathy with the Member in this instance. The trolling, bullying, misogyny, racism, homophobia and so on that happen on social media platforms are reprehensible. Politicians and other public figures are often seen as fair game. We have more to do to support Members on this. I have a great deal of respect for the Member, and there's no doubt in my mind that the Member will continue to call out misogyny, racism, homophobia, bullying and trolling, as she always does, and she always does in a robust way. This is not a problem with the complaint. The committee are united in considering the level of abuse that the Member has faced as completely unacceptable. The rules we have ensure that we maintain those high standards around language we use. The committee's decision was based on the use of a word—however minor the Member or others see it—which breaches the code of conduct and the dignity and respect policy. Just to draw attention—I think Lynne mentioned in her contribution the issue of a Member here, Gareth Bennett, who had a complaint before us. And, in that instance, we suspended the Member for a week without pay. The debate and language about politics at the moment is toxic. We have to maintain our own standards so we don't descend ourselves. These are the high standards that we have set ourselves in our rules.

The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? [Objection.] I will defer voting until voting time. 

The next item is a report by the Standards of Conduct Committee, and that report is report 03-19. I call on the Chair of the committee to move the motion. Jayne Bryant. 

Diolch, Llywydd. As Chair of the Standards of Conduct Committee, I formally move the motion. The committee considered the report from the commissioner for standards in relation to a complaint made against Hefin David AM, regarding use of unparliamentary language. The Standards of Conduct Committee gave the commissioner's report careful consideration, and our report sets out the committee's judgment as to the sanction that is appropriate to this case. The facts relating to the complaint, and the committee's reasons for its recommendation, are set out in full in the committee's report. The motion tabled invites the Assembly to endorse this committee's recommendation. 

I feel like I've been existing in a parallel universe for the past 15 minutes, Llywydd. What I would say—. What I'm about to say has no bearing on the previous debate, in my mind. I'm reflecting upon my experience and what I would like to say with regard to my views and this particular standards commissioner's report. It is my view—and I know, from what's just been said, that it's not the view of some people in the Chamber—that, when you are found in breach of the rules, it is right to apologise for breaching those rules. And I endorse therefore what, particularly, Andrew R.T. Davies said when he was speaking in his position as a member of the standards committee. The decision of the standards committee should be respected, and, if you don't respect it, it can have the effect, and will have the effect, of undermining the standards process in this place, and one which was set up by this Assembly in order to manage and measure standards that we would expect to meet. [Interruption.] No, I'd rather not give way, thank you; I'd rather complete what I'd like to say.

Before I get to my response, I'd like to reflect upon what it is like to be on social media as a politician. And I can only speak from the point of view of being a male on social media. I expressed a view, and what has caused the abuse I received—I expressed a view about independence for Wales. And it wasn't a particularly massively anti-view, it was a skeptical view, but a view that was open to future debate in this Chamber and other places. I received a torrent of abuse, from people of both genders, some anonymous, some not, and some of it was horrific—some of it was horrific. I received a direct message—and I gave my word to Adam Price I wouldn't name the person, but I received a direct message from a young Plaid member that drew attention to my appearance and was in the strongest possible language that you could imagine. And it was dealt with properly and appropriately by Adam Price, quickly, and I received a direct apology the next day. But it was an awful thing to receive. I've also had my mental health questioned, and my appearance questioned, on Twitter, and my friends at home have remarked upon the abuse that I've received.

It's an incredibly difficult thing to do, when you're receiving a torrent of abuse simply for expressing a view—and seeing a constituent being abused for expressing a view—not to respond. I responded in the heat of the moment. I responded in the language that you've seen. I even managed to try out my Welsh in my response. And I was then reported for doing so. What I do regret is responding in that moment. And that is why, Llywydd, I've issued that apology to you for unparliamentary language. That apology is issued only to you and only for that breach of the rules, and only because I believe it is appropriate to do so with respect to the standards committee.

The committee Chair to reply. Jayne Bryant.

Diolch, Llywydd. I'd just like to thank the Member for his contribution and for the words that he's said today and his apology to you, Llywydd. He's accepted the standards committee's report. So, thank you, Llywydd.

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

The next item is a debate by an individual Member under Standing Order 11.21(v), historic industrial infrastructure. I call on David Rees to move the motion.

Diolch, Llywydd. And I move the motion in my name and in the names of Leanne Wood and Vikki Howells. I apologise before I start for my voice—unfortunately, as you might have guessed, I've not been so well lately, but we'll move on.

Now, Wales is a nation with a great history. And we have many buildings from medieval times that reflect that history—whether it be the many castles that remain visible, or the many religious sites across our country. But we move on a few hundred years and we also have a vast and wondrous industrial heritage, especially from a time when Wales was a driver of major exports such as coal, copper, iron, steel. But it's not only the buildings that produced those exports—the mines and the ironworks, et cetera—that remind us of that industrial past, but also the infrastructure that was put in place to allow those products to be transported. Now, some of that infrastructure is still visible. For example, in my own constituency, we can see the huge arches of the railway viaduct and those of the aqueduct, both in Pontrhydyfen, or the seven arches of the bridge in Cymmer. I'm sure many Members this afternoon, when they speak, will highlight such structures and buildings within their own constituencies. And we all know some of them, whether the Pontcysyllte aqueduct, Big Pit, or the ironworks in Merthyr. But, as well as the visible aspects of our industrial heritage, many of which have been restored and re-established for tourism or walking and cycling, there are many aspects of our industrial heritage that are invisible—mines that have been closed, disused railway lines where the rails have been removed, canals that have become overgrown, and a vast network of tunnels, as well as other infrastructure that once carried the riches of Wales to our ports of distribution across the world. 

The decline of our industrial past took its toll on these across Wales, and in particular in the south Wales Valleys. Add to that the actions taken following the Beeching report in the 1960s, which saw a reduction in the route network and restructuring of the railways across the UK—and that was not popular, remember, because many protests actually resulted in saving some of those stations and lines, but the majority were closed as planned, and Beeching's name remains associated with the mass closure of railways and the loss of many local services in that period that followed. Now, a few of these routes have since reopened. Some short sections have been preserved as heritage railways—the Gwili railway, the Brecon Mountain railway, to name a few in Wales—Colwyn railway, Llangollen. Others have been incorporated into cycling and walking networks, and the remainder have either been returned to their own natural farmland or they remain derelict.

Now, one of those lines affected by the Beeching cuts was the Swansea bay to the Rhondda line. When operational, this route ran through my constituency, from Briton Ferry, which maybe people don't realise was a huge port at one point, going through Port Talbot and Aberavon up the Afan valley, where it branched off to many other routes. Now, these routes often required numerous tunnels, allowing them to travel up the valley and between valleys. The majority are now disused and closed off, including the Gelli tunnel, the Gilfach tunnel, the Cymmer to Caerau tunnel, and one of the longest tunnels in the UK, the Rhondda tunnel, running between Blaengwynfi and Blaencwm, and on the screens you will see a rolling picture of some of the aspects of that particular tunnel. Now, that railway line allowed us to join the railway lines in the Rhondda valley. And therefore it's industrial infrastructure across Wales that we need to see it as an opportunity to be ambitious for the future. We should not lose sight of what these infrastructures actually offer us. 

Now, my remaining contribution this afternoon will focus upon these hidden gems, and, in particular, the Rhondda tunnel, which can offer opportunities for local communities to benefit from their regeneration. And the Rhondda tunnel is 3,443 yards long, or just under 2 miles, 1,000 feet below the ground at its deepest, with a 58 ft ventilation shaft. And it was a massive piece of work, and actually I was dropped down into the tunnel through that ventilation shaft, and you can see the actual fantastic Victorian engineering that built that. That was built between 1885 and 1890, officially opened in 1890, and a critical component of that line, connecting mines of the Rhondda to the ports and Swansea bay. It also became a route for passengers as well, later on in life. So, we had an opportunity, as time went on, not only to have an industrial line, but also a passenger line, to allow that connection between the two communities. The railway line was actually dual line—if you know much about railways—but the tunnel itself was a single line and dual at either portal. 

Now, unfortunately, in 1968 the decision was taken to close the tunnel temporarily, as there was work needed to repair it. But, in December 1970, the Department for Transport made a decision to close that tunnel permanently, citing the costs of repair as prohibitive—strange how it actually coincided with the closure of both the Blaengwynfi and Blaenrhondda stations as part of the Beeching cuts. We can only assume that it just happened to be coincidental. So, that happened, and, in 1980, as a consequence, both portals were closed and blocked off to prevent unauthorised intrusions. Because we know they have to be protected, because many children tend to walk into places like tunnels as an exciting experience and we need to ensure we protect them and safeguard them. 

Now, we're almost 130 years on from when that tunnel was opened. It is the longest disused tunnel in Wales, and the Rhondda Tunnel Society—I know some of the members are in the gallery this afternoon—have established themselves and have a vision—a vision, Deputy Minister, which I share with them; a vision that will see the Rhondda tunnel preserved for our children's future, which will reconnect the Afan valley and the Rhondda Fawr for pedestrians and cyclists, and not just for people in the two valleys, but for people from elsewhere and further afield.  

Will the Member give way? 

Yes. 

Can I just join him in commending the work of all those people who've put the time and effort into the Rhondda tunnel and getting that reopened? We know the progress that's been made, but how much more is still to be done. But I'd also welcome, on the back of that—and I'm sure they would, the Rhondda tunnel people themselves—in the future, the reopening of what is known in engineering circles as the Maesteg tunnel—the Cymmer to Caerau tunnel. And the fascinating thing with that tunnel is that it was done in two different ways. The Caerau end was totally different to the Cymmer end. The Cymmer end was dynamite, which cost the lives of 11 men, but the Caerau end was actually done by the sort of technology that was used then in the Channel tunnel and elsewhere, by a machine that bored the hole. So, there are good, historical reasons to actually open these tunnels as well, as well as what it could do for cycling and recreation.

Can I thank my colleague the Member for Ogmore for highlighting the various tunnels that exist? The Caerau to Cymmer one is one of the ones, clearly, I mentioned earlier. It is one of the tunnels in the Valleys that have been looked at very carefully. You highlighted the point that, in fact, it's not just about what we can do when we regenerate those tunnels, but it's also reminding ourselves of the history of those tunnels and the techniques and technology that were used in developing them.

Now, the ability to offer an experience that will allow people to use existing cycling and walking infrastructure—and the Member actually talked about, in his 90-second statement, cycling today—we should grab hold of that vision and opportunity. For the Afan valley, it would include encouraging cyclists to travel further down the valley—down to the fabulous 3-mile-long beach we've got, and Margam park, and if they're really adventurous, they could cycle along the Swansea bay area, all the way to Mumbles. But it provides an opportunity we need to seriously take hold of. The opportunities are endless, the possibilities are bountiful, and this project can breathe new life into a valley whose people often feel cut off and forgotten about. 

I and many others envision the tunnel being the focal point of cycling events and running events, and there have been examples of these happening: Bath tunnels have been one of these cases, where we've seen them being used as a focal point for 5Ks, 10Ks, half marathons and full marathons. It's not just simply an opportunity to walk through them or cycle through them. They could be used for other events, which bring more into the community. The Richard Burton 10K, which I'll promote—it's on 3 November, by the way, if you want to try it—we get over 1,000 runners into my village on that day, and they stay. And this is an opportunity, again, to look at what it can bring into the Rhondda and Afan valleys. People stay for those visits. So, it's not simply about restoring a tunnel; it's about offering a new vision and a new experience for local people and visitors. I've seen the figures on Bath, and they are phenomenal. But for the wider community, the benefits of people taking part in these events could invigorate the local economy—activity that was severely impacted on following the closure of the mines, which, at that point, provided so much employment to those living in those communities.

There are always challenges to building a vision around our industrial heritage, but in this case, one of the biggest challenges is as a result of the ownership of this and other tunnels. This has currently halted any further development of the Rhondda tunnel. I've written to the Minister as well as raising the matter of ownership here in the Chamber on numerous occasions, and we're no closer to resolving the matter today than we were three years ago. I am grateful for the funding from Welsh Government, and it's already made an important impact on that project. However, without ownership of the tunnel being transferred from the Department for Transport to Wales, this may have all been in vain. Further funding from other sources—and I'm not asking for Welsh Government funding—to complete the work cannot be sought until the ownership has been addressed.

I understand that the Welsh Government is concerned about the liabilities that will be placed at their door. However, you've got to remember that, at the moment, this tunnel is closed off. There are no liabilities, hardly, if a mountain falls in on it with nobody inside it. So, there's not much really to worry about at this point in time. Now, in a letter to myself and my colleague Stephen Kinnock MP, Baroness Vere of Norbiton, who is a transport Minister in London for roads and security, states that the Under-Secretary of State for transport in 2017 wrote to the Welsh Government, stating that the Secretary of State would be willing to transfer the tunnel to Welsh Government ownership and pay the sum of £60,000 to reflect savings for future survey costs—an offer that, I am told, is still open to the Welsh Government. So, the options to explore funding to reopen the tunnel may be explored and we need to very seriously look at this.

Let us have the longest cycle tunnel in Europe—the second longest in the world—open to cyclists and pedestrians, not only for active travel and not only for tourism, but to revitalise our valleys and make Cardiff easily accessible to people in the Afan valley, because at the moment, they have to go to Maesteg and catch the Maesteg train. Wouldn't it be nice if they could cycle through the tunnel and catch a train in Treherbert? Let's be forward thinking and share the vision that I and the Rhondda Tunnel Society have, and many others. Let's have ambition. Deputy Minister, today's debate is an opportunity for you to share a vision with us, a vision to revitalise communities across Wales, to share in the desire of my community, the Afan valley, to see the tunnel open for tourism, economic development and employment. Let's be forward thinking. Let's take a little risk. Let us be ambitious. Let's talk about a gem in the Afan valley for future generations to enjoy and appreciate the history of our industrial past. 

North Wales is blessed with a rich and diverse network of historic industrial infrastructure. The too-often-forgotten heroes in local groups striving to maximise the economic and social regeneration this represents deserve recognition and support. They battle daily with the practical and financial challenges of bringing such infrastructure back into community use. Instead of Welsh Government ownership, they seek real partnership with Governments in exploring and delivering the practical opportunities for reopening such infrastructure.

The Pontcysyllte aqueduct is the longest aqueduct in Great Britain and the highest canal aqueduct in the world. After it was awarded world heritage status in 2009, the Welsh Government then said it was creating a working group to establish north-east Wales as a joined-up visitor destination around the aqueduct, with the third sector represented by Glandŵr Cymru, the Canal and River Trust. We're still waiting a decade later, and other third sector heritage groups tell me that they've not been engaged.

Speaking here last year, I referred to the Channel 4 screening of the final episode of the Great Rail Restorations series, promoting the wonderful railway setting between Llangollen and Carrog, but now going to Corwen as well, and the efforts of all those on the voluntary trust there involved. As I then said, we still need a joined-up tourism offer, with through ticketing enabling regional visitors to extend their stays and have the fantastic time we know they can have. 

Llangollen Railway have repeatedly said they'd like to embark on joint ticketing with the bus companies and other railways in their area. Their through ticketing proposals also relate to wider destination management and to destination offers that develop visitor experience by partnering with other venues and industrial heritage attractions in the region. Llangollen Railway are one of the biggest employers in the area and the only standard gauge heritage railway in north Wales. They're extending the line to Corwen and building a new station there as their western terminus, which will help both open up Corwen town to many more visitors and help local people travel between Llangollen and Corwen. This project has been entirely volunteer led with professional support as and when required. 

The Glyn valley tramway was a narrow gauge railway connecting Chirk with Glyn Ceiriog and the Glyn valley tramway trust are working towards a recreation of the tramway from Chirk. Speaking here in 2014, and again last year, I called on the Welsh Government to consider supporting the reopening of the rail line from Gaerwen to Llangefni as a heritage connection. Last month, I visited Welsh Slate in Bethesda, which dates back over 400 years. I've worked for many years with Brymbo heritage group and trust, which works to promote the industrial history of Brymbo and adjacent areas and develop the site as a visitor attraction, including the ironworks' core buildings and Brymbo fossil forest. 

Shotton Point represents an important part of the heritage of Deeside, particularly in relation to steel making. The Victorian Society included the former office building of John Summers steelworks, including its iconic grade II listed clock tower, on its 2018 top 10 endangered buildings list. I recently visited the non-profit Enbarr foundation in Queensferry to discuss their exciting Shotton Point John Summers site project, bringing local people, businesses and community organisations together to plan, develop and build the future of the site.

The area between Wrexham and Mold, where I live, was once the site of many collieries. The Llay miners heritage centre is dedicated to telling the story of the coal-mining history in north-east Wales. North East Wales Heritage Forum celebrates, conserves and promotes the region's rich heritage, and I attended their Wrexham heritage fair on 27 July. The Romans mined lead at Halkyn, sandstone was quarried at Gwespyr and industrial initiatives centred on the Greenfield valley, ranging from copper to cotton, are an exemplar of the industrial revolution. I commend the guided heritage walks through Greenfield valley and visits to its heritage park. I also attended Northop Heritage Group's history day on 21 September, which ranged from coaching routes to brick making, in Buckley.

Later this month, Theatr Clwyd's performances of the Mold riots 150 years ago will remember the social unrest after two coal miners were sentenced to prison for attacking the manager of Leeswood Green colliery, which influenced the future of policing of public disturbances across Great Britain. Taking all this together, it is now time for Welsh Government to turn words into action by bringing all this people power together to unlock the potential for regional industrial heritage-led regeneration. Thank you. 

It's not often that I agree entirely with something from Members from other political parties, but this is one of those occasions. I would also like to place on record my support for opening the Abernant tunnel in the Cynon valley, and any other tunnel in Wales that would prove beneficial for the local communities that it would serve. 

As a Member for the Rhondda, I'm sure you would expect me to focus on that constituency for the rest of my contribution. There are undoubted positive impacts that the tunnel between Blaencwm and Blaengwynfi could have for the Rhondda. When the Rhondda Tunnel Society was formed in 2014, their determination, enthusiasm and momentum were admirable. I'm a member of the Rhondda Tunnel Society, so I must declare an interest as well as declare my staunch support for the society in this debate. 

While much has been achieved in the time that they've been set up, their efforts have been hampered by this question of ownership. I've got letters going back more than three years, asking the Welsh Government to take responsibility for this asset so that the project can move to the next stage, and I can't tell you how frustrating it is that this matter has not been resolved as we approach 2020. I know that that frustration is shared by the very patient and forgiving members of the Rhondda Tunnel Society. 

The members of the society are not looking for a blank cheque from the Welsh Government or any admission of liability. They are more than willing to accept any arrangement that absolves the Welsh Government of financial expense just so that they can have the tunnel back where it belongs, in Welsh hands. This will allow them, then, to apply for grants and funding from other sources. Without this ownership matter resolved, we remain in a deadlock. 

We know that there's no obstruction coming from England over the tunnel's ownership. I established three years ago that they had no objections to giving back the tunnel to Wales. I also understand that correspondence was sent to the Welsh Government in 2017 from the UK Department for Transport offering ownership of the Rhondda tunnel and £60,000 to reflect savings to that department in survey costs. The UK Department for Transport are still waiting for a reply to that offer. So, I really hope we can end the stalling now and make some progress. 

The Rhondda tunnel could be the catalyst for the cycle infrastructure that we've been crying out for in the Rhondda Fawr for years. It would help promote activity, thus tackling the obesity epidemic that we face as a society. It would also facilitate car-free local journeys, helping us to fulfil our responsibility to reduce the carbon that we emit into the atmosphere. It has the potential to be a big draw for tourists—not just cyclists, but also walkers. Just imagine the boost that this could provide for local businesses. Other countries have maximised their cycle tourism, and it's time that Wales did the same. So, whilst the last three years have been something of a wasted opportunity as far as the ownership question is concerned, it's not too late to see this project succeed. Let's grasp the opportunity that is presented to us from the legacy of our industrial past and put it to good use. 

I'm so pleased to have been able to have co-tabled today's motion, tabled in the name of my colleague the AM for Aberavon and also co-tabled with Leanne Wood. Both David Rees and Leanne Wood have been real champions of the Rhondda tunnel, and I thank them for their support for my call for the Abernant tunnel, and also to members of the Rhondda Tunnel Society who have offered their expertise and all sorts of advice to us in the Cynon Valley regarding that too. 

I want to spend the bulk of my time talking about the Abernant tunnel that connects Cwmbach to Merthyr or, as it is known locally, the Merthyr tunnel. This former railway tunnel, designed by Brunel, was part of the Vale of Neath Railway and is one strand, one branch, of the rich network of historic industrial infrastructure that we enjoy in Wales. Indeed, for 110 years, the main role of this amazing structure was to export coal from the Aberdare area to meet demand further afield. This reminds us of one of the negative aspects of that heritage, and of the industrial revolutions themselves: the precious mineral deposits, the struggle and toil of working men, the natural environment, all exploited for the enrichment of the few.

However, as the second point of the motion sets out, reopening these tunnels could provide opportunities for real, lasting benefits for the many, firstly, in terms of integrated transport and active travel opportunities. The walking and cycling charity, Sustrans, did a piece of work looking at the 21 disused railway tunnels in south-east Wales. They found that the Abernant tunnel scored highest under the Sustrans route assessment and transport evaluation tool.

As the Deputy Minister knows, this is their mechanism for evaluating the potential of walking and cycling schemes. And as Sustrans noted, it could provide a direct, traffic-free active travel route from Aberdare to Merthyr, and this is something that we don’t have at present. Indeed, I know of many constituents who cycle alongside the A465 Heads of the Valleys road as there is no real alternative, partly on a cycle path and partly on a rough grass verge in order to commute to work. So, the potential is there.

It has, as the Sustrans report says, the highest potential of all the routes analysed to encourage modal shift by encouraging commuting. It was just today that my colleague, the AM for Ogmore, Huw Irranca-Davies, noted that since the advent of the active travel Act in Wales, we've actually seen a decline in people walking and cycling. I see these tunnels as really being a catalyst that could turn that around and bring the active travel Act to life. 

It could boost health and well-being, as other colleagues in this debate have noted, especially amongst children and older people too. The tunnel itself connects with a series of footpaths that are very well used on the Cwmbach side already for cycling, walking and dog walking, and also on the Merthyr side the path links very closely to BikePark Wales. So, there are tourist opportunities there as well, and the practical benefits that it would bring to linking in areas of high deprivation and population density.

The Sustrans report also suggested that the tunnel was in a very viable condition, meaning that it would present a reasonable option in terms of cost-benefit analysis too. That's something that I saw for myself when I was treated to a tour of the tunnel alongside my colleague, the AM for Merthyr Tydfil and Rhymney, Dawn Bowden. The tunnel, which is gated at either end, as you may have seen in some of the images that were shown earlier, has been really well maintained, with over £100,000 of investment in the interior to make sure that it is in a safe and viable condition.

In this regard, it gives me the chance to pay tribute to the work of Hammond ECS Ltd. They're a specialist structural maintenance company who are actually based in the village of Cwmbach in my constituency. They have a key role to play, this family-run business, in ensuring that not only the Abernant tunnel, but also the rest of the network—which, as we know, is currently owned by Highways England—has been kept in a suitable condition, because they hold the contracts to do just that. 

This, for me, is another important strand of the argument in favour of repurposing the tunnels, for not only would opening these tunnels offer transport opportunities, but they offer also chances for economic development and regeneration, as the motion mentions, and business opportunities for companies like Hammond ECS, companies employing local people in skilled jobs. Sustrans, indeed, cite a figure of 0.74 jobs for every kilometre of active travel route created. When we look at other tunnels that have been converted, such as the Two Tunnels Greenway in Somerset, people have flocked from all over to celebrate their opening.

Can you wind up, please?

So, I hope that we can see progress on these ambitions and convert these symbols of nineteenth-century industrialism into one of twenty-first century sustainable prosperity.

I must say, when this debate appeared on the order paper, I was intrigued by the title of the debate and I've enjoyed the opportunity we've had this afternoon to share some of our memories, in some cases, but also our ambitions and aspirations for reinventing the communities in which we live. Because when I think about the industrial architecture or the industrial infrastructure that I grew up with, it speaks to us of who we are as a people today.

I grew up and went to school in the shadows of the Sirhowy ironworks, one of the biggest ironworks in Wales, when it was established at the end of the eighteenth century. I played rugby and football on fields in the shadows of the nine arches, which, of course, carried the Heads of the Valleys railway from Tredegar to Merthyr and then down to Abergavenny. And what it did, of course, was to tell us not just of the big, massive, global economic forces that shaped the economy of south Wales, but it also taught us about how we are linked and connected to each other. I think, in all sorts of different political debates, all too often we try to focus on those things that divide us from each other, but what our industrial infrastructure tells me is how we're all linked together. We spoke in a debate earlier in the year about how the Bryn Oer tramroad links Talybont in Breconshire with Trefil and with Tredegar, but look across a couple of Valleys into Brynmawr, and you also have the Disgwylfa tramroad, which took materials from the Llangattock quarries in Breconshire, again, in the Usk valley, to Nantyglo and which Bailey used then in making iron in creating the Nantyglo ironworks. These are important linkages that exist today. I can cycle along the Bryn Oer tramroad, I've walked along the Disgwylfa tramroad, and you can understand our history and understand who we are as a people and a community.

Last Friday, I was lucky enough to join a group of residents from Llanhilleth who had reopened somewhere called Granny's Wood. Now, the granny in question's name was Margaret Griffiths and she enabled her grandchildren, who were there last week, as it happens, to play on an area of land that had previously been the Llanhilleth quarry. If you walk down—you don't find it unless you're looking for it—from the old pithead baths to where the shafts actually were, the old pitheads down the Burma road, as they described it, that the colliers would walk up, of course, at the end of the shift, and then along the pathway that miners would walk on to and from work when the Llanhilleth pits were at their height, of course, there would have been hundreds of men walking back and forth there every day. Today, it's a peaceful and tranquil and rediscovered part of our heritage and our places, and I hope that we'll be able to look towards ensuring as part of the Valleys Regional Park that these experiences, these places, these histories and these linkages become part of who we're going to be as well.

The understanding of history, I believe, is absolutely fundamental to the future of public policy. When I think about how these different tramways, railways and roads have linked us, I also think of something else, which is a much older form of transport, of course, and that is our rivers. It hasn't been mentioned in the debate this afternoon, and our rivers, particularly in south Wales, rarely are, but if you ever speak to Councillor Malcolm Cross in Tredegar, he will talk about how he believes that the rivers of south Wales are our great neglected asset. And, do you know what? I think he's right. If you look at Vale Terrace in Tredegar, it's built facing the river because the river at that time was one of the primary forms of transport, before we used canals and—. I'll take an intervention.

Thank you for giving way, Alun. As you've mentioned rivers, as the chair of the cross-party Assembly group on waterways, it'd be remiss of me not to also mention the important role that canals have played in our history and industrial heritage. So, when you mention rivers, then perhaps you could give—actually, I'm not speaking in this today—perhaps you could give a word to our canals as well.

But you have spoken in the debate now and you have done exactly that, and I commend the Member for Monmouthshire in doing so.

But, of course, the tramways that I've described do all link down to the Monmouthshire and Brecon canal as well, and the Disgwylfa and the Llangattock tramway do link in with the wharfs down in Govilon with which he's very familiar. But I hope that, as the Government takes forward work on the Valleys taskforce, we will look again at the rivers of south Wales.

In recent years, public policy has been targeted at cleansing the water within those rivers, and rightly so; it's important. When I was growing up in Tredegar, I always considered myself lucky that the water I played in in the Sirhowy river was always brightly coloured, and nowadays I hope my own son would take a different view. But I hope, in replying to this debate, we can look again at the rivers of south Wales because our developments have, over decades and perhaps centuries, turned us away from our rivers, turned us away from the natural environment and not understood how fully that has shaped our own histories. And I think the rivers of south Wales—Malcolm Cross will tell me, and he's right—are the great undiscovered, neglected gem of our valleys.

The first Wales-only legislation for the historic environment became law in 2016, and it is an area that is of supreme importance to Wales, to our economy as well as our culture, and I take, obviously, a particular interest in my constituency of Islwyn.

Crumlin in Islwyn sits in the heart of the Gwent valleys and is the beating heart of the Valleys taskforce geography. It is a proud community with a strong industrial heritage and a strong industrial memory. The Navigation colliery in Crumlin opened in 1907 with the sinking of the mineshafts by the private mine owners Partridge, Jones and Company Limited, and it is an example of listed outstanding industrial architecture. In 1947 it was run by the National Coal Board, following nationalisation by the Attlee Labour Government, and it finally closed its doors in 1967. In the subsequent decades, this imposing edifice—. If anybody's had the luck or joy or pleasure of travelling through Crumlin on its route to Ebbw Vale, you will see a series of almost regency-styled red-brick buildings with the landmark chimney stack, now that the viaduct has gone, slowly beginning to decline into ruin, but still remaining one of the best preserved intact colliery buildings of Wales.

I welcome hugely my colleague Dai Rees and others bringing this debate to the floor of this Chamber because Crumlin is still a proud mining community that has huge economic regenerative potential to directly benefit from investment—and that's the word: 'from investment'—in its iconic, historical, industrial infrastructure. As such, I'm delighted that the transport Minister Ken Skates has confirmed that in 2020 the Ebbw Vale line that runs directly through the communities of Newbridge, Crosskeys and Risca in my constituency will serve the important Gwent city of Newport and Islwyn. And the potential reopening of the Crumlin railway station to serve this community and its attractions must, in my view, happen. We know that the opening of new railway stations is a convoluted process that is still very badly shaped and governed by UK processes, and we urgently need an ability in Wales to increase our ability to reopen stations and reuse railway lines lost to the nation from the 1960s, when the Beeching cuts devastated transport links and weakened our local economies.

So, here in Crumlin, at the Navigation colliery, dedicated bands of local men and women are committed to sustaining and bringing new life into the Navigation colliery, built to exhibition standard. It is a registered charity, working alongside the site's owner, South Wales Building Preservation Trust, to maintain and prevent deterioration of these buildings further and deliver effective renovation planning. It is made up of iconic and beautiful grade II buildings, as I've mentioned, buildings that could form the beating heart of regeneration activity within the heart of a Valleys taskforce area because the historic industrial environment and its infrastructure tell the story of Wales and tell the story of our people. They are both our legacy and our future. 

They deliver a collective memory, both fragile and precious, and we must be careful to pass on to each generation our collective memory and our cultural legacy. The reason is because we don't wish to live in the past, but because the past is part of the fabric of who we are as a people, and who we are as a nation. They tell the story of Wales, a narrative untouched in all of its glory, both good and ill, both rich and poor, of the many and of the few, and do tell the struggle of our peoples.

Crumlin, with its magnificent Navigation colliery and its famous lost viaduct and former working railway station, demands action and vision to restore them to benefit future generations, both economically, culturally, socially and for the well-being of our future generations.

I will be brief, Deputy Presiding Officer, because the part of this resolution, which I welcome, that is most important to me is the bit that talks about regaining control over some of the industrial infrastructure that we have. I particularly refer to the network that still exists on an enormous number of old railway lines all around south Wales and certainly many other parts of Wales as well. Certainly, in the Taff-Ely part of my constituency, where there was an enormous amount of residential development taking place, we know that, in reality, public transport is the only viable solution in terms of dealing with the congestion on our roads, and that needs a form of buses, but also the reopening of railway lines, and it is the reopening of railway lines that, I think, is one of the great opportunities that we actually have.

There is an old railway line that goes from Cardiff, through Creigiau, that formerly linked up into Beddau spur and then through to Llantrisant and to Pontyclun. I'm very pleased that there is a business plan that is under way, hoping to report fairly soon, that might lead to the reopening of that railway line, one of the first of these old lines to be reopened but to provide a modern solution to our public transport needs.

The key thing that occurred most when we were looking at this, and I know it's an issue that applies all over many other parts of Wales, is that we have to actually still preserve what is there, because it is rapidly disappearing. Parts of it are being encroached upon, parts of these old railway lines are being built upon in various ways, and the opportunities that we have for new railway lines, or new, bespoke routes, whether they be for active travel, whether they be for public transport, are in danger of disappearing. So, the actual mapping of these routes and ensuring the protection and ownership of these routes is fundamental, and I believe this resolution contributes towards that task.

Thank you very much. Can I now call the Deputy Minister for Economy and Transport, Lee Waters?

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. May I congratulate David Rees, Leanne Wood and Vikki Howells for bringing forward this debate? As their motion recognises, there is significant potential in the network of historic industrial infrastructure across Wales, in particular the old railway tunnels across the south Wales Valleys, that can serve the communities that surround them once again, providing important economic and social infrastructure.

But as the motion also notes, bringing them back into use does pose very real, practical and financial challenges. There are successful examples we can point to where the legacy of our industrial past has been harnessed to bring benefits today. The Ffestiniog railway and the Pontcysyllte aqueduct are examples of outstanding heritage assets that attract tourists and generate local employment, as well as telling the story of the past. We've recently announced funding through the Valleys Regional Park for £7 million for gateways to the Valleys Regional Park that will add to that too. Of course, these were not regenerated into the jewels they are today overnight, but as we look at other opportunities to bring the legacies of our industrial heritage back to life, we need to remember that Blaenau Ffestiniog wasn't built in a day.

Members have spoken persuasively this afternoon about the potential that the network of old railway tunnels across south Wales have as transport corridors, as Mick Antoniw has just mentioned. Other former railway lines have had a new lease of life as walking and cycling routes. The Taff trail, for example, between Brecon and Cardiff, and the Ystwyth trail, which connects Aberystwyth with Tregaron, are excellent examples.

I don't need any persuading to support the principles of the motion. Indeed, I was involved some 10 years ago in the scoping exercise that looked at the potential that these tunnels have for changing the dynamics of travelling between the Valleys. The fairly direct and flat routes that visionary engineers bored through our mountains, to carry trains in the industrial age, can help re-engineer the way we think about travel in the modern era. Even an electric bike over the Merthyr mountain may be asking a lot of most people, but a quick, direct route under it is an altogether more realistic ask—but only if the tunnels are linked up to a network of paths that connect destinations that people want to travel to. After all, active travel is about replacing car journeys with cycling and walking for everyday trips. To meet the challenge of the climate emergency, we need to replace car trips with zero or low-emission alternatives as quickly as possible.

Our priority, therefore, must be to put investment where it can have the quickest and most significant payback. Often, a mundane contraflow down a one-way street or a wider pavement may change an environment to make walking and cycling a visible option. In other cases, a harder engineering intervention like a segregated cycle path on a main road, to separate bicycles and cars, is what's needed. Having recently ridden down Cardiff's Senghenydd Road, I can testify to the dramatic impact that the segregated cycle lane being constructed there can make. I'm sure that once that route is completed, we'll see a very big increase in cycling in that part of the city.

So, we need the right infrastructure in the right places. Alongside it, we need training and promotion to bring about a culture change. As we look at the suite of interventions needed to bring this about, I'm in no doubt that the network of old tunnels has its part to play. But with limited resource, we have to prioritise. Today's motion asks the Welsh Government to take into our ownership this network of tunnels, and then to seek funding opportunities. I have to say to Members that I cannot support this approach. In my view, it is the wrong way around. Taking on the massive liabilities of these old tunnels would involve a very big investment of money and capacity at a time when our focus needs to be on getting early wins for the active travel Act. In themselves, the tunnels will not bring about modal shift, which must be our focus as we look to meet our very ambitious carbon reduction targets. They can play a part, but only in an integrated approach.

The active travel Act, which was passed by this Chamber six years ago this week, sets out an approach to creating a network of routes—

Will you take an intervention?

—which will help make active travel a realistic option for most people. Let me just finish this section and I will.

It requires councils to consult with people on routes they'd like to appear over the next 15 years across their communities, to safely connect them by foot and by bike to everyday destinations. Councils will then enshrine their desired routes onto an integrated network map, which will form the basis of future funding bids.

I give way to Bethan Sayed.

It was just on the point you were finishing off in relation to the cost. So, I'm just wondering if you have managed to have any conversations about the tunnels with the UK Government. Of course, I appreciate that just giving the cost of insurance wouldn't be enough, and that you'd need—. It's a massive liability. So, are you able to tell us if you're pursuing those conversations?

I'll come to that, if I may, as I make some progress.

So, we've now got the first set of active travel maps for our larger towns and villages, and we've got a reasonable amount of capital funding to start building and improving those routes. And as the Assembly's economy committee has pointed out, these first iterations of maps are imperfect. I'm determined that the next versions of the plans, due in early 2021, will be better and will be based on genuine engagement with people who, at the moment, might not consider getting on a bike.

The tunnels need to feature on the maps if they are active travel infrastructure, and only the Abernant tunnel features currently. But even though most of the tunnels don't have significant potential for active travel, they do, nonetheless, have real value. I want to explore how the conversion, as well as the maintenance and liabilities that will come with each, can be funded. Finding a sustainable future for industrial structures can be challenging, particularly if there's heavy pollution on the site. But we are committed to playing our part, as I know are local government. I spoke last week to Councillor Andrew Morgan, the leader of Rhondda Cynon Taf, and he told me of the considerable work his authority has already done to explore the opening of the Rhondda tunnel, and his commitment to work with the Welsh Government and Neath Port Talbot Council to work through the practical obstacles.

Realising the potential of our historic industrial infrastructure will require different bodies to work together, and different agendas to align. Utilising the old railway tunnels, for example, has the potential to create a network of routes offering leisure and tourism opportunities, as well as regenerating an area. As chair of the Valleys taskforce, that's a potential I fully recognise. I've spoken with the Deputy Minister for Culture, Tourism and Sport, who is supportive of the plans to reopen the tunnels, which chime with his forthcoming action plan for tourism in Wales for the next five years, and he's confirmed to me that Visit Wales are keen to be part of any development, making the tourist case for the project. The Minister for Housing and Local Government is similarly supportive of the potential reopening of the tunnels for regeneration of communities, and the involvement of the community has been the most striking example in the excellent campaign to reopen the Rhondda tunnel. The ambition to create the longest walking and cycling route through a railway tunnel in Europe, which would become an attraction of its own, is one that we support, and we commend the Rhondda Tunnel Society for their work. And we've worked with them to look at the practicalities of opening the tunnel. We have funded work on a high-level business case for the project, as well as providing funding for the development of a new business case, an ecological assessment, and improving access to the tunnel for survey work to be undertaken. So, we have done quite a bit, but until now, no funding has been offered by either the UK Government or Highways England beyond the token sum of £60,000, which some Members mentioned with the implication this was significant. I must tell them, it really is not.

The UK Government currently holds the liability for the long-term maintenance of the tunnel. It's in their interest to transfer that liability, but they also have an obligation to set communities up to succeed in managing these assets in the future, and the paltry offer of £60,000 is a risible one. I hope they'll play their part with us, and their local councils, to make the project a success. We cannot take full responsibility for the full liability of the tunnel from Highways England, nor can we fully fund the project, and I want to make that clear to Members. [Interruption.] I'm afraid I have very little time. But we will do our bit.

In 2015 we commissioned Sustrans—if I can just finish, Dirprwy Lywydd; I've an announcement I want to make. We commissioned in 2015 Sustrans to do a desktop study of a number of tunnels in south-east Wales to explore the potential for their reopening, and I have asked Sustrans today to update that work, drawing on the work carried out on both the Rhondda and Abernant tunnels in the interim. They will also draw on local authorities' active travel network mapping and data from similar projects such as the Bath two-tunnels scheme, to get a better understanding of long-term operating and maintenance costs, which is essential before we address the issue of ownership.

There is an opportunity to build a close partnership with the Valleys Regional Park partners, local authorities, and tourism, heritage and leisure partners to explore the potential for reopening the structures. I'm particularly interested in the lessons we can learn from the experience of reopening the 1 mile Combe Down tunnel near Bath in 2013. That project was led by Sustrans and involved a significant amount of lottery funding to reopen it. I've had an initial conversation with the National Lottery Community Fund about funding a similar project in south Wales. The Minister for Housing and Local Government and the Deputy Minister for Culture, Sport and Tourism and I have jointly agreed to fund Sustrans to lead a partnership bid for assembling external funding for the reopening and running of the Rhondda and Abernant tunnels. Clearly, the funding would need to come from a wide range of sources and can only be achieved with a wide range of bodies working together, and this includes the community, who I pay tribute to again for championing this cause. I do believe there are practical things that we can do, Dirprwy Lywydd, to make this opportunity a real one, but it is not easy, and we cannot do it alone.

Thank you. I call David Rees to reply to the debate.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. Can I first of all thank all those Members who contributed, and not only those Members who contributed today, but also those who have contributed in other debates on industrial heritage as well? Because you've all played an important role in highlighting how industrial heritage is important to us, and how it can help regenerate communities across Wales. Mark highlighted the many sites in north Wales that exist, which have benefited those communities, and moving on. Leanne reminded me as well I need to declare my membership of the Rhondda Tunnel Society as well, but it shows the tunnel actually affects two valleys, and how important it can be for both valleys. It's not just about active travel purely, but it's part of a mix. Active travel can play a part of it, but it’s also—. We can explore it for tourism and walking and everything else. It’s a combination of things that that tunnel offers; I’ll come back to the Rhondda tunnel towards the end when I have time.

Vikki reminded us about one thing: when we talk about our history—and a bit of the debate was about our history as well—we must never forget the negative side of that history, which was the social impact upon our communities, where we were basically plundered for wealth going to a small number. And that is also part of the history of our heritage that we want to remind people of. It isn’t just simply a, ’Hey, look at us—look at what fantastic facilities we've had.' Look at the communities and the social life they had, and the challenges they had to face up to whilst the money went to very few people. That reminds us very much of industrial heritage across south Wales and north Wales.

Alun talked about rivers. There’s no way you’re going to float down a boat on the Afan river to start with, but what he highlighted was that there are various sets of infrastructures that exist. It’s not just old railway lines—it is also canals, rivers and other forms as well, and that’s very important. But he also reminded us of one thing that we seem to have lost sight of—that our industrial heritage actually linked our communities together, very much so. And when you listen to the debate this afternoon, I think you hear that in, actually, the contributions from Members, about how it did bring those communities together and how we see that. Because Rhianon highlighted the works in Crumlin, the Navigation mine in Crumlin, and the existence of the—. Well, she highlighted, actually, how proud that community was of that building as well. So, it’s not just about reinvigorating the economy of our communities—it’s about actually reinvigorating our communities as well, bringing them back to life.

And Mick—old railway lines—showed us that we’ve been talking about railway lines and other things for, actually, different purposes. Mick wants to go back to the original purpose: put it back to railway line so we can get public transport working. And there’s nothing wrong with that—that’s exactly what we should be looking at. Because it gives—. Again, the infrastructure gives us an opportunity to use it for purposes such as that.

Can I thank the Deputy Minister for his contribution, particularly the latter end of the contribution, when he highlighted that he is intending to put, with the Deputy Minister and the Minister for housing, together a team to look at how we can actually do that work? I’m disappointed he didn’t take ownership. I understand the arguments about liability, but I’m disappointed. I would have hoped that they would look at the ownership question. But if he has come to a conclusion that they need to look very carefully at how they can support societies like the Rhondda Tunnel Society—. Because let’s remember one thing—we’ve talked about various organisations and various sites today, mainly run by volunteers, mainly driven by volunteers in their community. And therefore it is important that we look at how we can support those volunteers and those community organisations. And I very much welcome his last comments on that and how he intends to do that. And he’s quite right—it doesn’t happen overnight. It happens over time. The Rhondda Tunnel Society has been going for a few years, so we’ve got some of that time already under our belt. He’s also right on the issue about active travel maps, but I am concerned that, when Sustrans looks at this, they don’t look at the existing active travel maps, because they’re not wonderful. In fact, if you look at the Afan valley one, a large section of the Afan valley cycle track is not on the active travel map, and it should be, because people use it for both leisure and for access down to work; it’s not solely for leisure. So, we need that. And he’s also right that we need to have a cultural change.

Dirprwy Lywydd, I thank everybody for their contributions today. This is a debate that has reminded us of our past, but the important role that past can play in our future if we have the ambition and the foresight to take it forward. Thank you very much.

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

The next debate on our agenda this afternoon is the debate on the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee's report on dentistry in Wales, and I call on the Chair of the committee to move the motion. Dai Lloyd.

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. I am very pleased to take part in today’s debate on the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee’s report on dentistry in Wales. This is the second of the committee’s reports in a series of spotlight inquiries on health issues that are vitally important to the people of Wales.

The committee agreed to undertake a one-day inquiry to shine a light on dental and orthodontic services in Wales, along with wider workforce issues within the dental profession, including training places and recruitment. We published our report in May of this year and made six recommendations to the Welsh Government. I am pleased that the Minister has accepted all six of them, and I look forward to the Minister’s response today, which I am sure will provide some of the detail around how he will remedy the enduring problems of patient access to dental services and the profession’s long-standing dissatisfaction with the contract system.

The NHS general dental services contract came into force in 2006 in England and Wales. The contract pays dentists an annual amount for their NHS work through a unit of dental activity system. Now, this system consists of three bands that determine how much a patient is charged for their treatment and how much a dental practice is then remunerated. The payment is the same whether a dentist undertakes one or more similar procedures. The committee was told that there is no incentive for dentists to take on high-needs patients, as they would be paid the same amount for doing more work. This has clear implications for access to dentistry in Wales. We are concerned that the current UDA system may be discouraging dentists from taking on high-needs patients, particularly where poorer access to dental services already exists in Wales.

The Welsh Government has previously made changes to the UDA-based model, with the use of pilot schemes to test a reduction in UDA targets to allow dentists more flexibility and space to undertake preventative work. However, we heard clear concerns from dentists themselves that the changes to dental contracts over the last decade have not had much impact. That is why the committee’s first recommendation is to replace the current UDA targets system with a new, more appropriate and more flexible system for monitoring outcomes, to include a focus on prevention and quality of treatment. As I said, this system will focus on prevention and quality of treatment. We look forward to receiving an update from the Minister in November on progress in this area.

As part of the dental contract, practices are evaluated on the UDAs they achieve against their contracted allowance of UDAs allocated by their health board. The contract requires health boards to pay a dental practice 100 per cent if it has delivered at least 95 per cent of its contractual activity as expressed in its UDA. This is the percentage of activity that must be delivered if a practice is to avoid the health board clawing back funds. The committee heard in evidence that this clawback is not universally reinvested by health boards back into dentistry services. We believe that dentistry services in Wales could be further improved through the reinvestment of this money, and we recommend that the Welsh Government takes steps to ensure and monitor that all health boards reinvest this money until a new system for monitoring outcomes is in place, as recommended by this committee

A number of the available career pathways in Wales, including dental foundation training, dental core training and specialist training, are now part of UK-wide recruitment. We were pleased to learn that there are no major issues with recruitment into dental schools in Wales, although we are aware that these figures can be low for Welsh-domiciled students. The committee also heard evidence about the challenges with retaining dentists to work in Wales following their training period. We are aware that some of the barriers are the difference in salary in Wales compared to England, along with health boards' proximity to the dental school. We urge the Welsh Government to consider successful initiatives being used elsewhere in the UK to address issues of recruitment and retention. As such, our third recommendation is that the Welsh Government undertakes an evaluation of the UK-wide recruitment scheme to determine if it is effectively supporting an increase in Welsh-domiciled students and the retention of students following training. In his written response to our report, the Minister accepts that an evaluation is required and that he will discuss with Health Education and Improvement Wales how to take this forward. I look forward to hearing more detail about this today.

Turning to orthodontic services, the committee heard that inappropriate referrals to orthodontic services can put a strain on services and exacerbate waiting times issues. While we recognise that, primarily, long waiting times are as a result of recruitment issues, we are concerned about the method of referring and prioritising patients. We heard that some primary care dental practitioners refer patients too early in order to take account of long waiting times. This inevitably adds to the problem. We note the introduction of the electronic referral management system and recognise that, while the system may not increase capacity, we would expect it to have a positive impact on ensuring appropriate referrals, prioritising patients and reducing waiting times. The committee therefore recommends that the Welsh Government works with health boards to develop a clear strategy to ensure that the e-referral system for orthodontic services has a positive impact on ensuring appropriate referrals, prioritising patients and reducing waiting times.

Turning to the Designed to Smile scheme, the committee recognises the positive impact of Designed to Smile, which is the national oral health improvement programme for children in Wales. We welcome the extension of the programme to include very young children. However, the committee heard concerns around the Welsh Government’s refocus of this programme, placing more emphasis on children aged nought to five years, and a possible shift away from children above that age. As such, we recommend that the Welsh Government should fund the Designed to Smile programme sufficiently to ensure that those over five years of age receive its benefits. In his written response, the Minister refers to apparent misconceptions that, as a result of the refocus, those aged six and seven are being denied the benefits of the programme. I look forward to hearing more from him on this matter this afternoon.

We heard strong evidence that the oral health issues in older children and young teenagers can lead to the loss of permanent teeth. In some cases, many teeth are lost, and the committee expects effective action to be taken to address this. The committee is aware that the Welsh Government has commissioned an epidemiological study with the aim of assessing and understanding the needs of the 12 to 21 age group and to help inform future approaches to meet the needs of this age group. So, I look forward to receiving an update from the Minister on this area of work. Thank you.

I'm grateful to be able to speak on the committee's report. I'm delighted, actually, we did this one-day report, because it shone a light on a part of the NHS here in Wales that is so very vital to people's long-term health and yet sometimes is really overlooked. And I'm pleased that the Government has accepted all the recommendations, although I do have commentary on that. 

'Everyone should have access to good-quality NHS dental services'. This is the headline on the Government's Health in Wales website page on how to find a dentist. Now, that's quite tricky in an awful lot of Wales. About 45 per cent of the population—that's almost 1.5 million individuals—have not seen a high street NHS dentist in the last two years. And I'm concerned about the stagnation that these figures actually show up, because, nine years ago, 55 per cent of the population was being treated within the NHS dentistry service. Today, 55 per cent of the population is being treated in the NHS dentistry service. That sounds like good news, doesn't it, but, of course, our population's grown by almost 200,000, so, actually, we're beginning to reverse and, rather than reverse or stagnate, we need to improve.

So, Minister, I'd be very grateful if you could just talk us through how you think we're going to be able to address this and increase the numbers of people who are having access to NHS dentistry services. Because, in my constituency, there is no dental practice that is accepting new adult or child NHS patients whatsoever. Only 15.5 per cent of NHS practices throughout Wales are currently accepting adult NHS patients, and only 27 per cent are accepting new children, which, actually, is really bad news for a couple of reasons. One is it actually starts to negate all the positive work in Designed to Smile, because there's no encouragement to carry it on. Two, every time you go into a hospital, you're asked about the state of your teeth. It's absolutely vital and it's recognised by the medical profession. They promote the fact that, unless you have good, healthy teeth, you are liable to open yourself up to all manner of infections and tendencies for heart failure and all the rest of it. So, unless we have really, really good teeth and we keep our teeth healthy, then we are opening ourselves up to further illnesses. So, we're immediately setting ourselves up to fail if we do not give people access to good dentistry. 

And it's not a snapshot in time. I noted in your response that you said this was a snapshot, but this is two different years that all this has been monitored over. So, what's the real problem? Well, the real problem is there's no new money. All the recommendations you've accepted, which is great, but none of the recommendations have any financial implication whatsoever, which means there is no new money. The value of the total dental budget in 2017-18 is worth 15 per cent less in real terms compared to the budget six years ago, but I can assure you that in the six years capital costs have increased, staff costs have increased, everything else has increased. So, of course, what's happening is that the patient is being squeezed, services to the patient are being squeezed. An expenditure of £186.7 million in 2012-13, which is what we spent, should equate to £216.57 million now, and that's just to keep pace with inflation. Our six-year shortfall for last year was over £29 million, and £29 million in a small part of the NHS sector like this actually makes for an awful lot of money that can make an awful lot of difference. So, I'm deeply concerned about the fact that we have no new money.

The other point that also concerns me, and pertains to our recommendation 1, is about the fact that there are still pilot practices—or there's still a desire by the chief dental officer to implement new pilot practices to test how we ought to relook at the unit of dental activity. What I don't understand about this is that some years ago, I had the great good fortune to go down to some pilots that were being run by the Welsh Government in Swansea, and there's been one elsewhere—very successful. It absolutely looked at people in the round, it looked at the holistic way of being able to measure their dental health. The downside was that it was highly preventative, so they saw slightly fewer patients, but in the long term the benefit to Wales, to the dental service, was absolutely outstanding. I would be very grateful, Minister, if you could just clarify why you've not gone ahead with any of those pilots that were tested and seen to be positive, but instead we are waiting and waiting and waiting, and spending yet more time in trying to redesign the wheel and come up with yet another alternative, when we seem to have some very successful ones that your Government came up with not so very long ago.    

Members will be aware that I have been asking questions about the dental situation in my constituency of Arfon on a number of occasions, and it is a very grave situation indeed. There are six practitioners in the constituency, but none of them are taking NHS patients. They’re not taking adults on the NHS, they’re not taking children on the NHS and they’re not taking children and young people with disabilities on the NHS, either. So, many of them have to go out of the area to seek dental treatment on the NHS—as far as Dolgellau in some cases, which is an hour and a quarter away in a car, and takes even longer, of course, on a bus.

What that means on a practical level very often is that the patients wait until things have gone to an extreme, and have to go to an emergency clinic through NHS Direct once the problem has worsened. And then, that clinic, very often, is at least half an hour away in a car from people’s homes in Arfon. Or, if they can’t get to the clinic, what happens next is that they turn up at Ysbyty Gwynedd with serious problems. Anecdotally, I hear regular stories about such situations; it’s increasing in how often it happens. Therefore, the relatively cheap preventative work simply isn’t happening, and what happens is that it becomes an acute emergency case, which, of course, is very expensive. What’s very frustrating for dental practitioners in Arfon is that they do have capacity; they have the time to see patients. Half of them do accept private patients, so they have the resources, but they can’t take new NHS patients because the contract places a cap on the number of NHS patients that they can accept. They won’t be paid if they go beyond that limit.

The situation hasn’t changed in the past two years. It's wrong to say that the picture I'm painting today is a snapshot, as has been claimed when I have raised this issue previously. The situation is very similar to what it was two years ago. So, I am extremely disappointed that there will be no additional funding and I’m exceptionally disappointed that the move towards better contracts for dentistry on the NHS—that that movement is so slow. That’s what the practitioners are telling me in Arfon, too. Therefore, the situation facing new patients and children in my area will continue, despite the best efforts of the committee and this one-day inquiry that you’ve held. It appears that you’ve been wasting your time, because the Government doesn’t intend to do anything that’s hugely different to what they’re doing at the moment, and the dental crisis will continue.

I am pleased to hear that there is to be an evaluation of recruitment and retention among dentists, and I look forward to seeing the conclusions of that. I would like to ask today whether you will be looking specifically at a shortage of dentists in north Wales and whether there is a case for training dentists in north Wales, in Bangor, exactly as has happened with doctors. Because the arguments are the same: if you train people in a particular area, they do tend to remain in that area, and in that way, they do fill in those gaps that exist in many areas across north Wales. So, I’m sure you will have heard me making the case about doctors. Well, I think the same arguments can be made about dentists too. Thank you.

I thank the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee for the report on dentistry in Wales. NHS dentistry in Wales is in crisis. Less than one in five practices in Wales are taking on new adult patients, and just over a quarter of practices are offering appointments to new child patients. We regularly learn of patients making round trips of 100 miles to see a dentist. It's not unusual to see practices who open up to new patients have 10-hour queues outside the door and there have also been extreme cases of people doing DIY dentistry because they can't see an NHS dentist and certainly can't afford private treatment.

As the committee quite rightly highlight, the main culprit is the dental contract, which sets unrealistic targets and quotas, preventing dentists from treating more patients. The NHS general dental services contract also discourages dentists from taking on high-needs patients, particularly in areas of deprivation where there is already poor access to the dental services. Not only is the UDA system not fit for purpose, it has also actively harmed oral health in Wales. 

I am pleased, therefore, that the Welsh Government has listened to the committee and agreed to scrap the target system rather than tweaking it as they did in 2011 and 2015. I would go further and urge the Welsh Government to ensure the new UDA arrangements also prevent dental practices from insisting on six-monthly checkups and abide by NICE guidelines. The chief dental officer for England said that, in the majority of cases, check-ups are only necessary every 12 or 24 months, and this will not only ensure patients aren't forced to pay for unnecessary treatment, but will allow practices to take on extra patients because this time will now be freed up. So, hopefully, the improvements put forward by the committee will put an end to long trips, longer waits and instances of people pulling their own teeth with a pair of household pliers. Thank you.

Thank you. Can I call the Minister for Health and Social Services, Vaughan Gething? 

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I would also like to thank the committee for their report and their inquiry into dentistry in Wales and to Members who contributed to the debate today. The recommendations do broadly reflect Welsh Government policy and recognise some of the progress made to date, whilst identifying where further work is still required. We acknowledge that the current dental contract needs reform, as commented by all Members in the debate. Units of dental activity, or UDAs, should not be the sole measure of contract performance. They do not reflect or incentivise a preventative or team approach to care. However, calls to bin the UDA are too simplistic and don't offer an alternative.

Whole-system change is already under way in dentistry in Wales. We need clinical teams in health boards to collaboratively agree on what to deliver and how to measure excellence in primary care dentistry. New approaches to contracting with more meaningful measurement is already allowing patient need, practice-level quality, team workforce and access to be better understood. This is more than making a few tweaks with the contract. Dentists, dental care professionals, health boards and academics are working together to shape and deliver transformation in line with 'A Healthier Wales' by removing financial disincentives so dental teams can focus on prevention and make use of the skills of the whole team.

The dental reform programme is focused on quality, prevention and access. From this month, a further 36 practices are joining the existing 94 participating dental practices in contract reform. That represents about a third of all dental practices in Wales who are taking part. In contrast, in England, just over 1 per cent of dental practices are taking part in their contract reform programme. However, we want the pace of change to quicken even further so that more dental practices can work in new ways. I expect over half of all practices to be part of the reform programme by October 2020, leading to a full roll-out of contract reform in 2021. The broader set of monitoring measures and the removal of low-value UDAs under contract reform will help to reduce the need for health boards to recover funding from dental contractors. I have asked health boards to report on any resources recovered, and I expect them to provide year-round support to dental providers who experience difficulty in meeting targets.

We know recruitment and retention in the dental workforce causes difficulty in a number of areas of Wales. There is more to do to address the multifactorial issues involved. So, Health Education and Improvement Wales are looking at training numbers, ways to help develop the workforce, and are considering alternative workforce models to support delivery, enhance recruitment and incentivise retention following training. In addition, the All-Wales Faculty for Dental Care Professionals being established at Bangor University, which I expect to visit in the new year, will contribute to career opportunities for the dental care professional workforce.

The dental e-referral management system mentioned yesterday covers all dental specialties, including orthodontics, and has been successfully rolled out nationally. We are the first country in the UK to implement a fully electronic system for all dental referrals in all dental clinical specialties. That now means that the source, complexity, and volume of referrals for dental specialties will be known by health boards. And in turn, that supports evidence-informed workforce planning and paves the way to service redesign, with a shift out of secondary care for procedures that can, and should, be delivered within primary care. And, of course, a fortnight ago, we celebrated the tenth anniversary of Designed to Smile, our population child oral health improvement programme. This has made, and continues to make, a significant contribution to reducing dental disease levels, and we're committed to continuing our support for the programme.

There is, of course, more to be done. I'll happily respond again to the committee with a range of the points made that there isn't time to respond to today, however significant steps have already been taken in reforming dental services and improving the oral health for the most vulnerable members of our communities. I hope the clear programme of dental contract reform that I set out to be completed by 2021 will provide the assurance Members are plainly looking for. But I will continue to keep Members updated on our progress in addressing all of the recommendations made in the report.

Dai Lloyd to reply to the debate.

Diolch, Llywydd. Can I thank everybody for their contributions? In the short amount of time I have left, I'll briefly sum up. Obviously, this debate has provided a very welcome emphasis on dentistry and the concerns of dental colleagues, which is not something we do every day here in the Senedd. Can I thank all Members for their contributions—Angela Burns, Siân Gwenllian, Caroline Jones and the Minister?

There are significant challenges, obviously, as we found out in the evidence we took as a committee, because what was clear to the committee is that the current NHS contract arrangements for dentists simply aren't working. Paying someone the same amount to deliver a course of treatment on a patient regardless of the amount of work involved makes little sense.

It's simply not acceptable nowadays that only 14 per cent of dental practices in the old Abertawe Bro Morgannwg area are taking on new adult NHS patients. It's certainly not acceptable either that in the whole of the Hywel Dda health board area not one dental practice is taking on NHS patients. So, the Minister has started on a journey, but the Government needs to take far more action and take that action quickly. Doing nothing is simply not an option. Diolch yn fawr.

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

Which brings us now to the debate on the Culture, Welsh Language and Communications Committee report on supporting and promoting the Welsh language, and I call on the committee Chair to move the motion. Bethan Sayed.

Thank you very much, Llywydd. It’s important for us in Wales that we have the ability to use the language of our choice in our everyday interactions with public services. Not only is it a basic right, but it’s crucial to building our sense of self and community.

The Welsh Language (Wales) Measure 2011 was an important milestone in the history of our language. The Measure, for the first time, declared the official status of the Welsh language here in Wales. It also clarified the expectations for the provision of Welsh language services for speakers and service providers.

So, our inquiry looked at the perceived successes and limitations of the Measure, and we asked whether it supports Welsh language promotion, which is an issue that we felt has not received the attention it deserves. We heard, as a committee, that the Measure is an improvement on the previous system of publishing language schemes. And we were told that moving from schemes to a standards regime has provided clarity and has established rights for Welsh speakers. The majority of witnesses told us this is a positive step for both the public and the bodies that serve them.

However, there was some frustration about the complexity of the standards. In assessing whether to continue with the current system or to simplify aspects of the legislation, we recognised as a committee that the majority of the organisations currently implementing the standards have only been doing so for a year or two. The committee therefore agreed with the Welsh Language Commissioner in post at the time who told us, and I quote, that

'it's much too early to decide that the legislation needs to be amended wholesale'

on this point. She said that there has already been a positive change on the ground in a number of county councils that had changed people’s lives. So, as a committee, we want to see that being rooted and embedded in our communities before there is great change.

Now, clearly the Welsh Government heard the weight of evidence being presented to the committee and responded by withdrawing their proposed Welsh language Bill in February.

In terms of streamlining the standards, there are, however, a few issues that still need to be addressed in the absence of new legislation. We recommended that the current standards are streamlined, by combining ones with similar aims. The Welsh Government have accepted this recommendation and I would like to see more detail on the Minister’s plans to consider how this can be done.

I'm pleased that the Government has accepted our recommendation to speed up the introduction of standards for those sectors that are not already subject to the Measure. Again, I would like to ask the Minister to publish details and a timetable for this work.

We want to see the next set of regulations for water companies and health regulators being introduced urgently. I am disappointed that the Government can't say more on this other than noting that the standards are being developed. They have already been delayed for far too long in our opinion as a committee. We need a firm date for their introduction.

We also recommended revising the complaints procedure as the current process does not allow for complaints to be resolved without a full investigation. Amending the complaints framework was one of the proposals in the Welsh Government’s withdrawn Bill, of course. So, in the absence of a new Bill, we are pleased to see that the commissioner has taken steps to alter the investigation procedure along the lines of our recommendation as a committee. But when the commissioner came to committee recently, there was a lack of detail about how that was going to be done, and I think that the public in Wales, who are perhaps going to put forward a complaint, need to know with certainty what is going to happen and who they are complaining to. So, I would urge the commissioner and the Government to collaborate on that.

One issue that I believe hasn't received the attention it deserves is the promotion of the Welsh language. That hasn't received much attention: how we promote the language. When the Welsh Language Board was abolished, the responsibility for promoting the language was transferred to the Welsh Government, and a great deal has been done. We have to acknowledge that. But many people have said to us that we need to establish a new arm's-length body to promote the language. But, bearing in mind the consideration we gave to it as a committee and certainly in terms of the resources available, we felt that perhaps it would be better to see how we can use what we already have, and how we can use those processes that we already have to do this.

I understand that work on a memorandum of understanding between the Welsh Government and the commissioner has been started, and I would like to have more information about how that is going to work. For example, is the commissioner going to receive additional resources to do that promotion work, which might perhaps add to their remit? Or will they be expected to do the same thing with the same amount of budget? I would be interested in knowing what your opinion is on that.

I would also like to know a little bit more about the status of the Welsh language unit in the Government. The Government announced a new delivery unit called Project 2050, and even though we welcome that, it is crucial for it to have the necessary resources and expertise to succeed. If it's going to look at the Welsh language across everything that happens in Government, it's very important that that unit is supported.

So, I certainly believe that this work has been very useful for us to look back at the Measure, which was put forward in 2014. A great deal has changed since then, and a lot of opportunities have been given to organisations to change what they are doing, and there's been a great deal of culture change. That was what I was pleased to hear. Even in those areas perhaps that we would believe would be traditionally English-speaking areas, they have made more of an effort to change what happens in terms of their processes.

What perhaps we need to improve still is the use of the language and how people can develop their confidence to think that that is part of their everyday lives. It's not just a challenge for the Measure, but a challenge for us all in terms of strategies and how we do our everyday work, and how we promote the language as Assembly Members. So, I would urge people to get involved in this debate and to realise how important this element of our work is as Members. 

May I also thank the committee for their work? The publication of the 2050 strategy was ambitious and its success will depend on a number of things, including promotion, so I was pleased to see this report.

I wasn't here when the Welsh language Measure was passed. It’s been in statute for a long period of time, now, and therefore it’s entirely appropriate that we review it and consider its impact. Certainly, it is appropriate that we review the legislation because of the relationship between the Welsh Government and the commissioner. Certainly, Members know that we as Welsh Conservatives would prefer to see the commissioner accountable to this Assembly rather than to the Welsh Government, and there is good reason for that.

Many of us here will recall that the commissioner was relieved of some of her promotion duties by a previous Welsh language Minister, without the consent of the Assembly that provided those powers. More recently, we have seen the current Minister trying to abolish the role entirely and create a commission, which was very similar, to all intents and purposes, but felt less independent to my eyes. I'm very pleased that the Government has realised that its White Paper didn't have the support of this Assembly.

In turning to the recommendations, there are some very good ideas here. Changing the complaints procedures: yes. There are a number of degrees of gravity in terms of complaints and the current system doesn't allow a commensurate response. Recommendation 4 suggests that there should be simplification and, yes, we agree with that. A review of the efficiency of standards and duties: yes. Although standards are framed specifically in terms of creating and safeguarding the rights of Welsh speakers, I would want to judge their efficacy by evidence of growth in the use of the Welsh language and development in usage by Welsh learners or those who are shy in using the Welsh language.

I have said already that some rights are appreciated more by Welsh speakers than others in terms of their daily lives, and some are more useful in promoting the value of bilingualism than others. Before extending standards to new organisations and bodies, I think we need to understand which standards deliver those aims. And that’s why recommendations 4 to 7 are interesting. I recognise the committee’s comment that the Government could hasten the process of implementing the current standards, but it’s one thing to simplify standards for the future to make them more palatable for new organisations, yet it’s another thing to dilute them for new organisations. The core principle with the current menu of standards is that they should be applied reasonably and proportionately. Therefore, diluting standards could create a dilemma. Perhaps smaller organisations and more private organisations would be willing to accept them, but Welsh speakers would have fewer rights. The current system, we know, is confusing already, so we need to be guarded in interpreting these recommendations for any draft standards in the future.

The other recommendations relate to promotion. When you’re trying to persuade someone to do something, it doesn’t help to have a huge 'Welsh Government' badge on it. According to recommendation 11, the Welsh language unit is the place to collect and analyse data, to commission research, to provide resources, to take responsibility for implementing the 2050 strategy across Government, and to create high-level strategies and to plan with expert assistance. But I don’t think that this is the best place to promote the Welsh language, although it does have a key role in monitoring and evaluating the promotional activity undertaken by others. I’m not sure that the Government’s response to recommendation 11 is clear as to where the boundary lies between strategy and promotional activity.

I would say that the best way of providing advice on behavioural change is for someone entirely independent outwith Government, who has responsibility for working in a co-productive manner and with target audiences, to promote meaningful acquisition of Welsh language skills. There’s no purpose for a civil servant to tell mentrau iaith to attract people to an event unless there is an improvement in the usage of the Welsh language as a result of that. This responsibility could be given to a commissioner or a separate body—I don’t care much where the responsibility lies—but that body must have the freedom to design the activities of mentrau so that those on the front line are teaching adults or training council officers. And some of those have been less than clear in terms of their responsibilities in promoting the Welsh language. Thank you.

As we’ve already heard, the context of this inquiry by the committee was the Welsh Government’s intention in the summer of 2017 to legislate anew with regard to the Welsh language, and to do so barely 18 months after the 2011 Welsh language Measure had started to embed. So, Plaid Cymru was very pleased that common sense had prevailed, and ultimately the proposals were set aside. The evidence that the committee heard, the consensus of opinion that had been reported by language organisations, academics and perhaps most importantly by those organisations that implement legislation, all confirms that now is not the time to make far-reaching changes to a relatively new system. Even though that system isn’t perfect, as the committee says, it continues to drive significant progress with regard to the status of the Welsh language and its usage.

Even though I welcome the decision made by the Minister to set those proposals aside, recommendation 3 in the report, which suggests that any future proposals to amend or replace the Welsh language Measure should be supported by evidence, causes some concern and is a sign that the Welsh Government’s proposals for the language Bill weren't based on evidence in the first instance. And clearly, that isn't how a responsible Government should operate, and we need to learn lessons from these weaknesses that led to a loss of focus on the implementation of the strategy for creating 1 million Welsh speakers. So, I’d like to thank the committee for stepping into the breach and gathering the evidence that was missing in the discussion with regard to the Bill—to do the Government’s work for it, some would say, and to point to the priorities in moving forward.

It’s a matter, now, for the Government to look at these priorities, to take the reins and to implement them. And I want to focus the rest of my contribution on three important priorities, as far as I can see, and I would appreciate it if the Minister would take the opportunity to give a progress report on these points.

The report confirms that it’s in the Welsh Government’s hands that the responsibility for promoting the Welsh language lies and we need to improve the status of the Welsh language unit in the Government. Clearly, we need a powerful unit within Government, not a unit that’s buried in the civil service. I was at the Eisteddfod, where the Minister announced that there’s one new post—one new post—within the current division that will be created. And we also heard in the case of the fair work agenda, which is entirely appropriately a priority across Government—we heard in that particular case that there will be a directorate set up in the First Minister’s department to look at it. So, why doesn’t the Welsh language have the same status within Government?

The report recommends that the commissioner should review the complaints procedures regularly in terms of their effectiveness and their impact on service users. Everyone, as far as I can see it, wants to see effective procedures that give a voice to the citizen and the Welsh language. But putting additional pressure on the commissioner not to investigate complaints as a matter of course would be tantamount to weakening the standards regime. So, could you explain, Minister, why you have put pressure on the commissioner to undertake less investigation into complaints? And will you confirm today the independence of the commissioner?

My final point: Plaid Cymru—I have called many times for a timetable for introducing the standards across the whole range of areas that remain, where the commissioner has done that initial work. So, perhaps today you could share the latest timetable for introducing the timetables for the water companies and the health regulators, in addition to the remaining sectors in the Measure that haven’t been touched by you yet. Will you also confirm that you want to see the commissioner starting to do preparatory work in the telecommunications sector?

Thank you to the Culture, Welsh Language and Communications Committee for their report on supporting and promoting the Welsh language. Although I won’t make my entire contribution through the medium of Welsh, I am passionate about the value of the Welsh language; it's worth keeping alive.

I welcome the measured approach taken by the committee and the fact that the Welsh Government have accepted in full or in principle all 14 recommendations. I believe the position taken by the committee and Welsh Ministers is an acceptance that the carrot is far more effective than the stick. The Welsh language is a vital part of our shared heritage and culture. The fact that less than one in five of the population is able to speak Welsh points to past policy failings. Given that for the last 20 years it has been compulsory for all students to study Welsh, more than 19 per cent of the population should be able to speak the language. I certainly hear more of the language spoken in supermarkets and little ones engaging with their parents, and I therefore welcome the shift in focus to encouraging more people to learn rather than us forcing them to. And we must take people along with us on this journey—it’s exciting.

We have seen major progress in the use of the Welsh language recently, particularly in terms of technology.

We have seen big strides in the use of the language in the wider world in recent times, particularly in technology, and we have Welsh language versions of many software platforms, open-source projects seeking to bring the language to voice assistance, and learning platforms such as Duolingo allowing us to learn on the go. Utilising this technological change will enable us to encourage far more people to learn. I am however concerned that cutbacks to local authority budgets will hamper the Welsh Government's ambition for 1 million Welsh speakers. Adult learning opportunities are suffering as a result of cutbacks, and this will hamper efforts to encourage more people to take up learning Welsh. So, I would therefore urge the Minister to go further than recommendation 12 and ensure adequate funding for more than just promotion—they must ensure adequate funding for adult Welsh language classes. This approach is the best way of achieving more people to be able to speak the language of our forebearers. Thank you.

The Minister for International Relations and the Welsh Language to contribute to the debate—Eluned Morgan.

Thank you very much. First of all, may I thank the committee for their work during this inquiry and for their careful consideration of the evidence presented? As I've already noted in the Government's written response to the committee, we accept or accept in principle all of the recommendations contained within the report—noting, of course, that not all of the recommendations are recommendations for the Government. Some of them are for your own committee, so I won't go through each and every one of them today.

Members will be aware that I made a statement in August about the next steps in terms of the structures for implementing the Cymraeg 2050 strategy. Our role as a Government is to lead, to plan, to set the context and to create the right conditions for collaboration in working towards that 1 million Welsh speakers. It's wonderful to see that Caroline Jones is one of those 1 million that we will have by 2050. Thank you very much for making your contribution in Welsh.

Part of the leadership role, of course, is to take strategic decisions. In our view as a Government, the emphasis in terms of language policy has tended too far towards regulation, at the expense of other policy interventions over the past few years. And that was what underpinned the White Paper of 2017. And although we are no longer expecting to legislate, I have made a decision that is aimed at seeing a better balance between creating rights to access Welsh services on the one hand, and practical work, which is policy work, on the other hand. Of course, this will lead to increasing the number of Welsh speakers as we strive to the 1 million by 2050, doubling the daily use of the Welsh language and maintaining our Welsh-speaking communities.

To succeed in this work, I agree with the evidence presented to the committee on the need to ensure that there is greater focus and emphasis placed on language planning and behavioural change within Government and outwith Government. That is why we will invest in language planning expertise in establishing this 2050 project, which is a new multidisciplinary unit within the Welsh Government that will be responsible for driving the Cymraeg 2050 strategy. Of course, the aim is that we mainstream the Welsh language across Government. That's the ambition. So, we don't want this department to be a small part of Government. The purpose of the department is to mainstream. As I announced in August, the funds will be used to fund a civil service post to lead this project and to commission a panel of up to four expert advisers on language planning. My officials are currently working on this.

Will you take an intervention?

Of course.

Why is the Government creating a directorate for the fair work agenda, but isn't doing that for the Welsh language, which also has a cross-governmental focus?

Well, of course, we already have a department. What we’re trying to do with this new project is to ensure that this is something that is cross-governmental. Therefore, it is a different approach, yes, but we are seeking to achieve the same aims as that process.

So, the task of the 2050 project will be to co-ordinate the work of planning on our journey towards 1 million Welsh speakers, from the early years, through Welsh-medium education in the statutory sector, through to post-16, and Welsh for adults. We will also double the use of the Welsh language by creating new projects and evaluating current projects. And, thirdly, we will be supporting Welsh-speaking communities by supporting policy departments across Government to ensure that our policies in all departments do contribute to that, where relevant. That is the purpose of the new project. The project will report to me, as Minister, and will work closely with the Welsh language partnership council, which advises me on the Welsh language. I am confident that through working together, the experience and expertise of the 2050 project, the partnership council, the commissioner and grant partners will all put us on the right path in reaching that target.

Developing a better partnership of working with the Welsh Language Commissioner has been a priority for us this year. I’m pleased that we’ve agreed a memorandum of understanding, between myself and Aled Roberts, in August. Both of us are entirely clear that we must collaborate on a number of issues whilst we respect—and I want to highlight this—the independence of the commissioner in issues related to imposing and enforcing standards.

Let me be clear that the Welsh Government is fully committed to developing standards in order to enhance the rights of people to access services through the medium of Welsh. Rights are an important role of the policy interventions for delivering Cymraeg 2050. New regulations are being drafted at the moment in order to provide standards for those two sectors—the water companies and healthcare regulators. And it is difficult to give a specific date, because Brexit does limit our ability and our legal capacity internally, but I can tell you that there are a number of processes to go through in terms of consultation. Of course, the committee themselves have said that they want us to consult with them at an early stage, and we will endeavour to do that. There are a number of steps, and I have discussed this with the commissioner this week. But I do hope that, next year, this will happen.

The committee’s report has made a number of recommendations on how we should approach simplifying standards by reviewing or merging multiple standards that have the same aim or outcome. And I agree with this. I want to reassure you that the policy objectives have not changed. I am clear that any changes made to the process of developing standards should not have a negative impact on services for Welsh speakers. I am just as firm in the view that the organisations need to be clear on what they need to deliver. But I want to underline that reducing the number of standards is not akin to simplification. I want to avoid a situation where we create fewer standards in order to create standards that are longer and more complex. And neither do I want to create simpler standards that will mean that the compliance notices that the commissioner prepares will become more complex and more onerous.

The committee also said that it’s only after considering the need to review the standards that the next set of regulations should be imposed or should be brought forward for the water companies and health regulators. It’s important that we take our time to ensure that the regulations that we provide from here on in do reflect the lessons learned from the consultation on the White Paper and from the evidence received by the committee.

We as a nation have an innovative and exciting target to reach 1 million Welsh speakers by 2050 and to double the use of the Welsh language. As a Government, we are entirely committed to both those targets, and I have been hugely encouraged that there is support across the nation for this ambition. It is an ambition that has captured the imagination of the nation, and I’m sure, together, we will reach that target.

Thank you. I call on Bethan Sayed to reply to the debate. Bethan. 

Thank you very much to those Assembly Members who contributed today, and well done to Caroline Jones, again, for practising her Welsh here today. It’s very important that we try to do so when we have the opportunity to do so.

I have time, perhaps, just to explain some of the things that some Members had concerns about. I’d like to start, therefore, with this idea that Suzy put forward about dumbing down standards if we’re going to simplify them. And I think that Siân Gwenllian felt similarly in that regard. What we were trying to say as a committee, as the Minister said, was that, if there were multiple or similar standards, then we could simplify and streamline the process so that there were too many of them, and organisations had to comply with them. It wasn’t to weaken or to dilute the process. If we thought for a second that it was going to dilute the process, we would not have recommended it as a committee. So, of course, we need to see how this develops.

We’re hearing that there are operational concerns from the Minister. So, down the line, we’ll need to understand what those concerns are. But I urge upon those people who are watching this debate—the public who are going to be bringing forward complaints, perhaps—that that wasn’t the intention. What we were hearing from councils or other organisations was that they genuinely wanted to respond to the complaints, but sometimes the standards were so complex it was difficult for them to understand what exactly the path forward was. So, we want to help to improve them, and we want to help them, so please do understand that we’re not trying to dilute the standards. Time will tell how that plays out.

Now, some in this Chamber—Siân Gwenllian and Suzy Davies—clearly agree with regard to what happened with the commission and so on. And, clearly, the Government had listened and had seen what the evidence had shown when people came to committee; they weren’t supportive. A few of the organisations, perhaps, were supportive, but at present we're still seeing how the Measure is working on the ground. I think it would be very odd to change such a new system at the moment, and so that’s why we came down on the side of giving time for the regime to embed, and then assessing again in future.

I would disagree, unfortunately, with the Minister about saying that there was too much focus, perhaps, or too much had happened on regulations to this point. If we want to establish a new system, then we need to have those regulations in place and we need to ensure that they work. And now, I think, we have reached a point where we can look at the promotion, because those systems are in place. And I think that’s why people perhaps didn’t want to see a new Bill coming forward with a focus, perhaps, on regulations, when being on the ground and speaking the language in our communities is what we all want to prioritise.

Certainly, we are content that the Minister had spoken, in terms of the focus on language planning, about the new unit. We’re going to assess that and monitor that, I’m sure. I do have some—. I agree with Siân Gwenllian to an extent, because, if there is going to be a new unit, if there is going to be a focus on creating a new post, then it’s a bit disappointing to hear that Brexit is perhaps going to undermine some of the work that needs to be done as a matter of urgency. If it’s going to be mainstreamed, if there is an objective to put forward new standards, then that unit should be sufficiently robust and resilient to be able to withstand what’s happening, whether Brexit—. Brexit is ongoing and discussions are ongoing on a daily basis; we need to continue with other work as well, and I would urge the Minister to consider the fact that we need to ensure that this unit is robust and resilient and receives the support that you’ve said that you are going to give it today.

Now, I believe that the directorate has been mentioned today already, and I just want to conclude by saying that there is now an opportunity for us as a committee and for us as Assembly Members to look at how we can consider other elements of what is happening with regard to the Welsh language. Caroline Jones talked about technology and the digital arena, and we’re pleased to say that, as a committee, we will be looking at technology and the digital arena in the future, because it’s something that has been raised with us, as a committee, as being very important.

So, it is important that we do realise that legislation is important, of course, and the regulations and standards are important as well, but we do need to see the use of the Welsh language increasing and improving on the ground. Suzy Davies’s idea is a very good one. If mentrau iaith are holding events, then we want some of their objectives, or the things that they report back to Government on, to show that the use of the Welsh language has evolved and developed, rather than just that they can reach that target of 1 million Welsh speakers. Well, how is that 1 million doing it? Are they using it to put the baby to bed? Are they using it when they go down the street to the pub and talk to their friends? How is that going to evolve to be a daily reality for people?

So, thank you to everyone for engaging with this important report. I think it was a report that ended up being quite influential. So, not every report perhaps ends up being quite as influential, but we do our work, but I think this report was one of those ones that were influential. Thank you to the Government for listening and for being willing to respond to some of the things that they heard as part of the discussion, which I believe was a positive and constructive one between the Government, those who gave evidence, and Assembly Members. Thank you to everyone.

Thank you. The proposal is to note the committee's report. Does any Member object? No. Therefore, the motion is agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

We now move on to the Welsh Conservatives debate on GCSE and A-level results. I call on Suzy Davies to move the motion. 

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd, and, of course, I move the motion. First of all—and I know you will all join me in this—can I offer my congratulations to all the students, teachers and staff for the commitment and work that they've put into this year's exams? This debate is no criticism of them. It is about holding Welsh Government to account on how they're making—sorry, and how they're making it perhaps a little more difficult for us to do that. Let me congratulate also all those who passed non-A-levels and non-GCSEs too. Time and time again, we stand up in this Chamber and we talk about parity of esteem between academic and vocational qualifications, but the focus is pretty much always on the former. So, let's begin with this as an example of uncertainty dressed up as good news.

The Welsh Government amendment to our debate abounds with whataboutery, exactly as it did in last year's debate on this subject, but there is one statistic of which it looks like we should be proud, and that's a modest increase in the number of students attaining A* to C in science subjects. Now, Members will recollect that the number of entrants for GCSE sciences is increasing, partly due to the deliberate insistence that some students move from BTEC to GCSE, as the BTEC course limited students to a maximum attainment of a GCSE grade C equivalent. Yet it's not possible to establish how many of those students who would formerly have entered a BTEC course got a C or lower at GCSE, and, conversely, Qualifications Wales tells me that it is not possible to break down the figures for those who did take the BTEC this year to see how many of them attained the C equivalent. In short, at this stage, we can't tell whether moving students from one qualification to the other has made any difference to the standard of attainment or, indeed, whether staying on a BTEC course may have been better for particular students. The reason I'm raising this particular smoke and mirrors right at the beginning of this debate is not just to highlight that obfuscation surrounding what looks like, at first instance, good news, but to challenge you, Minister, on your failure to act on the status of qualifications that bring out different strengths in pupils.

In 2014-15, 19,775 pupils obtained a BTEC qualification. In 2017-18, which is the most recent figure I can find, only 8,425 learners sat BTECs. I want to know what that says about your ministerial confidence in so-called vocational qualifications. There is no point, as you did last week, advising Nick Ramsay that all schools in his area are offering an appropriate number of vocational courses, when your decisions have done nothing to convince parents and pupils that vocational qualifications are valuable. And inflating those non-general exam figures further by including the skills challenge from the bac is something of a sleight of hand, which I think needs pointing out.

With teachers as well as parents now looking to the GCSE and the A-level as the only gold standard, there is an even greater risk that those who could reach excellence by teaching to different aptitudes will be denied routes to achieving their potential. And, anyway, let's face it: waving apparently shiny science results in our faces doesn't disguise the fact that there was again a fall in the proportion of learners securing A* to C grades in English language, maths and second-language Welsh. You can't be pleased about that, Minister. These are the gateway qualifications to just about any next step into training, work or further and higher education, and it is the very point that I raised in the debate on the motion to annul the School Performance and Absence Targets (Wales) (Amendments) Regulations 2019, back in July. These are the regulations that remove the requirement for school governors to set targets for these subjects and the need to report on the percentage of pupils who achieve these targets in the years pre GCSE. Now, unfortunately, as that piece of secondary legislation was part of a suite of changes, it wouldn't have made sense to pull out that regulation, but you've singularly failed, Minister, to answer the point about the crucial nature of those particular key skills. It's why we've tabled point 4 of the motion.

The assessment of pupil performance in years 4 to 9 may well be about identifying how to help each pupil improve, and I do understand that, but those scores also act as a warning. Today's year 9 pupils are not in as strong a position as this year's year 11 pupils were in two years ago—not in English, not in Welsh, not in maths, and not even in science. And let's remember that this year's year 11 results in those key skill areas, those key qualifications, are down again on last year's already grim results, the worst in 13 years. And now, as governors are able to avoid setting targets even for these key skills earlier in the pupil's journey, that link between standards and the journey towards exam results is becoming less visible, less transparent and very useful for Governments to hide bad news.

Now, Members might be wondering about point 2 of our motion and the reference to 2007. It's not just random, I promise you. I've just brought your attention to the drop in attainment in the most important GCSEs again this year. But Welsh Government has countered, in its amendment, with the claim that, overall, results have improved this year, which, actually, they have by about 1 per cent, but, as there was a fall last year of about the same amount, I guess that they're only the second worst in 13 years. 2007 was the last year when the percentage of young people attaining A* to C grades was the same, pretty much, in Wales and England. And, as we can see from the Government's amendment, they love a comparison with England. Now then, since then, pupils in England, since 2007, outperformed those in Wales every single year on A* to C grades at GCSE, although both nations did see improvements.

In 2015, a drop in the English results meant that both nations were pretty much in the same place, and, since then, both nations have reformed their GCSEs. Both felt the disruption, but guess what? England's performance is stable—actually, rising modestly. In Wales, we have dropped all the way back to our 2007 levels. You cannot get away with saying that these are different exams when England has clearly managed its changes without the damage to attainment. And incidentally, Minister, you're very brave to mention Northern Ireland in your amendment. You know as well as I do that pupils in Northern Ireland put in yet another phenomenal performance in this year at GCSE, with around 80 per cent achieving A* to C, and they've been doing it for years. Why aren't we looking more closely at their system rather than Scotland, where state schools are now offering fewer subjects and where results for Highers have fallen for the fourth year running?

Now, comparing results leads me to the point raised in Plaid's second amendment, and Qualifications Wales has urged the same caution about comparison. Can I invite Members to consider this? All exam boards, regardless of which nation they're teaching to, work hard to ensure that the standards of challenge in their exams, as evidenced by grades, are broadly in line. So, in short, a C in a WJEC exam should be as good as a C from an AQA exam. The difference in content of those exams for quality assurance purposes does not matter as between boards, as long as there is consistency in the level of challenge. And surely that has not changed. The content of our new GCSEs may be very different—they may test different knowledge, they may test different skills—but the standard of challenge should still compare, within margins of error, not just with the standards of other nations, but with the standards of our previous GCSEs. Our poorer GCSE results compared to England and Northern Ireland don't arise from our exams being harder than theirs. So, you cannot hide your failure, Minister, by claiming that you cannot compare what we have today with what has gone before. We should always be able to compare standards year on year, and attainment data is part of that process.

Just briefly, to deal with the other amendments—we will support amendment 3, if we get the chance. Just one caveat on the third point of that Plaid amendment: Welsh Conservatives have always said that we want teachers to be free to teach, and it's why we're not laying into the curriculum at this point, but school leaders will need to know that we will insist on very robust, high-level accountability structures in exchange for trusting them. That is miles away from the current invasive management, but we cannot be completely hands-off. We have a Government to hold to account on its performance, let alone the interests of learners and, indeed, staff to represent.

We also support the Brexit Party amendment, not because we believe that specific accountability measures should be readopted, but because it talks of a trend. I hope my earlier remarks make clear our concerns about upholding and improving standards in English, Welsh and maths, and, indeed, achievement as between a general and vocational qualification.

Finally, amendment 4. This deletes part of our motion, so I'm afraid we can't support it, but it does come from the same place. Half our pupils are not achieving their potential, be that at A-levels, GCSEs or other qualifications, but they're also not achieving their potential for self-fulfillment, for economic advancement, for contributing to the prosperous, confident and strong, active society on which our nation should be built.

Ultimately, it is Welsh Government that must accept responsibility for all that. After 20 years of Labour in Government and all those years of underfunding compared to England, everyone who has been through your education system can look at your amendment. They can see what you think they should be grateful for and what you urge them to call success, and I think that is a pitiful deception, I really do. They deserve an apology, as Plaid Cymru, as the Welsh Conservatives, are asking. They and their children deserve better Government.

I have selected the five amendments to the motion. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendments 2, 3 and 4 will be deselected. I call on the Minister for Education to formally move amendment 1 in the name of—

Formally.

Thank you. I call on Siân Gwenllian to move amendments 2, 3 and 4, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. Siân.

I move the amendments. Thank you. I must say that I was extremely disappointed in reading the Conservative motion, which focuses on this year’s GCSE results mainly. I was even more disappointed in seeing the Government’s amendment, which again focuses on GCSE and A-level results. The Conservative motion gives a negative spin on the results. The Government’s amendment puts a positive spin on the same set of results. Anyone who is involved with education will know full well that meaningful, credible comparisons can’t be made by looking at one set of crude results for one year and setting them against another set from another year. As one who has been a chair of governors, a cabinet member for education and chair of GwE, I know that this is foolish and meaningless and everyone in the sector understands that too.

We need to look at attainment over a period of time, and even in trying to make comparisons, so much has changed since the year that the Conservatives have chosen, namely 2007. The specifications themselves have changed, access patterns for examinations have changed, the grades that count towards the performance measures have changed—and so on and so forth. What’s important is that we move away from a system of accountability that drives the education system in a negative direction from a pupil’s point of view—for example, a system that encourages a focus on those people who are on the boundary between C and D at the expense of those who are either above them or below them, and move away from a system that puts pressure on learners to take exams time and time again to get better results, or even doesn’t allow some pupils to take exams in order to avoid lower grades.

I see the Minister agreeing. I know that she agrees on this. We need to move away from a system that sees pupils as data rather than people and pushes schools to operate as factories rather than educational establishments, but unfortunately that’s exactly what this discussion does. It focuses on the weaknesses in the system. We also need to move away from a system that has increased the stress and workload of teachers significantly and has placed significant stress and pressure on pupils too. I welcome the move by Government towards a system where the emphasis is on assessment, namely assessment that provides valuable feedback, both to the teacher and the learner, rather than focusing on external accountability, and that is a significant and positive step forward. That’s why I was disappointed to see the direction of travel of that amendment.

Our amendments do highlight what needs to be done in order to raise standards. Yes, pupils leave half of Welsh secondary schools without reaching their full potential. Yes, we need urgent changes. That’s the fact that can’t be spun. That’s where we need to focus. And the greatest change required in order to raise standards is to ensure sufficient levels of funding that allow appropriate staffing levels that ensure that pupils receive additional support and preventative interventions when needed.

I received a letter from a governing body of a Gwynedd secondary school just yesterday. This is a cri de coeur. I will quote from the letter, because it states much better than I could what the problem is: ‘I write to express our grave concerns and dissatisfaction about the insufficient funding of schools on a continual basis. We urge the Welsh Government to address this funding crisis. We believe that there must be urgent change and that appropriate funds need to be provided to our schools and educational professionals and pupils. The future of our children is at stake. We have one opportunity to put pupils through the education system, and through cutting funds, the Government is failing our pupils. Cuts mean over the years that staff have lost their jobs and it’s likely that more will need to be cut in future. The impact of redundancies means an additional workload on current staff and the other impacts of insufficient funding is that fewer resources are available for pupils, there is less choice in subjects, classes are larger, there is less support for the children who need it, less support for parents and families, and fewer opportunities for children to take part in extra-curricular activities. This cannot continue and we cannot allow this to go without challenge.’

That letter explains the situation very clearly. So, support the Plaid Cymru amendments. Don’t be drawn into a debate about GCSE results. Face the reality that we need more funding for our schools.

Thank you. I call on Mark Reckless to move amendment 5, tabled in the name of Caroline Jones.

I formally move amendment 5, which Caroline Jones has put down. I congratulate Suzy Davies on opening this debate, and Siân on her speech just now. I agree with what Siân Gwenllian says about the need for more funding. I think that we have the finance Minister here and a budget coming up, and we have had a significant increase in education spending in England announced, and I do hope that we will be seeing that come through to Wales as well, and in particular, that we will see people who may be considering coming into the profession—that starting salaries and progression will be raised.

I sympathise also with what Siân said about the need for multi-year meaningful and credible comparisons. I think this debate really is rather difficult in terms of the motion from the Conservatives and the amendment from the Government. There is just lots of cherry-picking of very different things to either make the Government look bad or good, and I don't think it really helps us assess how the trend has been developing.

It's a shame, I think, in the Conservative motion—. Suzy did say it in her speech, and I credit that, but as well as noting the results, I think that we should congratulate the learners involved. I think it would have been good if that had been in the motion, but it was said. The regret on the GCSEs being worse than summer 2007—I though that that was just very weird when I read the motion. I didn't understand what the point was that the Conservatives were trying to make. If, as Siân says—or was it Suzy—the results are the second worst since 2007, I would have thought that that would have been the point to emphasise in the motion, rather than just the point that they are less good than those in 2007.  

Will you take an intervention?

I would be delighted to, Suzy.

The reason that 2007 was chosen was that it was at a time when the English and Welsh results were comparable. I went on to say in some of my contribution that, while both nations have actually improved in that time, until this year, England has done better than Wales. But this year, Wales has gone back to that starting point.

I think that is the core trend. I agree with you and broadly what the Conservatives have been pushing in that area—that in education in Wales, the results seem to have got significantly worse over that period, and that has been the substantial trend. If there is some improvement this year, I think that we should recognise that, but I think the trend is still the dominant matter.

With the Welsh second language, I won't ask for another intervention, but Welsh second language—is that the same as Welsh short course? Because my understanding was we're moving away from—[Interruption.] They're two different things. I will try and understand that more clearly. But we are seeing significant changes in this area that makes it harder to make the comparisons that we seek to do in this motion.

So, we note the Welsh Government research around key indicators. In some ways it's good to hear the Welsh Government's doing some research, particularly if it's being published, but there shouldn't be so much need for it, because we should have published and comparable data that we can all engage with in a consistent way. I've spoken before to the education Secretary both in the Chamber and elsewhere about my concerns about not publishing quality comparable statistics. I focused on 2014-17 when I was told that, actually, Estyn was publishing these results, and I was pleased to see that was the case, on school inspections, but that's now stopped, and I don't understand why that is. I was also disappointed to see the level 2 inclusive measure taken away as a requirement, and the schools being able to set their own targets and measures, and feared that would lead to them marking their own homework and not having the same reliability of comparison. But I do want to engage sensibly in this by making these points. I'm not arguing there should be a private market in education. I'm not saying schools shouldn't co-operate and work with each other, but I do think we need clear, published, reliable, trusted data about how well schools are doing in order to help drive improvement up.

Finally, on the Conservative motion, I thought it was slightly hopeful of them to expect the Government to be apologising to all pupils for letting them down, but I think it's right that we haven't seen significant improvements. But it's worse than that—we saw a significant deteriorating trend even if there was some improvement this year. One thing I would like to congratulate the Government for in its motion is point (b), which strikes me as very impressive, if indeed Wales is voted first for A* at A-level. That really is a significant achievement. I don't know how issues with exam boards—perhaps we have exam boards that may be different; I don't know whether that's an issue or whether there are other factors—but on the face of it, that is an impressive thing that I would like to congratulate the Government on at least in its own narrow terms. I wonder whether the Seren programme that I've also spoken about quite frequently—whether those two things may be linked in any way. I'm certainly very keen to see the top end of the attainment area being stretched and given a real opportunity to deliver. But overall, we'd like to see clearer and better comparisons available to ensure proper accountability for schools, not to deliver a market, but in order to drive up standards. I don't think it's helpful to characterise it in that type of language, and I look forward to hearing what the education Minister's got to say in response.

Education is the key to success in one's life, and teachers make a lasting impact on the lives of their students. Education is the passport to the future, enabling our young people to reach and to achieve their full potential. However, the Welsh Government is failing our young people to achieve that.

In the last 10 years, GCSE results have not improved. Wales trails behind other parts of the United Kingdom in both the international PISA results and tables and the key results such as GCSE A* to C grades. It is shocking that GCSE results are worse than they were in 2007. Also, the key stage 2 and 3 results have deteriorated for the first time since 2007. This decline in educational standards places a barrier in the way of pupils, hindering their potential earnings and impacting on their lives and careers. Research shows that an investment in maths and English skills provides a substantial social and economic return. Learners who have achieved English and maths qualifications secure earning premiums ranging from 5 per cent to 8 per cent.

However, Estyn's annual report says that in half of schools, provision for the development of pupil literacy, particularly writing, and numeracy across the curriculum is inconsistent. They went on to say that there are too few opportunities for pupils to develop their skills progressively in authentic contexts. Further, teachers do not have a firm grasp of how to make sure that their provision of skills is appropriate and leads to progression. The Future Generations Commissioner for Wales has outlined that nearly 45 per cent of school leavers in Wales could not achieve five good GCSE results between 2015 and 2020. These shortcomings in education standards translate themselves into poor employment chances. Wales has the lowest take-home pay of all 12 regions of the United Kingdom. Take-home pay in Wales is £60 less than the UK average. Thirty-six per cent of employees in Wales were in the low-skilled jobs in 2018-19, compared to a UK average of 32 per cent. Over a fifth of Wales students lack the required reading skills to function in the workforce. Without sufficient progress in these areas, the Welsh Government will continue to fail to provide our young people with the support they need to have the best possible chance of a secure future.

The Welsh Government has a long-standing commitment to protect school funding, yet the National Association of Schoolmasters Union of Women Teachers’ latest figures estimate the funding gap between pupils in England and Wales to be a staggering £645. School funding has not been protected. Between 2010-11 and 2018-19 school funding has fallen by nearly 8 per cent in real terms. Extra funding on education in England has resulted in an extra £1.25 billion for Wales over the next three years. The Welsh Government must commit to tackling the historic underfunding of schools. The declining standard must be reversed, Deputy Presiding Officer, if future generations of pupils are not to be let down. It is a very famous saying of Benjamin Franklin, an America President, who said, ‘An investment in knowledge pays the best interest.’ It is about time for the Welsh Government to deliver this investment in Wales. Thank you.

We are in danger of comparing apples and pears. In my constituency, in the secondary schools serving my young people: 65 per cent of pupils at Llanishen High School got five As to Cs, including language and maths; 76 per cent at Bro Edern; 86 per cent at Cardiff High School. So, which one did better? Well, superficially, Cardiff High did, but what proportion of this school has special educational needs? How many free-school-mealers are there? Well, far below average is the answer. So, I just want to focus a little bit on the achievements of a school where I'm a governor, St Teilo’s, where 61 per cent of pupils got five GCSEs, including a language and maths, and that is only just 1 per cent below the national average. That is in a school that has over one in five pupils in receipt of free school meals, 3.5 per cent of children have a statement of special educational need, and 3.5 per cent are pupils being looked after by the local authority, which is the highest in Wales. So, comparing like with like, the school is the second highest performing in its family of schools, which is the 20 per cent to 30 per cent free-school-meal benchmarking group. And this is where we should be making these comparisons. It's about whether schools of a similar nature are doing as well as other schools who are facing some of the challenges that we know young people face that impact on their education, and, clearly, poverty is one of them.

So, I think that St Teilo's is doing brilliantly, because, for children in receipt of free school meals, they've increased their performance every year for the last five years, and they currently stand at 36 per cent, which is much higher than the average in the family of schools they’re in. And looking to the future, this summer, two thirds of the children in year 10 who are in receipt of free school meals attained a grade C or above in English literature, meaning there was no gap in performance between the most affluent and least affluent pupils. That, I think, is a real achievement, and I thank the pupils and the teachers at St Teilo’s for that fantastic performance.

Will you take in intervention, Jenny?

Yes.

I think congratulations are due to St Teilo's School—that's excellent news. Can you explain then why, overall across the whole of Wales, the number of A to C grades, particularly in those key subjects, has gone down, if schools like St Teilo's are actually bringing the averages up?

I think we need to hear from the education Minister. I think it's very important that we have set what's called the level 2 plus benchmark—that we need all pupils to achieve five GCSEs where possible, including language and maths. I think that's absolutely right. You can see how, in previous years, when that wasn't the benchmark, there was less attention placed on the language and maths. I think it's absolutely right that we are now putting that emphasis. So, I think that that is one of the ways in which we ensure that young people, where possible, achieve what we think they need to make their way in the world.

But I don't understand why the Conservative Party have pitched the motion in the way they have. I don't understand what is so important about 2007. For me, it has lots of importance for all sorts of reasons, but nothing to do with the exam results. What was it that was so significant about 2007? As Siân Gwenllian has already mentioned, things have changed hugely in that period, and we are in danger, as I say, of comparing apples and pears. 

So, I think that there's been some really significant achievements by Welsh pupils that we really do need to celebrate. The numbers achieving the five As to C, including language and maths, has gone up, and that's fantastic, and the A* and A pass rate has remained stable. As Suzy Davies has acknowledged, the performance in science continues to improve, and that's really, really important, because otherwise our understanding of the way the world works is going to be much more difficult. 

So, just looking at the A-level results, Wales is outperforming the rest of the UK, and this doesn't seem to get mentioned by the Conservatives. So, we are now the first for A* compared to the English regions and Northern Ireland, and that's really, really good. So, why are we not celebrating that?

I think that one of the things that we need to consider is, if we're going to put more money into education, where is that money going to come from, given that we continue to have less money to spend than we did in 2010. So, is it going to come out of health? Are the opposition parties going to say, 'Yes, we need to take money out of health'—which is where we spend half the budget at the moment—'and put it into education'? Let's have that debate. I'm very happy to have that debate. But, simply saying, 'We've got to spend more money on this', without identifying what we're going to take it from, given that we do not have a rising budget, is something that we need to have an adult discussion about. 

I'm pleased to be able to take part in this afternoon's debate. Following the summer examination results, there was justifiable praise for Welsh learners, who, under considerable pressure from poor funding settlements and significant reforms, had worked hard to achieve their grades. We've all been there ourselves as learners, the pressure can be overwhelming, and the trepidation and anxiety that come with receiving your examination results can be enormous.

In my own constituency, there was a very strong performance at Ysgol y Preseli at A* to A grades, which I'm proud to say is significantly above the national average. However, not all schools in Pembrokeshire delivered improvements, and whilst I understand that improvements have been made at several schools across the county in achieving A* to C grades, Pembrokeshire County Council have made it clear that further work is still required to support Milford Haven School and Haverfordwest high school.

Of course, at this stage, the outcomes are still provisional, at school level only and could be subject to change. However, even at this early stage, perhaps in responding to today's debate, the Minister could tell us what immediate interventions the Welsh Government is planning, to work with individual schools to explore ways in which they can improve standards. I'm sure the Minister would agree that there's no one-size-fits-all approach to improving education standards in Wales and the support needed in one school may be very different for another. Therefore, I think it's clear that the Welsh Government could do more to develop a more bespoke approach to working with schools across Wales so that the package of support offered is tailored to the individual school.

Of course, there are a whole host of reasons why some of our learners aren't quite reaching their full potential. According to the NASUWT, one of those reasons is because the Welsh Government needs to address the continued funding gap with schools in England and the spiraling workload of teachers and school leaders. We all know that the funding gap faced by schools across Wales means that there is a lack of resources for our education providers, and that, understandably, undermines the ability of schools to secure the best education standards possible. Members will be aware of the Children, Young People and Education Committee's recent inquiry into school funding, which found that the £109 million schools budget gap in 2019-20 will rise to £319 million in 2022-23 and that at least half of all secondary schools in Wales are in deficit. And that figure is rising.

Schools across Wales are right to say that there's a real difficulty in maintaining and improving standards against a backdrop of increasing pressure on resources. In giving evidence to that inquiry, the Pembrokeshire Association of Secondary Headteachers made it clear that secondary schools are reducing the number of teaching staff, reducing the breadth of the curriculum offered, partially at key stages 4 and 5. They also said there was a need to increase the number of pupils in classes to enable fewer teachers to deliver to the curriculum. They went on to say that there will be reductions in the amount of time dedicated to leadership and management, which will increase the workload of those members of staff and reduce their capacity to focus on improving school performance. I'm sure the Minister is under no illusion that it's not only Pembrokeshire's secondary schools that have to take these steps, and so it's crucial that the school funding issue is addressed in order to ensure that schools are fully resourced and best equipped to provide for our learners.

However, school funding is only one piece of the puzzle, and we know that Wales's 2019 results are set against a backdrop of significant curriculum reform. In January, before the draft curriculum was published, the previous head of Qualifications Wales admitted that the new curriculum could mean an end to GCSEs in the longer term and more reforms in the short term. How, or to what extent, those qualifications will change is still up for discussion, but needless to say that that was met with opposition from some in the education profession. For example, the Association of School and College Leaders have been quite clear that, and I quote,

'it is important to understand that these results come at a time of enormous change in the Welsh education system which has included a huge overhaul of GCSE specifications.'

They went on to say that,

'It is vital to get this right so that we are in the best position possible to implement the even more ambitious reforms which are planned to the Welsh curriculum over the next few years.'

Moving forward, the Minister has consulted on plans for the new curriculum, and perhaps she'll take the opportunity this afternoon to tell us a bit more about the Welsh Government's plans in this specific area.

Dirprwy Lywydd, at the heart of this debate is the desire to see Welsh schools flourish and its learners reach their full potential. As far as my own constituency is concerned, where schools have been given significant support, there has been improvement, and that's to be welcomed. But more can and should be done to ensure standards are improved in schools right across Wales so that our learners finish their education journey equipped with the skills they need to get on in the modern world. So, in closing, Dirprwy Lywydd, I hope the Welsh Government will reflect on some of the concerns raised by the education sector and I urge Members to support our motion. 

I'm also pleased to contribute to this afternoon's important debate—important because what could be more important than discussing education? What could be more important than the future of our young people? The results that we've been talking about this afternoon are not the be-all and end-all of education, but they are a key indicator of where we are as a country in terms of educating our young people, and a measure along the way to where we would like to be. 

Other Members have mentioned many of the things I was going to mention, so I won't go over old ground. Paul Davies has mentioned Pembrokeshire and the results there; in Monmouthshire, I'd like to congratulate the pupils across Monmouthshire, who worked so hard, and their teachers, who worked hard, and gained good results. I know that the Minister, from your previous answer, was in King Henry VIII Comprehensive in Abergavenny, I think, on the day of the results, so you could see first-hand the delight. We all cast our minds back to when we were in that position, opening our results, and it's a time in your life that is never to be repeated later, but I'm pleased that the Minister was in my constituency for that day. 

I do have to say—and this was mentioned by Siân Gwenllian earlier—in terms of the Government amendment, I was disappointed by that amendment. It does highlight some interesting statistics, but it does make things seem as though everything is rosy in the garden, and I don't think it really does reflect the real desire that's out there in schools amongst the pupils, teachers and further afield to reform and to progress and to raise standards. And there's always going to be scope to raise standards, no matter how good the Government might say things are, or how good things might be perceived to be. At the end of the day, particularly as we approach leaving the European Union, Wales and the UK are going to have to compete, increasingly, on the world stage and we'll have to keep up with other countries that are seeing their educational standards rise, and we must make sure that we keep pace with that.

I would echo the earlier words of Paul Davies that, yes, some schools have done very well, but what about those schools that haven't done so well? It's important that good practice is spread from the good schools to the less-well-off schools, and it'd be good to see a restatement, a reappraisal, of the strategy of the Welsh Government on how the Minister sees that panning out and how good practice can be spread, because there's always work that can be done there.

Funding has been mentioned and we know that the recent UK Government's spending round will see an extra amount of money—£1.24 billion—coming to Wales as a result of extra investment in schools in England. I think it was Jenny Rathbone who mentioned where's this money going to come from and let's have a debate about how we divide the cake in Wales. Well, okay, it might not be everything, but it is a very good sum of money that's going to come to Wales, so we do need to have a debate about how that money is spent. And, let's make sure that that money goes to the front line of public services and doesn't get sidetracked or siphoned off into other areas. It must go to the education front line. Of course, money is not the whole answer—the Minister has made this point in the past—and I think too often we can give the impression that if we throw money at something, then that's going to solve it. But, of course, money is only half the answer, and indeed the NASUWT, as my colleague Paul Davies mentioned, has put that funding gap per pupil at £645. I know that's been disputed in some quarters, but that's the NASUWT's verdict and whatever that funding gap is then it's important that we seek to close that funding gap.

We welcome the fact that there's been an improvement in GCSE and A-level results since 2018. I was going to mention the year 2007, but it caused so much anxiety earlier. Suzy Davies explained why 2007 has been used, in that it's the last date at which there is an ability to compare the data sets. So, that's why that date was set. But, if you go back, yes, to last year, then there's been an improvement. If you go back further, then the results are less clear cut. So, I think we need to remember that behind these statistics that have been quoted this afternoon, it's more than about statistics; there are people, young people, human beings behind the statistics. The future is behind those statistics. Because when you're putting money into education and you're planning your education strategy, then what you're actually doing is you're building the future of this country. And we all want to see in this Chamber—. I think we're all united in the view that we want to see an improvement in the standards today so that, in the future, Wales can do even better on the world stage and we can all get on with the job of building a brighter future for our young people and a brighter future for Wales.

Thank you. Can I now call the Minister for Education, Kirsty Williams?

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. Back in August, I had the privilege of celebrating examination results with the learners at Coleg y Cymoedd on A-level day, and, as Nick Ramsay just said, with the pupils at King Henry VIII Comprehensive School in Abergavenny on GCSE day—a day when that school was celebrating its best ever set of GCSE results. And I'm sure that all Members across the Chamber will want to congratulate learners across our nation for the tremendous achievements and take this opportunity to thank and to praise our teachers for their hard work, particularly those who have worked so tirelessly to adapt to changes in delivering new GCSE qualifications. I'm very pleased that Jenny Rathbone mentioned St Teilo's in her constituency and Ysgol y Preseli in Paul Davies's constituency—both schools that I've had the privilege to visit and it's great to see them continuing to do so well.

But I have to admit, Deputy Presiding Officer, that I had wondered whether the Conservatives were looking at the correct set of summer results when drafting their motion, because I do think they have taken the opportunity to devalue the achievements of our learners this year. Hopefully all Members will join me instead in welcoming the record achievement of the top grades at A-level, with 9 per cent of grades awarded at A*, more than a quarter awarded at A*/A, and more than three quarters awarded at A* to C. I hope they will also welcome the fact that Wales is indeed now ranked higher than any English region and Northern Ireland for the achievements at A* grades, and those results are the product of many years of hard work from learners and teachers, and should be recognised.

Mark Reckless asked the question about whether we can attribute some of this success to the Seren network. Of course, this is the first year that the students will have been through the entirety of the Seren programme, and I think there is definitely something there that has driven those excellent results. Alongside those results we have seen a record number of offers from Cambridge University to our Seren students for entry in 2019, an offer rate of some 30 per cent, which is significantly above other parts of the United Kingdom. And when you think of the demographics of Wales as compared to the demographics in richer parts of the United Kingdom, I think we should say 'well done' to those children and to their teachers.

With regard to GCSE, we have seen an improvement in overall summer results since last year. I have, however, been very clear that over the past few years several important changes within the system make it difficult to draw similarly meaningful comparisons, but that does not mean that there's been a drop in standards or rigour; in fact, quite the opposite. This Government is supporting all of our learners and we will never lower any of our expectations for any of our young people. It is just the reality of the changes that have been made, and not just changes to the individual specification of courses, but we have seen a radical change in entry patterns over the last couple of years. I will make no apologies for taking forward a reform programme that is determined to deliver the best for learners in Wales. And that's one of the reasons why our reforms are necessarily wide-reaching and transformative, because I believe that they will ensure that learners right across Wales are supported through the education system to reach their full potential.

For example, steps taken to end the inappropriate use of early entry are beginning to drive changes in the size and nature of cohorts, and schools have also simultaneously adapted to changes in the exams themselves that have been phased in over the past few years. Welsh second language is a prime example of this, and this was another issue that was raised by Mark Reckless. This is the first year that learners have sat the new full-course GCSE option, following the removal of the short-course option. Entries are up by a third and changes quoted for attainment rates are misleading in that context, as most of those learners would previously not have sat a full GCSE; they would have been entered for the short course. Looking at the impact of these changes, we see increases in the actual numbers of learners achieving an A* to C grade in Welsh second language, up by some 12 per cent. The new GCSE has more emphasis on speaking, listening and using the language, which means that more young people are developing the language skills that Wales needs now and in the future. The summer series also saw improvements at A* to C in maths, numeracy, Welsh, physics, biology, chemistry, double-award science, DT, geography and PE.

Now, moving on to teacher assessment, this year's results need to be considered in the light of recent policy changes. We have shifted the primary purpose of teacher assessment back to individual learners for more formative use only, to guide decisions about how best to progress people's learning and not to make school-to-school comparisons or form part of any accountability system. Therefore, this year's outcomes, I believe, should be a more accurate and a more objective reflection of learners' progress, and comparisons with previous years I do not believe are meaningful. We know that there have been unintended consequences of some of the elements of our school accountability system, but I do not accept that recent changes amount to a watering down.

Our national mission sets out our vision for an accountability system that is fair, coherent, proportionate, transparent and based on our shared values for Welsh education. There will be a clear ability for Members to be able to see capped 9 scores, literacy scores, numeracy scores, science scores, as well as a distinction between male and female learners and between FSM and non-FSM learners. The new evaluation and improvement arrangements will help bring about the cultural change that is ultimately needed to support the realisation of our new curriculum. And at the heart is robust and continuous self-evaluation for all tiers of the education system, along with professional dialogue to support learning and improvement and embed collaboration, because Nick Ramsay is right: it is that school-to-school work that really drives things forward, builds trust and drives self-improvement and raises standards for all learners. And our plans are about making sure that the way in which we assess the performance of a school represents the performance of the school in the round, not just examination results. Outside accountability will continue to be a feature of the system. Schools will continue to be inspected, and more regularly than the 13 years that we've seen highlighted across the border today. And parents and guardians will continue to receive reports on the progress of their learners.

Now, Paul Davies asked what specific actions we're taking as a result of this summer series results. We do need to work with our exam board, with Qualifications Wales, with our regional consortia and our practitioners of English teaching, because there is more work to do with regard to English, and I hope to make an announcement to the Assembly shortly on a new approach to schools that are causing concern and how we can support those schools to make more rapid improvement and rapid progress.

With regard to the funding gap, it's not some quarters that have challenged the figures that have been quoted here. The Institute for Fiscal Studies made it very clear, only a matter of weeks ago, that once you take London out of the equation, the funding gap between English and Welsh schools has been virtually eliminated. With regard to the CYPE report, I have accepted all the recommendations in that report, including the primary recommendation with regard to an investigation into education funding, and I will give Members more details of the nature of the work that I am committed to undertaking when I respond fully to the committee's report, which I believe is in the next few weeks, when it is debated here in the Chamber.

But, if you're intent on talking Wales down, like some people appear to have been in this Chamber this afternoon, then you fail to recognise the shift that is undoubtedly happening in our education system—a genuine transformation based on co-production across all tiers and with key stakeholders. It's rooted in good practice, it's rooted in research and it's rooted in evidence. Deputy Presiding Officer, I do not—of course I don't—support the Conservatives' motion, which simply misrepresents and talks down the progress of our learners and our educational professionals. I know—I know—there's no room for complacency, and I know that we can do better. But, spurred on by the OECD's view that Wales is leading the way, and working together with the sector, we will continue our national mission to raise standards and deliver an education system that is a source of national pride and enjoys the confidence of the people of Wales.

Thank you. Can I call on Darren Millar to reply to the debate?

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Well, Minister, I'll give you a five out of 10 for that response, because—[Interruption.] I'm trying to be charitable. Because there's no doubt that there have been some positive steps in terms of trying to address the accountability issue in Welsh schools and our education system, and that's why we, as a party, welcome some of the work that has been announced in the past.

We particularly welcomed the stopping of unnecessary and inappropriate early entry for examinations. That's absolutely the right thing to do. But of course what we haven't stopped yet is the fact that some pupils are not being entered for examinations at all, and that, of course, is why the A-level results, perhaps, may have improved. Qualifications Wales warned of this last year. They said the number of entrants for A-levels had gone down and it was because weaker students were not being appropriately entered for their exams. I'll happily take an intervention.

The Member may be aware that there is a significant demographic change, so actually there are simply fewer of those pupils of that age in the system. And we've just heard from Suzy Davies of the need to value and have parity of esteem between academic qualifications and vocational qualifications. It is about the right students doing the right qualifications, and if those A-level students are going to do vocational qualifications, which we suspect they are, you've just undermined the very argument that your spokesperson was making earlier. 

Can I suggest that you take your anger out on Qualifications Wales? They're the ones I was quoting, and they're the ones who are saying that weaker pupils, weaker students, are not being entered for their examinations. 

Now, when we look at the independent analysis of the Welsh education system, the best comparator we've got, of course, are the Programme for International Student Assessment results, internationally. And Wales is at the bottom of the UK league table. It's in the bottom 50 per cent of nations worldwide in terms of the quality of our education system. 

We all want to see Wales reaching the top, and there are some fantastic schools in Wales that are working hard and achieving great results for their pupils. I should mention, of course, St Brigid's School in Denbigh, where my son got a decent clutch of GCSE results this summer. I want to congratulate, of course, all pupils across Wales who also achieved well. My former school in Abergele, Ysgol Emrys ap Iwan, which got the best results it has ever achieved. But it doesn't take away from the fact that we still have too many pupils not leaving school with qualifications and that, frankly, is not good enough.

Now, there's been much speculation as to whether we can compare these results with those results in 2007. One of the other reasons 2007 was used, by the way, was because it clearly demonstrated the fact that the results were worse this year than in 2007—that there's been no progress. And if there's been no progress over that period I think we should, frankly, be ashamed of ourselves here in Wales for not securing any improvement for our children and young people.

The Minister tried to dismiss the funding gap between England and Wales, saying that if you take London out of the picture, then everything looks pretty rosy. But, of course, the fact remains that for every £1 spent in England—and that includes those pounds that are spent in London when you work it all out in terms of the devolved responsibilities—for every £1 that's spent over there on a child, Wales receives £1.20 to spend here. So, there ought to be a funding gap, actually, but it ought to be 20 per cent more being spent per child in Wales, instead of this funding gap of £645 less. I'll happily take the intervention.

So, sticking with that argument, are you then prepared to discuss reducing the budget for health in order to put more money into education?

If you'd have listened earlier on, Jenny Rathbone, to the response that Nick Ramsay gave you, we have extra money coming into the system as a result of the good management by the UK Government of public finances. We've got £1.25 billion coming to Wales for education over the next three years, and that £1.25 billion could be invested to close that gap and eliminate it completely. So, you've had the money—you've had the money, so it's the way you carve it up currently that means that you cannot invest it in our schools.

So, we need to eliminate that funding gap. That then will give schools the opportunity to invest in the staff, invest in the technology and invest in their pupils to get the results that those pupils deserve. That's what I want to see, that's what we want to see on these benches, and that's why we're lamenting the fact that the results have not improved over the past 12 years in the way that we would have hoped. So, I hope that people will support the motion.

Thank you. The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Object. Therefore, we defer voting under this item until voting time.

So, it is now voting time. Unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, I intend to proceed—[Interruption.] You want to ring the bell. Okay. Three people show me they want to ring the bell, please. Thank you. Ring the bell.

We have reached the five minutes, and I would hasten a guess that you were standing outside waiting for me to call time, but I wouldn't be so cruel as to say that.

So, we now move to voting time, and the first vote this afternoon is the Standards of Conduct Committee report 02-19, and I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Jayne Bryant. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 37, four abstentions, 12 against. Therefore, the motion is agreed.

We now move to the Member debate—a motion under Standing Order 11.21. And I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of David Rees. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 39, 12 abstentions, three against. Therefore, the motion is agreed.

We now move to vote on the Welsh Conservative debate on GCSE and A-level results, and I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Darren Millar. If the proposal is not agreed, we will vote on the amendments tabled to that motion. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 11, no abstentions, 41 against. Therefore, the motion is not agreed.

We go to vote on the amendments. I call for a vote on amendment 1. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendments 2, 3 and 4 will be deselected. So, I call for that vote on amendment 1, tabled in the name of Rebecca Evans. Open the vote. Close the vote. For amendment 1 28, no abstentions, 23 against. Therefore, amendment 1 is agreed.

I now call for a vote on amendment 5, tabled in the name of Caroline Jones. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the amendment 12, two abstentions, 36 against. Therefore, amendment 5 is not agreed.

I now call for a vote on the motion as amended.

Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 27, eight abstentions, 15 against. Therefore, the motion as amended is agreed.

We now move to the short debate—[Interruption.] If you're going out of the Chamber, please do so quickly and quietly.

We now move to the short debate, and I call on Janet Finch-Saunders to speak on the topic she's chosen. Janet.

Diolch, Deputy Presiding Officer. The purpose of this debate is to trigger a conversation about how we can do more to care for our care homes in Wales. And I'd like to invite Jayne Bryant AM and Angela Burns AM to speak for a minute or so.

Over 15,000 people aged 65 or over live in a care home. According to the state of the nation report launched yesterday, the average age at which an older person moves to a care home is nearly 83 years, and people tend to live in the home, on average, for around two years and four months. As you'll be aware, there are three broad categories of care homes in Wales: residential, nursing, and EMI—elderly mentally infirm. Now, unfortunately, when searching for a home of any type, sadly, too many negatives present. Now, Welsh Conservatives believe that safeguarding our residents is key and essential, and I know that none of us would stand by until this is actually implemented. I've raised concerns about care standards in Wales, but we must also—tonight's debate is about celebrating the good care and the need that we have to support our care homes.

Anyway, rather than focus on non-compliance, I would like to use this opportunity to highlight some of the excellent work that is being undertaken. The need for this is apparent when considering that the number of care homes fell by 30 in less than three years, after the publication of 'The Care Home Market in Wales: Mapping the Sector' in 2015. As we know from Care Forum Wales, this forms part of a downward decline, as it has been estimated that 16 per cent of remaining homes will close in five years' time. So, supporting the care sector needs to rank high on the agenda.

Having visited a number of care homes in Aberconwy, and across Wales, I have seen at first-hand some amazing services provided. It was magical for me dancing with an elderly resident to 'Singing in the Rain', and having an umbrella full of decorations on the ceiling within the main living room. And that was in an EMI home. I was also pleased to join with two ladies, just relaxing and chatting out in the sun, at a nursing home in Ynys Môn. And I can never forget singing, with a resident in another home, a duet—a very heartfelt duet that the lady had remembered from her childhood days, and I sang with her.

Now, when visiting these homes, I have seen the passion that staff have for looking after their patients and residents, and have been pleased to listen how they—the people working in the sector—think we could do more to care for care homes. This brings me to the first way through which we could champion care homes: communication. Dementia is a condition that affects linguistic ability, so not providing care through the medium of Welsh can lead to frustration and the loss of dignity and respect. 

I have met Welsh language staff in care homes, but the Welsh Language Commissioner and Alzheimer’s Society Cymru have highlighted that care is not often available in Welsh unless someone requests it. This cannot be right, so I would like to see you, as the Deputy Minister, putting more plans into implementation to support homes to develop a capacity to make an active offer of care in Welsh—through the medium of Welsh.  

Additionally, there is a serious need to look at improving care home communication with health boards and local authorities. For example, we should look at the digitalisation of patient records. It is true that you have the Welsh community care information system, and I accept that implementing the new ICT system across local authorities and health boards could help accessibility to information, but what about care homes? 

It was explained to me by one manager that they would benefit greatly from being able to access information on the health board’s system about their clients—the very same clients that they are caring for on a daily basis—wanting to meet all their needs, including their health needs. The Welsh Government does not have oversight of the content of health boards’ internet platforms, but it does have the ability to set a clearer level of expectation. This could actually result in care homes more easily accessing information, which could improve their care.

Another way through which connectivity between health and social care could be strengthened is by acting on calls by Age Cymru for a duty to co-operate in this. I agree with the organisation, and believe that a duty could go a long way in boosting quality of care for people being transferred from care home to hospital setting and vice versa. I was actually quite shocked to realise that patients can leave their care home needing to go to hospital, but actually return needing significantly more care.

The need for a stronger dialogue is apparent when considering incidents such as care home staff not being told what rehabilitation their residents have had in hospital, patients being discharged to care homes with no information at all, and care home staff not being asked for important information, such as how an individual signals their need for the toilet and whether they like drinking from a particular cup, contributing to the situation in which some patients return to homes from hospital unrecognisable from when they went in. I've heard—you know, a simple thing like false teeth going missing in hospital. So, patients return to a care home without their false teeth—something so simple and such a basic requirement, but so important, has been highlighted by Angela Burns here earlier on dental healthcare.

Care home staff have a wealth of information that could transform the care of some patients in hospital. However, as Age Cymru have stated, existing professional boundaries militate against the engagement of care home staff, and even against informing them at a very basic level of how their resident is whilst the resident is in hospital. There's a cut-off—once the resident goes to hospital, there is very little dialogue continued then with the care home. The onus is on the care home to contact the hospital. That can't be right. This has to change and steps taken to ensure that the Welsh NHS recognises the value of the contribution care home staff can make, and how much they care about their own residents.

Such a wall has been a point of concern with regard to staff training too, which brings me to another way through which we could do more to support care homes. Wales needs around 20,000 more people to work in care by 2030. Now, I recognise that you've recognised this, and it is only fair that I acknowledge the work that is being undertaken to attract, retain and recruit staff in Wales as part of the We Care Wales campaign. However, more could be achieved by looking at the training that is provided to nursing staff. Organisations have spoken to me of the need to ensure that nurse training includes experiences in both the NHS and social care sector. Too long there's been this division between the two; it needs bringing together.

For example, we should encourage nursing placements in care homes, as this could help address the lack of cross-pollination between nursing and care skills. People assume that a nurse can only train in a hospital. It's not correct. They could learn a lot of skills actually training in care homes. Also, you cannot deny that there is much that can be learnt at care homes, as many are a hive of activity. In fact, they have the potential to be even more important community hubs.

I have already had it confirmed to me in writing that health boards are allowed to organise walk-in clinics in a non-NHS setting, and know that some homes are keen to open these up to the local community where they can, such as holding intravenous therapy clinics, blood testing clinics. This idea is certainly worthy of consideration. Such co-operation could represent value for money, especially for the service user where they would otherwise have to travel considerably further than a home to see a nurse. Care homes' professionals are well trained, and, where there is a will, it should be the Welsh Government’s mission to ensure that there is a way for homes to host these clinics and undertake tasks its staff are more than capable of doing.

For example, it is ridiculous that some care home staff have had to wait hours for a GP to attend to take blood pressure and temperature readings, and it is disheartening that some homes face a long wait when someone falls. We should all be supporting staff to take readings, looking at upscaling proven models such as the Welsh ambulance service's I-Stumble toolkit for care homes. Common sense dictates that an increase in clinical interventions available in homes would reduce the need to send patients to hospital in the first place, or the need to call an ambulance or GP, so the Welsh Government should get on with it.  

This brings me to my final suggestion as to how we could do more for care homes. I know of a home with a resident funded by a local authority, who, as a result of a deterioration in health, will now have responsibility for fees transferred to Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board. Shockingly, despite providing more intensive care, the home will be paid less. In fact, the health board pays less than local authorities pay in north Wales, setting one care home on course to be £155,000 worse off this year in their budget, because of the difference between local authority and continuing healthcare fees.

Clearly, you must look at ensuring that care homes are paid the actual cost of the care, and certainly at least look to match the CHC fee to that paid by local authorities. Undoubtedly, this should be regarded as a short-term solution, as I believe that a full review of how care homes are funded is required, and it is required now. Nonetheless, such a move towards sustainable and fair funding would be a boost to private sector homes that feel as if they are being repeatedly punished. It is time, Deputy Minister, that we start to show our care for our care homes and that we take some actions, just as some of those that I have outlined today, to show our seriousness, the Welsh Government's intent, about helping to secure a positive future for the homes of over 15,000 people in Wales. Thank you.

I'd like to firstly thank Janet Finch-Saunders for bringing forward this important debate today and for the opportunity to speak this evening. Last week, I hosted an event to launch Live Music Now's report into the impact of live music on care homes. The report carried out by the University of Winchester presents groundbreaking evidence about how music can benefit people living and working in care. Live music in care homes must not be just seen as entertainment. There's growing evidence to show the impact on those residents in homes. Music benefits the whole care home and contributes to the person-centred care. The evidence-based report recommends that music should be essential for all care homes. Furthermore, I’d also like to commend the work of the marvellous Forget-me-not chorus. They’re a fantastic charity who work with people living with dementia and their families, bringing them together to sing, with no pressure, just fun. Many families have described the sessions as 'a happiness fix', with everyone taking part to the best of their abilities. They bring people together weekly, and I’ve seen for myself, many times, the impact their work has both had on inside and outside of care homes, one of which is Capel Grange in Pill in my constituency. The choir is a great way of supporting people with or effected by dementia, and it’s sure to warm your heart and get your feet tapping.

I'd like to thank Janet Finch-Saunders for bringing this very important debate forward, because we need to demonstrate that we value the staff in our care home sector. Too often, the care home sector is seen in a pejorative way, as not quite up there with nurses or the other medical professions, and yet they are absolutely vital to the continuation and the cohesion of our society, and in looking after so many vulnerable people. So, Minister, I just have a couple of really quick questions I hope that you might be able to address this evening. Would you consider, or are you considering, a national campaign to attract people to a career in the care home sector? Would you be looking at the development of continuous professional development, how could we engage and develop staff and actually give staff within a care home setting a career progression? And flexible working, of course, is extremely important for an awful lot of care home staff. What could we do to promote flexible working and to encourage care home owners to be much more elastic in their thinking about how they might be able to bring people on into working for them?

And, of course, finally, I wouldn’t be able to end my contribution without mentioning the nursing element of care homes. It’s incredibly important, but we need to improve the nursing provision in care homes because there’s a significant shortage of nurses available for the care home sector. One of the ways would be that there needs to be a real harmonisation of social care terms and conditions with the 'Agenda for Change', and I wondered if you might just be able to touch upon that. And I also would like to have your views on whether or not you think that having more nursing student clinical placements in the care home sector during their degree training might also be of benefit, not just, in fact, for care homes, but for the whole orthogeriatric/geriatric training needs that come along, because we need more nurses in the older people sector. Thank you.

Can I call the Deputy Minister for Health and Social Services to reply to this debate? Julie Morgan.

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer, and thank you, Janet Finch-Saunders, for bringing this debate to the Chamber tonight. I think it’s a great opportunity to recognise the importance of care homes and the social care sector as a whole, and I’m really pleased that Janet has been able to highlight some of the really good work that is done in the care sector, because I think it is behoven on us to boost that sector as much as we can. So, I’m very pleased to be able to respond to this debate tonight, because it’s absolutely clear that the care homes make a vital contribution to the lives of people who need care and support in Wales. It also allows me to share with you some of the areas that this Government and our partners are focusing on to ensure the social care sector is supported effectively and is in the best possible position to care for itself.

Obviously, the sector does not and cannot operate and thrive in isolation. We must each play our part at national, local and, indeed, at service-provider level, and we’ve got a clear role as Welsh Government to work with the sector and to understand the issue it faces, and in ensuring the quality of the services it provides. Our partners, in particular local authorities and local health boards, as commissioners of care home services, each have important responsibilities at a local level. The sector itself also has a vital role to play. Welsh Government is actively supporting care homes in a number of areas, including funding and workforce, as well as measures to support both the quality and sustainability of services.

The financial challenges faced by the sector are well known and well documented, and we fully recognise this, and are working to achieve a more sustainable model of funding for the sector over the coming years. Our national strategy, 'Prosperity for All', commits us to developing innovative funding models to ensure that funding is available to meet these challenges and the increasing demands on social care. So, to take this forward, the Minister for Health and Social Services is chairing an inter-ministerial group on paying for social care to consider the potential for a social care fund created from a possible levy or variation in income tax in Wales. This would be to raise additional funding for social care in the long term. To date, the group has considered the principle of the potential methods to raise and distribute any additional funding raised in this way and will soon be considering the principle of the priority areas to receive any funding raised.

However, that is in the longer term. Any funding raised in this way is still some time off, and so in the meantime, we have continued to invest in social care, despite the very real and known pressures on our budgets overall. We've awarded an extra £50 million to local authority social services in this financial year to help meet the growing demand for care and support services. Of this funding, £30 million was provided as a grant to support local government in delivering social care, specifically to address workforce pressures and to support the wider sustainability of services.

The care home sector is nothing without a skilled and committed workforce, and I know that there are challenges both in terms of recruitment and retention, and Angela Burns raised a number of those issues in her contribution. I remain absolutely committed to raising the status and the profile of social care workers so that social care does become a positive career choice where people are valued and supported responsibly. We've taken steps to help make the social care sector a more attractive place to work, bringing forward regulations in 2018 to improve the terms and conditions of the workforce. These regulations limit the use of zero-hours contracts and ensure that providers clearly differentiate between care and travel time.

Our drive to professionalise the workforce will ensure that we have safe social care workers who are appropriately qualified to deliver quality care and support to both adults and children in our society. To achieve this, we have extended the workforce register on a voluntary basis to domiciliary care workers, ahead of their mandatory registration from April 2020. Similarly, adult residential care workers, who we're talking about this evening, will be able to register on a voluntary basis from 2020, ahead of their mandatory registration from 2022. I think that this registration will increase the status of the care workers. And where we've seen that the sector is facing difficulties, we've taken direct action to help alleviate them—

Will you take an intervention?

Yes, certainly.

Just a point of clarification, because that's really positive. Does that include all care workers, including the ones in domiciliary settings as well as care homes? I just wanted to clarify.

At the moment, we've extended the register on a voluntary basis to domiciliary care workers ahead of their mandatory registration. So, yes, it's going to include both—domiciliary and care workers in homes. So, as I say, this should be very positive in terms of giving them more status and recognising that they are a profession. Because what more important job could anybody be doing, really?

Where we've seen that the sector is facing difficulties, we have taken direct action to help alleviate them. One such example is the national living wage. We've invested £19 million of recurrent funding to local authorities in order that they can help service providers to manage the impact of implementing the national living wage. The Business Wales social care pilot project is another example of our commitment to support the sustainability of the care home sector. It provides a free specially designed business support package, which includes advice on a range of issues such as tendering, human resources and finance. It's a practical solution that recognises that care homes are businesses and offers the help they may need to become more resilient and grow sustainably. I'd like to thank those providers who have participated and provided very valuable feedback. And although, originally, it focused on the Valleys taskforce area, the offer is being made available across the south-east Wales business region, with a view to evaluating how to extend the offer to remaining regions in Wales. I'd encourage others to take advantage of this opportunity, recognising that care homes are businesses.

In terms of supporting the improvement of services' quality, we're funding the care home improvement Cymru programme over a three-year period. It's aimed at building supportive care home environments that move away from the top-down compliance approach and start with what matters to people living in, visiting, working in or managing a care home service. I was very struck by what Janet Finch-Saunders said about the lively nature of the care home, and how much actually goes on in a care home. This programme engages with all parts of the organisation, including front-line staff, residents and families, to understand each other's contribution to achieving outcomes for people.

I also think that that very important point was made by Janet Finch-Saunders about the link between the hospital and the home, because I think it is those transition periods when things happen, like false teeth get lost, and all these really important things that are so important to people's lives. That transition is vital, so I'm very pleased you made those points so strongly. Certainly, that is something that I think we have to emphasise in the support that we are giving to care homes.

So, as I say, this care home improvement Cymru programme does engage at all levels. We also intend to support care home providers by developing an online facility as part of the Dewis website, which will allow them to display real-time vacancies. We see the real benefits here in terms of time saved and engaging with commissioners and in opportunities to market their services. But this is in its early stages, and we'll be working with providers and others in its development.

I'm acutely aware that adding the prospect of the EU exit into the mix does create further uncertainty for providers. I was actually at a forum today where we were discussing the impacts of the EU exit on care home providers, and maintaining the quality and sustainability of care homes and other social care provision is a top priority throughout this unsettling process. So we are taking a range of measures in co-ordination with wider contingency planning arrangements, to support providers and to mitigate the impact of a 'no deal' EU exit. Two examples that are particularly relevant to care homes are food and medical supplies.

In terms of food, we've established arrangements to allow providers to report any local food supply disruption to local authorities quickly and easily. They in turn can escalate the matter to local resilience fora if necessary. Welsh Government is also fully engaged in UK Government planning for the import and distribution of critical goods, including medical supplies and clinical consumables. We've procured additional storage capacity, including providing a 12 to 15-week supply of these products, which will help increase resilience in both the Welsh NHS and the social care services, because these are issues that are being brought to us by the social care providers, and we think it's very important to try to address those as much as we can.

Turning now to our partners and their contribution, our regulators, Care Inspectorate Wales and Social Care Wales, have both undertaken significant work to implement the regulatory framework established by the Regulation and Inspection of Social Care (Wales) Act 2016. As part of the transition to the new system of regulation, the inspectorate has reregistered 1,550 services since last April, and this is a considerable achievement and is in addition to its day-to-day responsibilities and inspection activity. I'm extremely pleased with the very positive feedback that the inspectorate has received about this process, and the level of support it provided from providers themselves.

This legislation represents an exciting opportunity for us all. It recognises the role of service providers and responsible individuals as professionals with responsibility and accountability for the care and support services they provide. It deliberately doesn't seek to manage services at arm's length, but enables providers to focus on what matters to individuals, their well-being and personal outcomes. Both Care Inspectorate Wales and Social Care Wales will support improvement through their regulatory roles.

I mentioned the importance of workforce earlier, and that has been mentioned by Janet Finch-Saunders and by Angela—the importance of workforce. I think there is a consensus that we need a better understanding of the social care workforce, including in care home services. Social Care Wales and Health Education and Improvement Wales are developing a joint health and social care workforce strategy to identify current and future capacity and capability requirements and how these can be met. This will help ensure we have the right number of people in place able to deliver flexible and agile health and social care that meets the needs of the people of Wales. I know that Angela raised the importance of having a professional way of moving up in the service, and that's one of the things that we are looking at, because there is a differentiation between jobs that are done in the social care service and that are done in the health service, and other places as well. So, I think this is one of the areas that we are going to look at. 

The health service, of course, has been mentioned. Local authorities and health boards also have a key role here, both in terms of their statutory responsibilities and as commissioners of care home services. I know that Janet raised that issue at the end of her contribution, and I'd be grateful if you could write to me about what happened with that individual person and how that differentiation arose. Local authorities and health boards must work with providers to ensure that there is the right care and support available to meet people's needs within the care home they have contracted to provide effective care. I also expect them to play their part in supporting care home sustainability by paying fees due to the providers quickly and efficiently in order to help avoid unnecessary cash-flow pressures, which do happen. 

Last year, we issued the 'Let's agree to agree' toolkit to assist commissioners of and providers of residential care for older people in agreeing appropriate fees for placements. This was developed in collaboration with providers and commissioners. Initial feedback from local authorities is that the toolkit is being considered as part of their fee models for care homes, with some adopting it in full or in part. A more detailed review of the toolkit will be undertaken by the national commissioning board next year, and I want to encourage all local authorities to make use of this resource. Then finally, the sector itself, including those who own services and the people who work in those services, is integral to both the quality and future sustainability of care home services. I really want to recognise here at the end of my contribution the significant contribution they've made to adapt to the new regulatory framework and to making their own contribution towards meeting cost pressures and through investment in the workforce. 

I hope I've been able to show that the Welsh Government is working on a number of fronts in terms of recognising the importance of the homecare services and that we have got plans about trying to further and support the workforce in what is now a very difficult and unsettled time. But I do think that we do want to end on the optimistic note that Janet started with about the great service that is provided in so many homes and the really good practice that there is. I was particularly appreciative of the comments as well made by Jayne Bryant and her reference to the work with people with dementia, and particularly her mention of the Forget-me-not choir, because I've had personal experience of the Forget-me-not choir in my constituency of Cardiff North. I do believe, as Jayne had said, it is one of the most moving experiences you'll have to listen to the Forget-me-not choir. I know that they do operate in a number of homes. 

I also take into account the proposal that clinics should be able to take place in local authority homes, because I think there does need to be a degree of flexibility. And as it was said, there's absolutely no reason why that shouldn't happen. In fact, it does happen in some voluntary settings in Cardiff now. I know that the health authority does provide clinics in voluntary sector settings. I think the more that that can be done—because the nearer it provides them to homes, and to people's own homes, it makes them more likely to take advantage. So, I will finish now. We must continue to work together to ensure that this very important sector thrives and goes from strength to strength in providing the best possible care and support for people in Wales. Thank you very much.

Thank you. That brings today's proceedings to a close. Thank you.