Good afternoon, and welcome, all, to this Plenary meeting. The first item on our agenda this afternoon is questions to the Minister for Economy, and the first question is to be answered by the Deputy Minister for Arts and Sport, and to be asked by John Griffiths.
1. How is the Minister working with the Deputy Minister for Arts and Sport and Chief Whip to promote the growing tv and film industry in Wales? OQ59221
Deputy Minister for Arts and Sport, and Chief Whip
Thank you for that question, John. Both the Minister for Economy and I are committed to working together to maximise Wales’s growing reputation in the film and tv sector, and in promoting Wales on the global stage.
Thank you for that answer, Minister. Recently, I visited a local industrial firm, a family industrial firm, in Newport, GD Environmental. They are diversifying at the moment, and we visited their film studio, in Nash in Newport, where Urban Myth film the Sex Education series. It's all going very well, and the relationship with Creative Wales has been very useful, Minister, which I'm sure you'll be pleased to know. But they now have plans to build another film studio, alongside the existing one, and also they're interested in building a film and tv hub, which would be a film school, really, in conjunction with higher education and further education. So, they really are quite ambitious, Minister, and I think it's part of that growing strength that we have in Wales around tv, film and media. And I wonder whether you might look at what further support you might offer the company to expand in the way that they plan, and perhaps to visit, yourself, at some stage.
Thank you, John, for that supplementary question. I think probably it would be helpful if I set out initially some of the support that Creative Wales has been giving to the sector. We've got a strategic objective of ensuring that there is a good supply of studio space throughout the nation, for the incoming and indigenous productions. And we've recently supported capital investment projects in Aria studios in Anglesey, the Wolf studios in Cardiff, and Seren studios in Cardiff. In addition, the Creative Wales production funding is regularly used in conjunction with projects that have been delivered from studio sites in Newport, which you've already highlighted. And I thought it was particularly interesting you talking about the cross-over with education, and that fits very much with our support for the national film and tv studios that we have based in Cardiff as well. Skills and training are absolutely crucial and central to everything that Creative Wales is trying to do. We've recently supported 17 projects through our Creative Wales skills fund. One of those projects is supporting three new screen academies, alongside studio complexes.
But, to deal specifically with the support that we could potentially give for the organisation that you're talking about, GD Environmental, what I would say is that Creative Wales do consider business cases for new investment and are happy to review those in detail when they're submitted. So, they can be approached for initial discussions, and it sounds as though, from what you're saying, that that's exactly what has happened thus far. Any formal application for support would obviously have to be assessed on its individual strengths and the impact to the industry, and we require an initial and, later, a full business case—all of that which I'm sure you and GD Environmental would fully understand. But we do have a huge ambition for this industry in Wales. It's one of the fastest growing sectors in Wales. It has a huge impact on the economy. And I'd be more than happy to come along and visit GD Environmental, talk to them about their plans and see what they're proposing to do, because this is very much the kind of investment that we're looking to see grow.
The culture committee provided a workshop for people within the Welsh creative industries as part of its inquiry into barriers within the sector. Participants noted that access to Welsh Government funding for small businesses who are in the industry was challenging and overly bureaucratic, with one noting that delays can cripple small businesses. Another stated, and I quote,
'Access routes to funding are difficult in Wales, especially when those in the creative industries aren't known by their ability to handle technical paperwork. Often, big organisations find it easier to apply for funding due to having dedicated staff, which is very different for small businesses'.
Yet another was concerned that every application is considered a new one. So, every time they apply, they need to prove themselves all over again. Furthermore, it was stressed that long-term investment from Welsh Government and planning for the future was needed to see substantial growth in the industry. Suggestions included targeted investment and potentially taking industries with Welsh Government to global fairs to amplify the creative industry in Wales. Therefore, Minister, what urgent action are you taking to ease the application process for funding for small businesses, and what measures are you taking to enable those in creative industries to receive long-term investment, so that they can be showcased globally?
I think that's a fair challenge, Tom. We've seen a number of small businesses, small industries, that want to grow in Wales, and some of them do find the grant process very difficult. By the very nature of the process, it has to be thorough. We are talking about dealing with public money at the end of the day. We can't just willy-nilly hand over money to organisations that we don't do due diligence on. So, I'm sure you and, I'm sure, the applicants that you're talking to would understand and accept that. But I'm always open to a conversation with any of these organisations about how we can streamline and make the process more user friendly. It's certainly very much the approach that we've taken on the investment review with the Arts Council of Wales—applications to the Arts Council of Wales will be considered by the end of March, but very much part of that review has been about how do we reach out to some of the smaller organisations, and how do we make the process of grant applications far less burdensome that it has been previously. So, I'm very happy to have that conversation with any organisations that feel that their involvement or the application process through Creative Wales is too difficult. And if any of them want to write to me and explain to me their experiences, I'd be happy to look at that.
Thank you. The Business Wales youth entrepreneurship service encourages the next generation of entrepreneurs in Wales. It supports entrepreneurial ambition, and provides practical advice to take their ideas forward. Since 2016, 5,000 young people have been supported with start-up advice, and almost 700 have started a business. This, of course, is now being enhanced by the young person’s guarantee.
Thank you, Minister. As you are no doubt aware, 95 per cent of UK businesses are microbusinesses or sole traders. With much of the focus of economic development policies on attracting large employers, and preparing young people for workplaces, we have to question whether we are doing enough to encourage self-employment. I was, therefore, pleased to see a scheme run by the Bridgend Business Forum, in conjunction with the Rebel Business School, to offer free training to young people on how to start a business. Minister, will the Welsh Government monitor the scheme and look at ways to either replicate it across Wales or even incorporate the lessons into the school curriculum? Thank you.
I'd be very happy if the Member were to write to me with the detail of the scheme that he has identified. As I said in my initial answer, we have a range of support services that are available. Business Wales is still the front door, so if anyone is concerned or doesn't understand the individual scheme, they can go to Business Wales and they can help to guide people through, and, also, those people taking part directly in the young person's guarantee funded work.
We've got a range of Big Ideas role models—over 400 of them—who do go out and encourage people who want to start up their own business. And what's encouraging about the young person's guarantee in this area is that, as part of the national conversation, 28 per cent of young people indicated they would like to consider becoming self-employed or running their own business, and, indeed, 25 per cent of them wanted more information on becoming self-employed. So, part of our challenge is, with the enthusiasm that does exist, how to make sure we have the right support available to help those who can go from an idea and a desire to actually be able to have a business plan and then to start up. And that's also why, of course, we have a range of our start-up grants that are already available to support people with exactly that ambition. But I look forward to receiving the Member's correspondence.
Thank you so much, Presiding Officer. Minister, it's estimated that around 7 per cent of adults in Wales are not on the internet. A large chunk of that 7 per cent are people aged 75 or over who have no connection to the internet. Just under 80 per cent of people with a limiting, long-standing illness, disability or infirmity use the internet, compared with 93 per cent of those without such conditions. So, I'm curious to know, Minister, how the Welsh Government's digital strategy will help reduce digital exclusion.
Tackling digital exclusion is one of the key aims of our strategy, and there's a number of different strands. There's our work with the UK Government on the reserved responsibility for infrastructure. I've had a number of meetings with my officials and, indeed, with the current UK Minister—I think it's Minister Lopez, in the newly rebadged DCMS—and we're looking at how they are going to meet their own obligations, and actually the fact there'll be a gap, because they expect to meet 85 per cent of the population. Now, we have to talk about how we get services and improved services to that extra 15 per cent.
As well as the connectivity and the width, we then have a range of schemes in place actually to deal with practical access, and some of that is attitude. My mother has a connection in her house and I have regularly tried to get her to use it, but that's just one of those things. She doesn't do it, whereas other people are more keen to do it. And actually, this isn't just a point about entertainment. As we all know, there's a point about work, and it's also about access to services as well. Many of our services are moving to a digital-first model, which I think is a good thing, but that does mean we need to constantly be thinking about how we equip users, the people using the service, to be able to do so effectively. That's not just the public, of course; a number of the people who need support to make sure that they're properly enabled and are able to use the system actually are staff as well. So, those are parts of the challenges we're looking to try to resolve, and I'm very keen to see further progress made in the rest of this term.
Great, thank you, Minister. I really do appreciate the detailed answer.
Now, moving on to my second question, the UK Government's gigabit broadband voucher scheme is a fantastic initiative, helping people to combat slow broadband speeds in rural areas. Vouchers worth thousands of pounds are being given to homes and businesses to help cover the cost of installing gigabit broadband. Last year, the Welsh Government announced it was going to stop its top-up funding for the scheme because you, and I quote, said that you 'don't have the money'. How can it be, Minister, that you don't have the money to put towards this fantastic scheme, but yet the Welsh Government is happy to fork out in excess of £100 million for more politicians in this place? So, can you please elaborate on more information as to why this isn't actually happening? Thank you.
Look, I don't think it's particularly helpful or sensible to attempt to compare an entirely different issue with how we use Welsh Government budgets. If you want to have a conversation about the size and capability of this place, we could do that. When it comes to the reality of our budget, it's just undeniable—the reality is our budget is worth less in real terms, in cash terms. It's also a demand to use Welsh Government funds on an area that is plainly reserved as well. I actually had a conversation earlier today with one of your colleagues about what we are doing and what we will try to do to fill in part of that reserved responsibility where the UK Government don't intend to meet the needs of people. There are practical choices, as ever. I'd like to be constructive in responding to questions, but you really do need to recognise that this is a situation of the creation of your party in Government at the UK level.
Okay, thank you very much for that, Minister. But it was also this Government that sent back £155 million to the UK Government because they didn't actually do their homework when it came to funding. So, let's not go down that road. I will carry on with my third question.
Ofcom believes that approximately 15,000 premises cannot get a broadband service of at least 10 Mbps download speed and 1 Mbps upload speed. Openreach believes that it will be challenging to get those 15,000 properly equipped, and says it will require the industry and Governments to come together to find a solution. So, Minister, what is the Welsh Government doing to support the UK Government in ensuring that these 15,000 premises actually get an acceptable and adequate broadband speed? Thank you.
Well, I come back to this: this is a reserved responsibility. It is the responsibility of the UK Government. We are acting because we don't think it's acceptable to simply abandon those people. The UK Government's stated ambition is to provide access to 85 per cent of the population. There are a range of people who would be excluded if we did nothing in this reserved area of responsibility. If you want to look at the people responsible for not acting in this area, they're Conservative Ministers in the UK Government. That's just unarguable. It's the settlement, it's the reality. I will act with the resources that are available. I will be constructive with UK Ministers about what we can do, but Members need to recognise, in all parties, that every step we take in this area, every pound we spend will provide a benefit to people in Wales, but it'll be money that we cannot spend on areas where we are actually responsible. But we're doing this because we recognise the societal and the economic value of doing so. We could do so much more, of course, if the Conservative Government actually met their own responsibilities.
Diolch, Llywydd. The Digital Inclusion Alliance Wales has published the second edition of its digital inclusion agenda, 'From Inclusion to Resilience', building on the first edition of the agenda that was introduced in early 2021, which outlined five key priorities to make Wales a digitally inclusive nation. Now, although the report outlines the very good progress that's been made by Welsh Government, despite the lack of support from UK Government, since its first publication—which has seen an expansion, of course, to include over 90 members holding six quarterly meetings with Welsh Government Ministers—it is clear that there is still some work that remains to be done.
If I can start with the first priority: embedding digital inclusion across all sectors. The report highlights the need for greater engagement with the private sector, especially small and medium-sized businesses and microbusinesses, to ensure that digital inclusion is evenly distributed across Wales. So, could I therefore ask the Minister what steps are being undertaken by the Welsh Government to encourage private sector, specifically SMEs and microbusinesses, to engage in the digital inclusion agenda? And, of course, the Minister rightly pointed out, this is all being done by Welsh Government despite the complete and utter lack of support from UK Government on this agenda.
Well, actually, the pandemic has forced a number of people to think about the way in which they work, and actually, we all know that a number of businesses had to go into the online world when they weren't necessarily there. They then had to think about the customers that will want to use that, because more customers had to use things online. And so, there's a point here about a business need and fulfilment and the fact that, actually, there's a broad trend—and there has been—of greater activity online. And that's a challenge for some of our physical infrastructure, and having vibrant high streets and places, but that trend has really accelerated as a result of the pandemic.
And I know that we talked about this before; there's both an opportunity and a risk, and the opportunity is, you're getting used to the way that there are successful, commercial operations available. You need to make sure that your staff are able to deal with that; you need to make sure that your own facility is able to deal with the demand you'll have coming in, and then think about how you're servicing the needs of your customers in doing so, and making sure that your customer information and your business information is actually secure. And it is one of the things that we do talk about with a range of business groups, who represent small and medium-sized businesses—one of their key risks is to make sure that they are capable in those areas and that they can understand where the help and support are.
Now, when you come to Business Wales, that is something that we can and do talk with businesses about. We also know that there is a growing cyber security industry in Wales. Some of those are, if you like, the big names and the big players, whether it's PricewaterhouseCoopers or whether it's Airbus or others. Whereas, actually, we also have a range of cyber security firms that specifically look to help those small and medium-sized firms to make sure that they can take advantage of the opportunities and, at the same time, keep themselves and their customers secure.
Of course, this work is going to be vital, especially when you consider the challenges facing SMEs up and down the country, and, of course, how do we balance that, then, with our need for a vibrant high street at the same time? Let's take a look at the retail sector as an example, the Welsh Retail Consortium announced that, despite some signs of recovery over the past 12 months, the footfall of the retail sector in Wales remains 10 per cent lower compared to this time last year. Now, couple that with the sector, like other sectors of course, being hit by high inflation and high energy costs, and all this results in a major drag for retail.
Now, we've discussed previously in the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee, the Government's intention to bring forward a strategy for the sector. When could we expect this to be published and, more importantly, how would the strategy be implemented? How will it take digital into account and will it have the necessary resources and funding to ensure that it is successful?
Yes, I'm more than happy to update—and actually, when we had a consultation event, which I attended together with the Deputy Minister for Social Partnership, with the British Retail Consortium and the Welsh Retail Consortium, and, indeed, with the trade union side, led by USDAW, it was a deliberate further engagement in our social partnership way of working. So, we looked at what this would mean for workers as well as for businesses and, actually, the survey they had at the time highlighted some of the points you've made. There's still a challenge in footfall. That isn't evenly spread out though. So, Cardiff city centre had actually done better, relative to other Welsh centres. There was also a much more significant recovery at some of the out-of-town centres as well.
So, again, it highlights some of our policy dilemmas and challenges about wanting to have vibrant city centres and high streets, and actually, that goes into some of the comments we have about where we site public services. It's one of the reasons—only one of the reasons—why, as health Minister, I was keen to invest in community pharmacy and optometry: it provides greater access to patients, but actually footfall for those centres as well. When it comes to the delivery plan for the retail strategy, I expect to publish that shortly after Easter, so early after the Easter recess, you can expect to have that published, and that will set out how we expect to deliver and how we expect to measure the success of that strategy that we have co-produced between the Government, businesses themselves and trade unions too.
Thank you for the question. Due diligence on the proposal received from representatives of Green Man is in the final stages of assessment. I expect to receive advice from officials with regard to the next steps before the end of March.
Thank you for that answer, Minister. You've said, and other Ministers have said, on a number of occasions that the Government bought this site in order to secure the future of the Green Man Festival. However, it has come to light that the agreement that your Government is entering into is not with the Green Man Trust Ltd; it's a separate company called Cwningar Ltd, assigned to one person. That company is listed to buy or sell real estate, and it's also listed to operate leased real estate. So, can you explain how entering into an agreement with a company that, translated to English, equates to 'rabbit warren' is safeguarding the future of the Green Man Festival? To me and many others, Minister, it looks like the Welsh Government has really gone down a rabbit hole over this purchase.
I admire the consistent silliness of the Member's response to rabbits, but, look, when it comes to the opportunities around this piece of land, we've been clear about why we've entered into the purchase. We've also been very, very clear about the fact, as I said in my initial answer, that I will expect to receive final advice before the end of March, and I can then make a decision. The Member talks about what might happen; I will have a decision to make when due diligence is completed, and I will then not just make a decision, but I will also expect to face further questions in this Chamber in announcing any choice that I make. But, economic development in this part of Wales is the key purpose for the purchase, and that will be in my mind when I make the choice.
Thank you very much to James for tabling this question. We know that, in providing public funds to any organisation, the attention is to secure public good. We know that Gilestone itself is a collection of holiday accommodation with the potential of developing far more holiday units. Now, I'm not entirely confident that the response that you gave answered James's question, so if we could pursue that a little further. On 22 February 2022, just a month before the Minister agreed that the Government should purchase the farm, the owner of Green Man Festival established a company, as we've heard, called Cwningar Ltd. Now, this company is described as a company that is:
Now, does the Minister therefore believe that it's an unfortunate coincidence in terms of the timing of this purchase, or does the Minister, or his department, know of any further plans for the use of Gilestone, which does relate to real estate and Cwningar?
Well, the end purpose for the use of that land is economic development. We're interested in how we secure an increase in economic activity within this part of Wales. It aligns with the ambitions that Powys County Council have for events, and the economic benefit that they'll provide for local people as well.
When I make a decision, I would expect, in the due diligence, not just the proposal and the business plan but the company structure behind anyone who wants to do that. And, as is usually the case, if we're looking at then a lease or a different arrangement, I'll then expect there to be targets and measures to make sure that that benefit is genuinely being realised. So, I can't comment much further on that because, of course, I haven't had the final advice from my officials; I need to see what that looks like, and I then may have questions myself on the advice, and I then will have to make a decision. And there is no guarantee of one definitive decision. I may decide not to proceed with what comes before me; I may decide to do so. Whatever I do, I fully anticipate, given the significant interest in this site, that I will need to not just make a statement to confirm what choice I've made, but also, inevitably, there will be further questions. I'm more than happy to do so.
Yes. The unemployment rate for Clwyd South in the 12 months to September 2022 was 3.7 per cent. That is down 2.7 percentage points on the same period in 2013.
Thank you, Minister. It really is quite incredible and demonstrates just how relentless the Welsh Government has been in creating job opportunities for people in Clwyd South, and, indeed, across Wales. But, Minister, how concerned are you by the loss of millions upon millions of pounds in EU funding and the impact that it could have in terms of creating valuable high-skilled jobs in Wales?
I'm deeply concerned still about the choices made by the UK Government, not just because they are a breach of successive manifesto promises, but because they leave Wales short of well over £1 billion over three years. In fact, Newsnight recently undertook an investigation where they thought the gap might be as much as £1.4 billion. The gap that that creates for Wales is not just a budget pressure; it's what it stops us from being able to do.
And it's not just what the Welsh Government are saying, the UK Government haven't listened to us, they haven't listened to businesses about not just the reduction in the money, but the delivery design of that fund. It takes money away from skills, in investing in the future of the economy. Local authorities haven't been listened to in the design of the funds, forcing them to compete with each other, not to work collaboratively together. They haven't listened to trade unions, further or higher education. If you think about what universities are saying, the vice-chancellor of Swansea University has been very clear that hundreds of high-quality jobs will not be in Wales if there is not an immediate about-turn in the budget next week. I still believe, though, the approach that we have taken in wanting to bring together different actors in different regions of Wales is the right one to undertake. If only we had a UK Government on the same wavelength prepared to invest in the future in a collaborative way, we could ensure that we make even further progress in creating good-quality employment in Clwyd South, and, indeed, the rest of Wales.
The latest figures show that Wales, under a Labour Welsh Government in this case, has the lowest employment rate amongst the UK nations, that Wales was the only UK nation to see a fall in employment, and that Wales saw the largest increase in the inactivity rate compared with the same period last year. However, at 2.8 per cent, the unemployment rate in Clwyd South was lower than the figure for Wales as a whole. Will you therefore join me in welcoming the hard work of Clwyd South's Member of Parliament, Simon Baynes, representing in Westminster the needs and interests of companies, organisations and constituents in Clwyd South, where, for example, he's campaigned successfully for fertiliser companies such as Neatcrown Corwen Ltd in Clwyd South, to be included in the support given by the UK Government for high energy-intensive businesses. And, working in partnership with Denbighshire County Council and Wrexham County Borough Council, he secured the Clwyd South UK levelling-up fund grant of £13.3 million from the UK Government, which includes the installation of the new roof at Llangollen Railway's Corwen station, with the roof manufactured by Clwyd South firm, Plant & Robinson Construction Limited.
Well, look, I welcome money that is being spent in any part of Wales to secure a better economic future, but I think the Member needs to look again at the design of the shared prosperity fund and, indeed, the levelling-up fund. Half of local authorities in Wales lost out in their bids—a competitive bidding process that took time, energy and effort. And he might want to talk to other authorities in Wales, including Wrexham, that lost out on bids altogether, or indeed, Flintshire County Council that has not been supported in any of its bids. This is a competitive process that wastes time, energy and effort. We would all be much better off if the UK Government took a much more collaborative approach, stopped competing and trying to take powers away from Wales. We deserve to have the opportunities to still have our responsibilities, voted for by the people of Wales, in two referenda, and a budget that matches up, rather than the loss of more than £1 billion. And it really would be positive if the Tories in this place could actually stand up for Wales, rather than making excuses for what is being done to Wales by their masters in the UK Government.
We have many programmes and initiatives for supporting our high streets, including business support, small business rates relief and non-domestic rates. Our Transforming Towns programme, which is providing £100 million over three years, aims to address some of the decline in our town and city centres.
Thank you for your answer, Minister. It sadly appears that the Labour Government's anti-business approach, which has been there for quite some time, has rubbed off on some of your county councillors. We on these benches believe that the high-street businesses that are out there are the lifeblood of our communities and we should be doing all that we can to help them flourish. However, instead of helping businesses, Monmouthshire County Council had been threatening their local businesses with a £3,000 increase in the fees to set up al fresco dining. After a huge backlash, the council's budget was rejected last week—the first time in the authority's history, apparently—and I understand that this proposal has now been dropped. So, Minister, do you agree with me that this potentially damaging proposal should never have been on the cards in the first place? And will join me in urging the Labour administration in Monmouthshire to work with the county's businesses and not against them, going forward? Thank you.
I'm very proud of our record in the more than two decades of devolution in working with businesses. You've never heard a First Minister or an economy Minister here in Wales refer to disagreements with businesses by saying, as a previous, a former, Prime Minister who still wants to be the Prime Minister, referring to 'eff business' if you don't agree with them. That's not the approach we've ever taken here in Wales. We're much more collaborative. We recognise that, as the party of work, we could and should have constructive relationships with both businesses and indeed with trade unions. And of course the proposal from Monmouthshire was a proposal. They too want to see a successful future for businesses and jobs in Monmouthshire, and I look forward to working with the council to deliver just that.
6. What discussions has the Minister had with the Minister for Climate Change regarding the impact that default 20 mph speed limits will have on the Welsh economy? OQ59212
I have regular meetings and conversations with the Minister for Climate Change. 'Llwybr Newydd', our national transport delivery plan, sets out a vision for a transport system that is good for society, the environment and the economy. That will further help to support economic well-being through thriving towns, cities and villages.
Thank you for your response, Minister. I'm sure those regular conversations are enjoyable. You mention there the benefits to businesses and the economy of 20 mph, but of course you'll be fully aware of your own explanatory memorandum on the Restricted Roads (20 mph Speed Limit) (Wales) Order 2022, and, on page 32 of that explanatory memorandum, Minister, and I'll quote, it says:
'Overall an indicative central estimate of the monetised net present value of the policy is calculated to be a negative £4.54bn.'
So, in short, Minister, the Welsh Government's own explanatory memorandum to the Bill says that this default 20 mph speed limit will cost the Welsh economy £4.5 billion. This is people's jobs, it's people's businesses, it's livelihoods that will be impacted as a result of this legislation. It's clear, of course, that we do support 20 mph speed limits outside those areas where it's absolutely necessary, such as schools and hospitals, heavily pedestrianised areas. But this default limit is going to have such a detrimental impact on the economy, as the Minister for the Economy, I would have thought you'd be significantly concerned at the impact it's going to have. So, in your role, Minister, what do you say to residents up and down Wales, and what do you say to residents and businesses in my region in north Wales, who believe that the 20 mph speed limit as a default will slow down the Welsh economy? And where do you see the Welsh economy making up that deficit of £4.5 billion?
Well, of course the 20's Plenty campaign was predicated on an improvement to air quality and improvement to safety as well. I think pedestrians are five times more likely to lose their lives if they're struck at 30 mph compared to 20 mph. So, it's not just a simple one-off, and, of course, I don't believe you were a Member at the time, but, in 2020, in a debate, the majority of the Conservative group voted in favour of this, including the description of this as a commonsense and a safe move by your colleague, Janet Finch-Saunders, at the time. So, there has been widespread support until it comes to action. And this is a default move. Local authorities, who know their communities best, are in a position to change and to alter speed limits on some of those routes, and I think, actually, when you look at the additional one minute in journey times, that's what's then monetised and put into the way that we currently undertake the explanatory memoranda. I'm actually interested in some of the bigger challenges in the questions we've had earlier today. If you think about the over £1 billion lost over three years, if you think about the reality of what that does in terms of choking off growth and opportunities to grow parts of the Welsh economy, there are much bigger challenges facing the economy of Wales today and what we're going to be able to do in the future. I will continue to work constructively with all partners on what it means for the future of Welsh communities that make this a fantastic place to live and to work and to invest in.
This Government is committed to backing Welsh businesses. As we emerge from the long shadow of the coronavirus pandemic, one of our priorities is to continue to support Wales’s economic recovery. We will take a team Wales approach to creating a fairer, greener and more prosperous Wales right across the country, including, of course, in Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire.
Llywydd, earlier this week, I met with the Welsh Wool Alliance and local Pembrokeshire knitwear manufacturer Monkstone to discuss the huge potential that is Wales's wool industry. As it stands, the UK-wide wool industry generates the fourth largest wool clip in the world, with Wales contributing over one third of wool to this figure. Through the support of 6,000 Welsh farmers, we generate three times more wool than the US and Canada combined.
The Welsh Wool Alliance, Monkstone and others are working together to establish a traditional material and develop it into a national brand, in essence forging a kitemark equivalent for Welsh wool, capitalising upon its heritage, presenting it in a modern way and adding value to the raw product. Given the knitted relationship between wool and Wales, will you commit to meeting with the Welsh Wool Alliance to explore what support the Welsh Government can offer them to help establish this commodity and see its marketable potential fulfilled? Diolch.
Well, actually, I do maintain an interest, and I'm thinking about some of my own past, when it comes to wool. My mother used to knit our jumpers for going to school and my father was a rural vet, so I spent quite a long time seeing my father tend to sheep; it was fun, at the time, seeing my father going through what was then a sheep-dipping process as well. So, I do understand a little bit about this and what it means for the farmers themselves as well. I'd be very interested, if the Member wrote to me with more detail, to think about what is the appropriate interaction to take place. I would like to see a thriving and positive future for the wool industry, and, indeed, the variety of potential uses for wool produced here in Wales. So, again, I look forward to receiving the Member's correspondence.
Thank you, Janet Finch-Saunders, for that question. There are no plans to reform Visit Wales. We have an exciting and ambitious strategy, 'Welcome to Wales: Priorities for the Visitor Economy 2020-2025', for the development of tourism. We're working closely with the sector to achieve those collective aims.
Thank you. Well, speaking of the sector, it's actually the sector that has approached me and said, 'Visit Wales definitely needs some reform.' Now, the economic benefit of tourism to Conwy county is around £900 million, generated from 9.5 million visitors annually. Our local tourism and hospitality businesses have gone through so much with the pandemic and are still recovering now, but they do believe that they're losing out on potential revenue. Many are struggling with increased energy costs and a shortage of trained staff.
One thing that's been pointed out to me is, when people come to stay in Wales, or look to stay in Wales, they frequently use sites such as Booking.com—I don't; I always book, whenever I go anywhere, with the business itself, because the charges are quite high for businesses in this day and age. I just question why Visit Wales isn't doing what VisitScotland and Discover Northern Ireland are doing, in that they actually have a platform where you can book through VisitScotland or Discover Northern Ireland, and they actually promote coming to Wales—or Scotland and Northern Ireland. So, I think that's a lost opportunity.
But I would place on record how fortunate we are in north Wales to have Jim Jones and his team in Go North Wales. They do so much for north Wales tourism. Really, all I would ask, I think, is: rather than just saying, 'No plans to reform', will you look at increasing the remit, then, of Visit Wales and perhaps introduce this platform where potential visitors coming to Wales can go through that, and it is taxpayer funded, state funded, as opposed to these companies, like Booking.com, that, frankly, don't do anything to support the actual hospitality industry in Wales? Thank you.
Can I thank Janet Finch-Saunders for that supplementary, because I think she raises an important and interesting point? I've made it very clear that Visit Wales, as far as we're concerned, as part of Welsh Government, allows us much greater accountability for the work that Visit Wales undertakes. They're directly accountable to me, and, through Visit Wales, I have direct engagement with our tourist and hospitality industry in a way that VisitBritain, VisitEngland, VisitScotland, as agencies sitting outside of Government, don't have. So, I think the structure that we have is right. We have a marketing department that sits within Visit Wales, which is doing much of what you suggest that we could be looking at, in terms of trying to bring more visitors into Wales—that's clearly the overall point. But the point you've raised about a platform for accommodation is something that I'd be happy to explore, and I'd be happy to have a conversation, further conversation, with you about that, Janet, because, clearly, if there is a way in which we can attract more people into Wales at a lower cost, then that is something that we'd be happy to explore.
The Welsh Government is committed to increasing the number of apprenticeships undertaken by raising awareness of the programme. We promote the benefits to both employers and learners through a range of marketing and communications activities throughout the year, and, of course, there are regular topics and questions in the Chamber and beyond that help to raise the profile of the programme.
Thank you, Minister. In Wales, degree apprenticeships are still in their pilot phase, and still only available in IT, engineering and advanced manufacturing. In Scotland, they offer far more. In England, they offer over 100 degree apprenticeships. This Government are really letting learners down that want to stay in Wales. Degree apprenticeships at NVQ level 7 still haven't been introduced, unlike in Scotland and England. So, why does Wales have to continually be behind the rest of the UK? You say you see the need and desire for degree apprenticeships, so where are the offerings? Adding two more after this pilot is just not good enough. When can we finally expect this Government to catch up with England and Scotland in this regard?
Actually, when it comes to our apprenticeships programme, we're in a really positive position, compared to England, on the numbers comparatively, and also when it comes to completions as well, and, actually, we are expanding our programme. It's a regular topic of conversation whenever I go before the committee for scrutiny. You can guarantee that Hefin David will ask me about degree apprenticeships; you can guarantee that I will confirm yet again that we're committed to expanding our programme, but, more than that, the degree apprenticeships sit alongside other programmes of study, including supporting people to degree level within Welsh businesses, and it's a real feature. I saw this, today, in a manufacturing company that I visited in Islwyn, when they were looking at what they already do and how they're supporting their current workforce. But, more than that, the apprenticeships are part of the programme. They're going to invest in apprenticeships in this year. They've also taken up advantages and opportunities in the shorter, lean programme that we run for businesses here in Wales. They themselves support people to degree level qualifications for their business as well, and, actually, this is a key area for expansion and improvement right across the economy. Where is the appropriate level of the skills and the resource? How do you do that for new staff coming in? But, crucially, and this is often the way, how do you make sure you're supporting and reskilling and improving the skills of your current workforce? So, I'm a good deal more optimistic about what we're doing in all areas of apprenticeships here in Wales, and I look forward to reporting on the success of our expansion of degree apprenticeships and the areas and sectors they will be expanded to.
Our strategy, 'Welcome to Wales: Priorities for the visitor economy 2020-2025', sets out our direction and ambition for tourism, and Visit Wales promotes destinations equally across Wales. Mid Wales and west Wales are integral to that activity.
Thank you for that answer, Deputy Minister. Of course, our region has everything to offer, from stunning beaches to the international dark sky reserve in the Brecon Beacons, which, of course, will be celebrating its tenth anniversary this year. And that, I'm sure, is why Wales will, this year, welcome the highest number of cruise ships ever, with 91 ships expected to call at our ports in 2023, and the first will sail into Fishguard next month. Welsh Government investment in infrastructure has been key to securing this additional business. So, my question is: how might we build on that success story and capitalise on the economic benefits that these extra visits will bring?
Thank you very much for that question, Joyce. And you're absolutely right, because the strategy that we're talking about, the visitor economy strategy, is about emphasising the importance of addressing the spread of benefits, encouraging increased spend in our economy, right the way across Wales. It's what the marketing strategy is all about, and that has led to the increase that we're going to see in cruise ship activity across Wales, and, as you quite rightly say, we're going to be getting one in Fishguard on 6 April. We're going into markets now where we're trying to market Wales on that global scale, by attending events like Seatrade global and Seatrade Europe. All these events are attended by the major cruise lines and itinerary planners, and that's probably key to it, that as the cruise ships come in, we don't just see them sitting in the dock, having a few drinks and sitting in the bars and restaurants on the ship, but that they get off the ship, that they move inland, and the itineraries that are attached to those cruise stops are important and integral to all of that work. So, that is all included in the strategy as well.
1. Will the Minister make a statement on the recent decision of Wales Air Ambulance to maintain services in mid Wales for the next three years? OQ59209
I've noted the announcement made by the Wales air ambulance service. The Wales Air Ambulance Charity is an independent organisation, which does not receive any direct funding from the Welsh Government. As such, decisions regarding the configuration and operation of its services and bases are an operational matter for the charity and its board of trustees.
Thank you, Minister, but I don't agree with that. The Wales air ambulance operates through the service of the charity itself and also the Welsh NHS, and it's your responsibility as health Minister, of course, to ensure that we have adequate cover across Wales, which I know you'll agree with. I was very pleased that the Wales Air Ambulance Charity announced that they would keep using the Welshpool base up until 2026, and the campaign in mid Wales, and indeed Caernarfon as well, now moves to ensuring that those bases remain in place beyond 2026 and into the future. But we're currently waiting for the formal engagement process to commence.
The communications have been pretty abysmal on this, I have to say, during the last half of last year. We saw all organisations involved, and I include the Welsh Government in that, deny responsibility, passing over legitimate concerns and causing some serious worry as well. But I think, in part, that was recognised, which is why the chief ambulance commissioner was appointed to lead a review, then leading to a meaningful process and proper engagement.
Of course, you appreciate this is such an invaluable service to the people of mid Wales, as it is indeed to people in north Wales, but, Minister, we really need a date for the formal consultation to start. My constituents want to give their views on this proposal. It was supposed to start at the end of last year, and then it was January, and an e-mail drops into my inbox today from the chief ambulance commissioner, I'm expecting it to have the date when the engagement is going to start, and there's very little in that news update to date. It just tells me that they're still working on plans and the engagement material.
So, can I ask you, Minister, what is your assessment of why we've had to wait several months for the formal engagement process to begin, and, ultimately, when do you think that my constituents will be able to formally present their views on what they think about proposals to close the base in Welshpool, and indeed Caernarfon as well?
Thanks very much. Obviously, I know you'll be pleased that the current organisation configuration will be in place until 2026 and that a seven-year contract has been issued to Gama Aviation, but you're quite right, within the contract, there is a possibility to reconfigure if that's what's thought necessary. I think that it is important that we do continue with the review, because it's just good practice to make sure we just keep on looking at whether we are getting what we need from the service. So, I expect the formal engagement process to commence by the end of March. So, by the end of this this month, I hope that your constituents will have the opportunity to say their say. I know how passionately they feel about this, and I think it is important. I've been looking again to make sure that—. Actually, the criteria that we're looking at need to be the right criteria, so I have been having conversations around that as well.
Thank you to Russell George for asking this important question. In the response and the campaign on the ground, it's demonstrated clearly the importance of this charity and the place it holds in people's hearts. I attended a number of public meetings in Tywyn, Porthmadog, Pwllheli and Caernarfon, with hundreds of people turning out in the middle of winter to listen and to share their experiences. It's these people and the people who organised the campaign and gave thousands of hours of their own time, dozens of these people, who ensured that there was a change of view and that the air ambulance did listen. So, will the Minister join with me in thanking these campaigners for their work? But also, will the Minister work with other stakeholders in order to ensure that the air ambulance centres won't be centralised away from our communities and that we can secure their futures in their communities in looking to the future? Thank you.
Thank you very much, and I know that people in your area do feel very strongly about this issue, and it's evident that their voices have been heard, and I'm sure that they will be eager to respond to the consultation that will start at the end of the month. After the last discussion that we had in the Chamber, I asked the chair of the emergency ambulance services committee to ensure that he read what was said in this Chamber, because I think that there are strong feelings, and I think we have to ensure that the criteria for what we want out of that service are right.
Flying Start is delivering a phased expansion of early years provision to all two-year-olds. Phase 1 is nearing completion with services offered to over 2,500 additional children. Phase 2 begins in April and, over the next two years, will support over 9,500 more two-year-olds to access quality Flying Start childcare.
Can I thank the Minister for that response? I'm a vociferous supporter of Flying Start. It's not possible to overestimate the importance of a good start in life for a child. There are children starting nursery classes at three with a development age approaching four, whilst others have a mental age of just over two. How demoralising for them. Because of the way sensitive information is collated in lower super output areas, many children in some of the areas of greatest need miss out. Does the Minister agree that we need greater flexibility for local authorities to provide Flying Start for children, and is Flying Start's availability going to be changed following the 2021 census results?
I thank Mike Hedges for his question and for his enthusiasm for Flying Start. The Flying Start areas have been identified using the Wales index of multiple deprivation data from the Department for Work and Pensions and HM Revenue and Customs, and are broken down by lower super output areas. I think that this high-level approach to targeting remains fit for purpose, but there is the opportunity to give more flexibility to the local authorities. Under the programme for government, and working with Plaid Cymru through our co-operation agreement, we're expanding Flying Start, and this expansion started in September with over 2,500 additional children who are living in areas of disadvantage brought into the programme already.
But Flying Start outreach is a key element of the programme, which allows local authorities to be flexible in the way that they deliver Flying Start, because it obviously needs to be based on local intelligence and need. Flying Start outreach enables core Flying Start services to be delivered to high-need children and families who are living outside the recognised Flying Start areas. But, as I said, our ambition is that Flying Start that should reach all two-year-olds.
Thank you, Minister, and we welcome that expansion of it, because at the moment, there is a postcode lottery when it comes to Flying Start, and there are severe pockets of deprivation in rural areas that are seen as affluent, such as Monmouthshire, and that can't be good when there are families in need missing out, and I'm sure that you would agree with that, Minister. So, will that programme of expansion go into areas just like the ones I've just outlined? Thank you.
As I said in response to Mike Hedges, eventually, we hope that all two-year-olds will have access to Flying Start, but of course this has to be done in a phased way. So, each local authority is putting in its plans for the expansion of Flying Start, so Monmouthshire will have put in a plan, which I think we are in the process of approving. From April, stage 2 expansion will start and in the areas of deprivation in rural areas, areas of deprivation in constituencies that haven't traditionally had Flying Start, like my own constituency, where there is no Flying Start provision, but, as you say, there are pockets of deprivation, our aim is to reach all those areas, and phase 2 will take this further. And of course, another important element of our expansion is that we want to have an emphasis on the development of Welsh language places.
Diolch, Llywydd, and I'd like to focus my line of questioning to the Deputy Minister for Social Services this afternoon. The subject I'd like to raise today is the sad and tragic death of Kaylea Titford from Newtown in Powys in 2022. As you'll probably be aware, Deputy Minister, her parents were recently convicted of gross negligence manslaughter. To give some background, Kaylea was a 16-year-old girl who suffered with spina bifida and passed away due to negligence over a sustained period of time, and was left in squalid conditions that wouldn't be fit for a dog, never mind a young girl with disabilities. Unfortunately, this is not the first time we've heard of such upsetting cases. We know there is a high chance that it may not be the last time that such tragic circumstances occur, as we see such cases all too often.
So, what is the Welsh Government's response to Kaylea's sad death, and do you believe, Deputy Minister, that due diligence was applied to Kaylea's case, and that Powys's social services department has the adequate resources to identify and act upon potential dangers to children and act on them before it's too late?
I thank Gareth Davies for that question, and obviously I want to express my deep sadness about what has happened to Kaylea, and I think that we've all followed the description of what led to her death, and we obviously will have great and deepest sympathy.
A child practice review has been set up, which is the normal way of proceeding with these cases, with these situations that come up, and that will take its course. A chair has been appointed, I believe, and when the case review reports, we will then look at what they recommend and will certainly be considering that very seriously. But a child practice review is the normal process to take after such a tragic case.
Thank you for that response, Minister. What is disappointing is the fact of the Welsh Government's reluctance to conduct a review of children's services across Wales. What we're starting to see here, Deputy Minister, is a bit of a trend coming in, because we saw the tragic case of Logan Mwangi's death in Bridgend, and Kaylea Titford's death in Powys. One was at the hands of evil parents, in Logan's case, and neglectful parents in Kaylea's, in two different local authorities in Wales. Therefore, will the Minister finally realise the need for a Wales-wide children's review across the 22 local authorities, to ensure that all of our councils are equipped to deal with cases such as Logan Mwangi and Kaylea Titford?
Well, I can't tell you, Gareth, how seriously we are taking all these cases, and that of course we are doing all we possibly can to prevent such things happening, but the issue of whether there should be a review of children's services in Wales was debated here in the Senedd on 7 December, and the vote was taken against holding such a review for a number of reasons, which were fully debated here on that date. We are already considering the findings of the independent review of children's social care in England, which was chaired by Josh MacAlister and was published in May 2022, and we've had a wide range of independent research, reviews and evaluation undertaken in Wales. And of course, we've also got the recommendations from the independent inquiry into child sexual abuse, which has specific recommendations for the Welsh Government, which we are taking forward and considering how we will do that. Of course, you have mentioned already Logan Mwangi, and we did debate the child practice review and discussed the proposals in this Chamber, and we have got specific recommendations to take forward from there. So, there is a lot of work that we have got. There are a lot of recommendations, and I can assure you that we are working hard to follow those recommendations.
Thank you again, Minister, for your response, but I am a bit disappointed, to be honest, Deputy Minister, as we can't continue to bury our heads in the sand any longer and pretend these issues aren't out there.
Kaylea Titford was living in squalor, with maggots, faeces, urine-stained bed linen and unemptied catheters. She was bedridden due to outgrowing her wheelchair, which hadn't been replaced by her parents, and died alone in her fly-infested bedroom. Her weight went from 16 stone to 22 stone in a short period of time. One of the most horrific details was the fact that, when she did complain about the flies in her room to her mother, she responded via text, jokingly, saying, 'They like you'. I'm sorry to be graphic, Deputy Minister—I don't want to upset anyone—but I think you have to realise the scale of the problem here in parts of Wales, and ask yourself the question as a Government what is happening here, why is it happening, and what can you do as a Government to act in the best interests of our people and protect our children and most vulnerable citizens. How do you know that the latest tragic case isn't unfolding under our very noses as we speak now in this Chamber?
I believe it's incumbent on the Government to commission a review of children's services across the 22 local authorities, to see what might be going wrong, to make sure that we minimise these tragic cases and make sure that nobody slips through the net. Therefore, what conversations is the Deputy Minister having with local authorities, childcare leaders and all relevant agencies on how we can further protect vulnerable children in Wales, to minimise the risk of such tragic cases happening again?
Thank you very much. It's awful that you have to highlight those dreadful things that have happened to Kaylea, and once again I want to express my deepest sadness that this has happened. But I think the response from the Government should be that we should respond calmly, and we should give consideration to all the points that have been made, in particular to what the judge said in his summing up, which I'm sure you will have read. The normal course of practice is to have a child practice review. That's what we will do. There will be a child practice review. We will see what the child practice review comes up with. Because the child practice review looks very intently at everything that happened, all the contacts that were made, and it's a very, very thorough procedure. I'm sure that you would agree that it's absolutely essential that that process goes through before we start giving our views about what the Government should do or should not do. We have a vast amount of things that we need to do in this area. I've referred to them already in my previous answer—the number of initiatives that we are taking with different local authorities on child protection. So I can absolutely assure you that we take this tragic case very seriously, and that we will be addressing it. After the child practice review, we will look at what their recommendations are.
Thank you, Llywydd. If what the Minister did with Betsi Cadwaladr health board last week was supposed to give people renewed hope, then I'm afraid that's not what happened. What we have is a population and a workforce who are holding their heads in their hands. We've been here before. In 2015, Mark Drakeford said that he was to place the board in special measures because of concerns about leadership. Last week, the Minister said that there were serious concerns about the leadership and the culture of the organisation. I'd like to be kind and say that Betsi Cadwaladr has been treading water for the past eight years, but, with mental health problems, vascular issues, Glan Clwyd emergency department, the board hasn't been keeping its head above water.
Why is the Minister so determined that this failing, dysfunctional health board is the best model that is available for the patients in the north of Wales? Why on earth wouldn't she share my wish to just start again, with two or three smaller health boards? And before she tells me that this would distract from the focus on improving the board, will she realise that I and the people of north Wales have no faith in this Government's ability to improve things now, when she and her predecessors have failed so many times before?
Thanks very much, Rhun. Obviously, you're speaking to very different people from those that I've been speaking to, because, actually, I've had lots of people say that the step that I took was the step that needed to be taken. In fact, yesterday, I spoke to a whole group of consultants in Ysbyty Gwynedd, who remarked how they understood what was happening was quite a radical step. I think it's really important now that we focus on the job in hand, that we understand that there is a huge amount of work to be done. I'll be meeting with the new chair on Friday in north Wales, just to make sure that there is an understanding of the huge task that is ahead in terms of turning around this health board. I think it is really important that people understand that there were real issues around leadership and management, real issues around board effectiveness and governance, real issues around organisational culture and patient safety, and those are the measures that will get the focus with the new board in place.
Of course, the Minister is absolutely right that this is a step—putting it in special measures—that needed to be taken now. Of course it should have been in special measures. But the question is why we have a board that has, for eight years, needed to be in special measures. If the Minister won't share with me my ambition to look forward to a fresh start, with new health boards, how about having a proper look back to learn more about the lessons that need to be learnt? One former independent member of the board, effectively sacked last week, a highly respected individual, has suggested that there is more than enough grounds to have an independent inquiry now—the fraud investigation, the maladministration, the poor oversight of major contracts worth millions of pounds. They say they're convinced that the recent Audit Wales report in itself offers enough grounds for that. Eight years of a failing health board means eight years of poor staff morale, and I feel for every one of them. It means eight years of a population poorly served. We need to know what's been going on for those eight years and more, so we can protect the public. Will the Minister agree to my call for a public inquiry?
I'm certainly not going to agree to a call for a public inquiry, because I think we need to get on with the job. A public inquiry is going to distract people from the job that needs to be done. What I would argue is that, actually, this is a fresh start. For the first time ever in the history of Wales, not only have we put a health board into special measures, but we've also taken the unprecedented step of offering the opportunity to independent members to step aside. Obviously, their job now will be to read very carefully the Audit Wales report, which was highly critical of the executives. But we do need to make sure that their rights as employees are respected, and we have to go through proper due process.
We have a diagnostic target that no-one should wait over eight weeks. The health board is finding it particularly challenging to meet this in Swansea, where 70 per cent of those waiting over eight weeks are waiting for a diagnostic endoscopy. The health board is receiving support from the delivery unit and working with Hywel Dda on a regional diagnostic hub.
Thank you, Minister. The planned diagnostics and treatment centre in Cwm Taf will be a huge asset to those living in the east of my region, but those living in Swansea and Neath Port Talbot will see no such benefit. However, one positive development in Swansea has been the introduction of pioneering blood tests to replace colonoscopies for those recovering from bowel cancer. There are around 4,000 patients in Swansea Bay who have been waiting years for a follow-up colonoscopy after they had bowel cancer or polyps removed. These blood tests will reduce the demand on colonoscopy services across the health board. Minister, this is a great service, but it will only be provided to around 200 patients, thanks to funding from the Moondance Cancer Initiative. Does the Welsh Government have any plans to expand the roll-out of these pioneering new tests?
Thanks very much. I think it is important that we embrace new innovations where there's a clinical indication that they are helpful. Obviously, we need to balance that off against our ability to pay for them. But in this space, we have actually spent a lot of money on diagnostics—£51 million to replace diagnostic equipment, £25 million to replace imaging equipment and £25 million for four new PET scanners. We will be publishing a new national diagnostic plan in April. I recently had a meeting with the people who'd developed the plan, not just in Wales. I wanted to be very clear what is happening elsewhere, and so I spoke to UK experts as well about, 'How does this compare to yours? Where do we need to go? Are we far behind? Are we ahead?' So, there are some very detailed conversations going on there. Obviously, you've heard the proposals to build a new diagnostic centre in Cwm Taf. As I mentioned in response to your question, we will be seeing some support and working to see if we can develop a regional diagnostic centre between Swansea and Hywel Dda.
The Welsh Government is committed to supporting those living with bone health conditions in Wales, and improving provision for people with osteoporosis is a priority. My written statement issued in February sets out our expectations that fracture liaison services must be available and strengthened within all health boards across Wales.
Thank you. On World Osteoporosis Day last October I met with the Royal Osteoporosis Society in the Senedd. I heard that people in Wales suffer 27,000 osteoporotic fractures every year; that there are an estimated 100,000 undiagnosed spinal fractures in Wales; that a quarter of people have three or more fractures before they're diagnosed; that mental health issues arise from the constant pain; and that as many people die of fracture-related causes as from lung cancer or diabetes. I also heard that the right therapies and medication exist, but the postcode lottery in diagnosis means that tens of thousands of Welsh people who need care are being overlooked.
This month, the Royal Osteoporosis Society e-mailed welcoming the Welsh Government's announcement that they're committing to 100 per cent coverage in all health boards for fracture liaison services—although I think in your response you said that was more of an aspiration than a commitment; I hope you'll clarify that in your response—which would see all patients aged over 50 with a broken bone after a fall checked and managed to lower their risk of future fractures. Why, currently, nonetheless, do only 66 per cent of people in Wales aged over 50 have access to fracture liaison services when the figure is already 100 per cent in Scotland and Northern Ireland? How will you address the existing hidden need in Wales I described?
Thanks very much. You'll be aware that osteoporosis is a very common and debilitating condition. About 18 per cent of the Welsh population are living with it, which is an incredibly high number. In fact, one in two of you over 50 around here are likely to break a bone in the future—that's for women—and there's a one in five chance for men over 50 to be breaking a bone. We've all got to be aware that this is something that is possible, and that's why it makes sense for us to put some preventative measures in if we can. What we know is that we have actually worked really closely with the Royal Osteoporosis Society in order to develop that national programme. Obviously, we had that conference back in October, where we had the inaugural facture liaison service national conference, and indeed the aspiration of that conference and the intention of that conference was to set out our expectation that that postcode lottery will end and that provision of services will be available across the whole of Wales.
Public Health Wales was commissioned to produce a gambling health needs assessment for Wales, which was published last month. The report highlighted the extent of potential health challenges posed by gambling addiction across Wales, including Islwyn. These include stress, anxiety, substance misuse and, in the most tragic cases, suicide.
Diolch. ITV Wales's political programme Sharp End last week highlighted the issue of problem gambling in Wales, and the charity GambleAware estimate that the number of Britons who have a gambling problem is a staggering 1.4 million people. The availability and accessibility of gambling has never been greater. Today, there is no longer need to visit the bookmaker's shop in town centres, and every single person with a smartphone has accessibility and ease to gamble at the push of a button. The advertising of gambling is now all-persuasive, and its reach is even seen on gaming platforms, which is worrying for future generations. Public Health Wales have stated that they believe early education on problem gambling is urgently needed. There is clearly a tangible link between gaming and gambling. Public Health Wales have called for a system-wide approach that knocks down the barrier of shame and stigma, early education in schools, empowering GPs and other front-line services to identify and refer on to specialist services. So, Deputy Minister, what does the Welsh Government intend to do to assess our current ability in Wales to diagnose people with problem gambling, refer them to appropriate pathways for help, and what representations can the Welsh Government make to the UK Government on a much-speculated White Paper on the future of gambling in the United Kingdom?
Can I thank Rhianon Passmore for that supplementary question and for raising this very important issue in the Chamber? The Welsh Government is committed to supporting people affected by gambling-related harm, and continues to take an integrated and collaborative approach to gambling policy. We're committed to a public health approach to addressing the harms caused by gambling to protect people, in particular children and young people, and vulnerable people. My officials will continue to work with education officials and Public Health Wales to understand how to most effectively communicate the harm from gambling products to young people through a denormalisation approach.
Following discussions with stakeholders, we commissioned Public Health Wales to undertake a gambling needs assessment to inform our work. That assessment, published on 1 February, reviewed the needs of people experiencing harms from gambling to inform a public health approach to reducing gambling harm in Wales. It's absolutely crucial we make it as easy as possible to signpost those who need support at the earliest opportunity, and one of our recommendations from our gambling task and finish group was to look at the referral pathway and the potential for a specialist gambling treatment service for Wales. It's vital that pathways are clear and understood by professionals and by individuals who self-identify as needing support. We'll be looking at that this year, as well as working with the Welsh Health Specialised Services Committee, to understand what place a specialist treatment service could have here in Wales.
And, coming to your last point, Rhianon, as you know, some of the most influential levers to reduce gambling harms are held by the UK Government. We've been waiting for a very considerable time for a proposed White Paper that would address some of the key issues, such as advertising restrictions and a levy on the industry. We've been promised that this is forthcoming on several occasions, and we're very disappointed that progress has not been made to date. We will continue to lobby the UK Government on this point.
Statistics about the GP workforce are published on StatsWales. The latest snapshot, on 30 June, shows that there were 2,301 fully qualified GPs, which represents a full-time equivalent of 1,562. This includes partners, providers, salaried physicians, retainers and active locums.
I thank the Minister for that response. I held a public meeting in Tywyn a month ago to discuss the significant problems that people in that area are having because of the shortage of health services there. Pendre hall was full to overflowing, which is testament to the strong feelings in the area. The area did have excellent health provision up until around four years ago. Now they've gone from having four GPs working in partnership to having a surgery managed by the health board with only half a full-time equivalent GP. The rest of south Meirionnydd faces a similar future, with a number of GPs about to retire. If we're not careful, there's a real risk that there will be only two full-time GPs for the whole of south Meirionnydd. Indeed, around a quarter of all Welsh GPs are over 60 and are approaching retirement. We need at least another three GPs in the Dysynni valley and Tywyn, and more for the rest of Meirionnydd. I first of all want to invite the Minister to visit Tywyn, which is, of course, in her region, and then ask her whether she will work with the health board to develop an effective recruitment plan as a matter of urgency in order to attract GPs to the Dysynni valley and Meirionnydd. Thank you.
Thank you. Of course, we do hope that things like developing the medical school in north Wales will help and, of course, there will be an opportunity for people to do their practical work in places like Tywyn. And it's good to see that there's been a significant increase in the number of medical undergraduates in Wales. Forty-seven per cent of people studying in Wales now live in Wales, and 55 per cent to 60 per cent of those stay in Wales. So, we've seen a big change recently, and I think that's very encouraging. But, we then have to think about where people want to go to practise, and we have to ensure that we put teams around them. We have a similar situation in Solva, near to where I live—exactly the same kind of situation—but what we need to do then is to ensure that people can work in teams, where that's appropriate. But, at the end of the day, you have to have GPs who are qualified to do that work. It's important that people understand that it is possible for them to see other people, but, of course, ultimately, you do need a GP if you need that specific medical help that only a GP can provide.
Minister, there's no doubt we're facing a crisis in primary care, with one in five GP practices closing in the last 10 years. On the face of it, there seems to have been an increase in GPs during that time, but it's clear that practices are finding it hard to recruit GPs and therefore being forced to close. Furthermore, a Royal College of General Practitioners survey last year found that a third of GPs in Wales did not expect to still be in the profession in five years' time. The most recent annual Welsh Government data on full-time equivalent GPs showed that just half of GPs are indeed full time. In Swansea Bay University Health Board, a staggering 40 per cent of GPs are not full-time equivalent. In November, I asked the First Minister about constituents in Porthcawl being unable to get appointments, despite the practice working hard to see patients. He assured me that more clinician time would be released to help GPs, but my constituents are still finding it hard to get an appointment in Porthcawl. So, Minister, what urgent measures are you taking to ensure that GPs are attracted into full-time work at their practices and that patients, such as my own constituents, are freely able to see them in a face-to-face setting?
Well, thanks very much, and, obviously, the pandemic meant that GPs started to work in a different way, and I think lots of the public have welcomed this new way and new approach. So, we're not going to go back to a position where we insist that everybody is seen face to face by a GP, but what I will say is that, actually, we have a new general medical services contract in place, which means that, for example, the accessibility to GPs is written within the contract. There are some that are performing better than others, and, obviously, we need to look at best practice. But what I can tell you is that I don't think I've seen GPs ever working harder than they are now. There was a time in December where 400,000 contacts were made by GPs in Wales in a week—that's quite an extraordinary amount of work being done by them. And what I can say is that, actually, per head of population, there are more GPs in Wales than there are in England, and what we have seen is a 15 per cent increase from 2017 to 2021. And it is very difficult; you can't force people to work full-time. In fact, part of what we need to do is to make sure that people feel that they can work flexibly, because the last thing we want to do is to lose people who are prepared to work flexibly and give any amount of time. I think it'd be better to make sure that we keep them in the system in some way rather than lose them altogether.
Access to NHS dentistry in north Wales has improved significantly since the introduction of alternative activity measures in April 2022. Ninety-six per cent of dental practices who are offering NHS services have opted in to these reform measures, which include incentives to take on new NHS dental patients, and this has allowed 26,000 new patients to gain access to dental services in the first 10 months.
Thank you for your response, Minister. As one of those people who aren't registered with an NHS dentist in north Wales, last week I decided to contact every dentist in north Wales on the health board's website to see if they'd be willing to take on a new patient such as me. I contacted 69 dentists, spoke to 57 of those practices, and, staggeringly, just four of those practices in the whole of north Wales were looking to take on new patients, but those four who were willing to take them on were only willing to put me on a waiting list for up to two years. Along with this, one well-known group of dentists were advising callers that, due to Welsh Government's dentistry reform programme, they were unable to see NHS patients for routine check-ups, and they were openly saying this. Concerns have also been raised by the north Wales dental committee, stating that they're close to breaking point with NHS dentistry. So, in light of this, Minister, what assurances can you give that when you make your statement next week on dental reform, that will set out a route for residents in north Wales to access NHS dentistry in the very near future?
Well, Sam, I commend you on the incredible research work you've done there, because that's a huge amount of research work. What I can say is that there are those 26,000 new patients. Now, obviously, we're getting to the end of the financial year and we'll be in a different situation in April again. The check-ups situation—. I think it's really important that people understand that the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence said a few years ago that, if you've got healthy teeth, you shouldn't need to go for a check-up for two years, and yet what happens is that we're all on this treadmill where we go to dentists, and then you have to pay them to see healthy teeth. Let me be clear that I am following NICE guidance on this, and, obviously, that's much easier for dentists than seeing new complex patients. So, I understand there's a bit of resistance, and that's why I'll be meeting with the British Dental Association in the next few weeks just to listen to their concerns directly.
Good afternoon, Minister, and, yes, I'm very impressed also with Sam Rowlands's research work. Can I also just echo some of the comments that Sam has made? It is a real difficulty for people being able to access NHS dentists, and I'm aware, Minister, that you're looking at options around this. But I wanted to just focus in on community dental services in north Wales and elsewhere in Wales as well. We all understand the huge value that they provide to our communities in meeting the dental needs of some of the most vulnerable people in our communities, and I echo my gratitude for the work of those professionals who provide that service. There are two parts to what I'd like to cover with you, please. Firstly, would you confirm that you are intending to ring-fence the funding for CDS so that its resources can be properly focused on the needs of the most vulnerable users? And also, could you confirm—and I have raised this with the Minister for Social Justice as well, who I can see is in the Siambr this afternoon—that the CDS is there also to meet the needs of refugees in Wales? Thank you. Diolch yn fawr iawn.
Thanks very much. Well, I can flesh some of this out in the statement that I was hoping to make last week but I'll be making, I think, next week on dentistry. I think what's important is that we appreciate, as you say, the work that the community dental service has done, and obviously they have a role in providing care for people who are vulnerable and, because of that vulnerability, can't be seen in general dental services. So, vulnerability, I think it's really important, has to be seen as multifactorial, and should be considered on an individual needs basis. For example, we'd consider people with a learning disability as being vulnerable, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they receive care from a community dental service. So, I think it is important that we take every case and deal with them individually.
I am committed to the priorities set out in the women and girls health quality statement, for which NHS Wales is developing a 10-year women’s health plan. This includes the expectation that all health boards will ensure equitable and timely access to appropriate treatment and support for endometriosis.
Thank you very much. As today is International Women's Day, and it's Endometriosis Awareness Month, as you will have heard me say in the past in this Chamber, I receive a great deal of correspondence from women in west Wales that demonstrates that the provision for women suffering endometriosis is nowhere near good enough.
In terms of the women and girls health plan, across the 29 conditions where gender inequalities exist, including endometriosis, you've mentioned that NHS Wales will be developing this women and girls health plan, but I am a little surprised, given that women's health exists in a far broader context than simply health alone—it relates to poverty, it relates to diet, housing, and so on and so forth—so I'm surprised that it's not you as a Government that's leading on this, as is the case in both Scotland and in England. So, can you confirm to us that this women's health plan will tackle issues in terms of closing gender inequality gaps so that women in Wales get far better support in future?
Thank you very much. I hope that the Chamber has understood how committed I am to this cause. I also want to note that it's International Women's Day, and I want to take this opportunity particularly to thank all the women who work in the NHS and in our care service. They are a large majority in terms of the numbers working in those services, and so I do want to take that opportunity on this very special day to thank them.
As you say, we have the equality statement on women, which has shown exactly where we want to go and what our expectations are, but in terms of ownership, it's very important that the NHS has ownership of this, so that they feel the responsibility to ensure that they do deliver on it. So, I have ensured that they have ownership of it. We do understand that, when it comes to health, you have to look at all kinds of things, such as housing and poverty, but I think it is important to ensure that, within the NHS, we place the focus in a place where it hasn't been in the past, perhaps, ensuring, for example, that, when it comes to studies, we do look at how such and such a drug does affect a woman, and how people are treated when they visit a GP. It's evident and a lot of evidence shows that women and men are treated slightly differently. So, I want to ensure that they have ownership of this, because there is a greater chance that things will change if they have ownership of it and they develop it rather than I commission it.
Before I call today's topical questions, I'm sure that our thoughts are with the families of the three young people killed in St Mellons over the weekend. One of them, Rafel, I remember watching playing rugby in the same team as my nephew in primary school, playing for CRCC, Clwb Rygbi Cymry Caerdydd—such a young, fast talent on the rugby field. On behalf of us all in the Senedd, our sympathies are with the friends and families of Eve, Darcy and Rafel, and our hopes are with Sophie and Shane for a full recovery.
Peredur Owen Griffiths, then, to ask the topical question.
Diolch. I'd like to echo the Llywydd's comments and send my condolences to the friends, family and, indeed, the community affected by this tragic event.
Diolch yn fawr, Peredur Owen Griffiths, and diolch yn fawr, Llywydd, for your comments as well.
This is a devastating tragedy, and my thoughts remain with the families and the friends of the young people involved in the crash on the A48. This will be an extraordinarily difficult time for all affected by this terrible incident. I understand that both Gwent and South Wales Police forces have referred the case to the Independent Office for Police Conduct for investigation.
There's been a great deal of public distress following the crash, which claimed the lives of three young people following a night out in Newport, and two other people remain in hospital fighting for their lives. The police response is now the subject of an Independent Office for Police Conduct inquiry. It would be wrong to pre-empt any findings of such an investigation, but you cannot ignore the public disquiet from the families and the friends of the crash victims.
Just this morning, the BBC reported that Winston Roddick, the former Police and Crime Commissioner for North Wales, has commented on the police response. He was surprised about the lack of action, given reports that the phones and social media accounts of the young people involved had been inactive between their disappearance in the early hours of Saturday until they were found almost two days later.
Although policing is a retained function of Westminster, this is a matter that should involve this Government due to its implications for community safety. What input can you have into a police priority-and-escalation process around missing persons to ensure that episodes like this can be avoided in future and so that community safety can be improved? Diolch.
Thank you very much for that question. It is a situation where, with such an extremely tragic case, we just look on this and hope that we can do everything to support the families and friends of those who are affected. Can we just say, also, that we send our wishes, I know, across this Chamber, to those who were seriously injured in the crash? We hope that they make a full recovery.
Can I say that there has been regular contact with the police regarding this matter? Of course, criminal justice isn't devolved to Wales and it's the responsibility of the UK Government, but I do understand that Gwent Police and South Wales Police, as I've said, have referred themselves to the Independent Office for Police Conduct. They will look at exactly what happened, and what happened in terms of the circumstances around this terrible tragedy, covering the points that you've raised this afternoon.
I also think we just have to recognise that extraordinary public grief that was expressed at the vigil for the victims that took place at the site of the crash last night. Hundreds attended the sombre and reflective gathering, culminating in a two-minute silence to remember those who perished. But, I think, now, we need to await that Independent Office for Police Conduct investigation, which is ongoing.
I identify myself with the statement that the Presiding Officer made, and my group, as well, identifies with that statement, and our thoughts and prayers are with all of the families.
I just want to raise with you, Minister, if possible—I understand, obviously, the referral to the police complaints authority, but this is a part of the trunk road agency, the road, the A48 is, close to the M4. When a missing persons alert is put out by the police, what agencies that the Welsh Government sponsors would be alerted to such a missing persons alert? I'm thinking specifically of the highways officers who, obviously, the Welsh Government pays for and provide, who travel this part of the road, to make connections to the M4. Looking at the pictures, they visibly show that there has been an accident on this site, with trees lying flat on the ground and the motor vehicle leaving the road and going off onto the embankment. So, are the highways officers who are part of the motorway and trunk road agency alerted when a missing persons alert is put out by the police? And if they are alerted, what actions did they take?
Thank you, Andrew R.T. Davies. Clearly, in my response, I said that all of the circumstances around this terrible tragedy will be looked at by the Independent Office for Police Complaints. We know that South Wales Police is continuing to investigate this fatal road traffic collision on the A48 in the St Mellons area of Cardiff. Clearly, therefore, all of the circumstances around this will be taken into account in that investigation.
This news has been absolutely heartbreaking, and my deepest and sincere condolences go to the family and friends of Eve, Darcy and Rafel during this utterly awful time, and my thoughts go out to Sophie and Shane, who are in that critical condition, for their speedy recovery. This tragic incident has reverberated around the country, and is felt keenly in Newport. Maesglas community is a close-knit community in my constituency, where Eve, Darcy and Sophie are from.
Gwent Police, as you said, and South Wales Police referred the case to the Independent Office for Police Conduct, and it's now for them to carry out their work and to piece together what has happened. It's important that we respect the families' wishes by giving them the privacy and space they need, at what is an absolutely devastating time. Minister, a vigil was held last night, and was attended by many of the local community in Newport and Maesglas. It helped to show how much the community feels the loss of those young people. Will the Minister assure me that you will keep a close eye on the work of the IOPC, and work with the police and crime commissioners and the community throughout this process?
Thank you very much, Jayne Bryant, and really acknowledging what this means to you and your community, the people who you represent in Maesglas and across south Wales, but particularly for those families so tragically affected. And that was acknowledged and it was expressed in that vigil, wasn't it? This is something that is going to be with us in Wales, in the communities, and, indeed, in this Senedd, as we work through and as we learn what the outcome of the investigation is. I will certainly be keeping a close eye on the work, and, through my liaison with the police and crime commissioners representing us in Wales, we'll be asking for any updates that we can have in terms of the circumstances.
I also would say that it is important for the families, in respecting their privacy and their grief, but, I know, in recognition of the widespread support and grief and love for those showing their grief and love for those families and their friends, family liaison officers, I have been assured, are working with the families affected.
Thank you so much, Presiding Officer, for giving me the opportunity to contribute today. As we mark International Women's Day today, I hope that all Members will join me in celebrating the groups, organisations and businesses in Wales that are working hard to build a more balanced and progressive workforce, and I commend all of the women and men out there who are allies, when it comes to creating more equality for women. It fills my heart with joy to see women breaking barriers and smashing through glass ceilings in various walks of life all across Wales.
I attended the Openreach Wales reception in the Senedd last month, along with apprentices and engineers, to hear about the company's commitment to building a diverse and inclusive workforce. In an industry that has been traditionally very male-dominated, we are seeing more and more women on boards, and as directors here in Wales, who are very capable, experienced and very business savvy as well.
Today, I was fortunate enough to be part of Tata Steel's International Women's Day panel discussion, and it was fantastic to see so many men, actually, who are working hard in helping women succeed. Of course, there is still a long way to go, but it's fantastic to hear positive examples of industries, including our very own Welsh Parliament, that are making progress to improve equal access to employment, training and career development. Also a huge hats off to all of the sheroes out there, who are choosing to challenge stereotypes and helping to create positive change for women all across the board.
I will always say to every woman who wants to achieve a certain dream, 'Do not ever let someone's comments, criticisms and negative feedback prevent you from the life that you desire, dream and aspire to achieve'. A wise man once said to me, 'Why should Mother's Day be only one day of the year? It should be celebrated every single day of the year.' And, I hope, that women are celebrated every day of every month of every year, going forward. So, happy International Women's Day to you.
The eighth of March marks International Women's Day, and I'm delighted that the Heritage Hub 4 Mid Wales is marking this event in my constituency by paying tribute to Laura Ashley's legacy in mid Wales.
In 2015, the hub brought 175 members of the Ashley company in a grand reunion together, and it was from this event that came efforts to preserve the archives and memories of those who worked with the Ashley family. One of them made quilts from the original prints in the 1970s, some of which will be on exhibit at the Laura Ashley quilt exhibition in Newtown library, which is starting today and running until 1 April, and I look forward to attending myself. The chair of the National Federation of Women's Institutes has accepted their invitation, along with other WIs from across Wales and Montgomeryshire. The hub hopes that Wales will one day be home to a Laura Ashley museum that will become a global attraction, where her life and works will be curated for all of the world to see. Laura Ashley is one of if not Montgomeryshire's most famous of names. She opened her first shop in Machynlleth, above which she lived with her family before moving down the road to Carno.
As founder of the heritage hub and the driving force of this ambitious mission to preserve the legacy of Laura Ashley in mid Wales, I would like to congratulate and thank Ann Evans, who now has permission for the use of and loan of archives going forward. As a very successful businesswoman in post-war Britain, Laura Ashley is rightfully considered a female icon. So, I'm delighted to have the opportunity to commemorate her legacy, the work of the heritage hub and International Women's Day, all in one.
This week saw Helen Ward, Cymru's record goal scorer, announce her retirement from pêl-droed. Helen made a huge contribution to pêl-droed, playing 105 games for Cymru, and scoring 44 goals. She is one of only nine people to represent Wales in pêl-droed over 100 times. Helen brought us all, as football fans, so many special memories and moments over her career, and we owe her a huge diolch—thank you—for that.
Llywydd, what better way than International Women's Day to celebrate Helen's amazing achievements and recognise the huge role she has played as a role model to so many now and in years to come? Helen made us all proud to be Welsh, and I know she was proud to wear that shirt. Llywydd, if I may, I'll finish by quoting Helen's own words:
'The pride I feel every time I hear those words; "Mae Hen Wlad Fy Nhadau" and the sense of belonging will never, ever leave me.'
Helen, from us here in the Welsh Parliament, the Senedd Cymru, diolch yn fawr.
1. Notes that the prevalent collection and use of biometric data within schools across Wales is putting children’s personal data and privacy at risk.
2. Calls on the Welsh Government to introduce legislation that would:
a) ensure that Article 16 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, a child's right to privacy, is upheld within Wales;
b) ensure that schools and childcare settings are using non-biometric technologies for services, rather than using biometric systems that may compromise the security of children's biometric data;
c) ensure appropriate risk assessments and procurement processes of technology companies within educational settings are put in place;
d) acknowledge the potential harms from the unregulated use of biometric data;
e) acknowledge the lack of consent by young people and children within current usages of biometric data within schools.
Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Thank you to Jane Dodds, who co-submitted this motion, and to Carolyn Thomas and Jack Sargeant who supported it. I move the motion.
I have requested a debate on biometric data in schools a few times since being elected, so this is a significant day, and I am pleased and optimistic that we can discuss the legal, regulatory and equality and human rights aspects together today. I would like to thank Pippa King and Jen Persson from Defend Digital Me and Madeleine Stone at Big Brother Watch for their consistent research and help with this, which I will draw on today.
I am calling for our education Minister to write to all schools in Wales for a moratorium on biometric technology and use of bodily data in schools until the Information Commissioner carries out an assessment of the use of children's data across UK educational systems—this would include face, fingerprints, eye scans, vein and palm scanning, gait and emotional detection and processing—as well as writing to UK Government to ask what assessment has been made that these technologies are in line with the UK Data Protection Act 2018 to protect children at scale from overreach in this sector, and I will set out why.
As with most data technology changes in our public spaces, I became aware of fingerprint data collection in schools anecdotally. I was told by parents that it had been introduced by schools in my constituency, and then, when I asked more widely of parents and students if and where this was happening in other schools, I was surprised to discover that it is extremely prevalent. I then asked if consent had been requested for this to be introduced in schools, and I was shown one letter that parents had been sent to sign off on their children's fingerprint data being collected and stored to be used in exchange for payment for school meals. It stated, and I quote, 'If you choose not to have your children on biometric system, a four-digit PIN code will need to be allocated. Please note that the PIN codes do not have the same level of security, and it will be your child's responsibility to remember the code and keep it secure at all times.'
Minister, I cannot emphasise this enough: biometric data is not safer than a PIN code or passwords. Passwords and PIN codes can be reset. Once your biometric data is compromised, it is compromised for life. It potentially stops the children for the rest of their lives from being able to use their fingerprint for security reasons or whatever they wish. This is partly because data hacks are not an uncommon occurrence. We have seen it within NHS England, the Metropolitan Police and Lloyds Banking Group. Public bodies with high levels of security have fallen victim to their data being exposed, often with unknown consequences. The reality is that a primary or secondary school is not going to be able to afford or oversee this level of security, and therefore cannot commit to children's personal data being safe. I'm not speculating that this could happen; this has happened. In September 2022, parents in the US have reported receiving a notorious explicit image in a meme after hackers targeted the school app Seesaw, which has 10 million users, including teachers, students and family members. I was told this week that the Seesaw app is being rolled out in a primary school in my constituency, as I'm sure it is across all of your constituencies too.
Some people have questioned the role of encryption and whether this can offer the safety required to secure students' data collected in schools, by ensuring that hackers cannot reverse engineer a password or key. But we must take into consideration that a child's biometric data must be secure for their lifetime—so, six to eight decades—and it is impossible to say under our current system that a child's biometric data can be secure for the next 70-plus years. The Home Office and police can actually do this now.
Under the General Data Protection Regulation, students’ data should be deleted when they leave school, but students returning to their schools after graduating have realised that biometric systems still recognise their fingerprints in many cases.
So, what have we done in Wales so far? Back in 2021, I reached out to the Welsh Government, who were unaware that schools were using this technology or who was selling the technology to our schools. In response, Welsh Government Minister for Education Jeremy Miles worked with schools and young people to clarify non-statutory guidance for schools in Wales, and that there are no circumstances in which a school or college can lawfully process a learner's biometric data without having notified each parent of a child and received the necessary consent. The Welsh Government also went further and produced a child-friendly version as a tool for young people to understand how their data is collected, their right to consent, and, crucially, their right to say no. It was great to introduce this at Bryntirion Comprehensive School in Bridgend, along with our education Minister, and I really do appreciate this proactive and collaborative approach to clarifying the guidance. However, this was only ever going to be a sticking plaster in anticipation of what is a very necessary and urgent wider conversation that needs to be had in this Chamber and in our communities, which is what I hope we can start today. Because a Survation poll conducted in 2018 on behalf of Defend Digital Me, a campaign group on children's rights and privacy, found that, of parents across England whose children's schools were using biometric technology, 38 per cent said they had not been offered any choice, and over 50 per cent had not been informed how long the fingerprints or other biometric data would be retained for, or when they will be destroyed. We do not have any equivalent studies here in Wales.
Defend Digital Me has also found examples of schools where the use of biometric technologies is mandatory for all pupils, or where pupils who qualify for free school meals have to use a biometric system in order to receive their lunch, while other peoples can choose not to. In 2022, they asked 10 trade unions across the UK with members in teaching and education, who said that they do not have any code of practice on this to assist staff about their own use and rights, or for pupils.
Thank you so much to Sarah Murphy for initiating this debate. I know that Sarah has been a real champion of the concerns around biometric data and of digital rights, so I do thank you for the opportunity to sponsor this and to take part in this debate. Diolch yn fawr iawn.
The collection and use of biometric data in schools raises real concerns about rights, legality and the appropriate use of such crucial data. In particular, we need to be assured that schools are complying with the expectations both of the Welsh Government and of the law as well. For me, there are two questions: whether the legislation is good enough to protect our children's rights, and whether schools are acting within the legislation and the guidance from the Welsh Government. It is extremely concerning to hear accounts of how schools are compromising the Welsh Government expectations and children's data. I don't think they're doing this through any malicious intent, but rather lack of awareness of what the expectations are, which can lead to worrying consequences. In doing so, they create an environment in which young people get used to the idea that their biometric data is something to be handed over as a matter of routine. We need to remember that systems are only as good as the people who use them, and we need to be aware of the risks that they will incorporate unconscious bias.
Although data protection is a reserved matter, how the rules are applied in schools is a matter, as we've heard from Sarah, of the Welsh Government, and it's really encouraging to hear of the work that's been done so far. So, we need to build on the Welsh Government guidance and expectations, given to schools in protecting our children's data, and in the creation of those expectations of the collection as well.
In Europe, we are seeing case law making it clear that the inequality of status between school and pupil is a factor in deciding whether or not the use of biometric data is lawful. In my view, this is a principle that must inform how schools operate in Wales as well. More generally, we need to be vigilant about data protection legislation. The Westminster Government's Data Protection and Digital Information Bill is currently stalled once again in Parliament. The Retained EU Legislation (Revocation and Reform) Bill, currently again in the Westminster Parliament, means that, among other things, a review of the data protection legislation in the UK, which is due, is based on that EU data protection law. I understand that the Westminster Government is expected to announce its proposals for a UK GDPR shortly. We need to be aware of the risk that this will be used as an opportunity to water down data protection law.
I'm confident that the Welsh Government will keep the Senedd informed of developments in this area, and will ensure that the need to protect children and young people's data in school, and elsewhere, is recognised and acted on. Once again, a huge thank you to Sarah for raising this issue, and I hope that we continue to debate this and keep our eye on any developments. Thank you. Diolch yn fawr iawn.
Can I start my contribution as well, Deputy Presiding Officer, by thanking our colleague Sarah Murphy for bringing forward this motion to the Senedd today, but also by paying tribute to the tireless campaigning that she has undertaken in this area? I think that without Sarah becoming a Member of this Senedd and taking this work forward, this issue could very easily have gone unnoticed by this Parliament.
As the use of technology is spread through every single part of our lives, we've rightly become aware of the need to protect our own personal data. And for obvious reasons, regulation has not always kept up with the advancement of technology in this area, and we have numerous examples of how this has left people exposed. This is particularly dangerous in the case of biometric data—the issue we're debating this afternoon. As a guiding principle, I think caution should be at the heart of how we allow the use of biometric data in Wales, particularly within our schools. Because, after all, the important principle when gathering data is consent: consent to use the data from someone who is fully informed, but also informed of those potential pitfalls.
How can our young people give consent to this when the risk is simply not understood? And if you couple that with the fact that it takes a huge leap of faith—a huge leap of faith—to simply trust technology companies to do the right thing with our data, then you understand why so many of us are advising caution and why Sarah Murphy is leading on this issue. And, Deputy Presiding Officer, I say that as someone who's a big believer and uses technology every single day. But the reality is that data is money, and when money is the motivator, trust alone simply does not cut it.
In Wales, we are rightly proud of our record in promoting the rights of the child, and it's right that we are proud of that. But respecting those rights requires vigilance—the type of vigilance that Jane Dodds, our colleague from the Liberal Democrats, discussed earlier.
So, Deputy Presiding Officer, in closing, those are the reasons I was so keen to support Sarah's motion. I'm pleased that it's at the heart of Welsh democracy this afternoon. I'm pleased at the work the Minister has undertaken with Sarah on this. We are lucky to have Sarah, because this would have gone unnoticed without her, and we should recognise that, and we should use the knowledge and wealth of experience that she brings. And, finally, in closing, I do urge and look to backbench Members of all political parties in this Chamber today to vote in favour of this motion in front of us. Diolch.
Thank you very much, Sarah, for tabling this debate, which is indeed, as others have said, a very important thing that we need to consider, because, otherwise—. Technology is a wonderful thing in many respects; it can save lives. If somebody's gone into a coma with type 1 diabetes, they're not in a position to tell you what treatment they're going to need, but we absolutely have to apply the precautionary approach. But I think, at the same time, we shouldn't be throwing the baby out with the bath water.
In advance of this debate, I did consult one of the secondary schools in my constituency and asked about this, because I simply didn't know how much this was being used or what attitude I should be taking. So, it was very useful to hear that they indeed use biometric thumbprints in the canteen, because you won't be surprised to know that young people lose the cards on which they have the amount of credit they've got, and, therefore, they're not going to be losing their thumb. If you can imagine the speed at which young people have to be served during the lunch break, as well as the really important confidentiality that needs to be adhered to around who is in receipt of free school meals and who is not, a thumbprint doesn't tell you anything more, other than that this individual is wanting to apply to have whatever credit they've got on their account discounted by the amount of food that they are consuming.
So, just to be a little bit more technical, this biometric thumbprint translates into a code—not a photograph, not a name. It's a series of numbers, which, to the rest of us, is a meaningless piece of information. But it tells the till operator, managing the money, what items need to be deducted that have been purchased by the individual. So, even if the school's account was hacked, the information that was held via the thumbprint wouldn't tell you about which individuals had had dinner that day and who hadn't. It is a stretch to think that a hacker would be hacking the school's account and the till manager's account at the same time.
There are lots of benefits, therefore. There's confidentiality about who is in receipt of free school meals, which often doesn't get adhered to in other secondary schools where they are using cards, and where there's an exchange of information with the person managing the till, which is, sometimes, entirely inappropriate. And it's also about speed of throughput, because you're not having all the administration involved and the hassle of saying, 'I've lost my card', 'I've left it at home', and all the other issues that go wrong.
So, I think that this is really important, but I do sort of challenge that the motion is asking us to ensure that all schools and childcare settings are using non-biometric technologies for this sort of service, because what is the non-biometric service that's going to give us something as accurate and speedy as using a thumbprint? We all use a thumbprint, or in theory we do, to access our iPads, but I just need to understand what the worries are there. I absolutely agree with Jack and with Jane Dodds that we do need to proceed with caution on this, and we need to have all the data, but I do have some concerns about rushing into this and then throwing the baby out with the bathwater and not having the advantages of technology to manage important data in a confidential manner effectively. Thank you.
Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd, and may I start by thanking Members for their contributions to this important debate this afternoon? Particularly, may I thank the Member for Bridgend for her ongoing work in raising awareness of the issues related to the collection and use of biometric data of young people?
I hope the Member will forgive me for saying that the Senedd, I think, is at its best when Members bring to the Siambr issues that may not always have the profile they deserve and pursue those questions with an equal measure of expertise and passion, in the way that Sarah Murphy has consistently pursued the issue of biometric data and young people.
There is a differing view, Dirprwy Lywydd, on the use of biometric technologies across all aspects of society. It is a complex and sensitive issue. Technology is developing quickly in our daily lives, and in using it in the right way it can provide undoubted benefits, making aspects of our lives easier, more efficient and safer. But it's important that the use of technology is properly considered and that legal responsibilities are properly understood by everyone who gathers and uses personal data.
The Welsh Government recognises the need for checks and appropriate balances in a system where personal and sensitive information is used to enable learners, and indeed any citizen, to engage in day-to-day activities. In 2022, as Sarah Murphy mentioned, I launched revised guidance on safeguarding biometric data in schools and colleges, and I did so in Bryntirion Comprehensive School, with Sarah, in Bridgend. The guidance does provide clear information to schools and colleges on their legal duties in relation to implementing and using biometric identification systems. This includes legal duties under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, the Data Protection Act 2018, the UK's general data protection regulation, and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. In updating the guidance, we consulted with the Information Commissioner's Office, the biometrics commissioner, the Children's Commissioner for Wales, and Defend Digital Me. I am grateful to them all for their valuable input.
The guidance sets out clearly that schools and colleges, before using a biometric system, should carefully consider whether there are other less invasive options that could provide the same level of service to learners. When a school does consider a biometric system, the school must be clear on the legal requirements that would be placed upon it.
Dirprwy Lywydd, as noted in the motion, schools and colleges must consider the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, and that's also clearly set out in our guidance. This includes the right to express their views, feelings and wishes in all matters affecting them; to have their views considered and taken seriously; and the right to privacy. It's therefore vital that learners understand that participation in a biometric system is not mandatory. Alongside the main guidance, we produced a version specifically for children, as Sarah Murphy referenced in her speech, to help young people understand their rights in relation to this area. This document was developed with the help of young learners, including the children's rights advisory group and Young Wales, and I'd like to thank them as well for their valuable contribution.
Schools and colleges are required to obtain written consent from a parent or carer before any biometric data can be collected. They, or indeed the learner, have the right to opt out at any point. Schools and colleges must be transparent here, making clear that participation is optional, providing clear information on its intended use and data protection procedures. Where either a parent, a carer or a learner chooses to opt out, schools and colleges must find a reasonable alternative means of providing the service. This is an especially important point. Learners should not be disadvantaged or receive access to fewer or indeed different services because of a school's decision to introduce biometrics.
Schools are legally responsible for any data they gather and use. They must ensure that any biometric data is stored securely, is not kept longer than needed, is used only for the purpose for which it is obtained and is not unlawfully disclosed to a third party. This should be considered as part of a data protection impact assessment, which should be undertaken at the outset. Schools and colleges must ensure that they only award contracts to biometric suppliers that provide sufficient guarantee to implement appropriate measures in line with the general data protection regulation. Article 28 specifies minimum contractual requirements, which, in essence, ensure suppliers can only act on instructions of the school or college, and may not use the data for any other purposes. If a school or college were to procure a system without a fully compliant contract, then they would be likely to bear full legal liability for the actions of the system provider.
Where biometric systems are implemented, the school or college should monitor and review their effectiveness against their original purpose. This will ensure that the technology continues to be used for the reason it was intended, and that it meets the legal duties, the requirements and responsibilities under the data protection legislation. Any failure in meeting the required data protection requirements could result in referral to the Information Commissioner's Office, as Sarah Murphy mentioned in her speech. The ICO can provide advice and instruction to help ensure schools get this right, and serious breaches, obviously, can result in enforcement action.
Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd, and thank you very much, Minister, for those assurances. I really do appreciate it. I also want to say thank you very much to Jane Dodds. I totally agree, schools are not doing this on purpose—they have no guidance. Actually, if what had happened with the Department for Education happened now, they'd actually have been fined £10 million by the ICO, so we're actually leaving our schools wide open to absolutely enormous fines. They're sitting ducks for these huge foreign countries to target them and sell them this technology that they tell them is safer.
Jenny, I did address the very valid questions that you asked at the beginning, but you missed the beginning of my speech. I would ask you to go back and have a read of it, please, before you make your decision this evening. I will reinforce, though, that anyone with a toddler knows that they can remember the four-digit code to your smartphone. Children can remember a four-digit code to be able to have their school meals; that doesn't require them to compromise their personal data for the rest of their lives. And Jack, thank you so much for talking about the consent—children don't know what they're consenting to. They have no idea, as even many adults don't either. I think it's absolutely right that we have to hear their voice, which we do not have now.
I also want to say that I had a very interesting conversation with my colleague Cefin Campbell the other day about justice, and how, very often, in this Chamber we do talk about the legal, the practical, the outcomes, the results, the thresholds, the targets, but very little, sometimes, about ideology. Very often, it's dismissed as maybe being culture wars, and sometimes it is, but when it comes to this, it actually is really important that we do look at it through the lens of our values, our culture and our human rights—the children's human rights, and the power dynamics and the power exchange that is happening here on our watch, where our children, as we have heard, have no autonomy and no right to education free from surveillance. As the Manic Street Preachers sing,
'If you tolerate this, then your children will be next.'
But in this case, as we have heard, our children are actually being targeted first and we are tolerating it. The opportunity to share their very personal biometric data for whatever they wish has been taken from them because there is a lack of awareness, a lack of understanding, a lack of will, a lack of engagement with young people, a lack of basic data literacy to really grapple with the ramifications of this: how this is really changing our society, our children's perception of the world, their perception of themselves in the world and very much their futures.
Based on everything we've heard today, I do not believe that biometric data collection in schools should continue. Children have a right to education and a right to privacy under the UNCRC and, at the moment, they're not being able to do both at the same time. I also believe that this will lead to the introduction of live facial recognition technology within schools, which we have already seen in other parts of the country. I also believe that we wouldn't even be aware of its introduction. Once it is here, it will be almost impossible to roll back. So, I've brought this debate today and I thank everyone for participating in it. I hope that it's gone some way towards raising awareness. I hope now that we can put this on the agenda seriously, not just for children, for all citizens of Wales, and that we can work in conjunction with other devolved nations on this and that we can begin to take this very seriously. It is time to make up our own minds on whether or not this is something that we want to happen as a society. So, please vote for my motion today so that we can begin doing this. Diolch.
The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? [Objection.] I've heard an objection, therefore I will defer voting under this item until voting time.
Item 6 today is a debate on the Petitions Committee report, 'The Final Bend? P-06-1253 Ban greyhound racing in Wales'. I call on the Chair of the committee to move the motion. Jack Sargeant.
Notes the report of the Petitions Committee, ‘The Final Bend? P-06-1253 Ban greyhound racing in Wales’, which was laid in the Table Office on 15 December 2022.
Diolch yn fawr iawn, Deputy Presiding Officer. Fifty-three weeks ago, on St David’s Day of last year, a petition closed to new signatures with over 35,000 people having signed it, with 18,777 of those signatures from Cymru. That petition, submitted by Hope Rescue, called for a simple action: it called for a ban on greyhound racing in Wales. I can see that the lead petitioner, Vanessa, from Hope Rescue is here watching alongside supporters today, and I welcome them to their Parliament.
The Petitions Committee agreed to hold a brief inquiry, focusing on the welfare of greyhounds involved in racing. We took evidence from campaigners, the Greyhound Board of Great Britain, and indeed the owner of Wales's only greyhound racing track. Subsequently, we published our report, 'The Final Bend?', and it's that report that we are debating today. Our report made five recommendations, but the headline conclusion was that a clear majority of the committee are in favour of introducing a phased ban on greyhound racing in Wales. I’m confident that today’s debate will show that a majority of this Senedd Chamber will also join those calls.
I must say, Deputy Presiding Officer, I was disappointed that the Valley track previously boasted on its website, and I quote, 'an eye-watering sharp first bend'. It was in evidence to us from Hope Rescue where they explained that in their experience, it was here where the most injuries occurred. The Presiding Officer knows I'm a dog lover, and as a dog lover myself, the images of dogs suffering life-changing injuries whilst racing at this track have stayed with me, including those images of Sienna, who badly broke her leg at Valley and sadly had to have it amputated.
The sheer fact that in a three-year period the Amazing Greys programme had to step in to help over 200 racing greyhounds at Valley is truly heartbreaking, and it shows that Sienna's story is not simply a one-off. How anyone who has witnessed dogs in such pain can then take to their website to boast about the perilous nature of their track is beyond me. Wales should be leading the way on animal welfare, and this today is an opportunity for us to do exactly that.
We already have an indication of what the wider public in Wales think. Opinion polling conducted by Panelbase in February of this year, and shared with me by campaigning organisation GREY2K USA Worldwide, suggests a clear majority in Wales would indeed support a ban. The polling findings concluded that 57 per cent think that the Senedd should vote to phase out greyhound racing, while only 21 per cent are opposed; 50 per cent would vote 'yes' in a referendum to phase out greyhound racing in Wales, while only 21 per cent would vote no; and 43 per cent have an unfavourable view of greyhound racing, while only 21 per cent have a favourable view.
In her response to our report, the Minister has confirmed that the Welsh Government intends to consult on proposals for the licensing of activities involving animals this year. That consultation will also seek views on how to improve the welfare of racing greyhounds in Wales. And crucially, it will include a question considering a phased ban, as the committee recommended. In our report, we were clear that becoming a licensed track would give additional protection to greyhounds, but it would result in a significant increase in the number of dogs racing every week. More races will lead to more injuries and more animals suffering.
During the last year, a number of organisations have considered their position on greyhound racing. These are organisations that have previously worked with the industry to support the animals, and they have changed their policy. They have now decided that in the twenty-first century, it's no longer okay that greyhounds should suffer for our entertainment. Their change of heart was crucial for me personally and many of the committee members. They no longer felt that they could mitigate and make better; they have come out in favour of a ban, and are calling for Wales to take the lead in the UK.
Wales does have a strong recent record on animal welfare, and the Minister has been clear in her response that she was always intending to consider licensing of greyhound racing as part of Labour's manifesto commitment. I'm pleased that the Minister has also agreed to include the phased ban proposed by the committee as a question in that forthcoming consultation. But I know that many here in the Chamber, many in the audience, and many watching at home will have one very important question, Minister: how long will it take to hold that consultation, and if the evidence on the other side of that consultation suggests a ban, how long will it take to introduce that ban?
From the outset, I'd like to thank the Chair, fellow committee members and the clerks in particular for their work in putting this together. I'd also like to thank those who gave evidence from both sides of the debate as well.
Now, I imagine the Chamber clerks had put me down to speak on this debate today before I even indicated that I wanted to speak, so it is, no doubt, of no surprise that I'm on my feet now. And one of the first visits I made when I was elected to the Senedd was to Greyhound Rescue Wales, a charity that I was already a member of prior to being elected. Now, whilst I had been on the fence when it came to racing prior to that visit, though admittedly I was leaning to the side that wanted to bring it to an end, the visit itself made me think further about the topic. And, since that visit almost two years ago, although it only feels like yesterday, I've continued to ask questions of the Minister in both committee and Plenary, held multiple events alongside Jane Dodds in this Senedd, to raise awareness around the welfare of greyhounds. I'll be clear: I support the petition wholeheartedly. But I also do support it in acknowledgement that this is a difficult debate for many.
Now, Members will argue for and against what's included in the petition, but I will seek to focus on a particular point. As was noted by the committee Chair, greyhound racing is not regulated here in Wales, so naturally, for some, this argument should begin and end with the regulation of the sport. But we only need to look over the border to see what regulation looks like. Regulation doesn't resolve the issue that is at the heart of the industry, and we can't safeguard dogs from the inherent risk of racing.
Figures from the regulated sector itself show that, over 2,000 greyhounds have died or have been put to sleep and that there were nearly 18,000 injuries in greyhound racing between 2018 and 2021. The regulated sector offers £400 to pay the costs of retired dogs, but in many cases, this is insufficient to pay for the real cost of re-establishing and rehoming racing greyhounds. For example, data from the Dogs Trust on veterinary costs to treat 14 injured greyhounds between November 2018 and April 2021 shows that veterinary treatment alone had varied from £690 to £4,800 for every dog. Even if we had the ability to ensure that every racing greyhound in Wales had a good life, with these figures, it would be very difficult to ensure that that is the case. It's also important to note that the industry crosses five different nations, with different regulatory provisions, and that 85 per cent of racing greyhounds in the UK come from Ireland. So, the ability to safeguard dogs from cradle to grave is very, very difficult—almost impossible.
In focusing on Wales, the evidence provided by the track owner in Wales suggests that the track is no more dangerous than any other track and that there are improvements in place to make it a GBGB-licenced track, which would improve safety. But, in doing that, the intention would be to increase the amount of racing in Wales. Even with an in improvement in safety levels, it's likely that an increase in the number of races would lead to an increase in the number of dogs injured.
Dirprwy Lywydd, as I participated in this inquiry, and as I made some further research, it was impossible for me not to come to the decision other than to prioritise the well-being of the dogs. I can't support any event that puts dogs at risk of injury, and that's why I'm supporting the petition and hope that the Government will take action in this area.
I'd like to thank so many people; I'd like to thank the Petitions Committee and I'd like to thank the organisations that I met with, including GBGB. If they are here or listening, I really think they do care about dogs and I'd like to thank you for your time, but I would particularly like to pay tribute to those animal charities. I couldn't actually do what you do. It would upset me so much that I think I'd be taking home a dozen animals every night. I'd like to thank, also, those racetrack volunteers as well. You do that role with such dignity when it must be so upsetting for you.
This, for me, is about the sort of Wales we want. I don't want the sort of Wales where animals are produced on an industrial scale for sports. I don't want to be in a Wales where this promotes and encourages betting and gambling. I don't want to be in a Wales where animals are injured. I don't want to be in a Wales where, at the end of animals' careers in racing, they go to a dogs home where they wait for people to come along to take them away. That relies on charities, and those charities are here today. They get no funding for that, apart from through the GBGB rehoming bond. And let me just tell you a little bit about this. The GBGB rehoming bond will only go to homes who do no speak out against greyhound racing. That means that there is only one place in Wales that receives the Greyhound Board of Great Britain rehoming bond.
I want to just also cover a few other issues. Why not regulation? Well, because regulation is still about racing. Regulation is still about producing dogs at the end of that race that need to go a dogs home, and then need rehoming. And actually, regulation will still mean that dogs are raced in temperatures that, last year, on 12 August, were 32 degrees, when the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals were telling dog owners not to take their dogs out for walks. And yet, in a regulated track in Harlow in Essex, they were racing greyhounds.
Based on animal welfare there, and you're talking about animal welfare, I've spoken to quite a few councillors with regard to planning applications and their frustration at not being able to turn a planning application down on animal welfare reasons. I'd like to ask the Government if they would consider changing planning laws so that animal welfare reasons might be a reason to turn down a planning application.
Thank you. That's a really good point, and that really homes in on animal welfare issues. And we know, actually, that the only racetrack in Wales is looking to expand the number of dogs that they have, despite not having planning permission yet. They've been turned down twice, and yet, they are building right now; they are building not even kennels, they are building racks for 200 dogs to go into. And therefore, I do hope that the planning conditions do include animal welfare. I know I must move on, Dirprwy Llywydd.
The second issue is people may be asking: is this the thin end of the wedge? If we ban greyhound racing, are we going to move on to horse racing? And I would say 'No, we're not—it's a totally different entity'. Dogs for greyhound racing are produced on an industrial scale. They do not have owners who care for them and look after them, and that, for me, is the difference in greyhounds.
I can't let this time go by without talking about Arthur. You all know about Arthur—it's probably the last time you'll hear about Arthur. Let me tell you about Arthur's experience as far as we know about it, because we don't know an awful lot. Arthur was from a puppy farm in Ireland. How do we know that? Because he had tattoos in both of his ears. Only dogs from Ireland who are going to be raced have tattoos in both of their ears. If they're from England, they have a tattoo in just one ear. Let me tell you how tender and painful that is. As an adult dog, if anybody went near Arthur's ears, he would yelp with pain. It was so painful for him. We do know Arthur sustained an injury on the racetrack—he fell on his neck. He couldn't have anything around his neck, and, indeed, he would yelp in pain if anybody touched his neck in any way. Arthur spent six years in a racetrack, and was found in quite squalid conditions by the dogs home.
He spent two years in the dogs home before we came along. At the time that we collected Arthur, there were 65 other greyhounds waiting for a home. Arthur stayed with us, as you know, for three years. The first year of his time with us was very hard. He was terrified and traumatised by many and most things. Taking him for a walk—a five-minute route—would be about an hour, because he would freeze at any sound or sight that he was anxious about. I know I have to finish, Dirprwy Lywydd, but let me tell you this: I would have Arthur back tomorrow in a flash, but I don't want any more dogs produced that had Arthur's experiences. So, I hope you'll support the ban today. Diolch yn fawr iawn.
I would like to start by thanking my colleague, Jack Sargeant, for bringing forward this debate today, as I think it's extremely important that petitions like this do come forward into the Chamber to help us really focus our minds on the issues that affect animal welfare in Wales.
In the course of this petition, I have visited Hope Rescue, I have spoken with GBGB and I have met with several other organisations, all of which represent both sides of the argument. But the issue, as with most things, is not as clear cut as we would like it to be. Charities, such as Hope Rescue and Greyhound Racing Wales, have worked exceptionally hard over the years to engage with Valley greyhound track, in order to improve the welfare standards of greyhounds racing there, and have met with little success. They have identified aspects of the track that are dangerous and can cause serious injury to greyhounds. They've repeatedly called for veterinary cover for every race, and have cared for, sometimes at an enormous expense to themselves, greyhounds that have been seriously injured or have been abandoned. I, therefore, completely understand why they would call for an outright ban of greyhound racing in Wales.
However, what concerns me is that, if there was an outright ban, this doesn't automatically improve the welfare of greyhounds. In fact, there's an argument that it doesn't improve greyhound welfare at all. All those owners or breeders who commit animal abuse, or have poor welfare standards for their animals, will simply no longer be visible and will go underground. They will also have no qualms whatsoever with destroying their animals—
I just wanted to make the point in terms of the sport going underground, I was wondering if the Member realises the size of the track and the size of the ground you would need to be able to race greyhounds, essentially, and if he would be able to explain how that would be able to be hidden.
Yes, in the very next paragraph. Sorry, Dirprwy Lywydd. So, where am I now? So, there is nothing stopping them from having illegal races, from using disused warehouses to setting up temporary tracks, whether straight courses or bends, in isolated fields, which will be even worse for those animals racing, and their illegal nature will mean that their owners will never, ever seek veterinary care for them. And, whilst there may be some who will say that this will never happen, just looking at the extent of illegal dog fighting in the UK tells us otherwise. Dog fighting is still prolific in this country, even though it was banned in 1835. Indeed, between 2015 and 2020, the RSPCA had more than 9,000 reports of organised fighting in the United Kingdom, and even though the maximum jail sentence is six years and five months, the people who carry out these dog fights just simply don't care, and I fear that greyhound racing in Wales has the potential to follow suit.
Speaking with GBGB representatives, I've learned how track registration improves the welfare of greyhounds racing, because it's compulsory for every race to have veterinary care, owners in races have a duty to meet welfare standards, which are monitored, and there are well-funded rehoming programmes if animals are injured or can no longer race. I'm not saying that this model is perfect, or that Valley track should be GBGB registered, instead of being closed. I instead think that there needs to be a proper investigation into all aspects of greyhound racing in Wales by the Welsh Government, covering ownership, breeding, transportation, racing and even aftercare. More engagement needs to happen with GBGB, and independent analysis of the implications of a phased or outright ban has to happen, especially in terms of animal welfare.
My particular issue and concern here is that the Petitions Committee, of which I am a part, have not done sufficient due diligence in order to make the recommendations that they have made in their report. As a committee that is recommending a phased ban, we haven’t even visited a greyhound racetrack, registered or unregistered, and we have taken no evidence whatsoever from those countries or Governments that have already banned greyhound racing, which would have given us a better idea of the unintended consequences.
Do you understand that Wales and the United Kingdom is an outlier globally, and that even the United States, in 41 states, has banned greyhound racing? And do you not understand that, by banning greyhound racing, you will eliminate immediate suffering and you will also go a huge way to eliminating illegal trade from Northern Ireland?
Well, my concern, as mentioned earlier, is, if we ban greyhound racing—. The concerns that we have in terms of the welfare standards are they are done by those who have no care whatsoever for their animals. So, if we ban greyhound racing, the concern that I have is that we will see a lot of dogs put down, and that is why I’m saying that much more needs to be done to investigate the implications of such a ban, and why taking evidence from those countries who have banned the sport would have been crucial in making a recommendation.
I acknowledge that this an emotive subject and opinions will be guided depending on experience. Some members of the committee have had that first-hand experience, whether by adopting former race dogs or even by growing up in a greyhound racing environment, and I fully understand and respect their point of view. However, when discussing an issue such as this, opinions need to be objective and independent, and I well understand that some Members here might not like hearing that, but it’s true.
So, Dirprwy Lywydd, whatever happens here today, and whatever the result, I hope that Members and the Government will understand that, from an animal welfare point of view, considerably much more work needs to be done. Thank you.
Diolch to the petitioner for bringing this matter to our attention. As a member of the Petitions Committee I’ve had the opportunity to take evidence from a number of stakeholders. I’d like to thank them all, as well as the clerks and my colleagues on the committee for ensuring ‘The Final Bend?’ report includes a balance of voices from those in favour of and those who oppose greyhound racing in Wales.
With a strong belief that animal welfare must come first, I fully endorse all five recommendations of the report. I’m in no doubt that there are responsible, caring and proud owners who do their utmost to ensure the welfare of their dogs. But, in a racing environment, there are no guarantees, and unfortunately there is clear evidence of dog owners who couldn’t care less for the welfare of their dogs. Valley track, an unlicensed track, has no requirements to ensure a standard of animal welfare. The Greyhound Board of Great Britain have plans for a licence from 2024, but the fact is that, even at GBGB tracks that are licensed tracks, with vets, there is still a need for freezers suitable for the storage of greyhound carcasses. Because, between 2017 and 2020, 3,153 greyhounds have died and 18,345 greyhounds recorded injuries. We also know that greyhounds are being euthanised on economic grounds and in cases where they are not rehomeable. Regardless of the number of races that take place without injury or fatality, how many injuries and deaths must we reach before the welfare outweighs the entertainment, before life outweighs death?
The animal welfare plan for Wales makes reference to licences being a requirement for animal exhibits and establishments, potentially including greyhound racing. With the knowledge of the number of dogs injured, dead or abandoned, even at licensed tracks, I don’t see how this is in keeping with the plan’s ambition for all animals in Wales to have a good quality of life.
We pride ourselves in Wales on being trailblazers, recognising where change needs to happen and placing ourselves at the forefront—the climate emergency, for example. But, when it comes to greyhound racing, we’re in the company of less than a dozen countries worldwide. I'd prefer to see us in the company of the rest of the world, and animal charities such as Dogs Trust, RSPCA, Blue Cross, Hope Rescue and Greyhound Rescue Wales, who have all moved away from the tried-and-tested working with stadiums and the racing industry to minimise harm to an outright ban.
As the report notes, there's no denying that there's a long tradition of greyhound racing in Wales, but there must come a time and a place to debate whether a tradition that started back in the 1920s is worth the injuries, the abandonment and the fatalities of innocent dogs. I, for one, am glad that we are able to have that very debate today, and I'll continue to campaign for the welfare of animals in Wales. Thank you.
Greyhound racing is cruel. It damages dogs; it causes them immense suffering; injures them, sometimes irrevocably, beyond any chance of recovery; and it kills dogs, sometimes immediately, sometimes years later—dogs who have become beloved family pets, who live shorter lives than they should have because of the trauma and fractures and chronic pain that dog their days. As Hope Rescue, the RSPCA, the League Against Cruel Sports and others have reminded us, this debate today in our Senedd offers us a chance to start to change that, to give momentum to the idea that greyhound racing should be banned here in Wales and that no more dogs should have to suffer in this way.
It isn't just death that awaits these dogs. From when they're born, profit dictates their fate. They're not socialised properly; they're kept in cramped kennels; puppies are tattooed when they're reared; oestrus suppressants are used to allow them to race; they're carted around in vehicles that aren't suitable and they often suffer dental disease. Probably most harrowingly, there are stories about the puppies who go missing between birth and racing registrations; they are referred to in the industry as 'wastage', a brutal word and a barbaric practice, because these puppies are considered as surplus, and would either—
I'd like to thank Delyth Jewell for her contribution, but I'd just like to remind people in the Chamber about making generalised statements about people who keep greyhounds. Not every greyhound owner is a poor owner; some people really do care about their dogs, and I think making generalised statements doesn't really help this debate at all.
Thank you for that contribution. I would, obviously, echo the point that Buffy made earlier, that there are many, many greyhound owners who really, really care for their dogs. I'm not trying to in any way insinuate that this covers all greyhound owners. I thank you for that contribution. But I'm sure that you would agree with me that any dogs who have to go through these horrific injuries—that is too many and that's why we need to have a real, fundamental change, and that's why I, at least, think that there should be a ban. But I thank you for that intervention.
So, if we come back to this idea of puppies who are considered as surplus, either because of overbreeding or underperforming in training, they are often killed; they disappear, and they're called wastage, like they're scraps of meat or faulty parts—rubbish that's going to be just thrown away.
Sport should be entertainment; it should be about talent and celebration and energy and excitement. How anybody can look at pictures of dogs' carcasses and think that that's what sport is about is just beyond me. We need to cut out this cruelty, we need to cut to the chase, and we need to ban greyhound racing in Wales.
I'll say a word, if I may, Dirprwy Lywydd, about the Valley Greyhound Stadium near Ystrad Mynach. They have submitted, as we've already heard, two planning applications to develop their site: the first was refused in November; the second was refused last month. Now, planning decisions can't be based on questions of cruelty, of course. They were refused, as I understand it, because of a lack of a flood-consequences assessment and problems with the transport statement—that is, the site would be bad news for the community under these plans for other reasons, quite apart from questions of brutality.
I understand that the flood risk was played down, perhaps even denied, in the first application that went in. That information, if it had gone in, would, of course, have been incorrect, and I myself have spoken to residents near that area who were flooded in 2020.
But there's a concern that the track owner has gone ahead with developing the site, apparently working on kennels, a judges' box, extending the bookmakers' space. There are also questions around why so many kennels are planned for—200—if the intention is only to house the greyhounds on race nights, when no more than 60 or 70 greyhounds would be racing on any given night. What exactly are the owners planning for?
Wales, as we've heard, is an outlier in this, Dirprwy Lywydd. We are one of only 10 countries where greyhound racing is allowed to continue. I think we need to get rid of this anomaly that hangs around our necks. Let's bring an end to this practice of putting profit above the welfare of these graceful, gentle creatures. And I take again the points that have been made in intervention on me and by Joel in his contribution. Of course, there will be so many people who love and care for their greyhounds, but any dogs that, because of this practice, are actually born to suffer, I think that that is—. It's a disgrace, and, because of that, I really would urge Members to give a signal with this motion and to begin a process that we all—. Well, many of us, I hope, will want to see an end to greyhound racing in Wales.
Again, I'd like to thank all Members and the Chairman, Jack Sargeant, for their work, and all those who have contributed to this report, and that's what we're here today to discuss. I know that committee report findings aren't always unanimous, and that greyhound racing itself is a topic that arouses strong views and very passionate opinions. As a Member of the Senedd, it's fair to say I too have an overriding passion for animal welfare, and, as a former Petitions Committee Chair, I'm no stranger to measures and legislation that have come about as a result of the Petitions Committee—new laws made here in Wales. But I'd also like to make it clear that today is, as Delyth has mentioned, the start of a process, I would imagine, because today we're about voting that we support or note the findings of the report. That's what we're here for today. We're not here today to vote to ban greyhound racing, or to support greyhound racing. I don't want to be seen to disappoint those campaigners who have fought so hard to get us where we are today.
Now, the committee has taken evidence from a wide number of animal welfare organisations. Since April 2018, Hope Rescue and their rescue partners have taken in almost 200 surplus greyhounds from the one track in Wales, 40 of which sustained injury. While the track in Wales chooses not to disclose injury and death data to the public, 22,767 injuries were documented, including 1,026 track fatalities, at UK licensed facilities from 2017 to 2021.
And isn't it awful, when we're talking about a living, sentient animal, when we talk about 'wastage'? And there are levels of wastage from the industry, in the licensed racing industry—. By the age of just three and a half years old, 50 per cent of greyhounds registered to race have left. Ninety per cent of greyhounds are no longer racing by five years of age, and around 6,000 greyhounds leave the licensed industry each year, many of which then need to find new homes. This leaves charities and animal rescue organisations to pick up the pieces—
Thank you so much. Would you agree, then, that, in regard to the statistics that you've just shared and which are common knowledge to everybody in this Chamber, the longer we wait for a ban, the more animals that will be harmed?
Absolutely. In fact, Wales is one of only 10 countries in the world where commercial greyhound racing still takes place legally. The so-called sport is banned in most US states, 42, and racing in countries such as South Africa, Jamaica and the Philippines has been stopped.
Now, I think the imminent concerns are, for this, the independent track that now wants to become a certified Greyhound Boards of Great Britain licensed track. And of course, it's been pointed out that the number of races will increase to four times weekly—more dogs, more potential. And it's quite horrible, really, to hear that they're already building numbers of kennels that—. Well, it just worries me.
Now, I have got concerns about recommendation 3, Chair. This concerns the transportation of dogs. I think it's really important that we actually make a distinction between the plight of dogs travelling through Wales to races and the many legitimate purposes for which dogs can be transported. The one part that weakens this report in my opinion is recommendation 5, which opens the door to examining other animal-related sports. This could impact gymkhanas, dog shows, showjumping, and any other activities involving animals, and I'm sure some of those—I used to compete in gymkhanas—[Interruption.]
Thank you very much. And just on the point that you're making, there's no suggestion in this report whatsoever that this will go wider, or open the door. This has actually focused quite rightly on the petition, which is about a phased ban being introduced for greyhound racing in Wales. And just while we're on it, we've got to be balanced—
—and we've heard that there are people who are good owners and people who are awful owners, but you'll all know the song 'Another One Bites the Dust', and another one, and another one, and that is relevant here; it doesn't matter how good an owner you are, the fact is simply that greyhounds are dying on the racetracks in the name of entertainment.
No, no, I fully agree with my colleague Joyce Watson, but I have to bring us back to some reality, and today, we're here —[Interruption.]—no, no, no, we are here today to note the report, Deputy Llywydd.
A poll has found that 57 per cent of people in Wales feel that the Welsh Parliament should vote to phase out greyhound racing, and we've only got 21 per cent who are opposed, so that's a pretty good measure. Personally, I would support a phased ban today, here, but as I've said, we haven't got that option.
So, the time will come I hope, Dirprwy Lywydd, where we can actually bring to this Chamber a debate on, a full debate of all the Members here, whether a ban should be the basis for Welsh legislation. I actually look forward to that debate. However, in the meantime, I would like to thank all the petitioners, everyone involved with this report, and I will certainly be voting in favour of noting this report. Diolch.
I am pleased to see this petition is being debated in the Senedd today, and I also just want to say thank you to all of you that are in the gallery who have done so much work on this; tremendous work.
Since its inception earlier last year, I've supported this petition and the work of Blue Cross, Dogs Trust—which I've visited in my constituency of Bridgend—Greyhound Rescue Wales, Hope Rescue in Ogmore and the RSPCA in raising awareness of the current conditions many greyhounds currently endure. I also just really want to thank, as well, Jane and Luke; you've been tremendous in keeping us on track with this, and pushing this forward. I also want to thank the 44 constituents of mine who wrote to me to raise awareness of this campaign and those who have also signed this petition. So, that's really what I wanted to say today, keeping it short and sweet: I have been overwhelmed by the amount of constituents who have got in touch with me who are really, really backing this, and I think that's really important to note.
I was shocked to be informed by my constituents that as many as 6,000 greyhounds are abandoned by the industry every year and are forced to find new homes, and whilst Hope Rescue's Amazing Greys project helped over 200 racing greyhounds over the UK, heartbreakingly, 40 of these dogs endured serious career-ending injuries.
And finally, I just want to touch on how much of a unique opportunity that Wales has actually to end this practice, because in Wales, we do just have the one greyhound racetrack, the Valley Greyhound Stadium. Nowhere else in Wales is this practice taking place, unlike the rest of the UK, who have got 29 stadiums. So, today is actually our chance to take a step forward and lead the way for the rest of the UK. I support the report today, I support the petition. If there needs to be a consultation to take into consideration other things, then fine, but I really hope that we are finally, and we will soon be there, on the journey towards a full ban of greyhound racing in Wales. Diolch.
I'm not going to be taking a position today other than that of the Government, and the Government's position is to proceed with a consultation, which I think is the right approach. I think there are a lot of strong feelings that we've heard today on this issue, and I think that a consultation is the right way forward, and the place that I'm speaking from is only from the position of constituents who live in my constituency, who live in Ystrad Mynach, and will be affected by what happens to the track. So, all I really want to do is to ask the Senedd and the Government to consider the impact of any decision on those constituents.
I wrote to the planning committee, when the planning application came in, with my concerns about the application, which was registered as part of the planning process, and particularly the fact that the only racetrack in Wales is built on a floodplain—and Delyth has already mentioned that. I think that there are some wider consequences of the ban that will directly affect that, or any regulation that will directly affect that. The activity that's taking place on the track at the moment includes informal mediation of the river in order to, in their own interests, prevent the ingress of water onto the track. So, there is some form of flood prevention happening there.
I've been to visit the track, I've met with Hope Rescue and I've met with the Dogs Trust and have had these conversations. I think it's really important that any Member voting on this at any point in the future visits that track and has a look at what's going on there. And I'm concerned that the closure of the track would lead to a potential flood risk in that area, and also what it would leave behind would be derelict land, and derelict land is something that you do not want near a floodplain and you do not want in that community.
That's my concern, not directly to do with the racing—
I'd like to thank Hefin David for making the point that any closure of the track can impact on residents. So, would he agree with me that, probably, instead of going for the nuclear option of banning dog racing in Wales, we should look at regulation first, because that is a way to also safeguard the people in that area as well as the dogs that race on that track?
I thank James Evans for that intervention. I think he's making his view known, and I think it's a point that will be heard by the Senedd. In this debate today, I'm not going to take a position, but it is worth hearing from all sides, including from Jane Dodds and from Joel James as well. So, we've had those views expressed, and I think that James's views will be heard as well, but I'm awaiting the consultation. But, what I am pointing out today are the consequences for my constituents.
So, the planning application that went in was rejected because the council's decision was that, in the absence of a flood consequences assessment, it could not be demonstrated that the consequences of less vulnerable development within zone 2 could be acceptably managed over the lifetime of the development. Now, what that highlights is that there is a very real risk of flooding there, but it also bears out my argument that it is in the interests of the current owners to prevent flooding as far as possible. If they weren't there, there would be no-one to prevent flooding.
So, my argument today, my call today, is for the Welsh Government to proceed with the consultation, and it is also for the Government to consider what remedial action they would take should the consultation require either further regulation or a ban. Further regulation effectively means that GBGB would be the regulator. Unless they can get that planning application through, Valley racing will not be able to continue as an operation, should you introduce greater regulation. And that application is only going to go through if that flooding issue is addressed. So, that is of material concern to the decision that is made. Effectively, I think, if you regulate, you're going to be 90 per cent likely to be effectively banning greyhound racing in Wales anyway. What I would ask the Government to do in those circumstances is to be prepared to remediate that land, to put money towards the full remediation, through Natural Resources Wales, of that land in order to prevent it from becoming derelict. And I would also ask Welsh Government to look at what consequences there will be for the future of that land and the residents of Ystrad Mynach, who will be directly affected.
So, the consultation is important. There's clearly public appetite for it, and I think that will play out as it should. I think the views today that have been expressed from all sides will be heard, but at this point in time I want to keep my argument purely—purely—for the people of Ystrad Mynach and the consequences that they may see.
Minister for Rural Affairs and North Wales, and Trefnydd
Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and I'm very grateful to the Petitions Committee for bringing forward this debate. Although there is only one greyhound track in Wales, today's debate and the petition have highlighted the very strong public feeling surrounding the welfare and treatment of racing greyhounds. My ambition is for all animals in Wales to have a good quality of life. People who own animals have responsibilities under the Animal Welfare Act 2006, and we have a duty to support its enforcement.
Before addressing the issues around the petition, I'd just like to set out some of the work Welsh Government is doing to ensure we have some of the highest animal health and welfare standards in the world. At the beginning of this term of Government, I set out our five-year animal welfare plan. It sets out our programme for government commitments and complements our animal health and welfare framework. Together, they set the direction and drive a broad range of animal welfare improvements that I want to see.
Work on animal welfare enforcement has progressed, with a call for evidence under way to establish if existing regulation remains sufficient. Welsh Government funded a local authority enforcement project with 11 new officers taking up post, and over 40 having received training over the past three years.
Our consultation on closed-circuit television in slaughterhouses closed in February, with a summary of responses to be published shortly. We've been working with other administrations to examine the use of enriched cages for laying hens, farrowing crates for pigs, and breeding cages for game birds. We continue to work with the UK and Scottish Governments, stakeholders and animal welfare organisations on proposals to improve welfare during transport.
The Animal Welfare (Kept Animals) Bill makes provisions to deliver important reforms. Unfortunately, this is currently stalled, and I have been urging the UK Government on its progression. We've updated statutory guidance for the dog breeding regulations, and the introduction of new regulations on pet sales has made it an offence to sell a puppy or kitten not bred at the premises at which it is sold. All of these actions, I think, reinforce the message: the welfare of animals is an absolute priority here in Wales.
On ensuring a good quality of life for animals, Members have questioned if this is currently the case for racing greyhounds. Recent reports and feedback on the current arrangements show there is clearly room for improvement or for wider change. In 2019, we secured funding under the partnership delivery programme to enable Caerphilly council to carry out non-statutory welfare inspections at the Valley greyhound stadium. Animal health officers carried out eight inspections at race events between February 2020 and August 2022. On three occasions, the officers were accompanied by a vet. Whilst no serious welfare issues were reported at these inspections, the track does not operate to Greyhound Board of Great Britain standards, declared by the industry representatives that I have met to be best practice. I want these inspections to continue, and I am making provisions for them to do so. They provide a critical safeguard for the greyhounds and an insight into the conditions during race meetings, noting how this is only a snapshot of the dogs' lives and well-being.
I'm grateful, Deputy Presiding Officer. Can I thank the Minister for her positive engagement with the committee, not only today but throughout the process? The Minister is absolutely right: animal welfare is an absolute priority, and that's the position the committee undertook in its inquiry work. I was pleased, actually, to hear the Minister reference the difference between greyhound racing and the horse-racing authorities in Wales. I think that is an important lesson to be learnt.
Can I thank all contributors to today's debate? It is an emotive topic; we know it's an emotive topic. Jane Dodds articulated very well, as she does all the time in this Chamber, her memory of her beloved Arthur. Jane doesn't want to see another Arthur go through similar experiences. I don't want to see any dog go through those experiences. But there was a mixture of thoughts. A number of colleagues did support a phased ban approach; a number of colleagues didn't. A number of colleagues wanted to wait. Hefin David, for example, didn't want to take a view until the public consultation has been completed. But he very rightly, I think, as Member of the Senedd for Caerphilly, raised the consequences and concerns of what may happen next for his constituents. He was right to do that and, of course, those questions need to be answered.
I think what we did hear today was the importance of that consultation. I'll just turn to two points, I think, from my colleagues to the left of me. James Evans, first, referred to the nuclear option of banning. You referenced the consequences to the economy and so on. Well, actually, the Petitions Committee took into consideration those consequences and what we decided is it's not the nuclear option of a ban tomorrow—that if there was evidence for a ban, then it should be a phased-out approach, so that those consequences are mitigated. And to turn to my colleague Joel James, I think what he was trying to emphasise was the importance of that consultation. All Members of the committee signed up to a public consultation. The Welsh Government accepted that recommendation, and we look forward to hearing the outcome of that.
I would say that, in reflection on the contributions, I do think actually the committee did have sound evidence from both sides of the story. We held two oral evidence sessions in our committee. We heard from the chair of Premier Greyhound Racing, we heard from the owner of the Valley racetrack in Wales, and we heard from the chair and an independent member of the board of GBGB. And on the other side, we heard from Hope Rescue—the petitioner—Greyhound Rescue Wales and Almost Home Dog Rescue. The evidence in front of the committee at that time was enough to persuade the majority of committee members to call for a phased-out ban. But I do think it's an important reminder that there is that right process that I referenced in my speech in opening this debate. There will be a public consultation. The Minister referenced that as well, and it will include that important question, I think, for members of the committee, on a phased ban to greyhound racing.
The proposal is to note the committee's report. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection. I will defer voting under this item until voting time.
1. Notes the report of the Welsh Government's roads review panel, The Future of Road Investment in Wales.
2. Regrets the lack of engagement by the roads review panel with the public, elected representatives, local authorities, businesses and the third sector and others during the course of the review.
3. Believes that the roads review panel’s recommendations to scrap investment in critical road projects designed to improve road safety, address congestion, decrease air pollution and deliver economic benefits fails to deliver the transport infrastructure the people of Wales rightfully deserve.
Thank you so much, Deputy Presiding Officer. I'm pleased to move this motion today so that all Members here can properly debate the Labour Government's roads review and its transport policies. The way the recent roads review announcement was made was nothing short of a shambles. The Deputy Minister's statement in this Chamber just before recess was, in my view, one of the worst statements that I have ever heard to date—a statement about the roads review conclusion that didn't actually outline what roads have been given the go-ahead and which have been given the chop. Instead, the Deputy Minister chose to unveil which projects had been spared the axe while many of us were already in the Chamber, sitting around frantically going through the document that we'd only just received. Whether that was a deliberate attempt to avoid proper scrutiny or a genuine blunder on the Deputy Minister's part, I guess we will never know. But at least now we’ve had the time to digest the outcome of the review, and have had ample time today to give it the scrutiny that it rightfully deserves.
My view is that the roads review does not meet the economic, social and cultural needs of a modern and dynamic Wales. The Deputy Minister might believe that his move is groundbreaking, brave, and world leading, but those who will be directly affected by this most certainly do not share this view. Some have dubbed the Deputy Minister's announcement the 'Valentine's Day massacre of roads', with others staging large-scale protests. Take the community of Llanbedr, for example. Villagers thought their misery was coming to an end when plans for a Llanbedr bypass were given the go-ahead in 2020. Then, not long after road building projects in Wales were halted, we found out that the Llanbedr bypass was going to be shelved, despite the Welsh Government already spending some £14 million on the scheme. Residents in Llanbedr cannot move around their village safely due to the traffic problems, with the area often brought to a complete standstill. A bypass would have put an end to their nightmare, and restored the villagers' quality of life. They are so enraged that those affected by the Labour Government knee-jerk reaction are planning a major protest in the area later this month, and quite frankly I don't blame them.
It's clear from looking at the outcome of the roads review that north Wales is being well and truly hard done by, as is often the case with this Labour Government. I am sure my colleagues will go into this in more detail about specific roads in their patches that have been thrown onto the scrapheap, but let me just touch on a few. Both the third Menai bridge crossing and the Flintshire red route, two much-needed schemes, have been spiked. Only recently, we have just seen how vulnerable Ynys Môn is when the Menai suspension bridge was forced to close due to safety concerns. That resulted in major motoring mayhem in the area, including heavy congestion, not to mention the economic damage that was inflicted on the area as a result. A third Menai crossing would have helped improve journey times, road safety and resilience. I'm sure that many of the north Wales Members here, along with their constituents, will be bitterly disappointed by the decision as we all wait with bated breath to see what alternatives will be drawn up. The third Menai crossing joins a whole host of other projects being shelved, including the Flintshire red route, which some argue would drastically ease congestion and improve air quality. The Road Haulage Association, an organisation I have the upmost respect for and have worked closely with for quite some time, recently gave me their verdict on the roads review, and it's rather damning to say the least. Geraint Davies, RHA board member said:
'This is a body blow for supply chain businesses who need a modern, functioning road network to keep people and goods moving efficiently.'
Mr Davies went on to say that
'Roads are the only option for many businesses and communities in Wales. Bottlenecks on key routes makes transport costlier than it needs to be. Ministers must recognise these realities and commit to road improvements like the M4 Relief Road that we desperately desperately need.'
The RHA added, 'Road freight not only provides lifeline services to remote communities and the vulnerable, but it actually drives the UK economy. By not investing in roads and infrastructure, the Welsh Government is making Wales a more difficult place to do business.'
My inbox has been inundated with e-mails from constituents and those even further afield expressing their frustration over Labour's decision to stop road building projects. One constituent, who travels from Blackwood to Newport every day for work, a journey that used to take just a little over 30 minutes—. It now takes my constituent over an hour to get to work, because the Labour Government is grinding Wales to a halt by failing to address congestion. My constituent says that whilst he welcomes plans to achieve net zero, he believes the current approach to scrap road building will strangle Wales of future investment and take us all back to the dark ages. He says, 'We will always need roads and need a healthy economy to meet the needs of a growing population. I do not believe that anyone in the Welsh Assembly has any idea of what it's like to travel to work at peak times daily. They are making decisions by not living in the real world of the average human being.' This is from a constituent, I'll have you know.
Another constituent of mine has been forced to cancel his subscription to a popular indoor climbing centre in Cardiff because of the sheer amount of time it's taking him to get there from his home. What should be a 35-minute journey is now taking upwards of an hour, and he simply can't bring himself to sit in traffic all the time. After battling with traffic to get to the climbing centre for a considerable amount of time, he's now decided to cancel his membership completely as he just can't take it anymore. Because of this Government's failure to provide us with an adequate transport network, we have businesses losing money, and, in this case, residents' fitness, enjoyment and mental health is suffering.
Well, there you have it. These aren't my views; these are the views of just some of the people on the ground, the people who use our transport network every single day. These are the people the Welsh Government should be listening to. Unfortunately, the constituents I've just recalled are not the only ones; in fact, drivers in Newport, Cardiff and Swansea lost a huge 107 hours due to congestion in 2022 alone.
In light of Labour's ban on road building, we have been told the Government will invest, and I quote, 'in real alternatives' instead, and put a bigger focus on the transport network. But as is often the case with this Government so far, I fear that this is just rhetoric rather than meaningful action. I say this because, to date, we haven't seen any real alternatives from the Welsh Government. Instead, Ministers are slashing vital funding for buses across the country, axing funding for active travel, and cutting funding for sustainable travel. Also, Wales has just 47 electric vehicle charging devices per 100,000 of population, which is extremely poor when compared to 699 in the Netherlands, 399 in Luxembourg and 112 in France. This needs to be addressed urgently, as we're going to see more electric vehicles on our roads going forward, especially following the UK Government's ban on the sale of new petrol and diesel cars by 2030. According to the Welsh Government's own predictions, Wales will need between 30,000 and 50,000 fast chargers by 2030. Needless to say, time is of the essence.
My Welsh Conservative colleagues and I absolutely support the innovation of sustainable and greener travel. We all need to play our part in making greener travel choices, but the Welsh Government must not seek change by punishing motorists. Punishing motorists is exactly what the Welsh Government is doing, with congestion charges coming down the road, blanket 20 mph speed limits being rolled out now, and road building being axed. The Welsh Government seriously needs to rethink its transport policy, because at the moment it's not fit for purpose.
Buses can play a pivotal role in getting more people out of their cars, but now we're being told to expect drastic cuts to services as a result of the Welsh Government's decision to end the bus emergency scheme—a conversation that many of us had in a debate a few weeks ago. Coach and Bus Operators Cymru, which represents small firms in Wales, fear that between 65 and 100 per cent of services face being cut. The Deputy Minister for Climate Change said that he would desperately like to find the money to keep the funding scheme in place. Well, maybe if the Government didn't waste millions of pounds supporting a failing airport or buying Gilestone Farm, there might be some extra cash to spend on the important things out there. And don't even get me started on the problems with trains here in Wales—that's a completely separate debate for another day.
Recognises the need for bold and radical action in the transport sector to help reach net-zero emissions before 2050.
Calls on the Welsh Government to commit to more urgent investment in public transport and electric vehicle infrastructure so that communities across Wales have greater access to low or zero-carbon transport options.
Thank you, Llywydd. I’m pleased to move our amendment.
We need to do things differently if we want to reach net zero by 2050, and certainly if we want to be more ambitious and reach it by 2035, as we in Plaid Cymru have declared. We must make difficult decisions. Before I elaborate on the emphasis that we want to see on improving people's choices in terms of public transport provision, I want to state clearly once again that the ambition and the impetus behind this decision by the Welsh Government is something that I welcome. This is not a decision that is going to be popular everywhere. But if we only make easy, popular decisions, there won't be a planet left for us. So, I want to just make that clear.
In saying that, we must also acknowledge the importance of taking the people of Wales on the journey to the new future ahead of us. The purpose of our amendment is to refocus the discussion on the need for more investment and for more security for our public transport providers. This is in order to further improve and strengthen people's choices, to offer them more agency. I think a lot of people feel scared or concerned about these changes. So, we need to find ways to allay people's concerns, to satisfy those who are concerned, and to give them confidence about what this will mean for them.
At the moment, there are a number of places in Wales where the option of taking a bus or train is just not available, or the option is not realistic in the context of people's lives. This is particularly true in the Valleys and in rural areas of Wales, and we need to ensure that the necessary new future here will not lead to isolation and loneliness. Again, we must take people on the journey with us. And we have to make the option of travelling on public transport an easier thing for people to do. Between 2019 and 2020, bus fares were raised by 3.5 per cent, and in the same period, around 690 bus stops were lost, making it even more difficult to catch a bus. A constituent contacted me this week, pointing out that it costs £2.20 to get on the bus on the outskirts of Caerphilly and travel into town. That's a journey of 1.5 miles. And they also said that, if they wanted to go to a concert in Cardiff in the evening, it would not be possible for them to get home by bus, because the last bus is at 9 o'clock at night, and the constituent does not feel safe walking home from the train station. I think we have to look at the reality of people's lives and make it possible for people change their ways of living, because, again, we can't just carry on having more and more roads. I want us to achieve a future where this is not only possible, but normal.
Before I finish, Llywydd, I will just say something about trains, because that's already been raised in this debate. A lack of investment in our railways is holding us back as a nation, and the Conservatives in Westminster are to blame for that. There is no justification for the decision to deny Wales the billions that we are owed for HS2. It represents an attack that is both constitutional, environmental and ethical, and there is no justification for that. We have to find new ways of living, but we have to find ways of reaching our greener future with everyone on the same journey as each other. We can't disregard or deprive communities that don't fit the model, but we must make the investment, demand additional powers from Westminster, and create a new reality. That's the way of creating any new pathway, and that's the way for us to ensure that this is a change for all of the people of Wales.
Can I thank my colleague, Darren Millar, for submitting today's debate on the roads review, and also Natasha Asghar for opening today's debate? It's clear, from our side of the benches here, we believe that the Welsh Government's roads review is very badly thought out, to say the least.
In my contribution today, I'd firstly like to highlight the sheer impact that this review will have on residents who I represent in north Wales. As we regretfully know, north Wales is set to miss out massively due to this review. We know that 16 projects were lined up for north Wales, 15 of these will now either be stopped or scrapped altogether. All major road building and upgrade projects across my region of north Wales have been stopped. This review, for my residents, is absolutely staggering. Amongst the scrapped projects are upgrades to the A483 Wrexham bypass, the A494 Lôn Fawr, Ruthin and Corwen roads, the A483 Halton roundabout, the A55 at junctions 15 to 16 and 32 to 33, as well as the third Menai crossing.
The Welsh Labour Government will again tell us today that this road building ban is vital to protect the environment and reduce carbon emissions, but what they again fail to understand is that, for many of my residents in north Wales, private road transport is the only practical transport option, with around 84 per cent of people in Wales relying on car or motorbike to go about their ordinary daily lives, and with these vehicles getting cleaner and greener with a rapid shift away from the internal combustion engine. As point 3 of today's motion states, this roads review does nothing to deliver the transport infrastructure that the people of Wales, and the residents I represent in north Wales, rightfully deserve.
Of course, this roads review outcome would've been received with much more warmth if we had sufficient and appropriate levels of public transport in my region of north Wales. But the people of north Wales know that this simply isn't the case, and as evidence of this, we know that 11,000 train services were cancelled by Transport for Wales over the last three years, and over £2 million was paid out in compensation to those passengers since 2018. And, as we know, the north Wales metro project was announced seven years ago now, yet, the prospect of an integrated north Wales-wide public transport network seems as distant as ever for the residents I represent. All whilst we continue to see significant amounts of investment channelled into the metro schemes in south Wales—that's so far away from what we're seeing in the north.
As outlined by the Confederation of British Industry Wales, when looking at supporting our environment, we need to work on solutions that don't damage the Welsh economy at the same time. The two can work together. We need to see initiatives that support the environment also benefiting jobs, making sure that people have jobs that they can be proud to work in.
Thank you. I just struggle a little bit with your characterisation that no other roads will ever be built. The projects that have been scrapped may well happen in another way. They may well actually be developed under an alternative proposal. So, it's quite disingenuous to try and convey that this is the end of road building in Wales. And you referred to economic development; there's actually a piece of work now happening to look at creating exemptions of varied criteria for sites of economic development significance. So, don't spout this nonsense about no more roads ever being built, because that's totally misleading.
Well, I think the roads review for the region that we both represent in north Wales is massively detrimental. Fifteen of those programmes are being scrapped or paused—
In their current form—exactly. So, what is the plan? We need to see a plan for north Wales. Seven years ago, Llyr Gruffydd, you know that the north Wales metro project was announced. We haven't seen that take place there at the moment. It needs to be sorted out.
The final point I'd like to raise today, outlined in point 2 of our motion, is the sheer lack of engagement by the roads review panel with the public, elected representatives, local authorities, businesses, the third sector and others during the course of the review. As expressed by the Federation of Small Businesses in Wales, Wales's small businesses play an essential role in supporting local communities, creating wealth and employment, driving innovation, and helping Wales adapt and respond to the challenges that are ahead of us. As we move towards net zero, it's crucially important to ensure that their voice is heard as well, which is not, in my view, being taken into account properly at the moment.
And we heard yesterday a contribution from Alun Davies across the other side of the benches there, who highlighted that the investment that the road building taking place in his constituency has drawn in a number of businesses and created a number of jobs in his area. It's clear that road building can have a huge positive impact on driving investment, bringing those businesses, creating those jobs, and bringing people out of poverty.
So, in closing, Llywydd, the scrapping of the road building projects that have been announced in the road review could have a dangerous impact on the people of Wales. It's a backward step in how we go about our daily lives. Instead of slowing Wales down, the Welsh Government should grip the wheel and get Wales moving again with a pro-growth, pro-business, pro-worker programme that works for drivers. I call on all Members to support our motion here today. Diolch yn fawr iawn.
A small history lesson. Roads weren't invented to accommodate the combustion engine. Roads were invented to get people from A to B, long before the combustion engine was around, and what this is about is re-purposing our roads to have multiple ways of getting around, and to be aligned with our climate change obligations. We all voted to reduce our climate emissions in support of today's and future generations, but I'm afraid that all we've heard so far from the Conservatives is 'Do what I say, not what I do'. So, we absolutely have to align our roads policy with our 'Llwybr Newydd', our net-zero plans, and, indeed, our planning policies in 'Future Wales'. So, we simply can't go on like we've gone before, because that is the way in which we are going to completely destroy our world.
This is not about the airport—[Interruption.] Well, we don't have aeroplanes running on roads, and this is about roads. This is about having more coherent criteria for why we are going to invest in the carbon emissions created by roads. So, the new criteria: shifting transport to sustainable transport. So, prioritising—the hierarchy of sustainable transport is prioritising active travel and cycling; reducing casualties on the roads, nobody's going to argue against that, and adapting roads to the impact of climate change. So, ensuring that, where we are having to change the road network, we are enhancing the hedges and edges strategy around wildlife and minimising any impact that they have on nature. And then supporting prosperity by making sure that developed sites achieve high sustainable transport mode share. And that is the rationale behind the decision to approve 17 of the projects that these experts looked at and to chuck out many others that are simply just replicating the old way of doing things.
So, for example, there was a proposal to build a bypass, enhance a bypass around Wrexham just to accommodate a private development of new housing that had clearly been put in the wrong place, because there were no public transport links. Equally, I'm alarmed at the proposal by Cardiff Council to agree to building 2,500 homes in the north of Cardiff, north of my constituency, without, at the moment, any of the transport links that would be needed to ensure that people were able to get to work and to leisure either by active travel or by sustainable public transport. And the alternative is that they will do exactly what is happening on the Redrow site, which is close nearby, which is that people are getting into their cars and clogging up the roads with air pollution and making life hell for people who don't have a car, have no options, live where they live because they don't have choices, and certainly impacting on the health of our children. So, we have to ensure that local authorities are taking decisions aligned with the climate obligations that they too have made to ensure that we don't have a world that our future generations won't want to live in.
I just want to take issue with point 2 of the Tory motion, which is the idea that these experts should have been doing a public engagement exercise. No. That is the job of Welsh Government and the Welsh Parliament. That is the job of the Welsh Government and the Welsh Parliament, not transport experts. Obviously, we need to continue to consult people, but simply getting consultations to do everything infantilises Governments and makes them incapable of making the right decisions. So, we definitely need to change, and I think there's an absolute treasure trove in this roads review report, which, disappointingly, Natasha Asghar doesn't seem to have read. It's got some fantastic recommendations in it and I look forward to another debate where we will have a different focus other than the one of, 'Do nothing. Let's just go on as we did before'.
I can say that I've read it—I'm not all the way through, I must admit, but I'm almost there.
Now then, I'd like to say, Minister—and I've raised it with the Deputy Minister—how disappointed I am to see much-needed projects not going ahead, and this was after £9 million on those roundabouts on the A55. For us in north Wales, once again, we just see ourselves being shortchanged. But I just want to ask you a question whilst I'm here, and try and get it onto the record. On the potential of the roundabout removal, in the report, page 22, it does mention that the aims of the Welsh Government are aligned with having those roundabouts there in terms of a sustainable transport hierarchy, and that they can be taken forward in fresh studies using the regional multimodal way of working. So perhaps you can just explain a little to me, because that particular project might not be dead and buried.
Seven projects were marked as 'should not proceed', the most of any region in Wales. Four projects were marked as 'should not proceed bar some elements', and another four projects with 'insufficient information to review'. So, will you be coming back to those with 'insufficient information to review'? If they were there, they've obviously had some consideration prior to. Now, this is in addition to an enormous £21 million spent on roads under review in north Wales, which is by far the largest sum out of any Welsh region and, therefore, with the most to lose. That's an incredible amount money that, say, put into social care would bring dividends in better care for my elderly and vulnerable residents.
So, taking all of this together, it does appear that north Wales has got one of the worst deals. This is in a part of the country with a significant rural population who rely on good traffic links. Target conditions set out to seek 67 per cent of the Welsh road network to be in a good state of repair. And I've also noticed something else in the report. We talk about carbon emissions, and it quite clearly states that carbon emissions are higher under 35 mph, so I'm just a bit worried, really, as to how we're suddenly racing forward with this 20 mph to reduce carbon emissions. Someone, going forward on that, hasn't read their own report.
Wales has the lowest percentage of roads in a good state of repair; 57 per cent of the road network is described as 'good', compared with 63 per cent over the border, under a UK Conservative Government. The Welsh Labour Government, backed by Plaid Cymru, doesn't seem to have noticed that there's an electric vehicle revolution, and it's sweeping the world. Rather than try and embrace this technology, the Government makes empty promises about improving public transport. So, the Minister should explain ambitions to my constituents in Aberconwy—you know, you're talking about improving public transport and then take out a main arterial bus route, the T19, seeing students and pupils unable to actually attend their learning places.
Thank you very much. As you can imagine, I want to focus on one project specifically, namely the Menai crossing. I say 'the Menai crossing', because do bear in mind that we're not asking for a third bridge over the Menai necessarily; we are talking about a resilient crossing. Do it in another way, without another bridge, if you like. And there have been a number of inquiries that have looked at alternative options—getting rid of the towers and widening the road, putting a three-lane system in place, providing new lanes on cantilevers on the Britannia bridge. But the conclusion is, every time, that some sort of new bridge is the solution.
But, as I say, I am looking for resilience. It is a vulnerable crossing, where high winds or accidents can close the bridge for extended periods, and the Menai bridge is inadequate as a fallback, and we saw that for a period for three months recently. We were one storm, one accident, one event away from being totally isolated, and that isn't a situation that I'm willing to put up with.
There are two parts to what we are seeking: dualling the Britannia, the A55—ensuring proper flow of traffic, not more traffic. The rest of the road, of course, has been dualled for hundreds of miles, from Ireland to eastern Europe, in terms of that strategic artery. We're not talking about a special case across the Menai; we just want to be like the rest of the A55. And the other part is to allow active travel. Now, I don't know whether the Minister has cycled over the Britannia bridge—I have done so a few times, and it's not a pleasant experience. I'm quite sure that the Minister won't have walked over the bridge, because you're not allowed to, and the result of this is that a highly populated area like Llanfairpwll and the surrounding area don't have any links through active travel to sites of work at Ysbyty Gwynedd and Parc Menai. I've been seeing if there's a possibility for having a walkway or a cycle route on the lower deck on the Britannia bridge. It's possible, the space is there, but the roads review refers to the possibility that that lower deck will be needed for an additional railway line—
Diolch. I just wanted to ask you whether you'd given much consideration to using the older Menai bridge for active travel, for cycling and walking, because I accept that the Britannia bridge would be a terrifying cycling experience? And we know that there are some issues with its structure, and that might be a better way of separating these two sections of transport, conceivably with public transport involved as well?
I appreciate that Cardiff Central is the other end of the country. A comparison would be that it would be like asking somebody to cycle from Grangetown to Riverside via Llanrumney: yes, you can, but it's not practical. We need to make sure that those active travel links are practical and attractive to people. You will not walk or cycle from Llanfairpwll to Parc Menai, a couple of hundred yards away, by going a few miles in the other direction over the Menai bridge.
The roads review, as I said, does refer to the possibility of using the lower deck to expand rail provision for the future in order to enhance public transport, and that's an example there of the confusion in the report and in the Government's response. We hear that we don't need a bridge, we need to encourage the use of public transport and active travel. And I agree entirely, of course, but there is no suggestion there as to how we can expand public transport apart from perhaps stealing a possible active travel route.
It's striking, I think, that the roads review report on the third crossing reads like a case for that crossing. I'll quote here. The main cases for change are congestion—not top of my list, actually, but—
'congestion and lack of resilience of'
the Britannia bridge and Menai bridge. The
'scheme would improve reliability for freight movement.'
'Access by active travel modes would also be improved.'
'The scheme includes improved routes for pedestrians and cyclists'.
Lack of resilience makes
'Anglesey a less attractive destination for investment'.
A third crossing would overcome...safety concerns.'
'Improving local access for active travel'—
again—'would be beneficial.'
'The objective to improve accessibility for pedestrians and cyclists is aligned with current policy.'
'The objective to promote safety is aligned with current policy'.
It would improve 'reliability for buses'.
'Disruption caused by incidents, restrictions or closure of the existing bridges would be less frequent.'
I could go on. It tells us that the
'Cost-benefit analysis suggests that the scheme would provide medium or high value for money'.
But here's the rub: that benefit appears to be based on an economic calculation tied, it seems, to increasing traffic, which is not something that we're seeking, and which, surely, a link to an island with a limited population, and with the end of the road literally 20 miles that way, isn't comparable to the increase in traffic you could be encouraging by building a road between two large population centres.
This, I repeat again, is about resilience, basic resilience. How about measuring the project in terms of social value, safety value, health value as well, and in terms of, again, the basic economic well-being of an area? The suffering of businesses during the Menai suspension bridge closure was very, very real.
To conclude, Minister, I am preparing a submission to the Burns commission. I hope they too will see that this needs reviewing, and I appeal to you to remember why this strengthening of the Menai crossing was on the table in the first place. It’s because it is needed. The case is as strong as ever.
Thank you to Natasha Asghar for bringing this debate to the Senedd today in the name of Darren Millar. I’ve said it before—and many of my colleagues have, multiple times—that a decent road and transport infrastructure is the absolute key to a vibrant economy. And you’d think that was an obvious statement to make, yet we have a Government that is insistent on blocking Wales’s progress at every turn. We’ve come to expect nothing less, of course, from a failed socialist Government intent on banning things and taking us back to the dark ages. Where is the vision and want to open up Wales for business, for jobs, for tourism? We could and should have seen an M4 relief road by now and a multitude of other infrastructure projects, such as the A470 in Caerphilly, M4 junction in Merthyr. We should be seeing an ambitious Government opening up Wales, making it accessible and more economically open. Unfortunately, we have a Government intent on punishing people who drive cars, putting off inward investment and bringing Wales to a grinding halt. It just goes to show that this Government will spend millions on anything apart from improving our road infrastructure.
People don’t just drive for the fun of it. I can see you shaking your head. They need to get work, they need to get to hospital appointments, school—a multitude of reasons. If you live and work in rural area like I do, and many people across Wales, without significant public transport routes in place, you simply have to drive. Maybe that’s why the Deputy Minister over the last four years has claimed for nearly 12,000 miles of car journeys, and only three train trips. This says to me that the Minister knows deep down that cars and roads are needed and it just goes to show how he’s failed abysmally—and this Government, your Government—at improving public transport in the last two decades.
The Welsh Government once again has chosen to put ideology over people’s priorities. The UK Labour Party don’t even want to put their names to this road review. They see it’s ridiculous and toxic. Most of Deputy Minister’s Members of his own party are outraged by this, as we see by an empty Chamber here today. It is high time the Minister finally gets on with doing something positive in his role, like building the roads that Wales needs. After two decades, we have a transport infrastructure that is not fit for purpose and I urge everybody to support our motion today.
The original Llanharan bypass proposal was a road, or actually a series of roads connected by roundabouts, enabling the phased opening-up of a strategic site, connecting new homes and medical facilities and a new school with the existing community of old Llanharan along the main spinal route from the western point of the A473 beyond Llanharan, and allowing access and egress in the direction of Talbot Green, Llantrisant. However, during the many long years—I’ve been involved in all of them—of developing this proposal, changes in policy here in Wales and internationally have reflected major changes in our knowledge and evidence of the effects of road building. People may have different views of this, of course, but the evidence—regardless of views or opinions—is very clear and is rightly changing the way that farsighted Governments respond in policy terms.
Here are some of those major changes. The climate crisis: we either believe there is a climate crisis or we do not. I do. All political parties in this Senedd have signed up to this on paper; indeed, the Welsh Government was the first Government in the United Kingdom to declare a climate crisis—rightly—and was followed in very short order by Scotland and then England. This means that for the sake of our children and our grandchildren—even if not for ourselves—we need to think radically differently about the way we live and we work and we travel and much more. We are also unique amongst the countries of the United Kingdom in having a statutory responsibility to consider not just this generation but future generations.
The dead end of relentless road building that we’ve just heard about: for many generations, we’ve accepted the conventional 'wisdom’ that we can build our way out of traffic congestion. When roads fill, we build another lane, two lanes, a bypass, a relief road, and another and another, and yet the evidence against this is now compelling and unarguable. On the principle and practice of induced demand, we see that, when another lane or another bypass is built, the traffic relentlessly expands to fill it. New roads designed primarily for individual vehicle transport, as opposed to public transport, do not reduce congestion and air pollution, they increase it. Eventually, communities find themselves surrounded by ever-expanding tarmac.
Air pollution, the silent killer: air pollution from increased traffic comes not only from exhaust emissions; the combination of exhaust emissions from combustion engines and particulates impairs respiratory health and shortens average lifespans. In short, for the climate, but also for health and longer lives, we need to rethink the relentless growth in individual vehicles and the roads to accommodate this growth. It is killing people and shortening their lives.
The climate emergency is the most important challenge we face. That's why I support the conclusions of the road review. I also support the Conservatives' position, if indeed it is your position, to close Cardiff Airport. My challenge to you is: if, indeed, that is your position, bring forward a debate to close Cardiff Airport. I look forward to contributing to that, because that is consistent with the view about the climate emergency. [Interruption.] Of course I will.
Just for clarity, we do not propose shutting Cardiff Airport. In fact, we've brought two strategies out that have highlighted what the Welsh Conservatives would like to see of Cardiff Airport, which is a profitable airport, internationally connected but run in the independent sector.
Thank you so much for that clarity. Therefore, there is a little bit of disingenuous positioning there, isn't there, when you're saying to Labour, 'Close Cardiff Airport'. My challenge to the Labour Party is: if you really do believe in reducing carbon emissions, then ditch Cardiff Airport.
We have to reduce our carbon emissions, enable modal shift and enhance road safety, which will be hardwired into our road schemes. The aim of the review, as I understand it, is to base decisions about roads on a wider range of criteria. It is nonsense to say that the roads review means Wales is closed for business. The choice between the economy and the environment is a false binary. We know that the economic effects of climate change will be catastrophic. You cannot plan an economy in the long term without understanding that things need to change, and most innovative businesses actually know that. We know that, in many parts of Wales, especially in rural areas like those in Mid and West Wales where I represent, the lack of public transport is a huge problem. But even in our cities, I know that the cost of public transport is also prohibitive. I do look forward to the outcome from the pilot of the Fflecsi bus. I'm hoping that most people here have seen the Fflecsi buses. I know they've been piloted in many parts of Wales, and I know in Pembrokeshire they are being well used.
I want to see free public transport for the under-25s. That's where we need the shift. It's a radical proposal that would help get people out of their cars and switch to more sustainable modes of transport. It would help meet climate change targets, boost services, and would in particular give our young people a leg-up. We are all facing rising costs of living, but they hit our young people the most. We also need to think about what sort of economic future we want. I would argue that we need one focused on prosperity and well-being in their broadest sense, not just on the single metric of growth, and as part of that, we need to think about connectivity rather than travel.
In conclusion, I stand here with my tin hat on. I do welcome the conclusion of the roads review, not as the end of the debate, but as the start of a much wider one. That must include far better provision for public transport, especially in our rural areas. But, in the end, it is all about how we can shape a system in Wales that connects us, that supports prosperity, encourages well-being, and, most importantly, tackles the climate emergency. Thank you. Diolch yn fawr iawn.
In my contribution, I'm going to respond to the speech given by Huw. Huw, of course, mentioned the need for change, and I agree entirely with what he said, but what Huw said came from an urban perspective. The world is very different in rural areas.
As everyone knows, the Llanbedr bypass was the first to hear of its fate. The news came as a huge shock to local people, and those people were very angry. Indeed, the suggestions before the announcement had said that the proposal would proceed. The residents and the community and communities nearby had been waiting for over 50 years for a resolution to their problems, just to be disappointed at the very last moment. And indeed, the Government had invested millions of pounds in preparations for economic development in Mochras.
So, why were the people of Llanbedr so keen to have a bypass? Well, for those of you who are unfamiliar with that community, I will paint you a picture. Llanbedr, without doubt, is one of the most beautiful villages in Wales, and it's split by the river Artro. There's only one road through the village, which is the A496, the highway connecting Barmouth and Harlech, and to cross the river one must go over a narrow little bridge that dates back to the time of Cromwell. When a lorry, a tractor or even a van crosses that bridge, the whole village comes to a stop, and this happens regularly. The result of this is long traffic jams of vehicles waiting patiently to cross the bridge, letting out their poisonous emissions.
A number of ambulances have failed to reach patients in time because of this issue, and have had to ask for the air ambulance. There are local businesses that have left or are considering leaving because of the valuable time wasted unloading stock because of queuing. The parents of young children or people with mobility issues choose to drive hundreds of yards only in order to go to the nursery school or the shop, because the bridge is too dangerous to cross on foot. And needless to say, the bridge is grade II listed and nothing can be done to it.
I understand the rationale that the Deputy Minister has provided for not building more roads—and Huw mentioned it earlier—namely the fact that it will mean more vehicles on more roads, and more roads, and more vehicles, and that vicious cycle. The rationale is entirely valid, but not in all cases, and certainly not in the case of Llanbedr. Indeed, in Llanbedr, everyone has a car because of these difficulties. Indeed, one could make the case that, in having the bypass, that would take vehicles off the highway, enabling those parents to walk to the local nursery school and to allow people to go to events in the village hall or to go to the shop near the bridge.
The Deputy Minister said that we need modal shift, using more public transport. Well, the Minister won't find a more enthusiastic supporter of that than me in that regard, but there has been no investment in public transport. And indeed, as things stand, it's likely that the bus routes currently in existence will be cut because of that lack of investment. I acknowledge that the original plans had looked at preparing a bypass that would allow carrying vehicles up to 60 mph, but those communities and the local authority, Gwynedd Council, have looked and mitigating this and changed the proposals in order to change that speed limit to 40 mph in order to reduce emissions.
'there will always be journeys by car, as the only practical way to get around...particularly in deep rural areas, the car is always going to be the main mode of transport.'
That is entirely true of Llanbedr. So, I once again urge the Government to work with Gwynedd Council in order to develop a proposal to make a slower bypass in Llanbedr and to invest comprehensively in our public transport in rural Wales.
As the Minister I'm sure will say in her response, not all road construction is being ended. But again, we look at the issue in isolation. A road review needs to be part of a transport review. A bus plan is especially important because a lack of a bus plan and adequate bus services means there is often no alternative to driving except moving from the area in which you currently live. Also bear in mind that buses drive on roads, and outside major urban areas, bus lanes are rare. Buses are also caught up in traffic jams and their timetables affected. I remember when the Labour Party policy was support for an integrated transport strategy. I'm not sure when that ended.
The weather and topography of Wales makes cycling and walking unviable for many journeys. A transport review only makes sense when combined with a local development plan and an economic development strategy. They all fit together. They cannot be treated in isolation. Get transportation wrong, make it difficult to live in an area, then you will suffer demographic depopulation. The elderly and poor left behind, the younger and more affluent leaving—this is a post-war reality for some of our Valleys communities and some of our rural communities. I do not want to make it worse.
Building a road is not a solution. Look at the M25. The M25 was very expensive—a major road encircling most of greater London, 117 miles of motorway. Although the M25 was popular during construction, it quickly became apparent there was insufficient traffic capacity. Because of the public inquiry, several junctions merely served local roads where office and retail developments were built, attracting even more traffic onto the M25 than it was designed for. The congestion has led to traffic management schemes and, since opening, the M25 has been widened progressively, particularly near Heathrow airport. Still, the problem persists. It has been described as Europe’s largest car park. The M25 problem is the M4 in south Wales—too many junctions too close together, local traffic uses it as a local relief road. The danger of building relief road bypasses is that developments cluster around them and junctions, and traffic substantially increases. You end up back where you were.
Of course, for some places, one bypass is not enough. As many Members note, the A40 passes to the north of Llandeilo, passing the north side of the National Trust-owned Dinefwr Park estate before continuing to Carmarthen. This is not just any road, it's the A40, one of the major roads in Wales. But we're going to have a second Llandeilo bypass now, or there are plans for a second Llandeilo bypass. So, Llandeilo gets a southern bypass to go with its northern bypass. Whilst many parts of Wales that need new roads get left behind, Llandeilo gets two. It also has a regular bus service and is on the Heart of Wales line, and it's got access to both Swansea and Glangwili hospital in Carmarthen.
I cannot say that because, as you pointed out, or Darren Millar pointed out earlier, I have not been involved in any of this; the whole discussion takes place between the Welsh Government and Plaid Cymru, from which many of us on our benches are left out.
If, however, the Government believe that additional roads create more traffic and pollution, why couldn't they close the Cardiff eastern bay link road to cars, lorries and motorbikes, and only allow buses and cyclists to use it, if that is the solution? We need an integrated transport strategy linked to housing, commercial and industrial development. New roads are not the solution everywhere, but are needed in some places. What works is what matters.
Llywydd, there are some basic economic realities that are quite clearly unknown to the Tory benches. Economic growth and action on climate are not opposing objectives; the greatest economic harm would result from a failure to prevent runaway climate change. The balance we must seek to strike is one that avoids policies that, by not considering economic and environmental factors, are self-defeating.
This is the first root-and-branch review of road building in Wales for generations, and it comes amidst a nature and climate emergency, a cost-of-living crisis, and at a time when the Welsh Government is facing unprecedented financial pressures. So, however much the Tories might want to turn the clock back, we simply cannot just carry on as we have done for the last 60 or 70 years, not when we know that we must make deeper carbon cuts in the next 10 years than we've managed to deliver in the last 30; not when we know that transport has, to date, been the laggard on the path to decarbonisation; and not when so many species in Wales—one in six species according to the latest state of nature report—are at serious risk of extinction.
We are taking action here in Wales to actually try to deliver on our net-zero commitments and our wider environmental responsibilities. How often have I heard warm words from the Tories in this Chamber on tackling climate change and protecting biodiversity? But, despite those warm words, I cannot recall a single serious or constructive suggestion from the Welsh Conservatives in response to these great challenges of our age. So, perhaps they could start setting out their alternative path to net zero with something they're actually genuinely committed to. And it would be good, while they're at it, to know whether they agree with the Climate Change Committee, who also advise the Westminster Government, of course, and put the future cost of inaction on climate change at around 4 per cent to 6 per cent of gross domestic product every single year. The fact is that even if we'd wanted to keep progressing all 55 schemes looked at as part of the roads review, we simply do not have the money to do so.
I just wanted to point out that the roads review was looking at pipeline development schemes without an approval for construction final cost or capital funding allocated for delivery. And that's the whole point of an investment pipeline: something the Tories simply seem to not understand. Schemes are developed, some go ahead, some don't, and with our capital budget now 8 per cent lower in real terms due to the economic illiteracy of the current UK Government, and of the ones preceding this particular Tory Government, we lack the capital investment necessary to make all the economic interventions that all Governments need to make, and because of those reckless decisions taken in Westminster, we absolutely now have to prioritise.
So, let's just take the example of the Flintshire red route. The development work that consultants have carried out in support of the project showed local congestion returning to current levels within 15 years of construction, much like the M25 example quoted by Mike Hedges.
Why have you not acknowledged that the 'current Tory Government' has banned the sale of new petrol and diesel cars and vans from 2030, and that with effect from 2035 all new cars and vans will be fully zero emission at the tailpipe, which means that we need a road network for the future, planning now and delivering for that network, given the volume of new-technology cars that will definitely be on the roads then?
Well, I fundamentally disagree with that, Mark. If you're replacing all of the current cars on the road with electric or low-emission vehicles, you simply have a different climate crisis to look at. What we need here is a different solution to transport that does not rely on individual car transport.
Anyway, let me go back to my Flintshire red route example. Three hundred million pounds would have been spent—money that's not available then to spend on alternatives—to build a dual carriageway through an ancient woodland during a nature emergency; £300 million on a project that would have increased carbon emissions by 423,000 tonnes during a climate emergency, yet within a decade and a half of its construction levels of congestion would be back to where they are today. I really fail to understand how anyone can think that that is a sensible way to invest money. While I'm at it, the Tories who are going on about the amount of money that's not invested in north Wales really do need to do their sums; I think you need to have a look at what was proposed for the M4 in south Wales, if you want to really make the comparison.
Instead, we will invest sustainably in north Wales. The investment proposed there was not consistent with our commitments under the future generations Act, nor did it fit with what we said we'd do in the Wales transport strategy and it's not consistent with our statutory climate change targets. The reason we established the independent roads review panel was to test schemes like the red route, which were set in train before we agreed these policies, against our commitments and the organising principles of the Welsh Government. It is not a ban on road building, quite clearly, and we will work with the Burns commission to implement a sustainable scheme alternative, and that is quite clearly the right thing to do.
So, just to be clear, Llywydd, this is a technical policy exercise, and not something that any Government would consult on directly. The time to engage with the public and stakeholders is at the strategy stage and at the scheme stage, and, of course, we have done and will do as much of that as we possibly can. Indeed, the Burns commission in north Wales is now consulting as part of its work, and once local authorities have produced their new regional transport plans they too will consult on them, and rightly so.
The Conservative motion says that we need to,
'deliver the transport infrastructure the people of Wales rightfully deserve.'
We absolutely agree. We need to futureproof our infrastructure to deal with the challenges we know are coming our way. We will continue to invest in our road infrastructure. We'll do more to maintain the roads that we have and we will build new roads that meet our four policy tests. We will work with our local authorities to develop schemes that can address our transport problems without adding to the other challenges, and we have great confidence that that is all very doable.
Minister, thank you very much for taking the intervention. Could I just clarify that if you are approached by local authority leaders in those areas where schemes have been told to go back and think again about bringing it forward, where you need to show that a scheme also leads to a reduction in individual vehicle transport, you will, indeed, be sitting down with them and talking through proposals to make this work, and you'll be seeing how the Welsh Government can help them to do that as well?
Yes, Huw, of course we will, and we will be proactively doing that; we work very closely with our local authorities, and of course we'll be working with them on their local transport plans as they bring them forward.
We need to get this into proportion. To get us to net zero by 2050, we need to cut car use by 10 per cent. So, all we are talking about is shifting one journey in 10 from a private car journey to a sustainable form of travel. I know that upsets Natasha Asghar's ambitions, but, really, it is not a road ban. We really do need to get this in proportion. As well as reducing emissions, that cut will give us a cut in congestion, reduce air pollution, lower noise pollution and give greater choice to people of how they travel. At the moment, far too many people are denied that choice; people who rely on buses are denied better services because our investment has been slammed into an endless pipeline of new roads. Meanwhile, others feel forced into multiple car ownership because they just don't have an alternative. If we want to enhance choice, and if you want to increase freedom, if we want to strengthen communities, then we need to shift investment into a modern public integrated transport system.
We know we do not have the funding to make all the public transport investments we need now, but as our £1.6 billion metro programme and our record investment in active travel show, we are making progress. So, Llywydd, we fund mandatory concessionary fares by £60 million a year. This gives free travel to those who need it the most. We fund the MyTravelPass scheme by £2 million a year, offering a third off the cost of bus tickets for 16 to 21-year-olds. Through the bus services support grant, we provide local authorities with £25 million of grant funding, consistent with the cost of tendered bus services, along with support for community transport, and, in addition, we spent £3.2 million a year—
You'll need to bring your contribution to an end now, Minister. I've extended it by the interventions, so if you can draw your contribution to a close.
Thank you, Llywydd. It's very difficult, isn't it, to answer all of the points raised in a debate of this sort in the very short time we have available to us. So, we will be bringing forward a debate in Government time to discuss this in slower time.
But, Llywydd, just to sum up, a change in approach is undoubtedly the right thing to do, but to be effective we need to make the right thing to do the easiest thing to do, as the Deputy Minister has said many times, because human nature is to do what is easy. But, in short, Llywydd, we are moving forward into a bright, economically and environmentally sustainable future, whereas, as this debate shows, the Tories are locked in a false, overly nostalgic vision of the past, and they want a dystopian future where more and more of our countryside is devastated by traffic, and our climate and the essential natural world that sustains it are driven to their knees. I know which of those futures I support, and I know which of those futures the people of Wales, as all the opinion polls show, support as well. Diolch.
Diolch yn fawr iawn, Llywydd. Can I thank all Members that contributed in our debate today? There were a number of Members, actually, that contributed, so I won't pick up everybody, you'll be pleased to know, that contributed and respond to their points accordingly. But I did want to single out Natasha Asghar's opening statement and her passion for transport in Wales. Her ambitious vision for transport in Wales, I think, really shone through in her contribution.
We've heard from across the Chamber today how reliant every area of Wales is on good road infrastructure. Many of these road building schemes are vital to help both local economies and communities thrive, and perhaps we heard in the debate that nowhere is that more clear than in north Wales, as Sam Rowlands and Janet Finch-Saunders highlighted the major projects that had been shelved there. I did feel a degree of sympathy, actually, for Rhun ap Iorwerth, who had to balance his party's full support for Labour's latest schemes, as they often do, with his constituents' clear desire for a third crossing into Anglesey.
I think we heard from Sam Rowlands as a Member for North Wales that he very much supports the red route going through Flintshire.
As we've also heard, the Deputy Minister and the panel he created have abjectly failed to listen to any of the concerns of the communities and dismissed all of their concerns, instead pressing forward with their own narrow-minded agenda without any suitable alternatives. We heard from Delyth Jewell and others that we're facing a pivotal moment where, on top of cancelling vital road projects, Wales is facing a crisis in its transport system. These include concerns about the 65 per cent to 100 per cent of bus services facing being cut by small firms, because of a lack of funding, falling bus journeys, a staggering 11,000 train journeys cancelled over the last three years, and one in six rail passengers being dissatisfied with Transport for Wales services.
If this is, as we heard from the likes of Jenny Rathbone, Huw Irranca-Davies and Jane Dodds, Wales's reaction to climate change, isn't it bizarre that there has been absolutely no impetus to increase electric vehicle use, which will be a major factor in reducing emissions? Why do we have just over 1,400 public charging points here in Wales, well below the 50,000 fast-charging points that the Welsh Government itself has predicted will be needed by 2030? And why are there only 94 zero-emission buses in service in four authorities?
The authorities that have got electric buses are those that have applied successfully for UK Government funding, and we should be very grateful for that. But, on the electric charging points, I have to remind you that just as governments are not responsible for petrol stations, nor are they responsible for electric charging points. There is a responsibility, I agree, for us to ensure that communities are taking opportunities to install electric charging points in their villages and towns so that they can make some money out of that, using renewable energy in their area, but, really, it is not the job of Government to be transferring to electric charging points.
The Government has a role in encouraging the installation of charging points. It's no coincidence, Jenny, that, in Wales, there are 39 charging points per 100,000 of population. In England, that's 52. There's a clear difference along our border here in Wales as well, and that is through the proactive nature from the UK Government that we're not seeing here in Wales. And if it's about saving money, it's odd that the road building freeze in this review was started before any inflationary pressures were evident. If it's because of balancing the books, it is astounding that it's £180 million the Welsh Government has spent on road building projects that were never started—quite literally roads to nowhere, which can be written off so easily. If budgets are so hard to find, then surely a good saving would be the £30 million the Welsh Government's proposing to spend on a 20 mph road limit. It's been 10 years since the Active Travel (Wales) Act, Llywydd, but it looks like we've gone backwards: bus journeys down, at least 30 per cent of the population in every one of Wales's regions in transport poverty, and sustainable transport pilot schemes, including e-bikes and e-cargo bikes, stagnating, all because of a lack of investment and continually changing policy. However, the panel and the Deputy Minister are wholly relying on active travel and a public transport system in need of dire reform.
Welsh commuters and businesses are continually being pushed towards driving as a reliable form of transport because the Welsh public transport system is failing to deliver. However, instead of having a sustainable and well-used public transport system before banning road building projects, we're now left in this ridiculous situation where road users will be causing more emissions because of a 20 mph speed limit, will be paying even more should a road charging network be introduced in Wales—as the Deputy Minister's indicated he's interested in—and will be unable to efficiently use the electric cars they're being asked to convert to by 2030 because of a lack of charging points. [Interruption.] I've taken enough interventions.
It's quite ironic that the final budget was passed yesterday, as it showed some significant cuts in transport, even in areas where the Deputy Minister wants to focus his attention. Not only has there been a 17 per cent drop in capital funding for sustainable travel compared with the indicative budget, there's been a cut of £10 million to active travel and a cut of £22 million to bus support. That can't be a tenable position to continue alongside a cut to road projects.
So, the thrust of the motion is simple, Llywydd: the roads review has neglected to deliver the transport infrastructure that Wales needs. Instead, the Welsh Government has to ensure the transport network in Wales is able to supply its demand. By failing to do so, perhaps the Deputy Minister's famous words, 'We don't really know what we're doing on the Welsh economy' should now be updated to, 'We don't know what we're doing on the Welsh transport system, either.' Because unless he figures it out, it won't be roads he has to worry about, it'll be unhappy Labour backbenchers telling him to get on his bike.
And that brings us to voting time. The first vote this afternoon, unless, of course, Members wish for the bell to be rung, is on item 5, Member debate under Standing Order 11.21(iv) on biometric data in schools. I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Sarah Murphy. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 38, 14 abstentions, one against. Therefore, the motion is agreed.
The next vote is on item 6, the debate on the Petitions Committee report, 'The Final Bend? Ban greyhound racing in Wales'. I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Jack Sargeant. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 44, six abstentions and four against. Therefore, the motion is agreed.
The next vote is on the Welsh Conservative debate on the roads review. I call for a vote on the motion without amendment, tabled in the name of Darren Millar. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 15, no abstentions, 39 against. Therefore, the motion is not agreed.
The next vote is on amendment 1, tabled in the name of Siân Gwenllian. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 54, no abstentions, and none against. Therefore, amendment 1 is agreed.
1. Notes the report of the Welsh Government's roads review panel, The Future of Road Investment in Wales.
2. Regrets the lack of engagement by the roads review panel with the public, elected representatives, local authorities, businesses and the third sector and others during the course of the review.
3. Recognises the need for bold and radical action in the transport sector to help reach net-zero emissions before 2050.
4. Calls on the Welsh Government to commit to more urgent investment in public transport and electric vehicle infrastructure so that communities across Wales have greater access to low or zero-carbon transport options.
The next item is the short debate. This afternoon's short debate is to be presented by Llyr Gruffydd, and I call on Llyr Gruffydd to speak to the topic he's chosen.
Thank you, Llywydd, and thank you for giving me this opportunity to speak in this short debate today.
We can all be rightly proud of the internationalist outlook that has been a prominent part of our history, as Welsh people, over the years. Back in the early twentieth century, we had our Welsh League of United Nations, which campaigned for peace and international co-operation after the first world war. That is what drove the women’s peace petition of 1923, which was signed by more than 390,000 women, encouraging the United States to join and lead the League of Nations. Also, for over a century, the annual Urdd message of peace has been transmitted across the world, spreading a message of peace and goodwill from the children and young people of Wales to all parts and peoples of the globe.
These particular examples emerged in the pre-devolution era. And what they represented, in fact, was a means for Wales to speak collectively with one voice at a time when we didn’t have our own national parliament to articulate those feelings of international solidarity with others facing injustice and oppression across the world.
Now, more recently, of course, this Senedd has ensured that Wales is a nation of sanctuary, which is all about welcoming those from all across the world who have been displaced by war and conflict and those seeking a safe place to live. And, heaven knows, in light of some of the narrative coming from the Westminster Government at the moment, we really need to reflect on our responsibility to provide that sanctuary. Now that we have our own Senedd—albeit with little powers or competence in an international context—we have a duty to use this platform and to raise our collective voice to call out injustices wherever we see them. Despite the fact that many of the powers to really effect change are reserved to Westminster, we have a moral duty to use our status as a national Parliament, as a national Government, to speak up and to speak out to condemn human rights abuses, to condemn war and aggression and to reach out and embrace those who are in their hour of need. We're doing so with Putin’s war of aggression against Ukraine. We've done so in assistance to the people fleeing persecution from the Taliban in Afghanistan. We've done so in condemnation of the ongoing human rights abuses faced by the women of Iran. Not only are we a nation of sanctuary, we are a nation of solidarity. And that’s why, today, in the Senedd, we must also speak out and condemn the ongoing and largely overlooked atrocities perpetrated against the Armenian people in Nagorno-Karabakh.
Armenia is a comparatively small country, with a population similar to that of Wales. And since their independence, first in 1918 and then again in 1991, they have faced war and genocide by their neighbours. Between 600,000 and 1.5 million Armenians were systematically murdered by the Young Turks in what many nations still fail to correctly describe as genocide. And, prior to that, another genocide occurred under the Ottoman Empire, back in 1895, where 300,000 Armenians were murdered. Even the UK Government, over a century after those horrors were perpetrated against the Armenian people, is still to have the courage to call it out for what it was—genocide. Other nations that we often hold as beacons of freedom, liberty and human rights have only recently done so. Germany only recognised the Armenian genocide in 2016, and the USA did the same in 2019. And it’s high time that the UK Government followed suit.
In Wales, the road to genocide recognition began in 2001, of course, when Rhodri Morgan, then First Minister, laid flowers in memory of the 1915 genocide victims. Later, in 2010, there was an explicit recognition of the Armenian genocide by the First Minister, Carwyn Jones, when he paid homage to Armenian victims during the Holocaust memorial commemorations. The Church in Wales followed suit soon after, declaring 24 April as Armenian Genocide Day. Now, these have all been welcome, albeit incremental, steps. But, circumstances today mean it cannot stop there.
While a part of the Soviet Union, multiple votes and referendums were held in Nagorno-Karabakh to unify the oblast to Armenia, but these were rejected by Moscow. In 1988, the European Parliament passed a resolution supporting the demands of the ethnic Armenians in the region for reunification with Armenia, but, with a power vacuum from the collapse of the Soviet Union, Azerbaijan took the area under military control, and since then, of course, the area has been plagued by war and by conflict.
And like in every war, the real victims are the civilians. The horrors facing the people of Armenia are not only in the past. We mustn’t let the people of Armenia once again be overlooked as atrocities and human rights abuses are perpetrated against them in Nagorno-Karabakh. The situation there is dire. Azerbaijan has closed the Goris-Stepanakert highway, the only road connecting Nagorno-Karabakh to the outside world via the Lachin corridor. For Armenians in Artsakh, this is a corridor for life, connecting them to supplies, to trade and to the rest of Armenia. A recent letter signed by Baroness Cox, Lord Alton of Liverpool, Rowan Williams, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, Christopher Cocksworth, Bishop of Coventry, Dr John Eibner and Tim Loughton MP described the blockade of the Lachin corridor by Azerbaijan as 'a medieval style siege'.
Just last month, the International Court of Justice, the ICJ, the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, ordered provisional measures to ensure that Azerbaijan ends the blockade of the Lachin corridor. According to the ICJ, the situation has left some 120,000 ethnic Armenian residents in Nagorno-Karabakh without access to essential goods and services, including life-saving medication and healthcare. One cardiologist at a hospital there says they’re only doing 10 per cent of the procedures they would ordinarily be expected to do, simply because they don’t have the equipment they need. As a result he says, 'Every day we lose many people, many patients.'
The solidarity that we can show the people of Armenia means a lot, clearly, even though it costs us so little. I have been in contact with the Armenian community here in Wales, and in north Wales in particular, and I would like to read out some short statements from Anna, who moved from Armenia to Wales some years ago but who has family under siege in Nagorno-Karabakh. She says,
Diolch yn fawr, Dirprwy Lywydd, and thank you for bringing forward the debate this afternoon.
We stand with all our international communities who must watch and see their people, and as you say, it's people—family and friends—go through suffering. We show solidarity as individuals, as communities, and as friends with those who still suffer persecution every single day. The Welsh Government condemns persecution and violence in all its forms anywhere in the world, and where discord exists or has existed, the Welsh Government supports efforts to promote reconciliation between people and Governments.
Wales enjoys relations with many nations across the world, many of whom have decided to make Wales their home, and Wales is and will always be a welcoming nation, a place that promotes and celebrates peace. Our history attests to this, as you have reminded us today, from the Welsh League of Nations Union and the remarkable women's peace appeal of the early 1900s, to the Urdd Gobaith Cymru, the creation of Academi Heddwch, right through to the nation of sanctuary we've committed to making Wales today. And as you've said, Llyr, the nation of sanctuary means helping anyone who is dispersed or resettled to Wales to access services and integrate with communities from day one of arrival. It is about seeing the person before seeing their immigration status. It is about recognising that individuals come with skills and experiences and not just simply needs to be met. It is about harnessing the opportunities that migration helps to bring to our economy and to our communities, and we are a nation of solidarity, as you say. That was my message this morning at an International Women's Day event, organised by Hwb Cymru Africa, which was describing some of the projects we're supporting in sub-Saharan Africa on gender empowerment.
I am aware that the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is deeply complex, and, over the last 30 years, people have continued to suffer due to this conflict, which has been the backdrop to regional relations during this time. Well, as we've said, and, as we know, the UK Government have the lead on foreign affairs—it is reserved—and the UK Government have taken an active role. And I understand that their position towards tensions between Armenia and Azerbaijan over the Nagorno-Karabakh situation remains unchanged. But the UK Government, alongside much of the international community, has been clear that the current closure of the Lachin corridor, which is a lifeline into Nagorno-Karabakh, is wholly unacceptable, and they've repeatedly called for the opening of the corridor.
Last week, on 2 March, the head of the UK delegation to the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe stated that the UK Government remains deeply concerned by the continued disruption to the Lachin corridor, and urged immediate action to be taken to restore the flow of goods and people. The corridor has been discussed at the United Nations Security Council, and the fact that this has now been taken to the International Court of Justice, and a judgment passed, reinforces the need for urgent action to be taken.
It also goes against article 28 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, which says children and young have the right to education no matter who they are; under the UNCRC article 16, no child shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his or her privacy, and also the child has the right to the protection of the law against such interference; and then also article 8 of the European convention on human rights, the right to privacy.
Based on all of this evidence, I have concluded that biometric data collection in schools is intrusive, it is unnecessary, it is disproportionate, and it does not comply with current legislation or human rights conventions. Biometric technology in schools is more prevalent than we realise. First introduced around 2000, over the last decade, the use of these technologies has increased dramatically, with around 75 per cent of secondary schools across the UK now using fingerprint technology, as well as it being extremely prevalent in primary schools. We know that in the early 2000s, many of these technologies were once UK-owned companies, selling ex-military tech to the public and private sector, but now research indicates that most providers are owned by US, Canada and Israeli companies. However, to whom, how and why private companies are selling this biometric data technology data to schools remains unclear. Researcher Pippa King, a campaigner on the use of biometric data in schools, together with Defend Digital Me, have requested freedom of information requests. Some schools responded, but there is still no clarity about which Government department or other bodies monitor if schools adhere to the Protections of Freedoms Act 2012, how many schools use biometric technology, how many pupils have their biometrics stored on school or supplier databases, or if the data is accessible and shared outside the school. Furthermore, the UNCRC's, the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, general comment No. 16 says that:
'States should not invest public finances and other resources in business activities that violate children’s rights.'
In order to meet this standard, a human rights impact assessment is required. I do not believe that these are being done.
The Information Commissioner's Office does have a part to play here, and they did recently reprimand the UK Department for Education, following the prolonged misuse of the personal information of up to 28 million children. The ICO investigation found that the Department for Education's poor due diligence meant that a database of pupils' learning records was ultimately used by Trust Systems Software UK to check whether or not they were 18 when they wanted to use a gambling account. I welcome the ICO really taking this breach of the law very seriously, however I would now call on them to also ensure appropriate risk assessments and procurement processes of technology companies within educational settings are put in place to regulate widespread biometrics in schools. Because, as Big Brother Watch has highlighted, it is unacceptable that the biometric data collection technology is being sold to schools and parents by unscrupulous companies as a safer option. I met with the ICO recently and raised my concerns and offered to send over the evidence that I have presented today, and I hope that we can work together on this, going forward.
I have also met with the previous and current Welsh children's commissioner, and I would ask that the office also takes this on as a key part of their children's rights agenda to ask them how they feel about these technologies being used in their schools. It is not just fingerprint collection; biometric data may include information about the skin pattern, physical characteristics or a person's fingers or palms, features of an iris or any other part of the eye, or a person's voice or handwriting. In October 2021, more than 2,000 pupils at nine schools in North Ayrshire were enrolled to pay for their lunches by presenting themselves in front of a camera operated by the staff at the till. The system, installed by CRB Cunninghams, matched the children against the photos registered and deducted the day's spending from their account. The ICO responded quickly, all the data was deleted, and the resulting investigation exposed how organisations like local councils are ill-prepared for the task of capturing, processing and retaining personal data. However, the case was only able to be scrutinised through the lens of breaking GDPR and not looking at whether or not this should be introduced in the first place. Big Brother Watch has highlighted that other countries, like France, Sweden and parts of the US have outlawed this due to privacy concerns.
So, there is no ambiguity. I believe that, as politicians, we have a moral and ethical obligation to debate this issue and whether or not we want to have this here in Wales or the UK. The biometrics and surveillance camera commissioner, Professor Fraser Sampson, has warned that the use of biometric surveillance in schools requires careful consideration and oversight. He said:
'Somewhat ironically, biometric surveillance requires constant vigilance. To ensure its proper governance, avoid mission creep and irreversible erosion of freedoms this area calls for careful recognition—and anyone who believes it is simply about data protection hasn’t been paying attention.'
Again, we do have a responsibility as parliamentarians and in Government to scrutinise this.
Finally, what is this doing to our children's view in our society? I'll end by asking these wider questions: what message is this giving to students, that their biometric data, their bodies, can be used in exchange for a monetary transaction? As adults, we don't have to give our fingerprints to access food, knowledge, rights to education, and we would hopefully, and rightfully, kick off if we did, but our children have to. How is this shaping how our children view their civil liberties? Because, as adults, as one person who wrote to me highlighted, the police force, under the authority of His Majesty and an Act of Parliament, can collect people's fingerprints without consent if they've been arrested, charged or convicted, but our children have to hand this over daily. And how is this biometric data collection in schools perpetuating the ideology that, if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear—a dangerous ideology that comes from a place of privilege and is always used by the oppressor? Perhaps the question today should not be whether or not a tool is legal enough to use in educational settings, but whether it is respectful of human dignity and the aims of education, meeting the full range of human rights, freedom of expression, freedom of thought and aims of the right to education. Diolch.
Schools and colleges, I am satisfied, have the support and advice available to ensure they can properly implement the required data standards when adopting the use of biometric systems. At present, there is no specific intention to introduce general legislation for use of biometric data in schools due to the existence of a broader legal framework with relevant checks and balances. The decision to introduce a biometric system is one for individual schools to make based on operational needs, impact assessments, and in consultation with staff, learners, parents and carers. This is consistent with a principle of school autonomy, but within a clear regulatory framework.
The Welsh Government will object to the motion in order to abstain on it, as is its convention, but the Member has raised important points with me here in the Chamber today. As she has previously done this, it has allowed us to look together at what more we can do. As she has recognised, and I am grateful for this, the Government has acted. I give her the assurance that I will approach the request she has made today in the same constructive way and will update her and the Senedd accordingly. In the meantime, we will continue to remind schools of their legal obligations and keep our guidance under continual review to reflect developments in this fast-moving area.
Presiding Officer, banning things is something that we do not take lightly. There are processes that need to be followed, and thorough consultation with all stakeholders has to be a part of that on both sides of the story. I understand that, and campaigners understand that too. But, where there is a consensus for change, where the majority of people no longer see dog racing as an acceptable form of entertainment, there is an expectation of action. Minister, we called our report 'The Final Bend' because we think that's where we are—that this so-called sport is on its last lap. I hope that today, Minister, you'll be able to give greater clarity about when we will cross the finish line. Diolch.
Comparisons have been made to the horse-racing industry. Horse racing in Britain is amongst the world's best regulated animal activities. The British Horseracing Authority, together with the RSPCA and World Horse Welfare, is a signatory of the national equine welfare protocol. There is at least one BHA veterinary officer on duty at every race meeting, who oversees horse welfare and ensures the standards laid down by BHA are maintained.
There are many factors to assess whilst we look to improve the welfare of racing greyhounds, and I am committed to exploring all opportunities on how to achieve this. As the Chair of the Petitions Committee mentioned in his opening remarks, I have committed to consult on proposals, which will include seeking views on licensing and prohibiting greyhound racing in Wales. We will explore all options and we will take into account the views of the public and all stakeholders. Whilst discussions around an outright ban are necessary and of course will attract headlines, it is imperative that we approach the topic in a reasoned and appropriate way.
Our consultation must be based on the best evidence and will require assistance from those in the industry, as well, of course, as our animal health and welfare organisations. This is vital so that the public receives an informed view on both the current position and how positive change could be brought in to improve welfare and create a better life for racing greyhounds at all stages of their life, not just during race meets. I want to do this as soon as possible, and work on a stronger evidence base will commence this year, with a view to publishing a consultation towards the end of 2023.
My comments to the Petitions Committee left all options on the table, including licensing and a phased ban, and this Government will take a view on the future of greyhound racing only after considering the responses to the consultation. Diolch.
Deputy Llywydd, I don't think I need to say too much more than that. I do think, actually, still that the majority of Members in the Senedd do support a phased ban. There are some who support regulation. What is absolutely clear is that greyhound racing in Wales cannot continue as it is today. That is absolutely and fundamentally clear. I do thank those campaigners and the petitioner, because without the petitioner, we wouldn't have had this debate today; we wouldn't have had that inquiry. I look forward to the consultation. I look forward to its outcome and I look forward to working with colleagues in my capacity as a Member of the Senedd, and not as Chair, to continue to press the Welsh Government to deliver the recommendations of the report and bring down the curtain on greyhound racing in Wales. Diolch.
It's a fact that for many people in Wales, particularly in rural areas, cars are the only real option at the moment because of poor public transport. Roads are a must for people in those areas. The people of Wales need and deserve a transport network that is fit for the twenty-first century, and futureproofed, and it's vital the Welsh Government delivers just that, because anything less is just simply unacceptable. However, with road projects being binned and funding for sustainable travel and public transport reducing, along with all the other backward transport policies I've seen since I've been the shadow Minister for transport, I fail to see how we are going to achieve this here in Wales.
I encourage all Members who truly care about the plight of their constituents, businesses and communities to vote in favour of our motion today. Thank you, Presiding Officer.
As is proven in Aberconwy, the Welsh Government is simply failing to deliver the sustainable public transport system that you need to get in place before you even talk about some of the woolly and silly things that are being cooked up here in Cardiff Bay. So severe is your anti-car agenda that the future arrival of autonomous cars seems to have been completely overlooked, and it's fair to say that the Deputy Minister did not answer in committee, when I asked him, and the Chairman reminded me that I'd asked him three times, 'Have you considered autonomous cars, or driverless cars, in your review?' There was no evidence to suggest that they've even thought about it.
So, even though the Minister tries to claim that this doesn't mean the end of road building in Wales, the decision-making process now by this Welsh Labour Government is going to be anti-car and anti-roads. Businesses are worried. The Federation of Small Businesses has pointed out the reality for most small businesses is still a necessary dependence on road-based transport. The way to tackle climate change is not to impose the heaviest burdens on the poor, the vulnerable and our small-business owners.
Now then, I did raise this with the Counsel General: as you know, the future generations Act requires each public body to carry out sustainable development aimed at achieving the well-being goals. I'll remind people what they are: a prosperous Wales, a healthier Wales and a Wales of cohesive communities. The decision that 19 schemes should not proceed, such as the Flintshire corridor, the A55 junctions 15 and 16 and the third Menai crossing, will harm the prosperity, health and connectivity of communities right across Wales. So, I would be pleased, Minister, whether you could explain to me, because the Counsel General mentioned that this was more of a question for yourself, whether you may have breached your own well-being goals. Thank you.
A better transport policy has many advantages. The evidence has grown internationally that when transport policy is focused on high investment in better public transport—road, rail and tram—and also where short journeys are done by active travel—cycling, walking, et cetera—then quality of life is improved, health outcomes and mortality are enhanced, communities feel safer, quality of life for people in those communities is better, and there are added but very logical bonuses, such as the development of local shops and services, the so-called 15-minute neighbourhoods. And there are many more arguments, based on clear and compelling arguments, that back the Welsh Government's radical—for the UK, but not worldwide—changes in policy on transport and travel.
But the roads review is only one part of this. The comprehensive transport policy is set out in 'Llwybr Newydd: the Wales transport strategy 2021'; there are transformative bus transport proposals in 'One network, one timetable, one ticket'; there's ongoing work in the metro proposals for the Cardiff city region, south-west Wales and for north Wales; and there's record investment, despite what we just heard, in active travel in Wales, too. But, Minister, it is the timing and the funding gap between the realisation of these ambitions for public transport and active travel and modal shift and the announcement of the roads review that is our greatest danger. 'Mind the gap' is something we should be aware of in policy, delivery and funding terms, not only when we board the train.
I've written to you, Minister, already, asking for an urgent meeting, along with RCT leader, Andrew Morgan, and Chris Elmore MP and local Members. I believe that we can develop a new proposal for the Llanilid site that takes unnecessary traffic and journeys off the local road network, joins up the missing sections, including for active travel and bus routes to Talbot Green and Llantrisant, and creates more liveable communities and a better quality of life for local people. But, Minister, this will require your direct help—on buses and trains, on demand management, on active travel, on behavioural change, and delivering real improvements right now on the overly congested A473 through the old town. Llanharan and Llanilid could be an exemplar town in Wales for better communities and modal shift if you are willing to work with us and directly help us. We cannot do this on our own, so I invite you, Minister, to come out and meet with us in Llanharan, see the challenges we face first hand, and then help us make the changes we need to make Llanharan better for local residents and businesses and a model community for modal shift and better ways to create well-rounded, healthy and sustainable communities. Diolch yn fawr iawn.
In a previous response, the Deputy Minister said disparagingly to me that nobody has said that elderly people are expected to cycle everywhere, but the truth is, if you read the report on Llanbedr, which was published back in 2021, it demonstrates that the priority for Llanbedr is active travel. In an isolated community such as Llanbedr, it's nearly impossible to implement active travel to go to the surgery or to go to the shops. But, in having a bypass, that would allow people to walk and to go to the community events that I mentioned earlier. And indeed, in his evidence to the environment committee last week, the Deputy Minister said:
Of course, as Mabon ap Gwynfor just said, there's a village on Meirionnydd's coast called Llanbedr. The Welsh Government has pulled the plug, following advice from a committee it chose of transport and climate experts. Calls for the one-mile Llanbedr access road date back decades. It was hoped that the road would cut traffic through the Snowdonia village by 90 per cent. It has been directly contributing to increased traffic. Llanbedr has a train every four hours; not certainly a Heart of Wales line amount. For Ysbyty Gwynedd, there is no bus route, and that is the local hospital.
I hope—although I don't expect—the Minister can explain why building a road in northern Meirionnydd causes an increase in traffic and pollution, while the second Llandeilo bypass does not.
Let us put this all into proportion. To get onto a pathway that we need to get onto to get us to net zero by 2050, we need to cut car use by 10 per cent, so all we are really—
'I have friends and family that are caught up in what is going on and it’s very hard because when you know people it becomes so much more personal. My heart hurts for my country, for everybody, but then you have people who you know and you constantly worry about them. It’s difficult.'
Now, she talks about her cousin Rita and her family who now live in Stepanakert, which is in the area under blockade. They used to live in the town of Shusha, but, because Azerbaijan took over control, they had to move from there during the war. Anna told me,
'They ran away from there because there was bombing day and night. When the war ended, they decided to go to Stepanakert. Her son has wounds from this war. He has had one lung removed, a kidney has been damaged, and his spine is damaged too. He has three children.'
Her cousin Rita told her,
‘You know, Anna, it’s not the shortage of food or electricity or supplies. We lived through the first Nagorno-Karabakh war in those conditions. It’s not that. It’s the fear of not knowing what they’re going to do next.’
She goes on to say,
'In Wales, I would like to see Senedd Members sign the statement of opinion that has been tabled. So few people have signed it. It’s hurtful. We are not asking for too much. They just have to show that they understand our pain. We want acknowledgement, recognition and solidarity...I would like to see the First Minister, Mark Drakeford, and the Welsh Government speak out on this.'
She says,
'I am very disappointed that they have not.'
Now, we have a duty to condemn these actions, and although we might not have the power devolved to this Senedd to do much more than that, we must at least use the voice that we do have, not only to express solidarity with people like Anna and her family in Armenia, but also to put pressure on the UK Government to assist the Armenian people and to condemn the actions of Azerbaijan.
In 2019, as I mentioned earlier, Wales declared itself the world's first nation of sanctuary, a humane and pragmatic approach to the reception of refugees and asylum seekers, and since then, we have largely lived up to that billing, firstly, as I mentioned, with the assistance and housing of Afghan refugees and more recently, of course, with our support to Ukrainian refugees. This Welsh Government tells us that it believes that a distinctive Welsh response is needed for international assistance, and I agree. But words and actions are often of equal importance, and for us to prioritise the condemnation of some forms of international aggression against sovereign states while ignoring others, of course, is wrong.
Yes, we are a nation of sanctuary, not because we want to be popular, not because it's easy—far from it—but because we want those in need of sanctuary and support to know that we understand that, even during the horrors of war, people need to feel safe, that we, as a brotherhood and sisterhood of humanity are there for one another when people are fleeing persecution, human rights abuses, war and genocide. Our nation of sanctuary policy shows the world what makes us proud to be Welsh; we are kind and accepting and we offer the world our open arms when they are in need of our assistance. That's why I'm calling on this Senedd today, and on the Welsh Government, to condemn the war of terror being waged on the Armenian people in Nagorno-Karabakh, to be proactive in urging the UK Government to do the same and also to provide aid to avert the humanitarian crisis facing 120,000 Armenian people there. And let our actions be motivated not only by properly recognising and remembering the horrors of the Armenian genocide of 1915-23, but also by the explicit recognition of the threat of another genocide occurring now, this year, a century later, in 2023, because if we don't speak out, if we don't use the voice that this Senedd and the Welsh Government has to call out these atrocities, then the blood will be on all our hands. Diolch.
Now, my understanding is that the UK Government continues to support international efforts, including those led by the EU and the OSCE, and continues to call upon both Armenian and Azerbaijan Governments to work together to address their concerns, and to fulfil the commitments that both sides have made. And, throughout February, UK Ministers met representatives of Azerbaijan and Armenia to discuss progress on peace discussions, and this included travelling out to Baku.
And, thank you for raising the importance of humanitarian aid after the violence in 2020. The UK was the first nation to provide humanitarian assistance in the form of £1 million to the International Committee of the Red Cross, and now, through the Start Fund, it has allocated £350,000 to support those affected by the closure of the corridor. The UK has committed to continuing to monitor the situation through their extensive engagements with humanitarian actors, to keep under review the need for future and further humanitarian assistance should the situation continue to deteriorate. And the reports that war crimes have been committed are deeply disturbing, and I know that many are worried about the risk of genocide in the region.
As far as the genocide convention is concerned, and where there is evidence that thresholds have been met, the UK Government must ensure that appropriate action is taken, and where the UK Government has concerns over the conduct of troops, these matters will be directly raised with the appropriate Government.
Sadly, Dirprwy Lywydd, we are seeing conflicts in too many areas across the world. Much of it is caused by hatred, racism, lack of education, and unwillingness to sit down and listen and work with people. Wales has always been and remains a nation proud to open its doors, especially to those fleeing violence and hatred, and we're proud of the values of equality, co-operation and solidarity that are the hallmark of the Wales we live in today. But this must be a reality for people, and we must listen to the concerns that you've raised today on these matters.