Plenary

The next item is questions to the Counsel General and Minister for the Constitution, and the first question is from Jenny Rathbone.

Thank you for your question. The Welsh Government is committed to ending racism, as demonstrated through our anti-racist Wales action plan, which aims to build an anti-racist Wales by 2030. Racism and all forms of hate and bigotry have no place in Wales.

The police in the Vale of Glamorgan have recently had to deal with a small group of people descending on the area in the hope of persuading local residents that accommodating refugees in their community is in some way a risk to their well-being. It hasn't worked; on the contrary, the people in Llantwit Major, at all levels of the community, have loudly proclaimed that they support Wales as a nation of sanctuary.

But disinformation is the stock-in-trade of the far-right groupuscule involved in persuading other people to come into Wales and protest about anything to do with refugees. They've had serious form up in the north of England in disinformation to ordinary people who had thought that in some way this was going to impact on them. So, what can the Welsh Government do to ensure that the law against race hate is being upheld?

Firstly, can I recognise the tremendous support that was given by the local community, in the events that you refer to in the Vale of Glamorgan, in standing up to those far-right individuals—those racists that attended? I'm particularly impressed by the position that was taken by the local football club, which have a number of refugees who actually play for them. I think it really does such credit to a community when it comes together to stand by standards and by rights.

What I would say, of course, is that there is a lot of misinformation and there is a lot of rather unpleasant messaging that takes place on social media. Of course, race hate is a criminal offence, as is incitement to racial hatred, and I think where such messages appear that may contribute to provoking those sorts of incidents or provoking racial hatred, then such incidents should be reported to the police or to the relevant authorities.

I have to say that some of the comments and some of the messaging that has been coming out from the UK Government recently, playing what I would call the 'race card' for political advantage, has not been helpful in this situation and has contributed, I think, to that misinformation and to that growth of those far-right groups.

Thank you for the question. The fact of the matter is yes, of course, it will be of—oh, sorry. I believe that the work of the Independent Commission on the Constitutional Future of Wales is, and will be, a vital contribution to the discussions already taking place here in Wales and across the United Kingdom.

Thank you, Counsel General. It's long struck me that some of the most innovative proposals for necessary reform of the union are coming from Wales, rather than coming from Westminster and Whitehall itself. But be that as it may, would he agree with me that, if reforms are brought forward that are seeking not only to have a different relationship but a more modern relationship between the nations and regions of the UK, it should be not just for those of us here in Wales but for all those in Westminster and elsewhere throughout England to actually take the opportunity to engage with such proposals that might actually seek to put forward a reformed and stronger union? We all have different opinions within this Chamber, but, surely, that's an imperative for anybody who believes that the current situation is simply not sustainable.

Thank you. You raise a number of, I think, very important points. I suppose the first thing I would say is that, whereas over the past two decades the discussion on constitutional reform has been well advanced within Wales and Scotland, and indeed in Northern Ireland, but had been rather dormant in England, what is encouraging now is the recognition of how important the decentralisation of power actually is in terms of actually empowering people and communities, and particularly in England.

So, the comments that have been made by Sir Keir Starmer, the leader of the Labour Party, I think in terms of criticising the over-centralisation of Westminster Government, and talking about decentralisation, and the commissioning of the Gordon Brown report, are extremely important. Because that debate taking place in England is as important to us as well, because it is a recognition of the need to realign those structures and to rebalance them. Our own independent commission, of course, is about our say about what we think the future of Wales should be, and how that relationship should change—it's not something being decided elsewhere. But of course, alongside that is the Gordon Brown report, which also recognises a number of those issues that we are concerned with—subsidiarity and our parity in terms of powers within Scotland. And I think that the important point that was made in the Gordon Brown report—and Gordon Brown has, of course, given evidence to the independent commission, as indeed I will be, and as indeed I think the other Ministers will no doubt, in due course—is the talk about constructive engagement. So, it's about that recognition of the need for modernising our constitutional relationship, to have change, but also that it has got to be something that carries the consensus of people in the nations and regions across the whole of the UK.

Questions now from the party spokespeople. Conservative spokesperson, Mark Isherwood.

Diolch, Llywydd. The Welsh Government's 'NHS Wales Induction Guide for Independent Board Members' includes:

'The aim is to have a single set of values which guide how we work, change culture and shape the way we behave. Living these values means being autonomous yet accountable, being both brave and bold and creating a culture that is open and transparent...

'Holders of public office should act solely in terms of the public interest.

'The role of the Board is to...hold the Chief Executive and senior management team to account through purposeful challenge and scrutiny'.

And,

'Board members do not instruct the Chief Executive or any member of staff on operational matters but can challenge and question'.

In this context, what advice as Counsel General did you give to the health Minister before she forced the independent members of Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board to resign?

Can I just say that the decisions that are taken by the health Minister in respect of her functions as a Minister are properly addressed to that Minister and not to myself?

Well, what advice would you now give to the health Minister, in the context of the statement I've received on behalf of all the former independent members of the health board—respected people in north Wales—stating,

'We believe she is setting healthcare in north Wales back a decade'.

And including,

'Each CEO has told us that they have found the executive team unmanageable, made worse by ineffective workforce HR support. We therefore sought the advice of Welsh Government officials. On each occasion, as with all matters relating to the executive team, we are required to have explicit Welsh Government support and approval. Some well-intentioned executives have been tarnished and undermined by the behaviours of their colleagues, such that the team itself became dysfunctional and ineffective as a group. The Minister says that she delegates the running of the health board to the independent members. This is inaccurate. Welsh Government and the executive team run the health board, with the board an afterthought at times. And through her actions, the Minister has wiped the memory of the organisation. Those who battled to see the organisation learn from past failings have been replaced. Good staff are leaving, and those who remain are struggling to get even basic decisions made—

I'm going to have to remind you that these are questions to the Counsel General and the Minister for the Constitution. I'm struggling with where you're going with this particular question, so, if you can bring it to the question.

I strongly contend that these are matters that fall within the brief—

No, no. I just need to hear your question, basically, is what I was saying there, and I couldn't see where you were going with it.

And I'd therefore be grateful if the Counsel General could answer the question I put at the beginning: what advice would he now give to the health Minister in the context of this worrying statement?

Well, the health Minister yesterday responded to similar questions that were put. She explained the decisions that have been taken, and the basis on which those decisions were taken. Those are a matter for the health Minister, and should be properly addressed to the health Minister.

Well, I'd suggest it goes a little bit further than that. And this, I have to say, reeks of an unethical Government, with the Minister following her predecessors in seeking to silence the truth tellers and bury accountability.

However, moving on, the Windsor framework, agreed by the Prime Minister and European Commission President, replaces the old Northern Ireland protocol, providing a new legal and UK constitutional framework. It delivers free-flowing trade in goods between Great Britain and Northern Ireland by removing any sense of a border in the Irish Sea for goods staying within the UK. These goods will travel as normal through a new green lane, without red tape or unnecessary checks, with the only checks remaining designed to prevent smuggling or crime. And to give businesses and individuals the time to prepare, the implementation of the agreement will be phased in, with some of the arrangements for goods, agri-food, pets and plants movements introduced later this year, and the remainder in 2024.

These regulations insert a new schedule into the Northern Ireland Act 1998, which implements those aspects of the Windsor framework relating to the involvement of the institutions of the 1998 agreement, and all parties represented here in the Senedd supported the framework in Westminster.

Given your responsibility for the co-ordination of work on the common frameworks, and the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020 within the Welsh Government, what advice have you given Cabinet colleagues to prepare their departments for these changes?

Well, the biggest concern that we have in terms of the issue on frameworks is not actually to do with the Windsor agreement. The Windsor agreement is something that, I think, as a Government, we welcome. We wait to see precisely how it will operate, but anything that facilitates the economic links, the economic trade, and also the re-establishment of the Northern Ireland Government is really important to us.

In terms of the frameworks, the biggest challenge to the frameworks is not in terms of the Windsor agreement, it is in terms of the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020, and also the retained EU law Bill. It is the retained EU law Bill that still has very significant implications, both for Northern Ireland, for Wales, and for the rest of the United Kingdom. That is where my focus will be over the course of the coming weeks, and, of course, I made a statement on that yesterday during the legislative consent motion discussion, and will, of course, bring forward further statements in due course.

Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Peredur Owen Griffiths.

Diolch, Llywydd. Well, we in Plaid Cymru have welcomed the Windsor framework as a basis on which to re-establish power sharing in Northern Ireland. We're also clear that it raises a number of questions for Wales, to which we have not yet had satisfactory answers. As we have discussed in this Chamber, it raises particular questions about the regulation of the flow of trade through Wales's Ireland-facing ports. In response to a question posed by one of my party colleagues in the House of Commons, the UK Government has suggested that the new green lane created under the framework will apply to goods transiting to Northern Ireland via Holyhead and Dublin. I remain unclear as to how this might be made possible, what new regulatory obligations might flow from it and how it would interact with the new free-port status granted to ports in both Pembrokeshire and Ynys Môn. Can I ask what assessment the Welsh Government has made of the Windsor framework's impact on Wales? And, specifically, what conversations have been had with UK Government counterparts about the framework's implications for market access via Welsh ports? Diolch.

Can I say that most of the discussions that are taking place in respect of those trade aspects are discussions that have taken place with the Minister for Economy? Of course, I have an overall interest in terms of the operation of the frameworks. At the moment, it's still too early to be precise or to be clear how they will work. It is something that is under review. There may well be issues that are of concern that need to be sorted. Those do remain predominantly within the ambit of portfolio responsibility of the Minister for Economy. If there are specific legal matters, no doubt the Minister will engage with me on those.

I suppose the best thing I can say is, of course, the point I made in the last point, which is that one of the biggest concerns we have arising out of this still remains the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020, and the extent to which that may undermine or override the frameworks, and that, in conjunction with the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill, we don't know what those consequences would be. So it is still a sort of moving feast at the moment, but, of course, it's something that is of high priority, it is something we're paying very close attention to, and we'll bring further statements in due course to this Senedd, as we know more and understand more about the processes.

Thank you, Minister. The issue of trade regulation is one on which we need urgent clarity. Another issue for Wales, raised by the Windsor framework, is that of the democratic deficit. Last week, the framework's Stormont brake was approved by the House of Commons. It provides for what could become, essentially, a unanimous veto on certain kinds of regulatory change in Northern Ireland. While the UK Government has arguably now overcorrected for any democratic deficit in Northern Ireland resulting from the Northern Ireland protocol, it has shown no concern at all for any such deficit in Wales, where there is no protected role for the Welsh Government in the governance of the protocol. This is despite the impact that it has had in Wales, including the trade through our ports. The Windsor framework does nothing to address this.

Further, what is Wales's inability to prevent the kinds of post-Brexit changes to its regulatory regime that are liable to flow from the retained EU law Bill and that have already stemmed from the internal market Act if not a democratic deficit? Does the Minister agree with me that we need a Senedd brake on the new EU regulations, including to protect Welsh access to European markets, and, if so, will he outline what steps the Welsh Government is taking to secure one?

Thank you for that. We are meant to have some sort of Senedd brake in terms of the Sewel convention, but it's not a very effective brake and it doesn't have any judicable status. I'm afraid I can probably only really take the questions you raised by, to some extent, just enlarging on some of the points I made earlier. That is, at the moment, we're still trying to have to assess how this would work, what the implications are for the common frameworks and the implication of the retained EU law Bill.

You're right that the engagement has not been good on this. I know there is further engagement, and I know that the Ministers do engage with their counterparts now on these issues at every opportunity that arises. All I can really say that is helpful is that the situation is under very, very close review, and further statements will be brought forward as we understand better what is happening and how these will work. And I think that applies to everyone who's participating within it, and, of course, we wait to see what will happen in terms of the DUP's position with regard to that and what may then happen in terms of whether or not there's going to be the re-establishment in Northern Ireland of the devolved Government.

Thank you for the question. The Welsh Government has been very clear in its opposition to this cruel and unjust Bill. We will continue to use all available avenues to object to this Bill and in particular the impact it will have on modern slavery and human rights protection.

I thank you for that answer. I'm deeply concerned, as others in this Chamber are, at the impact the UK Government's Illegal Migration Bill is going to have on efforts to combat human slavery and protect human rights in Wales if it's passed at Westminster. As chair of the Senedd's cross-party group on human trafficking, I've seen for myself how modern slavery continues to pose huge challenges in our communities and the devastating impact that it has on those caught up in it. I've heard that this pernicious and cruel Bill would fatally undermine the work to combat modern slavery and deny survivors the ability to report trafficking and, importantly, access assistance. Last week, a coalition of more than 60 organisations, and it's been mentioned already, including the Women's Institute, Amnesty International UK, a cross-party group of MPs and academics wrote to the Prime Minister to set out their deep concerns and opposition to this Bill. Will you join with me and all those who are standing up for the victims of modern slavery in urging the Government to withdraw this appalling Bill?

Thank you for the question, and, again, I endorse the comments that were made by my colleague the Minister for Social Justice on this specifically earlier. The UK Government provided the draft Bill to Welsh Government on 6 March 2023, the afternoon before it was introduced in the House of Commons. Disappointingly, no prior notification was given of the Bill's content.

I can probably best answer the point you raised by saying, yes, I think there's a clear majority in this Senedd that fully support and endorse the comments you made. The starting point, of course, is that the Bill is non-compliant with the European convention on human rights and is almost certainly in breach of the UN convention on refugees. Those are matters of considerable significance, because I could not imagine why any parliamentarian would sign up to a piece of legislation, or endorse a piece of legislation, that was, effectively, unlawful. Unfortunately, we have seen too many occasions at UK Government level where there has been a majority of Members of Parliament prepared to support unlawful legislation in their own Parliament. That is something of deep, deep concern.

I might refer to three comments that have been made that deal with the point you raised. Beth Gardiner-Smith, the chief executive officer at Safe Passage International, a third sector organisation, said,

'The Government’s plans are not only morally bankrupt, they are completely unworkable and will not stop refugees from risking their lives to seek safety here. This is more of the same failed approach',

and called on the Government to

'focus on opening safe routes for refugees'.

That's a point, of course, that was raised by the shadow Minister today and, indeed, yesterday in the House of Commons, by Yvette Cooper, who said,

'After 13 years of failure, today's figures underline the shocking mess the Conservatives have made of the asylum system.'

She said,

'The Home Office is still taking a third fewer decisions each year than it was seven years ago and they have let the backlog rise by another 60% to a record breaking...160,000'.

The state of incompetence at Westminster level has really now resulted in a knee-jerk response, which is, again, to play the race card. If you think those quotes are partisan and unfair, well, let's refer to what recently Theresa May, a former Conservative Prime Minister, said. She said,

'My fear with this Illegal Migration Bill is that it will drive a coach and horses through the Modern Slavery Act, denying support to those who have been exploited and enslaved and, in doing so, making it much harder to catch and stop the traffickers and slave drivers.'

Well, I echo the comments of both the First Minister and the Deputy Minister for Climate Change that the UK Government should not fund the Northern Powerhouse Rail in the same way as HS2. Northern Powerhouse Rail should be classified as an England-only project, with Wales receiving a population share of this funding.

I'm grateful to the Counsel General for that answer. It's clear, isn't it, that the Tory Government in Westminster once again have short-changed Cymru, classing yet another England-only project as an England-and-Wales project. The money we should have received from the HS2 project and the Northern Powerhouse Rail programme is £6 billion—£6 billion. Counsel General, this could have revolutionised Wales's rail network, but instead it's simply another example of how the Conservative Party in Westminster have no interest in Wales. Counsel General, do you agree with me that there is one solution for the people of Wales to get what they are owed: a general election and a Keir Starmer, UK Labour-led Government?

Well, I totally agree with the last point that the Member has made. I'm sure he's probably not surprised to hear me say that. Wales is due £5 billion as a result of HS2. Wales is due a further £1 billion as a result of Northern Powerhouse Rail. So, to suggest that these English projects benefit Wales is a complete nonsense. The money would be transformational for Wales's transport network. The UK Government needs to do the right thing and to pay up. I believe what we actually have is an abuse of the Barnett formula. I can say that these issues are raised at every opportunity and through the current inter-governmental machinery, and Welsh Government is not leaving it there where it is at the moment.

The Tories seek to deny geographic reality with HS2 and Northern Powerhouse Rail and to claim that, for England-only projects, we should somehow see Wales as well. I am dismayed that Keir Starmer hasn't yet assured us that he would correct this injustice and repay Wales the billions we're owed, but, in any case, this messy injustice we have surely arises from the fact that arrangements over consequential funding are subject to the whims of Westminster. Do you agree with me, Counsel General, that we should move to a place where the Barnett formula or, far better, a fairer replacement formula should be enshrined in law so that we no longer have to simply rely on some 'good chaps' principle of hoping that Westminster will do what's right in terms of funding, because, as this episode and countless others have shown us, Westminster does not do what is right for Wales?

Well, I think the first thing to say is, of course, Barnett, for all its faults, is a redistributive formula, and we don't want to do away with a redistributive formula; we just want a fairer formula and one that has clear guidelines and rules as to how it should operate. It cannot be something that is subject to the political whims of a particular Government at any particular time. So, I think you are absolutely right that there is a need for a newer formula, a refreshed formula, and a formula that has clear constitutional status in the way it is operated and the way in which any disputes over the operation of that formula should operate.

Thank you very much for the question. As I made clear in this place just last week, we have accepted the thrust of the recommendations made by the Law Commission and we are committed to reform. We will publish a White Paper in the coming months and will legislate to make the reforms happen.

Thank you very much, Counsel General. I was delighted to hear the Welsh tribunals being discussed here in the Senedd last week. This is an important part of the justice system that very often is overlooked, and it’s part of the justice system that’s already devolved to Wales. What I wanted to ask you, Counsel General, is what is the timetable for the White Paper, and when do you hope the united tribunals system and the tribunals appeals system—which will be historic, as the first appeals system in Wales for centuries—will be established. Thank you.

Well, thank you for the supplementary question. The timetable for a White Paper, I would hope, will be imminent. Obviously, it’s up to the First Minister to make statements on the announcement of the legislative programme. Of course, in the 'Delivering Justice' paper, we make very specific reference to tribunal reform, and, of course, the intention of Welsh Government is to legislate within this term in order to implement the recommendations of the Law Commission, of course, after the White Paper consultation. So, it is every intention that we will do that, that we will reform the tribunals. I think it will be an exciting and historic legal reform, with many opportunities in terms of how it may provide an embryonic base for the further development of the Welsh justice system, and I will of course make further statements in the not-too-distant future.

We have a number of projects being established to build our understanding of the practical next steps towards the devolution of the justice functions we believe have a good prospect of being taken forward by a future UK Government. I will update the Senedd on our progress in due course.

Thank you very much, Counsel General.

Now, of course, the Gordon Brown commission didn’t go as far as you or I would wish with regard to the devolution of justice, but, nonetheless, probation and youth justice are a very important aspects of the justice system. For that, we need to build capacity and capability within Welsh Government and within this Senedd to deal with those matters. So, is now the time, Cwnsler Cyffredinol, to establish a Welsh ministry of justice and for me to come to this Senedd in a few months' time and address you as a Minister of justice rather than a Cwnsler Cyffredinol?

Of course, you conflate two areas there: the role of the Counsel General and, of course, the roles of a justice Minister. Quite often, they are separate functions and those are obviously things that would want to be considered. There is no doubt that further devolution of justice, I believe, will happen, perhaps starting with probation and youth justice. Policing, to a large extent, is almost operating as a devolved function; it’s the lack of that legislative framework that properly enables the cohesion and the hegemony in terms of all those factors to operate that holds us back, to some extent. But those are areas that not only open the door in respect of the devolution of justice, but, of course, they also provide a framework for a complete change in the way in the which our combined services that contribute to the justice system actually operate.

The point you make in terms of capacity is an important one. My belief that these are very serious things will be addressed by the next Senedd, and I hope will be addressed in some of the legislation that will be coming forward. I think we do need an increase in Senedd Members and in terms of the size of the Government to enable that to happen, and, of course, it was one of the recommendations of the Thomas commission. One of the things that we have done, I suppose as the interim, as we move towards that situation, is that I work very closely with the Minister for Social Justice, so we bring those two elements together, almost as an embryonic justice function. But, in the next Senedd, and with Senedd reform and an increased size of the Senedd, it certainly is my view that the Thomas commission recommendations on the creation of a justice ministry and department will, effectively, come to fruition at that stage.

Thank you for your question. As currently drafted, the potential impact of the Bill on regulatory standards and protections that the people of Wales currently benefit from, and also on the democratically established devolution settlement, is deeply damaging. We have consistently reiterated our concerns at both an official and ministerial level to the UK Government.

Thank you for that answer, Counsel General. As you will be aware, resolving the nature crisis and protecting biodiversity are issues that are high on my agenda, and, under the UK Government's EU retained law Bill, we are set to see habitat regulations that provide protections for nature against threats of building developments and other projects being torn up by the Tories. So, what advice have you given, Counsel General, to the Welsh Government regarding legal protections for biodiversity in Wales as a result of this Brexit failure? Thank you.

Can I just say that the points you raise are really important ones in terms of the debates that have taken place, legislatively? To many people, the UK Government's retained EU law Bill sounds like a piece of technical legislation, but it is far more dangerous in reality. It has the potential to scrap many hard-won rights and protections, including, for example, parental leave, but also food standards and also protecting wildlife, which is a point, I think, that you are making. Our society, our communities, face a biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse, and that has massive implications in terms of our future sustainability as a society. What the retained EU law does is that it—. The current legislation that we have, the retained EU law, provides the basis for so many of our fundamental environmental and other protections. It is wholly irresponsible that the Bill that has been introduced, the retained EU law Bill, threatens to remove them, and any proposals for reform must not undermine the protection afforded by these regulations. Welsh Government is absolutely committed to doing everything that we can to retain and improve standards in all those particular areas.

Thank you for your question. The commission is of course independent of Welsh Government and therefore how they engage with the public on their work is a matter for them to determine.

Thank you, Counsel General, for your answer. I suppose, therefore, I would ask you what your assessment is of the independent commission—or supposedly independent commission—and how it came to its conclusion that the only three options for the constitutional future of Wales are more devolution, federalism and independence. I would ask: what about the other political viewpoints that these didn't cover? Now, we know polling consistently shows that the status quo is a preferred option, and 'abolish' is as popular as independence—neither of which I agree with, I should add. But what credibility do you think that this commission can possibly have when it excludes so many other political opinions across Wales? If it's—. If its consultation—. If the consultation process does not demonstrate that there has been properly adequate engagement across Wales and public opinion, what is your assessment in that regard?

Well, thank you for the supplementary question. Can I just say, in terms of the innuendo in the first part of your supplementary question, 'supposedly independent', that the commission is independent? It has representatives from all political strands as well as people of no political strand whatsoever. I think it is completely improper to suggest that it is 'supposedly independent'. It is independent. It has been given that clear—[Interruption.] It has been given that clear independent status and it is wrong to suggest otherwise. Now, what I'd say in terms of your own submission is that, of course, the commission has been attending all political conferences. There have been opportunities to engage and for these points to made by every strand of politics. I understand they attended the Conservative Party, the Plaid Cymru, the Liberals, and indeed the Labour, conference to actually talk about the work they're doing. There was absolutely no hindrance or restriction on anything that could be asked. I would also ask that every single Member of the opposition, if they feel as you do, that they should put in their own submissions. I don't know; I wouldn't like ask now—. Perhaps hold your hands up anyone who's put in a submission to the commission. I don't see any hands going up. I wonder whether your party has put a submission in. I hope that your party has put a submission in.

But the point that you raise, in terms of how it reflects all those views that you've been expressing that are out there—it is open to people to put any submission in, and those will be taken into account by the commission. But it is not for me for Welsh Government to tell them how to do their job. We set the guidelines, we provided the framework in which they operate, and they will report in due course.

I was very impressed with the interim report because, quite often, the fault with interim reports is they actually are interim reports that basically tell you what they're going to conclude in their final report. Well it didn't. It left open a completely wide range of opportunities on how democracy can be improved within Wales. Can I just say that there is still a real opportunity for you to contribute to this, to make input into it? It is something that's been established by this Senedd, by the will of this Senedd, and I hope you'll give it the credit for that and participate in it fully.

Compliance with international law and human rights conventions is at the heart of everything we do in Wales. We do not see these obligations as optional extras, but consider them fundamental to the functioning of a progressive democracy. As law officer, I consider these obligations very seriously.

I welcome that response, and I noted the earlier response of the Counsel General to a question by my colleague, Joyce Watson, in respect of the UK Government's aptly titled Illegal Migration Bill. Can I note how strangely ironic it is that UK Ministers highlight in the very title of that Bill that the proposals that they're bringing forward are judged by many international authorities to be illegal in risking contravening international law and conventions? Yet this is not the only piece of legislation that introduces the strange predicament for Ministers in devolved nations of being asked to be part of the Executive function, because of directions from the UK Government, in discharging illegal actions. How does the Counsel General feel about that, and how do his Welsh Government Cabinet colleagues feel about being asked to take forward things that contravene international law and conventions?

Well, thank you for the supplementary question. Sadly, on so many occasions, we have seen this occurring, and we've had to discuss it and to raise it in this Chamber. We did it in terms of the Northern Ireland Protocol Bill, which was clearly unlawful, and of course we've seen all the previous incidents that ended up in the Supreme Court, where the unlawfulness of what was happening by the Westminster Government was rightfully challenged. In fact, the irony is the response of the UK Government to those challenges was, 'Well, how can we then restrict the actual operation of the Supreme Court itself?' And we see internationally what happens when Governments try to actually undermine the independence of the judiciary and the operation of the rule of law.

What I would say, in terms of our record within this Senedd, in terms of our obligation under section 108 of the Government of Wales Act 2006, which prevents us from passing any regulations or legislation that is not compliant with those international obligations, is that we were the first UK nation to make the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child part of its domestic law; our Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 adopts the principles of the UN’s sustainable development goals; children's rights are enshrined in Welsh law in the Rights of Children and Young Persons (Wales) Measure 2011, and I could go on and on, and we know, in terms of the legislation passed in this place, that reiterates and complies with international obligations.

Can I say what is fundamentally disturbing about the immigration Bill that has been tabled in Westminster that is being pushed through Parliament now, with very little proper engagement and adequate time for scrutiny, is that the purpose to having a statement on the front of it is to say that the Human Rights Act 1998, the European convention on human rights, has actually been considered and complied with, that the legislation is in compliance? There is not a get out of jail card to say, 'Well, actually, we don't think it complies', et cetera. I really question whether legislation should be allowed to actually be tabled if it is incapable of being able to have a statement by the law officers or by the appropriate Ministers that something is in compliance with international obligations. Otherwise, you're effectively tabling legislation that says, 'This legislation is probably unlawful, but nevertheless we're going to pass it.' What does that actually say about parliamentary democracy and the rule of law? I think it is a really disturbing development in Westminster, and something that really needs to be addressed in terms of the constitutional status of the way that these things are dealt with.

Finally, question 10, Jack Sargeant.

Thank you for this particular question. The defence and operational matters fall within the responsibility of the UK Government, however I would urge the UK Government to release all information relating to the inquiry.

I'm very grateful to the Counsel General for that answer and his urging of the UK Government to release those documents. I've been contacted by campaigners on behalf of the bereaved families, who want and deserve answers. Will you use the influence not just today on the floor of the Senedd, but in the meetings you have with UK Government, to urge them again to be as transparent as possible and also to join with me in calling, when you do meet with those officials, not just on the floor of the Senedd today, but when you meet with those Ministers and officials of the UK Government, that they should release all of the documents related to the 1982 inquiry into the sinking of Sir Galahad so that bereaved families and those survivors can get the answers they so desperately want, but also so desperately deserve? Diolch.

Well, thank you for that supplementary question. I have the great honour each year to attend the memorial event in Ynysangharad park in respect of the Galahad. It's a very moving event, and it's one where I think it is growing year by year as we increasingly recognise, I think, the actual role of armed services personnel and the sacrifices that individuals make, and perhaps events internationally make that even keener in our particular memory.

I'm well aware that Welsh Guards officers have now called for the declassification of the Galahad documents, and, as I say, these aren't things that are within our devolved responsibilities, but I think we've always supported, as with Orgreave and with other events, Hillsborough and so on, the maximisation of transparency, openness and accountability in terms of events that took place. The Galahad events were in 1982, some considerable time ago, and there would have to be some really exceptional reasons as to why documents would not be declassified. I think we would do everything we can to support the declassification of those documents so that the families of those who lost their lives can be satisfied that they fully understand what happened and any questions they have are fully answered.

I thank the Counsel General.

Item 3 is questions to the Senedd Commission. The first question will be answered by the Llywydd. Heledd Fychan.

The Commission provides opportunities for schools and colleges across Wales to come to the Senedd on educational visits. These visits, conducted with an educational officer, are two hours long and include a tour and educational session in Siambr Hywel. A travel subsidy of £1 per mile is available for visits from outside a 10-mile radius of the Senedd. The scheme has been in place for over 10 years, and this higher rate was agreed to attract schools to visit the Senedd, and is higher than the standard HMRC provision, which is only 40p per mile.

Thank you very much for that response, and I'm sure that we've all been involved with some excellent visits, and we've seen the superb opportunities that exist for our children and young people and how they and we benefit from these visits.

But one of the things that's concerned to me in speaking to schools in my region, and considering that South Wales Central is that region, is that more and more say that the cost of buses specifically does mean that they are perhaps bringing the school parliament, which is a smaller group that therefore fits in two cars, rather than giving an opportunity for every pupil to come. So, I want to ask whether an assessment has been made in terms of the cost increase of buses specifically, in order to ensure that there are opportunities and that we do emphasise to local authorities how important these visits are, so that everyone benefits, not just small groups of children and young people.

Well, that's a very fair point, bearing in mind that the system that we have we've had in place for 10 years, as I said, with the subsidy of £1 per mile for travel. But, of course, we're very aware that during the last year to 18 months the cost of transport and bus hire in particular has risen very high for all kinds of events. So, I will take the question that you've asked and I will ask officials to look to see whether there are different patterns, smaller perhaps, as you've mentioned, smaller groups who are visiting the Senedd as a result of transport costs, and we will have to look at that, if that is a pattern that we are seeing that's depriving children, from all parts of Wales, of opportunities to benefit from visits here. So, thanks for the question, and we'll look into it.

I know you agree with me, Llywydd, that it's essential for Welsh democracy that the Senedd promotes itself to the people of Wales, and especially to children and young people. And in light of transport costs, I wonder what more the Commission could do to ensure the Senedd takes advantage of major events, when they're happening, when people are already in Cardiff Bay, particularly on weekends. So, for example, I know last weekend the bay was full of people for the 10 km run, which included a fun run for children, and apparently the Senedd was closed. So, looking ahead to other major events—I suppose with the coronation, for example, of the King and Queen Consort on the horizon—can you confirm the Senedd will be open as normal for the Saturday and what special activities are being planned to celebrate the coronation, but also promote and engage with families over that weekend?

Well, can I confirm, first of all, that the Commission has had to take the unfortunate step of having to close the Senedd on a Sunday due to cost pressures and the call on us by Members from across this Chamber, especially in your party, to look at cost reductions and reductions in budget, and therefore the Senedd is not open to the public on a Sunday? You'll know, of course, that we are looking to reduce our budget even further for the next financial year, and therefore that has implications as well.

When you make these calls on us, I'm sure you make the calls, understanding that they will require more money and, therefore, I hope that when we next look at the Commission budget, as we go forward over the next six months, that in your scrutiny of that budget, you'll think about what you want this Senedd to do on the basis of what it will cost for the Senedd to do that as well. And I'm sure that you'll reflect on your aspiration, and my aspiration as well, to be open seven days a week, but that has a cost implication, and we will need to increase our budget in order to do that.

The Commission is reviewing the existing booking process for hosting events and meetings on the Senedd estate, following changes in the use of the estate post pandemic. The changes that will be introduced immediately include amending the booking form to create separate categories for room and event bookings and to be able to process requests more quickly. The new form will be tested and implemented during the summer term. We're also consulting to gather Members' comments on any possible changes for the future.

Thank you, Llywydd. Thank you for your answer. I'm very pleased with your answer, Llywydd. My concern is, there's great difficulty for me and my office when we seem to be trying to host an event in the Senedd. So often I'm told that there's a six-month delay before any event can be organised, and then other times I get told, 'We can't allow that date because it's too far into the future.' But I would appreciate a much more streamlined way of MSs and their offices being able to book meeting rooms in the Senedd. It would be helpful to see what's available, so we can look ourselves and make judgments, and that way it would be a much smoother way; it seems to be quite a bureaucratic way at the moment. But I do hope that the changes that you've talked about can be progressed, Llywydd. Diolch yn fawr.

Yes, we are aware that there are frustrations with the system currently about the availability of rooms and the booking of those rooms. And in light of the considerable changes, really, in how events and meetings carry on and want to carry on into the future as a result of COVID, especially hybrid meetings or virtual meetings being part of what we can offer now, as well as onsite meetings, then we're going through a consultation exercise with Members to make sure that we're capturing Members' aspirations for what they want to see happening on the estate. So, hopefully everybody will engage with our officers to see what's possible and what can be done to suit the work that Members want to do on this estate.

And also, the point that you also made in your question to make it a bit more open for Members and their staff to see what's already booked, and whether we can progress the idea of an online booking service for some parts of our estate in order to take some of those frustrations out, and to make it all a bit more efficient into the future.

Question 3, Joyce Watson. Jack Sargeant, sorry. [Laughter.]

Joyce is answering.

Thank you for your question, Jack. The Senedd Commission continues to make supporting the physical and mental health of its staff a priority—excuse me—with a well-being strategy in place outlining—excuse me—how we support this.

Can I thank Joyce Watson for that answer? Can I also thank Joyce Watson for her consistent support for those who suffer from endometriosis and other conditions, and for everything you do as the Commission to champion women's equality? I'd also like to place on record, Deputy Presiding Officer, my thanks to campaigner and petitioner of the Senedd, Beth Hales, for her tireless work and inspirational campaigning within this area. This is the month of Endometriosis Action Month, and, as an employer, the Senedd has to be more endometriosis aware and more understanding of employees impacted. Can I ask you, Commissioner, will you look to engage with the endometriosis-friendly employer scheme, and become possibly accredited with that scheme? And will you also look further at what more the Senedd can do, and the Commission can do, to support staff suffering with other conditions?

Right, I can speak now.

We do have a system in place where we have, in the past, promoted physical and mental well-being with campaigns, and one of those campaigns was Endometriosis Awareness Month last year. We do share communications with staff and include a staff blog sharing personal experience of working with endometriosis, and an internal webpage providing specific information and support for those who are suffering with endometriosis. And we do know that 10 per cent of women are known to suffer and are affected by that condition.

In terms of your wider question about whether we will become champions, I think the Senedd is pretty good at championing the welfare of its workforce, but if Endometriosis UK want to get in touch with us, or any other society, to help inform us to make life easier for those people who have conditions that affect them in the workplace, or if anybody within the workplace equally wants to advise us where we can improve, we're always open to that.

As you said, Joyce, 10 per cent of all women have endometriosis, and I did think about this when I was on the march on Sunday, as to how we might have menstrual health discussions with female Members of the Senedd and staff, because a lot of people don't understand why they're suffering the way they are with their periods, because people who work here today won't have had the benefit of the relationships and sexuality education that we're now giving to young people.

I think that's a fair point, Jenny. We have a lot of information around and about, but it's at different stages, very often, of women's lives. It's not just endometriosis; it's the menopause, it's other factors for different people. So, I think, where we can, increasing that information—whether that's putting a poster up somewhere—would be a good thing and, yes, we'd be open to that.

The Commission’s procurement policy is in line with the principles of the Wales Procurement Policy Statement. With regards to the purchase of materials, whenever we procure goods with a value in excess of £25K we undertake a sustainability risk assessment. This assessment looks at key life cycle impacts of the materials we buy.

Thank you very much for that response, Llywydd. Last week, I asked a question to the Minister for agriculture on using the Government’s procurement power to use Welsh wool, for example, in carpets on public transport. Likewise, what consideration has the Commission given to ensuring that Welsh wool is used on the Senedd estate, and that the procurement policy notes the need for Welsh wool, for example in the fabric seen on the floor of this Chamber or on the walls of this Chamber, particularly when we see the Chamber extended?

Yes, I’m aware of your support for that very important material, namely, wool in Wales. I share your ambition for that very sustainable material. We are in the eighteenth year in this Chamber, and the wool on the walls and the floor has lasted as long as that, which shows how good that product is. As you mentioned, there will be a period, if legislation demands it, when we will need to extend this Chamber, and possibly at that time we will need to consider whether wool will last, and will need to be bought anew for this Chamber. If we do buy wool at that time, then I hope that it will be a more interesting colour than the grey that was purchased 18 years ago.

Question 5 will be answered by Ken Skates. Huw Irranca-Davies.

Yes, I'm very pleased to confirm that the scheme was formally approved and has been launched today. More details are available on the intranet site, and there will be a webinar for Members and staff tomorrow. Immediately after the Easter recess we'll also hold an on-site event, and obviously this scheme fulfils the commitment that we made in our carbon-neutral strategy to help make electric vehicles more affordable. They'll be available for Members, Members' staff and Commission staff, and there'll be a good range of vehicles covering all pay grades.

I have to say that's quite taken my breath away. I will now expect that every time I ask a question in the Senedd demanding something, it gets provided immediately. So, Ministers take note.

But, seriously, can I thank Ken and the Commissioners and all the staff for the work behind the scenes that has gone into this? And if I could ask now for that active engagement with those staff members, particularly staff members of MSs. You've mentioned the webinars and the other engagement that will be taking place over and after the recess, not just to promote the advantages of the scheme in terms of the uptake of electric vehicles, but also the role this can seriously play in helping them do their own bit in dealing with climate change and air quality. Will there be an active engagement on that, Ken?

Thanks, Huw. Just to say that, online, on the intranet pages, there's pretty comprehensive information available to all employees, whether staff members of the Commission or of Members themselves. There's also information from the service provider on all the vehicles that are available. I should just point out that, because electric cars are so much in demand, patience will be required for some of the more exotic and popular vehicles, such as the Audi e-tron. There are more modest and lovely vehicles that are available in a matter of weeks, such as the Funky Cat. I'd encourage everybody to take a look at what is available. The scheme is going to be hugely important as we try to encourage people to switch to hybrid and electric vehicles, and the addition of hybrid vehicles in the offer helps to cater to people who may not be able to install electric charge points at their homes. So, we're trying to appeal to all people, regardless of their income or their circumstances at home. And as part of the webinar tomorrow, and the event after the Easter recess, I can promise you, Huw, and all Members, that we'll be actively engaging with everybody.

The Commission has strict rules in place around the use of the Senedd estate. All events are reviewed to ensure that they meet our requirements, which include the prevention of activities that are considered discriminatory or offensive. Our communications team have tools in place to monitor the media and social media, in order to identify disinformation about the Senedd. The rise in disinformation is a risk, and I belive that, as Members, we all have a responsibility to help stop its spread, both in our Senedd and in our communities.

Thank you, Llywydd. You will remember, I'm sure, that, on St David's Day, you hosted an event in the Neuadd to celebrate the contribution made by people who'd chosen to make Wales their home, including people who'd fled Nazism as children, and who'd obviously enjoyed the rest of their lives in Wales. At the same time, there was somebody outside the windows of the Neuadd promoting disinformation about relationships and sexuality education, which was very unfortunate, in all sorts of ways. There was nothing that anybody could have done about it at the time, but it was just not good. I suppose there should have been some intervention by the commissionaires, perhaps, but I can see the difficulty of ensuring that we're not seen as an institution that suppresses information that we disagree with.

On a wider issue, GB News, which has been found in breach of Ofcom guidelines around COVID vaccines, has many items broadcasting disinformation or hateful views, and it's currently broadcast on our internal televisions. I just wondered if any thought had been given to whether it was appropriate for an organisation that might continue to disseminate disinformation to be broadcast through our systems to our staff and Members.

On the first part of your question, I was there, and I did witness myself the opportunity taken by the protestors outside to take advantage of the fact that our walls are windows, and to make sure that those of us sitting inside could read their placards. That is both an advantage and a disadvantage of our building. In that moment, I don't think anything could or should have been done, other than it didn't make for a particularly comfortable situation within the Senedd at that point.

Coming on to your second point, it's something that I haven't given any thought to at all. I'll need to take away the issue that you've raised about GB News as a news channel—I think it's a news channel—that is transmitted within the Senedd. I make no comment at all on it, actually, because I've given it no thought at all, but I will since it's been raised by you.

And the final question, question 7—Sioned Williams.

Thank you for your question. We do strive to be a Parliament that is accessible to everyone who works on or visits our estate. The designers of the Senedd building worked closely with disability access groups to ensure that the building complies with the best practice for accessibility. A comprehensive health and safety risk assessment is undertaken for on-site events and activities, for staff using computer monitors and screens, and as a core part of equality impact assessments for improvements and refurbishment across the estate.

Diolch. Through the Equal Power Equal Voice programme, I'm mentoring a fantastic campaigner from my region, Becci Smart, from Coytrahen in Bridgend. Becci has organised an event I'm sponsoring at the Pierhead building next month to raise awareness about premenstrual disorders, and she is also a long-standing campaigner on epilepsy, a condition she herself lives with. The point of the Equal Power Equal Voice programme is to break down barriers to democratic participation, and increase diversity of representation. The Senedd estate itself therefore must play its part if the Commission supports these aims.

Becci has photosensitive epilepsy, which means she can experience seizures triggered by flickering or flashing lights. To ensure equality of access to buildings for people like Becci, LED panel lights need to be used in buildings like the Senedd, as opposed to other forms of lighting, whose flicker can also cause problems for some autistic people and migraine sufferers. The Senedd Commission could also help by ensuring any defective lighting be switched off as soon as a fault is noted, to ensure the continued health of susceptible visiting public, and replaced as soon as possible, and also that all videos created or funded by the Senedd Commission don't contain flashing images.

Will the Senedd Commission commit to implementing these steps, and engage with epilepsy campaigners like Becci to see what additional measures can be taken to make the Senedd estate more inclusive?

Thank you very much. Anything that we can do, and any information that we can have to help us be better able to support and encourage those people, whatever conditions they have, sharing that information with us, to our advantage, is more than welcome. The majority of the lighting is LED downlighting in the Senedd, and estates and facilities management are currently exploring options to replace the last remaining fluorescent strip light that is in the Senedd security area, and also the Pierhead main hall, which is the point of your question. I will have conversations, and if we can have more information on that event and facilitate that change, we certainly will. We don't have any flashing or flickering or strobe lights or geometric patterns, and we don't have any festive lights, or lights at festive times, that flicker. We do use flat-screen tvs and monitors. So, we're doing an awful lot of work in this space, but if there's more work that we can do, and are able to do, of course we welcome those conversations and I'll work with you to that end.

I thank all of the Commissioners.

Item 4 this afternoon is the topical questions and I call on Gareth Davies to ask his topical question.

The Healthcare Inspectorate Wales report notes the hard work and commitment of staff at Ysbyty Glan Clwyd's emergency department and there have been some encouraging improvements following the previous inspection. However, it is very disappointing that many of the issues have still not been fully resolved.

I appreciate your response this afternoon, Minister, and I'd like to thank the Llywydd for accepting my topical question this morning. I'm very pleased that it has been accepted as I've read the HIW report into emergency services at Glan Clwyd Hospital today and I'm shocked. I'm shocked that this is the third inspection within a 12-month period and we're seeing scant evidence of any progress being made on the recommendations supplied by the inspectorate. Let me make it clear that this is no attack on the front-line workers in the department, who are working way above and beyond their job descriptions, but they are firefighting. They are firefighting a high concentration of acutely unwell patients, staff sickness and a lack of space in the department to practise safely. But why are staff going off sick? There is good evidence that staff are going off sick because they are overworked, stressed, burnt out and becoming unwell, and it's a vicious cycle with the issue not being solved. The consequence of that is the perennial hiring of agency staff, which then costs a fortune.

As I've mentioned many times in this Chamber to you before, Minister, the people of the Vale of Clwyd, Denbighshire, Conwy, Flintshire and across north Wales have had enough of bad news after bad news within this health board, and are tired of years and years of no action and deflection of blame and accountability. When you combine this with the recent news that Betsi Cadwaladr has been returned to special measures in the last month, with the chair of the board and independent members being forced to resign by you, instead of the executives, then you can hardly blame my constituents for feeling this way. But I want to be constructive with you, Minister, today. Now you have survived the confidence vote last week, and have the backing and mandate from the First Minister, I want you to find a way out of this situation that we are currently facing in north Wales, and resolve some of these chronic issues in Betsi Cadwaladr. That will help everybody: my constituents, patients, staff and the overall culture within the board.

I have a few questions in my supplementary that I'd like to ask you this afternoon, Minister, if I may. What communication have you had with the new chair of Betsi Cadwaladr so far regarding this matter at Glan Clwyd Hospital? Are you satisfied that his and the new board's aims and objectives match that of the needs of the problems at the emergency department? I'm aware that you are unhappy yourself, Minister, with the current structural size of the emergency department—[Interruption.]

You have one question, effectively, but not a load of questions, so please keep it to the short and minimum, okay?

Okay. I'm aware of the structural issues that you've got with the department, so what discussions have you had with the estates team to maximise that capacity and make a safe working environment for all staff and patients?

With the staff sickness problems within the department, what liaison have you had with the executives and the individual operational departments to improve the staff culture and issues within the board? You may say this is not within your gift to achieve, but let's remember, Minister, the health board is now in direct control of the Welsh Government, so it is in your and your department's remit to tackle some of these internal issues, and the liaison with all relevant departments is crucial in tackling this problem.

What assessment does the Minister make of the internal triage system within the emergency department in consideration of heart attacks, stroke and sepsis, which require rapid treatment, rather than waits of up to two hours? What potential approved clinical pathways have you observed, both in theory and in practice, when visiting hospital sites, that could be implemented as a solution to this problem? And, finally, Minister, do you genuinely believe—[Interruption.]

The Member must be allowed to ask his question, and he will finish on this question.

Thank you very much. Do you genuinely believe that the emergency department at Glan Clwyd Hospital has the potential, in the long term, to improve its fortunes, and be in a position in the future to get waiting times down and be a reliable service for patients in north Wales going forward?

I appreciate they are technical questions, Minister, but I hope they are also helpful to you in formulating some ideas to improve the situation, as I was elected by my constituents on the basis that the technical skills that I acquired in my time in the NHS would be effective and influential for Ministers. Thank you.

Thanks very much. Obviously, I'm not happy with the progress that's happened in Ysbyty Glan Clwyd, and, obviously, I did have sight of this report prior to me putting them into special measures. I was very concerned, and it was one of the many factors that made me lead to that action that I took.

Staffing is a real issue. It's not an issue just in Ysbyty Glan Clwyd; it's an issue throughout the world. I was in a conference recently in Denmark, and the talk of the entire conference was about how difficult it is to recruit people to the health service. I've been talking, today, to the medical director in Betsi about what opportunities there are in relation to improving staffing facilities and recruiting more people in Betsi Cadwaladr, but specifically to see what more we can do in relation to providing that additional support in Ysbyty Glan Clwyd.

You'll be aware that we've escalated this particular facility from targeted intervention to special measures; that means that, obviously, with the special measures, we will become more directive. I think it's really important that people understand that that doesn't mean that we are running the health board. So, it's really important that people understand that the responsibility for running the health board is still with the chair and the chief executive; I'm not running the health board. It's really important that people understand that what we're there to do is to make sure that we support them and we become directive in terms of what our expectations are.

I think it's really important that we try to ensure that people understand that the majority of people who have care, even in this emergency department, continue to receive good care and a good experience, but there are too many people who are not having that good experience. One of the things that I've been very keen to do is to make sure that we give more support to urgent and emergency care, and that's why we've earmarked £25 million across Wales. But, in addition to that, there has been a specific allocation of £418,000 to emergency departments in Betsi, because I do appreciate that, actually, this is not going to go away in the sense that the demand is constant. Obviously, we've got a lot of work to do on flow, but I want people, while they're waiting, to have a more pleasant time than they are now, which is why we're putting some additional facility and support into the capital and the infrastructure in emergency departments.

There's a lot of work to do, clearly, around the staff culture in relation to what is happening in the emergency department. There are, I'm sure, many, many able people; there are people who are working extremely hard. But, also, I think it is important to note that this report suggests that some of the staff were not always kind and courteous to patients, and we have to make sure that there is a no-tolerance approach to that. It's clear that things need to change in relation to the culture in Ysbyty Glan Clwyd, and in particular in the emergency department. I hope, this time, that the health board will pay heed to this report and that we will not see another poor report from HIW again.

Here we are again—another damning report. We are talking about an inspection that had placed the emergency department at Ysbyty Glan Clwyd in May of last year under the designation of a service that needs substantial improvement. Let's be clear that this is the highest tier of concern that can be expressed, and nothing could be more of an incentive for the Government to act to ensure that things do improve significantly.

We could look at the positives, and note that the most recent report, after the most recent inspection, said that things had improved somewhat by that point, but what we read, I'm afraid, is—and I quote—that there have been 'minor improvements'. Now, I hope that I'm correctly quoting the Minister when she said:

'Many of the issues have not been fully resolved'.

Well, it's not that they haven't been fully resolved; there have only been minor improvements. There is one sentence that really struck me, namely that, 'Inspectors from Healthcare Inspectorate Wales had to assist one patient who needed help but no member of staff was to be seen'. How appalling is that—that inspectors are not only seeing those deficiencies, but they actually have to step in to help? It is quite frightening.

Through all of this, the staff are praised, and we, as a Senedd here, can praise those staff too. Their relationship with local managers is also praised, and it's worth noting that. The problem, and what we have to ask again today are questions about those senior managers—the executive board committee—and many of them have a lack of understanding of the problems in Betsi Cadwaladr emanating from the fact that they are at a physical distance from the area, as well as in terms of their understanding of the situation in Betsi Cadwaladr—many of them are interim positions of course. Now, the question is: why has the Government allowed things to drag on for so long? This is a copy of a report from nine months previously. If placing the board in special measures was the solution, why wait for nine months? But now that you, as a Government, have a hold of the board through those special measures, what steps will be taken to ensure that those staffing problems are resolved—that there is a new overview of how to tackle the staff rota problems and so on?

Unfortunately, what we have here is a board that has shown time and time again that it is broken and a Government that is failing to tackle the situation by taking those brave steps—taking those far-reaching steps of giving us a new start in Betsi Cadwaladr. The Minister can't use cost as an excuse for not reorganising because it has cost more to try and put things right and fail, and the Minister cannot use as an excuse the fact that that would be disruptive. There is nothing more disruptive than the lack of confidence and the lack of faith that people and staff in Betsi Cadwaladr have now in the ability to turn things around. So, let's have a fresh start. Will the Minister agree to my question once again today to put a plan B together, because I'm afraid that people's confidence in plan A—continuing with Betsi—has long since dissipated?

Well, I think the Government has acted—we've stepped in and given an opportunity to the board to act, and what we saw were not the kind of improvements that we would have expected to see. This report is not acceptable. The report does praise the staff to a certain extent. Some of them are critical of some of the staff and it is important that we monitor that because that's part of the culture that needs to be changed, particularly in Ysbyty Glan Clwyd. I do agree that we need to look at the role of the senior managers here and I know that the new chair is looking into these issues.

Regarding staffing, I am pleased to say that they are now in a position where there are two new consultants in the department, so it's up to a full complement in terms of what's expected in an emergency department. And we've also seen recruitment for bands 4, 2 and 5, and now what's happening is that there are monthly sessions that are being held where managers listen to the concerns expressed by staff and ensure that staff have an opportunity to have their say on their concerns.

I share the astonishment at the fact that we have yet another report before us that regurgitates many of the same concerns that we've seen twice before. I note that this inspection by HIW actually took place in November of last year. Why on earth has it taken so many months for these reports to see the light of day? And the Minister may well say that there have been improvements, and there do appear to have been some improvements, certainly in terms of record keeping, but we know, from our own post bags, as local Members of the Senedd, that there are still huge problems in that emergency department. Just this week, I was contacted by a constituent whose husband was conveyed to Glan Clwyd Hospital in an ambulance in a serious state and wasn't seen by a doctor, to be examined, for 28 hours—over a day. That is obviously unacceptable and potentially put that gentleman at serious risk of harm.

The situation is not getting any better from a patient perspective. It seems to only be getting worse. I want to see these improvements driven forward. It's very clear in this report that the staff did not feel supported, and, I quote from the report,

'did not feel supported by health board senior leaders.'

These are the same senior leaders that you, Minister, have allowed to stay in post. When will we have an accountable NHS so that people like this, who are failing to resolve long-standing issues in that emergency department—when will they be sacked? We need to see the back of them. We won't see improvements before they are moved on. It's unacceptable and my constituents and other people in north Wales deserve a lot better than this.

Thanks very much. Obviously, it's not my report to publish, it's HIW's report, and they're the people who determine the timescale on which that happens. Look, I acknowledge that there are still very, very serious problems, in particular in relation to Ysbyty Glan Clwyd and in particular in relation to the emergency department. That's why I've had serious discussions with the medical director to ask about what exactly is being put in place. Of course it's unacceptable if somebody is not seeing a doctor for that length of time. Triage, of course, is really important, but there are occasions when triage is taking too long, as well.

What's interesting for me is that there seems to be a specific problem here with the emergency department in Ysbyty Glan Clwyd, because I visited the emergency department in Wrexham Maelor recently, and it seemed to be far more organised and under control, they knew what they were doing, and it was in a much better place. So, one of the things I think we've got to encourage is to learn best practice from the other emergency departments that are working better in Betsi.

I don't know how many times I can say this: I do not have the ability to sack people who I do not employ. I cannot sack executives, and I think it's really important that people understand that the chair will obviously be looking at what needs to be done in this space, and I know that he's looking at that very seriously.

Thank you, Minister.

We move now to the 90-second statements, and the first is from Vikki Howells.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. The twenty-fourth World Transplant Games will take place next month in Perth, Australia. Since the very first games in Portsmouth in 1978, they've been held all around the world, serving as a celebration of the gift of a second chance at life, the demonstration of the success of transplant surgery, a promotion of the need to raise awareness of organ and tissue donation, and a beacon for transplant recipients, donors, families and supporters.

The seven-day programme mixes high and low-impact sports with social and cultural events. This year, 2,500 competitors from over 60 nations will take part, including Cerys O'Connell, an inspirational 14-year-old from Mountain Ash. When she was just four, Cerys was diagnosed with severe aplastic anaemia. The only treatment for this life-threatening condition was a bone marrow transplant. Luckily, her sister Megan was a blood match, and, following intensive chemotherapy, Cerys received her transplant in 2013.

This hasn't stopped Cerys being a keen competitive swimmer. After winning three golds and a silver medal for Wales in last year's British Transplant Games, Cerys was selected as part of team GB. Cerys needed to raise funds to cover the cost of her trip, and I'm pleased to say that she smashed her JustGiving target, thanks to the generosity of all who donated. The very best of luck to Cerys and team GB.

This week marks World Autism Acceptance Week, which aims to change attitudes towards autistic people and their families. As part of its sixtieth anniversary year, the National Autistic Society collaborated with autistic people to create a vision of a society that works for them. Through interviews, workshops, social media and non-verbal creative activities, the charity invited autistic people, their families and subject experts to describe a world that works for autistic people.

The resulting 'The Moonshot Vision' report outlines five key future realities, as well as short, medium and long-term milestones. It found that an autism-friendly society:

'Values autistic individuals. Understands and appreciates what autism is and how it is unique for each individual'.

And it:

'Maximises autistic power'.

It empowers autistic people

'to control how they live their lives and make distinctive contributions that influence the world'.

It also:

'Guarantees support. Provides seamless diagnosis, support and care for autistic people from all backgrounds, at all moments of need throughout their lives.

'Adapts public spaces and services'.

And it ensures that they're

'inclusive, with flexible adjustments that recognise that not all autistic people have the same preferences'.

And it:

'Is free from discrimination. Rejects stereotypes and stigma, removes the expectation to mask, and doesn’t accept being told to fit in'.

At least one in 100 people in Wales is on the spectrum, so it's crucial that we all consider the part we can play in making this ambitious vision a reality. Diolch yn fawr.

Y Dinesydd, at 50 years of age: it’s my great pleasure to note in this Senedd that half a century has passed since the establishment of the first papur bro—community newspaper—in Wales, and that here in our capital city. Y Dinesydd was the vision of the late and beloved Mered, and a number of prominent Welsh speakers played an integral role in its inception, including the very industrious Shân Emlyn, the unique David Meredith, and the experienced journalist Vaughan Hughes. In the midst of their busy everyday lives, many volunteers have worked diligently and often thanklessly to ensure that Y Dinesydd is celebrating its fiftieth birthday. The dream was realised in the first issue, namely to enrich Welsh-speaking life in the capital and to bring Welsh speakers closer together. The establishment of Y Dinesydd led to papurau bro—community newspapers—throughout Wales and beyond—and, if you're wondering where 'beyond' is, the Angor in Liverpool, edited by D. Ben Rees, is that 'beyond'—over 59 of them, including Llais Ogwen, the second to be established in 1974, Tafod Elai in the Pontypridd area and Clochdar in the Cynon Valley and the Gloran in the Rhondda Valley. Cardiff has benefited over the years from Welsh speakers moving to the capital. Certainly, this is at least one example of Cardiff’s contribution to the Welsh-speaking life of our nation. Please buy the bumper edition next month. Thank you very much.

Item 6 this afternoon is the motion to amend Standing Orders on proxy voting, and I call on a member of the Business Committee to move the motion—Siân Gwenllian.

Thank you very much, Dirprwy Lywydd, and it’s a pleasure for me to speak this afternoon on an issue that is a signal that we are taking a further step in the creation of a modern, progressive, inclusive Senedd we can all be proud of. The Business Committee by majority view has agreed to propose a number of changes to the Senedd’s proxy voting scheme. The Business Committee is proposing these changes in order to futureproof the options available to Members and to provide Members who are absent from proceedings, for a range of reasons, with a means to express their views on the decisions before the Senedd.

Now the existing temporary provisions did cover parental leave, but parental leave only, and I had direct experience of this, and held a proxy vote for Adam Price in the last Senedd, and Dai Lloyd did so on behalf of Bethan Sayed too. So, it’s positive today that Business Committee is now proposing that these provisions should be made permanent, and, in doing so, we are also proposing that the length of proxy voting for this purpose should be amended to a period of seven months for both partners.

The Business Committee is also proposing that the Senedd agrees to extend proxy voting to include cases where a Member is absent from the Senedd for other reasons—three other reasons specifically. Firstly, absence because of long-term illness or injury; secondly, absence because of caring responsibilities, which make it a requirement for them to be absent from the Senedd; and, thirdly, for reasons of bereavement.

The Business Committee proposes that a proxy vote to cover long-term illness or injury or for caring responsibility should be one that could last for at least four weeks, with a maximum of six months. If a Member were to be absent because of bereavement, the length of the proxy vote period is to be agreed between the Member and the Llywydd. These proposed changes would ensure that the proxy voting provisions in this Senedd would go further than the provisions currently made in any one of the other UK Parliaments. I'm very proud of that, and it's a clear sign of our willingness here in Wales to create a caring and inclusive workplace in our national Parliament.

The committee also proposes that the Llywydd should hold discretion to vary the arrangements when required, in response to individual circumstances. The committee is also of the opinion that proxy voting should have equal status with a vote cast directly by a Member, and, as such, it's proposing that restrictions on the types of votes are removed and proxy voting is permitted in all forms of voting in Plenary and in the Committee of the Whole Senedd.

The Business Committee has agreed to review these provisions before the end of the sixth Senedd, so I urge you to approve these changes to our Standing Orders.

I actually want to speak against the proposals before the Senedd today, not because I don't support the need to facilitate both short- and long-term leave for parents, for those who are sick or injured or with caring responsibilities or because of a bereavement, but because we have a system that has served this Senedd for over two decades, which has worked exceptionally well in order to provide leave for those purposes. It's called the pairing system. It's worked in parliaments for many hundreds of years, including here in the United Kingdom, and indeed in Wales it has served us very, very well.

I think it's worth just recognising that we're not employees; as Members of the Senedd, we're elected representatives. We're elected into public office, and I don't think that trying to compare us to employees in the way that is proposed by these reforms, if you like, by giving certain rights to Members for proxy votes, is an appropriate thing to do. So, whilst fully supporting the need to facilitate leave for parents when they need it, for those with caring responsibilities, and for those who have suffered a bereavement, I do think that those things can be achieved and have been achieved successfully through the pairing system, and, for that reason, I urge Members today to vote against these unnecessary proposals.

I am a member of the Business Committee, and we have rehearsed these issues before, including Darren Millar's position that the pairing system actually fulfils the issues we're trying to address. It doesn't address or fulfil those issues for somebody like myself, who is a sole Member. I cannot pair with another Member for a long period of time, because there will be different times for different votes. So, it doesn't work for sole Members, and, going forward, in an expanded Senedd, we may have further sole Members. Therefore, I fully support this proposal. It is bringing us into the twenty-first century. It will make sure that people who are carers, who are parents, who are parents to be, and those suffering from ill health, have the opportunity to have time from the Senedd when they don't need to worry about representation or about the business of the Senedd. And that's what a compassionate, caring Parliament should be about. So, I welcome this proposal. It is about a modern Senedd, and I urge you all to support the Business Committee's proposal here today. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

I call on Siân Gwenllian to respond to the debate.

Thank you very much, and I'll respond to the comments on the pairing system, because this is what has taken the attention of the Business Committee as well. Pairing is an informal arrangement, of course, where Members can pair and both Members don't vote at all, so there is no record of their vote. Voting by proxy allows that Member to record a vote through having another person vote on their behalf, so it's more democratic, in my opinion. Pairing is a practice, but it doesn't happen all the time. It is a practice, I believe, in this Senedd that the Government and the opposition can make pairing arrangements, but, in the last Senedd, Plaid Cymru Members weren't paired. By now, we are. Because of the co-operation agreement, there are pairing arrangements in place. But it doesn't follow that pairing happens on every occasion and, of course, when you have a sole Member, well that perhaps isn't going to be possible, although, of course, it is possible to request pairing arrangements under those circumstances as well. So, we're talking here about situations where Members are away for extended periods. Pairing is still a practice that can happen from week to week, but when a Member needs to be away for an extended period for the reasons that have been mentioned, proxy voting is a much more robust arrangement, it's more formal, and it's a recognition, isn't it, that we are a place that has modern working practices. We're not an employer, but surely we need to set an example of the way in which we wish to work and treat each other in this place.

The proposal is to amend Standing Orders relation to proxy voting. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, I've heard an objection. I will therefore defer voting under this item until voting time.

Item 7, a motion to amend Standing Orders, miscellaneous changes. I call on a member of the Business Committee to move the motion—Siân Gwenllian.

Formally move.

I have no speakers on this item, so the proposal is to amend Standing Orders in relation to miscellaneous changes. Does any Member object? No. The motion is therefore agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Item 8 is next, a debate on a Member's legislative proposal, a Wales tourism Bill, and I call on Tom Giffard to make the motion.

Diolch yn fawr iawn ichi, Dirprwy Lywydd, and it's a pleasure for me today to introduce my first Member's legislative proposal to the Senedd. My legislative proposal is something close to my heart, and I know the hearts of many in this Chamber—our tourism industry. We know how important the tourism industry is to our economy here in Wales, and it's something we need to nurture and to enhance. I want as many people as possible from across the UK, and indeed the world, to experience what we have to offer, from our absolutely stunning natural beauty to the famous Welsh welcome. Wales really does have an unmatched offer. But we haven't always sold it as well as we could have. Think of the way that somewhere like Scotland sells itself internationally—full of mythology, major events and incomparable beauty. Now, I think we do all those things better here in Wales, but yet, in the year before the pandemic, they had three times the number of visitors that we did. And one of the reasons is that VisitScotland sits away from Government. It's not something run by civil servants sat in a Government department. They're an arm's-length body that can have the best minds from within the tourism industry itself. And that's what this proposal is looking to establish here in Wales—a tourism body run by the very people that know the industry the best. They know how to market, they know what works and they know what Wales has to offer. And these aren't big businesses—the Federation of Small Businesses have been clear in saying the tourism sector is one that's overwhelmingly made up of small and medium-sized enterprises. And that's the norm. VisitEngland, VisitScotland, VisitBritain—these are all set up in this way. The Welsh Government have made us the outlier.

So, the motion seeks to reinstate or create an arm’s-length tourism body, removed from Welsh Government influence. This would have an independent board, a chief executive officer, with a letter of remit outlining general policy asks from the Government. An independent body would mean that there are board members who are held to a high level of transparency through, for example, annual reports, yearly accounts that are audited by the auditor general, and annual business plans that include milestones and targets. They wouldn't be a footnote in departmental expenditure.

There could be independence from Government funding. Both VisitBritain and VisitEngland are able to draw on private sector funding, so this could be a cut in costs in itself. And an arm's-length body would sit above politics and policies, and instead act as a critical friend to the Welsh Government, working together and supporting it where it gets things right, but then standing up for the industry, rather than the Government, when they disagree. Today's proposal isn't about any one policy—that sort of misses the point—but let me give you an example of what I mean. VisitBritain is an arm's-length body and it came out against the Welsh Government's pursued policy of a tourism tax, calling it 'inadvisable at a time when our sector is focused on driving up visitor numbers in the wake of the pandemic'. Could you imagine Visit Wales in its current structure ever calling out the Welsh Government like that? It's impossible to imagine. They didn't do it because they're Labour or Conservative or anything else; they did it because they're speaking up for their industry, real people that represent their part of our economy because they know it so well and want to see it thrive for generations to come.

I have so much more that I could say, but those are just some of the reasons why I've brought this legislative proposal forward today and am looking forward to hearing contributions from colleagues during the debate too. Thank you.

I'm happy to support this legislative proposal, although I should explain that I'm approaching it from a slightly different angle to the Member that moved the motion.

I will talk of my experience as a journalist back 20 years ago. I recall during that time, early in my career, in the 1990s, perhaps, there was a great deal of coverage in the Welsh media, in news and so on, as to what was happening within the tourism industry. Jonathan Jones was chief executive of the Wales Tourist Board. He was a very prominent public figure who spoke publicly very regularly on very technical elements of how to drive the tourism industry forward. I will declare an interest here. I don't think I have to declare an interest on my wife's former profession, but at one time she worked for the Wales Tourist Board.

I'm not saying that the tourist board did everything perfectly, but it was a body that was outward facing, public facing, and understood the industry. I remember what happened following the bonfire of the quangos: tourism in Wales disappeared from the public agenda in Wales. I recall asking, where I would have asked for an interview with the chief executive of the Wales Tourist Board, we had to go through the Government and ask for an interview with the Minister who had responsibility for tourism, and on a technical tourism issue, the Minister often didn't want to speak. It wasn't a particularly political issue; it wasn't a huge political priority. But there was something lost there, I think, in terms of expertise and discussion and conversation between tourism managers in Wales, the public in Wales, and communities in Wales, and I think that that is something that has been lost.

I would see great benefit in having a body that has a very specific function of developing tourism in Wales, and could do so in collaboration with communities in Wales. I'm not critical of the civil servants involved with tourism within the Welsh Government at the moment, but there is benefit in having a cohort of people who develop expertise over a period of years and can innovate.

One of the things that I would want this new body to do is to work more closely with communities. Tourism, in my constituency as much as any other, can be a strong economic tool, it can be a force for good, but tourism done in a way that isn't sensitive to the needs, aspirations and values of a community can be extremely damaging. We in Ynys Môn would want to see the development of a far closer conversation between the industry and the communities, and that is something that this new body could do whilst developing that expertise to innovate in tourism for the benefit of our communities.

I'm delighted to be supporting you, Tom Giffard, with your first legislative proposal, and what a really good call it is, and that's for a Wales tourism Bill. The lack of joined-up thinking across the tourism industry and policy is clear for all to see, and this doesn't come from those operators. The whole remit of Visit Wales is actually meant to be about driving trade in tourism. After all, this important industry supports one in seven Welsh jobs, and yet it is the Welsh Government's tourism tax that is now putting at risk those same jobs. I have seen very little, if any, support from Visit Wales with regard to the condemnation of this retrograde tax collection.

Now, we're very fortunate in north Wales. We have the tourism chief executive of Go North Wales or North Wales Tourism chief executive, Jim Jones. He himself has said that he's found it staggering that Welsh Government continue to talk about a tourism tax. He said,

'A tax on tourism would be a hugely regressive step that would damage an industry that is already reeling after being battered by the pandemic.'

Many owners of self-catering holiday lets have contacted us to say that they are considering selling up and leaving the market due to the Welsh Government's added red tape. Three hundred per cent council tax premium for second homes does nothing to address the housing crisis in Wales. Added together, these policies would amount to a disaster for thriving local tourism hotspots. This is a slap in the face to hospitality businesses, but where Visit Wales is concerned, as has been said by my colleague Rhun over there, we all remember the days of the tourism board. What we need from Visit Wales, what we need is something that's outward facing, stands up to Welsh Government on occasion and actually defends the very people who actually put that remit in their hands.

I have raised, but to be fair to the Deputy Minister, about how Visit Wales does not offer the same accommodation search features that VisitScotland or Visit Northern Ireland do, and I know we're meeting soon to actually look at this. The current centralised structure of Visit Wales means that our local operators, as well as those in other parts of Wales, can often feel left behind and they just see Visit Wales as another cohort of Welsh Government. We need a new board that would be above party politics, would help to put those businesses directly into the driver's seat. This would make sure we have a strategy, devised by local tourism operators, not by bureaucrats and civil servants.

Will you take an intervention? I know the time is tight, but would the Member agree with me that it can't just be about empowering tourism businesses, but about devising tourism in a way that works, yes, for those businesses, but for the communities in which they operate?

Oh, yes, we have to have sensitive tourism, Rhun, and we don't want people—. We know with Snowdon that overtourism can actually make it where we may end up losing visitors because of—. So, there has to be a fair balance, I would agree with you on that.

I think this proposal and a new Wales tourism board would go a long way towards fixing these problems, and I can also assure you that you'll be able to deliver a lot more for considerably less. Diolch.

Tourism is a vital part of our economy; it accounted for 11.3 per cent of all jobs in 2020, and, in rural areas like the one I represent, that proportion is much higher. More than half of those jobs are part time, a far higher proportion than the economy as a whole. It is essential, but it's fragile. Many of the jobs are in hospitality and it is a sector dominated by small and medium enterprises—businesses that we know are still recovering from COVID and struggling to deal with the impacts of Brexit. As COVID and Brexit have taken their toll on our economy and on our hospitality sector in particular, I think it is time we had a renewed debate about how we support our tourism industry.

Business confidence in Wales is at its lowest ever outside of lockdown periods, with retail and hospitality businesses especially hard pressed. There's no getting around these figures: small businesses' confidence is at its third lowest level since the Federation of Small Businesses started tracking it nearly a decade ago. So, I do think it's right that we start looking at how we deliver a sustainable tourism and hospitality sector going hand in hand with businesses in our community across Wales. An example is, today, in Ystradgynlais, a town of 8,000 people in the region I represent, the last bank in town, Lloyds Bank, is going to be closing. Lloyds Bank, which made a profit last year of £1.3 billion. The bank in Ystradgynlais is essential, along with those small shops, to be able to serve our tourism and hospitality sectors. So, we must look at this in the round.

I do have a number of questions about the proposal and about the board that's been suggested. Firstly, to whom is the board accountable? How is it accountable to the sector, but also to the Government and to us here in the Senedd? Who would make up the committees proposed? How would the board be funded? These are critical questions, and I do hope to hear more about these, because what we're talking about is revoking legislation and handing those powers from Welsh Government to a new body.

We have seen complex proposals brought forward around tourism, but there hasn't been a thread through these discussions about the overall visitor experience and the effect that that has on our communities in Wales. Tourism and hospitality are vital to our country. It is about making sure we are a healthy, outward-looking country. I strongly support the need to promote tourism in Wales and the Welsh brand around the world, and hope that this is a starting point for our discussion. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

I'm delighted to be able to speak in support of Tom Giffard's excellent proposal to create a Wales tourism Bill, and as already outlined here today, the Bill would create a new tourism board for Wales, certainly empowering the businesses of our tourism sector whilst unshackling their entrepreneurial spirit. We know—it's already been mentioned—the number of jobs that tourism supports here in Wales, and let's not forget the types of jobs we're talking about there: front-of-house roles in our hotels and attractions and areas of hospitality, but also those roles we often don't perhaps consider, such as the role of accountants, butchers and those in the supply chain that make such a difference in our communities.

In the region I represent of North Wales, tourism supports 46,000 jobs and usually generates around £3.5 billion every year to our local economy. Creating an independent tourism board, giving those businesses more input into how Wales is marketed as a world-beating tourism destination, can only be a good thing, in my view, both for those businesses, but to Rhun ap Iorwerth's point as well, also for those communities, in making sure things are done properly in supporting those communities, supporting those jobs in those communities, creating those jobs, generating the wealth that we all want to see and those communities prospering.

In my view, an independent board will have a better understanding of where investment is needed, how it can make the greatest impact, and how Government policy can best support our tourism sector. Perhaps it would remove some of that tension that we see at the moment from Visit Wales, where they're doing their best, I'm sure, but there's a tension there when it comes to Government policy because they are a Government arm. An independent board will be able to champion best practice for essentials like marketing and publicity, destination management and improved amenities, because we know that things like our public toilets being well maintained, sandy beaches and adequate parking are all really important factors for our visitors and local residents alike.

Today's motion, of course, proposes the transfer of power away from Visit Wales, part of the Welsh Government. I would have thought it was something that Welsh Government would be happy to embrace, because we know that Wales is home to countless world-beating tourist attractions and destinations, and empowering the best and brightest of these to champion Wales and everything we have to offer, in my view, can only be a good thing. These are the people who've been there, these are people who've done that, they've set their businesses up, they've created the jobs—let's empower them to do their best to promote Wales on a global stage as well.

I call on the Minister for Economy, Vaughan Gething.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd, and thank you to Members for contributing to today's half-an-hour debate. It won't be a surprise that I disagree with the Member's essential proposal, but he's entitled to bring his proposal forward. That's part of what this Chamber is for. I was, however, a little disappointed at the disparaging references to civil servants in the opening. The visitor economy is a priority for the Welsh Government, with tourism-related industry generating 5 per cent of Wales's gross value added, or £3.4 billion in 2020-21.

We have a clear and ambitious strategy for the visitor economy, 'Welcome to Wales: Priorities for the visitor economy 2020-2025'. Our final budget provides an allocation of £10.63 million in revenue and £5 million of capital to support the sector, and help deliver the strategy. That will provide funding for essential capital investment, like the Brilliant Basics fund, to support small-scale infrastructure investment, along with revenue support for marketing campaigns, investing in skills, recruitment initiatives and quality assurance through grading.

We also have ambitious cross-Government policies in development. I include the visitor levy and the statutory licensing scheme in those, in our manifestos and in the co-operation agreement with Plaid Cymru. These are aimed at enhancing and supporting the industry further. These three factors—strategy, budget and cross-Government, cross-sector working—are the cornerstones of effective policy making at the heart of Government. These directly support the development of the tourism industry here in Wales.

Members will of course be aware that, last month, I announced that the Deputy Minister, Dawn Bowden, was taking a lead on matters relating to tourism, and the tourism and hospitality sector have already started to work positively and constructively with the Deputy Minister. She’s already had an opportunity to see first-hand examples of what Visit Wales are doing to support the sector. She’s been, for example, to Cosmeston lakes in the Vale of Glamorgan to see small-scale infrastructure improvements through Brilliant Basics, and how they help to enhance the visitor experience. She’s been to Pendine Sands in Carmarthenshire; there’s a multimillion-pound visitor attraction there, home to the museum of land speed—at some point I’ll tell him my family connection to that—in addition to a new eco-holiday resort. We supported that project through Tourism Attractor Destinations with former EU funds.

Visit Wales creates a powerful and dedicated one-stop-shop department, with less of a false distinction between making policy and implementation. It has the necessary critical mass and increased commercial focus to generate policy areas that are directly suitable to Wales and our economy. And we are undeniably very close to the sector in the way that we operate. In Wales, we have the ability to know each other well, to engage with each other frequently. That does not happen in every country. I’m proud of how close we are as a Government to the people and organisations here in Wales, including in the visitor economy. We have direct and honest engagement with industry bodies and Ministers, not just officials. The idea that we don’t understand what’s happening and there isn't an industry body lobbying for views and interests simply isn’t accurate. The visitor economy forum and our regional tourism partnerships feed directly into Visit Wales with businesses making very clear their views, including on the times we disagree. But we do listen to the feedback, and we’re interested in the advice from the sector to inform the choices we need to make in the Government. But if there were an arm’s-length body, let’s not pretend that it would somehow put those choices and that advice above the political fray. We all know that wouldn’t happen.

You talk a great deal about the sector; are you going to discuss the connection between Visit Wales and the communities where tourism exists? I haven’t heard you talk about the communities at all.

That’s part of what we look to listen to as well, because those businesses recognise they have an interest in seeing a community that survives and supports the sector. It’s why we have within our co-operation agreement the work we’re doing on the balance of the impact of the visitor economy, to make sure that it’s a positive for the communities that house those visitor attractions, whether that’s in rural and coastal parts of Wales, or the visitors who come to some of our cities as well, to understand how it adds to, not takes away from, community life in those parts of Wales.

I should also point out that VisitBritain might be a part that is in theory at arm’s length; in practice, it has a very direct relationship with DCMS Ministers, and the way they want VisitBritain to behave. I think it’s a challenge that VisitEngland is housed within VisitBritain. [Interruption.] I’ll take another intervention and then I’ll try and conclude.

Thank you, Minister. You’ve heard me, in the last couple of weeks, mention Go North Wales and Jim Jones. He’s very well known—he’s like a superstar in north Wales. Have you heard of Go North Wales, and would you agree with me that they run a very effective support industry and marketing exercise for tourism in north Wales? Personally, I’d like to see it replicated across the whole of Wales. But have you heard of them and would you agree with me that they're doing a really good job?

I think there are lots of positives that Go North Wales actually deliver, and when we look at what we do in different regions of Wales to promote Wales, I think there are good stories and learnings from each of us. I am, of course, aware of Jim Jones; he has prolific and very strident views on a range of subjects.

With Visit Wales, we have a similar approach and model to Cadw and Creative Wales. I believe those operating models work well for us. The Government will abstain on the proposal before the Senedd today, as is usual when these proposals come forward, but we do want to make clear, to be honest with the mover and, indeed, others, that we don't support the proposal before us, but we do, though, look forward to seeing more detail in the proposal.

I call on Tom Giffard to reply to the debate.

Diolch yn fawr iawn ichi, Ddirprwy Lywydd. Can I thank everybody who has contributed to this debate today? As the Minister, I guess, alluded to at the end of his contribution there, I think this is the start of a conversation and not the end of a conversation. I'm grateful, even though he doesn't support the motion today, that the Government are going to abstain on this as well, and I intend to continue this conversation as this develops.

In my view, an independent arm's-length body is something that is sorely needed to boost our tourism sector after a crippling set of lockdowns, an increased cost of living and other pressures facing the tourism industry more generally at the moment. I'm grateful to some of the contributors who made their arguments as well, particularly Rhun ap Iorwerth. I'm grateful for his support, even if we didn't come at it from the same way, but, like a nice walk around the Gower peninsula, it doesn't matter where you start—as long as you end up in the same place, it doesn't really matter. [Laughter.] But it's really important that not only would it be representative of the sector, but it would also work very well with communities as well, and I think that's a very important point well made there.

Jane Dodds and Sam Rowlands talked about the fragility of small businesses that are involved in the tourism economy, and bringing together the best and the brightest minds to work on it. Jane, you raised totally legitimate questions, I think, about the funding and the structure of the board. One of the downsides of these half-an-hour debates, I suppose, is that you don't get enough chance to get into the weeds of these things. My preference would be to have that industry and community-led governance model, and have it be available for funding through Government, not, as I said in my opening remarks, as a Government line in a department budget but with its own set budget, but also an openness to be able to get private sector funding and so on. So, this is something, perhaps, we can talk about as, hopefully, this develops, going forward.

Then, Janet Finch-Saunders talked about how Visit Wales can refocus a remit on enhancing tourism, over and above the competing aims of the Welsh Government. I think the Minister, in his closing remarks, spoke about a lot of good things that the Government are doing, but isn't that exactly the reason why we need an independent Visit Wales—to verify those claims? A Visit Wales that sits outside of Government could endorse all of the points you made much more effectively than, perhaps, a Minister making them as well. Perhaps evidence of that is the fact that, as you alluded to, Minister, the responsibility for tourism has shifted from one Minister to another in the last couple of months. Each time that happens, it's a natural consequence of that. Having the experts sitting on a board—sitting on a panel—responsible for tourism is crucial, going forward.

The proposal is to note the motion. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is an objection. I will, therefore, defer voting until voting time.

Item 9 this afternoon is the Welsh Conservatives debate on local government funding. I call on Sam Rowlands to move the motion.

Thank you again, Deputy Presiding Officer. I'm delighted to open this debate today on local government funding. As our motion outlines here today, we propose that the Senedd first of all notes that local authorities have an estimated £2.75 billion in useable reserves, recognises the vital role that local authorities play in delivering public services across Wales and the funding challenges that they face, and regrets that the average council tax rise in Wales for the next year is 5.5 per cent. Also, we call on the Welsh Government to commission an independent review of the Welsh local government funding formula, that the Welsh Government work with local authorities to use their useable reserves to keep council tax as low as possible, and require any local authority proposing an excessive increase in council tax to hold a referendum and obtain a 'yes' vote before implementing the proposed rise. Let's be very clear, the funding of councils in Wales to enable them to deliver the services that our residents expect is wholly in the gift of the Welsh Government, who currently choose to provide around three quarters of local government's funding. The rest, in the main, as we know, is funded through council tax demands.

This shows very clearly that decisions made by the Welsh Government have a big impact on the finances of Welsh local authorities, with major levers of funding that local authorities have in terms of delivering their services coming from the Welsh Government. It's because of the significance of the impact of this funding on our communities that today we are calling for the Welsh Government to commission an independent review of that funding formula. Remember, it's the thing that determines how much funding is provided to each local authority to enable them to deliver those important services that our residents expect.

Of course, there have already been some reviews in minor detail from time to time that the Minister and previous Ministers have had with local government. A recent example of this was in regard to rurality, which wasn't properly accounted for in the past, but there has been some work to ensure that does take place. But that's just a one-off issue that is looked at, not going for a full review. As a further example, I've raised my concern in the past about some of the data being used and the recency of the data being used to determine that funding, because some of it is decades out of date.

There are also some actual measures in there that I believe are still not being properly considered. These include the appropriate level of funding to support older people. The Minister will know that the Welsh Government's funding formula assumes that an extra £1,500 a year will be needed to support each person over the age of 85. However, for people aged between 60 and 84, this figure is reduced to £10.72. It's a huge discrepancy. Surely, the assumption that providing care for an 84-year-old costs less than 1 per cent of the cost required to care for an 85-year-old shows that the funding formula is not appropriate in its current form. I would have thought it would be much more sensible that the assumed level of funding needed to care for our elderly increases gradually, not at a cliff edge. That's just a quick example of the type of thing that an independent review would seek to challenge, taking it away from the potential party politics. What I find perplexing, Deputy Presiding Officer, is that if the funding formula is currently so good, why would the Government want to resist an independent review? I expect the Minister, surely, today would want to welcome an independent review of its funding formula.

Finally, the funding formula must take the levels of reserves held by local authorities into account. I mentioned earlier that the current level of reserves held by local authorities is around £2.75 billion in their useable reserves, numbers that only the Welsh Government would want to dream of having in their reserves. It cannot be right that some councils over a period of years have been able to build up significant reserves, some close to £300 million, while other councils are barely able to get by. There seems to be a significant gap in the levels of funding that some councils are able to enjoy compared with others that enables this financial cushion. We know that Rhondda Cynon Taf council holds around £250 million in their reserves, Caerphilly around £233 million in their reserves, Carmarthenshire around £230 million in theirs. Whilst many of these reserves will be held for good reason, it cannot be right that £3 billion of public money is squirrelled away, not being used to support such important public services that our residents rely on. Therefore, I think it's essential that the local government funding formula takes account of the reserves held by local authorities to better support the finances of those authorities that do not have large reserves and to encourage those authorities that are sitting on large reserves to make better use of them.

I have selected the three amendments to the motion. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendments 2 and 3 will be deselected. I call on the Minister for Finance and Local Government to move formally amendment 1 tabled in the name of Lesley Griffiths.

I move.

And I call on Llyr Gruffydd to move amendments 2 and 3 tabled in the name of Siân Gwenllian.

Diolch yn fawr, Dirprwy Lywydd. Now, I certainly welcome the opportunity to speak in this debate and I think, at the start of a new financial year, it's right that we take the opportunity, I think, to reflect on the current state of local authority finances and the resulting implications for council taxes. And the reality is that an average rise of 5.5 per cent in council tax across Wales for the next financial year will be challenging for many people who are already struggling for reasons that we're all too familiar with.

But frankly, I think it is certainly disingenuous for the Tories to bemoan these hikes in council tax without acknowledging the root cause of the issue, namely the devastating impact of 13 years of Tory-driven austerity and economic incompetence that have affected local authorities and their ability to sustain essential public services. Austerity, as I've said before, is a political choice and it is a choice that disproportionately shifts the burden onto the poorest and most vulnerable in our society, and that stems—this whole situation stems directly from over a decade of cuts and under-investment that has left public services in an existentially parlous state. And now, the latest round of Tory austerity imposed on Wales—it's going to be an utterly disastrous experiment and it's leaving a gaping £30 billion hole in UK public finances, which is—

Will you—

Okay, very briefly.

Thank you. I appreciate it, Llyr. You will remember, in the last 10 years, the UK Government gave enough funds to the Welsh Government to freeze council tax for three years and yet, this was never passed on to the local authorities to do that—

Well, okay, you made the point, but what I would say is that devolution is all about allowing this place to make its own decisions, and, similarly, devolution to local government is about allowing them to make their own decisions as well—

Yes. But would not you agree—

Sorry, no. [Interruption.] Look, I'm not going to quarrel with you. Sit down, because I've allowed you to intervene.

All right, all right. Calm down.

There we are. Okay, thank you.

So, I think it is worth noting the extent of these pressures on local authority finances. And yes, there are challenges, clearly, but you can't absolve yourself from being part of that. [Interruption.]

Janet—

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. The WLGA, as we know, has quantified much of these budgetary pressures on Welsh councils. They've talked about figures in excess of £0.5 billion for next year on top of a £0.25 billion this year. You can do the maths. We know the situation and the challenges facing authorities in my region— Gwynedd, Conwy, Flintshire—and all Members here will be more than familiar with the pressures facing their own local authorities as well.

So, to turn to the elements of the motion that I believe have merit, I think that it's absolutely right that we do have a debate and an independent review of the formula through which local government is funded, yes. As a party, we've argued for some time for the need to look again at the system and to look at a needs-based formula involving a range of factors, including poverty and rurality. But there will always be winners and losers, no matter what formula you put in place, and you can cut the cake up differently, but we all know as well that the cake itself is too small, isn't it, really? So, there's no silver bullet, and I don't think anybody is fooling themselves there. But, yes, let's have the review, because there's no harm at all in looking at options and revisiting these things on occasion.

When it comes to reserves, there will always be a need for local authorities, of course, to maintain a certain level of reserves, and I'm not hearing anybody querying that. But in respect of this figure of £2.75 billion, I think that's an over-simplification of a more nuanced picture. Yes, there are conversations to be had, of course, about how local authorities can efficiently and responsibly allocate their resources for optimal outcomes. Personally, I think that's happening already to a sufficient extent. Local authorities are aware of that responsibility, and, of course, it is their responsibility. I come back to this point about devolution; it's about their role, they are answerable—and they will be answerable, every election time, so we shouldn't shy away from that. And I've just realised now that my time is running out. I stick to the same principle, of course, when it comes to referenda on council tax levels, local authorities are empowered to make these decisions, and in turn, they are accountable to their electors for those decisions at election time—yes? There's a slippery slope here; a referendum for all decisions that councils make.

So, I think the debate we should be having is about changing the regressive nature of the council tax, and I'm glad to say that, as part of the co-operation agreement with the Welsh Government, that programme of work is happening. We are looking to develop a fairer council tax. The first phase of the consultation has happened and the second phase is coming soon. So, I'm not standing here saying, 'Support the Welsh Government's delete-all amendment'; I don't agree with that. What I'm standing here and asking fellow Members to do is to support Plaid Cymru's two amendments, so that we can fine-tune the Conservative motion. Diolch.

I am very pleased to see that we have cross-party support for recognising the vital role that local authorities play in delivering public services across Wales and the funding challenges they face.

The rich, and their representatives here, the Conservative Party, dislike two taxes above all others: rates and council tax. There are a very limited number of ways of avoiding these taxes. Whilst income tax is aimed to be progressive, loopholes in our tax system are such that it’s easy to legally reduce liability. On the estimated council reserves, I assume that this figure’s taken from councils' consolidated accounts and includes schools' reserves. There are just under 1,500 schools in Wales, which would make £15 million if the average school balance was £10,000, and £45 million if it was £30,000. Why do schools need balances? Firstly, they have to have money in reserve. If they lose pupil numbers in-year, then, at the pupil level annual school census, they have to pay the money back, save for renovations and improvements that are not a council responsibility. Councils use reserves against potential departmental overspends—social services throughout most of Britain. Also with reserves, councils borrow for capital schemes from their reserves, which is cheaper than borrowing at market rate, especially at times of low interest rates, so money will appear on both sides of the balance sheet.

Finally, some councils use part of their reserves to form an insurance against a school fire that destroys the building. I also understand that, this year, councils have been using reserves to support expenditure. However, reserves used for revenue expenditure can only be used once and has the effect of creating a funding gap for future years.

Now, I'll turn to council tax. Band values were set on 1 April 2003. There are people here who were in school at that time. It is regressive; it was meant to be regressive. Band A is properties up to £44,000; band D £91,000 to £123,000; band H, £324,000 to £424,000. Council tax is set on band D, and all other band payments are based on that. Properties in band A pay 75 per cent of the amount charged on band D. Properties in band H pay twice the amount on band D. This is where it gets regressive. A £40,000 house will be charged two thirds the amount of council tax for a £120,000 house, despite it only being a third of the value. A £420,000 house will be charged twice as much as a £120,000 house, even though it's worth over three times as much. And it will get—. This is where it becomes unfair; it is regressive, but the system was built to be regressive, because it came in at the end of poll tax, and they still wanted people in low-value properties to be paying—

Will you take an intervention, Mike?

Please do.

As you outlined, the nature of the ratcheting of council tax at the moment—are you suggesting, then, that there should be a directly proportional tax on property in Wales?

I'm about to say that. Thank you, Sam. My preference is that all houses are revalued and that council tax is a fixed percentage of the value of the property. I will again call for either more bands and a change to the multiplier, or a spot-price valuation, with each property paying the same percentage of its value.

Moving on to standard spending assessment, which is where we get our aggregate external finance from, it's the Government mechanism for allocating grant based on a calculation of what each local authority needs to spend to deliver a standard level of service at a common rate of council tax. For the purpose of calculating individual SSA allocations, local government is broken down into 55 notional service areas. When I was involved in highway maintenance, it went from 52 per cent population and 48 per cent road length to 50 per cent of each. A minor change, you may say. It moved several hundred thousand pounds from Swansea, Cardiff and Newport into Powys, Pembrokeshire and Gwynedd. Again, you might think that's a good idea.

The standard spending assessment per head for each council varies between £2,520 at Blaenau Gwent to £2,049 at Monmouth. A separate method of distribution exists for each service element, in order to distribute the total across authorities. The distribution method falls into two categories: formula based and distribution based. I'm sure that Welsh Government Ministers are fed up of me asking for this, but why can't they publish the workings? Show how each local authority's standard spending assessment is calculated. You must have it, or you wouldn't be working on it. The aggregate external finance is calculated from the SSA and councils' nominal council tax receipts. Again, the figures are published, but the calculations are not.

Finally, what you would expect is that the councils with the most properties in bands A and B would get the most aggregate external funding, and those with the most in band D and above the least, which is actually what happens. So, I will again finish up on my request, which I will probably do at the next meeting as well, when we discuss this: can the Government just publish their workings?

I have the great fortune of being able to represent half of the wonderful county borough of Conwy, but unfortunately, residents in that county borough this year are facing the highest level of increase in their council tax bills on record, and, of course, it is the highest this year across the whole of Wales, at 9.9 per cent. That is an unacceptable increase, in my view, at a time when people are facing cost-of-living pressures, and it's particularly galling to people in my constituency to be facing that sort of increase when you look at the hundreds of millions of pounds that are being hoarded by some local authorities in south Wales, because if those resources were freed up, then, there would be more cash to go around to help hard-working families to be able to meet the cost of these bills. That's why I'm all in favour of seeing a reformed funding formula that takes into account the level of reserves that local authorities are holding, in addition to fine-tuning the formula so that it's fairer to older people, because, frankly, they're being overlooked at the moment in the way that the funding formula is working. We also, of course, have a rural sparsity issue in many rural local authorities. They don't seem to get the same sort of fair deal that urban local authorities get with their funding, and that's also something that needs to change.

I listened with interest to the comments from Llyr Huws Gruffydd, when he was objecting to any kind of assertion that—God forbid—the public should be given a right to have their say via a referendum if there's an excessive council tax increase proposed. I know it's galling for Plaid Cymru to ask the public's view on anything, particularly when independence is so unpopular in Wales, but the reality is that this system of enabling referendums for excessive council tax increases does act as an incentive for councils in England to keep their bills low, and that's why they've got lower average increases in England since the introduction of that rule than we have seen here in Wales.

Now, I expect that the Minister, in her response to this debate later on, will refer to the fact that, on average, council taxes are lower in Wales than they are in England and other parts of the United Kingdom, but we mustn't forget this: as a proportion of our income, because pay packets are much lower in Wales, we actually pay more in council tax than any other part of the United Kingdom, and that's because of the dreadful mismanagement of the economy here in Wales over two decades by the Welsh Labour Government and those who have propped them up in both the Liberal Democrats and Plaid Cymru. So, we've got to get these things on an even keel.

Having referendums to secure a 'yes' vote prior to any significant increases being introduced, I think, is the right step forward. People in Conwy shouldn't be having to pay a 9.9 per cent increase when they're already trying to make ends meet. And we know that the UK Government—. It's not a shortage of cash—the Welsh Government seems to have enough cash to be able to send £155 million back and burn through £0.25 billion on an airport and still fork out hundreds of millions extra, even, on a metro system, today, we learn. They're able to find that down the back of the sofa, yet they can't seem to find the resources for people to be able have their council tax bills frozen in a year when they really need to see those bills frozen. So, I don't accept that there's not enough money to go around. We've got the money; we just need to get on and facilitate the freezing of council tax bills here in Wales.

The impression this debate gives is that local government somehow has extra cash lying around, whereas the reality is that, after a decade of Conservative austerity, followed by huge inflationary pressures caused by the Liz Truss Government, local authorities are in dire straits. The future is also bleak under Rishi Sunak as there was nothing for public services in the spring budget. As the First Minister said yesterday, the Chancellor failed to do the most basic things on which growth depends, leading to a collapse compared to anything achieved in the last 60 years, leaving families across the UK worse off. As a councillor, I remember the Chancellor George Osborne delivering cut after cut to public services, saying the deficit had to be paid off. Yet, under successive Tory Governments, the deficit has grown out of control.

Carolyn, will you take an intervention from Janet Finch-Saunders?

No, I'll carry on. We heard this morning in committee that service providers fear we could be about to enter another period of dire austerity. As a council, we organised and restructured, making nearly £100 million-worth of savings over those 10 years. We went from six depots to one, rationalising staff by nearly 40 per cent, year after year salami slicing departments by 30 per cent. When we could not cut vital services, such as social healthcare and education, any more we took to street scene then and anything deemed non-statutory. And now we're really concerned about leisure services, as we've been discussing at committee.

Ten years ago, council tax used to be 24 per cent of the budget—the rest came from Government. But now it's, on average, about 30 per cent of the budget. Some Conservative-led councils did cut service funding rather than raise council tax, and I remember Conwy council cutting education funding and other services rather than raise council tax significantly, and, in my first year as an MS, I remember visiting a school in Colwyn Bay who were really struggling because of that cut in education funding. The pot was left empty for the new administration following last year's elections. They were unable to deliver vital services, and so council tax has had to go up to help deliver them, including education again, and to help those most vulnerable.

Carolyn, sorry, I've got another request for an intervention, from Sam Rowlands.

I'm not taking them—I'm just carrying on. I've got a lot to say here, okay.

Thank you.

Other authorities have cut officers and services rather than raise council tax, meaning they now have a shortage of officers to deliver core services, such as planning or social healthcare, and technical highway officers to apply for Welsh Government grant funding for active travel. More pressure is put on councils now due to the way replacement EU funding bids have to be made by local authorities, which is another issue.

Reserves cannot be used for ongoing revenue funding, because, once they are gone, that is it, and, as Mike earlier said, part of the reserves are the schools' budgets. It's vital some reserves are held should there be storm damage to council-maintained infrastructure. We've seen in recent years landslides and subsidence causing major damage from monsoon-like rainfall. Heavy snowfall means costly, prolonged gritting. School transport has increased by 40 per cent, and is very volatile. And if an operator goes out of business, the price rises significantly, as competition reduces. And if a family moves to the area in-year with significant caring needs, it can cost a local authority hundreds of thousands of pounds. That's why they need these reserves, especially the larger authorities.

I've previously asked the Minister and I've previously asked at the Local Government and Housing Committee for the funding formula to be reviewed, and the response was that it would be. One area that perhaps needs reviewing is funding for social services, based on the average age of a population. Conwy, for instance, has the highest level of over-80s in Wales. There have been calls for per capita funding, but then those in more rural areas would lose out significantly; it's a careful balance. Councils are often our biggest employers, even despite the reduced workforce, delivering vital public services that our communities and our economy rely on. They educate, provide planning, housing, transport and all the support services that take pressure off our NHS. They've been undervalued by the Tories, and there needs to be a change of UK Government, with a Treasury that respects and values what our councils do. Thank you.

It's my pleasure to contribute to today's Welsh Conservatives debate, especially as many people across Wales will be receiving their new council tax bills in a matter of days. I think, therefore, it's imperative for all of us to remember—paraphrasing, indeed, a great American President—that Government is of the people, by the people and for the people. We should therefore ensure that council tax payers are getting the best value for money while they support vital local services.

So, are we getting value for money? Well, no. In Labour-led Swansea, there's a blistering 5.95 per cent council tax rise from April, costing the average band D property in the area £1,893 over the next year—that's treble what they would have paid in 1999. In Labour-led Bridgend, a 4.9 per cent rise will cost band D properties £2,052—a 217 per cent rise compared to 1999. And in Neath Port Talbot, it's 4.5 per cent; in Rhondda Cynon Taf, it's 3.9 per cent—better, but still adding costs to the average household when they're struggling. I've heard the Labour and Plaid benches saying it's not their fault, it's all to do with austerity, and they've got no money left, and yet, together, the councils I've mentioned are sitting on useable reserves of over £0.75 billion. Two, Swansea and Rhondda Cynon Taf, make up nearly two thirds of them. RCT by itself, with £270 million in reserves, has the highest level in Wales.

In light of these figures in South Wales West, I must say that I agree with the former Labour leader of Bridgend County Borough Council when he said that, and I quote, 'an easy and lazy option when it comes to local government is to blame austerity and the Tories. It too often ignores other factors, such as poor decision making, when it comes to both budgets and service delivery.' That's a former Labour leader of Bridgend council. I couldn't agree with him more, especially when money for services is being set aside for vanity projects, unaffordable targets and simply bad accounting, and Welsh Government is at the very heart of this.

There's the fact that nearly £100 million was written off in debts by Welsh councils over the last five years, including non-domestic rates, court costs and invoices on top of council tax; there's the fact that RCT is reducing black bag bin collections to once every three weeks to avoid a fine of £420,000 from Welsh Government if it doesn't meet recycling targets; there's the fact that, after declaring a climate emergency in 2019, Swansea council has estimated that it would cost £187 million for it to reach net zero by 2030 under Welsh Government targets, and it's budgeted £4 million for it.

Thankfully, attempts by Swansea city councillors to name rooms after themselves in the city's new £50 million arena were paused last year. However, this lack of prudent accounting reaches the very top of Government here in Wales. Not only is the Welsh Government wasting vast amounts of cash on an unpopular and unwanted 20 mph national speed limit, due to COVID, it failed to spend £155 million in public money due to poor account management, and had to pay it back to the Treasury—[Interruption.] That's money small businesses and councils could have used to keep a stable footing and even pass on savings to taxpayers in this time of need.

It's obvious that the Conservative Party opposite have no idea what the duties and responsibilities of local government are, so thank you for extrapolating on that. So, I rise to support the amendments tabled by Lesley Griffiths. We have now endured more than a decade of Tory austerity, and it will become a teenager this May. From David Cameron through Theresa May to Boris Johnson, Liz Truss and now Rishi Sunak—a right-wing ideology at its heart of shrinking the state, which has totally decimated public services.

The Welsh Government's current funding settlement, which comes mainly from the UK Government, is not sufficient. It is not sufficient to meet all the extraordinary pressures that Wales is now facing, let alone all of our priorities for the people of Wales in 2023-24. Even after the additional funding in the autumn statement, our settlement is still worth up to £3 billion less in real terms and up to £1 billion less next year. An abysmal capital funding for Wales and no electrification for Wales. Despite this, the Welsh Government is providing an additional £227 million—providing an additional £227 million despite this—in 2023-24, and £268 million in 2024-25, to the local government settlement in Wales. This is the reality, so I would like that to be heard.

This builds on the funding that was outlined as part of the Welsh Government's 2022 spending review, now providing—[Interruption.]—now providing £1 billion up to 2024-25. Recently I've met with the leadership of Caerphilly County Borough Council in the Senedd, last week, and I know, from speaking to council leader Councillor Sean Morgan and the deputy council leader, Jamie Pritchard, that Islwyn's local authority greatly values the constructive working relationship—constructive working relationship—it has with the Welsh Government and the Ministers.

So, adjusting for transfers, the core revenue funding for local government in 2023-24 will increase—this is the reality—by 7.9 per cent on a like-for-like basis, compared to the current year, and no authority will receive a less than 6.5 per cent increase. Caerphilly County Borough Council saw a rise of 6.9 per cent. But we all know this is not enough and it creates real challenges, and, thanks to the UK Government, this is what local government is being tasked to do: to work with not enough. This is the reality. And whilst working closely with local authorities, partners continue to advance progressive causes, the settlement including funding to enable authorities to continue to meet the additional costs of introducing the real living wage for care workers and pay demands, something that I know will be hugely welcomed—and, again, it's not enough, and, for care workers, it is not enough—whilst the Welsh Government provided £20 million capital in each year to enable authorities to respond to our joint priority of decarbonisation to meet net zero—and a very confused narrative as to what the party opposite wishes local authorities to do around that.

Let the Member conclude her contribution, please.

So, the richest Prime Minister that we have ever known—[Interruption.]—I would like to finish—is paying a lower tax rate than working people, who face the highest tax burden in 70 years. How is that fair? How is that fair to the Welsh taxpayer, how is it fair to social care workers, who are paying their way?

It's called ambition. Ambition.

It's the same old—. Are you saying social care workers don't have ambition?

I am saying that all—

We'll not have discussions.

It's the same old Tories: one rule for the rich and another rule for the working man and woman. And it is apt that the BBC have made a new adaptation of Charles Dickens for Sunday evenings, as the present Tory Government is taking the UK back to the Victorian age—and that is not me just saying this; go and talk to the International Monetary Fund.

So, only, Deputy Llywydd—[Interruption.] They obviously don't like it. Only with the election of a future UK Labour Government can we hope to restore our beloved yet totally battered and beleaguered public services in this country, and it is way over time that we do that. Thank you.

I'm really happy to be supporting this motion, along with my Welsh Conservative colleagues. In England, local authorities, fire authorities, police and crime commissioners are required to determine whether the amount of council tax they plan to raise is excessive. Our Secretary of State sets thresholds of excessiveness, known as 'referendum principles' for different classes of authority. Should the same rule be applied in Wales, a referendum would certainly have been triggered in Conwy. This would have allowed people their say on the 9.9 per cent increase brought in by Conwy First Independent Group, Welsh Labour and Plaid Cymru. And we have north Wales Members here from Plaid and Labour actually supporting this.

We all know the power of referendums to make a difference. This is also true when it comes to council tax. For example, a referendum was held by the Bedfordshire Police and Crime Commissioner, who proposed a rise in council tax of 15.8 per cent in 2015-16. A poll was held on 7 May 2015, where 30 per cent of voters supported the proposal, whilst 69.5 per cent opposed it. The Welsh Government does not currently provide Welsh residents with the same democratic levers to hold councils like Conwy and this Welsh Government to account, when it talks about excessive council tax increases. It's not that long ago when I held the portfolio for local government, Sam, and I tell you now: there was a cap. I always remember there was a cap that was—[Interruption.] We have used the cap previously. So, I would also endorse the referendum idea and say that we should reintroduce the cap here.

As a consequence of this, the decision by Conwy council to raise council tax by 9.9 per cent, the steepest increase of anywhere in Wales, is now representing a worrying burden on many hard-pressed—

Will you take an intervention?

Yes, I will.

Thank you. Do you accept that these councils are facing a huge dilemma of either decimating the public services that they provide, leaving vulnerable people at the mercy of God knows what, or increasing council taxes? So, are you saying, in opposing the increase, that you, as a Conservative, would actually advocate the annihilation of services?

No, what I am saying—. What I have heard very loud and clear to me is that they want the kind of council tax increase that my colleague Sam Rowlands—. Less than 3 per cent. That was the council tax—[Interruption.] Well, yes. But, as a Member, you represent Conwy. You should not be condoning 9.9 per cent.

Well, are you condoning cutting the services—[Inaudible.]

Based on this new rate, that means—

Can I remind Members that this is a debate? It is not a conversation between two Members, okay?

Oh. This means that council tax in the Conwy local authority will have increased by an astonishing 224.16 per cent, and my colleague Sam Rowlands, is very—. You know, very small proportion of that. The rest was Labour-Plaid Cymru. This represents the largest percentage increase—oh, and some independents—of any local authority in Wales. Growth in regular pay among employees in Great Britain was at 6.4 per cent in September to November 2022. There's no doubt that the 9.9 per cent rise cannot be justified, especially when Torfaen—[Interruption.] No. I would have done, you know, but you won't. When Torfaen has managed 1.9 per cent. But we know why Torfaen can manage 1.9 per cent, when we see all the money pooled together and the resources they have in terms of their reserves.

Rather than taking action on wasteful spending or management, our council now expects local council tax payers to pay the bill. So, £155.5 million has been sent back to the UK Government. Some of that could have come to Conwy. None of you here will have faced those people and businesses when we had the additional lockdown for three weeks by your Welsh Labour Government. A lot of those businesses were on their knees. That money could have gone towards them. That money could have gone towards social care, where again—it's a pity that the health and social care Minister—. Again, they would have really benefited from that money going into their budgets. It is obscene that money came over here from the UK Government—[Interruption.] Sorry, Joyce, no. It's obscene that money came over here to spend during an emergency and the COVID pandemic, and instead of spending it or providing it or allocating it to where it was really needed, you just sat on it, thinking perhaps that the UK Government wouldn’t claw it back. But all I will say is that you need to have the ambition and the aspiration as a Government here that our Prime Minister of the UK has. Thank you.

I call on the Minister for Finance and Local Government, Rebecca Evans.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I hadn’t intended to use this debate to educate Members about the 2020-21 consolidated accounts, but I will begin with that, because we’ve had a number of contributions that have just been so factually incorrect it’s very difficult to let them go. So, we’re talking here about the year that was the pandemic year. Obviously, that was an exceptional year. We had a lot of additional funding come to us very late on in that financial year. What we did do as a Government was operate within our overall departmental expenditure line budgetary control, set by the Treasury, and of course we should have had a reasonable amount of flexibility to switch between revenue and capital controls. Our decisions to maximise our capital expenditure were made having regard to the rules within Treasury’s consolidated budget guidance that revenue budgets can be switched to capital, and that is a practice that we’ve used in the past many times to manage our financial position. And we were given to understand by Treasury that we could do that, and it would be managed at the end of the year. There was a decision, after protracted correspondence with the Treasury, that actually they wouldn’t allow that after all.

But just to be really clear and to have these comparisons: the total underspend by all UK Government departments in that year was £25 billion. The Department for Health and Social Care alone underspent by over 9 per cent, sending back £18.6 billion of money unspent to Treasury. Overall, UK Government departments returned almost 6 per cent of their funding to Treasury that year. In Wales, the figure returned was only 1 per cent of our available resources. The Barnett share, had we sent back our Barnett share of what was returned by UK Government departments, would have been over £1 billion. In the event, it was £155 million, but it would have been nothing at all if we had been allowed to have that revenue-capital switch. [Interruption.] I’m not taking an intervention on that because I’ve set out the facts.

Now, I’d like to begin by recording my thanks to local government elected members and staff across all authorities for the critical work that they do for communities, people and businesses across Wales. And it has been an incredibly busy period for local government. Councils across Wales continue to deliver and we continue to support them to do so. We’ve supported them and we’ve worked really closely with them through the tough times of austerity, through floods and the pandemic, and now we continue to work really closely with them through the cost-of-living crisis. In the face of inflation at over 10 per cent, authorities will be facing real challenges in delivering services and balancing their budgets whilst supporting their local communities by keeping council tax rises as low as they can. And the nerve of the Conservative benches bemoaning council tax rises when the UK Government has absolutely sought to starve council services and the rest of the public sector over many years is absolutely ridiculous.

To respond to the debate, Peter Fox.

Diolch, Llywydd, and can I thank everybody for contributing this afternoon to this debate? We're all as one when we praise local authorities and the great work that they do, and this isn't about what they do; this is about the funding system and how it needs to be fairer for both council tax payers and the councils themselves.

Can I thank Sam for opening up the debate and sharing again that there is £2.75 billion in useable reserves? I've done a lot of research on this, and £2.75 billion in reserves is a £600 million increase in useable reserves on the previous year. Useable reserves are not just the general reserves; they are the earmarked reserves as well. Yes, there is a portion that is school balances, which is a minuscule amount of the £2.75 billion. There is also a portion of capital in there that is a relatively small amount. The general largest pots are in the earmarked reserve, and many times those have been inflated and generally or often haven't got plans to utilise them over the coming few years or previously. So, there is certainly a need to review the situation there.

We have to reconcile the fact that there is £2.75 billion-worth of usable reserves at the disposal of councils whilst we have a council tax average rise of 5.5 per cent. My contention is that there is something fundamentally wrong with a formula that enables some councils to provide their services while accumulating huge levels of reserves, while others struggle to receive enough to provide their statutory services. The formula is out of date, it doesn't recognise well enough things like rurality, sparsity and the unit cost of delivery in large and rural counties.

Can I thank Llyr for his contribution? Sadly, we've heard this a lot today, blaming austerity, blaming the UK Government, but the fact is that this has been devolved for 25 years. The money that flows to Wales is unhypothecated. That means it can be spent in any way the Government wishes. It is totally devolved, and choices can be made. Those choices of where that cake can be sliced and how it can be divided are at the discretion of the Government. The cake may not be big enough, but the reality is the current system gives crumbs to some and large wads of cake to others. That is morally wrong. We need to do something to change that, moving forward.

Mike was quite right, and I touched on some of that in my opening about school balances and other elements of the reserves. Mike's also right that we need to understand how the SSA, the standard spending assessment, is built, so that we can challenge it and analyse it further.

I have nothing but respect and admiration for our councils. The work they do is phenomenal. As a past leader for 13 years, I know how hard it has been for them, and it really hurts me when I hear people like Rhianon shouting that we don't understand local government. We do understand local government here, and that's why we're raising this really important debate today.

Janet highlighted again the need for a referendum, highlighting those issues in Conwy, with those high increases, as has Darren, recognising it's just not tolerable. We do need an opportunity for the public to be able to hold to account through a referendum to challenge those increases.

Tom pointed out the need for best value, and he demonstrated how many parts of Wales aren't necessarily given the best value for the money they take. The fact is the current funding formula is enabling unacceptable variances in councils' positions and allows unacceptable levels of reserves to be accumulated by several councils at a time when families face huge financial challenges. This is morally wrong. Yes, reserves should not be frittered away, and they shouldn't be used for recurring costs either, but they shouldn't be stacked up at a time of great need. We had a plan in the budget for how we could mobilise excessive reserves to create a sector-wide floor, to enable all authorities to maintain low council tax for a couple of years through this difficult period, and it wasn't taken on board. This is what we could have done; we could have actually achieved something here.

The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection, therefore I will defer voting under this item until voting time.

If I can just remind Members as well, if you have taken part in a debate, it is important for you to stay in the Chamber or on Zoom and listen to the debate being responded to, because you may well be named in that response, and you may well, sometimes, want to respond yourself. I think we all know who we're talking about. If some of you don't, then try and work it out.

Item 10 is next, the Welsh Conservatives debate, again, on palliative care. I call on Mark Isherwood to move the motion.

Diolch, Llywydd. Our motion today notes the cross-party group on hospice and palliative care's inquiry on experiences of palliative and end-of-life care in the community during the COVID-19 pandemic in Wales. The motion is based entirely on the evidence-based report resulting from this, which sought to give people and organisations at the very sharp end of the pandemic a voice and a platform. The report summarises the written and oral responses received, detailing experiences of palliative and end-of-life care in people's homes and care homes during the pandemic. The majority of respondents gave evidence based on their own individual, personal and professional lived experience as family members, unpaid carers, social workers, nurses and doctors.

It is clear from those contributions that the COVID-19 pandemic turned the world of palliative care on its head, dramatically disrupting the lives of individuals at the end of life, their loved ones, and the health and social care workers supporting them. I express my thanks and gratitude to the family members, carers, nurses, doctors and many others who generously shared their often heartbreaking but also uplifting and insightful accounts of caring for some of our most vulnerable citizens during the most testing of times. We wanted to learn from their experiences of end-of-life care at home, and in care homes, so that we can be better prepared for any future disaster, and better placed to meet the ongoing impacts of COVID and the cost-of-living crisis. We believe this is more important than ever before, considering demand for palliative care in the community is forecast to nearly double by 2040, and the pandemic has given us a glimpse into how our health and social care system will cope under similar pressures in the not-so-distant future. Our motion today incorporates this, and acknowledges that during the COVID-19 pandemic hospice and palliative care played a critical role and went above and beyond in supporting patients and their families.

Key findings from the inquiry include that visiting restrictions in care homes and other settings caused untold pain and distress, leaving many patients and their families isolated at the end of life, leading to cases of complex bereavement. Many people had devastating experiences of caring for loved ones at home, and struggled to access adequate palliative care support. People at the end of life faced difficult and tragic transitions between home, hospital and care homes. Pandemic responses sparked a revolution in collaboration, creative working and use of communication technology across health and social care services delivering palliative care. Care home staff and those working with them were at times concerned with hospital discharge into homes and the use of 'do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation' decisions.

There were widespread shortages of staff, personal protective equipment—PPE—and end-of-life medication, impacting on the delivery of vital palliative care. Infection prevention and control measures within homes added to disruption, often requiring residents to isolate in their rooms for long periods of time. As a consequence, many faced social isolation, often resulting in a significant decline in their mental and physical well-being. The use of protective masks made what little contact carers and residents had more difficult. This was particularly devastating for those with a communication difficulty or cognitive impairment, who were disproportionately affected.

Our report found that lack of PPE and shortages of end-of-life medication, especially in the early days of the pandemic, were common issues reported by health and social care workers providing palliative care in the community. In many cases, palliative and social care workers were reliant on donations or makeshift PPE items such as visors, scrubs and masks from the local community, and described feeling fearful for their safety. Evidence from Marie Curie cited a study where almost half of healthcare respondents in Wales reported shortages of PPE and insufficient training in its use, affecting their ability to provide care to patients. The same study found respondents from Wales were more likely to experience medication shortages compared to other parts of the UK, with more than 40 per cent describing scarcities in end-of-life medication.

Our report therefore recommends that the Welsh Government should ensure that palliative and end-of-life care is at the heart of plans for potential future pandemics, and works with families and professionals to review how future visiting regulations could be enacted in a more compassionate and consistent way for those with a palliative care need, and that the findings and recommendations of the UK COVID-19 inquiry must be informed by the lived experience of people in Wales, and recognise the impact the pandemic has had on the nation's healthcare systems, specifically for people at the end of life.

Although the formal response to our report, received from the Welsh Government yesterday, accepted the first of these recommendations, it is concerning to note that the accompanying text makes direct reference only to 'consulting' with families and professionals whose personal experience was based outside NHS settings, rather than to working with them to review how future visiting regulations could be enacted in a more compassionate and consistent way for those with a palliative care need.

Whilst the Welsh Government response stated that the second of these recommendations is not applicable to them, they say that they're supportive of it, and state that the UK COVID-19 public inquiry is fully committed to gathering information about the lived experiences of people in Wales, and across the UK in general. However, COVID-19 Bereaved Families for Justice Cymru expressed their continuing concern to me in the Senedd last week that the format of the UK inquiry will prevent it being fully informed by their lived experience.

Our report also found that the pandemic saw a massive increase in demand for palliative and end-of-life care in the community, with deaths at home increasing by over 30 per cent, and continuing at this level today, while deaths in care homes and hospitals have returned closer to pre-COVID levels, after peaking at the start of the pandemic; that palliative care was prioritised and redirected in communities to meet increases in demand; that hospice and palliative care services that were more community-orientated and integrated before COVID were better placed to meet the challenges of the pandemic; that despite the incredible efforts of those in health and social care, people still experienced a lack of palliative and end-of-life care support in their homes, and relied heavily on families and friends at the end of life; and that, at times, care homes faced challenges accessing palliative and end-of-life care, and often felt less valued than recognised healthcare settings.

Thank you for bringing this motion forward today, Mark Isherwood. I'm very pleased to be able to take part in this debate, and very grateful for the work that was done by the cross-party group on palliative and hospice care in creating the report that forms the basis of this motion before us today. And, of course, we need to remember all of the individuals who are part of the consultation process for sharing their experiences before and during the pandemic. As the report does say, it's so important that the way in which we provide palliative care and end-of-life care, and the way that we plan that provision, changes as a result of learning from the pandemic's experiences. The pandemic did emphasise in a very clear way the major problems that we have at present with the palliative and end-of-life care systems that we have in Wales. Not only was the lack of robustness or resilience of the provision to be seen clearly, the lack of forward planning for a pandemic scenario leading to terrible bereavements and very difficult experiences for families across Wales, but we did also see that the charitable funding model was very fragile as well, and I'm afraid that we are not seeing the kinds of lessons that we would wish to see the Government learning.

It was very, very disappointing to see the announcement that children's hospices are not to receive an increase in financial support for provision of end-of-life care as part of the phase 2 funding and, with no timeline in sight for the commencement of phase 3, the hospices are growing increasingly frustrated and concerned about the future. I appeal to Welsh Government again today to remember the value that hospices offer, and that's the value in every sense of the word—the financial value, but also, more importantly, the value of knowing that we are giving the best care at the most difficult of times.

The pandemic, of course, also reminded us of the great potential that we have to deliver end-of-life care within our communities. The collective mindset that the pandemic brought out in all of us meant that, at a time when resources and space were limited, we could still provide a form of care for people in their final days, weeks of life. But we can't have a health system that over-relies on goodwill, and we shouldn't have to. As the report states, we could see almost a doubling of demand for palliative care by 2040—a doubling—and so, not only do we need to see an increase in provision in our current systems, a scaling up of the capacity that we currently have, we also have to consider how we can do things differently in future, how we could make use of communities to provide palliative end-of-life care in a holistic way that's comfortable, provides comfort not only for the patient but, of course, for their families. It'll need innovation, it'll need fresh thinking, that's why a report like this from the cross-party group is so important. But, inevitably, it will also need additional funding from Welsh Government, increasing resources, financially supporting families that are taking pressure off hospitals.

Now, from a policy perspective, the pandemic allowed experts in their field greater control over Government policy. If we have real intentions to put palliative care not only at the heart of plans for future pandemics, but also as a priority for a better health service in Wales in general, we must learn the valuable lessons of the positive impact that experts, driving ideas into the heart of the system, can have in leading and delivering on health in Wales.

To close, as I said, this debate is another opportunity to look at the specific problems that we had in Wales during the pandemic period. But we can't understand those problems properly and we can't learn the lessons stemming from those experiences unless the decisions that were made in Wales are scrutinised properly here in Wales, and that's why we on these benches are still calling for a public inquiry in Wales. And, with reports today emphasising that problem and news that only three weeks will be given to Wales in the UK inquiry, how can we expect all of the lessons that need to be learnt, including in end-of-life care to be discussed and learned?

I'm very grateful for the opportunity to contribute to today's debate. And firstly, may I pay tribute to the work of my colleague Mark Isherwood, and the work he's undertaken during his time in this place, to provide a voice on a subject that is often difficult and emotional to discuss? I also add my praise to those hard-working staff employed on the front line of the palliative care sector, either working hospices or providing end-of-life care in patients' homes.

My constituents in Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire are fortunate to be served by some excellent hospice and palliative care providers. The national providers, yes, but included in those are the local providers of Paul Sartori and Tŷ Cymorth, and I know that the staff at Paul Sartori made some valuable contributions to the cross-party group's report.

This is a subject matter that will touch a number of us and our families—mine included. The fact that demand for palliative care in the community is forecast to double by 2040, as Rhun mentioned—a date that still seems a long time in the future but is less than two decades away. The ability to meet these demands will only be achieved by ensuring that we look at new practices, offer new training and recruit and train new workforce. The cross-party group report touches on answers to many of these issues. It is certainly an impressive piece of work that resulted from the inquiry, and I commend all Members and stakeholders who contributed. Ahead of focusing on a few specific issues from the CPG's report, Westminster's health committee has this week taken evidence into their assisted dying, assisted suicide inquiry. They heard from Baroness Meacher, the chair of the Dignity in Dying organisation, who made the stark statement that, quote,

'Some people are having to choose between suicide, suffering and Switzerland'.

An emotive statement, but one that I feel rings true for a number of people entering the final stages of life here in Wales. Dignity in death is central to the findings of this report. Unfortunately, during the peak of the COVID pandemic, there were times when this was not possible. I will be interested to hear from the Minister, Deputy Minister, what lessons have been learnt from these experiences of three years ago, so that we are continually improving and best practice is shared and implemented.

I was concerned to learn that a decision was taken to wait until 2024 and the completion of another funding review before addressing the immediate cost-of-living pressures threatening hospice services right now. Staff costs are ever-increasing, with the expected NHS pay rise, which are likely to cost Welsh hospices at least £4.4 million per year. It is also worrying that a decision was not taken to approve the national programme board for palliative and end-of-life care recommendation for a £1 million one-off payment to support energy and fuel costs for voluntary sector hospice services.

I'm very pleased to take part in this important debate today. I think all Members are very conscious of the value of palliative care and end-of-life services in their own areas, and that certainly is the case with me. I'm very familiar with St David's Hospice Care; we're fortunate in Newport and around to have a really top-quality end-of-life and palliative care service through St David's Hospice Care. It's a consultant-led, in-patient hospice, with a 15-bed unit, and that can support people who have complex symptom-management needs and, obviously, provide that end-of-life care and sometimes, respite care. And the average length of stay there is, in fact, two weeks. Patients from Blaenau Gwent, Caerphilly, Monmouthshire, Newport and Torfaen, as well as mid and south Powys, are catered for by the hospice. And, of course, what very many people really do value is the care at home that enables people to die with dignity, as other Members have said, at home, and as we know, that is the choice for very many people—to die in the comfort of their own home, surrounded by their own family. And St David's Hospice provides the quality services that enables that to happen.

I know that there are, of course, issues at the current time, and St David's Hospice has 18 nurses on permanent contracts. They pay their nurses the same rate as NHS nurses, and, of course, if NHS nurses' pay is increased, there will be major challenges for the hospice to do the same. So, I do think that we need to look at how we can support hospices like St David's in those circumstances, and also, with regard to annual energy bills—for St David's, a year ago, it was £125,000; it is now around £400,000 a year. So, obviously, a very substantial increase, and, again, an obvious need for support with those costs.

Llywydd, Tŷ Hafan is also a very much-loved charity that provides life-changing care and support for children with life-shortening conditions, and, of course, their families. They provide those specialist services in a very comfortable and welcoming environment, and they very much work with the whole family, assessing the needs of parents, siblings, and other family members, as well as the children with the particular conditions. And it's about offering personalised support, to give strength to patients and family, and to make happy memories and improve quality of life. Since they opened in 1999, they've actually supported over 1,100 children with life-shortening illnesses.

And I think we're also lucky in Wales, Llywydd, to have some good work taking place on these end-of-life services. Members have spoken about the expected increase in the need for end-of-life care as part of the ageing society that we have, and I think quite a lot of work has been done around that. The Institute of Welsh Affairs, for example, looked at dying well in Wales, and of the 34,000 people who die in Wales each year, at least 75 per cent would benefit from some form of palliative care, but, for many different reasons, 25 per cent of these people will not have access to the care and support they need. In the context of the increasing demand we know we're going to see, we really need to get to grips with that situation. And we also have the national bereavement care pathway, which is a model specification developed to improve access to high-quality bereavement care, and to reduce local and national inconsistencies. I think that really does bear close examination in terms of what's suggested to have top quality care in place right across our country.

I’m delighted to take part in this important debate today. Dying is something we all do, but dying well is, sadly, something that eludes far too many people. This needs to change, which is why I am proud to be a member of the cross-party group on hospice and palliative care. As our CPG discovered, the pandemic had a very real, very dramatic impact on palliative and end-of life care. Whilst the impact of the pandemic on end-of-life care was understandable during the pandemic phase, its continued effect as COVID became endemic is less so.

At a recent CPG meeting, we heard that accessing out-of-hours services remains diabolical. A carer took over 20 hours to get through to the 111 service during a weekend just to discuss medication. It is little wonder, therefore, that one in every 14 patients attending A&E departments is end of life. We need to drastically improve end-of-life services in the community so that patients, carers and care homes are not forced to access acute health services. This is why I am extremely grateful to all those who participated in our inquiry, and why Welsh Conservatives have tabled this motion today.

If we are to prepare for the next pandemic and ensure we can meet the rising demand for palliative and end-of-life care in the community, we have to do things differently. Whilst we can’t always choose when to die, we should all have a choice where to die. Most of us would not choose an acute hospital setting for our final moments. Whilst the COVID-19 pandemic led to a third more people dying in private homes, witnesses to our inquiry pointed to the fact that accessing palliative care was sometimes impossible. Patients and their families were often isolated, and end of life became more traumatic than it needed to be.

Marie Curie’s evidence was telling, in that they pointed to the fact that, in 75 per cent of deaths at home, patients did not get the care needed. This was despite the heroic efforts of local hospice-at-home and community palliative care teams. These teams went far above and beyond to provide much-needed care during the pandemic. And I would like, at this point, to place on the record my thanks to all those teams for their care and dedication. But we shouldn’t have to rely upon the goodwill and stellar efforts of dedicated staff going the extra mile. We have to ensure that we have a well-funded, adequately resourced and staffed system of community-based palliative and end-of-life care. This is not what we have at the moment. Our CPG has been told that far too many front-line workers are struggling with exhaustion, burn-out and the emotional toll of providing care through the pandemic. And the demands on staff are set to skyrocket in the coming years. Who knows what will happen if H5N1 makes the jump from birds to humans? We are not prepared. We have not learned the lessons from COVID. I therefore urge the Welsh Government to take heed of our CPG report and accept all the recommendations, particularly with regard to future funding. Diolch yn fawr.

Thank you for the opportunity to participate in this debate today. Thank you to Mark Isherwood for his chairing of the cross-party group and the excellent report produced.

I know we’ve heard a little about children’s hospices from Rhun, and mentioned by John Griffiths, but I’d like to focus my contribution on the fantastic palliative care that is provided by Tŷ Hafan in the south and Tŷ Gobaith in the north of the country. Both places are beacons of light for children and their families in the darkest imaginable times. I have had the privilege of visiting Tŷ Hafan in Sully, and it was an incredibly moving experience. At the time, I was part of the campaign to increase their state funding and to bring them in line with their counterparts in England, and I’m glad to say that the campaign was successful and they received a significant uplift in financial support. So, I’d like to thank the Welsh Government for doing that.

However, I understand that increased costs and inflation have eaten into much of that extra money that came their way. I’d like the Government to ensure that Tŷ Hafan and Tŷ Gobaith have sufficient money in order to continue to provide care for seriously ill children and the much-needed respite that their families require. I understand that, in correspondence with Ministers, the children’s hospices have pointed out that there has been no mention or recognition of the inflationary pressures that are faced by the children’s hospices. This has resulted in the 2020 funding agreement now being worth considerably less than when first announced. I understand they’ve made it clear that they believe this simple progressive step would have been an obvious outcome to the second phase review. It seems obvious to the children’s hospices that funding should have been raised in line with inflation; it certainly seems obvious to me that it appears to be an obvious step for Welsh Government to take. I’d appreciate it, in her response today, if the Deputy Minister could outline how the assessment of funding priorities was carried out, and why the funding of children’s hospices was not a sufficient priority to ensure that they did not suffer a real-terms cut. Can we have an undertaking here today that the vital funding for children’s hospitals in Wales will be reassessed to ensure that they are not under-resourced?

Finally, looking at the future and the third phase review of palliative and end-of-life care, in the correspondence I mentioned earlier, I understand that there is a concern that lessons aren’t being learnt from earlier phases. In fact, the concern is that the flaws that prevented the phase 2 review from delivering any outcomes of note or on time are now going to be baked into the phase 3 approach from the start. Without significant extra resource put aside to pull together the review, and without the full involvement of children’s hospices and other partners in the process, they simply cannot see how the fundamental piece of work can be delivered to the desired standard in this timescale. They would welcome some urgent assurances about how the process will be run, what the detailed timelines look like, and where and how they can be involved. They go on to indicate—and I echo their points—if past instances are anything to go by, this could be a once in a decade, even a once in a generation, opportunity to get this right.

I would like to begin by putting on record my sincerest thanks and appreciation for all those carers and palliative care workers who worked tirelessly during the COVID pandemic and made huge personal sacrifices to ensure that those they were looking after received the best possible end-of-life care. The extreme working pressures that COVID brought, unfortunately, fell upon relatively few, and we must not forget that many people suffered in a way that many of us didn't.

We all know that the Welsh Government is against holding a specific Welsh COVID inquiry because it does not want to admit that mistakes were made, and it is frightened of another damning statistic that will show Wales as the worst performer in the UK. But the truth is those mistakes are only ever truly mistakes if we don't learn from them, and the only way we can learn from them is if we know and understand how and why they were caused and what better solutions could have been provided instead. COVID was an unprecedented time in recent history, I think this Welsh Government is worried about how their performance will be viewed in the media, and, because of this, the opportunity will be lost to truly understand what improvements need to be made. COVID was an enormous stress test for our NHS and the systems and ways of working that we had in place. I think it is foolish not to thoroughly assess the response by the Welsh Government with a Wales-only inquiry, because the context of the pandemic in Wales was different to other nations in the UK. We need to move forward with action plans, such as those for palliative care, that would help us to respond better if there were ever another global pandemic.

This debate today is exceptionally important. I would like to thank my colleagues for producing such a thorough report. One of the most striking observations for me was that many people suffered needlessly because infection control systems for moving and isolating patients had not been predetermined, but rather were decided upon by constantly updated guidance, which meant that the families of and those receiving palliative care were left to needlessly experience the devastating impacts of isolation. This is why it is vital that the Government now works closely with the palliative care sector to learn from the COVID-19 pandemic and ensure palliative care is at the heart of plans for future pandemics.

Another feature of the report that concerned me is the projection of the needs for increased palliative care in the future. The report shows that levels of palliative care needs during the pandemic were not expected until 2040. Whilst I can see that we could not necessarily foresee the need for palliative care reaching this level, it does reveal that, on the whole, there is a systematic need to now build into the palliative care system options for rapidly increasing capacity and improving death literacy within communities in Wales by encouraging higher levels of advanced planning for end of life, alongside improving support for bereaved families.

The Deputy Minister for Mental Health and Well-being, Lynne Neagle.

Diolch, Llywydd. Firstly, I'd like to thank the Welsh Conservatives for bringing forward this important issue to the Chamber and thank all Members who've contributed to today's debate. I've listened carefully to all speakers, and there have been many important points made.

The Welsh Government knows that good palliative care can make a huge difference to the quality of life of people facing life-limiting illness, helping them to die with dignity, and facilitating a healthy grieving process for those left behind. That is why we continue to invest over £10.5 million annually and end-of-life care remains a key programme for government commitment. Person-centred care is at the centre of our vision for palliative and end-of-life care, and we're committed to ensuring that anyone requiring palliative and end-of-life care in Wales should have access to the best possible care.

To achieve this, a broad focus across the spectrum of health and social care and third sector provision is required to make this happen as a whole-system effort. The vision is set out in our quality statement for palliative and end-of-life care, published in October 2022. It sets out the high-level Welsh Government policy intention for children and young people and adult palliative and end-of-life care. Implementation of the quality statement is being overseen by the national programme board for palliative and end-of-life care, and a work programme for 2023-24 is currently being finalised. The integrated work programme has a number of cross-cutting themes embedded throughout each work stream, including Welsh language, equality, diversity and lived experience. Workforce planning is a key issue within the work streams and this, alongside the local level discussion, will be instrumental in implementing the actions within the quality statement.

We welcome the cross-party group on hospice and palliative care’s inquiry into experiences of palliative and end-of-life care in the community during the COVID-19 pandemic. The inquiry supports our aim of providing high-quality and person-centred palliative care, which we will drive forward in collaboration with the national programme board for palliative and end-of-life care. The Minister for Health and Social Services has responded separately to the chair of the CPG, setting out responses to each of the report's recommendations.

The COVID-19 pandemic presented incredibly difficult challenges for delivering palliative and end-of-life care, and I commend all of those who went above and beyond in supporting patients and their families. It was a time of extreme pressure, and we will continue to consult with families and professionals to improve the experience of palliative care, should there be a need to tighten restrictions in the future. We have made significant investments in bereavement services during and since the pandemic, and have driven a number of activities to improve bereavement care. This includes the publication of our national bereavement framework in October 2021, and the launch of a specific bereavement pathway to support people affected by the sudden or traumatic death of a young person up to and including 25 years of age last August. In addition, we are providing a £3 million bereavement support grant to 21 third sector organisations over the three-year period 2021 to 2024. We also recognise that the number of people who need palliative and end-of-life care is increasing, and the pandemic highlighted the more pressing need to address out-of-hours and community palliative and end-of-life care provision. To help address this, the Welsh Government provided over £13 million of emergency funding throughout the pandemic.

Russell George to reply to the debate.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. Can I thank the cross-party group for their work and this report? Of course, I particularly thank Mark Isherwood, as the chair. Perhaps if I start by summarising, perhaps, Mark Isherwood's opening comments—his 11-minute opening—which outlined the brief points in the report. Hospice and palliative care played a critical role in the pandemic response, supported by a wave of community engagement and action, but the massive increase in demand for care in the community revealed perhaps weaknesses in pre-pandemic planning. Many people faced difficulties in accessing end-of-life care at home and in care homes, increasing the existing inequalities that already lay there as well—something that I know we focus a great deal on in the Health and Social Care Committee—and often, of course, with devastating experiences.

It is important to say as well, I think as Sam Kurtz pointed out as well, health and social care workers went above and beyond during the pandemic to support patients and their families at end of life, and our gratitude sincerely goes to them.

To summarise some of the other points in the debate today—. Before I do move off Mark Isherwood, I should really thank Mark Isherwood for his role in chairing this cross-party group. The cross-party group has got a large number of members from right across this Chamber, cross party, and nearly all cross-party groups that are successful are supported by a secretariat, and our thanks as well to Hospice UK for their support to the group as well.

Rhun mentioned, of course, forward planning ahead of the pandemic, highlighting that point as well, and, along with a few other Members—I think it was Peredur as well as Rhun—talked about the amount of support needed for children’s hospices across Wales, with Peredur mentioning the issues around inflationary costs and the extra pressure in that regard.

I thank John Griffiths for his contribution. I think it’s so important, isn’t it, that care at home can be in comfortable surroundings with family around. This is important for all parts of Wales, but I suppose particularly for me as a rural constituency representative, it's all the more important that those facilities are available in the home setting because other options are often far away from home.

I thank other colleagues as well who spoke in the debate. I know Altaf and Joel James spoke as well; Altaf pointing out, I think, how one in 14 people, I think it was, sadly pass away in A&E.

I think today we've had—. This is the last debate before the Easter recess and we’ve had two other Welsh Conservative debates—one today and one last week—that didn’t reach consensus, but I am grateful to the Welsh Government and the Deputy Minister for not seeking to amend the motion today and I think indicating support for the motion as well. That’s really greatly appreciated, and I think a positive note to end on ahead of the Easter recess.

The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? No. That motion is therefore agreed.

That now brings us to voting time and, unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, I will move directly to the first vote. That first vote is on item 6, the motion to amend Standing Orders on proxy voting. I call for vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Elin Jones. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 36, no abstentions, 12 against. And therefore the motion is agreed.

The next vote is on item 8, the debate on a Member's legislative proposal, a Wales tourism Bill. I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Tom Giffard. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 24, 11 abstentions and 13 against. Therefore the motion is agreed.

The next vote is on item 9, the Welsh Conservatives debate on local government funding. 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 12, no abstentions, 36 against. Therefore, the motion is not agreed.

We'll move now to amendment 1, and, if amendment 1 is agreed, amendments 2 and 3 will be deselected. So, a vote on amendment 1 in the name of Lesley Griffiths. Open the vote. Close the vote. The vote is equal. In favour 24, no abstentions, and 24 against. And therefore I exercise my casting vote against amendment 1. And therefore amendment 1 is not agreed.

Which leads us to a vote on amendment 2, and the amendment was tabled in the name of Siân Gwenllian. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 36, no abstentions and 12 against. And therefore amendment 2 is agreed.

Amendment 3 is next, tabled in the name of Siân Gwenllian. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 36, no abstentions and 12 against. And therefore amendment 3 is agreed.

The final vote is on the motion as amended.

Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 13, no abstentions and 35 against. And therefore the motion as amended is not agreed.

That concludes voting for this afternoon, but our work is not complete.

We will now move on to the short debate, and today's short debate is to be presented by Huw Irranca-Davies.

Diolch, Llywydd. Can I just check, as I'm joining you—as I've got a bug—remotely, can you hear me okay?

Yes, we can hear you. I'd just ask you to pause a second whilst the Chamber rearranges itself or some people leave and we get some quiet here. Yes, okay. Go for it.

Diolch yn fawr iawn. This is Endometriosis Awareness Month, so let me begin this debate by thanking the many women throughout Wales who have contacted me over the last few days and weeks to tell me their personal stories of the challenges they've faced with the diagnosis and treatment for endometriosis. And my thanks also to those campaigning organisations that include people with direct lived experience, such as Endometriosis UK and FTWW, Fair Treatment for the Women of Wales, who've met us here in the Senedd and in virtual meetings, and they've provided us with further information in advance of this debate. And also organisations like the Royal College of General Practitioners, the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, and Plan International, who've lent their authority to the menstrual well-being campaign. And finally, my thanks to colleagues for their widespread support from across the Chamber, and especially to Jenny Rathbone, Joyce Watson, Jane Dodds and Jack Sargeant, who will be speaking, if you allow, as part of my time allocation this evening, Llywydd.

So, why am I speaking today, when women can and do speak powerfully on this themselves? It's because men also need to be willing to champion women's health and endo too. This can't be put into the box of 'too difficult' or 'inappropriate' or 'too sensitive' for men to engage with. It is our families and our friends, our wives and our daughters, nieces and aunts, who need all of us to speak up with one voice, and that's why I'm really glad to speak up today, alongside my other colleagues in the Senedd.

Endometriosis affects at least one in 10 women, girls, and people assigned female at birth. Yet, it takes on average nine years—nine years, currently—to diagnose endometriosis. One woman, who shared her story with me, tells me of diagnosis with endo in 2015 after nearly 20 years of painful, debilitating periods; three years of fertility issues; of GPs repeatedly refusing to refer the condition to specialists; suspecting endometriosis; and having eventually to seek private treatment. She is, by the way, one of those organising a petition to Jack Sargeant's committee, which is already 6,000 strong and growing. She told me, 'The majority of patients you speak to are having to fight to access care, and even when they do, the wait times are huge. And even though the endo nurses'—she says—'are a fantastic resource, they don't have enough specialist surgeons to refer patients to, and they can't discharge us, as this is an ongoing chronic illness.'

Others who've contacted me describe how they feel they've been subject to what they call medical gaslighting, and how the support varies so much from area to area. Powys in mid Wales, by the way, have been particularly highlighted by some for special concern. And the stories can be harrowing. One woman has told me of the devastating impact endometriosis has had on her life: how she is under multiple consultants, including endometriosis specialists, colorectal consultants, urologist consultants, pain management and general consultants; how she has had 15 surgeries for endometriosis, including having her large bowel removed, leaving her with a permanent ileostomy, a stoma bag, a long-term catheter, which will soon be a urostomy, a second stoma, due to her bladder failing, a sacral nerve stimulator, and a radical hysterectomy leaving her in full-blown menopause at the age of 28. In desperation, she has spent thousands on private surgery and treatment. She says, her quote, 'This disease devastates lives. It's debilitating, relentless, and incredibly life altering.'

I've heard similar stories from my own constituents. I was totally floored by the scale of medical and social and relationship and personal and financial impacts this can have, if it is not spotted early and diagnosed and treated effectively. And therein lies the way forward: early identification and diagnosis, and the availability across Wales of a wide menu of treatment and care and support before the condition progresses. We know that many ideas are being considered as part of the women's health plan, but here are some of the proposals from the women facing these challenges daily and from the campaigning organisations.

Well, much progress has been made, but there's still a hell of a lot to do. Why is it, when 1.5 million people in the UK suffer from endometriosis, we do not know what causes it? So, there's an awful lot of research to be done, by both the expert patients and the clinicians.

Last week, I chaired an online discussion with a panel of experts, including two very experienced consultants—Nahid Gul, a surgeon, and David Rowlands, a gynaecologist—both with a specialist interest in endometriosis, both training in minimal access surgery, including endo surgery. Together, they're building the team required to operate three diagnostic units and a surgical centre for the population served by Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board. There's another specialist team being developed in Swansea, which is taking the load off Cardiff, which, until now, has been the only secondary and tertiary unit in Wales.

The specialist endo nurses are improving the education of GPs and gynaecologists, so that women no longer have to wait an average eight years to even get diagnosed. For many women, endo dominates their lives and, on the EndoMarch last Sunday, I met Karla Edwards, whose endo severely restricts everyday activities most of us take for granted. But modern telecommunications enable her to be part of the international research team, headed by Dr Nezhat, the most experienced endo surgeon in the world and founder of the worldwide EndoMarch. His endometriosis risk app helps women identify endo faster. And, in Hungary, endo warrior Adrienn Salamon has developed a menstruation app called Lucy, with the gynaecologist Dr Bokor. These apps won't cure endometriosis, but they help women advocate for themselves at medical appointments, where people are being gaslighted.

Most treatments involve hormones or invasive surgery to keep endo at bay. Nobody knows why it has developed, and it doesn't cure them. Interestingly—

Jenny, you need to conclude, please.

—in Hungary, rehabilitation treatment using thermal springs, physiotherapy, breathing techniques and abdominal massage is available to Hungarian women. They are judging the success of it at the moment on the fertility rates that are achieved by women who have great difficulty, obviously, in getting pregnant.

Jenny, you need to conclude because you've used more than your time.

Much more needs to be done. Thank you very much.

I want to thank all the women who've given and shared their stories, and the experts who have shared platforms with us. And I want to talk particularly about Powys Teaching Health Board, and what we've been told is that none of the visiting gynaecology consultants specialise in endometriosis or have an interest in the condition. That's a serious statement, actually. So, those people have to travel to other Welsh health boards and over the border. And, okay, we can't have things everywhere, but the problem here is that it's become a postcode lottery, and we can't have a condition where it affects one in 10 women, where those women are telling us that it's a postcode lottery, first of all, in getting to see a specialist, even knowing where those specialists are, and what treatments are available. And the concerning thing for me, whilst the nurses are excellent, on the webcam that we were on the other day, the endometriosis nurse in Swansea said the GPs didn't know she existed. So, I think there's some work to do there. Thank you.

Thank you very much to Huw for bringing this short debate, and I really do want to thank others here who stayed in the Siambr, of both genders, and across all of the parties. Thank you for staying with us and listening to this because it is appreciated.

I just want to also touch on the fact that, where I live in Powys, there are no specialist services and we do have to travel across the border. In north Wales, the nearest endometriosis specialist centre is currently in England, and while arrangements do exist for cross-border referrals, they are hard to secure. Hopefully, in Betsi Cadwaladr in the future, they will include plans for surgery on endo in the next integrated medium-term plan.

Just for those of you who don't know the effect that it can have on people's lives, my husband actually works with somebody who has endo, and he describes that, on a daily basis, she is in absolute agony, sometimes unable to stand. There is very little for her and no treatment, but she continues to come into work and she continues to get support. But what that person needs, and what we need in Wales for all women, is the ability to have both the referral, the treatment to come as quickly as possible, and the ongoing support. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Can I start by thanking Huw Irranca-Davies for bringing forward this important debate today? I also pay tribute to campaigner Beth Hales who started a Senedd petition on endometriosis in Wales. Campaigners like Beth are raising the profile of a condition that impacts so many people, yet still is widely not recognised or understood. As Huw and colleagues have alluded to, it's far too difficult for sufferers to get a diagnosis, and clearly that needs to change.

Presiding Officer, I spoke earlier in the Commission questions about my ambition to see the Senedd as an endometriosis-friendly employer, but that's exactly the type of scheme that the Welsh Government should be pushing through their social partnership approach. As Beth said to me on the steps of the Senedd handing the petition over—and in closing, Presiding Officer—endometriosis is not just a health issue, it's also a social justice issue.

I call on the Minister for Health and Social Services to reply to the debate. Eluned Morgan.

Diolch yn fawr. I'm really grateful to Huw Irranca for introducing this incredibly important topic for the short debate today. I hope you get better, Huw. Thank you very much for highlighting the difficult cases that you have. I think it's absolutely right that it's not just women who are leading the charge on this—it's really important that men understand how this impacts on so many women's lives.

March is Endometriosis Action Month, and I welcome the opportunity to highlight the challenges women continue to face, and to reiterate my commitment to deliver changes to the way healthcare is provided here in Wales, because for too long there have been deep-seated and entrenched inequalities in the healthcare provided to women. These inequalities present themselves in a multitude of ways, including how women's experiences and concerns are viewed and symptoms acted upon. This is particularly so for issues and conditions exclusive to women.

Endometriosis is a chronic condition affecting one in 10 women. Whilst it's most commonly active from puberty to menopause, its impact can last for life. The exact cause of endometriosis is the subject of medical debate, but its effects are clear. It occurs where cells similar to the endometrial cells lining the womb are found elsewhere in the body, where they should not be. These cells continue to menstruate monthly, but there's no external flow, and that can cause inflammation, scar tissue, fertility issues and significant pain, which can at times be entirely debilitating, as we've heard.

For many women, endometriosis can be difficult to diagnose and can take years to be accurately identified and treated. Endometriosis effects women from all social and ethnic backgrounds, and whilst there are several common symptoms, the extent of the condition and the range of severity of its symptoms varies considerably between individuals. Sadly, despite the prevalence of endometriosis, evidence suggests that it takes on average nine years to receive a diagnosis in Wales. This often follows numerous visits to doctors and hospitals, during which symptoms may not be recognised, or in some circumstances are even dismissed. For many women, particularly those experiencing endometriosis symptoms from a young age, they may not realise that what they're experiencing is not normal. This first step of believing women, recognising and acknowledging severe menstrual pain as possible endometriosis, should lead to appropriate investigations without delay.

At the heart of discussions about waiting times, there are women who are often suffering in silence, whose lives are being profoundly impacted. Nothing illustrates this more than the experience of a women's health advocate who is supporting the work that we're taking forward, for which I'm truly grateful. It sounds very similar to the example you gave, Huw. I think you gave an example of 20 years. Well, it took this particular woman 23 years to receive an endometriosis diagnosis. Her symptoms and concerns were repeatedly dismissed by doctors as being the result of stress or of a low pain threshold. She was told her concerns were simply in her head and a product of depression and anxiety. Yet, despite these incorrect labels, no referral to mental health services took place. The severity of her symptoms and the uncertainty that resulted from a lack of appropriate clinical care and support had a significant impact on her personal life and almost resulted in her losing her job. That's one woman's experience, but it will sound very familiar to far too many women.

Minister, will you take an intervention?

Yes, okay.

Thank you very much, health Minister. The signs and symptoms of the condition you describe very well. Endometriosis is a condition that involves all the organs; it's not only the uterus—it's the fallopian tubes, it's the bladder, it's the bowel. So, it becomes really vague to know about it, and it needs a team effort. Thank you for giving me the intervention.

Thanks very much. I guess that's part of the reason why so many people are misdiagnosed or not diagnosed, because it is quite difficult to understand that. That's why I think training for doctors, for physicians, is critical.

Endometriosis may be suspected due to an individual symptom history or through scans, but the invasive surgical procedure called laparoscopy is currently the main way to confirm that symptoms are due to endometriosis, and allows for surgical procedures to relieve symptoms and complications. Expertise and capacity are being developed across Wales to address the need for such services. There's also a clear need for further research into more rapid diagnostic approaches for endometriosis, so it can be identified sooner in its course.

Early treatment with hormonal manipulation is highly effective in reducing pain and complications, including surgical and fertility problems, but this, of course, depends on early diagnosis. It's with regret that the health service's response to the pandemic, whilst necessary, has negatively impacted access to care in Wales and across the UK for a range of conditions, including endometriosis. Sadly, difficult decisions have only added to the protracted timescale for diagnosis and treatment already being experienced by women. Health boards are responsible for providing their local populations with high-quality care and support for the management of endometriosis.

Wales has two fully accredited endometriosis specialist centres—University Hospital of Wales and Singleton Hospital—as well as an endometriosis specialist centre at the Royal Gwent Hospital awaiting accreditation. I understand there are some moves afoot in Betsi as well. There are, of course, areas of good practice across Wales, but not all clinicians have the confidence and expertise to correctly identify and attribute endometriosis symptoms, as well as provide ongoing care and support. So, there is a clear need for improvements in training, skills and awareness, as well as access to specialist advice and treatment, where that's required.

In recent years, there have been several important developments here in Wales in advancing the support and care available to those experiencing endometriosis. We had the task and finish group that was established. Following the receipt of its report in 2018, the women's health implementation group was created to take forward its recommendations. That led to endometriosis nurses and pelvic health co-ordinators being appointed in each health board. They actively spent time with patients in clinics and liaised with their multidisciplinary teams to improve endometriosis service provision across Wales.

A dedicated website has been developed for patients and clinicians. Endometriosis Cymru includes 'living with' stories from Welsh people and a symptom tracker, which has the potential to become a diagnosis tool for patients and clinicians to speed up intervention for early diagnosis and treatment of endometriosis. Additional resources have been created, such as the Bloody Brilliant website, to provide evidence-based guidance and help normalise conversations around menstrual health.

I've been clear that we must change the way we provide healthcare to women and girls in Wales. We need to do that so that they can get timely care, so that the NHS responds to their needs and requirements, and so that research and development work reflects the lived experience of women and girls. And that’s why we here in Wales have committed to bring all of these important issues together in a women’s health plan, which is being developed and owned by our NHS here in Wales. We have already taken important steps towards creating that plan.

In July, I announced the women and girls health quality statement. This sets out what the NHS is expected to do to secure quality health services to support women and girls throughout their lives. There is a clear expectation placed on health boards to ensure appropriate levels of care, treatment and support for women who experience endometriosis, so that they are cared for as close to home as possible, without lengthy waiting times.

Then, in December, the NHS collaborative published a report on establishing a women’s health plan. This reports from the perspective of more than 3,800 women and girls from all corners of Wales, and draws attention to what is being done to identify gaps in current provision. The document sets out opportunities to improve women’s health, including access to endometriosis treatment and support. These improvements will be put in place through an NHS Wales 10-year women’s health plan. Announcing the first stage of the women’s health plan set out the start of a conversation and agreement with women over 10 years using co-production methods set out in ‘A Healthier Wales’. It shows a clear commitment that the women’s health plan should be driven by the voices of women and girls in Wales.

The plan will seek to address any unfairness or barriers in provision at the moment using a lifetime approach to ensure that quality health services are available to women throughout their lives. Following the national clinical framework, the women’s health network is being created this year, which will create a more strategic and systematic approach to co-ordinating, supplying and securing health provision for women across Wales. To help to tackle the lack of research and data about women’s health conditions, my officials are working to create a women’s health research fund.

Endometriosis is essentially a medical condition, but it has broad-ranging implications. We need a socially modelled approach to ensure that women are supported throughout the process of diagnosis and condition management. The NHS needs to adopt this approach as an employer to ensure that it’s servicing its own workforce in the best possible way, and promoting the well-being and productivity of its staff. That’s exactly what we’re doing in Welsh Government. Jack Sargeant has said that we need to show the way, and that’s exactly what we’re doing. I’m pleased to confirm that the Welsh Government has taken the first, important steps on this journey already by signing up to menopause and endometriosis commitments for its workforce, and by appointing champions. This means that the organisation is committed to develop a working environment and culture that supports women in reaching their full potential. I am confident that we’re on the right track to address the lack of equality affecting women in healthcare, but it’s important to recognise the scale of the changes needed, and that they won’t happen overnight.

Thank you, Minister, and thank you, everyone. That brings today's proceedings, and this term's proceedings, to a close.

I hope that everyone has a safe and restful recess so that we all come back ready to go again.