Plenary

We will reconvene. The next item on our agenda this afternoon is questions to the Minister for Social Justice, and the first question is from Rhys ab Owen.

Thank you very much for your question.

I was extremely concerned to hear about the report into strip searches of children, published by the Children's Commissioner for England on 27 March. I have discussed this issue with the lead police and crime commissioner this week to clarify the position in Wales.

Diolch, Gweinidog. The issue of stop and search was raised this week with the Home Secretary, Suella Braverman, by Plaid Cymru's Westminster leader, Liz Saville Roberts, and again highlighted the lack of Wales-specific data—which we hear very often in this Chamber—on stop and search rates by population. Minister, do you support the recommendation of the children's commissioner to abolish child strip searches in Wales?

What is important now is that we look at the extent and use of strip searches. I've raised this with the police and crime commissioner, as I've said, and we recognise that strip searches are potentially extremely traumatic for young people, and it's crucial that we understand from the police what the data is. And, as you say, this is something that we are concerned about.

I have met with the children's commissioner on this issue, and I have been assured that policing in Wales leads are bringing together data from each force in Wales, to ensure that we have a full picture of how such searches are used, where the issues are, and where we need to take action. So, that will give us a more complete picture than the one that we currently have, and also, a picture of any disproportionality. I have stressed the urgency of this task, and asked for a projected timescale, and I have written to the Children's Commissioner for Wales to confirm how seriously we take this issue, and I'm happy to report back when we get that data picture on what appropriate action should be taken in terms of this practice.

Diolch yn fawr, Russell George. I am funding Third Sector Support Wales just over £7 million per year until March 2025; £346,463 of this funding goes to Powys Association of Voluntary Organisations every year, to help local voluntary organisations with fundraising, good governance, safeguarding and volunteering.

Thank you for your answer, Minister. The National Cyber Security centre issued a report last year that outlined the cyber threat that charities of all sizes face, and I'm particularly concerned about the charities in Montgomeryshire—smaller charities that do not have the resources to strengthen their cyber security without support. And, of course, a lot of smaller charities are more likely to rely on staff using personal IT, where it's less easy to secure and manage than centrally used IT.

So, can you outline, Minister, what the Welsh Government is doing to help charities become more secure? And the money that you outlined in your first response to me—how can that be used in relation to combating cyber security threats to the third sector?

Well, I'd like to thank the Member for raising a very important issue for the third sector, not just in your constituency in Powys and Montgomeryshire, but also, for the whole of Wales. And it is often the smaller charities that are caught by this, not understanding safeguarding responsibilities and threats in terms of cyber security.

I think it's important that we have put additional support into Third Sector Support Wales, and that is to address these very issues. It's going to enable the Newid partnership, which is led by the Wales Council for Voluntary Action, the Wales Co-operative Centre, and ProMo-Cymru, to continue supporting digital skills in the voluntary sector, which will help to start to address this. It's £1.2 million over this and the next three financial years. But it will benefit those voluntary organisations and the vulnerable people they work with as well, which they will encounter on these issues, and certainly, this is something I will raise at the next third sector partnership council meeting.

We will now move to the party spokespeople. The Conservatives spokesperson, Altaf Hussain.

Diolch, Presiding Officer. Minister, at the weekend, the capital once again hosted a very successful Pride Cymru—yet another sign of how far we have come in terms of LGBT rights. At the event, the First Minister reiterated the Welsh Government's intentions for Wales to become the most LGBT-friendly nation in Europe by the end of this decade—an aim my party fully supports. However, it appears that reality is not keeping pace with the rhetoric. Lesbian couples in Wales are being told they must prove infertility with 12 unsuccessful cycles of intrauterine insemination—double the original six—before accessing NHS-funded IVF. Not all health boards fund IUI, therefore, access to NHS fertility healthcare is inconsistent and dependent on where individuals seeking healthcare live in Wales. Minister, why are we treating same-sex couples differently from heterosexual couples? Surely, if Wales is to become the most LGBT-friendly nation in Europe, we could start with ensuring equal access to healthcare. Thank you.

Thank you very much for your question.

And it is an important question. I just wanted to say thank you for acknowledging the fantastic support that was received, and led not just by the First Minister, but my colleagues, the Deputy Minister for Social Services, Julie Morgan and Jeremy Miles. There was great support from Welsh Government, as well as from across this Senedd, at the event on Saturday, and all of the support in terms of the LGBTQ+ action plan, which, of course, is led by my colleague. But our support for Plaid Cymru, particularly extending—. I'm going to a procession in my constituency in Cowbridge on Saturday.

You raise a very important point, which is the responsibility, particularly in terms of healthcare, of my colleague, the Minister for Health and Social Services, and you are referring to a consultation proposal in terms of changes. So, I think, it is very important that you do look at the Welsh Health Specialised Services Committee consultation on this issue.

Thank you for that answer, Minister. We certainly still have a long way to go if we are to create a more equal Wales. It is certainly not helped by extremists on the left and the right seeking to sow division between various groups. We have seen this play out in the past week, when Westminster held a debate about the definition of ‘sex’ in the Equality Act 2010. Attacks on the trans community and on women who are concerned about single-sex spaces help no-one and do nothing to address either side's concerns. Minister, your LGBTQ+ action plan aims to address the issue of gender recognition here in Wales. What steps are you taking to ensure that we can have a measured approach here in Wales, an approach without the name calling or death threats, without the vitriol and spite? How can we guarantee that everyone’s rights are respected?

Diolch yn fawr for your question. But, I have to say that LGBTQ+ rights, including trans rights, are human rights, and the LGBTQ+ action plan—. I think the thousands of people who attended on Saturday, particularly in our capital city, acknowledge what we're doing. It is important, and you acknowledged it earlier on, that we're committed to making Wales the most LGBTQ+-friendly nation in Europe, and that's why we've developed such a robust and cross-cutting action plan, and why it strengthens protections for LGBTQ+ people and promotes equality for all. But can I just say also that I think it is very important that we look at the impact of our education and the important ways in which—? Today, even in our Youth Parliament, the Minister was able to respond to this point. Actually, the inclusive education curriculum for Wales, relationships and sexuality education, I think today we saw how important it is, how important that that commenced last September and that it has such a positive and protective role in learners' education. It's our children and young people who will, as we've seen today, show the way forward in our learning curriculum.

Thank you, Minister. All of us have a role to play in removing the heat from and bringing light to such discussions. All of us have a role to play in combating hate, which is why I was delighted to learn yesterday that the organisers of the Glastonbury Festival have decided to cancel a screening of the documentary, Oh, Jeremy Corbyn: The Big Lie. The film claims to tell the story of what caused the Corbyn project to fail. Seventeen minutes in, after presenting evidence of an orchestrated campaign against Corbyn, the narrator, Alexei Sayle, asks: 'But if it was an orchestrated campaign, who was in the orchestra?' There follows a silent montage showing the Board of Deputies of British Jews, the Jewish Labour Movement, Labour Friends of Israel, and the Israel Advocacy Movement, using captions and pictures to state that which, if spoken aloud, would be blatant antisemitism, which is why the Board of Deputies of British Jews called upon Glastonbury organisers to cancel the showing—

I think the Minister has many responsibilities, but the responsibility for what's shown in Glastonbury probably is not hers. So, we'll need to come to your question.

Can I speak now?

You can ask your question.

Minister, do you agree that this attempt to rewrite history and its shameful antisemitic tropes have no place in Wales, and will you join me in calling upon all venues in Wales not to screen this hateful film?

Llywydd, can I just say, and also it's an opportunity to remind the Member and Members in the Chamber, that, in 2017, the Welsh Government adopted the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's working definition of antisemitism in full and without qualification?

Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Sioned Williams.

Thank you, Llywydd. Good afternoon, Minister.

Plaid Cymru welcomes the fact that the Welsh Government has launched a refreshed child poverty strategy this week, something that we've been calling for for some time, and it's eight years, of course, since the last strategy was published. Data published this month by Loughborough University shows there's been very little progress made over that time. We welcome the fact that it reaffirms the commitment on measures such as the delivery of the free school meals programme, which reflects the positive and constructive legacy of our co-operation agreement.

I’m also glad, Minister, to see commitment to accelerate work on establishing a Welsh benefits system. You know that I have consistently advocated for this and received the Senedd’s support for my call for a Bill to ensure that every £1 of Welsh support goes to the right pocket at the right time as easily and quickly as possible and in a consistent way throughout Wales. So, will there be a statutory element to local authority delivery of these support payments through this Welsh benefits system to ensure this?

And turning to the fifth priority of the plan, on enabling co-operation, Minister, how do you envisage the commitment to establish and support a communities of practice approach working on a practical basis? Will there be additional frameworks for relevant stakeholders to ensure that the different elements of the plan are co-ordinated effectively?

Diolch yn fawr, Sioned Williams. I am very pleased that we were able to launch the revised child poverty strategy for Wales. It is now open for consultation, so I look forward to having the in-depth response, of course, from yourselves and from Wales, and particularly from children and young people, on all of the aspects that you raised.

It is a 12-week consultation, launched on Monday, and it has been based, in terms of the way in which we've developed it, in terms of the involvement of 3,000 children and young people and families and organisations already, to develop this draft revised child poverty strategy. So, I think you're right in focusing on the issues where we can make the most difference. It's the policies where we can make the most difference, identify priority areas, and I'm particularly interested in those points that you raise. On the policy in practice, I'm meeting with the Bevan Foundation very shortly and, in fact, I'm being joined by Siân Gwenllian, because it's part of looking at our commitments in the co-operation agreement, and looking at what this could mean in terms of our development of our Welsh benefits system, which, of course, is crucial in terms of tackling child poverty.

Diolch, Weinidog. A more general point about the plan that has actually been made by Dr Steffan Evans of the Bevan Foundation—he points to the lack of detail in the plan generally, and cites the example of the commitment, for example, on childcare and transport costs, which merely says,

'focus work across government to find affordable solutions to childcare and transport costs to remove barriers to work and make work pay'.

He asks what does this mean in practice and if there is a target as to how many children should have access to free or affordable childcare in the next five years. What barriers will the Welsh Government be seeking to remove to enable more access to affordable transport for children? Why aren't there specific targets in this plan, Minister?

Well, thank you very much for that question, and I'm, obviously, very keen to hear and learn from what the Bevan Foundation—. I've already responded to that point, but also the Wales Centre for Public Policy have helped us in terms of moving us forward and the key issues that came forward that we need to address. So, yes, in terms of childcare, where we have got the best offer in Wales, particularly enhanced by our expanding Flying Start offer for free childcare, which, of course, reaches out to the most disadvantaged—. But also, looking at transport, it's important that, actually, we acknowledge that the 20 mph speed limit is an important factor in terms of just protecting children in terms of tackling child poverty, but also looking at transport in terms of access to work and opportunities.

I think it is important to acknowledge the issues around the fact that we need to recognise that we have to have outcomes from this child poverty strategy. We don't hold all the levers necessary to bring about a real change in levels of child poverty in Wales, and I hope you will join us, as you know, in calling on UK Ministers to do what they need to do to tackle child poverty—abolish the benefit cap and two-child limit and to increase local housing allowance. But what we are doing is looking at ways in which can develop a monitoring framework—it says that in the draft strategy—so we can have real, transparent accountability for those things that we don't have the powers over.

Diolch yn fawr, Sarah Murphy. While the issue of police data sharing is not devolved, the Welsh Government is working closely with criminal justice partners through our blueprint approach to delivering the violence against women, domestic abuse and sexual violence national strategy. This includes a focus on empowering survivors to seek safety and support with confidence that patient information is safeguarded.

Diolch, Minister. Imagine coming to this country and being unable to receive the support you desperately need. Imagine coming to this country and being scared to reach out to not only the police, but also agencies that are meant to protect you from gender-based violence. Imagine coming to this country and being beaten, battered and bruised. And imagine, if you report this violence to the authorities, that you are deported, without your children, just like the perpetrator told you would be if you spoke out. Sadly, Minister, this is far too common, as the Equality and Social Justice Committee report, 'Gender based violence: The needs of migrant women', highlighted last year. I was proud to take part in the investigation conducted by the committee, and I thank the chair, Jenny Rathbone, for leading the charge on this issue.

Minister, I was pleased that the Welsh Government accepted in principle recommendation 13 of the report, which stated that a firewall should be established that restricts the data sharing between agencies of those who seek support for sexual and gender-based violence. Elizabeth Jiménez-Yáñez of the Step Up Migrant Women coalition suggested that a firewall would not only have the positive result of allowing victims to report safely, it would also take the burden from statutory services, including the police, to have to do immigration-related actions. So, Minister, can you provide a specific update in relation to recommendation 13 and how the Welsh Government should establish a firewall that restricts the sharing of data between agencies on those who seek support for sexual and gender-based violence? Diolch.

Diolch yn fawr, Sarah Murphy, and can I thank you for not just this powerful question today, but also for the leading role that you're playing, I have to say, in this Senedd, in developing understanding and expertise in data justice? I think we recognise that, and we turn to you, and we are learning from you on these issues in terms of your contributions, particularly on the Equality and Social Justice Committee, and this particular inquiry that you undertook in the committee and the recommendation.

Now, it is important that we recognise, as I said, that safety ought to come before status, absolutely, in terms of immigration and support. We've got to protect and support victims and survivors of abuse; it's got to be the first priority for all services, including the police. This is something I'm now raising in the national implementation board of our strategy, the violence against women, domestic abuse and sexual violence strategy. We did accept the recommendation in principle. We can't direct the police or other reserved authorities, but we're considering with them how barriers can be removed to accessing services and how we can actually make this a delivery mechanism for our national strategy.

Question 4 is next, and is to be asked by Carolyn Thomas.

Diolch yn fawr, Carolyn Thomas. Our vision for Wales is to be a nation of sanctuary, embedding compassion as a key principle. Our nation of sanctuary plan aims to ensure people seeking sanctuary are welcomed from day one of arrival in Wales, and our support includes advice services, information about rights, entitlements, and integration services.

Thank you for that answer, Minister. I recently visited Holywell world dance festival, which was, in part, to help refugees now resettled in north-east Wales feel more included and to give them the chance to share their culture with others. I enjoyed chatting to refugees from Afghanistan and Ukraine along with fair-minded, kind, Welsh, English and Chinese people from around the area who believe in hope rather than hate. The mayor of Mold, Councillor Teresa Carberry, is having an event on Friday, and she's called for a widening of compassion and empathy to celebrate diversity, and this is the message that I believe political leaders should be sharing. It saddens my heart when I hear UK Government Ministers who consistently encourage hatred and fear towards asylum seekers, in an attempt to appeal to the far right. They're all people, after all. There are good and bad people everywhere, so I just don't understand it. Minister, do you agree with me that this makes it all the more important that here in Wales we continue to highlight that we are proud to be a nation of sanctuary, and are dedicated to supporting those that are seeking asylum? Thank you.

Well, diolch yn fawr, Carolyn Thomas. How important it is to recognise that compassion that was shown in the Holywell world dance festival, with such integration and such compassion, and, of course, such benefit that the whole community was feeling from that integration. We are in Refugee Week, and the theme is compassion, and earlier this week I attended a school—and I'm meeting other schools, and, in fact, there are events going on in schools across Wales—who are working on embedding this in the curriculum, but it's also something where towns, communities, councils and universities are embracing the nation of sanctuary and actually also engaging with City of Sanctuary, who were with us yesterday when we met with the Welsh Refugee Council. This is about Wales being a compassionate and welcoming place for those seeking sanctuary, and it is important that you highlight today, from that community in your constituency, in your region of North Wales, the support that's coming, with the mayor of Mold actually also playing her part. It's leadership, and it does mean that we should all play our part in terms of that warm welcome, and recognise that we're enriched by the skills and experiences of those sanctuary seekers who come here, who we can care for in Wales.

Question 5. Joel James. I do apologise—

—I mixed up my Sams there. I was looking for Sam Kurtz when, in fact, it's Sam Rowlands I have down. So, I mixed up my Sams. Apologies for that. A supplementary—Sam Rowlands.

Not at all, Llywydd, and thank you for the opportunity. It's wonderful to hear of the Holywell world dance festival. Sadly, I wasn't able to make it there; I'm not sure whether Holywell would have been ready for my dance moves on that occasion—[Laughter.]—but I thank Carolyn Thomas for raising the important point today.

Of course, Minister, you'll know that the United Kingdom has a history of accepting and welcoming those seeking asylum and refuge from around the world for centuries. In Britain, of course, we always maintain that welcome and heart of compassion. If you look back, in the sixteenth century, from the French Huguenots, right through to the present day with Ukrainians, Syrians and people from Hong Kong seeking that refuge, in Wales, and in the UK as a whole, we maintain those open arms and that haven for those who need it.

Focusing on my region, Minister, you'll be aware, I'm sure, of proposals for a hotel to be used, in Northop Hall, as a site for 400 single male refugees. I'd like to know what the Welsh Government's view is on this, please.

Diolch yn fawr, Sam Rowlands, and thank you for your recognition of the nation of sanctuary and the recognition of the support and welcome in north Wales, in your region, and the ways in which local authorities are also playing such a crucial role in terms of support. Now, obviously, this is an area where it is not—migration policy—devolved to Wales, but we work very closely on the point of integration with all of the local services that we provide. I think it is important that this is where the team Wales approach has been so successful, not just in terms of our response to the Ukrainian humanitarian response, which continues, as we discuss here in the Senedd, but, before that, the response to the Afghan evacuation, where we have, as has already been said, Afghan refugees living all over Wales whom we support, and the Syrians who are also with us and who are so much part of our communities.

It is important that we recognise that this is a Home Office responsibility. We are concerned about the ways in which the Home Office is not engaging sufficiently with our local authorities, particularly in terms of support and the response—the multi-agency response. I think you know that the particular site that you mentioned is subject to planning now. But, indeed, we now have a nation of sanctuary ministerial board, which met this morning with Ministers, and including representatives from the Welsh Local Government Association and the Wales Council for Voluntary Action. So, we are working on a team Wales approach to ensure that we can offer the support we can, but also raise with the Home Office our particular concerns about the way in which they are using, inappropriately, these locations.

Now, I would say, and I think we said this yesterday in terms of the Illegal Migration Bill, I do ask again whether you and your colleagues can raise these issues with the UK Government. I'm not talking about the Illegal Migration Bill at this point; I'm actually saying, 'Can you join us in saying that what the UK Government needs to do is improve the processing facility for asylum applications for those in need?' The House of Commons Home Affairs Select Committee has got a range—and that's cross-party—of recommendations in this area. If they could improve the asylum applications, then there would be less need for people to have to come to stay in unsuitable venues and locations. We need to ensure that they can swiftly, as they used to be, be accommodated and settled, or, indeed, there can be effective return agreements for those with invalid claims and an exceptional process to ensure asylum for those in particular need.

I am making this point, Llywydd, today, because it is something that we could unite on—call for those safe and legal routes, and ensure that we can get some of those safe and legal routes like, as I said yesterday, the Dubs scheme, named after Lord Alf Dubs. I think, if you can join with us on that—. I'll be meeting with the immigration Minister, as local government has very recently, for clarity, better engagement and raising concerns about the impact of large sites on integration and cohesion.

Diolch yn fawr, Joel James. We're working closely with credit unions to provide ethical loans and savings, delivered through 13 projects. In addition, we are providing £1.2 million for a loan expansion scheme. I also engage regularly with responsible lenders, to ensure they're doing all they can to support people through the cost-of-living crisis.

Thank you, Minister, for your response. According to their website, Cardiff and Vale Credit Union, while selling themselves as an organisation that, and I quote,

'offer flexible loans on fair terms, with low rates, no fees'

seem to be offering quite staggering interest rates for loans that are massively above market rates. In fact, Minister, a standard family loan for £1,000 would incur an interest rate of 41.2 per cent, and a loyalty loan for £1,000 would see someone paying 40.2 per cent in interest. Indeed, most of the rates they offered on loans of different amounts were considerably higher than someone would get from a bank or building society. And, though they do offer competitive loan rates, these are restricted-access only and won't be available to many people who will be applying for them. I'm most concerned that, for family loans, listed for school uniforms, trips, holidays, Christmas and family holidays, Cardiff and Vale Credit Union will now accept child benefit as a method of payment. So, the benefit paid to families to make sure children are properly fed and clothed can now be used to pay the 41.2 per cent interest on loans to the credit union. However you look at this, Minister, it's wrong for a family that is struggling and needs money for school uniforms to pay 41.2 per cent interest, which is an interest rate within the region of the infamous pay-day loan companies. With this in mind, do you believe that this rate is punishing people for being poor and that it's not within the ethos of the credit union's stated aims of fair terms and low rates? Thank you.

Well, thank you for that question. I'm a very proud member—I should declare that interest—of Cardiff and Vale Credit Union, as are so many others, and I would urge you to visit Cardiff and Vale Credit Union. We visited credit unions after Christmas to congratulate them on the work that they're doing and, indeed, to support them as ethical lenders, providing access to affordable credit, setting up community hubs, working with families through the school-saving scheme.

But I think it is important to say we have supported them with this loan expansion scheme. So, £1.2 million's been provided to 10 credit unions for this loan expansion scheme, and it does allow people with poor credit history to access affordable credit. Up until March of this year, almost 1,700 loans were issued through this scheme, and that's continuing to increase. There are financial challenges being faced by households across Wales, but the credit unions across Wales—and I've visited many, and I do encourage Members to do so, across the Chamber—have welcomed this particular loan expansion scheme. And, let's face it, in terms of supporting the cost of living, £1.2 million was given to credit unions in the last financial year to expand their lending. That's been recycled into this financial year, and it's the ethically driven credit union sector that's attracting and serving those very financially vulnerable new members.

But can I also take the opportunity to say that more than 35 per cent of credit union borrowers are lone parents with dependent children? They provide family loans, where repayments are deducted automatically from benefit payments. It's very popular—it opens up access to affordable credit and, with the savings element, it helps parents to save more regularly. They're very engaged with their members, credit unions. They're affordable, not for profit and ethical.

And finally, can I say we're also joining with Fair4All Finance? And we're joining with Scotland—all devolved nations, as well as England—we're joining with them, and responsible lenders, to test a no-interest loan scheme, which I'm sure the Member will be interested in. So, credit unions in Wales will be referral partners for it. It's being delivered by Social Investment Cymru, Fair4All and Salad Money, and I shall be glad to report on how that pilot is going.

The next question is from Darren Millar—question 6.

Our national digital inclusion and health programme, Digital Communities Wales, supports organisations across all communities and sectors to help people engage with digital. The digital strategy for Wales makes clear that for people who cannot, or decide not to, participate digitally, alternative ways to access public services in Wales must remain available.

Thank you for that response, and I'm very pleased to hear you say that access to services in a non-digital way should be available. We know that only 41 per cent of the over-75s have digital skills, and 32 per cent of people aged 75 plus feel that they are digitally excluded. And, unfortunately, this is leading to problems in those individuals being able to access vital services, such as access to blue badges. Research by Age Cymru has shown that, very often, older people are being told by their local authorities that the only way to apply is online. When they ask for help because they're not able to apply online, they're told, 'We can't offer any help', and clearly that isn't good enough. What action are you going to take, as the Deputy Minister with the responsibility for this issue, to ensure that local authorities do live up to the aspirations that you've set them as a Welsh Government to make sure that applications for blue badges—and, indeed, any other public service—are available for people who are not able to do things like online applications?

Can I thank Darren Millar for the question? I know this is something that you've raised in this Senedd Chamber before, and it's definitely something I think all of us collectively share concerns about, that people cannot always still access services, because you pointed to the 32 per cent figure of people 75 and over in Wales who do not personally use the internet, or people that don't know how to or don't feel confident using it as well. So, I'll certainly pick up the points you made specifically on blue badges, but if there are any other concerns, any specific cases you want to write to me or Jane Hutt to raise, we can make sure that's followed up in our conversations and implementing this with colleagues in local government and beyond as well.

We're also doing some work—we've commissioned the University of Liverpool to do some research for us on a minimum digital living standard for Wales. So, basically, building a consensus for citizen organisations to consider what they might need to do more of and the way that they need to do things to have minimum digital inclusion, but that they would always have that alternative in place as well.

Thank you for the question. The Welsh Government is committed to community safety in Wales. One of our programme for government commitments is to maintain funding for 500 police community support officers and increase their number by 100 over the period of this Senedd term. And there are currently 34 PCSOs based in Denbighshire.

Thank you very much for your response, Minister, and the reason I want to raise this question this afternoon is that recently I spent three shifts on the beat with north Wales local policing teams. I did two shifts in Rhyl and one in Denbigh, and one of the common themes that has been recognised is the need for the enhancement of a local policing presence on the streets to increase the visibility and be a natural deterrent to crimes in our towns and villages in Denbighshire. As you mentioned in your initial response, Minister, it was in the Welsh Labour Party's 2021 Senedd election manifesto that you were committed to increasing PCSOs in their hundreds, and, two years on, we're still waiting to see evidence of this pledge on the streets. Can you give us an update on this matter and a bit of a timeline as to when these PCSOs are going to be delivered, or is it just more warm words from the Labour Party in Wales?

I'm very glad you have actually welcomed the fact that it is a Welsh Labour Government that is not only funding 500 PCSOs, but also increasing their number by 100 over the period of this Senedd term, and that is important in terms of the timeline—I will come on to the timeline. But also, can I take from that an indication that you might also perhaps be warming to the fact that we feel that devolution of policing to Wales would be the most appropriate way forward, so that we can actually meet the neighbourhood policing needs of our communities? And I congratulate you on joining three shifts on the beat. I myself joined a shift on the beat—a ride-around, as they call it—recently, and learnt a lot from that experience, as many Senedd Members have also mentioned over a period of time.

So, we're providing over £22 million of funding for PCSOs in this financial year, despite the fact that, as I say, at present policing is reserved. We want to devolve it. We've got a very challenging fiscal position, and that's because of your Government and cuts and austerity for 13 years. But you have got 34 police community support officers in Denbighshire—23 PCSOs are based in Denbigh and Abergele coastal, a further 11 are based in Denbigh and Conwy rural—and this is a mixture of Welsh Government and force-funded PCSOs. We're funding more than half of the total funding for PCSOs in north Wales in 2023-24, and that's an agreement with the force.

Just finally, Llywydd, I want to give one example of a very important neighbourhood policing team project in north Wales, and you will be aware of it, I’m sure, north Wales Members. The neighbourhood policing team have been supporting the Blossom and Bloom project. It’s a charity supporting young mums in the area, and actually it was the local neighbourhood policing team that helped with the funding application for this charity to continue their work. This just shows how the PCSOs play such a crucial role in the community, working with young people, offering fitness sessions to mums at a local boxing gym. One of you can claim this project, I’m sure, at some point. But also, the local boxing gym won an award at the police and crime commissioners community awards ceremony, so Wales is on the map in terms of the support we’re giving to those important PCSOs.

Whilst crime and justice are reserved matters, we continue to work collaboratively with the police and other relevant partners across Wales. Our policing partnership board for Wales provides opportunities to discuss a range of issues, including people trafficking.

Yes, this is firmly one of those issues that falls within that either jagged or fuzzy edge of devolved and retained competences, but my time out on the beat regularly with our local police has highlighted this issue of the trafficking of people, vulnerable people, into drugs farming in residential or empty properties in the south Wales valleys. It affects those communities, it takes police resource, and it impacts directly on vulnerable individuals who are often trafficked into these situations, exploited, and then they are the ones who are prosecuted, and the big criminals running the operations escape to run their operations from another property, on another day, with another exploited individual, but still impacting these often most disadvantaged communities, where the properties are cheapest and most viable for criminal operations like this.

So, what discussions can the Minister have with the PCCs and the chief constables on this? And, until policing is devolved, as it is to the Mayor of London, in effect, what discussions with the Home Secretary too, to end this exploitation of trafficked individuals and the exploitation of disadvantaged communities?

I thank the Member for his question. You're right to raise the impact that this sort of abhorrent behaviour, this human trafficking, has not just on the vulnerable individuals that become victims of it, but the impact on communities as a whole, and also the knock-on effect, as I said, in terms of resourcing for our colleagues in the police services as well.

Like I said before, we do work very closely in partnership, even though it falls within that area that isn't devolved, but we do have a modern slavery division within Welsh Government to address these issues too. We'll certainly do that through our lead PCC—it's currently Jeff Cuthbert—around modern slavery, about how we can make sure we are working as closely together as we can and also raising those concerns with our colleagues in the UK Government. Clearly, we heard in this place yesterday, and I'm sure we will hear again, concerns around the Illegal Migration Bill, and actually that makes things more difficult for people who are victims of being trafficked, rather than actually seeking to support them and crack down on those people who seek to exploit those vulnerable people in instances of human trafficking.

So, we're committed to continuing to work in collaboration and to approach this from a position of empathy and compassion, and actually working with our colleagues and the police community support officers in supporting local communities and on the need for community cohesion too, at the same time.

Finally, question 9, Luke Fletcher.

Diolch yn fawr, Luke Fletcher. I met with the Minister for Economy recently as part of a series of bilateral meetings on cross-cutting measures for inclusion in the draft child poverty strategy. The draft strategy, of course, went out to consultation on Monday this week.

Thank you for the answer, Minister.

Following the publication of the June ONS statistics showing a pattern of declining Welsh employment rates and economic activity, I asked the Minister for Economy last week whether we need a far more candid and brutally honest assessment of the state of the Welsh economy. Now, the 2022 progress report on the child poverty strategy alludes to the fact that children are at increased risk of poverty in households that are struggling to get into work. But, of course, we have had a scenario for quite some time where the prospect of in-work poverty has been dramatically extended to an ever greater number of households in Wales. The refreshed child poverty strategy is, I think, a real chance to implement some ambitious measures to change this. So, in light of the recent ONS figures, is any additional resource being allocated to this and what fresh thinking is being generated between your officials and the economy Minister's to tackle what is a long-standing issue here in Wales?

Thank you very much for those really important comments and, in your question, reflections on the opportunities we have now with this draft child poverty strategy, which I encourage Members to consult in their constituencies about, and consult on the opportunities that the strategy provides us, despite the fact that we are very constrained in terms of our powers in relation to tax and benefits. But I think the key point about the strategy is it is cross-Government and all members of Cabinet, of course, endorsed the draft strategy for the 12-week consultation.

It is about supporting pathways out of poverty. You focused on the employment figures on economic inactivity, although the First Minister made clear that there is a picture of opportunity here as well, in terms of the Welsh economy. But it is about pathways out of poverty through those early years, education, employment, employment and skills, and the employability and skills plan is crucial to that, and that was a key point of my discussions with the Minister for Economy.

But it is about how we can strengthen the Welsh Government approach to integration of policy and funding to enable longer term collaboration. It's regional, local anti-poverty work and working with our partners to create a Wales where every child, young person and family can prosper.

Thank you, Minister.

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

Thank you for your question. I have not yet had discussions with the Magistrates Association on this issue. However, a Wales youth justice academic advisory group is currently reviewing the opportunities that arise from youth justice devolution, at our behest. The operation of the youth courts is part of that review, and magistrates are being consulted.

Thank you, Minister, for that. The Counsel General may be aware that the Equality and Social Justice Committee report, called '60%—Giving them a Voice', is due to be published and is due to be debated in the Senedd next week, and that it highlights that at least 60 per cent of young people who become involved with the youth justice system have speech, language and other communication difficulties.

During our inquiry, we heard about the best practice established by Neath Port Talbot and Swansea bay youth justice areas and what a difference that has made, to have people who are communication experts supporting young people so that their voices are properly heard and, more importantly, so that they understand the process that they have got themselves involved with. I wonder whether this important issue is due to come up in the conversations that you have with magistrates, and what influence magistrates have on ensuring the quality of support required to ensure there are no miscarriages of justice involving young people who simply do not understand what is going on.

Thank you for your supplementary question, and I very much do welcome the report. It's not appropriate for me to respond to that report, because it'll obviously be going for debate in the Siambr and also before the Minister for Social Justice, I understand. But what it does highlight is that a number of young people who get involved and come into contact with the justice system come from, often, very difficult backgrounds, and often have a high proportion of additional learning needs, and those have been identified in that particular report.

What I would say is that we have a multi-agency approach that I think diverts many young people from the justice system in Wales, and that has had a very significant impact in reducing the number of cases that go before the youth courts. But what it is is a recognition that the appropriate way of dealing with many of those issues that arise is to actually keep young people out of the criminal justice system, and also to engage all the agencies, the overwhelming majority of which are devolved, more in the form of a problem-solving response. And I really do wonder that whilst we give further consideration to the recommendations of the Law Commission in terms of tribunal reform, whether there's a role within a reformed tribunal system where, for example, you already have the issue of mental health, where you have the expertise in respect of learning needs, and no doubt at some stage in terms of exclusions, that this will be an appropriate area where that expertise would benefit within a reformed tribunal system.

Thank you for your question. The amendments to the Public Order Act 1986 concern reserved matters, and the UK Government did not inform us of their intention to give the police yet further powers in relation to protests. It is vital that people have the right to express concerns freely, and in a safe and peaceful way.

I thank the Counsel General for his answer, and can I agree entirely with the comments he made there? It is the case that, in the last Senedd elections, the people of Cymru backed Welsh Labour in record numbers. They backed a bold First Minister in Mark Drakeford and they backed a bold manifesto that included pursuing the case for the devolution of policing.

Counsel General, as the Public Order Act gives more powers to the police, what further discussions have you had with law officers in Westminster, ensuring that the justice system as a whole in Wales really does reflect the priorities of the people of Wales?

Our concerns about the changes that have been made have been well made, both in discussions and in correspondence. As we are aware, policing is a reserved matter, and as I've already said, we were not engaged. The Public Order Act 2023 includes powers that we think are far too widely drawn, and the rush to commence the legislation before the King's coronation, I think, has resulted in excessive onus being put on the police to try and make sense of what is badly drafted legislation.

It's also important to note as well, within that, that one of the reasons underlying our concerns is because these proposals were discussed previously in the House of Lords, who actually voted down similar amendments during the passage of the Public Order Act 2023. So, this is now using secondary legislation to actually bypass Parliament.

There have been a number of commentaries, and it hasn't all been from the Labour side. David Davis, former Cabinet Member, said that:

'There’s an issue about what’s legal and I think we’ve lost sight of it.'

He said,

'The truth is, you have a piece of law, that goes into law, and seven days later the Commissioner of the Met has to apologise to people he’s wrongfully arrested under that law.'

He asked,

'It says there’s something wrong, doesn’t it?'

Sir Charles Walker, another Conservative MP, said,

'I think the Public Order Bill, we saw the policing of protests over the Coronation weekend—I entirely disagree with my party on that...More importantly, I warned when we were criminalising protest during the Covid lockdowns where it would all end up.'

Our opposition is clear. Our ability to influence that because it's a reserved matter is limited, but we, of course, do engage with policing and with other bodies within our communities, and we do hope that there is a responsible approach to the application of what is badly drafted and very unfortunate legislation, which has been imposed without the wish and without the merit, really, of proper consideration.

The Welsh Conservatives' spokesperson to ask a question, Mark Isherwood.

Diolch, Llywydd. In The Law Society Gazette article of 27 January on the future direction of Welsh Government's justice policy, you state that the Welsh Government's agenda for the law and legal sector includes a tender to assess the need for solicitor apprenticeships in Wales. The Solicitors Regulation Authority, the largest regulator of legal services in England and Wales, covering around 90 per cent of the regulated market and overseeing more than 4,000 solicitors and 400 law firms in Wales, is championing solicitor apprenticeships as an alternative to the traditional qualification route through university for candidates who want to earn as they learn. They also point out that aspiring solicitors can already qualify through a solicitor apprenticeship in England, which typically takes five to six years to complete. Why, therefore, are you only assessing the need for this in Wales, when it already operates in England, opening up opportunities for people who might not otherwise enter the profession to do so, and helping the profession's need for new entrants?

Thank you. It is a good question. The answer to it, really, is because what has been implemented in England I don't think has been thought through very well. We want to support access into the legal profession, we want to support increased social mobility and diversity, but what we don't want to do is to fund legal apprenticeships that basically merely replace the funding that law firms are already spending on that. That actually advances nothing—it just gives a bonus and a boost to law firms in what they're already doing. So, the approach we've adopted is this: we've adopted support at the legal executive level in terms of assisting those coming into that. What we want to understand is how we can actually support apprenticeships in the legal profession that go into the areas where we actually want more lawyers, where we need more lawyers, particularly into the advice deserts, and how we also do that in a way that we are sure that the people who we're supporting are the ones who would not normally get that support from existing law firms in Wales. It's not an easy task in order to achieve those objectives, but it is something we have been addressing our minds to. We do want that research to be carried out, to give us a further understanding of how we might best use public money, firstly to support the legal profession in Wales, but also to support it in those particular areas of our communities that most need that legal expertise and advice.

I hope you're consulting the Solicitors Regulation Authority regarding the practicalities they've already addressed elsewhere regarding this.

How do you respond to concern raised with me by a barrister and King's Counsel who copied me on the article of 27 January in The Law Society Gazette? His concern was that the present discussion may set in train incremental development where reform of criminal law and justice in Wales leads ultimately to a situation where the civil law of Wales becomes separated from the civil law of England. He added that, although the Thomas commission of 2019 did not recommend this—and the Counsel General would doubtless say there was no intention to do it—the logic of criminal law and justice change, combined with the pace of legislative output from the Welsh Government on devolved matters, would mean that two legal systems would emerge. This would bring about an end to the existing law of England and Wales, which has existed for nearly 500 years, which 'would be disastrous for the Welsh economy and prosperity, and for most people in Wales'.

Thank you. I think the question is one that we've addressed on quite a number of occasions, and continue to address. My engagement with the legal profession and legal institutions is to make it absolutely clear that we're not talking about reforms that lead to any barriers being created. But there are clear anomalies, even if we just take the jurisdictional one as one example. You'll remember that we had a Bill in 2016, I think, and of course it is an area that the Law Society themselves are now addressing. So, if, for example, you have a law on education passed by the UK Parliament, it becomes the law on education for England and Wales, even though it only applies to England. If we have a law on education in Wales, it becomes the education law (Wales). There clearly is an anomaly, isn't there? Any legislation coming from the UK Parliament that only applies to England should actually clearly specify that it is from England, so people know where that law applies and what the jurisdiction is.

There is no difficulty whatsoever in the concept that, when a court sits within Wales, it is part of the Welsh jurisdiction, but when it sits in England, it's part of the English jurisdiction. The laws of England and Wales and the laws specifically just of Wales that apply within Wales clearly form part of the Welsh jurisdiction, and the same applies in respect of England. I don't believe those are difficult concepts. I think the fundamental interest we have is that there are no barriers in terms of the judiciary, there are no barriers in respect of the lawyers. What is important though, of course, is that, in the training of lawyers, in the training of judges, and training of those who work within the legal profession, there is an understanding that there are distinctions. That divergence comes not just from what we do in Wales; that divergence also comes from what the UK Parliament does in England. It doesn't cause major problems and difficulties in terms of a jurisdiction in Northern Ireland or in terms of a jurisdiction in Scotland, and neither should it in Wales.

The senior barrister and KC I referred to, whose representations were very recent, further stated that the end of the existing law of England and Wales would be 'disastrous in two respects. First, the current law of England and Wales has been, and remains, the gold standard across the world for commercial contracts and business relationships, but the existence, or even the mere prospect of, a different jurisdiction in Wales would have a hugely damaging effect on investment in Wales from business in England or overseas, adding significantly to the cost of doing day-to-day business. It becomes seriously problematic in the event of disputes, not just because of cost, but also because of uncertainty of outcome—which law applies to which part of the transaction, what happens when there is conflict. This would create mountains of work for lawyers and the losers would be everyone else. The second big problem, briefly, is for people who live on either side of the Anglo-Welsh border, and who may live in England and work in Wales, or vice versa. They would find their daily lives subject to two sets of laws.' How, therefore, do you respond to such concerns being raised by senior lawyers who are stating that, and I quote again, 'this is a big issue because two jurisdictions would be a huge problem'?

Can I firstly say that, in respect of the overwhelming majority of lawyers that I've dealt with, many of whom practice just in England, though some have practiced both in England and Wales, and some just practice in Wales as well, none of those actually see it as a problem? Many of them are absolutely very positive about some of the reforms and changes that are taking place. They also recognise the absolute logic that, where you have more than one parliament passing legislation, then, clearly, you have a jurisdiction for that legislation to take place.

I do sense a certain paranoia about the concept of England and Wales. It was reflected by the previous Secretaries of State for Wales in the UK Government, but I think it was without foundation; I think it was without any evidence. It seems to me a very straightforward matter that, where you have laws that apply within Wales, that are passed by this Parliament, well, clearly, not only should they be heard in Wales, but they become part of a Welsh jurisdiction. And the same thing, every time England passes legislation that only applies to England—and there's quite a lot of it being passed on that side—where is the problem? Lawyers adapt to what the law is. They need to understand what the law is. The judges need to do so. The England and Wales jurisdiction is just a sort of historic mirage. It represented a situation where there was just one parliament. I think maybe your colleague needs to keep up with the fact that we actually have four parliaments in the UK passing legislation, and that legislation creates its own legal jurisdiction.

Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Peredur Owen Griffiths.

Diolch, Llywydd. Cwnsler Cyffredinol, last week, the Scottish Government published a paper on devolution since the Brexit referendum, providing a neat summary of the way in which devolution has been rolled back since 2016. It makes for extremely worrying reading. I think there would be value in the Welsh Government undertaking to produce a similar paper. I'm certain that it would arrive at a similar conclusion, namely that there cannot be true self-government under a devolution settlement that retains Westminster supremacy. Westminster supremacy was given brute expression in the UK Government's use of section 35 of the Scotland Act 1998 to block Scotland's gender recognition Bill.

It was also reflected in the recent controversy surrounding Scotland's proposed deposit-return scheme. As the Minister will be aware, the scheme has effectively been blocked by UK Ministers exercising power under the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020. Specifically, the Scottish Government has been prohibited from including glass products in the scheme, a decision that should, by right, be its and not Westminster's to make. Can I ask the Minister if he believes that the UK is a union of co-equal territories, and if so, is this belief not undermined by this kind of Westminster overreach? The Welsh Government has insisted that plans to develop its own DRS, including glass, remain ongoing. Can the Minister provide an update on these plans and, in particular, on discussions with the UK Government about them in light of the decision on the Scottish scheme? Diolch.

Firstly, thank you for your question. Yes, I am aware of the Scottish paper. I have read it. It's 38 pages. I don't think it adds anything further to what we know in terms of the Scottish Government's position. The Scottish Government have their own mandate and they obviously pursue that. We have produced our own papers in terms of the way in which we think the future of the UK should look, 'Reforming our Union'. The position that we've adopted consistently is that we see the UK as a voluntary union of four nations, but within that it has a significant number of constitutional dysfunctions. Rather than us producing papers—. I think that would be most inappropriate when we actually have our own independent commission that is doing a considerable amount of work. I gave evidence to it recently, other Ministers have and many other bodies and Ministers from across the UK and elsewhere have done so as well. I think it's due to produce its report towards the end of this year, and I very much look forward to reading that report. That seems to me to be the body that will, I think, influence the debate that takes place in this Chamber on constitutional reforms.

The point you raise, though, in terms of the deposit-return scheme is a very valid one. It was agreed within the common frameworks that there was an agreement between Wales, Scotland and the UK Government in terms of the need for such a scheme. Work has been under way at different paces, quite advanced within Scotland. The request for an exclusion under the internal market Act has only been partially given, and it seems to me that what has happened is that English Ministers, using UK legislation, have actually disrupted what was a co-operative agreement on an important area of environmental policy. What you actually have are UK Ministers who are now, basically, undermining those collaborative efforts—that common work that formed the basis of the common frameworks, which was established in order to ensure that there was a cohesive discussion amongst the nations and within the various devolved responsibilities of the internal market once we left.

I think the internal market Act is an abuse. The pulling out and the attempts to use the internal market in this way, I think, is extremely unfortunate. Our position is that we do not think the internal market Act overrides our own devolved competence. We will be continuing to develop our own policy and work in that particular direction. But clearly there are common interests across the whole of the UK, there is some form of policy in this that everyone can buy into, and I think it is really most unfortunate that effectively the UK Government for England has become an outlier in this process.

I thank you for that response, although I have to say I still remain deeply concerned about what the UK Government's decision on Scotland's DRS may mean for developing an equivalent scheme here in Wales. Further, I am concerned by the process by which the decision was taken and what this tells us about the ambiguities of the internal market Act, and you've expressed some of those concerns there in your answer. Correspondence between the Scottish and UK Governments revealed that UK Ministers were confused, and even contradicted themselves, around the process for applying for exclusions from the internal market Act, a process the UK Government itself outlined in a ministerial statement in December 2021. It seems that the Scottish Government was required to jump through a series of additional unexpected hoops to get a decision on the DRS. This added to the delay around UK Government Ministers making and publishing such a decision. The Welsh Government has raised concerns that this represented the ad hoc addition of further steps to the process of seeking an exclusion from the UK internal market Act. Can I ask what assurances the Minister has secured that the UK Government will not be making any further changes to the mutually agreed common frameworks process? Does he ultimately agree with me that the episode reveals the deep dysfunction of inter-governmental relations in the UK? And finally, does he also agree with me that the reports this week that the UK Labour leadership has repeatedly chastised the Welsh Government for its characterisation of the UK as a union of four nations revealed that this dysfunction is not liable to improve with a change of Westminster Government? Diolch.

Perhaps if I just take the last googly that you gave me right at the end there, I can tell you I've not been chastised by anyone. I have stated it at every opportunity I get, whether at UK level, England level or whatever, and I will be doing it in front of an important legal conference next week. I will also be making the point again in terms of the position that the UK is a union of nations, and it must be the case, because you have four Parliaments passing legislation and constitutionally, maybe we have dysfunctions and it hasn't caught up to date, but that is the position that I make. I've not had it actually challenged at any particular level. I've not seen any valid argument that actually challenges that either.

In terms of the point you raised with regard to Scotland and the deposit scheme that you referred to, yes, it does undermine inter-relations within the UK, and yes, it does drive a coach and horses through common frameworks, because within the common frameworks it was agreed that there would be a voluntary agreement that, where there was a need for an exclusion, evidence would be placed and that would be worked out by agreement between all those participating within the common frameworks, and it is the UK Government acting on behalf of England who helped, actually, to change that. They have basically just changed their position. Why they have changed their position, no doubt, maybe at some stage we will find out what it is that has put pressure on the UK Government to change that particular position, but we are left with that, and yes, it causes those dysfunctions, and yes, at every opportunity we are raising those. We are raising it in correspondence, and at the inter-ministerial standing committee meeting that I attended only a few weeks ago, this very issue was raised and concerns about the failure of the UK Government to support the exclusion was raised, or to actually take a decision on the exclusion. We now have a decision and it's an unsatisfactory one.

It could be a short answer. The United Kingdom's departure from the European Union should have resulted in enhanced devolved competence. Instead, the UK Government's unacceptable imposition of legislative constraints on the devolved institutions and its repeated breaches of the Sewel convention are threatening the Welsh constitutional settlement, and placing a strain on the United Kingdom.

Thank you for your response, Counsel General, and the reason I want to ask this question today is that, on Friday, we celebrate the seventh anniversary of the people of Rhyl, Prestatyn, Vale of Clwyd, Denbighshire, north Wales, Wales and the UK voting to leave the European Union and setting us on an independent course away from the bureaucratic constitutional chaos that held us back since the 1970s.

Now, what the Welsh people have seen is an ideological denial from people on those benches whose constituents voted to leave the EU, including in Alyn and Deeside and Blaenau Gwent. Despite their own constituents voting to the contrary in 2016 in voting for Brexit, they tried every method in the ensuing years to deny their own constituents the benefits of leaving the EU and maximising the potential to the Welsh economy. It was only yesterday that Andrew R.T. Davies quizzed the First Minister on the fact that Wales has the worst employment figures, and the fact of the matter is that the Welsh Government is failing to deliver the benefits of Brexit to the people who indeed voted for it. So, can you outline, on the seventh anniversary of Brexit, Counsel General, the discussions you and your Government have had with UK and European Ministers and officials to alleviate unemployment figures and make sure that the Welsh economy benefits from Brexit?

Well, can I refer you to the response to those particular issues that the First Minister gave yesterday, and on the advances and progress that have been made in terms of the employment situation within Wales? Can I also say that, yes, as we come across that anniversary in another week's time, I can probably do no better than to refer the Member to the Office for Budget Responsibility, who tell me that we will be celebrating—this is in their report—a reduction of 4 per cent in productivity as a result of Brexit and a reduction of 15 per cent exports as a result of Brexit, but that we can celebrate many new trade deals with non-EU countries, but that these will not have a material economic impact because they mainly duplicate pre-existing EU deals? But I can also refer to the one positive, and, of course, the one positive comes from veteran Conservative Brexiteer, Peter Bone, who really sums up the benefits of Brexit. He says, 'We have got to start talking about the benefits of Brexit’, as the Member is now doing. He said that there had been a lot, even small ones—the £50 off motor insurance—but we're not talking enough about them. The fact that that £50 off motor insurance is actually nothing to do with Brexit, but, nevertheless, it is certainly something that he feels is important to highlight, even if it is not true. But then that probably represents most of what the Brexit arguments were.

What we do recognise is that, of course, having left the European Union, there are many changes and strains on our economy. We recognise the need for commonality in some policy areas and even consistency and minimum standards—and one of the positions is—[Inaudible.]—to maintain standards—to do all we can, actually, to protect employment from the impact of Brexit and what we already see, which is the transfer of jobs to the European Union from the UK, and also the reduction in trade through Wales as a result of Brexit as well.

Thank you for your question. Turnout is lower than we would want it to be. Having enfranchised more people than ever to take part in devolved elections, we are now working to encourage participation, as outlined in our electoral administration and reform White Paper and targeted projects to drive engagement.

Thank you for the answer, Counsel General. I believe that 15 per cent of those eligible to be on the electoral register have not registered to vote, and I know you agree with me, Counsel General, that this is 15 per cent too many. But it's not the only challenge we face to improving democratic participation. For the first time last month, voters in England were required to bring photo identification to polling stations, and this has had a significant impact. For instance, in Hull, just one in five eligible voters exercised their democratic right. I'm grateful that the Welsh Government has ensured that ID will not be required for Senedd and local elections in Wales, but this will still impact Welsh voters during the next general election. So, may I ask what Welsh Government is doing to encourage people in Wales to register to vote and, following the local elections in England, what representations you have made to the UK Government calling for a u-turn on voter ID? And I believe that Rees-Mogg actually said that the gerrymandering of the Tory Government actually shot themselves in the foot.

Thank you for your question. Just to make one point, of course, voter turnout in the 2021 Senedd elections was the highest ever with the wider franchise of eligible voters. However, it is still not high enough and there's still important work that needs to be done, I think, across all elections that take place across Wales and across the UK, because participation is really the key to the stability and strength of our democracy. We have a democratic engagement grant of £300,000 per annum, £260,000 of which has been allocated for 2023-24 to 12 to separate projects that aim at engaging and supporting communities to become active citizens.

I've made the point very clearly in the past in terms of the Welsh Government's opposition to voter ID and the reasons for it. They are well known, they are well understood. The estimate we see is that somewhere in the region of 9,000 were turned away during the English local government elections. But there is work that is under way. I attended recently an inter-ministerial group on elections. One of the purposes of that group is to actually look at the common interest we all have in actually management of elections, even though there is divergence taking place. So, it was a very positive meeting for that purpose, and we recognise the difference of opinion that we actually have. The UK Government is carrying out its own assessment of the impact of voter ID, so we await that. We also await the work of the Electoral Commission, which will be publishing their initial findings later this month, and we will then assess further the impact of that.

I thank the Counsel General for his acknowledgment of some of the concerns around the turnout for elections for Senedd elections. Indeed, as the Counsel General will know, in the last UK general election, the turnout in Wales was 66.6 per cent, and in the last Senedd election, the turnout was 46.6 per cent—a full 20 percentage points lower in elections for this place than for the UK Parliament. I must say, it was a brave suggestion, I felt, from Carolyn Thomas, that representations made from this place or from the Welsh Government to UK Government around advice, perhaps, around elections, when, indeed, elections for that place are showing a 20 per cent higher turnout than elections for this place. I agree with the Counsel General that it's absolutely imperative that we see a higher turnout for elections for this place, because that's what provides its legitimacy, not just in terms of the Government here, but as parliamentarians of the Welsh Parliament.

So, Counsel General, you commented on some of the actions being taken by Welsh Government to see that increased engagement in Senedd elections. Could you point to which single action you think could make the biggest difference to that turnout?

I think the biggest difference was actually in the increase in the registration that took place. Those who took up the offer of support for electoral registration support officers almost unanimously suffered significant increases in the number of registrations. I think that was important; those who didn't get the benefit of that. I think that was significant.

I think what is probably more significant is that, of course, we are looking at the issue of electoral reform and the issues such as automatic registration, and, of course, you'll be aware of the sorts of consultations around those particular reforms. I think there are a number of things that are important. I think automatic registration, whilst making sure that people are on there doesn't force people to vote, but it does mean that there's an obligation then, I think, on the political parties and the democratic institutions around Wales to actually provide the incentive to vote. I have to say, my own personal view is that the voting system we have, the first-past-the-post voting system, I don't think actually creates that climate where people can feel that every vote is helpful. So, there is a lot of work to be done, but I think a lot of that work is dependent on us as politicians and our political parties to actually show that voting makes a difference in the way in which we actually engage with people, particularly those who are disconnected from that.

Thank you for your question. We continue to make good progress on translating the recommendations of the special purpose committee on Senedd reform into legislative provisions. As part of the co-operation agreement with Plaid Cymru, I look forward to introducing legislation with a view to changes coming into effect for the 2026 Senedd elections.

Thank you, Counsel General. Accountability is very important, and in February 2023, the First Minister misled the Senedd when he claimed that he and others were advised by the auditor general to take Betsi Cadwaladr out of special measures ahead of the 2021 Senedd elections. It transpires that this wasn't the case; he misled the Senedd.

Just last week, the health Minister told the Senedd that forensic accountants from Ernst & Young Consultancy were asked to look at the body's accounts on advice from the Welsh Government. However, two senior officials from an NHS body told the BBC that the Welsh Government was not involved, with the health Minister later admitting that there was no direct conversation on the matter: she misled the Senedd. When Ministers mislead politicians in other parliaments, the Labour benches here call it a disgrace, corruption, and that those people should be sacked. So, in Senedd reform, it's important that we look back at making sure that we improve transparency and accountability. So, Counsel General, will the Welsh Labour Government support a move to establish a privileges committee in the Senedd so that those who mislead, hinder, or prevent the work of the Senedd are held accountable for their actions, and receive a measurable punishment?

Point of order.

I will take the point of order afterwards.

Well, can I firstly say that the supplementary question, it doesn't seem to me, actually particularly relates to the issue of Senedd reform? Can I say that, in respect of the point you raised in terms of a privileges committee, that is a matter for the Senedd? It's not a matter for Government; it's not a matter for me in terms of my responsibilities. And can I say how disappointing it was that when we witnessed within Westminster an important privileges committee report being there, how many—[Interruption.]—how many of the—[Interruption.]—how many of the Conservative Members of Parliament actually declined to actually participate within that? But this is not a matter for me, it's not a matter for Welsh Government; it's a matter to raise as a matter of Senedd policy. It's not right for Government to be establishing these; it's a matter for Parliament itself to do so.

I will take the point of order at the end of the Counsel General's questions.

Question 6. John Griffiths.

Thank you for your question. The inter-governmental relations review provides a sound basis to support inter-governmental working, but its impact continues to be undermined by the UK Government’s lack of respect for the principles and approach set out in the review and for devolution more widely.

Counsel General, at the end of last year, the First Minister stated that for nearly 20 years the Sewel convention was observed by UK Governments so that UK Government legislative proposals that might intrude into devolved areas in Wales were only taken forward with the Senedd's consent, but that recent Tory UK Governments have not respected the convention and this is bringing the devolution settlement to a 'very difficult place'. Counsel General, in light of those remarks from the First Minister and the importance of these matters to the constitutional future of Wales and the UK, what is your current assessment of the position under the current UK Government?

Well, can I say that it is only in, really, the last couple of years that we have seen what is a major series of breaches of the Sewel convention? It is suggested from time to time that, of course, these are all only related to constitutional issues around Brexit, but that is clearly not the case, as we've recently seen with the levelling-up Bill, as we've seen with the Energy Bill and with numerous other pieces of legislation.

The Sewel convention really is the oil of the constitutional engine; it's what enables the Governments to work together with confidence and trust. So, the breaches of it are something that I have raised at every opportunity at the interministerial level, and that the First Minister has raised, and other Ministers. We raise it consistently in terms of UK Government legislation that is coming through, where legislative consent is required.

For me, the real challenge is that Sewel needs to be redefined; it needs to be codified and it needs some form of justiciability, and that's why I quite welcome the recommendations that are concluded within the Gordon Brown report, that the next Labour Government will actually introduce reforms that will require a constitutional ceiling for the UK Parliament to be able to overrule devolved legislation or to, basically, breach Sewel. I think some step in that direction would be a significant step forward. I think it probably needs a longer term and more thoughtful way of resolving, ultimately, the relations between the four nations of the UK and also the nature of inter-governmental relations.

We have a structure that could work, but it is very much a structure that is dependent on trust and goodwill. Unfortunately, with the UK Government in these areas at the moment, trust and goodwill are in very short supply.

Thank you. The Welsh Government is committed to inclusive and accessible voting in Senedd and local government elections, and wants to encourage participation rather than to restrict it. That is why we don’t support voter ID and want to introduce automatic registration for all local government electors in Wales.

Well, the voters in Wales are very astute and very intelligent in their choices always, and they will be able to find their way through this morass. But there is genuine scope for confusion as they lurch from a general election at a UK level, where all of the evidence shows that there was clear voter suppression—there were forms of voter ID that were not usable, including, I have to say, NHS photo ID that was not usable or young people's photo ID that was not usable—and then a Wales-based approach at local and Senedd elections that is designed to extend the franchise and make it more available to people, while still maintaining the security of our voting. So, I understand, Counsel General, there is a review that will now be carried out, at a UK level, of how it went. Well, I think everyone informed, including the independent assessors of the election, has made clear the view already: the vote was suppressed, people were turned away; people turned up to vote and couldn't get in. So, would the Welsh Government consider, either in its interministerial meetings or as part of that review, submitting its own views to them, that the way to avoid voter confusion is, actually, to scrap what they're doing in the UK and follow the Welsh example?

Can I thank you? And the point you make, of course, is that those aspects of the UK Government's Elections Act 2022 were another example of the UK Government diverging from what was the previous consensus around the format of elections. It's created divergence, because, clearly, Scotland and Wales were not prepared to go along with those particular changes, having a different direction. I would say that our approach within Wales is one of modernising the electoral system, to use technology and the ability to maximise inclusivity and accessibility.

But can I just say, just referring, as I did earlier, to the interministerial group that took place not long ago—the first one of these on elections—is that there was a very frank discussion between all the parties in terms of the differences that we have? We recognise that those differences are there. What I do believe there was was a common belief that we have to make the system work mutually, that we can't allow a change in one election to adversely impact on the others, and we have to look at the ways in which our systems operate collectively, the way in which we avoid confusion, and that does depend, to a degree, I think, on the sort of communications, the explanations, we have when elections actually take place. So, there is further work that's taking place on that.

We will consider very carefully the UK Government's own review and, indeed, the Electoral Commission's reviews, when they take place, and there will certainly be further discussions in this Chamber as well on these issues. Because reform is inevitable within our system in Wales; we do want to press ahead with modernisation, inclusivity and accessibility, but we have to ensure that we do also work collaboratively with the UK Government to ensure that those common areas that we have in terms of the administration of elections work for the benefit of everyone.

Thank you for your question. Accuracy and clarity are crucial to all aspects of the law, including future jurisdictional arrangements. The current terminology of an England-and-Wales jurisdiction does not reflect the reality that, clearly, the law here is different.

Diolch yn fawr, Cwnsler Cyffredinol. As you indicated, uncertainty is always a bad thing within a justice system, and, as indicated by Mark Isherwood earlier in this question session, any suggestion of the devolution of justice will create anxiety with some within the legal profession in Wales and England. It's very important, then, that we're clear and accurate in the terms used when we are discussing any future jurisdictional arrangements. What discussions are you therefore having, Cwnsler Cyffredinol, with the legal professions, and also law schools, to make sure that Wales remains an attractive place to practise law?

Well, thank you for those important comments. Can I just say, I've been having a lot of discussions in many legal fora in the whole area of justice, social justice, accessibility and devolution of justice? The issue of jurisdiction is one that frequently arises and, of course, as you know, this was raised and set out in draft form, actually, in the Government and Laws in Wales Bill that was published in 2017, which was about the clarification. It wasn't actually about devolution of justice, it was just about the establishment of a recognition of the legal jurisdictions that exist in practice, or exist in reality, although the actual practice and processes and operation of the administration of law don't necessarily reflect that.

Can I say also that I have been engaged with the Law Society Wales, and very positive and constructive engagements they have been? And I do very much welcome the recent work by Law Society Wales on this issue, and was pleased to note their endorsement of the paper entitled 'A Separate Legal Jurisdiction for Wales' last week. So, I think within the legal professions there is an increasing recognition of that and the importance of that. It is also, though, equally important in terms of the training and in respect of the law schools. Of course, not everybody comes into the profession through law schools, but we're very pleased with, for example, the work of the Solicitors Regulation Authority and the specific requirement for students to have to learn about Welsh law. And of course they should have to, just as a Welsh law student should have to learn about English law, and, in fact, are required to learn about English law.

So, as I said earlier, in some of the earlier questions, these are not things that are complicated or difficult to understand. Once we recognise the fact that with four Parliaments you have, effectively, the creation of four jurisdictions, maybe those jurisdictions overlap and there's commonality. In some areas there may be barriers, but, between England and Wales, we don't see the need for any barriers. But you're absolutely right: education, training and clarity I think are the three key components.

I thank the Counsel General. Point of order, and I call on Alun Davies.

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. During questions, the Member for Brecon and Radnorshire made a number of serious allegations against Ministers, stating that both the health Minister and the First Minister had deliberately misled this Chamber. I was certainly in the Chamber when the Conservative chief whip raised some matters with the health Minister, and she then corrected the record. I believe that the First Minister's also clarified remarks that he's made here where there's been some dispute, but I recognise some of his remarks remain contested by others. But it is unacceptable, of course, when a Member is talking about misleading the Chamber that he himself misleads the Chamber.

I thank you for that point of order and I will reflect upon the contribution on the record, and I'm sure the Member will also reflect on the contribution on the record. And we will both reflect upon the accuracy of the events identified in that contribution, and I will look then carefully after that.

Item 4 is questions to the Senedd Commission. First of all, Heledd Fychan.

The PCS union is currently taking industrial action in relation to its pay claim with the UK Government. The pay claim extends to the UK civil service pension scheme, a proposed job security agreement and to the terms of the UK civil service compensation scheme. Whilst Commission PCS members have voted in favour of industrial action, the grounds for this action relate exclusively to the UK civil service schemes, namely matters that are beyond the remit of the Commission.

Thank you, Llywydd, and you responded on 25 January confirming that there was no specific dispute locally with staff here, so I do understand the elements related to the UK.

But I do understand that, since then, the PCS union has written to you setting out not only how this is a matter that the Commissioners have some local control over, but also how the Commission, as a public service employer, should be using its bargaining power with the Cabinet Office to resolve these matters not only for those staff supporting us in this place, but for the wider civil and public services. Could you provide an update on how Commissioners have made representations to the UK Government to attempt to resolve the wider matters of the dispute? And what local mitigations have been put in place to avoid any escalation of the dispute that could result in a greater impact on Senedd business?

Thank you for that additional question. I did receive a letter from the PCS union to the ends that you outlined there. So far, the Commission hasn't intervened directly with the UK Government on this issue. My opinion on the whole is that it is for the political parties in this place that have representation on the Commission to apply some pressure, if they believe in that as political parties, on these issues through the ways that are relevant to them. It's not a matter for the Commission to intervene directly with the UK Government. Just to add once again that this is a dispute with the UK Government, this dispute with PCS. Our co-operation, I hope, as a Commission, with the PCS union and with our staff generally is one that operates in a respectful way and a way that can react to the current financial situation that a number of our workers find themselves in. And, of course, we have responded in that sense by providing some support to those workers in the form of a direct payment in the last financial year, and through a range of measures available to our workers who face serious problems in their everyday lives because of the cost-of-living crisis.

I chair the PCS cross-party group in the Senedd. The Senedd has prided itself for very good reason on being a good employer, and I am sure most Members, if not all Members in here, are very pleased that we see ourselves, and have been seen by others, as being a very good employer. Can I associate myself with the questions raised by Heledd Fychan, which you'll be thankful that I'm not going to repeat? What I am going to ask, however, is what discussions the Commission had with PCS to discuss the concerns of PCS and to work towards resolving this dispute.

Well, I'm not privy myself to those discussions as chair of the Commission. They're undertaken by the staff responsible within the Commission to hold the discussions on any matter that the PCS bring forward as a trade union within our structures here, in discussing both the current dispute, yes, but also how we prepare ourselves for further negotiations into the future on pay and terms and conditions for our staff here. To reiterate the point that both Heledd Fychan and Mike Hedges have said, we are served in this place by excellent staff who go very often beyond what would be expected of them, especially during the particularly challenging times we have had. We hope that we are able to respond to our staff needs when they develop, and in a respectful way with our trade union partners in particular.

The Commissioners have received two letters from the independent remuneration board recently. The first letter highlighted the board’s current consultation on proposed changes to the determination on Members’ pay and allowances for 2023-24. The Commission agreed to respond to the consultation to highlight the implications for the Commission's budgeting process. The second letter identified a request from the board to engage in dialogue with the Commission about how support will be provided for Members in the future to deliver their duties through Commission services and the board’s determination.

Commissioners discussed the significance of protecting the integrity of the two bodies, and emphasised the importance of not creating confusion about their respective roles and safeguarding the separation between the two.

Thank you for that answer, Presiding Officer. In my view, the remuneration board is not fit for purpose, and frankly doesn't have a place in this institution anymore. The rem board, as it's often known, is not accountable to anyone, meaning they can do whatever they want without proper scrutiny. The board does not act in a fair manner and there's a long list of reasons why I'm wholeheartedly against it, but I haven't got enough time to go through all of them today. I firmly believe the rem board should be scrapped and an alternative body should be put in its place. For example, the UK Parliament has the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority in place, and based on conversations I've had with parliamentarians from all different parties here, they are fairly well received. So, I'd be interested to know if the Commission's thoughts are indeed going to be on perhaps replacing the rem board going forward, and if any discussions about this have taken place, because surely the board's lack of accountability to anyone or anything is undemocratic and raises some serious questions going forward in this Welsh Parliament.

I am aware, Natasha Asghar, that you weren't here in 2010. Some of us were, when we passed the National Assembly for Wales (Remuneration) Measure 2010, which established the board's independence from any influence by the Senedd or the Senedd Commission when exercising its functions. I was here prior to 2010, and that lack of independence that Senedd Members here had at that time from decision making on our own salaries or the resources available to us led us to very difficult situations in our own accountability to our constituents. I would urge the Member to be careful what you wish for here. That independence between the remuneration board and ourselves as a Senedd is something to be protected. We do not want to go back to a situation where Members here are voting for our own salaries and are responsible for decisions that put resources at our disposal or not.

Your conversations with MPs about what is in place in other Parliaments seems to be at odds with some of the conversations I have with MPs about how they are served as well. So, the independence, the fact that the remuneration board is a statutory body, I don't need to highlight to a Member of this place what that would entail. We would need new legislation. It's not for us just to stand up and to say that it's not fit for purpose; we would need new legislation if ever that was to happen.

What I would say, though, in a more constructive way, is that these issues—new legislation even—are always open to have that debate. I think, in the context of Senedd reform, and as we prepare for 2026 and beyond, I think it's right to have a wider discussion about the roles and responsibilities that both the Senedd and a body such as the remuneration board can have into the future. So, in that respect, in a longer term respect, I think that having that conversation would be welcomed, even by the remuneration board itself as well as the Senedd.

Engaging with the people of Wales is one of the Commission’s three strategic priorities. We have set up new systems for measuring the reach and impact that our work has on improving the public’s understanding of the Senedd. Two years ago, we commissioned Professor Diana Stirbu from London Metropolitan University to undertake an external assessment of how we engage with the public. We are now implementing her recommendations. This includes developing new online engagement tools to enable the public to contribute to Senedd committee inquiries in new ways by using digital methods in particular.

Diolch, Llywydd. I think the earlier joint session between the Senedd and the Welsh Youth Parliament was a very powerful demonstration of just how interesting, important and uplifting it is for the Senedd to engage with our young people. I know that our Senedd education team do a fantastic job with schools and colleges across Wales, again, increasing that engagement between Welsh democracy and our young people. I have very much enjoyed attending sessions in Newport East, most recently at Lliswerry Primary School. I'm very encouraged, Llywydd, to hear that work has taken place and will take place to look at how we increase and strengthen our engagement with the Welsh public, and I certainly think that any more that we can do to engage with our young people, as well as the general population across Wales, is absolutely invaluable. I wonder if you could say a little bit more about your own thinking on these matters.

Thank you for all those comments leading up to your question. I think we all found the session with our Youth Parliament this afternoon to be an uplifting experience, challenging for Welsh Government and Ministers, challenging for us as Members as well to think about how the priorities that our Senedd Ieuenctid have can be reflected in the work that we do in this Chamber and in our committees. The young people of Wales, represented in their Youth Parliament, are a clear voice and a challenge to us as Members.

We should reflect that in the work that we do, as you've outlined in your constituency, and we all do in our constituencies, in having that direct contact with young people in their school environments and in the wider community. That's an area of work that we need to continue to improve directly as a Senedd as well, and provide as great and as much opportunity for young people to witness directly our work here in the Senedd, but also to have the ability via digital platforms these days to have that direct contact with young people in their own communities.

So, as you’ve challenged, John, there is more to do; there is good work already happening, but there is always more to do, and more young people to have direct discussion with. And as a point that you’ve made in the past in this Chamber, we need to make sure as a Commission and as elected Members that we’re not always going to the same young people; that we are going to young people who are not the usual suspects, or from usual schools, even, that have that relationship with us, and that we continue our efforts to reach every community and every young person in Wales.

Deputy Presiding Officer, I understand that you've given your permission to group this question and question No. 7.

The Senedd Commission is preparing in four ways for this work. Firstly, it is preparing to support scrutiny of Senedd reform legislation. It is essential that the Senedd receives the support it needs to thoroughly scrutinise the Welsh Government’s legislation on Senedd reform, when it comes.

And secondly, the Senedd Commission, as a leading stakeholder, is preparing to assist the Senedd and its committees when they come to consider Senedd reform legislation, for example, should a committee invite the Senedd Commission to contribute to its scrutiny work on any legislation. The Commission is currently responding to requests by the Welsh Government for information on an estimate of the costs to the Senedd Commission that might arise from the Welsh Government’s legislation on Senedd reform.

Thirdly, the Commission must prepare for the potential change. Without pre-empting the Senedd’s decisions on Senedd reform, the scale of the proposed change is such that the Senedd Commission has had to start preparing for the possibility in a prudent way.

And finally, if the Senedd legislates for Senedd reform, then the Commission, in partnership with other organisations, will need to help communicate clearly any electoral changes to the public ahead of the Senedd election in 2026.

Thank you very much for that answer, and I’m really glad to see that sensible preparations are being made across a range of areas, because certainly, it’s not simply to do with the physical adjustments that will need to be made in terms of the support for an enlarged Senedd, in terms of the Members and the support that’s often invisible to many members of the public. But it could also be aspects to do with internal reconfigurations of things like Standing Orders, the way of business, the number of Commissioners, et cetera, et cetera, the way we operate within this Senedd Chamber. So, I’m glad to see that proceeding.

Will the Commission also be turning its mind to how we do this, as we've tried very hard over the years to do, utilising very much a value-for-money approach as well? Democracy doesn’t come free; we actually have to spend money to have good accountability, good transparency and good democracy. But what we don’t want to do is see some of the excessive spending that we might have seen in other places within the UK, curiously, because whilst it’s lovely to be grouped together with Tom on this question, he might be coming from a different angle, and it would be good to see, for example, some of the money that’s been spent on the enlargement of the second chamber in the Houses of Parliament being directed this way, because we could do a lot with that.

As I outlined in my original answer, and as you’ve expanded there in your contribution, Huw Irranca-Davies, there are so many facets to this work. Some of the work is currently being done in preparing for and in responding to the request from Welsh Government in providing costings for the legislation that will come forward in the usual way. I’ve no doubt, as we move to a scrutiny stage of this legislation, when it comes forward, that those costings and the finances that we intend or put forward to spending on Senedd reform will be highly scrutinised by Members across the political divides here.

As a Cardi Chair of the Commission, I will make sure that those costings provide for the people of Wales the value for money that democracy requires of us as well. So, this is an area of work that will be open to the people of Wales to watch what we do and what we decide, and, in that context, I'm looking forward to the introduction of the Senedd reform legislation. It feels a bit like we're shadow-boxing at the moment, but we're waiting for that day when we see some of the detail on all of this. That day will come, and this Senedd will have its view.

Can I just first follow up, Llywydd, on your latter point there about costings, just to know exactly when you anticipate they'll be available, and whether, in the interests of transparency and scrutiny, those costings will be made available to all Members of the Senedd, and also to have an understanding of how the costings perhaps have come about?

But the actual question I wanted to ask—. Huw alluded to the enjoyment that he and I have had sitting on this bench together; I've actually enjoyed the last couple of months sat here on our Labour bench, particularly having many conversations with my friend Carolyn Thomas as well. One of the reasons I'm sitting here, obviously, is the physical construction of this Chamber. You would have been elected in the very first Senedd, and I think the Senedd at that time was meant to be a very modern Parliament—the physical construction of this building suggests that. But obviously, the physical reason why there are 15 seats over there is dictated by the number of computers, for example, that are in this Chamber. So, will the Commission look at whether that is still a modern requirement? Lots of us use laptops and iPads, and so on, in this Chamber to do some of the work that perhaps wouldn't have been envisioned when the Senedd itself was constructed. You can take that to the outside of this Chamber as well—things like the press conference room. In my two years, I don't think we've had a press conference. So, will the Commission be looking at whether what was perhaps intended as being very modern when the building was opened is still very modern and forward-looking today, or will it be a museum, if you like, to the mid noughties?

The museum is next door, in Tŷ Hywel.

Just to answer the off-the-cuff question you asked at the start, of course the costings of the legislation will be scrutinised when the legislation is introduced by the Welsh Government, and they will go through the usual processes of scrutiny here in this Senedd, as they will in terms of public consultation as well, as part of the legislative scrutiny. We have a legislative statement next week by the First Minister. Who knows, we may get an inkling then as to when to expect the Welsh Government to introduce this piece of legislation.

I remember a colleague of mine, Steffan Lewis, who stood on these benches and who urged in one of his earliest of contributions in this place that these computers were taken away, and that we didn't focus on what was on the computer in front of us but rather on the debate around us, and that stays in my mind to this day. Mind you, sometimes, I forgot to call him, because he hadn't been able to get the message to me in the Chair, because of the issues around that. But as you say, how we design this Chamber, if we have 96 or more Members—. No, sorry, I need to rephrase that; I didn't mean more than 96 Members, I mean more than 60 Members for the 2026 Parliament. How we design it will be a matter that we can discuss, and it may well be that, by then, these phones are enough for all of us and that we do not need the computer screens that we have in front of us, and that will provide us with greater flexibility as to how we can extend this Chamber to meet the requirements of the 2026 Parliament.

Senedd officials are currently in the process of reviewing the Senedd’s travel subsidy scheme, which is available to schools and colleges participating in education sessions at the Senedd. This review will consider the rising costs schools and colleges face against the current value of our offer, and opportunities to prioritise groups form poorer areas.

Thank you for the response, Llywydd. I'd like to start by placing on record my thanks to the Commission, and the engagement team in particular, for the fantastic work that they do with schools right across Wales, to reach children and to teach them about democracy and the Senedd. I think they do a fantastic job, actually, in schools, and bringing children here as well. That choice that they have to do it virtually or in person is really good. An important part of that is the schools visits here, particularly for children from north Wales to come here and to actually see Cardiff as well, and the Senedd and its setting. The travel subsidy is vital, really, to ensure that they can get here. I know that school transport costs have increased by 40 per cent, so I just hope that, going forward, that is considered, and I'm grateful for your response. Thank you very much.

As I said in my response, Carolyn Thomas, the costs associated with schools being able to visit Cardiff and our Senedd have changed quite considerably—over the past 12 months, even. We need to consider how we reflect that in the offer that we make to schools to be able to come the Senedd. So, we're reviewing that at this point, and it will take on board the points that you and other Members have made in this Chamber over the last few sessions, as we think about how we promote this Senedd to schoolchildren and colleges throughout Wales and make sure that everybody, in every place, is not prohibited from visiting here merely by the cost of doing so.

The Commission currently outsources four non-core specialist services, those being facilities management, catering, cleaning and broadcasting. The Commission specifically considers the option of bringing these services in-house whenever contracts are renewed. Our most recent assessment of bringing services in-house identified that it would result, of course, in a significant cost and resourcing increase. However, we remain utterly committed to positively exploring and assessing in-house options as existing contracts reach completion.

I thank the Commissioner for his answer, and I'm grateful for the comments he made. As I'm sure he's aware, and Members are aware, concerns have been raised about the terms and conditions of staff working in outsourced services within the Senedd. This, coupled with concerns over individual cases, has led to a boycott of the canteen by support staff, who are, for the record, Deputy Presiding Officer, fellow members of Unite the Union. I believe the Government also has a contact with that firm in question. Deputy Presiding Officer, it's clear to me that people working alongside each other in the same building in the Senedd should not face huge disparities in treatment. To put it rather simply, some staff missing out on cost-of-living payments is wrong. I'd be grateful if the Commissioner could comment further on how parity of conditions could be achieved, and perhaps provide a timescale as to when we might see that happen.

Can I say, first of all, that I think that all staff, regardless of whether they're Commission staff, Member support staff or contracted staff, should all be treated equally and fairly, in line with the respect and dignity at work agenda, and with fair work?

In terms of the process that we're going to be following, and the time frame, the first thing that I should say is that the arrangements that are in place at the moment for contracts are the same as what was initiated back in 1999. And so, we're considering, in bringing services in-house, something that's not been done before, and that's why a thorough examination of the costs and the time frames is being initiated.

I think it's fair to say that, with the exception of the broadcasting contract, all other services would require pretty significant financial and human resource. We've calculated it, in our most recent assessment, as just under £1 million additional financial requirement each financial year for bringing in 47 full-time equivalent staff and the cost of creating staff within the Commission to be able to manage those services coming in-house. That's the top line for the maximum amount that we estimate. Of course there are other options; we wouldn't necessarily need to consider bringing all services in at the same time.

The first contract that is up for renewal is the catering contract, which is up for renewal in September 2024. That's because we agreed on a shorter contract back in 2022 with options to extend by two single years. So, that's the first contract. The cleaning contract began in February 2020, and is due to expire in February 2025. So, all options are being examined, including the simpler and more straightforward option of bringing staff in-house and to maintain certain contracts externally. So, all options are being examined.

Whilst we do this, it's also important to say that the process wouldn't be straightforward in terms of time frame. We estimate that it could take between 12 and 18 months to plan for such a significant change. However, in the meantime, I think it's important to stress that, as a result of dialogue that takes place between the Senedd Commission and contractor companies, many staff are offered enhanced terms and conditions over the average that those companies offer to their employees. However, I would encourage any employees who are with contracted services, if they do have concerns, first of all, to raise those concerns with their line managers, because, as I say, it's absolutely essential that all people who are working within our estate are treated equally and fairly.

Question 7 was grouped with question 4, so question 8, James Evans.

The Commission provides a range of first aid support, including portable defibrillators. The Commission also provides a range of first aid training, which includes performing CPR and the use of defibrillators. To raise awareness of onsite procedures, the Commission will be providing drop-in sessions in Cardiff Bay over the summer recess and autumn term and will provide short training sessions that will cover CPR. The sessions will be open to Members of the Senedd, support staff, Commission staff, and on-site contractors.

Diolch. I'd like to thank the Llywydd for that response. As I went for my blood pressure check with my good colleague Jack Sargeant, I was quite alarmed, actually, by what my blood pressure said, and I needed to take it a bit more easy. But it did actually raise genuine questions within myself, that if a Member was going to be here, or a member of Commission staff, late at night, that they are made aware exactly where defibrillators are within the estate and exactly how to use them, because we don't want to be in a situation that if a Member or member of staff here need medical help or attention that no Member or any other person here would be able to access that. I'm very grateful for your reply, Llywydd.

Yes, and to ensure as well that Members are aware, and staff members are aware, that in any instance to ring 6333 during a first aid emergency and they would be guaranteed onsite trained first aiders that are supplied by our 24-hour security officers at the moment. They have the training to provide that service. As you've noted, of course, there may be a need for Members and staff members to be here all times of day or night, and our security team, also, is here 24 hours and are trained in order to provide the service to us. Hopefully, nobody will need it.

And finally, question 9, Jenny Rathbone.

Thank you. I thank the Member for asking me the question. During the past financial year, the tonnage of food waste collected from the Senedd estate has increased, but is still less than half the pre-pandemic figures. The reasons for the recent increase are manifold, but primarily due to increased use of the estate, with more staff coming to the office and the number of events held here doubling compared to the previous year.

We do work closely with the catering contractor to ensure food waste is minimised. Indeed, the contractor’s kitchen produces less than a third of the waste of a commercial outlet. Food waste on the estate is also generated from staff and visitor lunches and is not something that we have control over. The catering contractor works with event organisers to minimise food waste. Most buffets are organised by external parties and food left at the end of them simply cannot legally be donated to other outlets.

Thank you for that. As the Commissioner is also a member of the climate change committee along with myself, you will be aware that the Climate Change Committee's latest progress report on Wales to achieve our targets in 'Beyond Recycling' reminds us of our target to reduce all food waste across Wales by one third by 2030. And therefore, I would challenge the Commissioner to reveal how you think we can possibly tell the rest of Wales what to do if we don't do it ourselves, and what you think needs to be put in place to reduce our food waste.

Thank you. I would just say, yes, I'm pleased to be a member of the climate change committee. But I was also brought up to waste not, want not, and when we think of children living in poverty, to think that we would be wasting any extra food here would not sit with me comfortably, Jenny, so I'm really grateful to you for asking the question.

As I say, there are some positives. Awareness amongst members of staff of disposal facilities around the estate is improving. Counters in the restaurant are condensed towards the end of lunch instead of replenishing the whole counter for fewer diners. I mean, I've got to be honest; anybody in business now producing food, for here or anywhere, with the cost of food and the food price increases, it's even more important now than ever that this is grasped. Fresh vegetables are reused to make soup. Menu planning ensures that any uncooked ingredients can be utilised in making other dishes. In relation to the hospitality, buffet menus offered are calculated on a per-head basis so as to avoid waste, and food that is unused, such as biscuits, will often be reused where health and safety rules allow. Food caddies in kitchens across Tŷ Hywel are provided for the collection of fruit and vegetable peelings, tea bags and other foods to prevent any food waste from being landfilled.

I can assure you, whilst I am in this post as the Commissioner, in this area, that I probably am as keen as you to ensure that we don't see any food wastage over more than what is practically reasonable. There will be times, because of certain—. Sometimes, I see receptions where there is lots of food left over, and then on other occasions, there's very little food left over, so it's about the contractors actually working with us as well. Thank you.

I thank the Llywydd and Ken and Janet.

Item 5 this afternoon is topical questions, and the first question will be asked by Andrew R.T. Davies.

Thank you. We welcome the engagement of the drink retailers in the development of the deposit-return scheme, and we will work with them to bring forward a successful and effective scheme.

Thank you, Deputy Minister, for that response. Do you recognise the genuine concerns that these businesses, 61 of them, have made to the Welsh Government over the complexity, the commercial disadvantage, and what they say and others have made representations over is that there is not the necessary impact on recycling targets and actually, the complexity of recycling that could come about by the deposit-return scheme including glass?

At the moment, we have good recycling rates, something I do commend the Welsh Government over, and we do have good kerbside recycling as well, but these concerns raised by businesses on the front line that are employing and creating wealth in communities the length and breadth of Wales do need to be taken seriously, and in particular, based on the comments that the First Minister made yesterday about cost recovery, if the Welsh Government do continue to proceed down this road of including glass in the deposit-return scheme, will the Welsh Government make available financial moneys so that they can be compensated for the extra measures they have to put in place and the extra machinery and training they will have to do, because the First Minister indicated that that should be a priority for any Government that is introducing regulatory reforms in any area that it's responsible for?

Well,

'Scotland's Deposit Return Scheme will help tackle the plague of glass bottles littering communities because its inclusion of glass will see the recycling of an additional 53,000 tonnes of containers. It would be fantastic to see such a boost to recycling here in Wales too'.

That's a quote from Janet Finch-Saunders, who has consistently argued in favour of including glass in the deposit-return scheme. And in fairness to Janet Finch-Saunders, that, in fact, was in the Conservative manifesto in the 2019 election, and it was the basis on which we have consulted with the public, jointly with the UK Government and the Scottish Government and the Northern Ireland Government all along, and that’s why it forms the basis of our proposals.

Now, I’ve seen Andrew R.T. Davies saying on social media that the Welsh Government is trying to be different for the sake of it by going ahead with glass recycling when England have decided late in the day not to do so, and the reverse is true. The outlier here is the Government in England, which has decided, in the face of industry pressure—. And I recognise the quotes he makes, because those are quotes directly from the big business lobby groups; he’s parroting these lines that are not consistent with the Conservative manifesto, not consistent with Janet Finch-Saunders and other Conservative support and not consistent with the consultation we jointly did in good faith with the UK Government. Eighty-six per cent of people when we consulted, and we consulted twice, supported the inclusion of glass. It makes the scheme more efficient; it makes it simpler; it brings significant savings; it’ll reduce litter and it will cut carbon emissions. It’ll also bring benefits of more than £126 million if it’s all done together.

By singling out glass, it makes it a disadvantage for plastic and aluminium producers—I’m not sure if he’s had any representations from their lobby groups. But he is deciding for some reason to single out one sector versus the others. And also, in terms of the impact on litter, because the evidence shows that we’ll see a reduction of between 60 and 80 per cent in drinks litter with the inclusion of glass in the deposit scheme. So, I don’t think the position he’s making is consistent with Conservative manifestos; it’s not consistent with the decisions of this Senedd; it’s not consistent with the public consultation, nor is it consistent with his so-called support for bringing down emissions. Because to bring down emissions, as we said to the Youth Parliament earlier—and he was keen to listen to what they had to say—. They’re telling us very clearly: we’ve got to hit net zero by 2050. It’s no good approving that in principle, if, every time we bring forward a practical step to do that, he opposes it.

The points that you made, Deputy Minister, are very powerful. Instead of just looking at what's happening with the Government in England, I wanted to ask you what you've learned from the experiences in other regions or countries that have succeeded in implementing a deposit-return scheme that includes glass—what lessons and insights have emerged? Because by studying successful cases, you as a Government, and we as a country, can benefit from valuable information that can be used to see how this could work, as you've said, so that we can tackle the crisis that faces us all. And I think that the public wants us to do something that is visible and that is going to be effective and efficient. So, I would like to know what you've learned from other countries that have done this, or hope to do this with schemes.

Thank you, and the Member makes a strong point. It is typical in schemes around the world to include glass, and that shows to be a much more effective way of doing it. By taking a comprehensive approach, it's much clearer for the consumer, it's easier for the industry to know where it stands and it reduces greater emissions. We don't want to get to the position where we constantly recycle things rather than reuse them, because every time we crush it, and reheat it, there's considerable embodied carbon in that process. So, by being able to reuse things through washing them, that's a far more sustainable way of operating.

And in terms of the international evidence, the other effects of it are also fascinating. So, a paper by Keep Wales Tidy on drink-container littering referenced a study by Cardiff University researching the comparison of bottle and glass attacks between Helsinki and Cardiff, and Helsinki has a population twice the size of Cardiff. And in 2003, that study noted that there were 133 bottle-related assaults in Cardiff, but just one in Helsinki, which has glass in its deposit-return scheme. So, there are multiple benefits from including glass in the scheme, going way beyond the original intent. I'm afraid that's been lost in the debate. And, as I say, it's really disappointing the way the UK Government have treated the Scottish Government in this, trying to wreck a scheme. They've spent a considerable amount of money, which is now too late to pull back from, on the assumption that we were all working together on a common goal, as continuously agreed. And for them to pull the plug at the last minute is deeply disrespectful, and undermines the devolution settlement. And this is the sort of thing that fuels local grievance about the union. So, they need to think very carefully about continuing to behave like this.

I thank the Deputy Minister. The second topical question is from Jenny Rathbone.

Thank you very much, Jenny Rathbone for that question. We are seeking specific figures for Wales on this historic injustice revealed by the BBC, and we continue to call on the UK Government to ensure that the Windrush generation receives the respect, justice and compensation they deserve, and to implement in full the 'Windrush Lessons Learned Review' recommendations.

The BBC has dug out the fact that at least 411 mentally unwell people were deported between 1950s and the early 1970s, but, as the UK Government has less than comprehensive records, it could involve many more British citizens from the Windrush generation. So, experts are flagging up that repatriating British citizens to a country where they were born may have been unlawful as it's really unlikely that many of these individuals would have been well enough to have the mental capacity to consent to be sent to a country where mental health services were largely non-existent.

As it involved separating unwell people from their loved ones, including dependent children, some of whom were then taken into care as a result of the absence of their parent, the idea that each of these individuals would have expressed a wish to return is far fetched. At the time, the Jamaican high commissioner complained to the British Government that UK hospitals were requesting repatriations largely on the grounds of pressure on beds or other hospital services. This is just the latest shameful revelation of how the Windrush generation were treated, and the ongoing failure to compensate them for the absence, the absolute abuse of their human rights.

What role can or has the Welsh Government played to help the UK Government identify families in Wales who are victims of this injustice, to inform them of what happened to their deported loved ones? Unless we learn from history, we are destined to repeat it. So, have you had any discussions with UK Government on establishing a formal public inquiry to learn from this shameful part of our post-colonial history?

Thank you, Jenny Rathbone, and as I said in response to your really important question today, on the eve of the day when we are celebrating Windrush 75 here in the Senedd—it's an event that's sponsored by Commissioner Joyce Watson, and the Llywydd, the First Minister and many of us will be attending—these revelations from the BBC are extremely disturbing, and so, we will be calling on the UK Government to tackle these injustices and to right the wrongs faced by those in the Windrush generation.

We will do what we can, from a Welsh Government perspective. Obviously, the data will be held by the UK Government. But, as I said, this comes alongside our call anyway on the UK Government to address the injustices and to deliver on the lessons learned report by Wendy Williams. I'm very concerned that, actually, the Home Secretary has said that she will not implement all of the Windrush lessons learned recommendations. And one of those recommendations, importantly, was about having reconciliation events. There is so much we always learn when we meet with our Windrush elders, and we're meeting with distinguished Windrush elders tomorrow here in the Senedd, and I'm sure that that will provide an opportunity to learn other lessons. But can I just say that tomorrow, we'll be paying tribute to the contributions made to Wales by the Windrush generation and their descendants and all other migrant communities who came before and after?

I'm grateful to Jenny Rathbone for raising this important question, but I don't think, Minister, you touched on the nub of what Jenny pressed you over, which is what action the Welsh Government is taking to try and uncover the injustices that Welsh families caught up in this debacle and this gross injustice between 1958 and 1970, so that maybe from a position—. And this isn't the fault of Welsh Government, this is a historical issue, it is, but you have corridors and avenues that you can proceed down to try and extract that information so that we can be in a position to assist those families who are still blighted by this injustice, who still have loved ones caught up in this scandal. We know from BBC's investigative work that about 400 families potentially have been affected by this repatriation. So, can you give a commitment in response to this question that the Welsh Government will work with the UK Government to identify those affected here in Wales, and will you commit to reporting back to the Welsh Senedd so that we can understand exactly what help the Welsh Government, when those names are identified, can offer the families who have been affected by this injustice, which is an historical injustice between the years of 1958 and 1970?

Well, I'm grateful that you do recognise, Andrew R.T. Davies, that this is a historical injustice. It's a historical injustice, and, as we look to what's been revealed in this report, unearthed through the BBC unearthing documents in the National Archives revealing the scale of the policy—. And it was a policy—it was a policy of the UK Government at that time, pre devolution. But, of course, as I said, we will be not only calling on the UK Government to tackle these injustices, but we will do everything that we can to support those citizens who have been affected.

I do hope, as leader of the opposition, that you will join with us, and I'm sure other Members across the Chamber, to call on the UK Government to implement the Windrush lessons learned review recommendations in full. It's very important that we have that call across the Chamber, I think, today. I was very concerned to hear that the Home Office might be winding down their Windrush unit, for example; that was in the headlines this week. So, can we have a united front here? We will play our part, but the UK Government has to take the lead and right these wrongs.

Plaid Cymru will certainly support those calls and join with you in those calls to address these historic injustices. I want to thank Jenny Rathbone for tabling this important question. Tomorrow, I'm going to be joining Neath Port Talbot Black Minority Ethnic Community Association and Neath Port Talbot libraries for a special day to honour and celebrate the legacy of the Windrush generation and the significant contributions they and their descendents have made to my region. I was glad to hear also that there was a new woodland grove planted in Neath to commemorate 75 years, and want to thank Coed Cadw for helping facilitate the creation of the Windrush grove with Windrush elders in Brynau, the largest woodland creation project ever to be undertaken by a charity in Wales.

So, yes, we must learn from the past, Minister, and we must address these historic injustices, and, given the debate we had yesterday and the irresponsible language used by some Conservative politicians when discussing immigration, what tools are at our disposal in Wales to counter the colonial and xenophobic attitudes that led to the inhumane treatment of those from the Windrush generation, some of whom were deported against their will, and, Minister, what more can we do in Wales to promote the important contribution of Windrush elders now and into the future?

Well, diolch yn fawr—thank you very much, Sioned Williams, for your support for the Windrush generation and also for your support for some of the many events that are taking place in Wales, across the whole of Wales. I hope Members across the Chamber will attend them. We have made funding available—and I made this point in my statement last week about Refugee Week—we've made funding available. Funding has been delivered to projects across Wales; you're clearly attending one. We've got an important event tomorrow here in the Senedd, as I've said, where we will hear more from those Windrush elders, the legacy of their contributions here—Vernesta Cyril OBE, former midwife—the extraordinary contributions of Windrush elders and also the pain and discrimination that they faced, I'm sure, will come up, which has now been highlighted by this latest revelation in terms of historic injustice. That wasn't the only historic injustice: families being ripped apart, and losing their parents as a result of this policy that's been revealed. So, yes, we will do everything we can to ensure that the legacy of the Windrush generation—. In fact, a film is being made; we've commissioned a film about the Windrush generation and legacy, and we will be able to then ensure that this reaches out, to show what the Windrush generation have delivered and supported in the NHS, in the economy, in businesses, in education, in every aspect of life, and let's celebrate those Windrush elders and the Windrush generation here in Wales tomorrow.

I thank the Minister. The final topical question is from Altaf Hussain.

My condolences and thoughts are with the family, friends and community affected by this tragedy. We are implementing the Petitions Committee recommendations on Mark Allen's law, which is underpinned by the drowning prevention strategy. The strategy will enable people to be safer in, on and around water. It promotes and encourages a consistent approach to water safety engagement, education and awareness.

Thank you, Minister. I would like to add my condolences to the family and friends of David and to all at St Joseph's RC High School in Port Talbot. It is a tragedy whenever someone loses their life, but doubly so for one so young. This young man had his whole life ahead of him, celebrating the end of his exam with friends, when disaster struck. Unfortunately, when we are young, we think we are invincible and pay little or no heed to the signs warning us of danger ahead. Aberavon pier is off limits for very good reasons, but the water is so enticing that people will ignore the warnings. Minister, as our summers become ever hotter, our bodies of water become ever more appealing to young people. Last year, we had drowning in ponds and in rivers and now we have this tragic case. What more can we do to get the message across to young people inside and outside of schools about the dangers of swimming in unpatrolled waterways?

Well, this is a very serious subject, and I offer my sympathies to anyone who has been affected by drowning incidents in Wales—this, or, indeed, others. As Altaf Hussain alludes to in his question, there are still too many water-related incidents occurring in Wales and elsewhere, including water-related deaths. Implementing the recommendations in the Petitions Committee report on Mark Allen's law is a key priority for us as a Government, as it will enhance the drowning prevention strategy, which we published in 2020, by Water Safety Wales.

Over recent years, we've seen in Wales a substantial growth in outdoor activity. Outdoor spaces are important for our physical and mental health, and we support water activities and encourage everyone to enjoy water in a safe way. As an awful coincidence, Llywydd, this week also marks the Royal Life Saving Society's Drowning Prevention Week, one of the largest summer water safety campaigns across the UK and Ireland, actually, and so Members might wish to visit the RLSS website and share information about that campaign with their constituents on their various social media channels.

From our point of view, we are aiming to raise awareness of the profile of swimming and water safety more broadly in our school curriculum, working with Water Safety Wales to make sure that there's a coherent education and water safety programme in our schools, delivered from a young age. It goes absolutely without saying how important it is that learners are able to keep safe in and around water, and the statutory guidance for the Curriculum for Wales, which all schools, of course, must consider, as the Member will be aware, emphasises that physical activity in water is important for developing physical health and well-being, and so swimming, in that sense, is a clear and obvious choice for schools. But it's also understanding the risks of doing so and being able to manage those risks, including in relation to life-saving skills and first aid.

Can I join the Minister and Altaf Hussain in sending condolences to David's family and his friends, and to the wider community in the constituency of Aberavon? This is a tragic incident. A young man who was celebrating his end of exams, looking forward to the future ahead of him, and unfortunately he passed away as a consequence of an incident that we are yet to find out the full details of. Can I also praise St Joseph's RC High School, who have put in place support for the pupils, the friends of David and others in the community that are suffering as a consequence of this incident? That support is going to be important, Minister. What discussions are you having with your colleagues in the Cabinet about the support systems in place when events like this happen? We can educate people about open water, the dangers of open water, we can show them that, actually, it's not the same as a swimming pool—there are a lot of huge unknown challenges in open water—but, unfortunately, events do occur, and we need to make sure that people are supported, not just the pupils of the school, or the families or friends, or the community, but also the emergency workers who attend these events, because some of them suffer terribly as well as a consequence of attending these.

So, can you tell us what discussions you're having with your colleagues to put those things in place? And when you talk about the open-water development and training—you said about outdoor activities—will you ensure that, for any outdoor activity that involves water activities, the proper training is put in place, and that young people are aware of the dangers? I've known too many occasions when boys have gone into reservoirs—I can name you where they are—or rivers, because it's something—. They want to cool down. They want to have a break. They want to have some fun. But there are dangers there that we never appreciate, and this is one of the incidents, unfortunately, where that danger has led to a horrific situation.

I thank David Rees for that supplementary question and associate myself with his remarks about the school as well, and the work that they're doing to support their young people and their families. The awareness of danger to which he importantly referred in his question is very much at the heart of the statutory guidance about supporting our learners to understand how to identify the risks, and how best to respond to them and manage them in a way that protects their safety. So, that is part of the guidance to which I referred earlier.

He asked about cross-Government work in this area. I actually met with Dawn Bowden most recently in relation to some of the challenges that schools are facing in providing swimming lessons for learners, which, for various reasons, is more challenging now than perhaps it has been in the past. And we're discussing how we can best support schools with this, in collaboration with Swim Wales. He'll also know the work that I do with my colleague the Deputy Minister for Mental Health and Well-being in relation to the support at a school level for pupils' well-being, and it will respond to circumstances such as this. The funding that we provide through the whole-school approach funding stream enables schools to make decisions about how best to support their pupils in relation to counselling and so on in this kind of situation.

I'm aware that Neath Port Talbot Council are currently offering additional counselling services to pupils and staff at the school, and, as the need arises, will be looking at providing support to other schools and the communities in the area affected by this awful event. Children and staff who may need extra support can then request that through the school or via the local authority.

I thank the Minister.

We now move to our next item, the 90-second statements. And the first statement this afternoon is from Tom Giffard.

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Llywydd, and I'm delighted to be here today to celebrate the historic achievement of the Welsh team in the PDC World Cup of Darts 2023. As you all know, our team of Gerwyn Price and Jonny Clayton lifted the trophy in Frankfurt last Sunday after a stunning 10-2 victory over Scotland in the final. They showed incredible skill, nerve and teamwork throughout the tournament, beating some of the best teams in the world, including England, Sweden and Belgium. This is a proud moment for Wales and for darts as a sport. We've always had a passion for darts, I think, in our country and our team has always inspired a new generation of fans and players with their performance. They've also shown the world that Wales is a nation of champions, capable of competing and winning at the highest level, and I'd like to congratulate Gerwyn and Jonny on behalf of the Welsh Parliament and the whole nation. You've done us all proud and we're all grateful for your dedication and talent. You are true ambassadors for Wales and for darts.

I'd also like to thank the organisers, officials and fans of the event who made it possible and successful. The World Cup of Darts is a fantastic showcase of the diversity, excitement and camaraderie of this sport. It brings people together from different countries and cultures united by the love of darts. I hope you all enjoy this celebration and join me in celebrating our Welsh heroes. Long live Wales and long live darts.

And you might think that’s an odd ending to a speech, Llywydd, but I can declare an interest, to say that was the first speech, I think, made in this Chamber written by ChatGPT.

Thank you for that, yes, indeed.

Congratulations to the Wales team on that victory. Samuel Kurtz next.

Diolch, Llywydd. This week marks the second annual NFU Cymru Welsh Food and Farming Week, a celebration and recognition of Wales's world-renowned produce, climate-friendly production and the millions of pounds contributed to Wales's economy by our agricultural industry year on year.

Farming is the silver thread running through the fabric of Wales's national identity. Welsh agriculture is not only a vital part of our economy, but it is part of our rich culture and protects both our language and our environmental beauty. Welsh farming is the foundation of Wales's £7.9 billion food sector, with 53,000 of the 239,000 people employed across the Welsh food and drink sector employed on Welsh farms. These farmers not only work year round to produce world-class food and implement sophisticated breeding built on generations of experience, but are pioneers of global climate change initiatives, shown by their commitment to targets such as reaching net zero by 2040. It’s therefore these farmers and families who protect the land, celebrate animal welfare standards and consistently deliver the highest quality Welsh food to our tables.

From our multi-award-winning Pembrokeshire potatoes to Gower saltmarsh lamb, we have a plethora of people and produce to celebrate this week. With this in mind, Llywydd, this week-long campaign of activities to promote all that’s great about Welsh food and farming is a perfect opportunity for us to unite and to take a moment to say thank you to our farmers for their continuous hard work, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, and for giving so much to ensure rural Wales prospers. Diolch.

The next statement from Vikki Howells.

Earlier this year on 8 March, Aberdare cenotaph celebrated its centenary. The cenotaph was unveiled in Victoria Square in the heart of the town centre before an estimated crowd of 20,000 people in 1923. It had been designed by Francis Morley of Durham and supplied by Dalbeattie Granite Works in Dumfries, styled after the cenotaph in Whitehall. It cost about £1,200, equivalent to £87,000 in today's prices—a fantastic sum, largely paid for through the war memorial fund and public subscription. Initially, it commemorated the 800 local people who had lost their lives serving in the first world war. It now remembers the dead in all wars in which British service personnel fought and died. As such it is the focal point for the local community every year on Remembrance Sunday.

A celebration of the cenotaph's centenary will take place in Aberdare throughout the month of June. Of particular interest is the dedicated month-long exhibition at St Elvan's church. This is well worth a visit. This Sunday will see a parade and a very special ceremony taking place at the cenotaph. It will be followed by a free concert in Library Square, featuring performances from Cwmbach Male Choir, Cwmdare Voices choir, Dare To Sing ladies choir, and Tylorstown Band. I hope that many people will join us for what will be a very memorable event. Their name liveth for evermore.

Thank you for all of those statements.

Item 7 has been postponed.

That brings us to item 8, the debate on the Health and Social Care Committee's report on dentistry. I call on the Chair of the Committee to move the motion. Russell George.

Diolch, Llywydd, and I move the motion on the order paper today in my name.

I’m delighted to open this afternoon’s debate on the Health and Social Care Committee’s report on dentistry, and I thank the Minister for her response to the recommendations made in our report.

Access to NHS dentistry is an issue that has dominated Members’ casework, I know, and is frequently raised in this Chamber. It doesn't seem many weeks ago since I was last on my feet in a debate talking on dentistry. I’ve spoken previously about a two-tier system, where those who can afford to pay for private treatment do so. I know the Minister will say there's always been a private dental system available to those who choose to use it or can afford to. In one way, of course, I accept that the Minister is right. The difference now is that this is not about people choosing to access private dental treatment because they can afford it; it's about people who are accessing private dental treatment because they have no other option. For too many people, dental treatment is no longer a matter of choice, it's an absolute necessity.

Now, Rhian Davies from Ammanford told us that her son had not seen a dentist in five years after her local NHS practice closed, and she said that the letter telling her the practice was closing offered three options for other practices. One of those was 40 miles away, so she said

'We are a family of four and I don’t really want to go private but we are left with no choice.'

From some of my own casework, I know 40 miles is nowhere near as far as many of my constituents would have to travel in order to receive NHS treatment.

Even more worryingly, there's also now a third tier and a growing tier: those who cannot access an NHS dentist, but who cannot afford to pay for private treatment. They're left with no provision at all other than, of course, emergency dental services.

We also heard from a family in Powys who had struggled for six years to access an NHS dentist. One of the children had an accident and smashed her tooth, they then had no option other than to contact 111 to access emergency dental treatment. Sadly, this is a story that's not uncommon, and the cost-of-living pressures are likely to make the problem worse.

It is disappointing that the dental community feel that there was a lack of consultation and information prior to the restart of the dental contract reform programme. We were told that the lack of notice had caused significant concern to dentists who had little time to make an informed decision on whether to accept the contract offer.

The Minister, of course, accepts that the contract variation offer for 2022-23 was issued later than she would have wanted because of the exceptional circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, going forward, I certainly believe and the committee believe that the Welsh Government should ensure that, unless there are exceptional circumstances, consultation about potential changes to the dental contract takes place no later than six months before the reforms are planned to come into effect.

This, I think, is a really important issue: our inquiry found that there is no clear picture of the number of people waiting for dental treatment. So, there's no clear picture of people waiting for dental treatment. If we're serious about tackling inequalities to access NHS dentistry, we have to target resources where they are most needed. It’s incredibly difficult, if not impossible, if we have no idea of how many people are actually waiting to see an NHS dentist. It's also, I think, unacceptable that, once people are on a waiting list, they could be waiting up to 26 months before getting an appointment.

In oral evidence, the Minister noted some of the difficulties associated with creating an all-Wales waiting list. So, I am therefore pleased that the Minister was able to accept this recommendation and that discussions are already taking place with Digital Health and Care Wales to scope a design for an all-Wales dental waiting list. I'd be grateful if the Minister could clarify the timescale of this work.

I'd like to thank the Health and Social Care Committee for undertaking this inquiry into the state of dentistry in Wales, and the report clearly outlines the fact that dentistry is in a critical situation, particularly perhaps in rural areas, with a shortage of appointments, an insufficient workforce, and NHS contracts being returned to the health board.

Like perhaps every Member in this Chamber, I often hear from more constituents who are now without an NHS dentist for the first time in their lives—including me—or constituents who have been waiting for years on a waiting list, and I'm very concerned about the region of Mid and West Wales, where there is not a single dentist willing to accept adults as patients on their lists.

And just to add to the problem, as Russell George said, we don't really understand the scale of the problem in terms of the waiting lists for NHS treatment. I'm very pleased that the Government has accepted one of the committee's recommendations that we need to create that central waiting list and that the health boards need to present that data to the Government, because without that data, it's very difficult to plan for the future—difficult to know where to commission services and where recruitment is specifically needed in terms of filling the gaps. So, could I ask the Minister what the latest information is in terms of this task of creating these lists?

I'm also very concerned about the gaps in the workforce in some areas, which are affecting people's ability to get NHS appointments. The Government, I know, has submitted a plan to try and tackle this, particularly in rural areas, but I doubt that this alone will go far enough. I think that the Government has acknowledged, in its response to the report, that students who study in a particular area tend to stay in the area where they receive their training. So, in a meeting last week with Hywel Dda health board, I asked them whether they could consider the possibility of establishing a school of dentistry somewhere in west Wales. So, Minister, to close, would you be prepared to hold discussions with key stakeholders in order to consider establishing a school of dentistry in west Wales to meet the specific challenges facing rural areas? Thank you.

This is an example where committees work well: examining in detail an area that needs scrutiny and public discussion. Like many other Members, I get a large number of queries about access to dentists, especially when a local dental practice stops seeing NHS patients, often immediately. It's disappointing that the Senedd's Health and Social Care Committee report on dentistry has warned that support cannot be targeted in the right place to tackle the backlog as long as there is no clear picture of how many people are currently waiting to see an NHS dentist.

While COVID-19 invariably had a severe impact on access to NHS dentistry, the report found there were long-standing issues prior to the pandemic—and, can I say, prior to the current Minister taking office. We're talking to the current Minister who has inherited this along with a whole range of other problems. There are problems with getting an NHS dentist. Dental practices are reducing and, in some cases, terminating their NHS contracts, including for children. I, along with many other people, would like NHS dentistry available to everyone who wants it, and I'm sure the Minister's going to be in agreement with me on that.

Those dentists carrying out NHS work are committed to the principles of the national health service. The issues that dentists I met with raised included the new contract and that dentists signed up to the contract without the detail, which emerged later. This was meant to be a learning year, but that does not appear to have happened. The discussion on the motion about dentistry on 25 May seemed to highlight some confusion about the definition of what is a new patient. One of the current volumetrics of the reform programme is around specifically what this is. If a patient moves practice, then they appear to be shown as a new patient when they join the new practice, even if they were previously an NHS patient at the previous practice.

I support the recommendation of the Welsh Government to ensure that consultation on a potential change to the dental contract should, other than in exceptional circumstances, take place no less than six months before the reforms are planned to come into effect. Negotiations need to listen to the British Dental Association—not impose a contract. The Minister needs advice from people who are either currently or have been working as NHS dentists in the community, which I think is really important. Sometimes we turn around to blame the Minister, but some of the advice the Minister is getting is not of benefit.

The latest contract system in 2019 is called contract reform—of course, every time I hear the terms 'reform' or 'modernisation', I break out in a cold sweat—again, predating the Minister taking office. Under the system, dentists are paid for a set of units of dental activity per year, which is 25 per cent of their contract value, with other key performance indicators making up the other 75 per cent, with the emphasis on preventative care and patient outcome, which is good, but clawback has generated huge concerns for dental practices.

I'm grateful for the opportunity to contribute today.

Access to dentistry is an issue that I know makes up most of our Senedd Members' casework inboxes, and I've spoken on the issue previously. I must congratulate the Health and Social Care Committee on their detailed report, which I read with much interest, and note both the recommendations that the committee made and the responses provided by the Welsh Government. I also took the opportunity to reread the letter that I received in February of this year from the Dyfed-Powys local dental committee. There are a couple of points that I would like to pick up on.

Firstly, recommendations 1 and 2 of the report discuss the need for adequate consultation time on the new contract, as well as to ensure that the right balance of patient appointments are being set and monitored, and it is exactly these points that the local dental committee had raised with me. They felt that they had faced, and I quote, 'an ultimatum' to progress with the contract reforms in March 2020, despite concerns about—and I quote again—'targets that would be imposed.' They stated that, I quote again, 'No evidence was forthcoming at the time about how contract targets had been constructed, and that this evidence was still to be provided.' Of most concern was the view that, despite being consulted, the feedback from dentists surrounding the new contract was not taken on board.

Recommendation 10 refers to the need to create more training posts, specifically in this case by opening a dental school in north Wales. The dentists that have spoken to me recognise the need for more training places to be made available to enable the profession to grow, and I would be interested to hear the views of the Minister as to whether, alongside the north Wales dental school, a west Wales one could also be considered. As with many roles within the medical field, permanent employment opportunities are easier to fill closer to where the students have trained, and if regular cohorts of students are graduating in west Wales, then there is more chance of those vacancies being filled.

Will you take an intervention?

I'm happy to take an intervention.

Would you agree that we need to have it near or at a medical school, because of the benefits of people working between the two of them?

I think that's a wholly realistic opportunity. I note that my health board is a university health board, and west Wales does have a number of vacancies within the dental field, but there is definitely consideration and strength with having those services and that training combined as closely as possible.

Finally, moving on, Minister, I would be interested to seek some clarification on the comment made by the First Minister to the Welsh Affairs Committee in Westminster regarding dentistry. I quote the First Minister:

'One of the things that we would be happy to explore with the rest of the United Kingdom is the way in which our new dental contract came into force in April this year, leading to thousands more appointments in the NHS for dental patients, including in the Hywel Dda area, where, I think, there are nearly 10,000 more appointments available as a result of the new contract.'

From the Hywel Dda health board briefing call undertaken last week, the leadership of Hywel Dda did not seem to recognise this analysis. I would be grateful if reassurance could be offered that the First Minister's evidence is an accurate reflection of the situation, and I'd be interested to see a breakdown of how these extra appointments are split across the health board region. It's vital that the new dental contract listens to those on the ground, to ensure that it delivers for patients the length and breadth of Wales. It's important that access to dentistry improves, and that the Minister, and the Welsh Government, fully appreciate the seriousness of the situation that we currently find ourselves in, and I have no doubt that they do understand the severity of it.

The committee report goes some way towards addressing some of these issues, but it's now incumbent on the Welsh Government to work with the sector to ensure that change happens and access improves. Diolch, Llywydd.

It's a pleasure to take part in this debate this afternoon on what is such an important and topical issue that is facing the majority of people in Wales. As a member of the Health and Social Care Committee, I'd like to begin my remarks by thanking everyone who has given evidence to the dental report, and all of the clerks, researchers and staff on the committee for pulling this all together on an operational level.

There are many avenues of discussion to be had around dentistry and the lack of fast, effective treatment of dental problems in the NHS that has sadly waned since the COVID-19 pandemic and before. It is one of the biggest topics that have been brought up by constituents of the Vale of Clwyd, who regularly contact me about the lack of access to treatment in NHS dental services, in particular Mydentist branches at Elwy Dental Practice in Rhyl and on the high street in Prestatyn. I can't emphasise enough the importance of good oral health, as it contributes to so many health and aesthetic benefits, even to the point of consequential benefits or detriments to the heart and other major organs in the body.

One line of this wide-spanning debate I'd like to focus on today, which we have heard in evidence in the Health and Social Care Committee, is the NHS contract offered to dentists from the Welsh Government. What we have heard in evidence is the fact that the NHS contract fails to compete with the offer of the private sector. And when this is married up to the fact that dentists in the NHS are subject to more red tape, bureaucracy and middle management, it fails to compete with the private sector that offers better pay, better terms and conditions and fewer chiefs. To anybody in their right mind, it's a no-brainer as to why they choose to strive for a career in the private sector.

Where it is incumbent on the Welsh Government is that it needs to recognise the fact of this reality, and look at how the NHS contract is constructed, and how it can best compete with the private sector to ensure that careers in NHS dentistry are competitive with the private sector, and will encourage aspiring dentists to have a career in the public sector, or even help migrate private sector professionals back into the NHS who may have been attracted to the private sector in years gone by.

Let's focus on the political reality of this for a second. We have a Labour Government in charge in Wales, and have done since the birth of Welsh devolution in 1997 and the first Assembly elections since 1999. One of the founding principles of Aneurin Bevan, and the creation of the NHS in 1948, was that of a creation of parity of esteem for health and dental practices with the private sector that would give the opportunity for every man, woman and child to access high-quality healthcare free at the point of need. This was scuppered a long time ago with a UK Labour Government under Tony Blair, who promised in 1999 that every person in the UK would have access to an NHS dentist, only to admit, just six years later, in 2005, that he was powerless in the matter and admitted defeat on his vision set out previously.

As a non-committee member, I'm thankful for the opportunity to speak on this. I really welcome the report today, Llywydd, and I want to thank the committee clerks and the Chair for working so hard on this report and their commitment on this. I, of course, concur with everything that the Chair of the committee just said.

As the report states, access to dental services was severely impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, and this is something I recognise in my region of south-east Wales. The report duly notes that it created a backlog of patients in need of dental care and treatment. I recognise a lot of what's been said in this report, and I also share the grave concerns about dental contracts in my region too.

When speaking to a constituent who has owned a dental practice for a decade, he laid out some stark issues. He stated that when the contract was being filtered in slowly, it was fine; the phase of testing allowed practitioners to adjust. After it was forced through after COVID, the owner is now potentially facing tens of thousands of pounds of clawback from the Welsh Government for not hitting the targets, although their target is on track to be met. This is coming out of the cost of the practice having to work for free. Alongside this, he said that data tracking is inaccurate and lacking, which I'm pleased the report has recognised and recommended for the Welsh Government to consider a single, centralised waiting list across Wales, and that the Minister has accepted that recommendation.

My constituent said that, despite seeing 400 new patients, only 200 are showing up on the system, as they can only input the data once the full treatment has been completed, yet the targets for patient numbers mean there is not enough appointments to see existing patients, new ones, and completing, of course, the treatment for first-time patients requiring multiple appointments. He stated that around 90 per cent of patients would require multiple appointments, and the new system is just swapping one number-bashing exercise for another; it doesn't take into account that some patients are very nervous, or haven't seen a practitioner for years. This means, of course, that appointments for one person may take double the length of another.

I'm pleased that the report does call for the Welsh Government to explore whether current levels of funding are sufficient to tackle the backlog of patients. This funding, of course, is pivotal, as has already been said, and more needed than ever if we are truly to get on top of the dental crisis in Wales and the lack of access that my constituents describe to me. I hope the Minister takes heed of the crucial recommendations of this report, and takes on board the severity of the situation that dental services across Wales are facing. Thank you.

I just want to make a short contribution to this important debate on the future of NHS dentistry. Unfortunately, many of my constituents have received letters in recent months saying that their dental practice is no longer going to see NHS patients. That's happened in both Ruthin, at the Ruthin Dental Practice, where 9,000 patients have received those letters, and it's also happened last week at the White Gables Dental Practice in Colwyn Bay, with yet more thousands of people who are going to be left high and dry, either having to pay privately for treatment that some of them can ill afford, or just having no dentist at all and then having to rely on the emergency dental service. Obviously, this is the start of what appears to be a significant exodus by NHS dentists from NHS dentistry in a way that we've not seen for many, many years.

Of course, the dental profession, the British Dental Association has warned that this would happen as a result of the dreadful programme of reform that the Welsh Government embarked upon, which everybody had hoped would result in more people being attracted into the NHS dentistry profession, more people having more security with their contracts so that they could see more patients. That doesn't appear to have been happening. The Minister has been warned time and time again that that programme is now failing and that there needs to be a reworking of it. I want to urge you, Minister, to go back to the drawing board and work with the BDA to come up with a different and new approach to the contract, so that we can have a more sustainable NHS dentistry offer across Wales that patients can benefit from. And, in the meantime, Minister, it is absolutely essential that we have an emergency dental service that works and that people find easy to access. It is not currently working in north Wales; there are people who get in touch regularly with my constituency office, who tell me that they face enormous barriers and challenges in trying to access dental services that they need. They're either told to go to a dentist and pay private, which many of them can't, or sit in agony, waiting until they reach the threshold at which they will qualify for some emergency treatment. That is not good enough. We have to make sure that we have a system that is better focused on addressing people's needs, and making sure that we can have centres that people can go to and have access to urgent dental treatment when they need it. They don't have that access easily enough at the moment.

The Minister for Health and Social Services to contribute now—Eluned Morgan.

Diolch yn fawr. Before I respond, I would like to put on record my thoughts and concerns for all the people who have been involved in the very serious incident at Withybush hospital today. I'd like to express my thanks to all the services who are helping to respond in such an urgent way.

I'd also like to put on record my thanks to the committee for the report on their inquiry into dentistry in Wales. Like all Senedd Members, I have received many, many e-mails from concerned constituents about the issue of, in particular, access to dentistry. There is much to do to resolve the access issue in NHS dentistry, but we are working on creating a long-term sustainable solution that includes taking forward the majority of the recommendations made in the committee's report. But I have to tell you that there is no quick fix in relation to dentistry, and for the fix to happen, it's going to cost a whole lot of money that is very difficult, currently, to find. Now, I can't do justice in terms of responding to the report in a few short minutes, so I will give a written response, to enhance some of the answers today, to the letter that I've received from the Chair of the committee.

There are some green shoots, though, and I'd like to take some time today to update Members on the progress we've made with some of the recommendations that you as a committee have made, since I gave my written response to the report of February. So, first of all on skill mix, this was very much on our radar before the committee's inquiry, and Members will have heard me say previously that we must make better use of the skills of the whole dental team. To facilitate this, we've already unblocked that regulatory issue that prevented, previously, dental therapists and hygienists from providing treatment independently, without the need for the treatment to be authorised by a dentist, or, to use the technical term, 'opening and closing NHS treatment'. So, this has been done now without the need to issue these members of the dental team with a performer number, and, as we move forward with developing a new dental contract, we need to ensure that it provides the right framework to encourage and to enable skill mix within the NHS dental teams.

On a broader level, the committee recognised the difficulty in recruiting people into rural areas—and many people have touched on that issue in particular—and to tackle that particular issue, therefore, Health Education and Improvement Wales have put together an enhanced offer, which aims to encourage future dental trainees to complete their foundation year in dental practices across rural Wales, rather than in those more popular urban areas. So, in addition to that £5,000 salary uplift, dentists taking up the offer will also be provided with enhanced academic and well-being support for the duration of the programme, and I hope this will help to increase access to NHS care for local people in rural Wales.

Will you give way there, Minister?

Yes, of course.

I'm really fascinated by what you're just saying about the capacity to increase training places, because I think one of the themes of our debates on all health-related matters, over the 16 years, in fact, that I've sat here, has been about workforce and this inability to train a workforce. And if we look back across the 75 years of the national health service, we've failed consistently to train a workforce—you always had to bring people who had trained overseas to sustain and support all of our health functions. Would it be possible for the Government to actually lead a debate on these matters, so that, as a Parliament, we can consider how we can invest in a workforce, and how we would pay for that? Because I think opposition parties as well would appreciate the opportunity to have the conversation about the priority that we need to lay on the training of a professional workforce to sustain health services into the future.

Thanks very much. Well, of course, we are training more than we've ever trained before. We're spending £280 million a year on training people, so we're already very much in the system. I'm keen to see what more we can do to make sure that we get a return on that investment. So, we do have a workforce plan—and, in England, they haven't had a workforce plan, I don't think, since 2003. So, we have a workforce plan. We now have a strategy, we now have a workforce implementation plan. So, all of this is building to make sure that we do look at that. So, actually, we've got quite a lot in place. We could do a lot more if we had a lot more money, but I do think that there are some broader issues that we need to talk around, in terms of, if we're putting that much in, are we absolutely sure that we're getting what we want out from it, and are they sticking with us once we've trained them? So, I appreciate that, and it's certainly something I've asked my officials to do a bit more work on.

Another of the recommendations was to do with recovering the Designed to Smile scheme in schools. We know that this service has had a positive impact on dental outcomes for children up to seven years old since it was established 13 years ago—and I thank Mike for raising that. The annual report for last year is being prepared at present, and we are confident that significant steps towards recovery will be taken. I will share that report with Members when that is available.

I said in my statement some months ago that the age group that we're eager to focus on next is secondary school children. This is consistent with another one of the committee's recommendations. This is the formative age when children start to make more independent choices about what they eat and what they drink. Later on this month, the mobile dental unit will be piloted on the site of Ysgol y Moelwyn in Blaenau Ffestiniog. Over a number of weeks, every child in the school will have an opportunity to have a dental examination and advice on oral health, and will be directed to any treatment that they need. This is a development that I think is very exciting, and it will be fully evaluated to understand the benefit to this specific age group before moving on to introducing that provision more broadly.

I can confirm as well that we have started the process that will lead to a formal discussion on the new dental contract. The three-part mandate that notes all of the items that the Welsh Government, the NHS and the British Dental Association wish to discuss is going through the approval stage. Now, I know that this will be a very challenging period at times, but I'm confident that the negotiation process will provide a transparent mechanism to ensure the right balance between the needs and aspirations of those taking part. It also provides an opportunity to identify and get rid of any administrative burdens or duplication associated with dental provision in the NHS, in accordance with the recommendation of the committee.

Now, you also mentioned that you want to see data. So, we do need to obtain the data, which comes into that administrative burden. So, we need to strike the right balance. Inevitably, many of the recommendations in the report are associated with the discussions on the new contract. I do think that we need to change it somewhat. I'm trying to have talks with dentists on the ground to have a better idea from them about how they feel at present. This is the basis, I think, for providing primary dental care services, and, once this is in place, it will, hopefully, become a firm foundation for tackling the broader dental reform that is central to many of the committee's recommendations.

I do recognise that there is a lot to be done to improve access to NHS dental services, and it's one of my primary priorities. I will provide a regular update to Members on progress and the work that we have done. There is a lot to do. We could do much more if we had more money, and that is a problem. Several people have mentioned the fact that people are suffering with cost-of-living problems at the moment. The fact is in Wales for band 3, you need to pay £203. In England, you must pay £306. So, the amount we charge for people to get treatment on the NHS is much less here, and I do think it's worth saying that dental services were only available for free for three years in this country, from 1948 to 1951. So, it hasn't been a free service in this country since 1951, even though we do, of course, have a way in this country of ensuring that those who genuinely can't pay do have the support they need, and 311,000 people hadn't paid for treatment last year of the 1.3 million who had received an NHS service.

I call on Russell George to reply to the debate.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I can just say, as I was listening carefully to the Minister, Janet Finch-Saunders, my colleague next to me, was passing me a sweet, so I thought I shouldn't really put that in my mouth as I respond to this debate this afternoon. [Laughter.] But can I thank Members for taking part in this debate, and my thanks also to the committee team, research team, the wider integrated team and the Senedd's outreach team as well for their work?

I, of course, align myself with Cefin Campbell's views in regard to dentists being in a very difficult position in rural Wales. I knew that Powys didn't have a single NHS dentist willing to take on or accept adult patients onto their waiting lists; I didn’t know that was the case for the entirety of Mid and West Wales, a much wider area. But also Cefin mentioned concerns, as others did, about the workforce. Then there was the issue around the school and training facilities. I think west Wales won the ask on that. I think Cefin mentioned that, and Sam Kurtz did as well, and Mike Hedges wandered in on Swansea, and I may as well ask for one in mid Wales as well. But, no, I appreciate the Minister’s response and update in her response in regard to the school in north Wales in her contribution.

Mike mentioned an issue about dentists signing up to the contract without having clear information about it, and of course we had a recommendation around that point. It did strike me that Mike said at one point he would like everyone to have availability of an NHS dentist, and I think a few years back we would have just thought that’s the norm. And now that’s becoming the ask—we just want that. That should, of course, be the bare minimum.

And Sam Kurtz pointed out the inadequate consultation on dental reform, and Gareth Davies pointed out the same as well in terms of the NHS contract failing to compete with the private sector, with Laura Anne Jones making similar points in that regard. Darren Millar started off by saying he was going to make a short contribution and then went on for five and a half minutes, but Darren also was making similar points, and challenging as well, making that appropriate challenge to work with the BDA, of course, in terms of future reform as well, and making sure that there’s adequate time.

I think, whilst COVID-19 inevitably had a severe impact on NHS dentistry, it’s clear that there were long-standing issues prior to the pandemic, a point picked up by both Mike Hedges and Laura Anne Jones as well. But if we really want to tackle, I think, the inequalities in NHS dentistry and improve dental outcomes for people across Wales, we need to get a greater availability of disaggregated data. I’m pleased that the Minister picked up on that at a later point in her contribution, because without such data we can neither identify the barriers affecting certain groups nor assess whether the work that the Welsh Government is doing is actually going to have the impact that we want to see. So, I thank you, Minister. You will have received the letter from us just a couple of days ago. We wanted to send you that ahead of the debate, and I thank you that you’ve picked up some of the points, but I’m grateful that you’re going to respond to us further as well.

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

Item 9 is the Plaid Cymru debate on devolution of justice and policing. And I call on Rhun ap Iorwerth to move the motion.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and it's a great pleasure for me to open this Plaid Cymru debate, my first debate as leader. I'm pleased that the first debate under my leadership is on such a vitally important issue. Justice is an issue that is at the heart of our daily lives. It impacts on our communities, on our citizens, in so many different ways, and it's related to fairness, it involves us devising our own fates. Fundamentally, it's only through ensuring that Wales receives the necessary powers that we will successfully build a fairer, greener, more prosperous nation, a more ambitious nation, indeed.

Devolving justice and policing, it's not a 'nice to have'. I view this as being essential, and I believe it is harmful that we do not have these responsibilities. I'll begin this afternoon with the words of a leading academic expert in the field of justice, Dr Rob Jones. His startling conclusion in co-writing The Welsh Criminal Justice System was that, and I quote:

'On many key measures we uncover that the Welsh criminal justice system performs even worse than that of England, a country with a well-deserved reputation as among the worst performers in western Europe. We see higher rates of violent offences, disturbing data on race throughout the system, higher rates of incarceration than in England, and a higher proportion of the population subject to some kind of probation supervision.'

As Members across the Chamber consider the contributions today and make their own contributions, I urge everybody to ask themselves, 'How can this be acceptable?' Whilst the UK Government implements policies that seek to address issues that may well be prevalent in England, it cannot be right—it can never be acceptable—for us in Wales to have to inherit so-called solutions that do not work for us here in Wales.

Now, before I turn to the purpose, the practical need for devolving the justice system, I do want to say a few words about the politics. The 2021 Welsh Labour manifesto committed to pursuing the case for the devolution of justice and policing, as set out by the Thomas commission, yet only yesterday in this Chamber the First Minister endorsed a very different proposal that emerged from the work of the former Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, that of only devolving powers over youth justice and probation to the Senedd in the event of a Labour Government in Westminster.

It is, to say the least, a disappointing outcome to Labour's contribution to the debate on devolving further powers. I welcome rowing together in the same direction, but, goodness me, it frustrates me when one is rowing faster than the other. The result is that you end up going around in circles, don't you? The constitutional crumbs on offer are a far cry from what was promised by the First Minister's predecessor, who, on the passing of the Wales Act in 2017, stated that without engagement on the fundamental questions of justice and jurisdiction our current devolution settlement would never be stable.

Can I urge the Welsh Government to be as ambitious as we are on these benches for Wales on this particular issue? I repeat what I said yesterday: if you don't ask, you do not get. Yes, there's a need to keep the would-be Prime Minister Keir Starmer's feet to the fire on prior commitments made by Labour themselves, but the formal questions have to be asked of UK Ministers currently. I read with a huge amount of disappointment the answer given to my colleague Lord Wigley's written question in the House of Lords, which exposed, according to the Minister, that Welsh Government have not formally asked for the transfer of justice and policing powers.

Now, I heard what the First Minister said here in the Siambr yesterday, that it's not true that Welsh Government hasn't been trying to influence policy on devolving justice, and I know that discussions on enacting elements of the Thomas commission have been going on, and the First Minister gave a description yesterday of some of the action that has been taken. But let me say this to the Counsel General today: don't give Conservative Ministers at Westminster the reason to say that there has been no formal request for the devolution of police and justice. And let me ask the Counsel General today: write to UK Government to make that formal request for the full devolution of powers over police and justice, and I will only be too pleased, when that letter is made public here in Wales, to endorse it, and then, if indeed Keir Starmer does become the next Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, that we hold him to fulfilling that request made by the Counsel General in the name of Welsh Government and in the name of the Senedd.

I am very pleased that we have been able to bring forward this debate at the Senedd today. I look forward to hearing the contributions from all parts of the Siambr. I also look forward to hearing the Counsel General's response, and I truly believe that this debate will drive or inspire something within the Welsh Government to want to accelerate their actions on what they state in their manifestos and so often in public. But we can't let words be words alone; it's action that is important. If every other normal nation worldwide that has legislative powers over justice policy and policing takes it for granted that they have those powers, then what excuse is there for Wales to be any different? And what damage is caused to Wales and its citizens by not having those powers? Think about those two questions. And won't the solutions to those questions lead naturally to the conclusion that devolution of justice is the only sensible solution?

I have selected the amendment to the motion, and I call on the Counsel General and Minister for the Constitution to move formally amendment 1, tabled in the name of Lesley Griffiths.

Formally.

I very much welcome the contribution of the new leader of Plaid Cymru, and I should congratulate him on his election last week and wish him best wishes for the future in that role.

The devolution of policing and criminal justice is something we've discussed here on a number of occasions, and it is possible to find that elusive cigarette paper of difference between the Plaid Cymru benches and the Labour benches on this matter. But my advice would be not to try to do that, but to seek unity and to seek agreement on these matters, rather than to seek division, because this is an emergency. This is an ongoing emergency in our country. It's not an academic or abstract concept, something for lawyers to talk about late at night, something for constitutional anoraks to converse over when they've run out of every other abstract concept to converse over. This is an emergency that affects people in this country today, tomorrow, next week, next month, next year, and it is women, I believe, that suffer the worst excesses of the failure of this system.

The administration of criminal justice and policing in Wales is broken. It's broken—structurally broken—by a system that was never designed to work in the context of democratic self-government in Wales. We should recognise that. What I would seek to do, and—. I've heard this debate, and quite often we have some very sterile arguments, I'm afraid, on a Wednesday afternoon over this matter. I've absolutely no doubt at all that Mark Isherwood will join the debate in a few minutes and will quote us a speech that he made in 2018 or 2017 and will quote his speech again from 2020 where he lists the crimes that were committed by people from Merseyside or elsewhere in north Wales. It is right and proper that we discuss these matters, Mark, but we have to have a more intelligent conversation as well.

If you look at policing, for example, across the United Kingdom, it's devolved in every single administration in the United Kingdom, and it's devolved in cities of England, such as Manchester and London. Nobody is suggesting that these places are oases of crime with no relationship to places elsewhere. Nobody is suggesting that police forces in Wales have no relationship with police forces across the border or elsewhere. Nobody is suggesting that we don't speak to each other, we don't work together. Nobody is suggesting that we create some sort of iron curtain across our borders and prevent police officers here speaking to colleagues elsewhere. Nobody is suggesting those things. Those straw men that are put up to argue the case against devolution need to be recognised for what they are.

I think here the Conservatives and, frankly, some people within the Labour Party, are making a fundamental error of judgment when it comes to what this means. I want to see a strong United Kingdom and I want to see a stable United Kingdom, and the asymmetrical form of devolution we had in the United Kingdom back in the 1990s probably fairly reflected the wishes of the people of Wales in 1999, and I think it is important to recognise that. But what reflected our views 25 years ago doesn't reflect our views on the structure of government today, and government needs to move and the constitution needs to move to recognise that. What that means is that symmetrical devolution, certainly on the island of Great Britain between Wales, Scotland and the rest of the UK—and England—is important in terms of the structure of the United Kingdom and enabling the United Kingdom to have the governance that we all require.

Thank you, Alun. You can conclude now.

I will bring my remarks to a conclusion. So, I would ask all Members in this Chamber, for the good of the people who are some of the most vulnerable people in this country, who are currently so badly served by criminal justice and policing, to vote for this—to vote for this because this will strengthen the United Kingdom, but it will also begin to create the coherence of policy, the coherence of structure that means that we can go to work for the people who need this work more greatly than others. Thank you.

New Plaid Cymru leader—congratulations; same old chestnuts being recycled yet again and same grandstanding from Alun Davies. I will, therefore, recycle my arguments showing that this call defies reality. Of course Wales remains the only devolved nation without its own legal system and powers over its police forces, reflecting the rational basis for this. Specialist policing matters such as counter-terrorism are best co-ordinated at a UK level. Further, policing in Scotland and Northern Ireland is a devolved matter, but, for reasons of geography and population, the situation in Wales is entirely different. Prior to the introduction of direct rule in 1972, the old Stormont Parliament had the responsibility for policing and justice in Northern Ireland, and successive UK Governments retained a commitment to redevolve policing and justice when circumstances were right to do so. Further, Great Britain and Northern Ireland are separated by a big chunk of sea. In contrast, yes, 48 per cent people in Wales live within 25 miles of the border with England, and 90 per cent within 50 miles. In further contrast, only 5 per cent of the combined population—

Mark, will you take an intervention?

I'll finish the sentence, and then, yes. Only 5 per cent of the combined population of Scotland and England lives within 50 miles of the border between those countries.

Interesting stats as they are, what's the difference between Manchester, therefore, and the rest of England, and how can Manchester have greater devolution of policing?

The mayor in Manchester, as elsewhere, has the same powers as the police and crime commissioner. Are you calling for that to be centralised in the Welsh Government and for our regional police and crime commissioners to be abolished? Because that's what it sounds like. Despite this, the Thomas report makes only one reference to the key issue of cross-border criminality, in the context of county lines, and the only solution it proposes is joint working across the four Welsh forces in collaboration with other agencies, without any reference to established joint working with neighbouring partners across the invisible crime and justice border with England. And although I've repeatedly asked Welsh Government Ministers whether they will commission work to remedy this deficit, they've always dodged, dived and diverted in the name of policy-led evidence.

As I learned when I visited Titan, the North West Regional Organised Crime Unit, a collaboration of North Wales Police and five north-west England forces, all north Wales emergency planning is done with north-west England. Ninety-five per cent or more of crime in north Wales is local or operates on a cross-border, east-west basis. North Wales Police have no significant operations working on an all-Wales basis and the evidence given to the Thomas commission was largely ignored in the commission's report.

Commenting on its 'Delivering Justice for Wales' report last year, the Welsh Government described

'a distinct Welsh justice policy based on prevention through tackling social challenges and rehabilitation',

and contrasted this with a more punitive approach, it said, by the UK Government. In so doing, it conveniently ignored all evidence to the contrary, when the UK Government has stated repeatedly that it favours a policy based on prevention through tackling social challenges and rehabilitation. It ignored the UK Ministry of Justice's 'Prisons Strategy White Paper' to rehabilitate offenders and cut crime, its victim strategy to align support for victims with the changing nature of crime, and its £300 million turnaround scheme over three years to support every council across Wales and England in catching and preventing youth offending earlier than ever, helping to stop these children and teenagers from moving on to further, more serious offending.

Further, it was the UK Government that published a female offender strategy to divert vulnerable female offenders away from short prison sentences wherever possible, invest in community services and establish five pilot residential women's centres, including one in Wales. However, it was the Minister for Social Justice here who subsequently wrote to Members, stating that she had been working closely with the UK Ministry of Justice and announcing that she announced that one of these centres would be near Swansea in south Wales. Of course, Swansea's planning committee then refused this.

Mark, conclude now please.

I'll conclude, yes. And neither Plaid Cymru's desire to divide and destabilise, nor the failing and controlling Labour Welsh Government's desire to grab ever more power, should be allowed to distract us from the real needs of Britons on both sides of the east-west, England-Wales border.

Wales's anomalous position as a devolved nation without a legal system of its own is not simply a constitutional irregularity; it has profound and damaging consequences for the quality of justice and policing. The cost of being tied to the England and Wales judicial system, which inherently concentrates decision making in Westminster, has been emphatically illustrated over the last 13 years of Tory austerity.

Let’s start with the access to justice, which was one of the key issues highlighted in the Thomas commission. Cuts to the justice department’s budget in Whitehall have precipitated a disastrous decline in the provision of legal aid across Wales and England. Indeed, the Law Society has recently taken the Government to court for failing to uphold the recommendation of the Independent Review of Criminal Legal Aid to increase legal aid fees by a minimum of 15 per cent. For example, between 2012 and 2022, the number of provider officers for litigators in Wales had decreased from 175 to 106; from 180 to 122 for advocates; from 248 to 160 for solicitor firms; and from 54 to 29 for not-for-profit organisations. The situation is compounded by the fact that the legal workforce in Wales is also an ageing one. As such, it is inevitable that we will witness further shrinkages in the provision of legal services over the coming years. In north Wales, 48 per cent of criminal duty solicitors are over the age of 50; 49 per cent in south Wales, 62 per cent in west Wales and 64 per cent in mid Wales.

Another consequence of cutbacks to the justice budget in Westminster has been the emergence of the so-called advice deserts—areas of very low coverage in terms of legal advice centres on issues such as community care, welfare, education and immigration. In this respect, the landscape of legal services in Wales is particularly barren. Latest figures from the Law Society show that 18 out of the 22 Welsh local authorities do not possess a single community care legal aid centre; 20 out of the 22 do not possess an educational legal aid centre, and 21 out of the 22 do not possess a welfare legal aid centre. Given the fact that such centres are often a lifeline to the poorer households, which would otherwise be priced out from legal counsel, the veritable desertification of Wales in this respect risks baking in existing inequalities within the justice system.

The impact of austerity on policing has also been severe. The number of full-time equivalent police officers in Wales has only just recovered to the level it was at in 2010, after years of underfunding. Meanwhile, the number of police community support officers in Wales and England is at its lowest level since 2006. We should also consider the extent to which decisions in Westminster are inflicting enormous pressures on the budgets of police forces. All four police forces in Wales are having to make efficiency savings over the next few years, with the South Wales Police force—

Will you give way?

Let me just finish this sentence. All the police forces in Wales are having to make efficiency savings over the next few years, with South Wales Police currently facing a £20 million shortfall in its budget. Yes, Mark.

Will you recognise the fact that Alistair Darling's austerity budget in the spring of 2010 introduced the police cuts that lasted until 2015, because he dated them to 2015, and that police budgets have been rising since 2015?

But it's Labour and Tory: it's the same old story, so, there we are.

The police precept element of council taxes also has increased substantially this year to counteract cuts to central funding. In Gwent, it's 6.78 per cent, and in Dyfed-Powys, 7.75 per cent. We therefore have a shameful scenario in which the people of Wales are having to fork out more of their hard-earned money in the middle of a cost-of-living crisis, to compensate for the centralisation of spending decisions in the hands of austerity-obsessed ideologues in Westminster. A recent survey also revealed that 97 per cent of north Wales police officers believed that their recent treatment by the Government, especially on funding, has harmed their morale.

Perhaps we should not be surprised by the Tories' disregard for the value of justice. After all, the self-declared party of law and order has made rule breaking its modus operandi in recent times. But it is unacceptable that simply due to the ideological constitutional arrangements that currently exist here in relation to justice and policing, that the people of Wales should be made to endure declining standards. We can do better, and of that I'm confident, if we are given the chance. Diolch yn fawr.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. We quite regularly have these debates about the devolution of policing and the criminal justice system. I know, because I've led some of them. In Britain, we have had piecemeal devolution, whilst in the USA, Germany, and most other countries, areas of responsibility are either devolved or held centrally. For example, in the USA, California and New York have the same areas of responsibility as Montana and New Jersey. We have asymmetric devolution, and as Spain has found, that leads to problems. With devolution, we have the two extremes: Plaid Cymru believing that they can salami-slice powers to separatism; and the anti-devolutionists, mainly in the Conservative Party, believing that all proposals for further devolution should be resisted.

A case has to be made for every additional power to be devolved, which means that the powers devolved to Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and English mayors vary considerably. Policing has been devolved to Scotland and Northern Ireland, and we only have to look at Northern Ireland's history to realise that that was a really big step, to devolve policing to Northern Ireland. Wales is the outlier. In Greater Manchester and West Yorkshire, the powers of the police and crime commissioner have been merged into the mayoral role. Why should Scotland, Northern Ireland, Greater Manchester and West Yorkshire have policing devolved, and not Wales?

Many of the levers that affect levels of crime have already been devolved to Wales: community safety, education, training, jobs, mental health service, alcohol and drug treatment, housing, healthy communities and many more—as well as other services. Tackling crime and reducing offending and reoffending necessitates the police working with other public services, which already operate at different levels across Wales. For example, support for those with mental health conditions, both before they reach crisis point and afterwards, needs police intervention, and once they have entered the criminal justice system that often means working with the Welsh NHS and local health boards. If policing powers were devolved, this would allow for much greater liaison between both services locally and by Ministers and civil servants at a strategic level within Wales, rather than between Wales and Westminster.

There is a potential for a successful Welsh model, which can build on the strength of devolution without cutting us adrift from the United Kingdom. I believe that police devolution should not include the National Crime Agency, national security and counter-terrorism; they should stay as British. Co-operation in policing clearly needs to extend not just to the British isles, but also Europe and beyond. We know that crime and terrorism know no borders, and we need co-ordinated measures to make sure that criminals cannot avoid charges by fleeing abroad.

I'm in favour of the devolution of justice, because I believe it will improve the justice system for people in Wales. That was the firm opinion of the Commission on Justice in Wales. Lord Thomas was against calling that commission the 'Thomas commission', because he wanted to emphasise the expertise of all of the commissioners. The commission was very fortunate to be chaired by the former chief justice of England and Wales, but the commission also included international experts in the field of constitutional law, prisons, the probation service, the legal profession and policing. Expertise was also apparent in the drafting of the report, from experts in the field of victims and human rights. The commissioners were not typical members of boards in Wales. Neither were they trying to push any specific agenda. The commission was not a mouthpiece for the Welsh Government. The report is very critical of the Welsh Government in several places. It had no ideological motivation. It was not a commission of nationalists at all.

The justice commission recommended devolution after it had weighed up carefully the evidence in detail: 205 pieces of written evidence, 46 oral evidence sessions, and 87 engagement sessions. It was a report by experts based on detailed evidence. It is therefore incredible that the Tory party, and so many within the Labour group in Westminster, are willing to disregard the report.

It's certainly obvious that Baroness Bloomfield, in her answer to Lord Wigley, saying that there's no been no persuasive case that shows that justice would be improved by being devolved to Wales, clearly has not read the report at all.

Devolution has been disregarded on ideological grounds, which is very strange, because Lord Hunt said that, in 1990, he and Ken Clarke agreed that policing would be devolved to the Welsh Office at that time, but it was prevented by bureaucracy in Whitehall. The response by Sir Robert Buckland to the report spoke volumes—there were no strong arguments against it, just that the jurisdiction of England and Wales had worked well for centuries and it should continue. Well, as we've already heard, that's just not true.

As Alun Davies and Mike Hedges said, I cannot see the logic of any unionist who professes to be in favour of devolution opposing the devolution of justice. It would create a proportional system throughout Britain. That should lead to a clearer system of devolution and less bickering between governments, and it would help to deal with the problems of the jagged edge, and it would be much easier to explain the principles that underpin the administration of justice throughout the UK. The current system just makes no sense.

We see those problems. We see the lack of accountability. For example, only a third of the budget for policing in Wales comes from Westminster. The rest comes from Wales. And in 2017-18, the Welsh Government and local authorities were responsible for nearly 40 per cent of the spend on justice in Wales, and that didn't include spending on the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service Cymru within family law, it didn't include young offender teams, or education and social care in prisons in Wales. The lack of accountability is clear in relation to this significant expenditure.

I remember Whitehall officials challenging the line that Wales had the highest prison population per head in western Europe. When they were asked to support their challenge, they said that Guernsey was worse. Now, with the greatest respect to Guernsey, its population is smaller than that of Ynys Môn, and it's very difficult to compare the number of prison population per 100,000 on an island that only has a population of 64,000. The truth is, when policy is formed in Whitehall, Wales is not even on the radar, let alone the fact that Wales has its own devolution settlement. We should pin a map of Wales at the entrance of the Ministry of Justice to remind them of our existence.

I agree with the First Minister that the devolution of probation and youth justice will be an exciting first step, but piecemeal devolution of justice was rejected by the Commission on Justice in Wales report; it would only shift the jagged edge slightly sideways. I urge my Conservative colleagues and those within the parliamentary Labour Party to read the report, to put to one side blind ideology and to look carefully at the evidence. The evidence overwhelmingly points that justice needs to be devolved, and it's a matter of when, not if.

Let us show clearly today to Westminster, to a future Labour government, possibly, that the opinion of the great majority of this Senedd is that justice should be devolved. Thank you.

Thank you to everyone who has contributed to the debate so far. For those of us who have made the argument as to how necessary this is, it's one thing saying this time and again; it's now time to take action. That was Rhun's challenge: how do we ensure that these aren't just warm words? Because the people who suffer when we don't have the powers here in Wales are within our communities, and it's our job here in the Senedd to secure the best for those communities.

We heard from Peredur about the impact of austerity policies on policing specifically. We also know, in terms of austerity, the huge pressure that this has placed on police—cuts to health services, and particularly mental health services—and how much police time and PCSO time is spent dealing with these cases because the necessary services aren't in place.

Day in, day out, I see in the town where I live, Pontypridd, fantastic work being done by both police officers and PCSOs to make our town a better place to live, going above and beyond to help the community through a number of initiatives, but equally I know they are overstretched, and that, simply put, they have to try and fill the gaps left by services such as youth clubs. They are spending so, so much time because they are trying to work with a system that fundamentally doesn't work.

We see a deterioration in crime rates as a symptom of this: total recorded crime in Wales at the end of December 2022 was 275,233, up nearly 25,000 from the previous year. This means that the rate of crime in Wales currently stands at 88.6 per 1,000 people—the highest level since the Office for National Statistics first collated data in 2015. It's apparent that this is part of a longer term trend. Crime rates have risen each year in Wales since 2013, with the exception of 2020, and apart from burglaries and drug-related offences, there have been increases in each category of crime in Wales over the past year, with substantial rises in theft, at 33 per cent, bicycle theft at 19 per cent, and shoplifting at 31 per cent, in particular.

Anecdotally, I know, from speaking to police officers and PCSOs, that the link between the cost-of-living crisis and those statistics is something that is of huge concern. The fact that we're criminalising people because they can't afford some fundamental things such as food now is a concern. The fact that they're being criminalised for some of the political decisions that have led to that situation is something that we should reflect on. The rate of violent crime in Wales is also higher than the UK average, at 37.7 per cent per 1,000 people, compared to 35.8 previously.

At this stage, it's worth reflecting on the situation in Scotland, where justice and policing are fully devolved. Over the past decade, recorded crime in Scotland has generally decreased, and currently stands at its lowest level since 1974. Moreover, the crime rate in Scotland at the end of December of last year was around 52 per 1,000. It's worth understanding and exploring further how different approaches can make a difference, and ensure that when we have the powers here in Wales—because I'm convinced that it's a matter of when we have them, rather than if—then our approach will be one bespoke for the challenges we face. After all, we have a criminal justice system that is failing too many people. Too many UK Governments have favoured heavy-handed incarceration over rehabilitation, which is disproportionately weighted against some of our most vulnerable people living here in Wales today.

The prison population of Wales, as of December of last year, was 5,154, or 165.9 per 100,000 of the Welsh population. It's one of the highest rates in Europe. We see that our prisons are overstretched. If we look at Cardiff prison, for instance, it's overcrowded: 138 per cent; Swansea, 155 per cent. Thirty years from the murder of Stephen Lawrence, which exposed the full extent of institutional racism within the police, we see huge issues, with, in 2022, 27 per cent of prisoners in England and Wales identifying as an ethnic minority, compared with 13 per cent of the general population. We've seen allegations of misogyny and racism at Gwent Police that, sadly, are by no means isolated nor exceptional instances across Wales and England. We can do so much better here in Wales—a system that works for people and finds solutions. We cannot allow a Conservative Government or a Labour Government, should there be one after the next election, to continue to fail our communities. I hope we can work together as a Senedd to demand these powers now and fully.

I do want to support the principle that powers on justice and policing should be devolved to Wales. The Welsh Government is committed to pursuing that case and preparing for the devolution of police and justice.

We have all here seen the results of 13 long years of Tory failure—even on that bench, they can't be blind to that. They've seen neglect, austerity, inequality, unfairness, and a broken legal system as a consequence of their policies. A failed system, where only 1.3 per cent of rape cases are now being prosecuted; a broken system that has created scandals like Hillsborough, with a 27-year fight for justice, because of an absence of legal aid to support the families and the victims of that tragedy in trying to secure a voice for themselves in the justice system, and now a call for, quite rightly, a Hillsborough law.

In the 11 years since the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012, we've seen a two-tier legal system develop, with legal aid cut, denying justice to many Welsh people. Access to justice and the right to advice, representation and support is a fundamental human right. The link between justice, access to justice and our core public services is a key to tackling poverty, social disadvantage and inequality, and that was mentioned just now. The Thomas commission—sorry about calling it the Thomas commission—found that spending per head on criminal legal aid is £11.50 in Wales, compared to £15 a head in England. So, if it were devolved and we received our fair share of funding, I absolutely agree that we could fund legal aid better. We would create our own Welsh legal aid and advice service, to serve the people of Wales and provide the access to justice that we all believe in.

Individuals facing criminal prosecution and imprisonment fear that the financial cost of defending themselves could bankrupt them, even if they are successful. This can lead to people—and it has led to people—pleading guilty to offences they haven't committed, to protect their homes and their assets for the rest of their family. In the case of rape, the median time between offence and completion is now over two and a half years, with only, as I said earlier, 1.3 per cent of cases now being prosecuted. The huge delays result in emboldened criminals endangering prosecutions, and they have devastating consequences for those victims—a shameful situation that, in all honesty, is more suited to the nineteenth century than the twenty-first.

Despite justice not being devolved, and despite not being resourced to help those struggling to access legal aid, the Welsh Government has taken action to support people, and, last year, made more than £10 million funding available to single advice services in Wales. I agree with the Minister that powers over justice should be devolved, and a Welsh legal jurisdiction should be established. I also have to discredit what the Tories are arguing—that, somehow, an English police force wouldn't know where the lines were drawn, or a Welsh police force wouldn't know where the borders are between England and Wales. I'm sure they manage perfectly well to know where Scotland ends and England begins, or where England ends and Scotland begins. And quite frankly, if anybody couldn't draw a line on a map or understand it, I wonder whether they should be in the police force at all.

The urgent need to devolve powers over justice is not only a question of principle; as we've heard already, it is necessary to gain greater fairness for our people, to help people when they are at their most vulnerable. We have heard already about institutional racism in parts of our current justice system; I'd like to focus my remarks on the ways in which our present system not only lets down women, but exacerbates their trauma.

The Equality and Social Justice Committee has, I know, looked at this, and found a worrying lack of progress since Baroness Corston's work on this area 16 years ago. The committee has highlighted how counterproductive short custodial sentences are for female offenders—again, this is from our current system—citing evidence from the Prison Reform Trust that 60 per cent of prison sentences handed out to women in Wales in 2021 were for less than six months. Those will often be for petty offences. Women are more likely to be the primary carers of children, meaning that their incarceration will throw their families into the mouth of a lion. Nobody in those families will come out unscathed by that experience of separation, loss and trauma—they will be ripped apart.

A six-month prison term—again, what is put out by this current system—cannot be motivated by any hope of rehabilitating a person into society, or of encouraging them to change their ways. It is a punishment, slapped down on people who often offend for complicated reasons—a sense of hopelessness because of neglect or abuse or the fact that support services haven't been there to get them onto a better track, or indeed the cost-of-living crisis. So many petty crimes could be avoided if we invested in caring for people instead of criminalising them. And it's not only a question of doing what's right, it's also a question of resource. Short prison terms are statistically far more likely to lead to reoffending. The Women in Prison charity has found that over 70 per cent of women released after prison sentences of less than 12 months reoffend within one year, meaning nobody is learning anything from the experience—it just makes things worse, and sets up this cycle of carelessness, abandonment and blame.

This system lets down female survivors of crime badly too. UK Government statistics show that only 1.9—. We've heard these harrowing statistics of how few recorded rapes result in conviction. Almost 70 per cent of survivors of rape withdraw from investigations because of their loss of faith in the system. As the Domestic Abuse Commissioner has found, it is a system that retraumatises survivors of violence because of a lack of support in family and criminal courts. I know from my experience of working with survivors of stalking and coercive control about the devastating, shattering impact that that retraumatisation can have—that cycle of carelessness all over again.

I call on the Counsel General and Minister for the Constitution, Mick Antoniw.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd, and can I thank Plaid Cymru for bringing forward this important debate? I do welcome the opportunity to discuss and keep attention on these issues. I obviously congratulate Rhun on his first major speech on this issue as leader of Plaid Cymru, and I suspect the first of many as this process continues. Can I also say that, in terms of all the contributions that have been made today, I do embrace the width of them because they raise so many of the different aspects of the justice system that have led us to the view as to why it is important to devolve justice? I can't address all of them and I don't want to respond to two of them. I will next week, I think, be addressing a gathering of the Bevan Foundation, and, of course, I'd hope there to expand even further on the issues around equality, justice, social justice and the linking of those.

So, today, just in responding to this debate, I hope to adopt, in good judicial fashion, the high moral ground and deal with the essence of the devolution of justice. I think that most of us in this Chamber across all parties recognise that there is a great deal of agreement on the need to reform, to modernise and improve the delivery of justice in Wales. After all, who is there in this Senedd who does not want to see a more humane, more effective, fairer and accessible justice system, and one that is based on evidence, as all justice should be? A problem-solving system that is trauma informed, that is joined up with other public services, and that is focused on reducing crime, reducing reoffending and the protection of the public.

Llywydd, we believe that the primary objective for reform and the devolution of justice is that it is a natural process of decentralisation that enables a better co-ordination of justice with other devolved public services, and it can lead to a better and fairer justice system. I acknowledge that Plaid Cymru Members have an additional motivation in this, but our view is that the devolution of justice has nothing to do with the issue of independence: it is simply and unequivocally about the better delivery of justice. This is the focus of Welsh Government, and the logic that underpins this process is not only relevant to Wales, where so many of our devolved services are synergistically intertwined within the justice system, but also to the regions of England that I believe would also welcome some of the reforms that we are talking about, and, indeed, preparing for the implementation of.

It's been over three years since the Commission on Justice in Wales recommended that justice and policing should be devolved to Wales and that crime reduction policy be determined in Wales, to ensure that justice issues are integrated within the same policy and legislative framework as health, local government and other public and social services. So, the position of Welsh Government is clear: we support the commission conclusions and are committed to pursuing the devolution of policing and justice. Only when we have full oversight of the justice system in Wales will we be able to fully align delivery with the needs and priorities for the people and communities of Wales.

Will you take an intervention?

Yes, I will.

I'm glad to hear of your commitment to the devolution of policing and justice—that's great. Is that true for your leader, Keir Starmer, in London?

Keir Starmer has given a commitment of support to the Gordon Brown report. The Gordon Brown report makes it absolutely clear that there are no powers that, for example, there are in Scotland that Wales cannot also have. What he did do, which I think was very important, was defer specifically to the independent commission on the future of Wales, which will be producing its report, and called that, after that point, there should be constructive engagement on those recommendations. I think that is exactly the correct way forward.

There is, of course, as you say, the constitutional element. The Senedd is the only Parliament in the common law world that we know of that can legislate without the jurisdiction to enforce its own laws. So, the motion talks specifically about devolution of policing, and we agree, of course, that this is an important element of the devolution that is needed—not just the justice commission, but Silk before it recommended that policing be devolved. I make the point here: all four elected police and crime commissioners in Wales, those with a democratic mandate elected by the people of Wales, support the case for the devolution of policing. I made the case strongly for policing to be devolved when I appeared before the commission on the constitutional future of Wales chaired by Laura McAllister and Rowan Williams, and we are of course waiting with the greatest interest to see what the commission’s views will be.

Our objection to the part of the motion from Plaid Cymru does not stem from the difference about where we’re hoping to get to with regard to justice devolution. Our difference is about how we get there and why, and whilst I agree that we need to formally establish a distinct Welsh jurisdiction and for Welsh policing to become fully accountable to the Senedd, it would be a grave error to try to link this with Plaid Cymru’s position on independence. It is not some sort of stepping stone to independence, it is about the better delivery of justice. Surely it is just common sense that the law that applies in Wales should be formally recognised as the law of Wales, just as the law that applies only to England should be known as the law of England. The notion that law is still the same across the territory of England and Wales is a fiction. That outdated view no longer reflects reality, so recognising where laws actually apply can only have a beneficial impact on the clarity and accessibility of the law, not just for Wales, but also for England.

The second reason we’re asking for an amendment is because we do not recognise the characterisation that there is some sort of formal process needed to call for justice to be devolved. There is no set process for these things. There are no magic words or incantations that, if spoken correctly to the UK Government, will change the position of the present UK Government. They have their heads in the sand, they are oblivious to reason. For there to be change, there needs to be a change of UK Government and the election of a Labour Government.

Will you take an intervention?

Yes, I will.

I just saw a Plaid Cymru meme on Twitter earlier that said the opposite of that. So, you're suggesting that that's just untruthful.

Well, I think it was made clear by the First Minister yesterday, and I think it's clear to everyone here, that that was a comment from a Conservative Minister in the Lords that is totally unfounded and completely untrue.

Will you take an intervention, just so I can—?

Yes, certainly.

Thank you very much for taking an intervention, so I can make the case that I made before. This was a written answer. You may or may not believe that it is a written answer that reflects the truth, but don't give them the excuse. Write a letter. Write a letter this evening: 'Okay, if you're saying we haven't formally requested, we're doing it through this letter', and I will be more than happy to endorse it.

I can assure you, during all the work that takes place in terms of discussions when there are amendments and motions going through, particularly, the House of Lords, those positions are made very, very clear.

The implication of the motion that somehow we've never asked for it, as I said, is somewhat bizarre, because we have continually called for the devolution of justice. We set up the independent commission on justice and more recently set up the independent commission on the constitutional future of Wales. Immediately after the 2019 general election, the First Minister wrote to the Prime Minister putting the case yet again for the devolution of and fair funding for justice. We've repeatedly made our position, and the position of this Senedd, clear with numerous Lord Chancellors over the years since the Thomas commission was published. It is profoundly disappointing that the UK Government has ignored the mandate that we have for this from the Welsh people and the disregard it has had over 13 years for the justice system, not just in Wales but for the whole of the UK. The justice system has never been in a more parlous state due to 13 years of Tory cutbacks and neglect.

In closing, our priority is constructive action. Members will know that I've already welcomed the Brown commission’s recognition that there is no reason in principle why matters that are devolved in Scotland cannot be devolved in Wales, including justice and policing. The Brown commission recommends starting the process of justice devolution with the devolution of youth justice and probation, although they make it clear that it is for the people of Wales, through this Senedd, to determine the constitutional future of Wales.

I can tell this Senedd that, with an imminent change in Government, we are no longer simply making the case for the devolution of justice, but as a Government, we are now preparing the ground for the actual devolution of youth justice and probation and for the further devolution of policing. We will see what the further recommendations are of the constitutional commission when it reports later this year. On 25 April this year, I issued a joint statement with the Minister for Social Justice and Chief Whip outlining our work, and I will again be updating the Senedd next week. Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd.

I call on Rhun ap Iorwerth to reply to the debate.

Thank you very much, Dirprwy Lywydd, and thank you to everyone who contributed, and thank you to the Counsel General for his response to this afternoon's debate. Yes, there is a great deal of agreement within this Chamber. We've heard so many strong arguments this afternoon, haven't we, from Peredur Owen Griffiths, Heledd Fychan, Alun Davies and Joyce Watson, with some very strong words indeed. Delyth Jewell explained the gravity of not having these powers that we're seeking in the field of justice and policing.

Yes, it was said many years ago that devolution is a process, not an event, and there was an element of requiring some patience as we began that democratic process as a nation. But, it is 10 years now since the second Silk report, or it's almost 10 years since the second Silk report noted that we do need to devolve policing, and we're still waiting. Frustration naturally builds, and the failure to improve people's lives is something that should make us, as a Senedd and as individual politicians, more and more impatient.

I'm grateful to Mark Isherwood for his heartfelt congratulations on my new role. 'Same old chestnuts', he said. Let me tell you what his chestnuts look like. [Laughter.] They look outdated; they look like they're backwards facing. If I were being honest, it sounded like someone who didn't believe in devolution or in the coherence of Wales. He said that Plaid Cymru was dividing and destabilising. Dividing, when his entire speech was based on dividing the north and the south of Wales. Destabilising—to hear a Conservative accuse others of being destabilising comes with a lack of self-awareness of gargantuan proportions.

Let's focus on why we're talking today about the devolution of justice and policing, and the need to do so to improve the lives of people in Wales and to tackle some of the inequalities that, as I mentioned earlier, have led to big discrepancies in access to justice and so on—[Interruption.]. By all means.

Lots of reference was made by your colleagues to devolution in other parts of the United Kingdom. I won't rehearse the arguments I made again, but are you aware that Scotland now has the lowest number of police officers since 2008, that police officer numbers in Northern Ireland are down 7 per cent and that nine out of 10 Welsh women released from Eastwood Park prison to services in devolved Wales go on to reoffend, compared to only one in England, released to services there?

On those two points, wouldn't it be wonderful if we ran the prison service and the justice system here in Wales, so we can put those right? And I'm sure those are major talking points that you referred to in Northern Ireland and Scotland. Wouldn't I love to be able to have that discussion on what is happening to policing in Wales? We're currently unable to, because we're told that everything is okay with the current system. I just don't believe that it is.

In my positive vision of an independent Wales, of course, we wouldn't need to have this debate, because every normal nation has its system of prisons and policing and a justice system all of its own. It seems strange having to state the obvious there. And I know that I have some work in convincing more people of the end point of that constitutional journey, but it is a journey that we're on. This isn't salami slicing, Mike, and I'm a little bit disappointed in those comments, because we are talking about something that is at the heart of our future as a nation.

We heard the Counsel General saying that this has nothing to do with independence. I agree that we need these powers now, whether or not we are independent—we need these powers immediately—but this will be a key part of creating that sense of being a normal nation that I so desperately want to see being played out for the future of Wales. But, whether it's on the issue of constitutional change and independence, or on the specific issue of the devolution of justice and policing, let's remind ourselves that we're not doing it because we want constitutional change for its own sake, but because we are putting in place plans and proposals that would improve the lot of people in Wales. That is at the heart of what we are talking about.

I'll finish with responding to the Counsel General's comments specifically. Of course, he is right to say that there is much that we agree on. But the political reality, of course, is that his aspirations, and I believe they're genuine and I believe they align with mine in many, many ways, are at odds with his own party's leader. And whatever statements he has made recently offering warm words in response to a report by Gordon Brown, they remain warm words until they become pledges for, potentially, an incoming Labour Government. And I hope that the Counsel General himself will want to hold an incoming Prime Minister's feet to the fire, as I wish to do.

Final words, in response to Alun Davies: very grateful for his comments. He said we are facing an emergency. 'This is an emergency', he said. He called on us to work together. I'll remind you that the Government's amendment today calls for deleting the clause:

'Calls on the Welsh Government to formally request powers over justice and policing.'

I accept that you believe that request has already been made. Make the request again. If you don't ask, you don't get.

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

Before we move on to voting time—

I wish to respond to the point of order raised by the Member for Blaenau Gwent earlier this afternoon. I have reviewed this afternoon's transcript, and, firstly, I find it necessary to stress to all Members that they must be very mindful of the use of terms such as 'misled' and 'misleading' in their contributions. And when unqualified, it always gives the connotation of being intentional, which I am sure was not meant. I have concluded, therefore, that the Member for Brecon and Radnorshire, during his question to the Counsel General, referred to the First Minister and the health Minister as misleading the Senedd without a recognition that the First Minister clarified his comments and the health Minister corrected the record when the inaccuracy was brought to her attention. I am sure the Member inadvertently forgot to do so, and will agree that the record should now recognise these points. I see the Member is nodding, so I see that he is agreeing with that. So, therefore, it's on the record. Thank you.

Unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, we will move immediately to voting time.

The first vote this afternoon will be on item 9, the Plaid Cymru debate. I call for a vote on the motion without amendment, tabled in the name of Siân Gwenllian. If the motion is not agreed, we will vote on the amendment tabled to the motion. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 10, no abstentions, 40 against. Therefore, the motion is not agreed.

I now call for a vote on amendment 1, tabled in the name of Lesley Griffiths. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 25, no abstentions, 25 against. Therefore, as required under Standing Order 6.20, I exercise my casting vote against the amendment. Therefore, in favour 25, no abstentions, 26 against. And therefore the amendment is not agreed.

As the Senedd hasn't agreed the unamended motion or the amendment tabled to the motion, the motion is therefore not agreed. That concludes voting for today.

We move now to the short debate, and I call on Joel James to speak to the topic that he has chosen.

Those leaving, please do so quietly. Joel James.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. A rare disease is one that is categorised as affecting fewer than one in 2,000 people, and, unfortunately, many of these rare conditions can evade detection for years. This is because they can present a wide variety of symptoms that often appear unrelated, and although rare diseases may be individually infrequent, they are collectively common, with one in 17 people being affected by a rare disease at some point in their lives. Whilst there are some who can carry on as normal, as their symptoms are relatively mild, the majority of sufferers end up living very difficult and limited lives.

Take, for example, those who suffer from epidermolysis bullosa or EB, a rare genetic skin blistering condition, often referred to as butterfly skin because of its fragility. This rare disease causes skin to blister and tear at the slightest touch. It causes excruciating lifelong pain and can have a devastating impact on the physical and mental well-being of sufferers. In many cases, on top of the condition itself, sufferers must endure several hours of daily bandaging and unbandaging of the most affected parts, which is astonishingly painful, as the skin is ripped away with the bandage. In its most severe form, EB also affects the eyes, where blinking results in intense pain, and the internal organs, where eating and drinking cause severe problems, all of which requires extensive healthcare.

Many people who suffer rare diseases such as EB also spend their lives in the shadow of their respective conditions. That is to say it impacts on many aspects of their lives, stopping them or limiting them from socialising, from forming relationships and from being able to work or travel. Survey data has shown that 60 per cent of adults with a rare disease have said that they struggle to hold paid employment, meaning, on top of their health conditions, they also have to worry about finances or potentially losing their job and not being able to find another. Moreover, almost 70 per cent of rare diseases are exclusively paediatric onset, meaning that children who have these diseases are often robbed of their childhood as well.

Sadly, 95 per cent of rare diseases do not have a licensed treatment, meaning that not only do patients have to deal with the devastating consequences of these conditions, they also have to live with the knowledge that the only treatment they can expect to receive is limited to dealing with the symptoms they present, rather than the actual disease itself. The journey to diagnosis can be lengthy and seemingly inefficient. Whilst waiting for diagnosis, patients and their families can, unfortunately, suffer from an absence of suitable care. Receiving a diagnosis of any disease can be incredibly tough, and, when there is very little knowledge of the disease and the complexity of many rare conditions, it often becomes very challenging to manage, leading to further confusion and isolation for the sufferer. This is often exacerbated by the fact that doctors trying to treat them may simply not have heard of the disease, and therefore, in many cases, there is no co-ordinated approach to health services. I think we can all agree that this must be absolutely terrifying for those going through this, to think that the pain you may be suffering and the symptoms that keep reoccurring are never going to go away and the future you face is one where there's a very high chance of no medical treatment whatsoever being available to you.

And this brings me to the point of this debate: I want to raise awareness that there are staggering numbers of drugs out there that have already passed all clinical trials, been brought to the market and have the potential to treat thousands of rare diseases, but we're not allocating sufficient resources to studying how these existing drugs can be repurposed. While several successful drugs have been repurposed for rare diseases—such as sirolimus to treat autoimmune lymphoproliferative syndrome, ALPS, and nitisinone, the first licensed drug for the treatment of alkaptonuria, after previously being used for tyrosinemia type 1—they have mostly been discovered by serendipity.

Repurposing drugs for rare diseases is a win-win scenario. Not only is there a substantially reduced timeline for drug development and lower costs of development due to reduced risks of failure in clinical trials, they also offer patients the possibility of life-changing treatments, a cure or significantly improved health, without the need to wait decades before a specific drug for their condition can be developed. I acknowledge that the Welsh Government's initiatives already in place, including the Wales rare diseases action plan 2022-2026, and the £80 million new treatment fund, have significantly sped up access to innovative new medicines in Wales, especially for sufferers of cystic fibrosis and Fabry, Gaucher and Batten diseases. I'm also aware of the UK rare diseases framework, and as part of this in Wales we have the genomic cafes, organised by the Wales Gene Park, which are informal opportunities where individuals can meet others and to find out more about the new advances in genomic medicine in Wales. We also have the patient and public sounding board initiative led by the Genomic Partnership Wales, GPW, which is helping patients and members of the public with personal or family experiences of rare diseases. However, that said, and whilst it feels like a lot is going on, there are as many as 175,000 rare disease sufferers in Wales who would undoubtedly argue that nowhere near enough is being done, especially since they know that there could likely be drugs already in existence that could substantially relieve or even cure their condition.

There are overwhelming reasons why we should be investing in this. Not only would we be able to substantially improve the quality of life of people that suffer with rare disease, but we can reduce the amount of care that has to be provided by family and social services. And this is by no means a small thing: some rare diseases, such as EB, as I've mentioned, make prisoners of those who suffer and care for the person. Very often, sufferers have to travel long distances to receive treatment, which has a huge impact on the finances of the families, having to maybe find childcare for other children, having to take time off work, as well as travel costs, and it is right that we utilise to the best of our ability the knowledge and the drugs that we already have—to the best of our ability.

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

Diolch yn fawr. I want to thank the Member for South Wales Central for raising this important issue. I’d like to assure Members that the Welsh Government is committed to improving the lives of those with rare diseases. Rare diseases can be both life limiting and life threatening, and they disproportionately, as you’ve indicated, affect children. On top of this, patients and their families can face a lifetime of complex care. And I think the example that you gave initially makes us all appreciate how important it is to find treatments for people with such debilitating conditions.

So, we’ve got to do whatever we can to help people facing a rare disease diagnosis. And one important area being looked at is the repurposing of existing medicines in the treatment of conditions other than those for which they were originally licensed. Repurposing medicines takes significantly less time than it would to bring a wholly new medicine to market, and, during the pandemic, repurposing medicines to be used as treatments for COVID helped us manage people with the most severe infections and literally saved lives.

This type of medicine use, where clinical efficacy has been proven for one condition but the medicine is not licensed for a new condition we hope to treat, is known as 'off-label use'. Off-label use is common in the NHS. Repurposing of medicines in this way happens every day in hospitals and in primary care. In Wales, we have processes in place to support routine adoption of off-label medicines where it is supported by evidence. This process relies on advice from our expert advisory groups, including the All Wales Therapeutics and Toxicology Centre and the All Wales Medicines Strategy Group, which provides advice on all matters relating to prescribing and to medicines.

Where medicines are used outside their licence, they're not suitable for our usual approach to determining their value to the NHS. This can be because they're used in very limited circumstances or because clinical trial data are not available to support licensing medicines for the new conditions. Now, to support the optimal use of these types of medicines, we developed the One Wales Medicines process. An example of a medicine made available through the One Wales process is rituximab for the treatment of fibrotic interstitial lung disease, a condition that causes scarring and stiffening of the lungs, which makes it difficult to breathe. A small number of people in Wales have this lung disease, which does not respond to conventional treatment. It is not routinely available in England. However, in Wales, we considered there to be an unmet need and identified a cohort of patients who could benefit from rituximab. This medicine was therefore assessed through the One Wales process, and is now routinely available within NHS Wales to help improve the lives of people living with fibrotic interstitial lung disease.

Unfortunately, without randomised controlled trials, we cannot guarantee that the repurposed treatment will work effectively, and therefore MHRA cannot provide a licence. To help fill the evidence gap, the repurposing programme for UK medicines was established in 2019. This is a multi-agency partnership between the NHS, NICE, the health and social care commission, and the MHRA.

The aim of the programme is to seek opportunities to strengthen the situation in terms of unlicensed medicines or off-label medicines that are commonly used in the NHS or are likely to be used—that is to say, to strengthen the evidence base for the licensing, supply and cost-effectiveness. There is certainly potential to provide new licences more swiftly for innovative medicines that have been repurposed through the MHRA innovative licensing scheme that the All Wales Therapeutics and Toxicology Centre is a partner of.

I welcome efforts to support repurposing by working with producers that do want to license medicines for new indications. When NICE or the All Wales Medicines Strategy Group does license and recommend medicines, we will ensure that they are available swiftly. Our new treatment fund, which is very successful, does ensure that innovative new medicines are available to everyone in Wales.

When drugs are repurposed or recommended through our One Wales process, or are then licensed by the MHRA, the NHS in Wales will also ensure that they are available as a matter of course. As I said earlier, repurposing can be a particularly important element in treating rarer diseases, but it's just one step among a number of steps that need to be taken to deal with the needs of patients who have rare conditions.

In June of last year, the Wales rare diseases implementation plan was published. This prioritises a number of issues that focus on improving the accessibility and quality of the care provided for individuals. The rare disease action group is working towards delivering these objectives and, during the last year, they have made progress on all of their priorities.

To conclude, I hope that I've demonstrated not only our commitment to improve the situation of people in Wales who live with rare diseases, but also the robust arrangements that we have put in place to assess drugs for other purposes. Thank you very much, Dirprwy Lywydd.

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