Plenary

Item 2 this afternoon is questions to the Counsel General and Minister for the Constitution, and the first question is from Delyth Jewell.

I thank the Member for the question. Planning enforcement was initially a matter for the local planning authority, Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council. Because legal proceedings by Coal Action Network are ongoing, the Member will appreciate that I'm unable to comment further.

Thank you for that response. There's clearly something wrong with our planning system that has allowed the company operating Ffos-y-frân to keep extracting coal for a year, and counting, after it was told to stop. Now, during that period, the local council failed to issue a stop notice, and I take into account, Counsel General, what you've just said, but I would ask whether the Welsh Government could have intervened. I understand that the Government would have needed to consult with the council before itself issuing a stop notice, but I'm not sure whether that would have required the Welsh Government to sit and wait and watch the illegal activity continue for a year.

I understand that because of the ongoing action you may not be able to comment on this case specifically, but could you tell us at what point you'd be able to be in a position to tell the Chamber whether the legal advice that was provided to the Welsh Government took account of the urgent need to stop the extraction of around 1,000 tonnes of coal a day and how necessary stopping that has been, and remains to be, for the sake of our collective climate? When would you be in a position, please, to publish that advice, and how do you think the law could be strengthened in future to make sure that something like this doesn't happen again?

Well, it's not the practice to publish legal advice between myself as Counsel General and the Government, but you are correct in respect of the fact that because of those ongoing legal proceedings, it's not appropriate to comment further. There can, of course, be further comments once the legal action is concluded, once the outcome of that is known. Perhaps I could just refer you to the comments that were made in response to the question to the First Minister yesterday.

Thank you for the question. Officials have had some very early discussions with officials from the Department of Health and Social Care, and the Welsh Government will co-operate fully and transparently with the independent inquiry to ensure that we learn every possible lesson from this distressing case.

Can I thank the Counsel General for updating the Chamber today, and also his commitment on behalf of the Welsh Government to co-operate fully with the inquiry into this harrowing Lucy Letby inquiry? Counsel General, families need answers, they deserve answers, and they also need full openness, transparency and candour from the Countess of Chester Hospital and those who previously worked there when answering questions in relation to this case. I was pleased that the UK Government accepted calls from me, accepted calls from Samantha Dixon, the MP for the City of Chester, and others in relation to a statutory inquiry. I think that is a particularly important step forward in getting these answers, but what we now need to ensure, Counsel General, is that the families have access to fully funded legal teams when taking part in this inquiry. Can I ask you what conversations you can have with UK counterparts to ensure that the legal costs associated with the Letby inquiry are met by the UK Government, and not the families affected?

Thank you. You raise a number of really important points that have also related to other issues to do with the postal service, to do with Hillsborough, and so on. I think it's probably appropriate just at this stage that all the thoughts and condolences, I'm sure, of everyone in this Chamber are with the families that have been affected. I think for those who are not directly affected, even just to think about the circumstances of what happened is distressing. So, how the families cope with that is obviously very, very difficult.

Welsh officials have had initial discussions with their counterparts on the statutory inquiry, in particular through our chief nursing officer. Further engagement is planned. I will come on to the legal support issue in a minute, but just perhaps for the record also, officials wrote to the chief executive on 25 August following the verdict and in advance of a more formal review and inquiry, to ask them to take stock, and to be assured that the mechanisms that we do have in place in support of quality and safety of all those who use these services are robust and well implemented across all organisations.

The duty of candour and quality, of course, we introduced with our Health and Social Care (Quality and Engagement) (Wales) Act 2020, and the duty of candour certainly builds upon our ongoing work to try and embed a culture of openness and transparency across NHS Wales, and to strengthen the 'Putting Things Right' process. As a result of the Letby case, the Welsh Government has issued a framework for speaking up safely in NHS Wales earlier than was originally planned. It will be kept under active review for the next 12 months to ensure that it remains fit for purpose. And NHS organisations are expected to develop action plans to address any gaps upon considering the framework for speaking up safely. The framework will be published formally shortly, with a written statement from the Minister for Health and Social Services.

On the issue of the statutory inquiry, I have long supported the view that the crux of the problem really is that people should have proper access to full legal aid within those. There have been discussions, of course, on the Victims and Prisoners Bill that is currently going through Parliament, with regard to the issue of independent public advocates and so on. That is something I have discussed with the Ministry of Justice. It's ongoing because we're not satisfied it's by any stretch clear enough yet how it would work and how it would relate to devolved services. I did make yesterday, with the under-secretary in the Ministry of Justice, the point that the crux really is that legal aid should be available in full for people. Those who are core participants within a statutory inquiry, of course—and I hope this will apply to all those families who are involved, or want to be involved—will be able to apply for financial support through the inquiry process. I hope that happens, and that's certainly something that would have my support.

I now call on the party spokespeople. First of all, the Welsh Conservative spokesperson, Mark Isherwood.

Diolch. I'm unfortunately stuck at home having tested COVID-positive once again, and was therefore unable to attend this lunchtime's Legal Services Board's reshaping legal services in Wales event, at which I understand you spoke. Their reshaping legal services strategy sets out their ambition to make sure regulation supports access to legal services for everyone who needs them, especially those individuals and small businesses whose needs are too often unmet. Although this states that the UK Ministry of Justice's legal support strategy set a new path for overhauling the legal support system, and that its emphasis on early intervention solutions like legal support hubs and focus on innovation is welcome, it lists a number of challenges, including achieving fairer outcomes for people experiencing greater disadvantage. What consideration have you therefore given to the needs of autistic and disabled people, who regularly contact me after failing to obtain representation from lawyers willing to take on their complex cases, with the relevant expertise, or both, when senior local authority officials have failed in their statutory duties to them, made false statements about them, or both?

Thank you for your question and the very fair point you raise with regard to those that have a particular need of access to legal services but difficulty in accessing them. Of course, the issue of public law is equally important.

Firstly, I hope you're feeling well soon. I'm sure you will be and you'll be back in your seat in this Chamber next week, I would hope.

In terms of access, of course, the crux of the problem initially is that, since 2013, since the legal aid Act that your party brought in, legal aid has been savaged. At a stroke, in the first year after legal aid cuts were made, £350 million was knocked off. So, what you do actually have is a whole series of people who no longer have access to legal aid who would have had access to legal aid previously. Legal aid is something that is not devolved to us. We've tried to make some repair to that through the single advice fund, and, of course, that is available to all families and people living in Wales. We've put £11 million into that. I don't think it is a substitute for proper legal aid, and I hope where you're coming to is to support the view that, really, legal aid does need to be reviewed, it does need to be extended, it does need to be made available to people.

One of the areas I'm very keen to support, which will also be relevant in terms of the point you've raised, is with regard to law centres and pro bono work and so on. There are those who do provide free legal services; that's very valuable. The Speakeasy Law Centre, one of the participants in the Legal Services Board event today, talked very strongly about the support and representations that they give. It is one of the issues that I actually raised yesterday with the under-secretary from the Ministry of Justice in terms of the fact that we have to look innovatively at other ways of ensuring that people have access to justice whoever they are—whether the issue is with the Welsh Government, whether it's the local authority, with whoever it is. The sad fact is that, as a result of the legal aid Act that was introduced in 2013, 80 per cent of the population probably no longer have access to legal support in the way they might have done previously. There are many people—the most vulnerable in our society—who basically no longer have that. We do the best we can. It's not a devolved area, but we nevertheless recognise its impact in so many areas of our devolved responsibilities.

Thank you. Of course, as the Legal Services Board documents, as referred to earlier, they themselves reference legal aid is being reviewed. I know, from previous exchanges with you, that you've been having some input into that. But the issue I highlight applies also where people have been eligible for legal aid but have still been unable to secure legal representation because of the complexity and specialism of the law applying to their situation.

However, moving on, in the context of access to justice, and as you stated in your address at the Bevan Foundation's summer social, justice is not just the system of courts and judges where laws are enforced; it's as much about, or should be as much about, the delivery of social justice. You also stated that, although the Welsh Government is working with the UK Ministry of Justice on the establishment of an alternative women's residential centre in Wales, this is yet to happen. How can you reconcile this with the fact that, although it was the UK Government that published a female offenders strategy to divert vulnerable female offenders away from short prison sentences wherever possible, invest in community services and establish five pilot residential women centres, including one in Wales, it was the Minister for Social Justice here who subsequently wrote to Members announcing that one of these centres would be near Swansea in Wales, and who could not answer how this would help vulnerable women offenders in north, mid and west Wales to access the services they need closer to home, and, further, that Swansea's planning committee subsequently refused this?

Thank you for that question. Just on that very last point on Swansea's planning committee, I think there has now been an appeal against that and the inspectorate has now overruled that, so it looks as though that centre will now actually be proceeding. That's my understanding of the current position.

But on the point you raise in terms of centres elsewhere and access across Wales, I thank you for probably putting part of the case for the devolution of justice, because that would enable us to actually plan things in Wales, whereas we don't actually have any control over it. The Minister for Social Justice, Jane Hutt, and I went round the various prisons and so on. We went round Eastwood Park in Bristol, we've been round Berwyn. I think we've got other visits that are planned. Of course, those are not areas where we have any responsibility or authority over, but we nevertheless work to engage with them, because we provide, for example, the education services, we provide the health services within those. But we recognise very much the situation with, for example, Eastwood Park, which is a women's prison, where the actual governor of the prison told us that every prisoner that was in that particular prison was a victim. That highlights, really, the social justice issues.

I do have to say that I have real concerns over the current state of not only the prison estate, but the fact that since 2010 the prison population has doubled from about 45,000 to just under 90,000. So, in the 13 years of this Government and its handling of the justice system and the prison system, we've had the most appalling increase in the number of prisoners. Wales has probably the highest level of imprisonment of its citizens in the whole of Europe. That is one of the reasons why we really do think there needs to be a review of justice and the devolution of justice so we can actually look at, I think, some of the broader alternatives and the social justice elements that you're referring to, which I think are at the heart of the reason why we want to see justice devolved.

Might I suggest, in that context, and as we raised in the committee inquiry I was party to many years ago, that custodial sentencing levels in Wales are higher in Welsh courts than in English courts under the same legal system? There were questions there that we highlighted 15 years ago.

You also referred positively in your presentation to the Bevan Foundation to a pilot drug and alcohol court, funded jointly by the Welsh Government and the UK Ministry of Justice, and to a similar pilot under way in north Wales to tackle the issue of private family court hearings as part of a problem-resolving, dispute-resolution approach, which is part of a UK Ministry of Justice pilot. However, despite your repeated references to the delivery of social justice by such UK Ministry of Justice programmes, you concluded by describing the devolution of justice as the way forward. If, as it appears from your repeated public statements, including earlier today, you’re basing this upon your perception of different policy approaches by governments at a particular point in time, rather than long-established geographical and operational reality, how can you justify this when, for example, and in the context of your previous response, Wales has the highest proportion of children in the UK in care, and one of the highest proportions of children looked after by any state in the world—devolved services—and when, during their visit to HMP Eastwood Park women’s prison, members of the Senedd’s Equality and Social Justice Committee were told that when released from the prison to services in Wales, nine out of 10 Welsh inmates go on to reoffend, compared to one in 10 of those from England?

I’m not quite sure what the question is out of that. If I might just refer to what you were saying about the pathfinder project, which is the one you’re referring to in north Wales, that is an MOJ-funded project. It does, of course, involve very heavily the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service Cymru. An element of that project is also in the south-west. That project has proved incredibly successful. The Minister for Social Justice and I met up there with some of the key judges within that, and I can tell you that not only do they think the project has been very successful, but also it’s partly been successful because of the ability of all the devolved agencies and bodies to be able to engage collectively in problem solving. And, again, one of the interesting developments up in north Wales also is the development now of a new law centre up there that is going to focus mainly on women’s and domestic abuse issues initially. But I think that goes hand in hand.

In terms of the children in care issue, well, of course, we don’t control the family courts; we don’t control the decisions that are made in those courts. There are, of course, I think, very valid issues that will be addressed I think by other Ministers in respect of the delivery of those services—why there may be divergences from one area to another. What I think there is is common agreement, probably across parties and across everyone in this Chamber, that we don’t want to see people going into the care system. We want to see children staying with their parents or with their mothers. There are many factors that affect that, but it is not solely a question as to what happens in terms of the care system; there’s also a question of how that engages with the court system and the support that’s available.

Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Delyth Jewell.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I declare an interest because my mother is one of the Women Against State Pension Inequality about whom I'm about to ask a question. Can I thank the Counsel General for the meeting he held with me over the summer alongside Welsh representatives of the 1950s women who've been denied their pensions? Whilst we don't have a responsibility over pensions here, as it's a reserved matter, we do have a responsibility as a Senedd to represent and advocate for the women of Wales. After that meeting, could you, Counsel General, provide an update on any news that you've received from the all-party parliamentary group on state pension inequality in Westminster and from the UK Government about the scandalous plight that is still facing these women?

Firstly, thank you for the question and thank you for the consistency with which you’ve raised this issue that’s been kept on the radar here. As you know, the Welsh Government has written on a number of occasions to the UK Government, particularly now to the ombudsman in terms of the consideration of the agreement that the original reports were unacceptable and didn't actually do justice to the issue. I think that is the issue that we're waiting for the outcome of at the moment. All of us will know WASPI women; there are so many of them. The crux, as I said, in this, of course, is the way in which the matter was dealt with was certainly an injustice, in my view, as a breach of the contract people have when they enter into the pension system, when they enter into the work system—to suddenly change and move the goalposts just as people are beginning to approach their retirement age.

What I can assure you is I think that everyone in this Chamber is very much supportive of justice for those women. We look forward to a favourable outcome in respect of the ombudsman work. We will use whatever influence we have to try to speed that up, to try to encourage that that be resolved as quickly as possible. So many women have passed on before hearing the outcome of all this incredible campaigning work that was going on, and I’m very happy to continue to engage with any further information that would useful as time goes on.

Diolch, Counsel General. Can I thank you for all the work that you have undertaken in this area? And I join you in paying tribute to the brave campaigners, who have not given up in spite of the fact that, as you've alluded to, so many women have died before the outcome of their compensation has actually been arrived at. I'm very glad that you have written to the ombudsman and I, alongside you, await what they will say in response. There are so many campaigners who have taken hope from the words that you have said in this place. So, could you commit again now, please, as you've just done, that whatever the political colour of the Westminster Government after the next election, you'll continue to push for improvements for women born in the 1950s, and that you would stand alongside the pledge that was signed by the Labour leader, Keir Starmer, last year for the need for fair and fast compensation for 1950s women? I would again thank you sincerely for all that you have done in leading on this issue.

Well, certainly my position, my analysis of what has happened, doesn’t change. There is of course a new shadow pensions Minister, I think, Gill Furniss, Member of Parliament. I’m sure the position of the Welsh Government remains the same—that there’s been an injustice and we want to see that injustice resolved. We think that the correct way to resolve it is actually through a proper decision by the ombudsman, of recognising that Parliament got it wrong and that the Government got it wrong, and the way the matter was handled was wrong, and that therefore there are consequences that flow from that, and that should be in terms of trying to properly compensate all those who were affected.

The Welsh Government has long recognised the vitally important role of legal advice providers in the third sector and the legal sector in supporting people across Wales, including the most vulnerable, as evidenced by our single advice fund and our support for the development of the legal sector in Wales.

Thank you, Counsel General. I often refer constituents to these incredible legal advice centres that we have in Cardiff, but recently I've seen an increasing number returning saying that there is no capacity at these centres to support them. Now, following on from your response to Mark Isherwood, I know about your interest, and the Minister for Social Justice's interest, in this issue, and that the Welsh Government is providing £11 million to legal advice centres in Wales. But it's clear that many people aren't getting the advice that they need. Compared to this, the £10 million that the Westminster Government has added to housing legal aid sounds tiny, particularly given the deep cuts that have been experienced. Now, I know that the budget is very tight indeed, and I know that justice is not devolved, but would it be possible for the Welsh Government to perhaps work more closely with these centres and with the professions, and with law schools, in order to expand the provision available, because at the moment, as you will know, Counsel General, many of the most vulnerable people in our society aren't receiving the advice that they need? Thank you.

Thank you again for raising this particular point. Of course, one of the real unfortunate developments over the past decade or so has actually been, as a consequence of legal aid cuts since the 2013 Act, the demise of law centres—law centres that were so important in so many of our communities. The number of legal aid cases to help people get early advice dropped from almost a million in 2009-10 to just 130,000 in 2020-21, and the number of advice agencies and law centres doing this work has fallen by 59 per cent.

What I said, of course, in the legal services board event today in the Senedd is that one of the advantages of having legal advice available to people on a whole range of social issues, from housing, to debt, to rent and accommodation and so on and so forth, is that what you get out of that, of course, are lawyers who are committed to that work and who've developed the expertise and specialism in that work, and they go on to continue to be able to provide that work.

The point you're raising now is a very valid one. For example, in terms of immigration advice within Wales, we are now in a crisis stage, in terms of the number of lawyers who are available to actually do that sort of work. It may well be that, in the not-too-distant future, we don't have any lawyers who are able to do that work and we don't have enough lawyers to do this sort of representation and give this sort of advice in a whole series of other areas. Now, we have supported financially, through the Chartered Institute of Legal Executives system, in terms of some training. Of course, we are in a very, very difficult financial position, but I have certainly raised with the Under-Secretary and with the Ministry of Justice, just about on every occasion, and the last occasion was actually yesterday, that we have to start looking at law centres and how they can be accredited and funded more easily through the legal aid system. But, also, we equally need to look at how we actually co-ordinate all of the different bodies that collectively give specialist advice in one way or another. Effectively, what we do need to look at is the creation of an embryonic legal advice and support system that builds on the single advice fund. That is not easy in this environment. Again, it's one of the reasons why we've asked for the devolution of some of these areas. But, there is work that is ongoing and I'll happily discuss that with you as time goes on and again in this environment.

Thank you for your question. I have discussed the condition of the court estate with the justice Minister, Lord Bellamy, in our regular meetings on many occasions, and I have raised this issue in writing with the new Lord Chancellor. I continue to press the Ministry of Justice about the need for investment in the Welsh court infrastructure.

I hope to visit the civil courts and the magistrates' courts in Cardiff myself so that I can familiarise myself with the facilities available for those seeking resolution of their concerns to ensure that they are accommodated with the dignity they deserve. But, I am concerned that this ongoing issue that has clearly not been resolved, despite your excellent conversations with Lord Bellamy, has been exacerbated by the presence of reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete in so many public buildings, in England in the main. Asbestos, rightly identified by Rhianon Passmore yesterday as a major worry for all custodians of public buildings, has the potential to exacerbate an already deteriorating condition of the public realm. So, what hope do you have that the courts, particularly those in Cardiff, which are my concern, are actually going to be able to get any attention to this matter, given the problems we are seeing in schools in England?

Thank you, you raise a very valid point and, of course, the court in question I think is within your constituency, so it's a matter not only of concern more broadly, but also in terms of your constituency responsibilities. As you say, it is a reserved matter, but, of course, so many people in Wales are actually engaged within that—people who work within it, and families have to go into the civil justice centre. It is not fit for purpose; it's recognised that it's not fit for purpose. I can say that, when I have had discussions, the response I'm given is that, 'Well, there are some places that are even worse'. A point I'd come back with is that, 'Well, that's not a matter for us.' But, the fact is that this is the capital city of Wales and we don't have a fit-for-purpose civil justice centre. I've been around the court, I've met with the judiciary and I've met with those who work within it. There's common agreement that what is not happening is money being made available to make it fit for purpose.

It is not the only court. I attended the civil courts in Newport, and I have to say that I was quite astonished at the state of those as well. In fairness to Lord Bellamy, he has actually been visiting those courts and he's well aware of it. He doesn't hold the purse strings. The new Lord Chancellor has said that we must invest in the infrastructure of the court estate. I've written to him welcoming that particular statement and asking him to ensure that he takes into account the situation of the estate within Wales.

With regard to RAAC, I have made enquiries. I'm not aware that RAAC is an issue within the court estate within Wales, certainly not in terms of the information that I have so far. I think seven courts have been identified across the England-and-Wales area, but I don't know what the state or the extent is yet of all the investigations into those buildings.

Thank you for your question. The Welsh Government remains committed to long-standing relationships with EU partners, and also maximising the benefits of the trade and co-operation agreement, supported through our international strategy, appointed representatives on Europe and participation in a range of EU regional networks. We welcome the UK’s overdue association to the Horizon and Copernicus programmes.

I'm grateful to the Counsel General for that. We are witnessing, of course, the collapse of Brexit, not only with UK capitulation and rejoining Horizon two years too late, but we're also seeing the UK failing to deliver basic customs checks, the UK failing to deliver its own standards and having to adopt EU standards for the sale of goods. So, we're seeing, on every promise made back in 2016, UK policy collapsing. We have a review, of course, of the trade and co-operation agreement beginning in May 2026. It's important that Wales has a strong voice and is represented in the structures of that agreement and the structures that create accountability for the relationship, not only over that agreement but the wider UK-EU relationship. At the moment, the situation certainly is far from being one that would be welcomed on most sides of this Chamber. Is it possible for the Welsh Government to begin work now on a policy response to the review of the trade and co-operation agreement and to ensure that Wales has a strong voice in these EU-UK structures, but also that we begin preparing for the UK rejoining the EU?

Thank you for your supplementary question and also, again, thanks to you and others within this Chamber who have carried on the work on, I suppose, the vicarious body that's been set up to keep some relationship going after we had to leave the Committee of the Regions. I think that work and that engagement—. It is vitally important that we don't lose those connections and that we maintain them as best we can in what is not an ideal situation. Again, one of the issues that was very important and was part of the programme for government was, of course, that we kept the Brussels office operating, and I think that is a very important indicator and will become increasingly important again now, particularly as regards the Horizon programme, as well. And we might hope, at some stage in the future, to see developments in respect of Erasmus as well.

The trade and co-operation agreement, I think, is scheduled to be reviewed by 2025, and, of course, the extent to which it will lead to further change is going to depend significantly on the new European Commission and Parliament that will be in place from mid to late 2024, and on the outcome, I suppose, of the UK general election, which is due by no later than January 2025. So, in the meantime, the Welsh Government is committed to ensuring that those existing structures work effectively and that we maximise the benefits of the existing trade and co-operation agreement. The inter-ministerial group on UK-EU relations, which is chaired by the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office of the UK Government, is a useful opportunity for Welsh Government to raise issues. I can confirm that the Welsh Government are also engaged with UK Government counterparts in the development of the UK positions on a range of UK-EU committees provided by the trade and co-operation agreement to explore and resolve issues relating to the trade and co-operation agreement's operations. I think the nub is that we are in a position where a number of consequences of Brexit are being recognised that have to be resolved. That process has started. There is momentum there. I'm hopeful it will continue and no doubt those processes have changed. I suspect it may lead to much greater co-operation in the near future.

I laughed and smiled to myself when I saw the order paper and the question from the Member for Blaenau Gwent, because it reminded me of a time that he and I travelled to Brussels as part of the UK-EU Parliamentary Partnership Assembly, where I found myself becoming a staunch Brexiteer to counterbalance the Member for Blaenau Gwent's Europhile style. But it was interesting that both you and the Member for Blaenau Gwent mentioned Horizon, and I think it's right that we celebrate that the UK has now rejoined Horizon under better terms than we had when we were members of the European Union. So, does the Counsel General agree with me that the binary, polarising chat of Brexit either being the best thing in the world ever or the end of the world as we know it is not helpful, it's polarising and it does a disservice to celebrating successes that UK Government and other Governments have when they negotiate with the European Union? And on the Member for Blaenau Gwent's discussion about rejoining the European Union, does the Counsel General agree with the EU's assessment that any country looking to rejoin the European Union must also sign up to the Euro and single currency?

Well, what—[Interruption.]

Those are the rules.

I will ask the Member to allow the Minister to respond.

Those are the rules.

As far as I'm aware there are no discussions on any clear matters in terms of the issue of rejoining. Whatever personal views I or others may have, that is not on the agenda at the moment. I think what is on the agenda is, actually, damage limitations with regard to the consequences of Brexit. Horizon now, which was always an area that was under continual review between the various Governments, was incredibly successful, and the UK played a significant part in it, and the years that we've been out of it—it will take a long time to repair that damage and to get back into the position that we were in. I think, in several years' time, it may be an area that we will want to review how successful it has been. It is always better being on the inside of an organisation like Horizon 2020 and working within it than coming from the outside on an ancillary basis. The crux of the matter is, though, it was an absolutely disastrous mistake not to stay in Horizon 2020 when we had the opportunity, even with Brexit.

Thank you for your question. The Mobile Homes (Wales) Act 2013 and the Mobile Homes (Selling and Gifting) (Wales) Regulations 2014 prescribe the maximum amount of commission that is payable to the site owner by the new occupier upon sale of a mobile home. That maximum amount is currently set at 10 per cent.

Thank you. Of course, calls have been made by a number of my constituents now to establish whether this rate can be reduced or abolished. I remember from my time here when Peter Black brought this through, and, at the time, it was concerning many mobile home owners and sellers about this high commission rate. Now, I found out that the Welsh Government commissioned financial analysis to inform its decision on 5 June 2018 to lower the commission rate by one percentage point per year over a five-year period until it was reduced to a maximum of 5 per cent of the purchase price, which I'm sure everyone would agree is a more—. It's more fair and balanced. However, that change didn't go ahead. In fact, in January 2019, on the application of the British Holiday & Home Parks Association and a park owner, the administrative court for Wales gave permission for a judicial review of the Welsh Government's decision. So, in light of the previous judicial review, would you arrange, Counsel General, for legal advice to be provided to the Welsh Government and this Welsh Parliament on the legality of charging the maximum commission rate? Thank you.

Well, can I just say that I understand that you are representing your constituents, residential mobile home site owners, but I think any question on proposals for the future of the commission rate payable on the sale of residential mobile homes really needs to be addressed to the Minister for Climate Change. Should mobile home residents have any queries about the terms of their site residency, including commission rates, there is the leasehold advisory service who can offer free and impartial advice. It's not appropriate for me to talk about legal advice that may or may not be engaged between myself and the Welsh Government. The issue of policy that you are specifically raising, though, is something, really, that needs to be addressed to the Minister for Climate Change.

Thank you for your question. We continue to work alongside the Ministry of Justice on the provision of disaggregated data. We are also taking forward our own work—notably we published a dashboard on youth justice on 31 August. This will be the first of a series of Welsh justice dashboards.

Diolch, Counsel General. That's really good to hear, because as we know, via the Independent Commission on the Constitutional Future of Wales, also known as the Williams-McAllister commission, and the Brown report, we have heard and read vital discussions and recommendations about the constitutional future of Wales. One of the key points of these discussions is of course the fact that justice is currently not devolved in Wales, despite most of it being devolved in Scotland and Northern Ireland. So, one of the key first steps to righting this imbalance would be to begin devolving both youth justice and probation service, which would also help with some of what we were discussing earlier on about women in prisons as well.

But currently, Counsel General, due to the nature of the lack of devolution in Wales, much of the data on justice is only available in a way that groups England and Wales together, and as such, we are unable to determine a clear picture of the justice system in Wales alone. I actually wanted to come back to Mark Isherwood: one of the statistics that you used earlier on from the equality and social justice report—it was actually nine out of 10 Welsh women are more likely to relapse into substance misuse if they don't receive support straight from prison, not that Welsh women are more likely to reoffend than English women. I'd like to set that straight; it's unfair and inaccurate to say that. The problem that we have is that, at the moment, it's just, all we know is that 70.7 per cent of women reoffend within one year after they receive a short custodial sentence, but that's women in England and Wales. Therefore, Counsel General, would you be able to confirm what steps the Welsh Government has taken thus far in terms of detangling this data from England and establishing a clear picture of the future of the justice system in Wales? Diolch.

Thank you very much, and thank you for that clarification of those points that were made earlier. One of the areas of concern we do have, of course, is that we are only now really seeing some of the work from within Cardiff University, getting an understanding of some of the issues around imprisonment rates, and not only the scale of them, but also, over the past year, the significant increase in the rate of imprisonment of women from Wales. So, it's a very serious issue. It's an issue that I and the Minister for Social Justice have been discussing with various bodies, with various agencies. We have developed as best we can our own system in terms of interactive dashboards to bring together and, I think, make more accessible the justice data that there actually is, to extract it from the various sources where it is. The first of these dashboards focused on youth justice; that was published on 31 August and this makes data available about youth justice easier to find in one place. Analysts are currently developing the remaining dashboards that will deal with areas such as courts, prisons, crime recurrences, legal aid, workforce statistics, and again, with the view of making these publicly available.

But it does move away from a point that I raised yesterday with the Under-Secretary from the Ministry of Justice, Lord Bellamy, at the inter-ministerial group meeting, and that is: we do need much better data in order to develop justice policy, and this will become an issue that is much more important as parts of the justice system are increasingly devolved to us, as we expect to happen, to have the data that enables you to develop the social policy. If you don't know what's happening, if you don't know what the rates of imprisonment are, what the reasons are, the backgrounds of the people who are there, the people who are coming into the court system and how long the court systems take, and so on, it is very difficult to work out how you actually engage all the agencies together, how you actually develop a policy that is aimed at primarily keeping people out of the justice system but then ensuring that if they are in the justice system that it works as effectively and as efficiently and in as rehabilitative a way as can be possible.

So, it is an ongoing battle. I hope you will continue to raise and monitor these issues, because I think they are becoming increasingly important. We raise them on every occasion that we can. It is, of course, dependent on access to other systems and to the Ministry of Justice. There aren't particular disagreements with the need for it, but making it actually happen at the moment is one of the products of having a very centralised justice system, unfortunately.

And we'll conclude with question 8. Alun Davies.

Well, I hope that any new UK Government would pursue a different path and that they would support the devolution settlement and collaborative inter-governmental working, instead of undermining the constitution and the union of the United Kingdom.

I'm grateful to the Counsel General for that response. What has become clear in recent months, over the summer, is that there is a clear assumption in all quarters across the United Kingdom that we are heading towards a change of UK Government at the next general election. I think it's clear to everybody that there is no way that the Conservative Government is going to be re-elected. Now, whilst this will be welcomed in certainly most parts of this Chamber, it is also an opportunity for us to prepare and to refresh our constitutional policy for the new United Kingdom Government and for the Welsh Government to make a very clear statement of what its priorities will be for the new United Kingdom Government. And any incoming Labour Government of the United Kingdom will require, I think, a very clear statement of constitutional policy so that we can collectively support the incoming Labour Government and to ensure that this place, as you say, has the respect it deserves from the basis of its mandate.

Well, thank you for that comment. You make good points, and you made specific reference, I think, to the report that was commissioned by Sir Keir Starmer. It was his report, the Gordon Brown report; it was a report that he wanted. It is one that has been accepted and has significant consequence. We also have our own independent commission that will be reporting at the end of this year, which will also no doubt deal with a number of those particular points.

What is very clear is that there are different perceptions as to how inter-governmental relations are actually working. There is no doubt in my view that one of the consequences of the Energy Bill going through in the way it has, without legislative consent from Wales, is that it is basically yet another breach—significant breach—of Sewel. But a further breach because it goes beyond arguing that the changes are a consequence of leaving the EU or constitutional issues, this is just a matter where the UK Government has turned around and said, 'Well, we don't agree. We're going to do it anyway.'

And we talk about Sewel, but we should also be talking about the fact that the Sewel convention is in statute. It is there in legislation, and there are significant consequences I think to continual breaches of constitutional relations. None of this is really mentioned in the UK Government's report on inter-governmental relations. Their annual report is a bit like a brochure inviting you to join the British Airways executive lounge. In fact, it says at the end, on legislative consent mechanisms,

'a total of 18 legislative consent motions...across 13 pieces of legislation, were passed by the devolved legislatures on the advice of the devolved administrations.'

Welsh Government has published its own inter-institutional relations report on the agreement between the Welsh Government and on the inter-governmental relations. I'll just read one part of that, which I think summarises it:

'There have been areas in which constructive joint work and dialogue has been possible with the UK Government, for example in relation to aspects of responding to the COVID-19 pandemic, and in relation to Ukraine.'

'However, the UK government’s attempts to undermine the devolution settlement and its continued disrespect for the Welsh Government and the Senedd during much of this period has impaired intergovernmental working and damaged the union of the United Kingdom.'

What I would hope with an incoming Government is that there will be an opportunity to refresh and put on a secure footing the constitutional convention to give it some status legally, so that it cannot be overridden at whim, which is what's happening at the moment, and that there will be also further developments in terms of the broader constitutional relationship between us. It's one that has to be respected and seen as being important to the future of the UK. At the moment, the fact that it is not being fully respected, I think, in the long term, is something that eats away at the unity that exists between the four nations of the UK.

Thank you, Counsel General.

Item 3 is next, questions to the Senedd Commission. All questions will be answered by Joyce Watson. Question 1, Mike Hedges.

I thank you for your question. The Commission employs a broad range of technical measures to safeguard the security of the Senedd's e-mail system. These measures augment the standard security protections applied by the system supplier. Human error remains the greatest threat to our e-mail security. Therefore, technical protections are underpinned by regular training and internal phishing tests for system users to raise awareness, identify vulnerabilities and strengthen our defences against genuine threats. The Commission provides specific training and awareness sessions for Members, but attendance could be better. The Commission will deliver a two-day cyber security event in November, including sessions from a number of well-respected external experts. I would encourage all Members to attend this to understand more about the current threats and the actions that we are taking to mitigate these.

Can I thank Joyce Watson for that response? I also believe the system is as secure as any other in the public sector. Civil servants in the education department have stated it is not secure enough to share school governor agendas and reports. Does the Commission know why they do not consider it secure, and will they discuss with the Welsh Government education staff where they consider the weaknesses are?

I think it's an odd situation I think is all I can say, because what I do know is that there is a high level of technical protection. We apply the latest security fixes to address vulnerabilities and weaknesses; strong access controls including multifactor authentication for user logins, to prevent unauthorised access to e-mail accounts; robust e-mail filtering and anti-malware solutions to prevent malicious content, including spam phishing attempts and malware. We have enforced encryption of e-mail communications, which protects data from eavesdropping and unauthorised access, with comprehensive back-up and recovery to ensure data can be restored in case of data loss. So, I don't really understand how this has happened, and I think I would advise Mike, the Senedd Member, to write to the Commission so that we can look at and investigate and give you a more rounded answer into how this has happened.

I thank you for that question. Engagement with the EU is a key strand of the Commission's international framework. Commission staff support Member and committee engagement in a range of new UK-EU structures, which include the UK Committee of the Regions contact group and the UK-EU Parliamentary Partnership Assembly. And the Senedd also has hosted a number of inward visits from EU institutions and organisations that provide valuable opportunities to further develop relationships. Most recently, these included hosting visits from the EU's ambassador to the UK, the Conference of Peripheral Maritime Regions' Atlantic Arc conference, and the EU's European Economic and Social Committee.

I'm grateful for that response. The independent remuneration board seems to be doing its best to prevent Members travelling anywhere outside Cardiff Bay and, over the last few years, we've seen this place becoming increasingly Cardiff Bay centric, and that's something I very much, and I'm sure other Members very much, regret. Members on all sides of the Chamber will want to see greater scrutiny and greater accountability of all the different structures and bodies and processes that currently exist to manage the relationship between the United Kingdom and the EU. Members will also want Wales to be represented in its own right in many of the institutions and bodies that currently exist within that relationship. It is important, then, and perhaps more important today than it has been in the past, that the Commission doesn't simply respond to requests to host visits, but actually is more proactive to enabling committees and Members to visit institutions of the European Union, to have those conversations, but also to structurally hold all of those people and Ministers, whether they happen to sit here or elsewhere, to account for the management of these relationships. That is something that I hope the Commission will regard as a priority in the coming months and years.

In answer to your question, and you said particularly about the rem board, my understanding is the rem board has made no decision in relation to international visits. There may be some confusion following the review of the determination, which removed references to Brussels and European Parliament, but they were merely, I've been assured, technical wording changes and have no bearing on resource. For committee business, the relevant section of the rem board's determination states this is a matter for the Commission, and there has been no freeze on spending via the determination. But, if Members wish to make arrangements for visits abroad, they can apply in advance for this to be funded through the determination provided the journey is necessarily undertaken to enable the performance of the Member's duties and meets the requirements of that.

In terms of budgeting, and a lot of this is about budgeting, the Commission is still in the process of assessing in detail the impact of making a cost-of-living payment to staff, and part of this will be examining what requires prioritisation within the resources available. There will be some difficult decisions to be made, but the Member's comments will be noted and fed back into that process.

Our communications and engagement strategy places greater emphasis on gathering the impact of our work. We're conducting audience research to gather insights into knowledge and public perception of the Senedd, with the latest survey finding that 97 per cent were aware of the Senedd, with 64 per cent recognising how issues close to them are affected by Welsh laws. And we've introduced new ways of capturing feedback from audiences, like customer surveys for visitors and attendees at our events. And we've also introduced tools to monitor the reach of our social media and media coverage. We'll conduct an evaluation of our communications and engagement strategy at the end of this Senedd.

I think engaging the people of Wales in our democracy is a vital part of the work of every Senedd Member, as well as the institution itself, and I'm sure all Senedd Members are keen to encourage people from their constituency to visit the Senedd and to engage in the work of the Welsh Parliament in various ways. But there is a lot of work to do, and turnout in Senedd elections, for example, as with other elections, is disappointing and something that we need to improve. I believe that the education programme and school visits are very positive in this respect, and it's great to see the children that come along so regularly to the Senedd. But I wonder whether, in analysing the engagement of the institution with the people of Wales, it's possible to identify particular groups, particular sections within society, that are not engaging as much as others, whether it's possible to look at those demographics and perhaps particularly promote engagement to those people who perhaps are less involved than others.

I accept exactly what you're saying, and I think that evaluation is necessary and would prove useful. In October, we are hosting a big event by WEN Wales, and it will be called 'We belong here', and it's specifically aimed at engaging people from all backgrounds, albeit women in this case, to make sure that they understand fully what it is we are doing and, hopefully, to encourage them to take part in that and become more aware of that.

We do also, of course, have the Youth Parliament structure, which is fed back into schools, and there is a wide range of differing backgrounds in terms of the membership of that Youth Parliament, but we are always striving to ensure that access and knowledge of the work of the Senedd is as good as it can be, and we will take your request back. Thank you.

I thank Joyce Watson.

The next item is the topical questions, and the first will be asked by Mabon ap Gwynfor.

Thank you very much. Ensuring that the NHS estate in Wales is safe is a priority for the Welsh Government. My officials have been working closely with health boards and the trusts as well as expert advisers on the presence of RAAC—reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete—across the health service to ensure that patients, staff and visitors stay safe.

I thank the Minister for that response. It's interesting that everyone is now talking about RAAC and building safety following an announcement by Gillian Keegan about schools in England at the beginning of September, but nobody had thought twice about patient safety in Wales when the news broke that a ward was to close at Withybush hospital because of the dangers of RAAC. Indeed, because of Keegan's RAAC announcement, the education Minister here in Wales felt the need to make a statement on the safety of Welsh schools yesterday, however, we've had no announcement on the health estate in Wales, never mind other public buildings in Wales. But we know from meeting Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board at the beginning of this year that only 62 per cent of health board buildings there are operationally safe, and health board officials tell me that the capital cost of repairing the estate is one of the greatest challenges facing them. So, can the Minister provide us an assurance that there is a programme of work in place to remediate the estate, not only looking just at RAAC, but also the other problems that exist? What's the timetable for ensuring that the buildings in the health estate are safe? And what additional capital is available to carry out this necessary work? Finally, will we see more wards or other estate buildings closing at short notice because of concerns about safety?

Well, I thank you. I understand that this has been something of a surprise to some members of the public, but certainly we were very aware of this as a problem as a Government, and we have been keeping an eagle eye on this situation.

We had commissioned some specialist structural engineer reports in November. On 20 February this year, shared services—that is the group that commissions work, so that we have work across the whole of the NHS that is commissioned and procured, so that we have a once-for-Wales approach—wrote out to all of the NHS organisations to ask them for enhanced assurances on where RAAC was located, making sure that mitigation and safety measures had been identified and implemented, and making sure there's robust monitoring for the future. So, all of this has been in place since February in relation to the NHS.

Now, what I can tell you in relation to what we found is that there are two areas where there were significant concerns: Withybush was one of them; we've known about that for a while. On 18 August, I visited Withybush just to have a look at exactly what the condition of the RAAC was. Six wards have been closed as a result of the presence of RAAC in Withybush. Many patients have been relocated to South Pembrokeshire Hospital, and already, £12.8 million has been given for initial mitigation for support in Withybush and to make safe.

The other area that we're particularly concerned about is Nevill Hall Hospital in Abergavenny. Mitigation and safety measures, so there's still work to do on that, but it's not in a clinical area, and those areas we're a bit more confident about.

There's a small part of Bronglais Hospital in a remote plant room where RAAC has been identified, but it's only authorised personnel who have access to that part. And in Llanfairfechan, RAAC was identified in a canteen at Bryn y Neuadd, but that was decommissioned in January. So, we're fully confident so far in terms of the big concerns that those are the areas that we have to focus on, and we're on it, I think, in relation to the NHS.

Minister, as you will appreciate, I'll be focusing my comments on Withybush hospital, and asking questions on the presence of RAAC at the site. Now, yesterday, I called for a statement on this matter, and so I'm pleased that we now have an opportunity to better understand the Welsh Government's actions on this issue. I have concerns that Hywel Dda University Health Board, and possibly the Welsh Government, have known about this since 2019, and that little action had taken place to address the problem until an expert survey in May 2023 revealed the need to take urgent safety measures. Therefore, perhaps the Minister can confirm exactly when the health board notified the Welsh Government of the problem at Withybush hospital. If the Welsh Government has known since 2019, what exactly has the Government and the health board done since then to address this problem in the last four years?

Secondly, as you've said, Minister, six wards have been closed off, and many patients and staff have, quite rightly, been moved to South Pembrokeshire Hospital in Pembroke Dock, temporarily. Now, it's vital that this is a temporary move and not an opportunity to once again centralise services away from Withybush hospital permanently. So, can you, Minister, provide a cast-iron guarantee today that any services that have been temporarily relocated will be returned to Withybush hospital once it's safe to do so?

And finally, Dirprwy Lywydd, I want to put on record my thanks to the staff at Withybush hospital who have been affected and continue to be impacted by this matter. It's crucial that there is some understanding of the timescales involved in resolving this problem, so that those staff can plan and co-ordinate service delivery. Therefore, can you, Minister, update us on the latest discussions you've had with the health board regarding the time it may take to return services to Withybush hospital? Some reports have speculated that three wards may be reopened by Christmas, and the remaining three by April. And so, I'd be grateful if you could confirm whether that is still the case, or have there been any further developments on this front?

Diolch yn fawr iawn. And I will be issuing a written statement following this debate today. I know that the Minister yesterday suggested that I had put out a statement. That was because I thought I had, actually, because I've been responding to a lot of media reports in relation to RAAC. So, apologies if I hadn't done a formal statement, but I have been trying to keep members of the public informed in relation in particular to the situation in Withybush hospital, where I know a lot of people have big concerns, and I would also like to put on record my thanks for the huge efforts that have been made by staff in Withybush hospital to make that situation safe.

Now, I am very keen to make sure that there is an understanding of the timeline of what's been happening. This, as I say, has not come as a surprise to us. This is not something that came as a surprise to us in August. We have been on this ever since there was an alert in May 2019, which told us that there were potential risks posed by RAAC. What happened then was that the NHS organisations were tasked with undertaking investigations to try and identify the presence of RAAC across the whole of the Welsh NHS estate. In June 2022, the Welsh Government appointed a specialist structural engineer to review those reports, just to make sure they were absolutely accurate. Those were completed in November 2022. A further request was made in February this year, in terms of making sure we followed up on that engineer's report, and those reports are currently ongoing, they're being completed, they've been collected, they're being reviewed, so all of that is still happening, but we know we've identified where the biggest problems are already. Since February, as I say, we have identified where the biggest problems are and there's been huge work done to make sure that we're on it.

In terms of what happens next, as I say, I visited in August, and it was interesting to see how quickly the hospital had moved to shore up and make sure that lots and lots of poles were put in place to make sure that there was no danger of ceilings falling. So, the initial safety issues, I think—we can be confident that that's in the right place. Of course we had to decant people from those particular wards. There is a huge effort being made to make sure now that we address the issues of RAAC in those wards. It's not going to be cheap and it's not going to be fast, but, yes, as you say, we're hoping that three of those wards will be reopened, hopefully, by the end of this year. But obviously we'll have to see what they find as they go along, so I think we're confident in that. So, the intention is very much to reopen those wards, if possible, but obviously we have to make sure that we do not put people back into a hospital setting if there is the slightest chance that it is unsafe.

I thank you for your statement, and it is important to remember the £12.8 million mitigation funds that have gone into Withybush. And it is also right to recognise the work that has been done and the effort and commitment by all staff to step up and keep services running wherever that was possible. Of course, the question here that people want to know is: are those services that currently can't be provided in Withybush being provided as close to home as is possible? And they will seek answers to that. But I'd also like to thank the chief executive, who called an emergency meeting of all the politicians to let us know what was happening and who has kept us informed and updated, like you have yourself, Minister, so that we could understand and relay that understanding back out into the community. And that is my request here, that we play our part also—all of us—in keeping people informed in such a way that we don't leave them concerned about their situation.

Diolch yn fawr, Joyce, and you're quite right: we consider this to be something we have to respond to very quickly. Making sure our hospitals are safe is fundamental. So, we have had to raid our capital budgets to find that £12.8 million. That £12.8 million will now not be available to spend on some of the other projects that we had hoped to spend it on, but there is an absolute priority to keep people safe. So, yes, there is a need to keep the public informed as well, and that's why I have been trying to give a commentary, certainly in the press, over the summer, just to make sure that people are reassured that we are on top of this issue—we're taking it very seriously. As I say, it's not come as a surprise to us, but once we found the detail and the potential for danger, then of course we acted as soon as we were aware of it.

Thank you, Minister. The next topical question is from Peredur Owen Griffiths.

We've been considering where spending can be delayed, deferred, reprioritised and reduced. We are working to minimise the impacts of making difficult decisions to ensure that public services continue to have the funding needed so that we do not breach our budget, which would create a more difficult situation next year.

Thank you for that response.

Over the summer, we were notified that the Cabinet were working through the summer on measures to mitigate the financial constraints that affected the current budget and which are likely to influence the design of the next budget. And we fully appreciate the extremely challenging circumstances that the Welsh Government currently faces from a financial perspective: the implosion of the UK economy by the Truss administration and the subsequent implosion of a new wave of austerity measures by the Sunak administration have pushed public finances, which were already in a precarious state, to breaking point. It’s for a good reason therefore that the current budget was described by the Government as the most difficult in the devolved era.

We’ve been informed on many occasions that the Welsh Government’s current budget is £900 million lower in real terms compared to when it was originally set during the UK Government's 2021 spending review. And I’m grateful for your explanation this morning in the Finance Committee as to how that figure was calculated and that a further statement will be coming in due course.

Given the events that have transpired since the UK Government’s spring budget, including the downward trajectory of consumer prices index inflation since June, could the Minister clarify to the Senedd how this deficit is currently being factored into the aforementioned Cabinet work on mitigating financial pressures, and to what extent you expect it to inform the design of the subsequent budget? And can you confirm the overall total quantum of the saving that you’re currently asking your Cabinet colleagues to find within their budget lines, and what figure are you working to? Are you looking for £900 million in total savings; and then, could you split that by revenue and capital? At times of financial hardship like these, where every single penny counts, enabling effective transparent scrutiny of the Welsh Government's budgetary decisions becomes even more important. Diolch yn fawr.

I'm very grateful for the question and also for the opportunity in committee earlier on today to be able to set out some of the work that the Welsh Government is doing to try and meet that gap that we now have in our finances as a result, as you've described, of the period of austerity, the mismanagement of the economy, and particularly the impact that inflation is having on our budgets.

Over the course of the summer, the Welsh Government has been meeting regularly and I've been meeting with my colleagues on an individual basis as well, to understand the pressures within those departments. And I think that the fact that we've done work relatively early on in the financial year is really important because we have a monthly monitoring process where my officials are informed by our groups right across Government of what the pressures are and what the potential overspend or underspend is on all of their budgets, so we actually have really, really good visibility on what's happening in the budgets across Government, and it became very evident early on that inflation was having a big impact. So, we thought we needed to take some remedial action and do so before decisions have become so locked in that actually our room for manoeuvre is reduced.

So, it's been a really helpful piece of work. I wish I could say more today. It is my intention to give a full update to the Senedd on the work that we've been doing, but we still have yet to agree the package across Government, and I'm really clear that it has to be a cross-Government piece of work and a cross-Government-derived solution to the challenge.

In terms of the £900 million, just to reassure colleagues that I'm not looking for £900 million to be reprioritised across Government; we're looking at what else we can do. We have to consider assumptions around, for example, NHS pay consequentials. We're really keen that we finally have some clarity from the UK Government on that particular point when we meet as a Finance: Interministerial Standing Committee next week. I spoke to the Deputy First Minister of Scotland again just today, and she was very keen that we take that opportunity to really press the UK Government for that clarity. When we have that, then we can factor that into our decisions, and it might mean that we have some different choices to make. So, there is some clarity that we need yet before we're able to bring forward the package and describe it in more detail to colleagues.

Until this morning, I believed the Welsh Government got the actual income from the Welsh rates of income tax in-year, rather than just the Office for Budget Responsibility estimate; I thank the Minister for earlier correcting that misunderstanding. But for every additional £10 million paid to civil servants in England paying basic tax, the Treasury receives £2 million in tax, creating a net cost to the Treasury of £8 million. In Wales, the £10 million stays the same, while Treasury still gets the £2 million in tax. The Welsh Government receives nothing until tax reconciliation occurs, which can take up to three years. Is the Minister happy with this system? If not, is any representation being made to correct this?

I'm really grateful for those comments and also for the discussion that we had in committee this morning, recognising the importance of our devolved taxes and also Welsh rates of income tax in terms of enabling us to set our budget. I do think that the system that we have—. You know, it's very early days; we only had the first reconciliation payments for this budget, and we're looking ahead now to what that means for the next budget as well.

I think what the system as it is at the moment does is give us at least a level of certainty on which to plan. The OBR's forecasts thus far have been fairly robust. They've given us really good confidence upon which to plan, and I think that's been helpful, rather than, for example, perhaps having monthly returns from HMRC that provide us with our Welsh rates of income tax that wouldn't give us the kind of confidence we need upon which to plan. So, I think the system we have at the moment is good; we're definitely still testing it at the moment in terms of the robustness of the forecasts, but as I say say, they've been good so far.

This year, we're hoping for a positive reconciliation next year, and, of course, if we do have situations where we have negative reconciliations, as they have had, for example, in Scotland, there are some measures there that can help us manage that across financial years—for example, in terms of borrowing. Normally, we're only able to borrow for capital so that we're able to invest in infrastructure, but there is some flexibility for us to borrow specifically to manage tax volatility. So, I do think the system that we have is fit for purpose at the moment. It's still early days, so if there needs to be any adjustment to it, we can certainly identify that, and I know the Finance Committee will keep a close eye on how the system is working as well.

Thank you, Minister. The final topical question will be asked by Russell George.

I've escalated a further three health boards for planning and finance to enhanced monitoring. This means that all seven health boards are in escalation for planning and finance, due to the extremely challenging financial situation following a period of considerable inflation and austerity.

Minister, I shouldn't have to come to this Chamber today and submit a topical question; you really should've brought forward a statement yesterday on such an important issue to Members in this Chamber. Perhaps you can explain why a statement wasn't issued yesterday.

What the public do want to know, Minister, particularly those 28,000 people who are waiting over two years for treatment, which, of course, have been wiped out in other parts of the UK, is what this actually means for them. Can you clarify and set out what does your statement mean today for the thousands of people in Wales who are waiting for treatment on the Welsh NHS? Because your statement doesn't set that out. Tell us today, Minister. Your statement says that health boards have not provided plans in accordance with your direction. Is it the case that the direction that you have set to health boards was not reasonable or achievable, or is it in your view a failing of senior health board teams in every health board in Wales? Because it's got to be one or the other.

You said in your statement there are growing financial deficits, operational pressures, long waiting lists, as well as extremely challenging financial positions, and this is not unique to Wales. I accept health services are affected right across the UK and around the world—I accept that—but this Labour Government is the only Government in the UK to have cut the health budget not once, but twice. That's a decision that you've made here in Wales. You're asking health boards, Minister, to do more for less. You write to health boards, you set out your priorities, correctly so, but if everything is a priority, then nothing is a priority. What I would ask, Minister, is have you also told health boards what should not be their priority, because I don't think you can have it both ways on this. So, please, Minister, tell us what should not be health boards' priorities.

Can you also confirm that the Welsh Government will be protecting this health budget in this financial year? Can you confirm that no further cuts will be made to the health budget, and can you also set out today what this statement means for the next budget in 2024-25? Will you be seeking to protect the health budget in real terms next year? Ultimately, what is the Welsh Government doing to fix this situation? Because I read your statement today, every page of it, and it doesn't actually set out what you are doing as a Government, what you are doing as the Minister to fix this situation. I think the Welsh people want clarity on what this means for them.

Thanks very much. I understand the frustration. I understand the frustration of the public when they see that health boards are finding it difficult to balance the books. There's a reason why they're finding it difficult to balance the books. It's because the poor way in which the UK Government have managed the economy has led to significant inflation, which is impacting massively not just on all of the public in Wales who are finding it hard to find the money to pay for their energy—health boards are also finding it difficult to pay, for example, for their energy.

On COVID costs, we started vaccinating people this week—another COVID booster—but all of a sudden we're not getting any additional money from the centre for that. But we have to find the money. They have to find the money, the health boards, from within the budget that they have. This is at a time when demand on the NHS is still going up, because we've got an ageing population, we have complex care, we have 60 per cent of the population who are overweight or obese. We have all of these things that health boards are trying to contend with. So, you're quite right—we do have to have a very serious conversation about whether we can do it all, can we continue like this. I've made it very clear on the anniversary of the NHS that that is not possible—that, actually, this situation is not sustainable and we are going to have to make some very tough decisions.

Already, yes, I have been very clear with the health boards that, actually, they have to focus on six priorities. That's the first time they've had such clarity on, 'I recognise you can't do everything under the current budget situation, so here's your six priorities for you to focus on'. So, I have been very clear on that. The next question is, 'What are you going to deprioritise?', because that's true as well. So, I've already asked them to make sure that they are not making interventions where we know that the health consequence is not where it should be, and there are explanations from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence and clinical reasons for doing that. So, I've already, again, given an instruction that they have to stop doing those interventions.

So, we are being clear with them, but let me make it absolutely clear that the determination of where this money gets spent within health boards rightly has to be the responsibility of the health boards, because they're closer to the public. I can't tell you what is safe to cut because I don't know if you've got a bigger cancer problem in one area or a bigger orthopaedic problem. That's the kind of local intelligence that those health boards have to determine themselves. So, you can be prescriptive to a point, but, actually, there's a reason why we appoint health boards.

It's the start of a new Senedd year, but I’m afraid it’s the same old story when it comes to the health service in Wales. The fact that this announcement was made late this morning without a pre-arranged oral statement in the Senedd suggests that the Government would rather avoid scrutiny. I noticed that the Minister didn’t respond to Russell George’s first question, so I hope that the Minister will explain why the Government consider it sufficient for such a major announcement to be made in this manner, and with little scope for scrutiny.

People will be rightly scratching their heads at this point as to the actual effectiveness of these escalation measures and the ability of the Welsh Government to deliver them. We’ve already witnessed Betsi Cadwaladr being put back into special measures earlier this year, a little over two years after they were originally lifted against the advice of the auditor general. But the limited effectiveness of the escalation protocols is also apparent in other health boards. For example, Cardiff and Vale is remaining in enhanced monitoring for planning and finance despite having run a deficit for four of the past five three-year periods. Hywel Dda has failed to break even at any stage since 2016-17, and yet it will remain in its current escalation status of targeted intervention. On this basis, how effective is the special measures framework, and is it time for an independent investigation into whether it delivers improvements for health boards and, most importantly, the quality of care across Wales? Something somewhere is failing. Either the frameworks or the Government that is implementing them is not fit for purpose. Which is it? What will these enhanced measures mean to services on the ground? Will the Government refuse to bail out any overspend this year or next year? Are health boards expected to stop further planned care to save costs? People simply don’t understand what these enhanced measures mean and what they intend to deliver, so I hope the Minister can elaborate.

While the impact of COVID and inflation have undoubtedly contributed to this situation—and we heard the Minister blame COVID earlier—this is only part of the picture. The Audit Wales report published last week shows that expenditure on agency staff reached a record level of £325 million in 2022-23, and that permanent staff vacancies were by far the main reason for this. You may recall that, here in Plaid Cymru, we put forward a plan earlier this year to address some of the most urgent challenges facing our health service, which included prioritising staff retention and getting to grips with eye-watering sums being paid out to the private agencies. At the time, the Minister responded by saying that work was already under way to reduce the Welsh Government’s spending on agency staff. So, nine months on, how much confidence does she have that this work is actually bearing fruit? Will we see a reduction in agency spending over the current financial year? Finally, does the Minister agree with me that the failure of the Conservatives in Westminster to provide Wales with the funding we need to run public services effectively and efficiently here is threatening the health and well-being of the people of Wales?

Diolch yn fawr iawn. I think an explanation of the escalation and intervention framework is important. What we have is four levels of escalation. This is something that happens on a frequent basis. It's not something where we automatically give a report to the Senedd. If that is something that you would like to see in future, I'm happy to entertain that as something that we consider, but I think that's why the statement was issued earlier today.

So, let me just tell you about the escalation and intervention framework and why we've done what we've done today. Health boards have a responsibility to balance the budget over a three-year period. If they're unable to do that, then it means that the monitoring is increased and enhanced, and that's the situation that they are now all in, so that's why we've had to put them all into that escalation framework. Now, what does that mean? Well, it means that they'll all get significantly more hand-holding from the NHS Executive, there'll be a lot more monitoring and, of course, at the moment we're having very frequent discussions with them about how they're going to address the issue of the significant deficits that they are foreseeing this financial year.

It's not fair to say, 'Look, actually, they always just go up one way.' The fact is, in this statement, that Cwm Taf Morgannwg—we have seen some significant improvements in Cwm Taf Morgannwg, in particular in relation to their maternity and neonatal care. So, because of the efforts they've made, we've been able to reduce the intervention on that, so it does depend on where we're at.

Let me address some of the other issues that you asked about. Money to bail out—we don't have the money to bail out this year. You've heard that we're effectively £900 million down on where we should be, which is why, very often, they say that they're going to have a deficit, but, actually, we can find something centrally, usually, to help them out. That's not going to happen this year, so we're in a really, really difficult situation, which is different from the usual situation, and that's because of the way that the economy has been run by the Conservatives—that runaway inflation that we're seeing at the moment.

Now, just in relation to the agency staff, look, your priorities, and it was good that you commissioned that report into how we should fix the NHS—the fact is we were doing all of them already. But the agency staff situation—of course, what we want to see is permanent staff being recruited and a reduction in agency staff. I can give you a guarantee that we will see a reduction in agency staff. We've been working with Health Education and Improvement Wales and the appropriate partners to say, 'How do we do this?', without, actually, as far as possible, damaging the services that we will see provided, because the fact is, I remember going and spending the evening as a nurse in Withybush hospital, and 50 per cent of the nurses that were working that evening were agency nurses. Now, you can switch that off, but you'd have to switch off most of the hospital at the same time.

I thank the Minister.

We'll now move on to item 5, the 90-second statements, and the first today is from Heledd Fychan.

Thank you, temporary Presiding Officer. It is easy to forget that the heroic generation of Gareth Miles is ageing—he was 85 years old upon his passing last week—but we won't, and we shouldn't, forget that he was one of the main pioneers of the revolution that transformed Wales and the status of the Welsh language, as one of the founders of the Cymdeithas yr Iaith, and that, of course, led to the Welsh Parliament.

Having been brought up in Waunfawr near Caernarfon, he quit his job as an English and French teacher, moved to Pontypridd and became an organiser of UCAC, the National Union of Teachers, Wales, before taking the brave step of becoming a full-time writer.

With his commitment to Marxism and the anti-apartheid movement, his life attested to his passionate belief that the fight for Wales and the Welsh language was part of the international fight for justice.

In aiming for a million Welsh speakers, we should all have listened to Gareth Miles over 50 years ago. In 1970 he published his first book, Pelydr-Ll—not 'pelydr x', or 'x-ray', but 'pelydr ll', a machine that would turn everyone into Welsh speakers. All that was needed was to point the machine at them, and we would've smashed the target of a million Welsh speakers by now.

In expressing our deepest condolences to his wife, Gina, and his daughters, Elen, Branwen and Eiry, we remember the humour as well as the seriousness that characterised the great Welshman, Gareth Miles. Our debt to him is great.

Throughout September, Bus Users UK hold their Catch the Bus Month campaign. Every day, people in communities across Wales catch a bus. Buses are essential services that many people rely upon and that we all benefit from. Buses are good for our economy. They help people to get to education, employment, shops and leisure activities, contributing billions to the economy.

Research from the University of Leeds found that improvements in bus connectivity is associated with decreases in social deprivation. Buses are good for our health. Aside from ensuring access for all to key public services like health and social care settings, buses promote physical activity and can also help to reduce loneliness and social isolation. Buses are good for our environment. A fully loaded double-decker bus can take 75 cars off the road, reducing congestion and emissions. In fact, if everyone across the UK switched just one car journey a month to a bus instead, there would be a billion fewer car journeys and a saving of 2 million tonnes of carbon dioxide per year—just one journey a month. At this difficult time for buses and those affected by the cuts to services we're seeing in Wales, I think we should all take this opportunity to support this important campaign, while we continue to debate funding levels for buses and the best way they can be delivered. Let's all get on board and catch the bus.

Thank you for those statements.

We'll move on now to item 6, a debate on petition P-06-1337, 'Sycharth, the home of Owain Glyndŵr, should be bought to safeguard the site for future generations'. I call on the Chair of the committee to move the motion—Jack Sargeant.

Diolch yn fawr, acting Presiding Officer.

On behalf of the Petitions Committee, thank you for the opportunity to bring forward this important debate.

In the week when we celebrate Owain Glyndŵr Day, this debate concerns a petition signed by 10,539 people calling for action to safeguard his birthplace, Sycharth castle. This petition is about protecting, it's about celebrating and it's about learning from our history. We do not just do that from books or online, but by celebrating key locations in Welsh history. Sycharth castle is one such location.

As the committee Chair of the Senedd Petitions Committee, I had the privilege of visiting the site earlier this year. We were joined by my committee colleague Joel James, the lead petitioner, Elfed Wyn ap Elwyn, who is here today with his beautiful children, members of the Owain Glyndŵr Society and the agent for the owners of the land. I'm also grateful, Presiding Officer, to the Deputy Minister for allowing senior officials from Cadw to join us there too. During the visit, it became clear that there were challenges. The current tenant has a lifetime lease, the site is not easily accessible, or easily found—and trust me, I struggled myself—and we don't have as much information as we would like regarding what the site looked like in Glyndŵr's day. Now, the final point, Presiding Officer, makes a rebuild more difficult. However, it does not mean that we should not act. Future generations, those like Elfed's children, must be able to mark that historical site. The pupils of a local school, Llangedwyn Church in Wales School, made this very clear to me on the day myself and Joel visited. They are proud of their famous forbear and they want their community to be a place that people from across Cymru and across the world can visit and learn about Owain Glyndŵr.

Now, Presiding Officer, there are two ways in which the Welsh Government could respond positively to this popular petition. Firstly, they could improve signage at the site. A small, discreet sign on the road just to show you you're in the right place. At the moment, as I said earlier, it’s far too easy to be looking for the site and to drive straight past it. It happened to me a few months ago. Secondly, Presiding Officer, the Welsh Government could and should give serious consideration to supporting proposals to create a visitor centre. This is a solution that not only would provide a way for local people to keep the history alive, but also create an accessible way for everybody to be able to come and engage with the story of Owain Glyndŵr through this ancestral home.

Llywydd, Cymru is an increasingly confident nation. If we are to build on that confidence, then we need to understand and celebrate our history—whether that is the Chartists, Presiding Officer, or what happened in the 1980s when the Tories decimated communities like mine in Alyn and Deeside, or, indeed, Owain Glyndŵr. We as Welsh people must be able to understand better the events that shaped us.

I would like to start by thanking the petitioner for raising such an important topic as this and to also thank the Petitions Committee Chair, Jack Sargeant, for opening this debate. This petition, once again, highlights that we have a major issue in Wales with regard to protecting and promoting our historic and cultural heritage. The fact that we've received this petition with over 10,000 signatures shows the people right across the country clearly feel that, once again, they are not empowered enough to be able to decide for themselves how their community is shaped.

We learnt from our visit to Sycharth and Ysgol Llangedwyn that, in collaboration with the landowner, Cadw are taking steps to improve and promote greater awareness and access to this site, but considerably more needs to be done to engage other stakeholders, such as the local authority. Indeed, as already mentioned, there were no street signs at all directing me to the scheduled monument, and I believe that the underlying reason why other stakeholders haven't engaged is because they don't see this site as an asset. This brings me to what I feel this petition is really highlighting. As mentioned, Cadw have a positive relationship with the landowner and they have guardianship over Sycharth, but this wasn't always the case. There are many other examples throughout Wales where this isn't the case. More needs to be done to address this and make sure that our heritage and community assets are not allowed to rot. While Cadw do recognise, promote and conserve many significant historical buildings and sites, those that fall short of Cadw's strict criteria but nonetheless have high community value are the ones most often left without adequate protected status, and are left to either crumble or are wantonly destroyed. Cowbridge old girls' school and Cardiff velodrome are just two examples in my region that I can highlight. I believe the Welsh public shouldn't have to be signing petitions of this kind in a desperate attempt to get the Welsh Government to recognise the importance and significance of what we have to offer here in Wales in order to spur Cadw and others into greater action. There should be a much better mechanism in place to ensure that communities are properly consulted and their views are held as valid when deciding what needs to be protected. Furthermore, there is a clear need for a larger range of protected statuses that recognise that, even if a site or building does not measure up to a grade I or II listing, residents can still be assured that something they value won’t be wantonly destroyed.

Finally, acting Llywydd, I believe that we should also have much harsher penalties for land and building owners who clearly flout the rules regarding places of historical and community importance. As was mentioned in the Chamber yesterday, Guildford Crescent in Cardiff, which the community heavily campaigned to save, is now just a pile of rubble. Clearly, the developers are not worried about the consequences of destroying this heritage.

I would like to start by thanking Elfed for submitting this important petition, and echo the fact that it’s lovely to see you here, and I’d also like to thank everyone—the 10,539 people—who signed the petition. And although I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak about and support the petition, I have mixed feelings that we, as Welsh people, must continue to make the case for the importance of not only protecting but celebrating and promoting sites like Sycharth; these are sites that have played such an important role in the development of our nation, including this Parliament, but are effectively forgotten, with very few people here in Wales knowing about their existence, never mind their significance. And perhaps that’s reflected in how many people are here listening to this debate and contributing to it. Someone mentioned to me this morning, who was aware of this debate, 'Think, if Sycharth was in Ireland, what would be made of that.’ It’s something for us to think about and reflect on, perhaps.

I have received quite a lot of correspondence on the matter since becoming a Member of this Senedd, and I wrote to the Deputy Minister to express my personal concern regarding the lack of attention that has been given to the Sycharth site, receiving a defensive reply that stated:

‘I do not agree with the claim that the Welsh Government has neglected Sycharth. In recent decades, the Welsh Government has invested significant money to protect Sycharth, along with other privately owned historical sites’,

and so forth,

‘presenting a combination of conservation, public access and interpretation on each site.’

But I would like to challenge that today, and you only need to visit Sycharth or visit Cadw's website to know that Sycharth has been neglected and that its significance is not celebrated or promoted. In fact, if you go to Cadw's website, there is not even a picture of Sycharth on the Welsh history map that traces the history of Owain Glyndŵr, although there is a reference to it. There is no way to know where the site is or how to get to it either. In fact, if you click on a link on the Cadw website regarding another important site in the history of Owain Glyndŵr, namely Glyndyfrdwy, you will be directed to an English-only website with the title ‘Welcome! to the Ancient Historic Sites of England’.

If you search for 'Sycharth' within the Cadw site, you can also find a monolingual English document dating from 2010, ‘Owain Glyndŵr and his Uprising: Interpretation Plan’.

The preface to this document states:

'This interpretation plan aims to help guide and inform Cadw’s Heritage Tourism project and expenditure',

and the

'objectives are to maximise the economic value of heritage by increasing the volume, length and value of heritage visits. This plan recommends actions and initiatives which make sites associated with Owain Glyndwr and his uprising more intellectually accessible and enjoyable for both tourists and residents.'

It makes a number of recommendations, and I would like to know what became of this study. Because, from visiting the sites identified in the report, including Sycharth, and from looking at Cadw's own website, and also the Visit Wales website, it doesn't appear to me that Cadw or the Welsh Government have implemented this plan.

Why is it important to address this? If you've visited Sycharth or seen a picture of it, you'll be well aware that there is very little to see in Sycharth today compared to the majestic castles of Edward I, which are celebrated and promoted by Cadw and Croeso Cymru. There is a good reason for that, as it was burned down by the army of Prince Henry in 1403, who later became Henry V. Nevertheless, thanks to Iolo Goch's poem, which describes not only the buildings in Sycharth but also the fun and excitement that was present there, we have a very good idea of what Sycharth was like in its heyday. This is supported by excavation work carried out on the site in 1962 and 1963 and, more recently, the independent archaeologist Spencer Smith has done some further work. But more is needed.

Having now ensured through the co-operation agreement that the history of Wales, at last, will be taught in our schools, we also urgently need to secure sites such as Sycharth and improve the way that we interpret, promote and market them. As was mentioned earlier, it will be Owain Glyndŵr Day on 16 September, and what better way to celebrate that than to commit to supporting this petition and also ensure that Cadw and the Welsh Government pay due attention to a site that is the basis of this Senedd?

And for those of you who haven't visited Sycharth yet, why not follow in the footsteps of Iolo Goch:

'I will go to his court in haste, / the most splendid of the two hundred. / A baron's court, place of refinement, / where many poets come, the place of the good life'?

I'd also like to thank the petitioners. Yesterday evening, I went to visit Amelia, who had a school project on what it means to be Welsh. Her mother had asked if I had any information about the Senedd that she could use. I arrived with leaflets and books, and we talked about Wales being a Celtic nation and how Prince Llywelyn ap Gruffudd had, according to a letter, stayed in her village overnight, and the stories of Owain Glyndŵr, his statues, the castles—Welsh and English—in our border county, and that today we are having this debate on preserving Sycharth, his home.

I've just read a historical novel on the time of Owain Glyndŵr, how he gathered support travelling up and down the border regions of Wales, the conflicts and the battles, and how the bards used to tell news and relay stories through poetry and music, also travelling through the border regions, trying to avoid danger and conflict, from south to north Wales. Owain Glyndŵr's home, Sycharth, was fulsomely but obliquely described in a poem of about 1390 and was burned in 1409. It has been described as a motte and bailey castle, consisting of a large ditched earthen motte, or castle mound, and the 1390 poem describes 'a fine wooden house atop a green hill'. Further buildings, including a great lordly hall, would have stood within the bailey. The poem mentions a mill, fish ponds, a warren and a deer park containing a lodge.

Without Owain Glyndŵr and the 15-year revolt, would Wales still be a separate country? He's such a notable character who has steered history and contributed so much to Welsh identity. We need to see Owain Glyndŵr's home given more prominence, care and maintenance. I have read with disappointment that, although managed by Cadw, it's still not well signposted, accessible or maintained, and that the interpretation, which is now how we get much of our historical information, could do with being updated. I support this petition. We need the site safeguarded. It needs to be properly maintained and celebrated with the same prominence as the many castles and other historical gems in Wales under Cadw's care. Diolch.

As a child, my father often took us to visit Welsh castles. And, as Heledd Fychan has said, unlike the majestic Norman castles, these were often just a mound with a few scattered stones, and very often we had to trespass on private land to get to them. It's quite possible that the twins of the petitioner will have a similar upbringing. When visiting Morgraig castle, which is on the road from Cardiff to Caerphilly, we all as a family had to start running when we heard a farmer firing a gun in our direction.

Sycharth has not changed much since I first visited the site almost 30 years ago. This is also not a new debate; the sorry state of Sycharth has been a topic of discussion for decades. Sycharth is not treated as a local monument, never mind one of national importance. As the petitioner said, and a number of speakers, there are hardly any signs to raise awareness of the importance of the site as the birthplace of one of the most famous Welsh people of all.

The accessibility of the site remains a great concern. The roads to reach the castle are poor, and, even on fine days in summer, the path resembles a bog. If you visit Sycharth, acting Presiding Officer, please take some good walking shoes with you.

The rebel became a statesman. He had an incredible vision for a leader of his time. Many of his dreams came true, including this place, a Senedd for Wales. The poets claimed that Glyndŵr did not die and that he would return one day to lead Wales to being a free country. Whether that is true or not, the least we can do as Members of the Senedd is to ensure that his home is respected and that there's an opportunity for all of the people of Wales to visit the home of this incredible man. Could I therefore wish a happy Owain Glyndŵr Day to the petitioner and all of you for Saturday? Thank you.

I do feel quite passionate about protecting our heritage in Wales. I'm pleased to speak briefly in this debate today. Owain Glyndŵr was obviously a significant figure in Wales, born in mid Wales, and his links to my own constituency, of course, are well documented. As I mentioned, recognising and keeping our Welsh heritage is fairly close to my heart. I'm a trustee of the Evan Roberts Institute, established in 2013, and that's largely there to safeguard sites of religious and spiritual significance in Wales, especially those associated with shaping Welsh culture and our nation's identity. So, the charity's first major project was to purchase and secure the future of Pisgah chapel near Swansea, which had been earmarked for demolition, so it was fitting that the institute's first project was to protect a building so closely associated with the revivalist Evan Roberts.

There are of course many well-known links to Owain Glyndŵr in Montgomeryshire. I've spoken about them previously in this Chamber. Over the summer I was pleased to visit what is now called the Friends' Meeting House or Cwrt Plas-yn-dre on Milford Road in Newtown. This fifteenth-century hall, which was reconstructed on the present site in 1885 from Dolgellau, was formerly, it is claimed, one of Owain Glyndŵr's parliaments, but there will be others in this Chamber—perhaps above me as well—that will have views on that, of course. But the property was bought by Tim Chilton, who restored the property and gives tours and talks, and I thank him for his private tour that he gave me this summer.

But this Friday I'm pleased to visit, along with my colleague Tom Giffard, Sycharth, the former home of Owain Glyndŵr in my own constituency, so I look forward to discussing the culture and heritage centre. I'm very supportive of the actions of all those who support making sure that our important heritage sites are restored, and, most importantly, are accessible to the public. Thank you, acting Presiding Officer.

I'm very grateful for the opportunity to contribute to this debate, and I would also like to take the opportunity, as we've heard already, to encourage people to remember Owain Glyndŵr Day on Saturday and to celebrate as well—16 September.

'No failings, famine or shame, / Nor ever thirst in Sycharth':

the immortal couplet of the poet Iolo Goch from the fourteenth century, which describes the great welcome that was always available in the household of Owain Glyndŵr and his family in Sycharth. This ancient court is in the farthest reaches of my region and part of the constituency of Russell George, near Oswestry and just a stone's throw away from the English border. And although the site was burnt to the ground during the Glyndŵr rebellion, the importance and legend of Sycharth has continued to fascinate and inspire Welsh people throughout the centuries. In fact, the ruins in this sleepy corner of mwynder Maldwyn have an equally central, if not more important role in our nation's history than the majestic walls of the castles of Caernarfon, Conwy, Harlech and so forth.

And as Heledd Fychan has already noted, as a result of the co-operation agreement between Plaid Cymru and the Government, I am also so proud that the history of our nation in all of its diversity will become a compulsory part of the new Curriculum for Wales, for the first time ever. Think about that. As the old saying says: 'A nation without memory is a nation without heart'.

However, if we're serious about protecting and promoting our own history for future generations, it is just as important that monuments such as Sycharth—which, as we have already heard, have been neglected for far too long—are respected and promoted in an appropriate fashion by our Government. And by buying the medieval court of Llys Rhosyr in Anglesey, the Government and Cadw have already set a precedent in terms of safeguarding our historical heritage.

And the significant surge of grass-roots support that this petition has garnered bears testament to the integral importance of this site within our nation's public memory. I therefore, like everybody else who has spoken, implore the Government and Cadw not only to consider the demands of this petition, but to work in the meantime to ensure that Sycharth develops to be an accessible site, where information about Owain Glyndŵr—and think about this also, as Rhys ab Owen said—who set the basis for the modern Wales, with his vision for a Welsh parliament, legal system, churches and universities, becomes known to visitors today and future generations.

And to close, acting Llywydd, I want to thank the submitter of the petition for bringing such an important matter before the Welsh Parliament. Thank you very much.

Thank you very much to Elfed Wyn ap Elwyn for initiating this petition, and thank you to the over 10,000 people who signed the petition. And Elfed, in his petition, is right to say that history is important to people, to society and to our nation. It's our past that created our present, and is often a map to direct us towards the future. But every nation has its own narrative. We have a story as to how we came into being; what's created us, and what has defined us is part of that narrative. Very often these are subjective things, and differ from person to person, or region to region, but there is a common thread running through all of this, and it's these threads that tie us together and make a nation. And whatever people's views here are, it's impossible to make an argument that Owain Glyndŵr wasn't central to one of those important threads. A hero to many, a villain to others, but certainly at the heart of the history and the existence of our nation here.

And in case everyone here doesn't fully appreciate the importance of Owain Glyndŵr, it's worth reminding ourselves that, back in 1999, at the turn of this century, The Sunday Times released a power list of the most notable people of the previous millennium, asking world leaders, scientists, cultural leaders and others, and from all of the greats across the world, over the previous 1,000 years, it was adjudged that Owain Glyndŵr was one of the most important, with Glyndŵr seventh on that international list, ahead of Galileo, Isaac Newton, Abraham Lincoln, and many, many others. At that time, the late Dr John Davies stated:

'Revolutionaries all over the world have always looked to Owain Glyndwr as a famous guerilla leader. His position in this poll shows that the rest of the world appreciates him a lot more than we realise.'

Indeed, the rest of the world appreciates Owain Glyndŵr far more than we ourselves appreciate Owain Glyndŵr. But, despite the military element that inspired Ireland in 1916 and Cuba in 1953, his most important legacy is the one that inspired Wales in 1997, and continues to be a source of inspiration for people here today. The Pennal letter, with a copy in the Pierhead, if anyone's interested in going to read it, demonstrates that he, Owain Glyndŵr, wanted to empower the people of Wales through education. He called for two universities to be established in Wales. He also wanted to see Wales, and the communities of Wales, controlling their own assets. In the letter, he called for the disestablishment of the church so that the church's money could remain in Welsh communities, and there is much more, of course.

So, the history of Glyndŵr, and the golden thread of Glyndŵr that runs through our history as a nation, is at the core of our identity and our very being, and because of that the Government should assist Cadw in adopting Sycharth fully and developing it as a national heritage centre.

The final point, this Saturday, 16 September, as we've heard, is Owain Glyndŵr Day, and I myself will be in Harlech, with hundreds of others, where, in 1405, Owain Glyndŵr called a national parliament. May I take this opportunity to wish you a happy Glyndŵr Day, and encourage you to support the calls of this petition? Thank you.

Well, as a lover of the real history of the Britons, I'm pleased to support this petition, but also call for this site not only to spotlight the well-known aspects in Wales of Owain Glyndŵr, but his whole life, his years serving the last Norm, the last Plantagenet king, Richard II, serving under Flintshire knight Sir Gregory Sais in Berwick Castle and fighting the Scots, serving Richard II fighting the French in France; the deal he then did with the Mortimers and Percys to divide Henry IV's kingdom in three; and, after his rebellion, the belief that he spent the last years of his life, as highlighted in an S4C documentary, living with family in Abbey Dore near Ewyas Harold in Herefordshire.

Thank you.

I now call on the Deputy Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism, Dawn Bowden.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd, and thank you for giving me the opportunity to contribute and comment on this petition.

It really was so good to hear Members speaking so passionately about our history and our heritage, and one of the reasons why the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 places a duty on us to safeguard our culture, protect the physical remains of our history, and inform and educate people about it—and I don't think there's anyone here, as we've heard today, who would dispute that the story of Owain Glyndŵr and his former home at Sycharth should be amplified. The question is how best to do this.

The petition calls on Welsh Ministers to purchase Sycharth and take it into state care. The site is in private ownership, it has sitting lifetime tenants, and it is not for sale. Furthermore, it is not currently at risk, so compulsory purchase is not an option, and that, Cefin, presents the very significant difference between Sycharth and Llys Rhosyr.

However, there are other ways to provide for its protection, care and promotion so that this unique historic site can be appreciated and enjoyed, both today and by future generations. As a scheduled monument, the site is protected through legislation, and there is close partnership working between the owners of the site, the Llangedwyn estate, the tenant farmers, and Cadw, to provide for the conservation and maintenance of Sycharth's physical remains. Through this collaboration, much has already been achieved, and I'm delighted that the Welsh Government, through Cadw, has supported extensive archeological survey, conservation, interpretation and access improvements. This has included the installation of a drainage system, earthwork repairs and a visitor parking area.

Alongside calling for Sycharth to be brought in to state ownership, the petitioner asked for the site to be made more accessible, to enable people to visit and appreciate this wonderful site. And accessibility is indeed a key to connecting us with our history and our heritage, and Cadw works hard to make the sites in its care accessible and encourages the owners to do the same. Beyond Sycharth, Cadw has undertaken works at Owain Glyndŵr's other seats at Glyndyfrdwy, including conservation, accessibility improvements and interpretation, and this is just one more example of a site where Cadw has co-operated with the landowner to manage and protect significant monuments associated with the Welsh princes.

I firmly believe that we do need to encourage access to our historic sites, but in a way that is sustainable. And we have to recognise that visitor pressure can, in itself, impact on sensitive historic monuments and local communities. There is public access to Sycharth, but it is a sad truth that there are some limitations to what can be done to encourage more visitors to the site, and that huge visitor numbers in itself might in fact be detrimental. For a start, the narrow access roads provide a challenge, as Jack Sargeant and others have said, and related to the signage. Welsh Government and Cadw have no role in the installation of directional signage on nearby roads; that is the responsibility of the local authority. But the local authority highways department has previously been reluctant to improve road signage, because of the narrow access of the roads and a reluctance to encourage too much traffic to use those roads.

If I may, if you take Cefin Campbell's point, if you've ever been to Llys Rhosyr in Anglesey, the same thing is true there. The roads are very narrow, there's not much space, but it has been promoted well. There are lots of things that you can see on the site and get the feeling of the place, and it's not true that there are thousands and thousands of people visiting there—maybe that's something else for us to discuss in terms of promotion. But is it completely intentional for the Welsh Government and Cadw not to provide details on Cadw's website because of the concern that you have about visitors, or is there another reason for that?

Yes, and I will come on to that as I go through, but as I say, there is a significant difference between Sycharth and Llys Rhosyr, not least of all the risk at which Llys Rhosyr was under, which is not the position at Sycharth. So, for that reason, I'm supportive of a more creative approach that links Sycharth to other relevant sites with greater carrying capacity.

But perhaps here we do have an opportunity to seek an approach that's a little bit more innovative. Alongside enabling physical access for visitors, I'd like to see people working together and investigating other methods of connecting with the history and the stories of the site and Owain Glyndŵr more generally. In particular, it's been suggested that creating digital resources could be one way to enable more people to learn about and appreciate the site and its significance. And, as Jack Sargeant has said, the local school are very keen to be involved in something along those lines. There's an opportunity to look at providing information and interpretation about Sycharth at nearby more readily accessible locations, such as Llansilin church. And the Glyndŵr family, of course, had a close association with the church, making it a good potential starting point for telling the story. Hearing that both the local school and the local church are keen to be involved in promoting Sycharth is very heartening, and it engages the community and opens up avenues for them to be involved in what happens next.

But it is worth pointing out that this is not the only site where we are telling the story of Owain Glyndŵr. Cadw has produced pan-Wales interpretation plans for Owain Glyndŵr and the Welsh princes of Gwynedd and Deheubarth, which form the basis of presenting the story at Cadw's own sites and other sites, and Cadw is always looking for ways to work in partnership with local groups to conserve, manage and interpret monuments in their care, such as Dinas Brân, which is the seat of the princes of Powys.

I would like to thank the Petitions Committee for its work on this petition, and the petitioners for raising awareness of this historically important site. Whilst those signing the petition, I'm in no doubt, will be disappointed that we're not able to take the site into Welsh Government ownership, I hope that they will appreciate the different ways in which we can make this and other historical sites more accessible to people. I'm always pleased to have the opportunity to discuss how we can protect and promote them to a larger audience. Thank you so much for the constructive debate.

Just one point I didn't come back to Heledd Fychan on was the plan she referred to. I don't know the answer to that, Heledd, but I will find out and I'll write to you about that. Diolch yn fawr.

I call on Jack Sargeant to reply to the debate.

Diolch yn fawr, acting Presiding Officer. Can I thank all Members? I'm not going to be able to run through all of the contributions this afternoon, Presiding Officer, but can I thank the Members for their contributions and the Minister for her response today?

Just to pick a few, Russell George, we all, I think, spoke about the importance of protecting and celebrating historical sites and celebrating our Welsh history. Russell George pointed out a particular site in his own constituency and the importance to his local constituency. I saw that when I visited Llangedwyn school there.

Carolyn Thomas showed us once again that our future generations are keen to learn about their history, and they are proud of their history. I think Amelia was the young student that Carolyn has been discussing her local project on the history of Wales with.

But as Mabon rightly reminded us, it's not just our future generations here in Wales; it's notable leaders across the world that have a huge amount of respect and time for the story of Owain Glyndŵr. I think you put him up there with the likes of Abraham Lincoln and Isaac Newton. It's an incredible story in its own right.

Rhys ab Owen talked about 30 years ago when he visited the site—it was my first time a few months ago—and the importance of accessibility and improvements to the story on the site shone through all contributions today from all Members.

On the Minister's points, I think it was particularly pleasing to hear about the innovative methods that they are seeking to use with regard to Llangedwyn school and the church in the local community. I would ask the Minister perhaps if she could update us on the progress that will be made and assisting and facilitating those conversations going forward. I think by the sheer number of contributions, the sheer number of signatures to this petition today, it shows how incredibly important that update would be, and also perhaps to have a conversation with the local authority about whether it is the correct way to implement better signage. As I say, I got lost. I'm not afraid to say that. It took me quite a while to join Joel James. So, there definitely should be some consideration there. We don't want to cause harm, of course, but certainly we want to celebrate and promote our history.

I'll end—I can see the eyes of the acting Presiding Officer—by saying to everyone, for Saturday, 'Happy Glyndŵr Day'.

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

We move on now to item 7, which is a debate on the Equality and Social Justice Committee report—'Unsustainable: debt fuelled by the rising cost of living', and I call on the Chair of the committee to move the motion, Jenny Rathbone.

Diolch yn fawr. Here we are again with the UK seeing the largest fall in living standards since the second world war. Our latest report on the rising cost of living and the unsustainable debt that it is fuelling, published in May, sets out the harsh reality for Wales. It's having a deeply damaging effect on the health and wealth of our nation. I want to thank our committee clerks, the Senedd Research service, as well as the expert witnesses who gave evidence to this follow-up inquiry, as well as the citizens who shared their lived experiences, some of whom, I'm pleased to say, are in the gallery to hear the debate that they helped shape.

Governments across the world have played catch-up in their response to the spike in energy prices triggered by Russia's invasion of Ukraine, but no other European country has experienced the energy price hikes imposed on UK households. The most important levers of economic policy and the tools for addressing inequality remain under the control of the UK Government, and it was the UK Government's decision to give every household a £400 handout rather than protect those who most need support.

We have seen a 70 per cent increase in energy debts in three years, and the UK Government's decision to be a bystander while energy companies force families onto prepayment meters, doing nothing beyond an unenforceable informal agreement, is unlikely to deter gas and electricity suppliers from pushing thousands more people onto more expensive prepayment meters this coming winter. And that's on top of the standing charges that Wales and Merseyside are having to pay—£380 a year for people on prepayment meters before they even turn on a single light.

So, there's the rise in energy, and the cost of food has also followed, partly fuelled by energy prices, but also the disruption to food supplies caused by the climate emergency. Nineteen per cent inflation in food obviously impacts the poorest households far more than it does those who have spare disposable income.

Sadly, the UK Government has diluted society's obligation to contribute towards the welfare of all our children by deliberately allowing child benefit to wither on the vine, and limiting child tax benefits to the first two children only. The others simply don't exist in the mind of the benefits system. Hundreds of thousands of people do not have enough money to live on, affecting somewhere between three in 10 and four in 10 households. StepChange told us that as many as 40 per cent of their clients turning to them for advice are in full-time work, and we had similar evidence from other experts who say that many people that they are helping have never had to seek help from charities or the state before, and they are really struggling to understand why their world has fallen apart.

The support provided by the Welsh Government has been a lifeline to many, but these interventions are temporary and will taper off in the months ahead, leaving households facing permanently higher prices in the future. This winter poses a particular challenge.

In terms of the Welsh Government's response to the committee's report, I want to thank the Minister for her thorough response and for her ongoing commitment to engaging constructively with the issues raised by the Equality and Social Justice Committee, and for her efforts to get the UK Government to address the depth of the crisis through the Interministerial Standing Committee and, I'm sure, other mechanisms as well.

I would like to thank the Chair, the clerks and everyone who contributed to our inquiry. Many who contribute to this debate this afternoon would have you believe that the cost-of-living crisis was caused by the Conservative UK Government. This could not be further from the truth. The whole world is facing a cost-of-living crisis. Putin's illegal war and Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries greed have fuelled spiralling prices for everyday items, food and fuel, and it is the hard-working people of Wales who are paying the price.

Thankfully, inflation has fallen since we conducted our inquiry, but food and fuel prices remain stubbornly high. The UK Government has put billions of pounds into people's pockets in an effort to mitigate the worst of the crisis. Despite this, and as many of our witnesses highlighted, Welsh families are struggling to make ends meet and are being forced into unsustainable debt to provide essentials like food, fuel and shelter. Research from Citizens Advice Cymru shows that single-parent households are struggling the most. Two thirds of such households are having difficulties with council tax arrears and four in five are in debt because of energy bills.

The Runnymede Trust told us that people from ethnic minority communities are currently experiencing much higher levels of food insecurity, material deprivation and fuel poverty. Rising fuel and energy costs have hit hard, which is why the UK Government took the unprecedented step of introducing an energy price cap. The Welsh Government also made £90 million available for payments to eligible low-income households under the winter fuel support scheme. However, that scheme was only available last winter and there will be no such support this winter. It is also concerning that less than £65 million had been spent when applications closed, meaning that only two thirds of the allocated funds had been spent on this vital scheme.

Citizens Advice Cymru told us in their evidence that you can remove the scheme, but you won’t remove the need. One of the biggest impacts upon reducing energy bills is simply to use less energy. Which brings us on to the Welsh Government's Warm Homes programme. While everyone who gave evidence to our committee acknowledges that the previous scheme was flawed, they highlighted the urgent need for the next iteration of the programme. Our committee felt the same, which is why we made recommendation 8. Welsh Government may have accepted this recommendation, but they failed to address the issues in their response.

Families in fuel poverty can't afford to wait until spring. If the Welsh Government is not going to help with fuel bills, then they need to help with energy efficiency measures. If you can't bring down the cost, you bring down the demand. According to National Energy Action, fuel poverty remains wide and deep in Wales. They state that the winter ahead will be exceptionally tough for low-income and vulnerable households. From 1 October, average energy bills will cost £1,923 per year—still far too high, still unaffordable for low-income households and still close to double pre-crisis levels.

Our report highlights how the most vulnerable people in our communities are facing serious hardship, truly unacceptable hardship, in one of the richest nation states in the world. It also highlights the need for targeted interventions now, as well as longer term measures that will help prevent the situation where our citizens tell us, 'What else do you want from us? At what point do you just give up? We're not living, we're just existing.' That's what we were told as a committee. Can there be a more damning indictment of the failure of government at both ends of the M4, of both colours, than that?

The evidence we heard was shocking and frustrating in equal measure. I want to focus on how this report and the response to it evidences this failure of government, and what changes must be seen—changes in priority and in delivery. The Government rightly states in the very first sentence of its response to our report that people across Wales are experiencing the biggest fall in living standards since records began. What isn't acknowledged is that the people of Wales have been particularly vulnerable to recent economic shocks because of a failure to tackle the underlying and root causes of poverty. And although of course I agree with the Government that many of the levers to respond to the cost-of-living crisis do sit, Altaf Hussain, with the UK Government, our 14 recommendations are ones that specifically ask the Welsh Government to improve, accelerate and, in some cases, change the nature of its response to tackling poverty. Considering the fact that Labour has been in power throughout the whole lifetime of devolved government in Wales—such a unique position in the modern history of democratic politics—it's so frustrating that such little progress has been made to ensure better strategic direction and informed and effective policy.

In its response to recommendation 2, for example, that the Government develop a long-term action plan on

'how it will prioritise a shift towards preventative measures aimed at tackling the root causes of poverty',

we're told that officials have been asked to consider options for how this could be developed and that the Government has a draft child poverty strategy. Where have you been?

The draft child poverty strategy was only published this June. It's eight years since the last strategy was published, and, of course, we've had the shameful situation over the summer when even as you are consulting on that same draft strategy, free school meals over the holidays were stopped with only a few weeks' notice right before the end of term. If that's not evidence of a lack of strategic approach, I don't know what is.

It also completely undermines the credibility of the claims throughout the Government's response to our report that you're listening to people who are experiencing poverty and those who are experts in the field of tackling poverty. Members will be familiar with my campaigning for a Welsh benefits system, and, indeed, the Senedd supported my call for a Bill to ensure every pound of invaluable Welsh support is delivered as easily and quickly as possible and in a consistent way throughout Wales. I was glad, therefore, to see the Government accept recommendation 5 that Government should

The Member must come to an end now, please.

Our report is entitled 'Unsustainable'. The situation in which thousands of citizens find themselves is unsustainable, because, Minister, the union is unsustainable.

I welcome this debate on the report by the Equality and Social Justice Committee, titled 'Unsustainable: debt fuelled by the rising cost of living', today. I want to thank everyone who submitted evidence, clerks and colleagues for their contributions to the vital recommendations. It is clear from these requests that 12 months on from the UK Government's disastrous 2022 mini budget, many people are still struggling, and I am going to push back on what I consider to be more information from the opposition benches today. This is actually the second time I'm having to do this today, just myself, because there is no getting away from the fact that that mini budget made everything a lot worse. And I’m going to back this up: it was stated that rarely has a budget caused such political and economic damage; not even George Osborne’s omnishambles budget, when he was forced in 2012 to back down from the pasty tax, comes close. And somebody else said

‘Britain is engaged in by far the worst unforced economic policy error of my lifetime.’

I do understand and accept that the UK Government are trying to fix this, but you also cannot take away from the fact that that budget made everything worse, and it is relevant to this report that we have done today. [Interruption.] Of course, yes.

I was just going to mention, what I think Altaf mentioned there was aspects around the Russia-Ukraine war and some of the activities of Vladimir Putin being a contributing factor to some of these economic problems. Would you accept that, and not place it solely at the UK Government’s fault and the mini budget that you just mentioned?

Absolutely, and that’s what I said. I acknowledged that these were issues that were happening across the world, across everywhere, but you also cannot dismiss that that 2022 mini budget exacerbated everything. I mean, as you can see here, no other country had their Bank of England intervene with a promise to buy up to £65 billion of Government bonds to save funds responsible for managing money on behalf of UK pensioners from collapse. That didn’t happen in any other country, that happened as a result of the UK Government's then Prime Minister—decisions that they made that made everything worse. And this report today is about debt, and a lot of that debt at the moment, and getting back to what I want to say today—. According to the Bevan Foundation’s ‘A snapshot of poverty’ in the summer, just now, 2023 summer in Wales report, nearly half of parents of children under the age of 18 have had to borrow money between April and July, and I am sure that every single one of us in this Chamber share my view that this cannot continue.

That’s why I am pleased, Minister, to see that all recommendations of this report have been accepted, starting with recommendation 1, which states that the Welsh Government should work with counterparts in the UK Government to closely monitor the impact of rising prices, as you said, which is happening for many reasons, which doubtlessly will disproportionately impact vulnerable people. This was selected as the first recommendation of our report due to its importance, and due to the fact that currently, the Welsh Government does not have all relevant powers relating to this area. We cannot do this alone; we all must agree that our UK Government and Welsh Government have to work together, because according to Which?, 2.4 million UK households have either missed or defaulted on essential payments, including for housing loans or credit cards, from June to July this year, returning to the highest levels seen since last winter. And we have also seen mortgage payments continue to get worse and worse, with them set to be £15.8 billion higher in 2026. This is not getting any better anytime soon. And that is—again, I will come back and say this—due to the decisions of Liz Truss and her disastrous mini budget. And we know the cost-of-living crisis has affected everyone, but it will affect the worst-off the most. Again, according to the Bevan Foundation, nearly half of people on universal credit or legacy benefits have skipped or cut down on the size of meals or had to go without heating. What is the common theme here? That again is the Department of Work and Pensions in Whitehall who ignored what we said in the Senedd here not to reduce the amount of people on universal credit.

And then, what are we doing in Wales? We have set up the discretionary assistance fund. I know that this has been a tremendous help to many of my constituents, and I am pleased to see that the Welsh Government has accepted recommendation 4 and it’s become a lifeline for people in Wales, along with the Trussell Trust and Citizens Advice Cymru, which both contributed to this report and recommendation.

I call on the Minister for Social Justice, Jane Hutt.

Diolch yn fawr, acting Presiding Officer, and thank you for the opportunity to respond to this important debate on the Equality and Social Justice Committee's report, 'Unsustainable: debt fuelled by the rising cost of living', and I welcome the report and its recommendations. I thank the Chair and the members of the committee for their significant contribution, hard work and their contributions this afternoon, but I particularly welcome the way the committee has involved people with lived experience to help shape the response and provide that evidence from the front line, if you like, of people's lives and experiences here in Wales. For me, that's very powerful in terms of responding as your Minister for Social Justice.

Citizens Advice Cymru has been mentioned. Their report shows that the numbers approaching them for debt advice are now above pre-pandemic levels, with 3,000 people seeking debt advice during May this year alone. And of course, as has been said, the accumulation of debt will perpetuate the impact of the cost-of-living crisis for those households affected. We are working closely with Citizens Advice Cymru and, of course, recalling responses to earlier questions this afternoon, Citizens Advice Cymru is funded with its partners through our Welsh Government £11 million single advice fund. And they're monitoring levels of demand and advising us on measures that help reach people in need to cope through the crisis.

We're looking always at how we can help advice services better cope with the increase in demand, but, clearly, getting your entitlements is crucial to this. Income maximisation is the most powerful tool to tackle poverty. And so this is the vital support we're providing to help people find out about the financial support they're entitled to. And it is important to put on the record that, by March 2023, our single advice fund services, which were introduced back in January 2020, had helped more than 200,000 people deal with over 920,000 social welfare problems. And those helped were supported to claim additional income of £116.6 million and had debts totalling £30.7 million written off. That evidence is important, and I know it came to the committee, that we can increase that entitlement, that income maximisation, get those debts written off by access to the benefits people are entitled to.

It is important that we target our support, and this was raised, of course, in terms of the Chair's introduction. We provide targeted support worth more than £3.3 billion to help mitigate the impact of the crisis, and we're targeting those households in the bottom half of income distribution, and evidence shows us that we are reaching them. But many of the issues that we did support last year, as has been said, with cost-of-living pressures, were only possible because of that significant funding that was able to be allocated through last year's budget. But the inflation shock since last October, the fallout from the UK Government's spring budget, the points that have been made this afternoon, on top of 13 years of austerity means that our Welsh Government settlement this financial year is up to £900 million lower in real terms than expected at the time of the 2021 spending review. So, there is less funding available to do all of the things that we want to do, especially as inflation remains so high. And indeed, in response to the recommendations, yes we do want to work with the UK Government. We work on that inter-ministerial group. It was important that we had that recommendation in, because that's what we've been calling for as well, and we are obviously calling on the UK Government to restore that funding and enable us to meet those needs that we jointly have responsibility for.

Thank you very much for the opportunity to respond to the committee's recommendations.

And thank you so much for giving me the tools, the evidence, that I need to take the action that the people of Wales require. Diolch.

I call on Jenny Rathbone to reply to the debate.

Thank you very much for all your contributions. As you can see, we have lively debates in our committee about the causes of the situation we find ourselves in, and that's a strength. But, at the end of the day, politics has to be the art of the possible in terms of how we can maximise the impact that we can have on our most vulnerable citizens with the limited resources that we currently have. That means we have to be eliminating waste, we have to be stopping doing things that aren't actually working, and I'm sure all committee members would agree on that.

I'm very pleased that Altaf Hussain mentioned the difficulties that people living in private sector housing are struggling with, because the benefits system—. If they're relying on any form of benefits at all, they're having to use the money they should be spending on food, clothing and other essential needs on subsidising the inadequate housing allowance they get from the UK Government, and that is a considerable worry. These are people who really are between a rock and a hard place. I absolutely also acknowledge that the impact has been greater amongst ethnic minority communities, and you're absolutely right to highlight that evidence. We can agree that next winter is going to be exceptionally tough. We were let off the hook last winter; we had a very mild winter. We just have to pray for another mild winter, but that won't necessarily happen.

As Sioned Williams said, there are unacceptable levels of hardship in our communities. We all receive information about this when we are talking to people we represent, but we would really like you to focus on the notes from the focus group sessions undertaken as part of this work. The sense of desperation being felt by far too many people is absolutely clear and makes for really sobering reading. They also illustrate powerfully the reasons why we must continue to fight for economic and social justice now and in the years ahead.

Sarah Murphy, once again updated us with the latest Bevan report. Half of households with children under 18 are having to borrow money to make ends meet, and mortgage payments are affecting the sorts of people the Purple Shoots, Well-Fed, and other organisations spoke about. These are people who have never had to cope with adversity, and they're like rabbits in the headlights—[Interruption.] [Laughter.] Right. The Minister has taken seriously our recommendation and acknowledges that the demand for debt advice is above pre-pandemic levels, and we are lucky that we have such dedicated volunteers who are prepared to give that advice, and the Welsh Government's 'Claim what's yours' campaign is absolutely vital for ensuring that the maximum number of people get what they are entitled to. This is not a handout; this is what they are entitled to through their contributions to taxes in better times. They must be helped in the future.

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 8 today is the Welsh Conservatives debate on the Restricted Roads (20 mph Speed Limit) (Wales) Order 2022, and I call on Natasha Asghar to move the motion.

Thank you so much, Deputy Presiding Officer. It's my pleasure to move this important motion, tabled in the name of my colleague Darren Millar. In just a few days' time, this Labour Government's ludicrous blanket roll-out of 20 mph speed limits is set to come into force here in Wales. Today is really the last-chance saloon. Consider today's Welsh Conservative debate a chance for all politicians to stand up for their constituents and send a message to the Deputy Minister for Climate Change that we do not want a blanket 20 mph speed limit here in Wales. I have absolutely no doubt the number of people up in arms will swell further once Labour's money-making exercise gets into full swing. It's clear the vast majority are against this costly blanket move, yet the Deputy Minister continues to bury his head in the sand, ignore the legitimate concerns and push forward with these plans. What will it take for this Government to admit it's made a huge mistake with this blanket roll-out and drop the scheme for good? There is still time for the Government to abandon these plans and instead focus on targeted measures, just like the Welsh Conservatives have been saying from day one. Of course, it's not just the number of people against the scheme that has grown over the last few weeks and months, the cost of this has as well. Originally, we were told some £33 million was being spent on implementing the scheme, yet the figure has skyrocketed, and then we discover more than—[Interruption.] The figure has skyrocketed, and then we discover more than £800,000 has been earmarked for marketing the blanket roll-out.

Deputy Presiding Officer, as someone who has worked in PR before, this is perhaps the most pathetic and patronising leaflet that the Welsh Government has ever sent out to members of the Welsh public. And let's not forget that the move will deliver a £9 billion blow to our Welsh economy. These are not my figures; these are your figures. For a Government that was only weeks ago pleading poverty, these really are eye-watering sums of cash that you're splashing out on this ridiculous scheme.

Earlier in the summer, the First Minister ordered his ministerial team to go away and find cuts in their departments in a bid to save money, and shortly after that we heard Labour's health Minister threaten deeper cuts to the Welsh NHS. Here are some words of advice of mine with love to the First Minister and his frontbenchers, including you, the Deputy Minister, believe it or not: if this allegedly cash-strapped Government wants to free up some cash, scrapping the 20 mph scheme and other vanity projects would be a very good place for you all to get started.

Residents, motorists and the Welsh Conservatives aren't the only ones with legitimate concerns and opposition to this scheme. Over the summer, I spoke to a retained firefighter who's genuinely, seriously worried about the impact that this 20 mph speed limit will have on him being able to get to the fire station in time when he gets a 999 call. This will undoubtedly lead to longer response times for emergency services—and these are not my words, they're his—[Interruption.] I will not be taking any sort of interventions. These admissions prove that this hare-brained scheme is not about safety, when lives are being put at risk as a result of this policy.

Plaid Cymru councillors in Wrexham, believe it or not, have seemingly come round to the Welsh Conservative way of thinking, and have called for a rethink on the 20 mph scheme. Councillor Carrie Harper said, and I quote,

'It's another example of a top-down approach by this Welsh Government that doesn't take into account local knowledge or opinions.'

I quote again from Carrie Harper. She says:

'The blanket introduction will cause problems and I have no doubt will need to be reviewed and undone.'

The leader of Pembrokeshire council has also called for the brakes to be put on this costly scheme, alongside Senedd expansion. There's clearly a theme here. More and more people are waking up to the fact that this blanket 20 mph scheme is a bad idea, just to put it mildly.

During the summer, we've seen motorists tie red ribbons to their cars in protest, and people defacing 20 mph road signs—similar to the scenes that we've seen in London with Sadiq Khan's ultra low emission zone expansion. Whilst I'm not condoning in any way, shape or form the defacements, this clearly shows the intense level of dissatisfaction and anger towards this policy.

One minute. [Inaudible.]—check on the point of order validity, okay?

It's not a relevant point of order.

I will take the point of order, as you have named a Member.

Indeed. Dirprwy Lywydd, I'm struggling to see how this is a debate when the Member's refusing to take interventions. She has now named me in the debate, but still refuses to take an intervention. Could I just check—? [Interruption.] Could I just ask you to—[Interruption.] Could I—putting away the continuing barracking—could I just ask you to reflect this afternoon on where this leaves us as backbenchers, when we're named on the floor of the Senedd Chamber, but the individual naming us refuses to actually entertain the concept of a debate?

I will say this: it is an individual Member's choice whether they wish to accept interventions or not. It is their decision, and that is their right. Therefore, if they decide not to take interventions, that is their decision.

Thank you so much.

As you point out, though, when Members are named, I would hope the Member may wish to speak themselves in the debate and put their name forward.

Yes. Thank you so much, Deputy Presiding Officer. I really appreciate it.

I'd like to know why on earth I have never been referred to. After all, I am the shadow Minister for transport, and you know full well that not a single Member on these Conservative benches have ever voted for a blanket 20 mph speed limit since the sixth Senedd term. FYI, when the Senedd debated this backward policy earlier in the year, the Welsh Conservatives, including myself, my leader, Andrew R.T. Davies, and Janet Finch-Saunders as well, voted unequivocally against it as well, alongside me and these benches. As politicians, it's our job to represent our constituencies and be the voice of our residents. Residents have had their say on this proposal and the verdict is resounding: they do not want this costly, ill-thought-out, disastrous blanket 20 mph speed limit project; they want to see a targeted approach, with the speed limit reduced outside schools, playgrounds, busy places instead. And I really hope that Members across the floor have had a chance to reflect on this 20 mph scheme over the summer, as you've all probably been out and about in your constituencies, talking to constituents across your regions and areas. And I really hope to see you all represent your constituents and their legitimate views by voting with the Conservative motion going forward today. The Welsh Government really needs to scrap this anti-driver mentality and instead ensure that Wales has an adequate road network for the future, not introduce your own version of ULEZ, going forward.

I have selected the amendment to the motion. I call on Delyth Jewell to move amendment 1, tabled in the name of Heledd Fychan.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I think we could all do with slowing down. I fear all nuance has been lost in this debate. I think that's a cause for real shame. I move the Plaid Cymru amendment.

Air pollution kills. That's a point that has been made by Members of all parties at various points when calling for a clean air Bill. There does seem to be a dissonance between what we've heard on those many occasions and the un-nuanced and, I fear, deliberately provocative points that are being made not only this evening, but in recent days and weeks. There are problems with how the new 20 mph limits are being rolled out. I agree with that. There are many people in Wales who are angry, yet more who don't understand the reasons for introducing those limits. Our amendment calls for continuous reviews of the implementation of the policy and to empower local authorities to be able to make further exemptions. I hope very much that it passes. But lowering speed limits in those areas where vehicles and people interact the most saves lives, not just through reducing emissions, but also because fewer people will be killed by cars. Lowering speed limits near high streets results in more people feeling able to walk or cycle to shops. And lowering those limits near where people live reduces noise, pollution, stress and depression.

The motion that the Tories have put forward to throw the proverbial baby out with the bath water ignores those nuances, those vital nuances, the things that make life worth living, the things that actually keep us alive. But we do need to look at the implementation of the policy with some urgency. I wouldn't dispute that. In areas where there's been no public consultation or not enough, this is always going to be more important, and being truthful with the public is important. This is not a blanket ban. There are exemptions to the 20 mph changes, arguably not enough. I think communities should be supported in seeking further changes where these limits don't seem right. We'll all know of examples in our communities where that's the case. There's perhaps not been enough communication between councils and Government on the roll-out of the policy—perhaps that could be strengthened—and we really would welcome seeing this policy's implementation being reviewed to ensure the public is engaging with it. Again, I very much hope our amendment will be supported.

But I’m confident that the majority of people would be in favour of making our roads safer. People will be in favour of saving lives, not only by reducing accidents, but also, as I’ve said, by improving the quality of the air that we breathe. We need to listen to people’s concerns. That’s what’s important. There are valid and understandable concerns about the quality of public transport, which will make things difficult for people who commute and will be affected most by these changes. I understand those concerns. We need to listen and to improve the situation. And it’s not too late to change certain things. This party supported the policy on the understanding that those roads that should remain at 30 mph would not change to 20 mph, but what we’re seeing, unfortunately, is many local councils introducing these new speed limits in inappropriate places. We have to have this nuance that responds to local need, and a nuance that allows local authorities to listen to the concerns of local people and to respond to them.

As I said, I regret the tone of the debate—and I don’t mean just this evening’s debate, but the way this public debate has been conducted—but there is an opportunity here for the Government to show that they are hearing people’s concerns, that they understand them, that they want to take people along with them. We must ensure that local authorities don’t just decide to take the easy, quick, possibly unpopular and inappropriate option in making everywhere 20 mph, never mind local circumstances. So, I’d like to hear more about what the Government is doing to that end.

It's compromise that’s at the heart of so many political successes. It’s listening, hearing and changing. There is an opportunity to ensure that people are heard, but it's not by shouting or through soundbites, and not through cynical campaigning that we achieve that, but sometimes by being quiet and listening and acting.

I very much welcome the imminent introduction of the default 20 mph speed limit in Wales, where the interaction of vehicles and people require it, and the ability of local authorities to keep some 30 mph roads at that limit, where local circumstances support that. My constituency of Newport East has one of the pilot schemes, and Monmouthshire County Council showed that experience of implementation and community feedback can be acted on. So, in accordance with that experience during the pilot scheme, where there was a lot of opposition to a particular stretch of road being included in Caldicot, Monmouthshire County Council removed that section of road and it was returned to 30 mph, showing how the scheme can operate.

Dirprwy Lywydd, in my experience, people readily understand that a car hitting a child or an elderly person, or a person of any age, at 30 mph is much more likely to cause death or serious injury than a car doing 20 mph. And people readily understand that it takes longer to stop at 30 mph. Indeed, at the distance a car travelling at 20 mph can stop, a car doing 30 mph would still be travelling at 24 mph, and I think that's a clear illustration of the differing impacts of speed on people, and, indeed, other vehicles.

People actually want 20 mph, but, of course, they want it on appropriate roads, and that is what Welsh Government guidance and local authorities have to ensure. I described the way that that pilot scheme in the Monmouthshire County Council area in my constituency operated, Dirprwy Lywydd, and I'm sure that the implementation of the full scheme across Wales will be monitored and will be flexible enough so that adjustments can be made in the light of experience.

But I must say, Dirprwy Lywydd, that sadly, in recent times particularly, this debate has been characterised by an awful distortion and a great deal of misleading by the Welsh Conservatives. I regret that very much, because this is a policy that will save life and limb. It’s about road safety. Also, of course, there are environmental and general quality-of-life benefits, and it will make our communities safer and better places to live, walk and cycle. We know it’s not a blanket scheme, and the Conservatives can say it is as many times as they like, but that will not make it true. It is a default scheme, and there will be exceptions where roads currently 30 mph remain at 30 mph. Nor has it been sprung on people, as the Welsh Tories, or at least some of them, are suggesting.

I must say, Dirprwy Lywydd, that I very much regret the Tory attempts to personalise this debate, seeming to try and portray the policy as the individual initiative of the Minister for transport. I mean, it’s just complete nonsense, isn’t it? A default 20 mph policy has been worked up over a number of years, and of course already introduced in other countries and local authorities, and being worked up by many more. It was, of course, in the Welsh Labour manifesto for the last Senedd election, and we are keeping our promise to the people. It is in the programme for government and, Dirprwy Lywydd, it will help make Wales a safer, greener and better place.

This week we saw an ITV Wales poll that showed that 66 per cent of people in Wales—two thirds—opposed Labour’s barmy blanket 20 mph scheme. But with his usual flippant attitude, the Deputy Minister dismissed the poll as an outlier, just as he always does. He dismisses those that don’t agree with him. But I think deep down even he knows that the Welsh Labour Government have lost the battle of public opinion on this issue. And you can see it in the sheer panic of the comms strategy. When the Deputy Minister mentioned the launch of the scheme there was little mention about the mailout for every home in Wales, using taxpayers’ money to explain the changes. He didn’t mention that every time you’d log in to social media you’d be met with a Welsh Government paid-for advert promoting the scheme. And he didn’t mention the £800,000 earmarked to explain the changes, either. Because they’re all the product of a mad panic, knowing how unpopular this change is without being brave enough to admit that they’ve got it wrong.

We all heard Ken Skates this week saying that there hasn’t been enough citizen involvement in the change. I commend Ken for saying that, and he’s right. Because it’s the product of a Government and a Deputy Minister that only seems to want to listen to people that agree with him. That’s how we ended up here today: an extreme policy from a Minister that only wants to listen to the extreme views of those that agree with him. And speaking of people who like to agree with the Labour Party, what have Plaid Cymru got to say on this issue? Well, as usual, not an awful lot. Plaid’s new political direction is clear: they haven’t yet found a fence that they don’t want to sit on. Taking a leaf out of the Lib Dems’ book, they’re keeping their heads down hoping no-one will ask them about it. They’re fully aware of how unpopular this issue has become, but as usual, Labour’s reliable little shadows will line up alongside them today to support a policy the people of Wales overwhelmingly oppose. The so-called Party of Wales value their one foot under the big boys' table of government over standing up for the people of Wales.

We on these benches can be proud that it was a UK Conservative Government that revolutionised the Welsh economy and our personal freedoms by scrapping the Severn bridge tolls. Meanwhile we have a Welsh Labour Government considering in the future charging people to use roads altogether. In fact, whether it’s cancelling the M4 relief road project, a ban on new roads being built, charges to use existing roads, extensions to the restrictions in speed, as we heard from Natasha, or today’s blanket 20 mph scheme, there’s no doubt that the Welsh Labour Government is waging war on motorists. And people experiencing Labour’s war on motorists—[Interruption.] Dim diolch.

Can we have Members seated and no cross-Chamber conversations happening, please? It has happened more than once already this afternoon.

People experiencing Labour's war on motorists every day will be wondering exactly what Labour's problem with drivers is. Well, the problem is clear: it's socialism. It's because socialism just doesn't get the feeling of personal freedom you get from owning your own car. Socialism doesn't understand the personal sense of achievement you get after working hard for months and months to pass your test and get those keys in your hand for the first time. Socialism doesn't have a place for those who want to work hard, get on in life—

Would the Member take an intervention?

Oh, absolutely.

The policy you're decrying as socialist is a policy being taken forward by Conservative-run Cornwall Council. You're talking nonsense.

Well, I look forward to the Deputy Minister's response, if he thinks I'm talking nonsense. Socialism doesn't have a place for those who want to work hard and get on in life, spending what little money they have to buy a new car to reward themselves for all their hard work. And socialism just doesn't compute with the idea of the so-called white van man, who works for years to learn a trade, starts their own business to put food on the table for their family or earn a bit more in the good times to see them through the bad times.

Because these aren't experiences for everyone, they end up wanting them to be experiences for no-one. They'd rather we all use public transport, which is shoddy in Wales under this Government, and this 20 mph scheme is only set to cut back further. But, they're incredibly relaxed about that, because they'd rather have a shoddy experience for everyone because that's what socialism is, or perhaps they'd rather we didn't travel at all, because at least that's the same for everyone.

That's what's wrong with today's scheme and that's what's wrong with socialism: it kills off aspiration—the very idea that you can work hard to make a better life for you and your family. It tells you that you're greedy for wanting to put food on the table or petrol in your car. Socialism puts up barriers for you to want to get on in life. That's why I'm opposing Labour's war on motorists, because it's about something far more profound. It's in opposition to the idea that the Government always knows best and that people just can't be trusted to get on with their lives—the idea of aspiration. It's a war on those who work hard every day to provide for themselves, their families and communities, and that's why I'm backing this motion today, and if you feel the same way, I hope you do as well.

I'm very eager to contribute to this debate. As a starting point, I will say that I am a strong believer in pragmatism. I am a strong believer in trying to do what's right, but to do that in a way that is practical and reasonable. The immaturity of the Conservatives in engaging in this debate is shocking—it doesn't surprise me, but it is shocking. Of course, the Conservatives have chosen to be entirely unreasonable. They have no objective but to play politics with this.

Like me, many of their Members here in the Senedd have voiced their support for reducing speed limits. We know of the picture of the leader of the Conservative Party supporting the 20's Plenty for Us campaign because he thought that that suited at that particular time; he was more than happy to see that photograph taken. Now they're calling for the scrapping of this change because he's decided that that is politically expedient today, although he knows that the Welsh Government won't scrap this change. It would be far more—

Would the Member take an intervention?

Of course—I was expecting it.

I understand that you have accused me of hypocrisy—forgive me for not having the translation system on.

I regularly do, yes.

I wouldn't have dared accuse you of hypocrisy, but if I look at the record, I think it stands for itself that there is hypocrisy there. There is nothing wrong with the position of standing up for your own communities that have been overdeveloped to say that 20 mph is plenty in those particular communities, as I fought for in 2018. But, to have the blanket ban in proposals being put on the table at the moment is not the situation that will take Wales forward and will not reduce casualties as the Government wishes, as my lead spokesperson on transport highlighted that the Spanish figures are identifying with.

Thank you for the intervention—I was only too pleased to accept it. I will explain why I think there is a far more reasonable way forward. Your use again there of the term 'blanket'—it clearly isn't a blanket change—shows that you're coming at this from an ideological and politically motivated position. Surely, far more effective would be to support the position that we as a party take and have outlined in the amendment to the Conservative motion today. There are many genuine concerns, as Delyth Jewell said, not about the principle that lowering speeds in the right places can save life and limb—I think most people agree with that—but about the extent of the changes and whether, in all instances, the changes are being brought in in the right places—indeed, in reasonable places. The Conservatives' reference, time and time again, to the 'blanket' change to the 30 mph limit—that's the phrase they think has the most political impact: 'blanket this, blanket that'. It's like their 'small boats', isn't it, it's just repeat, repeat, ad nauseam. But this isn't a blanket—[Interruption.] Yes, absolutely, Gareth Davies.

Just on the 'blanket' aspect that you're mentioning, would you accept that that would be the case in certain areas, in certain local authorities? For example, in the Vale of Clwyd, the list of exemptions is woeful, because the local councils have to seek Welsh Government approval in order to expand that list of exemptions. So, in some cases, yes, it is a blanket change.

I assume from that that you will be supporting our amendment that calls for supporting communities to seek further exemptions. I'll look forward to that and I'm grateful to you for expressing that support.

The law makes it very, very clear that there can be exemptions where the lower limit is deemed to be unreasonable. It's in the application of that, as Delyth Jewell said, that I think the problems arise. I've been driving in France recently, in towns and cities there, and the limit is actually lower than 20 mph, I think it's 18.5 mph or 30 kph. The difference is that that is in more limited and more targeted areas. It's clear to me that the process of identifying exemptions has identified fewer exemptions than I had expected, but more importantly than that, fewer than most reasonable people perhaps would have expected the length and breadth of Wales. And that's why our amendment calls for communities and local authorities to be supported and empowered to seek further exemptions if that's what they feel is necessary after practical experience.

I'll be clear: just as in my experience in France proved, I have no doubt that, in urban areas, in village centres and all those places where there's most interaction between motorised vehicles, pedestrians, children and active travel cyclists, et cetera—towns and city centres, village centres, residential streets—lowering the limit is the right thing to do, but we need to win support for that and it has to be Government's duty to understand and reflect on people's concerns about the appropriateness of 20 mph in places where there are fewer people, fewer houses—village edges, link roads and so on.

I believe that it would have been better to do this differently—to create 20 mph zones rather than changing 30 mph to 20 mph and then inviting exemptions. But that is not what the Labour Government decided to do, so let us now ensure that there is a process in place so that we get to a place where safety truly is the priority and where common sense is given appropriate attention too.

I welcome this debate today. The public want us to discuss this. It cannot be overstated just how much concern that this—and I will use the word, I'm sorry—blanket 20 mph speed limit has created across Wales. This will escalate to new levels, believe me, next week, when people start to realise that this isn't just a bad dream.

People in Monmouthshire—and I live in Monmouthshire—have been living with this for a while, and compliance, I have to say, has been poor. I also want to stress that the impact that this policy is having on everyday life—and I'm living it—is far greater than the Government would have us believe. Yes, as John said, Monmouthshire County Council took a short stretch of about 1 km out and reverted it back to 30 mph, but it took months and months and it's costed—[Interruption.]

Could I say, for the last time, hopefully, this afternoon, that Members have a right to speak and there should be no across-the-Chamber conversations going on whilst those Members are speaking? I'm sure that the leader of the opposition and the Deputy Minister want to respect that.

Thank you. That section took months to take out, it cost thousands and thousands of pounds and caused a huge amount of issues. The reality is it will be the cost that will prohibit councils from pursuing any further changes that they would want to make to bring back sense into their communities. Minister, you'll argue that this has been worked on for years. Well, if so, clearly then, this policy was going to happen despite what the views of businesses and the majority of people in Wales were going to be. Once again, it seems that their views don't seem to mean anything. The Government knows best. Their 'you do what we say' attitude sums up the way the Labour Government treats the people it claims to represent.

This policy has not been thought out. It's unsophisticated and it's blunt. No-one disagrees with 20 mph around all of those obvious areas of high footfall, residential areas, shopping centres. But the truth is the Government hasn't really looked properly at all aspects of day-to-day life. Their own reports identify the fact that their proposals would have a negative impact on the Welsh economy to the tune of £4.5 billion, perhaps as much as £9 billion over coming years. What will this do to our already lagging economic competitiveness in Wales? I know of businesses already who are having to put more vehicles on the road to compensate. They're putting more drivers in, and the cost of this will ultimately fall to the consumer.

We don't believe the Government has assessed the impact on public transport well enough. As explained by Professor Stuart Cole, the go-to man for long-term Welsh Government transport policy issues, his Nation Cymru report looked at public transport in detail and showed the issues buses and bus operators will face. There is no doubt the public will face lengthened journeys to work, to school, to hospital appointments. It is clear that many people will be disadvantaged.

The effect on our emergency services hasn't really been assessed properly, or, if it has, where is the analysis? Not only that, but Welsh Government Ministers have admitted there are no plans to assess the wider impact the policy will have. Enforcement will be difficult and compliance will be poor. I have already seen it and lived it. Unfortunately, we will see increased danger as drivers get frustrated and risks are taken. Yes, councils can look for further exemptions, but we know they will have to lower almost every road to 20 mph first and then, eventually, once money is found and traffic—[Interruption.] Once money is found and traffic orders are consulted on, they could change some stretches back to 30 mph. This will take months, creating huge extra cost and confusion.

We know this is going to cost around £33 million or more to implement at a time when public services are stretched. Councils have been implementing 20 mph zones for years in those areas where we really need them. Why couldn't the Welsh Government just have worked closely with councils, encouraging them to introduce more 20 mph zones where it felt appropriate, give them some of that resource to help them to support that, but allow local government and local people to make local decisions? Labour's command-and-control attitude has to stop. Virtually every single constituent I have spoken to over recent months thinks this is a stupid policy. They want their tax to be spent on matters that are a priority to them, like providing quality local services or dealing with our desperately struggling Welsh NHS.

Carolyn Thomas.

Sorry, did you call me then? I couldn't hear you.

I did, Carolyn, yes.

Diolch. This is, again, populist hypocrisy from the Tories to grab headline attention and deceiving the public with untruthful information, a tactic being used time and time again. Speeding and highway safety is one of the biggest issues raised with all levels of politicians, especially, I recall, county and community councillors. The policy is not a blanket ban. Councils are able to make roads back up to 30 mph based on exceptions criteria. Rolling out 20 mph as a default speed limit was voted on by the previous Senedd four years ago, by the majority of Members of all parties, including Conservatives. It was in the programme for government, and to appeal it now, as is proposed today, at such a late stage of implementation, would be very difficult for councils, the delivery body, and counter-productive.

Twenty miles per hour will make streets safer for playing, walking, and cycling, encouraging more people to walk, wheel or cycle. North Wales, the region I represent, is different to city areas such as Cardiff and Swansea. I understand, the councils in those areas have included many exceptions—one just over 70 exceptions—and I ask that Welsh Government continues to work with local authorities in north Wales to help them overcome concerns regarding liability, work with exceptions criteria—

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

Okay.

Thank you, Carolyn. Clearly, you're a Member for North Wales, so you represent my constituents also in Aberconwy. So, what is your response to those, the majority of the residents in Aberconwy, who do not agree with this? What do you say to them?

Well, I think that the campaign that the Conservatives have had with members of the public has been untruthful and misleading, and, when it's actually worked through, people will get on board and it will be fine; they'll get used to it. It's not a blanket ban as it's being perceived. I think if the campaign or if the information that gets across to people was correct, more people would be fine, and it wouldn't be so controversial.

Just going back, I know from previous experience as a council cabinet member for highways that concluding a speed limit review had to happen periodically. Councils do get continuous lobbying by the public and councillors regarding implementing new speed limits. It happens all the time, and it can take a lot of resources, consultation time, and there are often some minor changes following implementation, which I expect will happen following 17 September. I would therefore support the Plaid Cymru amendment that the Welsh Government should continuously review the impact of these new limits, working with local authorities and empowering them to make any further exemptions, and to provide local authorities with the adequate funding. Local authorities are actually the highway authority, so they do have the power; it's just working it all through with this policy. Thank you.

Well, the day's nearly upon us, isn't it, 17 September 2023, and, as I mentioned yesterday, it's my birthday on Sunday as well. So, as I mentioned yesterday, the best day of the year has now become that day that 30 mph zones end in Wales, the day when the serving Government of the day acts against the people's interests, the day when the Labour Party's war on the motorist extends its arm to Wales, where it already has in London, and the good people of this country are being told to suck it up and get on with it. And the Deputy Minister even has the guile to turn up to this Senedd Chamber every week and plough on regardless, in an arrogant attempt to save face and continue pandering to his bosses and lobby groups that keep him in check.

Well, the reality is, I'm afraid, that most normal people outside of the Cardiff Bay bubble reject this authoritarian policy from the Cardiff Labour Government and would like to see the restoration of 30 mph and a commonsense approach that most people can accept and understand. And nobody you would speak to would ever argue against having lower speeds outside schools, nurseries, care homes, hospitals et cetera, but that's the very concept of a commonsense approach in action, where people can sympathise and think, 'Yes, maybe they've got a point there.' But, sometimes, those commonsense approaches—[Interruption.]—no, I won't, sorry—can't always be legislated for, and discussed around a table of so-called experts, who try to legislate for every human eventuality that can occur in somebody's life. That's why, in previous discussions on the matter, the Welsh Conservatives have tabled amendments suggesting that local authorities should have the discretion to decide where these areas should be and to make local decisions by local people who know how their areas tick. But, oh no, as ever, the Welsh Government know best on placing a blanket, one-size-fits-all approach and thinks it knows best and every individual’s needs and wishes across the nation.

Well, I’m afraid life isn’t like that—

Will you take an intervention?

No, I won't. We've had—

The Member is not taking an intervention.

—ample opportunity to discuss this in a rounded way.

Well, I'm afraid life isn't like that and what people need to see is due diligence being practised by Government in a way that factors in local variation and differences in demographics and cultures. I know that the Minister is keen to distance himself from the blanket approach and to wash it down with notions of review periods, negotiations with local authorities and, yesterday, even spoke of commonsense approaches and stressed that this is a default mechanism that may change in the future. Now, that sounds to me like the beginning of a back-pedalling exercise, a realisation that your policy isn’t going well with the public, so we’re sugar-coating the policy to appease those opposing it. The public don’t have confidence in it and, increasingly, I don’t believe the Deputy Minister and the Government have confidence in it and are trying to jump start an engineless car.

Now, locally, in my constituency, there are many main arterial A roads at 30 mph that connect major towns, as we don’t enjoy the luxury of modern motorways, lots of dual carriageways and high-speed road links. So, the blanket 20 mph approach will be implemented on many straight, clear roads that do not have schools, hospitals or care homes, thus slowing down traffic for many people who use the road for work purposes and tourism. And with us being a tourist destination, with Rhyl and Prestatyn having a broad appeal to people from the north-west of England and midlands, we expect to see driver confusion and apathy towards the policy, as they will be asked to practise a way of driving that isn’t required at home, which, in turn, leads to a threat of consequential, adverse effects to local businesses, footfall and tourism numbers in my constituency. Towns such as Rhyl have had a tough few years and have to battle the constant negative press from national media rags, and many people in my constituency feel that this 20 mph policy will compound this is issue and make life more difficult for those wishing to get from A to B in a reasonable fashion.

I’ll just conclude my remarks this afternoon to encourage the Government to think again on this matter, listen to the 66 per cent of Welsh people opposing this policy and vote with us this afternoon in scrapping this proposal.

Dirprwy Lywydd, I hadn't intended to speak in this debate, but having been named in it, and having had an intervention refused, I'll have a go; I'll do my best. Let's face facts: the Conservatives have shamelessly u-turned on their previous support for a 20 mph default speed limit in urban and residential areas. We all remember the smiling photographs, as one after the other—

Will you take an intervention?

I will in a moment, but let me get under way first of all, because I'm going to mention you in a moment.

We all remember the smiling photographs, as, one after the other, the Conservative Members of the Senedd queued up for that photo opportunity upstairs and the '20's Plenty for Us' placards. The current leader smiling for the cameras, pledging his support. But when the going got tough, they got going in the other direction. They turned tail and ran. [Interruption.] Please, speak.

I'm grateful that you've offered me the chance to clarify. That picture was taken in my office on a specific local campaign in Sully—

Of course it was.

—which I fully support. [Interruption.] I stand full square behind it, in an area—

Let the Member make his intervention.

—that's getting 1,500 new houses, '20's Plenty for Us', with no improvement to the transport infrastructure is a sensible proposition. This blanket policy is not a sensible proposition and will cause havoc for the Welsh economy.

Dirprwy Lywydd, that was a minute-long intervention. When the going got tough, the tough got going in the other direction—they ran.

In different times, under different leadership, they may have followed the evidence and taken the right decisions to save lives and prevent injuries and save the NHS money, create more liveable, residential areas for people, not just for traffic. And let's call out sharp practice for what it is. All through the summer, and this week in questions to the Ministers and in this debate and in the Welsh Conservatives' social media ad nauseam—and I use 'ad nauseam' wisely—loyal Welsh Conservatives have trotted out the line 'blanket 20 mph speed limits'. It's a load of old tosh, it's a load of cobblers. A leading Western Mail journalist who is certainly not an uncritical friend to this Welsh Government noted the Conservatives had gone into hyperbolic overdrive on this issue and posed the question,

'is it actually true that the Welsh Government is bringing in a "blanket 20mph limit"?'

It's a very interesting read. He looks at the standard definition of what a blanket limit would mean, a universal limit. He finds, if we use any of the dictionary definitions,

'it is fair to say that if a person says there is "a blanket 20mph limit" that they are suggesting that there will be a 20mph limit on all roads in Wales—this clearly is not true.'

Not true. What's another word for 'not true', I wonder? Despite this, the journalist goes on to say that some politicians will try to impose their own interpretation of these definitions to get a little wriggle room. His conclusion is telling. [Interruption.] Let me read his conclusion in full, Russell. Some politicians will argue

'that the 20 change technically does apply to all 30mph roads but many will be exempted by the local authority.'

We've heard that this afternoon. 'This is highly disingenuous', he says, but it's

'a technicality they can hide behind.'

He goes on to say that this similar tactic was used recently over Conservative claims

'that the Welsh Government were offering any illegal immigrant £1,600 a month when in reality it applied to...a handful of children.'

Russell.

Thank you, Huw, for taking the intervention. So, there is a criterion where local authorities can opt out, there is an exemption in place—

It's not a blanket.

—I accept that. But what I would want to know, Huw, from you is this: can a local authority have exemptions for all those 30 mph speed limits in a local authority area? Because the answer is 'no', then it is a blanket policy across Wales.

So, Rhondda Cynon Taf and Bridgend have both produced their maps with a number of exemptions on those 30 mph roads. [Interruption.] Dirprwy Lywydd, I've given way twice now.

Let me go underneath all of this. There is a policy that is designed to save life and limb and millions of pounds to the taxpayer by reducing the burdens on the NHS and the economy through lost days at work. The 20 mph default with exceptions, which the Conservatives now opportunistically oppose, will save up to 100 lives in the first decade and help avoid 20,000 casualties. I ask them to think about every one of those lives saved and every one of those potentially life-changing injuries prevented. The policy they now opportunistically oppose will save an estimated £92 million in the first year alone, and it puts into perspective the mendaciously circulated lower implementation costs, which they've been trying to pass off as annual recurrent costs on this. The policy they opportunistically oppose could result in one in three Welsh adults walking more often, cycling more often because of all the safer, calmer residential and urban streets and the wider health policies. And the policy that they oppose, Dirprwy Lywydd, is supported by the majority of excellent third sector organisations, including RNIB Cymru and Guide Dogs as well.

Can I just finish this, because I took a minute and a half of interventions, Dirprwy Lywydd—

I check the time, don't worry. I don't need to be reminded. [Laughter.]

Thank you very much. Diolch yn fawr iawn. By commending those Conservatives who in the past decided to lead on this and join the cross-party and cross-society coalition of support for this evidence-based policy to improve people's lives, save lives and improve our local communities, Conservatives like those who, back in 2018, signed a statement of opinion that led to them adding their names to a debate urging a default 20 mph limit in residential areas and actually went on to say, 'We'd like to emulate up to 50 councils in England', Conservatives who in a debate in 2020 all bar one backed this proposal for a default 20 mph limit—one exception. The other ones who backed it, by the way, were the kippers, the Reform Party and Uncle Tom Cobley and all. And to Janet Finch-Saunders, I commend her for waxing lyrical about the evidence, showing the huge benefits of a default 20 mph limit, concluding in that debate, Janet:

'I've done quite a lot of homework on this, because it's a huge problem and I thank the Government for bringing this forward.'

And the then leader of the Conservative Party, a certain Mr Andrew R.T. Davies, who posed for that picture with the founder and director of the campaign '20's Plenty for Us'—oh for such figures to be leading the Conservative Party now, speaking from the front bench. Where are they? What a loss we have suffered. In their places, we have impostors, like Janet Finch-Saunders and Andrew R.T. Davies—

You have now exceeded your time, Huw.

Clearly, not the same people, but just by coincidence the same names.

Huw, you have exceeded the excess time you were given—

They are now dying in a populist ditch to halt a policy designed to stop people dying or being injured on our roads.

And I'll take the point of order from Janet Finch-Saunders if she wishes to make it. Do you wish to make a point of order?

Yes, I do think that we should have correct terminology in here, and I would ask you—[Interruption.] I have huge respect for you, even though we don't agree on things, but please refrain and withdraw the comment that I am an 'impostor'.

I'll let you answer, Huw.

Indeed, could I suggest, Dirprwy Lywydd, that the Member actually reads my very carefully phrased use of the term 'impostor'?

What I'll suggest is that we will both read the very carefully worded statement. Mike Hedges.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. As promised, I'll be under a minute. There are 157 exceptions in Swansea. It's on the council website. It includes every A road in Swansea. So, I'm not sure why this 'blanket' word has come in. Can I ask people to check the time your sat nav tells you you'll cover a journey with a 30 mph limit? You'll be amazed how often the average speed is under 15 mph. 'Buses are going to be held up'—as everybody in this room knows, buses stop every 400m or less. Getting up from 0 mph to 30 mph and down to 0 mph again in 400m would be a phenomenal piece of driving. Can I ask the Conservatives—I've got 10 seconds left—name me any road in Swansea that has not defaulted to 30 mph that you want to move back?

I call on the Deputy Minister for Climate Change, Lee Waters.

Dirprwy Lywydd, the Conservatives have been against every progressive reform in this country. They were opposed to the creation of the NHS, they opposed the creation of the minimum wage, they were against the ban on smoking in public places. They were even against votes for women. They're always on the wrong side of history, and they never learn. We will look back in years to come at the claims that have been made, just as we saw with the claims the Conservatives made about the impact of the charge for carrier bags, the introduction of free bus passes for older people, the changes to the laws on smacking children—remember those claims? And we will find that their fears are overblown and their claims of calamity just don't stack up. Speed will come down. Fewer people will be killed. Fewer people will have life-changing injuries. The burden on the police and the fire service of attending deadly collisions will ease. More people will feel safe in their communities and feel confident to walk and cycle around them. The second biggest public health harm, noise pollution, will lessen, and parents will start to feel more confident letting their children play outside. There is evidence to back every one of those expectations. And the saddest thing is that most of the Conservatives know it.

When we first debated the recommendations of the expert group I set up in the Senedd three years ago, two thirds of all elected Members supported the move to a default area-wide speed limit. That's what the motion said. That fundamental change we approved, which they're now calling a blanket ban, was supported by the then leader of the Welsh Conservatives, Paul Davies. It was supported by Janet Finch-Saunders. It was supported by Russell George. It was supported by Laura Anne Jones. The record is there: they supported a default speed limit. If they think it's a blanket now, why did they support it then? They signed up for the policy they are now disingenuously claiming is harmful. And they supported it because they knew it would improve the quality of life of people in Wales. And to their shame, they're all now lining up behind the shrill populism of the current leader, Andrew R.T. Davies, and his chief culture warrior, Darren Millar—

Would you take an intervention?

I will not. The leader of the opposition acknowledged—[Interruption.] I will not. The leader of the opposition—

Darren, he said ‘no’.

—acknowledged on BBC Radio Wales this morning that local authorities can make exceptions to the default speed limit. And, in fact, they are. His weak defence of his blatantly misleading campaign against this policy is that the Welsh Government are hellbent on imposing a blanket speed limit. The facts just don't support it. People's experiences don't support it, and, in their hearts, their troops know it's a cynical lie. Shame on him, shame on them. Cywilydd arnoch chi gyd.

I call on Sam Rowlands to reply to the debate.

[Inaudible.] In the Deputy Minister's response to the debate, you mentioned the word 'shrill', which is a very old, derogatory term towards women. So, could you change that remark for the Senedd record, please?

I will check the transcript later on. If it's applied to a collective, then we will leave it. If it's applied to an individual, I will contact the Minister. [Interruption.] Well, we will look at it. Sam.

Well, thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and thank you to everybody who's spoken in this debate this evening. Of course, my role here is to do my best to try and wrap up and conclude somehow—a summary conclusion—what has been a passionately debated proposal here this evening, an issue that the Deputy Minister rightly described yesterday as the biggest step change for a generation.

Let's remind ourselves—today's debate was opened by Natasha Asghar, who spoke passionately again about what she sees as the negative effects of this policy, which will be felt in every corner of Wales. She made a number of very important points, including questioning whether the default 20 mph speed limit is just the tip of the iceberg. I note the Deputy Minister didn't answer this point when it was raised yesterday, and the question still remains—'Is Welsh Government looking at further speed reductions, such as 40 mph and 50 mph roads in Wales?' And it would be helpful, at some point in time, to have a straight answer on this.

The next contribution was from Delyth Jewell, who highlighted the Plaid Cymru amendment and certainly acknowledged a number of the issues and concerns around the scheme, but was keen to bring Members' attention to the detail and the nuance of the scheme, as Delyth Jewell described it in particular, perhaps an opportunity to improve, as she sees it, some of the air quality. Also, the need for councils to listen and include those exceptions where they're clearly needed.

John Griffiths welcomed the Welsh Government's proposal, as you'd expect, but like Delyth Jewell, sought flexibility with the exceptions for the councils, and for those exceptions to be implemented as easily as possible.

It was good to hear from Tom Giffard on the Conservative benches, who pointed to the expectation versus reality of the Welsh Government action, and the sheer unwillingness of a Cardiff-based Labour Government to listen to people up and down Wales, instead putting the blinkers on and powering ahead—I sound a bit like Jeremy Clarkson now—powering ahead in face of what our constituents actually say they want.

Rhun ap Iorwerth, who, as a politician, expressed concern at the politics of this issue, and then proceeded, perhaps, to make the most political of contributions in the Chamber here this evening, pointing to the amendment from Plaid Cymru.

Peter Fox was keen to outline the experience of the pilot scheme in Monmouthshire, where there have been, as he described it, low levels of compliance, and was keen to point out the impact on everyday life, which has been significant for his constituents there, which I think certainly brings into question, perhaps, the ability of Welsh Government to achieve the outcomes that they expect to see as a result of this policy. Peter Fox also outlined his concern with the costs and the time associated with reverting roads back to 30 mph from the default 20 mph. We know it's not a straightforward mechanism, and, of course, it's an area that Welsh Government are keen not to talk about too much at all.

Do you realise that it's the Conservatives that run Cornwall County Council and several other county councils? Introducing a 20 mph scheme in Cornwall was a key Conservative manifesto pledge, and they introduced the 20 mph scheme in Cornwall in March, and it's being rolled out now. So, do you argue against your own party colleagues in Cornwall and elsewhere in the United Kingdom when they roll out the 20 mph schemes in those local authorities?

I'm here to represent Wales, and I'm sure you would passionately agree about that as well, Mabon, and, of course, unfortunately, you weren't here for the whole debate to hear the full context of what was discussed this evening, which is a shame.

Everything we do, of course, is a balance of risks, and describing options around speed limits without properly considering the many consequences seems to be the frustration that many of my constituents have. Perhaps the theme of the debate here this evening as well is the frustration at the knock-on consequences of this not being properly considered.

On our Conservative benches, and on this small portion of Labour bench over here as well, we continue to believe that any reduction in speed limits should be specific, they should be targeted measures outside of those places that Members have already highlighted here this evening. That to me seems like a sensible approach to dealing with speed reductions. We also heard this evening that the reduction of the default speed limit is not what the people of Wales want. We've heard a number of times people pointing to ITV Wales's poll showing that two thirds of people in Wales are against the introduction of this default speed limit down to 20 mph, and we even heard more loudly from people where this has been trialled out in recent years how against this policy they are. The Deputy Minister himself admitted to getting those trials wrong.

In essence, what I think I'm concluding here, Deputy Presiding Officer, is that what people think doesn't seem to matter to the Labour Party here in Wales. They have their say, they have their views on this matter, and they're completely being ignored. That's why we've called for this proposal here this evening, and I call on everyone in this Chamber to join the Welsh Conservatives, show some common sense, and vote against the default 20 mph.

The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There are objections. I will therefore defer voting until voting time.

And that brings us to voting time, and, unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, I will proceed directly to voting time.

So, the first vote this evening is on item 8, the Welsh Conservatives debate. I call for a vote on the motion without amendment tabled in the name of Darren Millar. If the proposal is not agreed, we will vote on the amendment tabled to the motion. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 15, no abstentions, 38 against. Therefore, the motion is not agreed.

I now call for a vote on amendment 1, tabled in the name of Heledd Fychan. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 38, no abstentions, 15 against, therefore the amendment is agreed.

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

Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 38, no abstentions, and 15 against. Therefore, the motion as amended is agreed.

That brings us to the end of voting.

We'll move now to the short debate.

Members who are leaving, please do so quietly.

I call on Janet Finch-Saunders to speak to the topic that she has chosen. Janet.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. So, the debate tonight is: bringing the world to Wales—how do we unleash the potential of Wales as a major global tourist destination? I'm pleased to give a minute of my time to Tom Giffard MS.

Now, here in Wales, we have the most amazing people running a high-quality tourism sector. Twelve per cent of the Welsh workforce are in tourism. This past summer, I have been lucky enough to witness, once again, their hard work first-hand. With our stunning Conwy valley and our beautiful coastal towns, I am honoured to be surrounded by many wonderful hotels, attractions and the tourists who visit Wales every year. However, despite what the First Minister attempted to claim yesterday, our tourism industry is facing an enormity of pressures, not least of which some have been handed down by this Welsh Labour Government and, sadly, supported by Plaid Cymru.

We know our businesses are going through COVID recovery and they're already facing inflationary food prices, higher energy costs and a shortage of trained staff. And yet, despite the First Minister's claims yesterday, where he was sort of bigging it up that tourism is sort of rising and things, international tourism is down in Wales by 33 per cent. The proposed tourism tax, the self-catering accommodation regulation threshold of 182 days, the stigma towards second home owners, all of which do nothing but deter tourists and put careers and livelihoods of Welsh business owners in financial jeopardy: it is the targeting of these businesses by the Welsh Government that is now preventing them from fully recovering from the lingering effects of the pandemic and the substantial current pressures.

In July, the Welsh Affairs Committee published the 'Wales as a global tourist destination' report. I don't think the key findings of this report are going to be too unsurprising. They found there is a lack of a coherent Welsh brand, with a poor overseas profile. Wales is not usually included in tour operator holiday packages. The failing transport infrastructure in Wales, combined with years of underfunding by the Welsh Government, continues today to have a negative impact on Welsh tourism. These findings are fact, they're true, and they're inexcusable. Isn't it a real sign of failure on the part of devolution and this Welsh Government that, despite this Parliament being in its sixth Senedd term, and its third decade, our nation does not have a clear Welsh brand?

Of course, Welsh Government are largely to blame, as we have had years of wasted marketing costs through those ineffective themed years, such as the Year of the Sea in 2018. Whilst we all love the sea—and I do in particular—Wales has so much more to offer. In north Wales, we're very lucky to have Go North Wales. Now, therein, you have a proactive, enthusiastic and hard-working organisation who work hard every day in their attempts to try to sell Wales to the world—in particular, north Wales. It would be lovely if we could actually have that across the whole of Wales. I would be pleased to learn what action you will take to work with the private sector to agree on the best way to sell Wales to the world. These people are entrepreneurs—they're good business people, and Government could learn a lot from them. In Aberconwy, we see a lack of direct public transport services from Manchester airport and Holyhead port, to Betws y Coed and Blaenau Ffestiniog; cancellation of the direct service from Liverpool to Llandudno before it even came into force; a complete lack of evening transportation, either by bus or train. I'm sure many other Members of the Senedd could recount similar stories about their own constituencies. It is simply not good enough. Wales has so much to offer.

Now, transport links should be a key priority in establishing Wales as a global tourist destination. There is a major wish amongst the private sector themselves to unleash this potential of Wales. For example, in Aberconwy, we're very lucky to have food and drink tourism and farm immersion experiences. Leading the charge on these, of course, is the most famous farmer in Wales, and that's Gareth Wyn Jones; I'm sure you all know him, or have certainly heard of him. The nation's favourite farmer offers a unique site in agri-tourism, something that Wales and the Welsh Government could be leading on. He and his family offer farm immersion tours, sheepdog demonstrations, culinary experiences using Welsh produce, and they give talks about farming, heritage, culture and the language of Wales. Their impressive immersive tours and bespoke trips to local attractions are increasingly popular with tourists from around the world, especially the USA. They are linked to many travel companies, and are looking, hopefully, to expand to cruise ship bookings from Holyhead in 2024. Gareth has proven—and his wife, Rhian—that there is an interest in agri-tourism. So, again, why are you not looking at these good models and then taking them out and sharing them across Wales?

I think it's really important, Janet, that you've tabled this debate today, and as Welsh Conservatives we can never talk enough, I think, about tourism here in Wales because of how important it is, not only to our economy, but to the communities that we represent. And I've been lucky enough in my role as the shadow Minister for tourism to visit some of those communities this summer—Pembrokeshire with Samuel Kurtz; Llandudno, of course, with Janet Finch-Saunders; Prestatyn with Gareth Davies; as well as place like Mumbles, Gower and Porthcawl in my own region. And what those businesses say to me almost unilaterally is that they offer a fantastic tourism offer here in Wales, but that it does not feel supported by the Welsh Government. We heard from Janet Finch-Saunders that the number of visitors coming to Wales had come down by a third in the past year—that is an incredibly worrying statistic for anybody interested in Welsh tourism. Wales has all the potential in the world to be a tourism powerhouse; we just need the Welsh Government to realise it too.

I now call on the Deputy Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism to respond to the debate, Dawn Bowden.

Diolch yn fawr. Sorry, I wasn't expecting that to be quite as quick. I do apologise. I may not be quite as quick as that in terms of my response.

But I am grateful, Llywydd, to the Senedd Member for Aberconwy for scheduling this debate as it provides an opportunity for me to highlight yet again the work being done to make Wales’s tourism sector sustainable and successful. However, Llywydd, what we’ve heard, as we’ve heard time and time again—it’s a bit like groundhog day, isn’t it, in this Chamber—we heard it again today, we heard it yesterday from the opposition benches, the prophets of doom, running down our tourism industry. And while I encourage scrutiny of policy decisions, and there’s been plenty of that in the debate today, we mustn’t lose sight of the positive stories that the industry has to tell, or the bright future that I firmly believe it has.

We need to ensure that the tourism industry can sit alongside and align with our ambition to ensure sustainable, balanced and thriving communities, and we have to acknowledge that tourism does not and cannot exist in isolation. It’s all intertwined and linked with wider policy areas such as transport, the environment, heritage and housing, and we want to develop tourism that does good—that is, tourism that supports our communities and cares for and protects our land, and is mutually beneficial to visitors and citizens, providing year-round sustainable jobs in all parts of our country. That is essentially our vision and ambition for the tourism industry in Wales. The value of the visitor economy is recognised as a priority by Welsh Government, and we have made that recognition and support clear in our Visit Wales tourism strategy.

In our strategy we focus on four pillars: economic growth, environmental sustainability, social and cultural enrichment, and maximising well-being and health benefits. The focus in our strategy is on the three Ss—that is, seasonality, spend and spread—and that is about encouraging the growth of off-peak tourism, encouraging visitors to stay longer and spend more, and to actively promote the quieter tourist spots. And so, from that, we get the fourth S, which is sustainability.

Wales, as we all know, is a place of adventure, of outstanding natural landscapes, of a thriving cultural scene. It has Welsh heritage and world heritage. It has varied and unusual accommodation that is also an experience in itself, mouthwatering food and drink and a calendar packed with enriching local and global events. These are the reasons residents and visitors alike love this country, and are fantastic selling points for how we support and promote tourism.

How Visit Wales supports tourism is very important, and working together and engaging with the industry and with local authorities and our communities is key. It is a truly collaborative approach. How we engage with the sector is very important. We already do this in a number of different ways, including through the visitor economy forum that I chair and through the four regional partnerships, and I’m thrilled to say that we’re going to be bringing back the regional industry roadshows next month in the south-east, in the south-west, in the mid and the north of Wales, and we’re looking forward to inviting our partners and stakeholders to those sessions. We have also announced that our national summit and awards will be returning next year.

Turning to the international perspective, Llywydd, and how we promote tourism, it's also a core plank of our international strategy, which highlights how we want Wales to be known as a world leader in sustainable adventure tourism. Investment in mountain bike centres, hiking paths and ziplines has reinvigorated our international reputation to new, younger visitors. Visitors are increasingly seeking out authentic, sustainable and unique experiences, and Wales's approach to environmental and cultural sustainability gives us a competitive advantage.

International tourists are an important part of the tourism sector and I'm not going to shy away from addressing the current statistics. The number of international tourists coming to the UK is still recovering from the pandemic, but in 2022, there were 686,000 international visitors to Wales, with a spend of around £391 million. However, it is crucial to understand that domestic visitors have always been the most important source of visitors to Wales, representing over 90 per cent of all visitors to Wales, and only yesterday, we saw the latest domestic statistics for overnight trips for Wales published, which showed an increase of 13 per cent in the volume of trips taken in Wales between 2021 and 2022. Now, updated figures show that, in 2022, there was £4.6 billion of associated expenditure on tourism trips within Wales. The volume of trips taken in Wales is clearly increasing and that is great news. Now, I know that there is the potential to increase the numbers still further. Our post-pandemic activity has been focused on supporting the sector to restore and grow international markets, and that includes working with partners on travel trade activity that enables them to showcase their products at key overseas markets.

Wales has a world-class offer beyond the honeypot areas and beyond the summer season, and we are committed to investing in marketing Wales to the world. Over the last 12 months, that has included campaigns that take advantage of the increased awareness of Wales, particularly in the US, around the Wrexham story and our award-winning FIFA World Cup activity last year. Only last week, this Cymru Wales brand, which Janet Finch-Saunders dismissed as being non-existent, was named by the World Media Group as the global travel campaign winner and grand prix winner at the World Media Group awards for the best of the best across all sectors, beating the likes of Volkswagen and Adidas. The World Media Group is a strategic alliance of leading international media organisations that connects brands with highly engaged influential audiences in the context of trusted and renowned journalism. It includes The Atlantic, BBC News, The Economist, Forbes, Fortune, Insider—shall I go on—National Geographic, Politico Europe. All these people have said that the Wales brand is the best of the best. So, don't take it out on the Welsh Government; have a look at what the rest of the world is actually saying.

I thank the Deputy Minister, and that brings today's proceedings to a close.