Plenary

The next item is questions to the Counsel General and Minister for the Constitution. The first question is from Jack Sargeant.

Thank you for the question. Not even the Post Office can identify the number of people impacted by the Horizon scandal. Across the entire United Kingdom, even beyond, some former sub-postmasters are only now realising that they may have been the victim of one of the most widespread miscarriages of justice and failures of the legal system that the United Kingdom has ever known.

I thank the Counsel General for his answer. If the Llywydd will let me place on record an update from Neil Hudgell from Hudgell Solicitors. He's the solicitor who has supported a number of sub-postmasters in overturning their criminal convictions in the High Court in London. Presiding Officer, he says that close to 450 new requests for legal support have come forward since the ITV drama. These include 52 people with convictions and potentially hundreds who are undercompensated. As the Counsel General said in his first answer, the Post Office don’t know what the extent of this miscarriage of justice really is. We know that there are Welsh residents included in the figures I’ve just quoted from Hudgell Solicitors, and we know there are likely to be a lot more individuals and groups that have yet to come forward. Can I ask the Counsel General what conversations he’s had with ministerial colleagues in the Welsh Government about the importance of supporting Welsh residents who are victims of this deep, deep miscarriage of justice?

Can I thank you for the question and also thank you for continuing to monitor and raise this particular issue? It is, in many ways, not just about the Horizon issue; it is also about how this managed to happen within our legal system.

As the First Minister reported some time back, I actually wrote to the Lord Chancellor generally on this back in September 2021. About six months later, I received a reply from the Minister for small business, Paul Scully—that was in February 2022. I know that questions have also gone, on a number of occasions, to the Deputy Minister as well, and, indeed, to others. Can I say that this is a matter that we are all aware of? And can I say also that I raised it only last week when I was in Scotland at the second meeting of the justice inter-ministerial group, where there were reports on the situation in Scotland as well as in England from Lord Bellamy, the under-secretary for justice? That is something that is going to continue.

You've raised in the past on this the issue of the duty of candour, which I think is fundamental. There is the issue of compensation, which is fundamental. I do not understand why that cannot be dealt with by the inquiry, but it is being excluded from that. There is the issue of the revocation of the convictions, and, sadly, I think I recognise that there probably has to be legislation to revoke. It is really an incredibly difficult position to be in where Government has to legislate in respect of decisions of the courts and the justice system, and it is an intrusion that we need to be very, very wary of. I think the position that most of us have taken, and most of the law officers have taken as well, is that this is such an extraordinary and exceptional situation that it has to happen. There is also the issue of the use of private prosecutions, and we've seen other issues to do with the warrants of execution, which you've raised before.

Can I say one other thing that's really important as well? We are now becoming aware of certain Welsh citizens, and indeed people from around the UK, in respect of the system before Horizon. There was a Mr Lewis from Ebbw Vale, a former auditor within the Post Office. He pled guilty to five charges, including theft and false accounting, and had a 12-month probation order. Another individual, a Mrs Roberts from Wirral, who kept the books for her sub-postmaster husband, refused to plead guilty for something she said she hadn't done when losses of £46,000 were discovered. This is the Capture system that has emerged. And I think that it's very, very important that that is also dealt with, because this is a sort of Pandora's box that seems to go back further and raises all sorts of other issues—more modern issues in respect of artificial intelligence and the use of technology.

Thank you. The devolution settlement in relation to energy is indeed complex, and the conclusions and recommendations of the independent commission’s report demand thoughtful and considered attention. So, we will be considering the report in the coming weeks.

Thank you very much for your response. May I ask you specifically to outline for us the Welsh Government's plans to implement what the commission has suggested on the devolution of energy? To be clear, the commission has called for the establishment of an expert group to provide urgent advice on how the devolution settlement can be amended and to create a better connection between Governments, to facilitate the restructuring of the energy sector. According to the commission, this is vital to prepare for innovation in terms of technology, to ensure that Wales can reach its net-zero target and to facilitate the production of local energy. I also note that the commission has recommended devolving the Crown Estate, and the commission has suggested that this advisory group on energy could provide advice on options to achieve this. So, can I ask exactly when we can expect to see the establishment of this advisory group, what the timetable is, what its remit will be, and when, specifically, we can expect to see movement on the devolution of the Crown Estate?

Thank you for the question. You do raise a very important issue with regard to energy, and, indeed, legislation that has been going through the UK Parliament in respect of energy, which impacts on Wales, and of course you will have seen the legislative consent memoranda in respect of that. It is important to recognise that we've just had the commission report; it does need very careful thought and consideration. There will be a very detailed debate in the Senedd on a date in the not-too-distant future. I know that is being planned, in order to give people time to consider carefully that.

I note also that what the commission say in respect of energy, of course, is they recognise that they've only really been able to scratch the surface of it, but they make a number of important points. They say that energy generation and distribution is an area where the binary—devolved or reserved—nature does not sit easily with the practical realities of delivery, and I think that's something that we probably all agree with across all political parties. They also say that some of the current reservations seem outdated and lacking strategic rationale, such as local heating systems and energy efficiency. And I think that is something that is probably uncontroversial. They also say the role of the regulator in relation to energy is crucial, but that, in fact, we have no formal role within that. And again, I think that is particularly important.

What they do recommend is the establishment, as you say, of a review of the inter-governmental relations that exist, and also in relation to the Crown Estate, which is totally interlinked with this. And they ask for an expert group. Well, I'm sure the issue of expert advice, assistance, and so on, in the whole energy area is something that will be very, very carefully considered, and also considered by the Minister for Climate Change in how to take this forward. I'm not in a position to give you those specific answers, but those are clearly ones that will be considered by the Minister and by the Welsh Government, and will certainly feature, I think importantly, in future discussions.

Questions now from party spokespeople. Conservative spokesperson, Darren Millar.

Diolch, Llywydd. Minister, the First Minister said in his statement yesterday to the Senedd on the report of the Independent Commission on the Constitutional Future of Wales, and I quote, that he wants to continue to:

'Work for a new and successful United Kingdom, based on a far-reaching federalism.'

He said that in his 2021 manifesto pledge. The report by the commission, of course, makes multiple references to federalism as an option for the future of Wales, and it talks openly about the challenges associated with federalism, noting that only 6 per cent of the people consulted supported that view as an option for the future. So, in light of the report, does the Welsh Government still consider that pushing for federalism within the UK is a viable option?

One of the difficulties with the terms—whether it's devolution, whether it's independence, whether it's federalism—is that it's very much open to pejorative interpretation as to what they mean. Quite often, I find that, when different terms are used, people are quite often talking about the same thing. So, we do have a difficulty in these debates with what is a common language.

I actually believe that the long-term constitutional structure is going to be best served by a form of federalist structure. You have to interpret what that might actually mean. Gordon Brown, in his report, basically sets out a number of principles. He talks about subsidiarity, that is that decision making should be taken as close to people as possible, and it is only those areas where there is common dependency that are the subject of broad cross-governmental and parliamentary structures and so on. That is a form of federalism. Subsidiarity is probably something we would all agree with, but what does it mean in terms of what that democratic structure might actually mean?

What I think is important in what the report has done is that it's set a framework for discussion in terms of what we need—which I think we do genuinely need in Wales, and, of course, in England, where devolution is becoming more of an issue—which is a discussion, really, on how that future will develop, how those relationships should develop, and also, how power should be exercised across the UK, particularly within the global environment we're in. So, I think it is a very valid basis for discussion.

In terms of setting a silver-bullet blueprint, the commission doesn't do that, but it does set, I think, an evidential base and a framework within which discussion on reforms can take place.

I'm grateful for the response. Of course, I can appreciate the attraction to federalism that many people in this Chamber have expressed, and that which has been expressed, of course, in the constitution commission's report. But it doesn't address the fact that it does appear to be a deeply unpopular suggestion and way forward for the future of the constitution of the United Kingdom.

Because we're talking about the constitution of the United Kingdom, as I said initially at the outset of this constitution commission, it did seem rather strange that Wales was going it alone in order to try to develop a conversation, within Wales, and across the UK, about the future of the UK. Because, of course, we had a unilateral report commissioned by the Welsh Government, rather than something commissioned by all the nations and constituent parts of the United Kingdom, which I feel would have been a much better and more appropriate way forward, particularly given that one of the criticisms in the report is the lack of joint working between the various Governments across the United Kingdom.

So, can I ask you this? What conversations does the Welsh Government now intend to take forward with other devolved Governments in the UK, and with the UK Government, regardless of which colour of rosette the Prime Minister might wear at the next general election? Because we're never going to achieve any progress on these matters unless there is a UK-wide conversation that now takes place. So, how are you trying to bring people to the table to have that conversation?

Can I thank you? I think you raise some very important issues, and I think you raise them in a very constructive way. It is an important part of this sort of debate to ask how you actually make change. There was, I think, a very well-known economist and philosopher who said that we know what we might want to change, but the question is how do you actually make change happen.

One of the ways forward, which I think is something that does need to happen—it had been on the agenda, it's been discussed, it's been around—is that there does need to be a UK-wide debate, a UK-wide convention. Some time back, when I was on the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, we pushed very hard and went back with evidence—through the Llywydd's Committee, and through the inter-parliamentary forum that existed—that there needs to be a UK convention. And I say that because, for example, when the 2014 Scottish independence referendum took place, one of the great difficulties was the question of what is the purpose of the UK.

It has come together historically through a whole series of reasons and historic events, but, as we are now, and as we are an entity that is outside of the European Union, the questions are, 'Well what is our purpose? What should be the structure? What should be the principles on which we are based?' And I think that is a very valid discussion that does need to happen, and I think it's a discussion that may well be recognised across political parties. When that 2014 independence referendum took place, I think there was a genuine struggle to actually say, 'Well, what is the purpose? What should the relationships be? What is it that people are going to buy into? What are the principles of equality?' We know there clearly many of them. One of them is—. The Barnett formula, for all its faults, is a redistributive mechanism. It is about redistribution of wealth and, to a certain degree, equality around the UK, the welfare state and aspects of that and tax raising, to that extent, are as well. So, those are matters that we get raised with the Interministerial Standing Committee through the inter-governmental forums that exist.

At the moment, we are in an environment where there is very little reluctance for there to be any movement, but I'm convinced that if there is a change of government in the near future, on the basis of Gordon Brown's report, that debate will increase. On the issue of England, because we talk about Wales and Scotland, and, of course, important events taking place in Northern Ireland now—very important events—it is equally important that the country that consists of 85 per cent of the population of the UK has largely been slightly extraneous from that debate. But, of course, you've seen it growing in places like Manchester, Liverpool, in terms of London, and it is very valid—how is power best exercised, how can it bring us as close as possible to people, what should be the governmental structures and inter-governmental structures, and, perhaps, coming to the very first point I made, how can we develop, actually, a common language that is not pejorative, that doesn't make all sorts of presumptions, but is based on things that we probably all agree on, and that is how we make our democracy work better and how we bring decision making closer to people.

Well, clearly, there are discussions that need to take place as soon as possible, particularly in relation to some of the immediate recommendations in the report, especially, for example, on issues of financial flexibility for the Welsh Government, which is something that we have expressed our support for on all sides of this Chamber in the past.

Can I just turn to the constitutional commission's budget? So, obviously, undertaking this exercise has cost the taxpayer about £1.5 million to the time of the report being published. That's not an insignificant sum when you consider the opportunity cost of investing that money, perhaps, in our public services at this particular time, given the struggles that many of them are facing. But I noticed, in the budget for the forthcoming financial year, there's another £1 million that has been allocated to the constitutional commission even though it's finished its work. I just wonder why the Welsh Government is allocating a further £1 million to the commission, given that its work has finished and given that that will be from April next year to April 2025. Why is that sum in your budget?

Well, can I say that the budget for the commission, having given the commission independence and a fairly broad remit in terms of how it was to go about its work and engagement, had to be one that had provision to enable that to actually happen? Now we actually have the report, and we have the end scale of that particular budget, I think there is a very valid debate now in terms of—. What is really important in this debate is that the work that has taken place is not something that comes to an end, 'Here's the report', and so on; it is actually a living document that works in terms of a debate, and, of course, an important part of it—. One of the things that Gordon Brown's report said was that he was effectively deferring to the fact that we had this commission, but, then, when it had made its recommendation, there was an important and very constructive dialogue.

So, there may well be, and I would hope there is, certainly, in my view, a continuing engagement with elements of the commission, not in terms of the scale at which it is, but in terms of what the role will be in the development of that debate, how that debate might develop with the post-general-election government and so on. Whether all that £1 million is needed or not would be a matter first to consider as to what we think might be the way of carrying forward those recommendations and some of that work and that ongoing engagement. And I think this is really the start of a process. It provides a basis for that engagement and that particular debate. But it is past that particular milestone, so there will need to be a review in terms of what the remainder of that budget is, what of it is needed and what the precise terms and functions might be of how that is carried forward. I'm not in a position to say now, but I think that is some very important consideration that will need to take place, and I think the question you raised is a very valid one. It'll be very valid when, I think, within the weeks ahead, we have the full debate in this Chamber on that.

The Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Adam Price.

Thank you, Llywydd. Has the Counsel General seen the results of the survey of MSs and MPs by ITV Wales, which shows that, amongst those who responded, 76 per cent said they had felt unsafe as a result of the abuse that they have received, and 31 per cent have considered leaving public life altogether as a result. I was, this morning, at an event on abuse in politics, hosted by the Minister for Finance and Local Government, and what was clear, based on the discussion there, was that that picture is also reflected within local government in Wales. Two of the ideas that were proposed in order to respond to this terrible situation were that we gave someone the job centrally of monitoring the level of abuse that is being experienced across Wales, so we can benchmark it on an annual basis, and that we also have a central point of advice and support for elected representatives at all levels, in terms of how they can respond to abuse, given the current legal framework.

I haven't seen the survey, but it's not something, in your talking about it, that causes me any surprise, because I doubt whether there's a single Member in here, and across all parties, who has not experienced severe abuse. I've had quite a bit of it recently—individuals telling me that, on the Senedd reform, I belong in a padded cell. That is probably the milder and more moderate form of some of the abuse that has taken place and the language that is experienced.

There are different aspects to it. The first thing is you're absolutely right—I think there's an awful lot of people who would like to serve in public office, at whatever level, who've chosen not to because they do not want to expose themselves and their families to the sort of abuse that comes particularly through social media. I think social media is a major challenge. Like all things, it has considerable benefits in terms of communication and exchanges of information, but also, certainly—and we've seen this within the political environment internationally as well, not just locally—the potential for threat and intimidation. There are laws, of course, that provide for criminality in certain aspects of that, but I do agree very much with what you say—I think there is a need for considerable thought within our democratic process about how we do, I suppose, maintain certain principles in terms of online abuse. Legislation, of course, has gone through the UK Parliament, but, of course, much of it is subject to how those who own and control the social media networks actually operate. And we know that, even within that, there are clear vested interests, and I put that as diplomatically as I can.

In the elections Bill, which is coming forward in this Senedd, we've strengthened the issue of undue influence, and so on, within that. But I do agree, when we talk about our democratic health in the round, that the issue of people's ability to participate and to protect people, and also to protect the civil rights of people to participate and to speak freely within that, is absolutely vital. I think what you are raising is something I can't give you an answer to, other than I think it is a fundamentally important issue for the future that we have to tackle, we have to address and we have to engage with across all governments.

Women in politics suffer this abuse disproportionately, and, 12 years ago, Bolivia became the first country in the world to create a specific offence of abuse against women in politics, and that's been copied in four Latin American countries. We couldn't introduce that law because of the reservation around equal opportunities, but we could strengthen general provisions to prevent abuse in politics, which would then benefit women and those other groups—ethnic minorities, LGBTQ+ and others—that suffer this abuse. We could, for example, take the new offence of intimidating elected representatives and apply it not just during election periods but permanently or continuously. We could add to that offence by not making the sanction limited to disqualification from standing in elections, but actually having a criminal sanction involving fines and imprisonment. We could take the long-standing offence of making a false statement about somebody's personal conduct or character, and also extend that beyond election periods and apply it to political conduct—for instance, claiming that somebody voted one way when, actually, they didn't. That's not illegal currently, and that is something that is the source of abuse. Would the Counsel General look at all these ideas, and also look across the world—the Oireachtas in Ireland is about to produce its own report on safe participation in public life—would he look at all of these ideas, give them consideration and report back to the Senedd if he saw merit in implementing any of these ideas here in Wales?

Can I say I think the point you raise is fundamentally important? It is certainly something that goes to a trope that I've been continually mentioning, and that is democratic health. I think there is a need for an ongoing debate on our democratic health. Some of that comes with some of the legislation that we are bringing, but I am happy to look at exploring ways in which this can be developed within the Senedd and can be looked at within the Senedd—whether it is the most appropriate at a Senedd level, a Senedd committee, et cetera, that then actually seeks evidence from Ministers but other bodies, et cetera, that explores that. Maybe that would be the way in which we start that process.

I have to say, there are real concerns I have in terms of how we might be able to do things in terms of our competence, and I think our competence restrictions in terms of the online issue and other areas all begin to emerge and make this a very difficult area. Also, this is very much a cross-governmental issue and one of the issues—. Perhaps we can look forward to see how that might be raised. I think it has been raised at some of the inter-governmental meetings in a general way, and I'll happily look to explore that and perhaps come back to you—I'll happily write to you—about where we are on some of those issues, and perhaps explore what might be a way forward in terms of that. One of my portfolio responsibilities, obviously, is the constitution. I think that embraces the issue of democratic health within the confines of our devolved settlement, so I'll happily be prepared to look at that.

Again, can I thank you for raising this? I have raised the objectives of the Hillsborough Law Now campaign with the UK Government on many occasions, most recently at last week’s Inter-ministerial Group for Justice in the context of the case for a statutory duty of candour.

I thank the Counsel General for his answer and also for his long-standing commitment to fighting for justice for ordinary working people, and I again thank him for supporting the premise of a Hillsborough law now and the campaign to achieve that. As you say, Counsel General, a Hillsborough law would place a new legal duty of candour on public authorities and officials to tell the truth and to proactively co-operate with official investigations and inquiries. With that in mind, can I ask the Counsel General what assessment he has made of how a Hillsborough law will not only end the familiar pattern of cover-ups and concealment, but will also save public money in doing so?

Can I just thank you again for keeping this issue on the radar, because it's a very important one? It's an issue that features also in the UK Government's Victims and Prisoners Bill, and, of course, one of the ways that that Bill is seeking to address some of the Hillsborough issues is by the creation of independent advocates. There are issues around that that we have discussed at inter-ministerial level that caused concerns, particularly in terms of the devolution settlement. There are conversations that are ongoing with regard to that Bill and legislative consent. I think even what is contained within that does not actually deal with the Hillsborough law and the issues that are raised there. I think I said when this was raised before that one of the most straightforward ways of actually resolving this is actually by making legal aid available to victims.

Just to say, whilst I’m very pleased to see today the result of the Law Society’s judicial review of the UK Government in respect of legal aid, I’m just going to mention this part of the judgment, because although it relates to the rates of legal aid and the impact that has, this, I think, is pretty fundamental in terms of what is happening with our justice system, which is creaking and is basically beginning to crack and come into disrepute:

'The court observed that it had been presented with an "impressive, compelling body of evidence" which showed "the system is slowly coming apart at the seams". "Unless there are significant injections of funding in the relatively near future, any prediction along the lines that the system will arrive in due course at the point of collapse is not overly pessimistic." '

That is a pretty damning statement coming from a senior court. They went on to say that 1,400 duty solicitors have left since 2017, and

'We’re already seeing that there simply aren’t enough solicitors to represent suspects in police stations'..."The imbalance between the defence and the prosecution will continue to grow and public trust in the criminal justice system will continue to fail." '

That relates back to the earlier question of Horizon, but it also equally relates to the Hillsborough issue and the issue that I’ve raised a number of times, and that is about access to justice.

I have agreed that questions 4, 5 and 6 should be grouped. To ask question 4, therefore, John Griffiths.

Thank you for the question. As the Llywydd has outlined, questions 4, 5 and 6 are being grouped.

The Welsh Government’s position is clear. We continue to support the devolution of policing and justice to Wales, as supported recently by the constitutional commission. We will shortly be publishing our 'Delivering Justice for Wales' progress report with further details.

Counsel General, we do not have a criminal justice system fit for purpose in England and Wales, and I think the case is very well made for devolution, and I know that you would agree with that. At the moment, people are unnecessarily criminalised. We have overcrowded prisons where rehabilitation is not possible to the extent that it should take place. This then leads to more reoffending than would otherwise happen. We know lots of people there have mental health issues, alcohol and drug addiction, poor literacy and numeracy skills and generally low skills. It’s regressive and it’s counter-productive, and we badly need a more enlightened approach along the lines of social justice and improving quality of life for our communities that Welsh Government is committed to.

The Independent Commission on the Constitutional Future of Wales has made the appropriate recommendation, so I just wonder what you could tell us in terms of your assessment of the preparedness in Wales for that devolution, and what are the most immediate next steps that need to take place?

I think one of the difficulties there has been when we talk about the devolution of policing is that we've got to understand the interrelationship between policing, how policing has changed over the years, its interaction with youth offending, with social communities, with socioeconomic issues, and so on. That development has actually been really, really important, and to devolve youth justice and to devolve probation also leads you to say there is an illogic in not then also devolving policing. Policing is devolved, of course, in Northern Ireland, as it is in Scotland. There are devolutions of policing in Manchester and again in London. So, I've never understood why it is that the logic of all the devolved functions we have aren't in keeping, or considered to be in keeping with the devolution of policing.

We, of course, do have in Wales four police and crime commissioners. They are a reserved matter. But when the four elected police and crime commissioners all come together and say that policing needs to be devolved, and recognise the importance of the interrelations and work that is going on with devolved functions, I think it's important that people sit up and listen to that very carefully, if you really want to see policing and the justice work more consistently and more effectively.

Can I just say that the step we have taken forward on this—? I was in Scotland for three days looking at the tribunal system, but also at the youth justice system, and there are some very interesting developments there, which I'll perhaps talk about on another occasion. But the relationship there with policing, and the understanding of how policing works, has led us, really, to the joint statement the Minister for Social Justice referred to a while back. That is in respect of the research that's being carried out, which we have commissioned with the retired Chief Constable Carl Foulkes, who's leading a review of policing, the opportunities from the devolution of policing, the practicalities of it. Because I think the onus is on us now to actually make the very, very clear case by showing, 'This is what would be different, this is what would be better.' Of course, there are inter-governmental issues across the UK in terms of specialist aspects of policing—none of those should change—but I think there is a very, very strong case there. We are working to actually present that, and there will be further debate on this when the conclusions of the research work that's being carried out are available and we can debate them in the Senedd.

John Griffiths explained eloquently why we need to see the devolution of justice and policing just now. Ten days ago, on 21 January, the Counsel General posted a message on X saying:

'Those opposed to the devolution of justice have still not put forward any evidence based argument claiming merely "isnʼt it great, aren't we wonderful, the world thinks we are fantastic!» Delusional!'

End quote. And I agree completely with the Counsel General in his remarks. The next day, the most senior Labour MP in Wales, Jo Stevens, went on the BBC and said that an incoming Labour Government will not be looking at devolution of policing and justice. So, does the Counsel General believe that Keir Starmer's Labour Party is deluded?

Well, can I say, firstly, that the social media clip you refer to was very much in response to a clip that came from the Rt Hon Robert Buckland, former Lord Chancellor and the Secretary of State for Justice? The reason I did that was because the tone of what was being said was, 'Look at our justice system. We are so respected throughout the world. We are almost the cornerstone of justice et cetera. Who would really want to undermine that and then to devolve justice, because everything is as it is?' And my immediate response to that is, 'No, it isn't.' Our justice system is becoming a laughing stock around the world. Our legal aid system is far worse than in many other countries of the world. We are exposed to an onslaught of miscarriages of justice: senior individual cases, to the issues that we've discussed, with warrants of execution, to the issues we've had with the Horizon scandal, which goes on and on. We have a justice system with backlogs, and the legal aid system means that the majority of the population never have access to the justice system. We now have a Government that is passing unlawful legislation and that is talking about legislating to break international conventions. So, that's what I thought was actually delusional. Anyone who still believes that old mantra we had 20, 30 years ago of the mother of parliaments and the justice system we've given to the world—we have parts of the world that have now more effective justice systems than we have.

Can I say, in terms of policing—? Well, look, the first thing is that the Gordon Brown report was very clear that the starting point in terms of change was youth justice and probation. The issue of policing is one that we will continue to explore. We will continue to put evidence together. We will continue to engage for changes that I believe are inevitable. These are not things that will happen overnight, but I'm convinced that we will get there and that we will actually achieve the devolution of those areas—not because it's a battleground between whether Westminster controls it or whether we do, it's because it's better for the people of Wales. It's better for our communities, it's a better way. If I thought it would actually not work and it would be worse, then I'd say, 'No, leave it alone.' But I don't believe that, and the more I get involved in the youth justice system and in the justice aspects and in sentencing and so on, the more I actually realise that, the way that these are all integrated, it makes no sense, when you have so many devolved functions that really make up a big chunk of the justice system, to keep them separate.

I agree with everything you've said. And, indeed, we are an anomaly in the world because we are, surely, the only nation that has our own legislature, that makes legislation, but doesn't have a system to administer its own justice system and its own legislation. We've had so many reports now that have suggested that policing should be devolved along with justice. What urgent discussions have you either had with the Westminster Government or are in your diary since the publication of the report of the Independent Commission on the Constitutional Future of Wales, and when do you think it would be reasonable to expect Wales to get these crucial powers?

And finally, do you agree with me that this isn't just an issue for constitutional anoraks when we talk about the devolution of justice and the administration of justice? Those powers could improve the life standards of so many people and ensure greater fairness in our nation.

Thank you for your question. Of course, I understand that when you head towards a general election, when you start looking at the major issues, you want to identify what are the most immediately important issues that are there. And, of course, there are priority, broad umbrella issues and so on. I do not think that it is the case that justice is something that is not vital. I think it is of vital importance. And it's of vital importance when we look at our current justice system, which in the last 14 years—. We have increased our prison population from 45,000 to 90,000 and we're now looking to invest another £400 million to put yet more people in prison. You ask where is the limit? If that isn't an indication that the justice system is failing and that something is massively wrong, then we really need to go back to basics to look at the facts.

We start raising these things in the Inter-ministerial Group for Justice and, of course, they will come about through other discussions. I will be chairing the Interministerial Standing Committee later in February. This is one of the issues that I will be reporting on there. It is a discussion that needs to take place, for all the reasons we had in that very long contribution I made earlier on, which I could see the Llywydd glaring at me over. [Laughter.]

The principle of legislative consent lies at the heart of the devolution settlements and the Welsh Government has long argued that the Sewel convention is in need of reform. We are considering the commission’s thoughtful recommendations on this.

The commission's report, of course, stresses the pressing need to reform the Sewel convention and put it on a statutory footing, so that Westminster is no longer able to ride roughshod over our devolution settlement and legislate in devolved areas against the express will of this Senedd. I'd ask, please, for a little more clarity on how the Welsh Government is pursuing implementation of this recommendation and for the Counsel General to outline a road map to delivering this with urgency. There is, of course, a further principle of consent dealt with in the report and here I'm quoting directly from it:

'The starting point for any consideration of constitutional options should be the principle that the UK is a voluntary union of nations.... Therefore, the people of Wales should have the right to determine the constitutional future of their nation.'

Does the Counsel General therefore agree with me that this means that the right to decide on the constitutional future of Wales—that is the right to hold a referendum on Wales's constitutional status—should be devolved to Wales, and if so, will he outline what steps he will take to secure this?

Well, can I say, just taking that last point first, I think that any party that obtains a mandate for those reforms and those changes is entitled to see them put to the people? That has always been the case, in terms of my opinion. I think it's also the position that the First Minister has presented, and that must be right, in terms of our democratic system.

Turning to Sewel, of course, Sewel I've always described as being almost like the engine oil in a car engine—all of the different components that make up the four nations, the oil that enables them all to work together. Of course, the breach of Sewel begins to cause that process to seize, and that's where we are heading towards at the moment, with all the breaches of Sewel that have taken place.

I have to say that I'm very impressed with the contribution that Gordon Brown made in his report. I'm very pleased at the references to it within the independent commission's report, which recognises, I think, things that we have been saying consistently all along—and not just us, actually: inter-parliamentary forums of all political parties have actually been saying the same thing.

Can I also say that I was very pleased, in that same interview that you referred to, with what Jo Stevens said about Sewel, in terms of when she talked about the strengthening of devolution? She said, that, 'Well, it means that, for example, the Sewel convention, which means that what we have seen from Conservative Governments, where they ride roughshod over the devolution settlement—the internal markets Act—legislating on things that are the responsibility of the Welsh Government and the Senedd, you won't see that from the UK Labour Government. You'll see better inter-governmental relations. You'll see professional working, collaboration, trust and respect—and respecting not just the situation now, but in the future.'

Now, I think that that is a very important statement. I think that it leads on to the fact that we need to look at how we consolidate Sewel, possibly in line with the recommendations from the Gordon Brown report, but in other ways. That is its status. Now, of course, we used to have the Ponsonby convention on treaties. I'm sorry to sound like a bit of a legal nerd now. But, of course, that was converted into legislation to ensure that Parliament had an opportunity to actually scrutinise, and I think that we do need to head in the longer term into something that puts it on a solid and justiciable constitutional basis.

And finally, question 8—Gareth Davies.

Well, thank you very much for the question. The Mental Health Act 1983 is the key legislation relating to mental health care and treatment. High-quality mental health services for all in Wales is a priority. We aim to provide care close to home wherever possible and to reduce the need for in-patient care through continued investment and community services.

Thank you for that response, Counsel General. It has been brought to my attention that it is fairly common practice for patients, once sectioned under the Mental Health Act, to be transferred to a facility anywhere in the United Kingdom for clinical mental health treatment. This means that a patient from Anglesey, for example, could be transferred to a treatment facility in Cornwall, with no right to request a transfer somewhere closer to home.

As far as I'm aware, there is more leeway with regards to Scotland after amendments to the Mental Health Act in 2007, but Wales and England are treated almost as a single entity. This can, of course, cause further stress and anguish amongst patients who have been sectioned and transferred to England, potentially hundreds of miles away from friends and family. Some patients' families may not have the means or facility to travel these distances to see their loved ones, and the anguish caused by being in an alien environment so far away from family will not help attempts to remedy their mental illness.

A constituent of mine finds themselves in this exact predicament, where they are being housed in a treatment facility in England, and they wish to be repatriated to Wales. Can the Counsel General please outline what advice you have given or could give to the health Minister regarding how much discretion Welsh Ministers have under the Mental Health Act when taking into consideration the preferences of patients who have been sectioned, namely their preference to be placed into a treatment facility that is a reasonable distance from their home and in Wales?

Can I thank you for that supplementary question? Can I thank you also for the dedication and attention you've given to this issue of mental health? Of course, I'm aware that you have the ballot to introduce a Senedd Bill relating to mental health. You've been given leave to introduce that. So, it's very much welcome and we recognise that commitment that you've given in that.

Can I say that most of the points you raised probably do need to be addressed to the appropriate Minister? But what I can say is that our aim, as Welsh Government, is to ensure that patients receive care as close to home as possible and to reduce the need for in-patient care through continued investment in community mental health services. In the last two years, Welsh Government has allocated £26.5 million to health boards through service improvements and to improve the availability of mental health service provisions. There's also been the establishment of the '111 press 2' service in terms of urgent mental health support and so on. The issues you raised are clearly important. I will ensure that the points you raised are passed over to the appropriate Minister on that, because I think it's appropriate that she responds specifically to that.

I thank the Counsel General.

We'll move now to item 3, questions to the Senedd Commission. These questions are to be answered by the Llywydd, and the first question is from James Evans.

Our communications and engagement strategy sets objectives to raise awareness and increase understanding of the role of the Senedd. Last year, we engaged with 22,000 young people in education sessions and Welsh Youth Parliament events. We also welcomed over 150,000 visitors to the Senedd and engaged with over 6,000 people during our summer shows programme and other events. A major part of our social media strategy involves explaining our work to the public too.

Diolch, Llywydd. One thing that does strike me every time I go out canvassing is, actually, how, sometimes, ill-informed the electorate are about what the Senedd actually does. It's amazing the number of doors I actually knock on that still think the health service is a reserved matter back in Westminster. But it doesn't help when you've got political parties—. I was at a recent by-election in my constituency where they had an election candidate for the Liberal Democrats going around telling everybody in the council how he was going to fix the health service and how he was going to improve the economy of Wales. These things aren't devolved to local councils; I'm talking about national issues. So, I'd like to know what work do the Commission do to actually engage with political parties when they are spreading falsehoods on the doorstep, because that does actually affect what our electorate do understand about the role of what we do here as Members of the Senedd, standing up for our constituents on matters that affect Wales.

I think you raise a really interesting and challenging point there, requiring a great deal of self-discipline on behalf of all political parties and all politicians. How many MPs write to the Minister for Economy here on matters that are devolved to the Minister for Economy or the Minister for health? And equally, how many Senedd Members write to, possibly, a Secretary of State, or even their local council to fix a pothole in a street in Llanrwst, or anywhere? So, yes, I agree that we all need to be upfront, honest and clear with the electorate on who has responsibility for what, and political parties most definitely have a role to play in that. But I suspect that, on this one, more than anything, it starts at our very own doorsteps, at ourselves being really clear with our constituents that, on matters relating to the benefits system, they need to talk to their MP and that, on matters relating to the pothole, they need to speak to their local councillor.

Educational visits to the Senedd are available to all school and college groups across Wales. Bookings for the following academic year are made available in June and allocated on a first-come, first-served basis. Our travel subsidy provides financial support to those taking part in educational visits who travel from outside a 10-mile radius of the Senedd. We're looking forward to welcoming Ysgol Tremeirchion, Esgob Morgan Primary School and Denbigh High School over the coming months to the Senedd—three schools from your constituency.

Thank you for that response, Llywydd.

I welcome the Senedd Commission's engagement with schools across Wales to speak to Members and learn about the work of the Senedd and to learn, indeed, about devolution in Wales. I'm pleased that pupils from Ysgol Gynradd Pant Pastynog Primary School and Ysgol Tremeirchion from my constituency have today visited the Senedd, which, I'm sure, has been a memorable experience for the children, although, sadly, I wasn't able to meet them, as I'm in the Chamber most of the afternoon. There is a good deal of engagement between schools and Senedd Members virtually, but this, of course, doesn't compare to the real thing. It's much more engaging for school pupils to visit the Senedd in person, be given a tour of the building, watch First Minister's questions, take part in sessions that are put on for school pupils. All of this is a positive thing for the future of devolution, for children to learn and become engaged in Welsh democracy.

In my time here in the Senedd, however, there haven't been many school visits from my constituency. I have heard from schools who have said they have found arranging visits to the UK Parliament an easier process, and the opportunity to do so is better advertised. Of course, I would like pupils in the Vale of Clwyd to be as engaged in Welsh politics as much as UK politics more broadly, and their familiarity with the institution is essential for that. A visit to the Palace of Westminster is bound to leave more of a lasting impression on schoolchildren than a Zoom call with their Senedd Member. I would like to ask, then, Llywydd, what is the Commission doing to ensure that schools are aware of the opportunities available, such as the travel subsidy, that in-person Senedd visits are promoted to schools and the importance of pupils' education about Welsh democratic institutions is stressed. Thanks.

Well, in my time, when schoolchildren from my constituency have visited here, they have been amazed to see such a modern, fantastic building that they are represented within in Wales, and I think that there's a responsibility both on the Commission, yes, to make sure that the ability to visit the Senedd is known to all schools in Wales, and we make every effort to ensure that, but I'd suggest also that you, as a local Member in your constituency, make sure that your schools are fully involved and engaged and are able to visit here as well. They are as welcome and, hopefully, as interested in their Senedd as any other place in Wales.

I thank the Llywydd.

We'll move on now to item 4, which is the topical questions. The first question is to be answered by the Minister for Economy, and is to be asked by Joyce Watson. Joyce Watson.

Since the written statement of 29 January 2024, my officials have met with Talybont-on-Usk Community Council to discuss the findings of the osprey conservation report. The community council are supportive of engaging on future plans for the site, which we will ensure continue to align with the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015.

I thank you for that answer, Minister. I suppose I should start by declaring my registered interest as a member of the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, because I'm delighted about the ospreys. As a regular visitor of the Dyfi osprey project, I've watched it grow into a world-leading wildlife business, attracting huge numbers of visitors and international interest, so there are economic opportunities here that are worth exploring. The site itself remains a valuable asset, and I'd welcome an update on the next steps that you plan to pursue, particularly in terms of helping young people to build careers locally. Of course, Green Man remains the standout success, a great advert for Wales's cultural offer, and it should be championed by all MSs.

But, on the subject of registering interests, and following up a point I made here last year, I note that the leader of the Welsh Conservative group has now tabled 90 written questions on this matter, far more than he's tabled on issues like steel, or issues like manufacturing. Some of those questions included reference to a declared interest, but many didn't. He also declared an interest when submitting questions, while failing to do the same when raising the matter verbally over the same time period. So, I hope that the Member can clarify his interest and why he failed to declare it when challenging the First Minister on this issue in the Chamber. Do you agree with me, Minister, that, given the public interest and the debate around Gilestone Farm, it's vital that there is transparency on all these matters?

Thank you for the question. Ninety written questions is an extraordinary amount to devote to a single topic. I think it is important that all Members are clear about where they have an interest and, if they haven't done so, that they declare it promptly. It's a matter, of course, for the chair and the authorities responsible for the Senedd procedures, and I don't want to draw myself into acting as if I'm the person making that determination, but members of the public will have their own view, I'm sure, about the matter the Member has raised.

I think transparency is important and transparency is what we're trying to do around Gilestone Farm. And I'm really pleased you mentioned Green Man, and I hope that Members across this Chamber do take up the point that Joyce Watson made. Green Man is a tremendous advert for Wales. It's a highly successful brand. It sells out within hours. And I still want to see businesses like that succeed in mid Wales, to provide economic opportunities and an economic future for young people within Powys and mid Wales, and we will carry on working with them.

It's great of you to remind us, of course, that you're a member of the RSPB, and this is the first time for more than 200 years that the ospreys have nested this far south in Wales. When we became aware of the matter at the end of summer 2023, we immediately took steps to try and commission a report and that leads us to where we are now. But I'm sure that, whilst the leader of the opposition isn't here, he will have heard the points you will have made and will want to take his own steps to deal with the matter.

Minister, I'd like to thank you for your statement that you made the other day, but I hate to say that there's a bit of, 'I told you so', about all of this. A lot of people in my community are very angry about the situation that we actually find ourselves in.

The basic due diligence of Welsh Government has to be questioned over this purchase. A basic desktop exercise on Gilestone Farm would have told Welsh Government officials all they needed to know. I don't lay all the blame at your door, Minister, because you are advised on what you have to do. Yes, you make the ultimate decision, but a basic search of that farm would have told you that there were issues with it from the start.

The community raised concerns from the start about biodiversity and species on the site. They were ignored. So, what I would like to know from you, Minister, is: how are we going to be in a situation where public money—£4.25 million of public money—is not going to be wasted again? I've talked to land agents locally who said that the site is worth considerably less now than what the Welsh Government paid for it, so I'd be interested to know your views on that and what you think the site is actually worth now.

You mentioned in your statement as well that you're going to be engaging with partners about the future of the site. I wonder if you can explain to us today who those partners are and what the Welsh Government intend to do with it, because I would like to know, as a local Member. And if you could keep me fully involved in this process going forward, I think it would help with the communication with the local community, it would help with the communication with me, and we can actually find a use for this farm other than what you wanted to use it for.

And I do want to share these points: the Green Man festival is a great asset for Wales; it is a great asset for Wales and it brings a lot of revenue into my constituency, but I would strongly advise the Welsh Government that, before you put your hand in your pocket again to look to secure a long-term site for its future, you should do some basic due diligence, like I mentioned earlier, so that you don't go wasting any more taxpayers' money.

There are several points in response. The first is that public money hasn't been wasted. We acquired an asset at slightly under market value. We have a commercial tenancy—a commercial farm business tenancy on the site. So, the site is in use. And, indeed, we are looking at the longer term future for Green Man, which, as I say, is a fantastic cultural and economic asset for mid Wales. We need more businesses like Green Man, not fewer. And I think it is right that the mission of this Government, and indeed the mid Wales growth deal, is to create more economic opportunities by supporting businesses like Green Man to grow.

I take on board the point the Member raised about anger, and that's been one of my real concerns about the whole progress of this issue. Much of that anger has turned to abuse in a generally disgraceful way, and the Member himself has talked about abuse in politics in this Chamber. Some of that anger has enabled abuse with very little to hold it back, apart from members on the community council and some people within this Chamber trying to be on the right side of a robust, but decent debate. It has caused some people to take a pause from their life in public service. And I think the Member should reflect on how he looks to communicate with his own constituents and the way in which he stays on the right side of this. I have seen correspondence from the Member's constituents claiming that I have made statements that I have not, which have come from him. And I've had a conversation with him outside this Chamber. His conduct is a matter for him, but he should understand that I will not forget the way he has conducted himself, and I hope for better from him in the future. [Interruption.]

And when it comes to the suitability of the site, of course, the ospreys were not there in August. There was no issue about a lack of due diligence around the site. People are entitled to disagree, as of course they are, but there was no sight of the ospreys. As I say, it's the first time in more than 200 years that they have nested this far south—that in itself is a success story. And actually, that in itself also is part of the issue about the ospreys being seen as an asset. [Interruption.] The osprey conservation society themselves think that the nesting of the ospreys could increase the value of the land—[Interruption.]

I want to hear what the Minister has to say on this. Minister.

Thank you. With the potential for eco-tourism and conservation being a potential advantage, in addition to the farm business tenancy. So, we will carry on working with Talybont-on-Usk Community Council, with Powys County Council, who are wholly supportive of the objects of Green Man and want to see them carry on within Powys and expand within Powys. And I will deal with all Members, including the constituency Member, in a manner that is full of respect, and yet at the same time not being afraid to be robust where there is disagreement or conduct that I do not think should be allowed to pass without comment.

Can I just put on the record that I also welcome the historic discovery of the ospreys, which is something that is exciting and something to be welcomed? However, there's no hiding the fact that significant questions continue to be asked about the purchase of Gilestone Farm by Welsh Government. And long before any ospreys landed, this farm was mired in controversy.

To say it had a troubled history is an understatement. Indeed, as James Evans has already alluded to, any simple Google search on this farm would have shown that, in the last 15 years before its purchase by Welsh Government, it had been the subject of major planning rows, judicial reviews, appeal court action, planning inquiries, even leading to national park resignations, and the previous owners forced to leave the farm. Arguably, few farms in Wales have been the subject of such arduous and contentious local and legal disputes. Were I to buy a farm in rural Wales, given the chequered history of this farm, that would have rung alarm bells in my mind.

So, Minister, I just wanted to ask you one question, in two parts. Given the controversial nature of the history of this farm, what level of due diligence did you carry out before sanctioning the £4.25 million of public money? And was this based on a rigorous business case?

So, we had an outline business case about the proposals from Green Man. It's in line with the objectives of the mid Wales growth deal. I looked at the opportunities at the end of that year, with the ability to use capital and whether it could further secure the Green Man business and its expansion. Audit Wales have been through this, and there's been no criticism of the propriety of the asset, or indeed about the fact that the Welsh Government had the powers to acquire the property, or indeed when we took on more professional independent advice to guide the purchase process, or indeed the value that went into it.

I'm very keen that we carry on supporting businesses, and that will require the Government to intervene in the market, and it will require the Government to take risk at various points in time. Otherwise, we have a future for mid Wales that I do not think any of us would want to sign up to. We need to use the assets that mid Wales has in a way that is genuinely sustainable, for our environment and for communities, which need work and an opportunity to access work, which is why we'll carry on working with businesses like Green Man for exactly that future.

I thank the Minister. We'll move on now to the next topical question, which is to be answered by the Counsel General and Minister for the Constitution, and is to be asked by Alun Davies. Alun Davies.

Thank you for the question. Can I say that I'm sure we all welcome any restoration of devolution in Northern Ireland, if all parties agree? But the UK Government has only just provided the details of the agreement. We will need to ensure that the financial, operational and constitutional implications for Wales are properly considered and addressed by the UK Government.

I think we will all, in all parts of the Chamber, welcome this week's agreement to restore devolved Government in Northern Ireland. I suspect that many of us will appreciate that the people of Northern Ireland have suffered enough as a consequence of the DUP campaigning against the consequences of a Brexit they themselves had argued for.

I don't expect that the Counsel General has had the opportunity to fully digest the command paper that was published about two hours ago, but in that paper, 'Safeguarding the Union', the UK Government outlines all the different provisions that have now been agreed with the DUP for the restoration of devolved Government. We all knew that Brexit would undermine the integrity and the union of the United Kingdom, and we recognised and welcomed the Windsor agreement, which was an important step in the United Kingdom Government recognising how it had misled the people of Northern Ireland, and had acted with bad faith towards our colleagues in the EU. And the Windsor agreement has enabled the UK Government to move away from the crisis that we've been in for the last number of years.

But there will be some significant consequences for Wales as a consequence of this agreement. We have already heard whispers of the financial arrangements that are being put in place for the new Northern Irish Government. We also know that the United Kingdom Government unilaterally changed the principles of funding under which they take decisions to fund the different parts of the United Kingdom. It was, prior to this change, essential for the United Kingdom Government to publicise and provide transparent rationale for the funding of all devolved administrations. They have recently changed that to enable themselves to make payments in addition to the Barnett formula to individual parts of the United Kingdom. We need to understand what the new needs-based formula is for Northern Ireland, and how it will affect the ongoing funding of Northern Ireland, because there are many of us here who have been arguing for a needs-based formula for the funding of Welsh public services as well. And it is not right that the Welsh public be short-changed again by a United Kingdom Government that doesn't give a damn about the people of this country.

We also need to understand how the divergence, or non-divergence from the EU, in goods and the single market provisions, will have an impact on trade within the Great Britain market, because there will be consequences if there is no divergence from EU rules for Northern Ireland, if we want to ensure streamlined trade between Great Britain and Northern Ireland, for rules and regulations in Great Britain. We also need to understand the operation of common frameworks from now on, because we have agreed a series of common frameworks with the United Kingdom Government and the Scottish Government. That will also need to be understood.

You're right. It is very disappointing that on something that clearly does have significant constitutional consequences for Wales there has been no engagement with us on that. We clearly have very specific interests in the matters that are being discussed. I listened to the debate on this on the radio this morning, and, of course, the devil is in the detail, and, of course, no-one knew what the detail was actually going to be.

But, clearly, there are significant issues in respect of the internal market. Can I say that, as the Minister for Economy's here, I have no doubt that he'll be paying very close attention to this? He will, no doubt, want to look at the implications that has, the implication it has for ports, the implications it has for the economy and internal market and so on.

But, in terms of what I can say on the constitutional situation, well, of course, the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020 is something that undermines the common frameworks and the arrangements that are in place. It is clearly very important constitutionally—certainly, for inter-governmental relations—that there may well be elected representatives again in Northern Ireland that are participating in that inter-governmental structure. I notice, also, that one of the proposals is the creation of a UK east-west council, but I see it's described in terms of Northern Ireland and Great Britain. I wonder where the Welsh voice will be in that, because, clearly, that would be a matter that is of some considerable importance to us.

I think there are clearly going to be financial issues that are important. The Barnett formula is part of our constitutional make-up. I'm very pleased to see the talk about the establishment of a needs-based formula. How long have we been arguing for a needs-based formula for Wales? So, all I should really say, I think, at this stage, on those points that you have specifically raised, is that it is of important consequence to Wales, it is important for the constitutional relationship, the economic relationship. The devil will be in the detail and there will be a need to look very, very carefully at all the issues that you have quite rightly raised today.

I think it is important that this question has been tabled today. But, I have to say, I'm disappointed by the tone of both the Counsel General and, indeed, the Member for Blaenau Gwent in referring to it. This is a good day; it's a good day for devolution, particularly for people in Northern Ireland, who have been crying out for the restoration of the devolved Government and, indeed, Stormont. I think we need to take our hats off, frankly, to Sir Jeffrey Donaldson for coming up with an agreement, against the will of many people in his own party and in the unionist community, and taking that brave and courageous decision in order to get this deal done. And, of course, we should pay tribute as well to Rishi Sunak for the work that he has personally invested in getting this deal arranged. We know that there was a huge leap forward with the Windsor framework. We know that the EU backs this deal as well.

I've taken a look at the command paper. Like you, Minister, I haven't had time to digest it in detail, but it is very clear that, within these new arrangements, Wales will have a voice. You mentioned, Counsel General, the east-west council. It talks about that being made up of representatives from all of the constituent parts and Governments of the UK. That is right and proper, and I hope that Wales will play its full part. The other important aspect of its work will be Intertrade UK, the new body that will be set up in order to protect our UK internal market. And we mustn't forget that there were never any complaints in this Chamber about the EU single market and us having to apply certain rules to our goods and services in order that they could get into the EU single market. So, I don't see why there's such a huge anti-internal market debate going on in here today. I appreciate that there will be implications for our ports, I appreciate there will be implications for trade, and that's why it is important that an east-west council is established with a Welsh voice in it, and that the Intertrade UK body also has key Welsh businesses participating in it.

There's one thing that it doesn't mention in the command paper, and I do think that this is a deficiency in it, which I hope the Counsel General would be able to take up with the UK Government. I think there's a need for an east-west assembly to hold that east-west council to account. In the same way that we have this apparatus with the British-Irish Parliamentary Assembly, which does the work of holding the British-Irish Council to account, we need a similar organisation and structure to do that work as well. So, can I ask you, Counsel General, what will you do to make sure that that is a feature of the new working arrangements, so that we can really support the work that has been done to bring this new development to the table today, which, as I say, is good news, especially for Northern Ireland, but also for the union of the United Kingdom?

Thank you for those comments. I'm sorry if it came over as though I was being a bit dour on it. I think it's always difficult when a very important step takes place that clearly has implications and there hasn't been that engagement, and some engagement that there clearly could have been. But you're right; it is a very good day.

I remember visiting Northern Ireland on a number of occasions in the 1970s, and, again, more recently. The transition and the importance of getting those democratic institutions back in place is important. It's important to the whole of the UK; it’s important to all the different peoples and nations of the UK. We notice the absence of being able to participate in the inter-governmental relations that we have, and, indeed, the conclusion to some of the issues with regard to the common frameworks.

You raised the point, exactly right, in terms of a Welsh voice, and of course, we have to be clear what a Welsh voice must be—a Welsh voice that is clearly related to those areas that are devolved, so it must have a proper respectful constitutional structure to that. But these are all matters that clearly need to be considered very, very carefully. I’ve started looking at the paper that came through literally two hours ago. It certainly has a lot of framework objectives within it, so, as I say, it is going to be in the precise details of that.

I do look forward very much, for example, to the next Inter-Ministerial Group for Justice that we will have Northern Ireland. We have, of course, the Northern Ireland legal representatives there, but they can only participate in actually indicating facts and consequences, not able in terms of the policies, the reform policies, and common arrangements and so on.

You raise an interesting point in terms of the issue of an east-west assembly, and I’m sure those are issues the Minister for Economy, and I’m sure other Ministers, will be looking into very closely and considering all the issues that are being raised today.

I’m grateful to the Member for Blaenau Gwent for tabling this topical question today, as we did; it’s important that we have an opportunity to discuss this. Can I start by saying that I also welcome on behalf of Plaid Cymru the news that the Democratic Unionist Party did agree to a deal to restore power sharing in Northern Ireland? I would say, though, that its spurning of dual access to both the EU and UK markets has been a little hard to stomach over recent months, given that that’s the kind of position that we would give our right arm for here in Wales.

I do, nonetheless, though, of course, look forward to seeing the appointment of a new Northern Ireland Executive in due course, and I should add also that the imminent appointment of a Sinn Féin First Minister does mark an era-defining shift in the politics of these islands. The restoration of devolution in Northern Ireland is a moment to be celebrated, and I wish our friend Michelle O’Neill all the very best in her role.

But the terms of the deal by which the restoration has been secured do raise questions for us in Wales, and while we will need to scrutinise the deal further, there are some immediate questions that I do wish to put to the Minister this afternoon. Do we have any steer at this point in time on what the terms of the deal might actually mean in practice for the operation of the Windsor framework, and what will be the implications on key trade regulations and goods checks, for which the Welsh Government, of course, has responsibility?

The Minister has made it clear that he agrees with me that, given the possible impact on areas of devolved competence, the Welsh Government should really have had greater inputs around negotiating this deal, around engagement with the deal. I wonder if there are ideas on how we move forward from this to make sure that lessons are learnt from that.

And finally, does the Minister agree that the £3 billion financial package that underpins the deal clearly appears to offer Northern Ireland a more preferential funding settlement than we have here in Wales? When will we know what consequentials this package will have for Wales, and what is the Welsh Government doing in practical terms to try to secure that?

Thank you for those points. I suppose the reality is that we will know more about those financial consequences when we know more about the detail. I know there is already some work that has been going on. It’s very clear that some of that sum that is made up relates to past pay deals, past consequentials that have already been received around the UK, but were unable to be implemented within Northern Ireland. So, it’s not clear whether all that's really happening is the backlog of all those is being accumulated together in order to make up for the past couple of years.

On the internal market Act, of course, we want to know how that works. In actual fact, I think we want to see it abolished, and to return back to the common frameworks that have really been pushed to one side as a consequence of that particular Act.

In terms of what the implications are for the Windsor agreement—. Well, can I just say firstly that I think you're absolutely right? What Northern Ireland has now managed to negotiate is all the benefits of being in the EU, which we have lost, as well as having any benefits there are in terms of the UK internal market. In fact, it seems to me almost that what has happened is that Brexit has almost been dissolved for the purpose of the Northern Ireland arrangements, and it is obviously very, very good news economically for Northern Ireland on that. There will obviously be considerations that I know other Ministers will be considering in terms of the issues in terms of trade, cross-border arrangements, and so on, and I'm sure there will be statements from the Minister for Economy and, no doubt, from the First Minister in due course around this and the consequences.

Beyond that, I'm afraid there's probably very little more that I can say. As I say, this document here, which we've only just seen, is very much a framework document; the devil will be in the detail. But we do need to consider very carefully what that detail is and its implications for Wales. But just to repeat, perhaps, the starting point, this is a very, very good day and we should all welcome it for Northern Ireland.

I thank the Counsel General and Minister for the Constitution.

We'll move on, now, to item 5, which is the 90-second statements. Jayne Bryant.

We're in the middle of Independent Venue Week, and Newport is proud to be home to a thriving independent music scene. A real success story is Le Pub, showing how a co-operative approach can go from strength to strength, and it's an exciting time for the new women-led Corn Exchange venue. Yet too many grass-roots music venues across the UK have closed in recent years. More venues would have been lost without meaningful support and funding from organisations like the Music Venue Trust. Last week, I was glad to be able to host Music Venue Trust's annual report launch, their first ever event here in the Senedd. The report highlights that nearly 1.3 million people attended events at grass-roots music venues in Wales last year, contributing over £24 million to the Welsh economy. Bands, venues, sound engineers, photographers and record labels all rely on grass-roots venues, and our communities will thrive if we recognise their value to society. This week is a reminder that it's not too late to act to make sure our grass-roots music venues not only survive but thrive.

I thank the Member.

We'll move on now to item 6, which is a motion under Standing Order 26.17 in relation to the Senedd Cymru (Members and Elections) Bill. I call on a member of the Business Committee to move the motion. Heledd Fychan.

Formally.

Thank you very much. The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? There is no objection. Therefore, the motion is agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

We'll move on now to item 7, which is a motion to amend Standing Orders—limited review of consolidation Bill procedures. I once again call on a member of the Business Committee to move the motion formally. Heledd Fychan.

I formally move.

The proposal is to amend Standing Orders. Does any Member object? No. Therefore, the motion is agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

That takes us on to item 8 on our agenda, which is the debate on a Member's legislative proposal: a Bill to establish structured oversight of NHS managers. I call on Mabon ap Gwynfor to move the motion.

I formally move the motion. The NHS is one of the great successes of the last century in terms of public services. Ensuring free medical services universally has made all of our lives better and safer. Naturally, the NHS is a huge organisation and requires staff with all sorts of expertise and different skills. From cleaners through to consultant doctors and everything in between, there is a huge variety of people working in our health service, and they are held to the highest standards, as they should be. However, the same cannot be said about the managers who make the decisions that can have a huge impact on the operation of this service that saves lives every day.

For decades, we have seen the commitment of professional healthcare workers—doctors, nurses, therapists and many other staff—who are fully committed to safeguarding public health. However, their efforts are often hampered by a system that isn't accountable enough at a management level. It's about time that we secured the needed change, namely the establishment of a regulatory body for NHS managers, similar to the General Medical Council for doctors or the Education Workforce Council for teachers.

Different professions work within robust regulatory frameworks. The Solicitors Regulation Authority ensures morality and competence among solicitors, gaining the public's trust. The General Medical Council maintains the highest standards of practice, safeguarding patients and professionalism. Likewise, the Education Workforce Council promotes quality education, promoting the well-being of pupils and teachers. These organisations improve professional standards, give the public confidence and have nurtured an ethical standard within the relevant areas. So, we can see that there is a crucial link in this accountability chain that isn't covered, namely managers overseeing these professionals and steering our healthcare organisations.

Consider the case of Betsi Cadwaladr, twice plunged into special measures due to systemic failings, or the tragic events at Cwm Taf, where warnings of inadequate maternity care went unheeded, leading to the avoidable loss of precious lives. These are not isolated incidents, they are stark reminders that our current system, lacking proper oversight of management, allows for a culture of silence and impunity to fester, ultimately compromising the safety and well-being of patients.

Why should teachers, lawyers and doctors be held to rigorous ethical codes and disciplinary processes, while those entrusted with the helm of our healthcare system operate in a regulatory vacuum? The answer is clear: it's simply unacceptable. We need a system that instils confidence in patients and the public, knowing that their concerns will be heard and acted upon. We need a system that ensures accountability and protects the whistleblowers who expose wrongdoing, preventing future tragedies.

This is why I propose the establishment of a dedicated regulatory body for NHS managers akin to the GMC or EWC. This body would not be a punitive arm, but a vital safeguard for patients, staff and the NHS itself. Imagine a framework that sets out clear ethical standards and a robust code of conduct for all NHS managers; establishes an independent, transparent system for handling complaints and investigations; empowers a board with the strength and independence to hold managers accountable for failures; provides fair and just disciplinary processes to ensure appropriate sanctions for misconduct; and promotes a culture of learning and improvement, fostering continuous professional development.

This isn't an attack on individual managers, but a call for stronger, more resilient NHS. By bringing management under the same rigorous standards as other healthcare professionals, we elevate the entire system, we protect patients from harm, empower staff to voice concerns and build a culture of trust and respect.

We need a dedicated independent body with the teeth to hold managers accountable and the sensitivity to foster a culture of improvement. This isn't about creating administrative burdens or stifling innovation, it's about ensuring that every decision, every action prioritises the safety and well-being of patients. It's about building an NHS where staff are empowered to speak up, where concerns are addressed swiftly and effectively, and where failures are met with accountability and learning. It's about creating a legacy of true accountability in the NHS. A legacy worthy of the trust we place in it. A legacy where every life, every story, every whisper of concern is heard and acted upon. A legacy where the health and well-being of our citizens is the paramount concern, not bureaucracy or personal gain.

I'd like to thank Mabon ap Gwynfor for bringing forward this Member's legislative proposal today. As a lifelong advocate for our beloved NHS in Wales, along with my Welsh Conservative colleagues on these benches, we are a firm believer in the NHS's boundless potential, but the potential thrives when only nurtured by accountability, excellence and a shared commitment to serving the people who depend on it the most. That's why I and my group fully support this proposal, as this was included in our Welsh Conservative manifesto, so it's lovely to see that the Member has been reading our manifesto and actually picking up the best bits from it and wanting to bring it into fruition.

To establish a dedicated regulatory body for NHS managers in Wales—this isn't a mere bureaucratic exercise, it's a transformative step towards a brighter, more accountable future for our healthcare system here in Wales. For too long, whispers of concern have lingered around NHS management, decisions have been made behind closed doors, and frustrations met with silence. Questions about competence sometimes remain unanswered. This isn't a system that inspires confidence, nor does it empower those who have the most at stake: patients, staff and the communities that they serve. We as Welsh Conservatives—and I know the Member does now—believe in a different path, one informed by clear standards, fair accountability, and a renewed trust, a path paved by the establishment of that dedicated regulatory body wielding the power to define and uphold professional excellence, not through nebulous expectations but through a concrete framework outlining what it really, truly means to be an NHS manager here in Wales, someone who champions patient care, fosters collaboration and embraces transparency and openness in the system. We believe it also will provide that platform, as I said earlier, for accountability, not through self-assessments and not through platitudes, but through a fair and independent body empowered to investigate grievances and issue sanctions and ensure that poor performance has no place in our NHS here in Wales.

We can rebuild trust brick by brick, not through blind faith, but through a system that empowers our patients and staff to participate, to have their voices heard, and to know that their concerns matter, and also the concerns of whistleblowers who work within our NHS who want to inform people of poor management practices. An independent body would allow that to happen and give whistleblowers the confidence to come forward and raise those concerns.

This proposal is about building a culture of improvement, a leadership landscape where every decision is actioned and held to the highest standards. But it's about equipping our managers with the framework they need to excel, knowing they have the support and the accountability to lead with confidence in our health boards and in our hospital settings. Some may argue: does this undermine trust in our managers in the NHS? I think absolutely not. It strengthens it. It shows that we have value in their role, that we believe in their potential, and that we are invested in their success. By establishing clear expectations and providing a fair system for feedback and accountability, we empower managers to lead with confidence, knowing they have the support and the framework around them to make those decisions that they need to do.

The Member must conclude now.

I'm coming very close. This is not a political issue, I don't think—this is a human one. It's about ensuring that every patient in every corner of Wales receives the best possible care. It's about standing up for our dedicated staff who pour their hearts and souls into the NHS, and they deserve a system that values them in return. I know the Minister may—. I'm coming very close to finishing now, Deputy Presiding—

You must conclude now.

Yes, I will. I know the Minister may worry about costs, but I know my group and I'm sure the Member in charge of this would like to sit down with the Minister to discuss how we can fund this, because I really do believe this can make a clear difference and improve the management levels within our NHS here in Wales.

I call on the Minister for Health and Social Services, Eluned Morgan.

Thank you very much, temporary Presiding Officer.

I welcome the opportunity to respond to this debate, and thank Mabon ap Gwynfor for tabling the motion. The overarching objective of professional regulation is to protect the public. It's a statutory system, independent of Government. Any framework that introduces new statutory regulation for NHS workers must first and foremost support and improve public protection. It must command the confidence of anyone raising concerns and, in particular, the public. At the heart of any consideration to regulate a new profession is ensuring that statutory regulation provides the most effective and proportionate means of delivering further public protection. Members will be aware that the regulation of health professionals is reserved to the United Kingdom Government, and the current regulatory system is broadly UK-wide. There are clear benefits to a UK framework, ensuring consistent education and professional standards and enabling the ongoing mobility of the health professional workforce between UK nations.

Now, the terrible events at the Countess of Chester and the conviction of Lucy Letby rightly shone a light on the governance and the safety systems within our NHS organisations, and we're going to consider, very carefully, the recommendations and findings of Lady Justice Thirlwall when these become available.

The regulation of NHS managers is an issue that has been raised and considered very seriously by the Welsh Government previously. We found that there would be significant practical barriers to regulating NHS managers in Wales only, and establishing a system for Wales alone would require a substantial mechanism and the creation of a Welsh regulatory body at significant cost. NHS managers come from a range of different professional backgrounds, and issues such as the balance of responsibility between the employer and any regulator would require careful consideration. Some NHS managers are already subject to professional regulation, through bodies such as the General Medical Council and the Nursing and Midwifery Council. So, any new system would need to take into account the issue of dual regulation and seek to avoid duplication of effort and purpose. An individual suspended or struck off the register of a Wales-only regulatory body for managers may not be prevented from working elsewhere in the United Kingdom. It's the Welsh Government's view that any new regulatory framework for NHS managers would be best taken forward on a four-country basis, consistent with the existing arrangements for doctors, nurses, allied health professions and other healthcare professionals.

Excellent and compassionate leadership, instilling the right culture within NHS Wales, is critical to delivering the best health outcomes for the people of Wales, and it was really good to have a really thorough conversation around this issue with the board of Betsi Cadwaladr this morning. NHS managers and leaders play a vital role in creating the right conditions to enable their organisations to thrive and deliver the most effective services.

In the health service in Wales, we have developed a method of selecting and appointing senior leaders in accordance with good practice. This ensures that we have open and transparent recruitment processes, and robust selection criteria for senior roles. Candidates must have to complete checks before appointment successfully, and there is a process for regulating and managing performance after appointment. It is the responsibility of employers to ensure that robust measures are in place in terms of appointment processes. In addition, managers in the NHS in Wales are accountable to a code of conduct that outlines the core standards that all managers in the service are meant to adhere to. We're still focusing on developing a culture of excellent leadership across the health service, and also, as part of the workforce strategy for health and care, we are developing a culture of compassionate leadership and supporting talent and succession planning. Last October, the Welsh Government published a whistleblowing framework for the health service.

I'm sure Members will be very pleased to hear that that framework about raising your voice set out very clearly the role and the system for whistleblowers in the NHS.

This outlines the responsibilities of executive teams and senior leaders, further developing a culture where raising one's voice is supported in a safe environment. We will need to consider and review carefully any legislative proposals for a Bill of the Senedd on regulating managers within the NHS. We will have to be clear, in terms of the legislative competence of the Senedd, that this does not come under the matter of regulating professional healthcare workers, which has been reserved. As usual with a Member's legislative proposal, the Government will abstain in the vote on the proposal today. Thank you.

I now call on Mabon ap Gwynfor to reply to the debate.

Thank you very much, acting Dirprwy Lywydd, and thank you to everyone who has participated in this debate. It's worth noting the valuable contribution of Helen Mary Jones, a former Member of this Senedd. Many of you will be aware of the work that she did on this issue some years ago. I'm also very grateful to James Evans for his contribution on behalf of the Conservatives.

You're quite right that it is something that you've been promoting, but it's something that a number of people have been promoting. I know the British Medical Association are in support of this motion as well. It has cross-party support, which is good to see and understand.

Now, the Minister did refer to that professional regulation is there in order to protect the public; that is exactly what we're looking to establish here. I understand that the Minister does have concerns around that it might be reserved to the UK Government, but there might be opportunities in Wales, albeit difficult, to set up a regulatory body. I'm ever the optimist, therefore, there's hope; there's no reason why we can't do this, so I would urge people to consider that, that it is not impossible, it is something that we could look at. There is an issue around funding; it's not going to happen overnight. So, let's look at the principle of establishing this initially, and Members here should consider supporting this in principle, if nothing else.

Finally, I'd like to just share with you a quote from Dr Bill Kirkup. Many of you will be aware of Dr Bill Kirkup. He said in a programme on Monday night, in Panorama, he said:

'There is a widespread culture in the NHS that if you're being criticised then the right thing to do is circle your wagons, manage your reputation.

'The first stage of that is usually to do with denial and deflection, and it's masking the problems.'

That's sadly true for too many people, and we've heard recently about issues in Abertawe Swansea Bay Health Board around maternity units there as well, with the Channon family saying that they were concerned that there was a cover-up. So, in order to avoid that, in order to strengthen and give managers the support that they need, that's why we need to see a regulatory body set up here in Wales, so that we can see an improvement not just in culture, but in raising the standards and fostering trust amongst the patients. So, I would ask everybody to consider supporting this motion today. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

The proposal is to note the proposal. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection. Therefore, I will defer voting under this item until voting time.

We'll move on now to item 9, which is a debate on petitions P-06-1359 and P-06-1362 concerning support for childcare costs. I call on the Chair of the committee to move the motion—Jack Sargeant.

Thank you very much, acting Presiding Officer. On behalf of the Petitions Committee, thank you for the opportunity to submit this important debate.

Can I also extend my thanks to members of the Business Committee for enabling us to schedule this debate during the period when the Welsh Government is finalising their budget? I see the Minister for finance is with us here today. Presiding Officer, it's because, at their heart, the petitions that we are debating today are about the choices that we make here in Cymru on behalf of the people of Cymru about how we spend their money.

Llywydd, we are debating two petitions today that touch on two very similar issues. Petition P-06-1359, 'Offer Welsh working parents the same financial support for childcare as England' reads, and I quote:

'In England from April 24 all working parents of 2 year olds get 15 hours free childcare. From September 24 this will be extended to parents of 9 months old +. From September 25 the free hours will be extended to 30.

'In comparison Wales will take until September 25 to provide 12.5 hours to all 2 year olds. With no plan in place for 9 months + or increasing the hours to 15 or 30.

'We’re in a cost of living crisis where the Welsh Gov have the ability to support working parents but aren’t.'

Presiding Officer, this petition was submitted by Jade Richards, with a total of 10,820 signatures, and Jade is here in the Senedd today.

The other petition, P-06-1362, 'Match the new childcare offer in England of 15 hours for 2 year old's from April 2024' was submitted by Madelaine Hallam, with 407 signatures, and I'm sure, Presiding Officer, you can see why we've joined both these petitions together for debate today. But these petitions alone aren't the only contributions to the debate around childcare in Wales. In November 2023, Oxfam published some work done on behalf of the Make Care Fair coalition. That work was clear: the current system does some things well but isn't the answer. They said, Presiding Officer, and I quote:

'While considerable strides have been made in childcare provision and early education in Wales, the persisting challenge of ensuring straightforward, equitable access to high-quality and affordable childcare remains a pressing concern.'

They say that childcare costs are, and, again, I quote,

'forcing Welsh parents into poverty and putting them off having more children.'

And that's why we're here today, Presiding Officer. It's also why the Equality and Social Justice Committee launched its follow-up inquiry into childcare at the beginning of the year. In their original report at the end of January 2022, the committee called for changes to the way the Welsh Government provided its childcare offer to working parents. The report, 'Minding the future: The childcare barrier facing working parents' analysed the current system, as it was then, and concluded that parents in Wales faced an array of barriers to accessing the care that they're entitled to. I'm pleased to see that work is being revisited to see what progress has been made and what barriers remain, and I see the Chair of the committee in front of us today, who perhaps may enlighten us some more.

Presiding Officer, this is an issue where the Welsh Government has been active. It's an area explicitly mentioned in the partnership agreement that sets out the priorities of this Welsh Government, and that document says, and I quote:

I would like to thank my committee Chair, Jack Sargeant, for opening and the petitioners for raising such an important petition topic. As we all know, childcare is one of the, if not the biggest financial drain on family and household budgets. Many families are ultimately faced with the prospect that childcare costs are not covered by the net income of one of the parents or guardians, and therefore they're economically forced to give up work to provide care for the children. Whilst this is sustainable for some families where one member is a high earner, for many families this will have long-term implications, particularly with the cost of living as it is, and this can so easily push a family into long-term poverty.

Moreover, we're ultimately losing trained and economically active people from the workforce, not only in the short term but potentially in the longer term as well. Those leaving their jobs to look after children because they cannot afford nursery fees can find it extremely difficult to re-enter the workforce several years later, and they face the prospect of returning to entry-level positions because of the gap in their employment history. This point is very important because it disproportionately affects women. I recognise that there are ever-increasing numbers of stay-at-home dads. However, women still take on the majority of childcare duties, and this has a big impact on their finances. Not only are they more dependent on the sole earner but they also lose out on pension contributions, and this has a big impact in retirement, more so if the couple are unmarried and split up; the rights to claim pension contributions and other finances are not clearly defined.

Families that cannot afford childcare or to lose an income from the household also face the prospect of juggling very complicated childcare arrangements, using family or friends to cover. This can be particularly hard during the school holidays, which, when you include five INSET days per year, amounts to almost 70 days' holiday, more than twice the average holiday entitlement of an average British worker. Meeting this demand without help from family or expensive childcare is impossible, and for single-parent families it must be a constant worry and concern. It is therefore imperative that the childcare provisions we have are the best that we can offer.

I fully support this petition because it is clear to me that having up to 30 hours of free childcare from the age of nine months available to all families is going to dramatically help them, not only with their finances, but also to manage the new responsibilities that they now have. It is going to help mums and dads stay in employment, and, for many women, after their maternity leave they will be able to afford to pick their careers back up and keep up with their pension contributions.

I have a great deal of sympathy with those who have submitted and signed these petitions, and I fully support the aims of the petitions, because investment in the early years is the most important step that can be taken to deliver equality, according to UNICEF. The need for better provision of affordable childcare is a call that Plaid Cymru has been making for years now, and as we've heard, report after report has shown how vital this is to ensure that our children have the best start in life, and to help families to be able to access employment opportunities.

I was pleased to stand on a Plaid Cymru manifesto, as a candidate in the last Senedd elections, that emphasised the importance of creating a national childcare service for every child from the age of 12 months for 48 weeks of the year, and I still believe in that aim. After being elected, I was pleased to support the inclusion in the co-operation agreement between Plaid Cymru and the Government of the extension of free childcare for two-year-olds, and as a result Wales is now in the vanguard in terms of the expansion of childcare, despite the new policy proposals in England, which are yet to be implemented. The childcare offer in England will not be available to every child and family, and it would only span 38 weeks of the year, leaving 14 weeks without any childcare support at all. This would continue to make childcare unaffordable to many families, and could undermine the sector and its need for certainty that families will use its services for most of the year.

However, Plaid Cymru has also echoed the calls on the Welsh Government, which have been included in the petitions, and made following the Chancellor’s statements, to ensure that any funding that comes to Wales as a result of funding the expansion of childcare in England is used for the same purposes in Wales. Because this is a crucial matter in terms of tackling the shameful levels of child poverty and inequality that scar our communities.

I was disappointed that greater attention was not given to the vital importance of expanding childcare in the Government’s new child poverty strategy. Because what we, as members of the Equality and Social Justice Committee, heard from the international experts who gave evidence to us was that full provision of affordable childcare is key to tackling poverty. That is why we, as a committee, recommended to the Government that uninterrupted and affordable childcare should be provided, via Barnett consequentials that would be available if there were an increase in expenditure in England. Because what our witnesses told us was that when parents on low incomes are asked, 'What do you need?', the answer time and time again is, 'Childcare, childcare. Accessible childcare, affordable childcare.'

You'll have to conclude now.

—on top of what she said in Davos recently about not increasing taxes on wealth or major corporations, was appalling in the context of the message in these petitions. We have to invest in our most precious asset, our children.

I want to start by saying 'thank you so much' to my colleague Jack Sargeant and all of the Petitions Committee for taking this so seriously. Thank you also to Jade and to Madelaine for putting forward these petitions. I've actually had many constituents who have asked me today specifically to speak, because what you wrote really resonates with them and what they're experiencing at the moment. Deputy Minister, I am really looking forward to hearing about the comparison that has been made with the Welsh and the English offer at the moment.

I will also make the point that it shouldn't always have to fall to women or parents to have to bring the childcare issue up, but it does disadvantage women most. They estimate that 1.7 million women are working fewer hours than they would like to, purely because they just don't have access to the childcare that they require.

I would like to also though point out that we have seen this introduction of a new offer in England, but it has been shambolic, to say the least. You can't put out an offer like this without the infrastructure being there, and that is something that, as a member of the Equality and Social Justice Committee, we found came through in our evidence. You need to have the workforce there, and you can see that that's really fallen flat on its face at the moment in England.

I'd also agree though that, to be honest, it's not good enough, really, in Wales or England, at the moment. The UK has the worst childcare offer in Europe as a whole. There are many, many more countries in Europe that have a more comprehensive offer, it is cheaper, there are more hours, there are more ages, and it works around people who are working maybe night shifts, such as NHS workers. If we look at Canada, for example, they've just invested £30 billion in rolling out what is going to be a universal and affordable childcare offer for $10 a day.

But I would like to come back to what Sioned Williams said: childcare is not cheap, and it shouldn't be. And I think that, really, we need to have a really honest conversation, not just in Wales, but in England as well—as you said, the Barnett consequentials for this would have to come from the UK Government and the Treasury—about where we are going, what are we aiming for with our childcare offer, and what are we prepared to do, to change, to fund it. All of those other countries in Europe will charge higher taxes in order to be able to do this. It's not a dissimilar conversation to the one we're also having around childcare. I would argue that childcare should be seen now as critical economic infrastructure.

We should be working for a childcare offer that is extremely affordable and universal, from when the baby is born up until they go to school. I know that at the moment that is impossible—I totally understand that—but I would at least like to believe that that is where we're aiming for. We took evidence from people in Sweden and they were saying, 'Look, we started this two decades ago and that's why we are where we are now.' We really do have to have this conversation and make this commitment.

Will you take an intervention?

Of course.

Thanks, Sarah. You seem to be alluding to wanting a nationalised childcare service. Is that something that you're hoping for?

Not necessarily nationalised. But as I said, I would like to see—. It would have to be heavily subsidised. Childcare is not cheap. Whether that's done in the private sector or whether that's nationalised. So, that money does have to come from somewhere. So, no, if you look at countries like Germany, it's not nationalised, but it's still very, very cheap for families. I just think that we need to have some idea of where we are going with this.

Many people will tell you that if you poll issues and policies around childcare, it tends to come out very, very low, and I do believe that that does have an impact on the commitment that is made by all parties and politicians. Because what tends to happen is that the only people who seem to be really in favour of a really great childcare offer are usually people who are using it and going through it, or have people who they know who need it. So, this is also just a wider societal discussion that we have to have, really, around—. And Sioned Williams, you mentioned this as well, about how good it is for children when they have this access too.

But we do have to grasp the nettle. I do think that the campaigners out there are getting louder. I do think that it's not just people any more who are impacted by this who are talking about it. I think it's really fundamental to who we are as a society. Like I said, it would be great to hear the comparison between England and Wales at the moment, but I hope as well, Deputy Minister, that you agree with me that we will get somewhere in future that is the best that it could possible be. Diolch.

We should consider support for childcare costs not just as another state handout, but like business rate relief, this is something that the Welsh Government could do, not just to make people's lives easier, but to stimulate growth—something we have largely failed to do post COVID here in Wales, with the lowest productivity per capita of any UK nation.

But what can we do to stimulate growth? We can stop putting barriers between businesses and their customers. Some of these barriers are fiscal and some of them are regulatory. The provision of good-quality, cheap childcare allows both parents to work, thus stimulates growth. The evidence for this is very clear. We should recognise that, in the UK, we have the most expensive childcare in Europe, as the Member for Bridgend mentioned in the previous contribution. The effect of this is to place parents into hardship. Many cannot afford to make care arrangements for their children in order for them to work. If their childcare costs were cheaper, parents would be less stressed, their children could be placed into care whilst they work and they'd have more money to spend on other things. And there don't seem to be any downsides to this happening.

The UK Government is taking positive steps towards expanding the 30 hours of free childcare scheme for working parents from when their child turns nine months old until they start school. From April 2024, working parents of two-year-olds will be able to access 15 hours of childcare support. From September 2024, 15 hours of childcare support will be extended to working parents with a child from nine months old. From September 2025, 30 hours of childcare will be available for eligible working parents with a child from nine months up to school age. The UK Government is doubling the amount they expect to spend over the next few years from around £4 billion to around £8 billion each year.

So, when I hear contributions saying that the roll-out of it has been chaotic, I struggle to see how that is the case when there is a clear timeline and funds are in place to fund this scheme from the UK Government for parents in England. That's why I'm alluding to the fact that Wales should be doing the same.

The Welsh Government should be matching this commitment and it goes without saying that failure to do so puts Welsh parents at a significant disadvantage. A typical two-earner family spends around 30 per cent of its income on childcare, the highest of any developed country. Unaffordable childcare is also disastrous for equality because it drives mothers away from the workforce, as Sioned alluded to, making women in Wales less equal with regard to access to the workplace than women in England. That alludes also to the brain drain that Joel mentioned in his contribution—something that we need to stop here in Wales. As I have already mentioned, this is a huge drag on productivity. During a cost-of-living crisis, the Welsh Government should shoulder the burden of one of Welsh households' biggest expenditures, because the economic benefits are all so clear.

Thank you so much to the petitioners for bringing our attention to this really important issue. It's a really vital concern for many of us here in the Siambr. Like Sarah Murphy and Sioned Williams, I also sit on the Equality and Social Justice Committee, where we have considered childcare, not only in relation to childcare per se, but also in relation to child poverty. It was one of the recommendations that we brought forward in our recent report, 'Calling time on child poverty'.

Having good-quality, accessible, affordable childcare in the language of choice of the parents is absolutely essential to tackling child poverty. It's a no-brainer. It is clear that having good-quality childcare helps the child and the parents. And this is normally, as we've heard, about women in our society, and it's about our economy.

I would like to encourage the Welsh Government to look at childcare in the same way that they have looked at benefits. One of the issues that we have heard is how complex and complicated accessing the childcare system is. If we had a Welsh childcare charter, where parents just told their story once, and on the basis of that were offered good-quality, accessible, affordable childcare in the language of their choice, that would be a game changer for Wales.

We need to make sure that we close the gap between those parents and carers who can afford good quality childcare and those who can't. We had a report—the Welsh Liberal Democrats—called, 'Closing the Gap'. We want a bold vision that is flexible, affordable childcare, for parents of children from nine months to school age to have access to 1,500 hours of funded childcare a year.

So, just to close, Llywydd dros dro, I'd like to hear from the Minister about whether these concerns can be taken forward, and whether there is really serious consideration of the impact that having high-quality, accessible and affordable childcare has in relation to child poverty. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

The petitioners need to realise that, from April, working parents in England will be entitled to 15 hours a week of free childcare, if they have a two-year-old. That does not mean that they will actually get that entitlement, because the provision isn't actually there. I mean, clearly, some of it is there, but the provision for all people to suddenly be able to walk into childcare is not there. So, I think we need to get realistic about the complexities of childcare and the importance of ensuring that it is good quality. We do not want lousy childcare for our children, and no parent would knowingly leave their child with someone unless it was good enough for their child.

The assumption from the petitioners is also that any families who are deprived or disadvantaged are already covered by Flying Start, and I'm afraid that that is absolutely not the case. As the Welsh Government knows, this is based on the super-output areas of deprivation, which themselves are blobs on maps, rather than actual communities, where, often, whole streets are divided in two. But clearly, because of the shortage of money, you've got to start from somewhere, so you might as well start with the communities that have been identified as the most deprived. I understand the Welsh Government's strategy is, quite rightly, to then move out from there and include more people, so that most of those who are the poorest will be getting those vital 12.5 hours of childcare at age two. It takes an awful long time, and even that won't cover all the children who are coming from poor families. So, this is a very complicated story.

We know from the report we've done in the Equality and Social Justice Committee, not just the childcare report we did last year, but the child poverty report, 'Calling time on child poverty' a couple of months ago—. The Children, Young People and Education Committee shared evidence with us of just how difficult it was to navigate any form of childcare entitlement if you had a disabled child or you were disabled yourself. That is part of their inquiry, 'Do disabled children have equal rights to education and childcare?' The answer is, 'Absolutely not'. It is really difficult for anybody to navigate where the childcare is, how to get it and what it will cost, but in the case of disabled families, the family information service really does have to step up to the plate and provide families with the information they actually need. If they've got a disabled child, then it should be the family information service that should be doing the research as to what is suitable for a child with a particular disability, not the hard-pressed family with the disabled child. So, I think we really do need to improve the quality of the family information service that is supposed to exist in every single local authority.

Can I also thank the committee for their work in bringing this forward? It's a much-needed petition debate, and thanks to the petitioners who presented it. It's a massive issue for many people, and I won't rehearse the differences between England and Wales, we've heard that enough today. But, unfortunately, the Welsh Government not deciding to follow suit with what is on offer in England places families here in an extremely difficult position.

I recently had the pleasure, it was only last week, of meeting some incredible mothers in my constituency, along with our MP, to hear about the their experiences accessing childcare. Many of these women were working professionals who are eager to get back to the workforce, but basing the childcare offer on the Flying Start areas has become a real postcode lottery as a result, and many are not able to access it, even though their neighbours could well access it. So, they're left in a situation where it is more financially viable to stay at home, rather than pay for childcare. One was a midwife, a profession we are desperate for, yet she has gone back into a non-clinical role because of the inadequate access to childcare. Others were simply just going to lose money, or were losing money, by going to work. This simply isn't sustainable.

On the other side of the coin, I visited, last week, a childcare provider who explained that the funding from the Welsh Government was barely covering the daily cost per child against a backdrop of inflation and salary increases. Indeed, I've been contacted by at least another 10 local settings only in the last few days echoing this same situation. However, it's not just anecdotal, because it is a reflection of a wider situation, with a recent survey showing that 70 per cent of settings did not believe they would have a future, a sustainable future, past 12 months, whilst data from Oxfam found that almost 90 per cent of parents listed affordable childcare as a top priority.

So, in the light of this, it was just absolutely astounding to me that the Welsh Government have reprioritised £11.2 million from the childcare offer funding due to a less-than-expected uptake when we are seeing both parents and providers crying out for more money to create a sustainable service and a service that is widely accessible to a lot more people. So, I support this petition, one that is simply asking for parity with our neighbours in England. It is clear that families in Wales are being let down, or will be let down, if we don't match the offer in England. We've seen what can be done and what is on offer in England, we're just simply asking on behalf of our many, many families in our constituencies for that same opportunity here. Thank you.

The Deputy Minister for Social Services, now, to contribute to the debate. Julie Morgan.

Diolch. Thank you very much for giving me the opportunity here today to respond to this really important debate about childcare, and thanks to the Petitions Committee for taking this forward and to Jade and Madelaine for bringing these petitions, because it gives us the opportunity to really talk about what is an absolutely crucial matter. We all recognise that high-quality, accessible childcare can be transformational for children, especially those whose families are facing additional challenges. Childcare also brings opportunities for parents to work, which has been discussed a lot here today, particularly women, helping our economy, tackling poverty and reducing inequalities. So, I can't stress more strongly the importance of childcare to the Government.

'Taking Wales Forward' committed us to provide 30 hours a week of Government-funded early education and childcare for working parents of three and four-year-olds. The childcare offer for Wales is currently one of the best offers in the UK, because it covers 48 weeks of the year, compared with England's 38 weeks, which I think Sioned Williams mentioned. It also supports those who are trying to improve their career prospects. From September 2022, we expanded the childcare offer to include all parents in education and training. So, in Wales, it's not just working parents, it's parents who are in education and training as well, and it's for a longer period of the year.

In December 2023, over 15,900 children were accessing the childcare offer, and this includes approximately 650 children whose parents were in education or training, and during the academic year 2022-23, we estimate that around 1,140 additional individual parents were supported because of the expansion of the offer to include eligible parents in education and training, and I think that was a crucial move, to bring childcare to parents in education and training. And we continue to invest in our strategic communication plan to promote our childcare offer through a variety of channels to ensure that eligible parents are encouraged to take up the offer.

And in response to Jenny Rathbone's reference to disabled children, we do provide particular support for disabled children via the childcare offer, but we don't think that is actually enough support, so we are looking at providing more support for disabled children.

So, whilst the Chancellor announced in his spring budget last year an expansion to childcare for working parents in England, it's becoming increasingly clear—as many people have mentioned today—that these promises, which were due to come in from April, will fall well short of expectations, because it's all very well to say you're going to do something, but in order to do it, you have to have the places, you have to have the workforce and you have to work jointly with the workforce, with all the stakeholders, to prepare. And in Wales we have a strong, skilled and ambitious childcare workforce and we're committed to working with them to support the sector to grow. This support is about enabling providers to expand in a way that meets their ambitions. We're all committed to maintaining and developing a highly regarded, highly skilled and a well-rewarded workforce. And we don't intend to compromise our staffing ratios, we don't intend to reduce qualification requirements, or otherwise risk the quality of the experience we provide for children and their families. Again, I think that was a point that Jenny Rathbone made in her contribution, that we want high quality, and so we don't intend to take shortcuts to achieve that.

Will you take an intervention?

Yes.

I just wanted to ask you, really, with the consequentials that the Welsh Government will be receiving from UK Government as part of the roll-out in England, it seems in your remarks that there is a continued reluctance from the Welsh Government to incorporate the proposed system for England. So, where will that money go from the consequentials, and where will that be spent, because it's a significant amount of money coming across from the UK Government, so where will that go, if it's not going to spent on its intended purpose?

Any consequentials that come from England come centrally to the Welsh Government, and it's decided by the Cabinet where that money goes. But I don't know why you have this obsession with us wanting to follow England. We are developing childcare here in Wales in a systematic way, and I see no reason for anything that is happening in England to change the way that we're developing, and we have a plan and we're working towards that plan. In any case, I'm very pleased to say that, through the co-operation agreement, we're making good progress and delivering on the commitments that we've given.

And, of course, Government-funded childcare provision can make an important contribution to mitigating the cost-of-living pressures that families are currently experiencing, and that has been raised in the debate. Childcare, which is an important element of the Flying Start programme, is not only an important means of promoting child development and attainment through high-quality provision, it can obviously be the key to work. And, as we all know, work is the route out of poverty, and I think Joel James and Sarah both mentioned the importance of women in that situation.

So, we're expanding Flying Start in phases. Phase 1, which offers all four elements of Flying Start, including speech and language, is now complete. We committed to provide 2,500 children with support through the phase 1 expansion of the Flying Start programme. As at the end of March 2023, 3,178 children were offered Flying Start provision—127 per cent of the target committed to. And this included 772 children who had been offered a childcare place.

We began the expansion of phase 2 in April last year, and this phase is focusing specifically on providing Flying Start childcare to more two-year-olds. So, during 2023-24 and 2024-25, we are investing £46 million in expanding Flying Start childcare to support long-term positive impacts on the lives of those children and families across Wales who are facing the greatest challenges. And we expect to support more than 9,500 extra two-year-olds during this phase, and we're absolutely well on track to deliver this. So, we are actually delivering more places here and now. You're talking about what's happening in England in the future, where there's a great deal of doubt about whether it will be able to happen because of the workforce pressures et cetera, but we are actually delivering this now.

And I just must say that, last week, with Siân Gwenllian, I had the privilege of visiting a nursery in a north Wales expansion area, and witnessed at first-hand the importance of high-quality early childhood play, learning and care, which was absolutely inspiring. We saw a pioneering childcare setting, which has adopted the Reggio Emilia approach to early years education. Putting children at the centre, it gives them power and potential to develop and learn from the environment, mostly outdoors, and by using the lessons learned from International Play Iceland, the setting is also committed to the positive development of children through play. And I just think it was one of the most inspiring visits I've had for a long time. And that is happening now in Wales, and Flying Start is being delivered from this setting.

Yes. Even Ministers have the clock ticking against them.

In conclusion, I think what I was saying then is what I want to end with: that the Welsh Government is delivering this expansion, this high-quality expansion, now, and I don't think we should be thinking all the time, 'How does this compare with England?' What we should be thinking of is, 'How is this happening now?', and working out how we will develop ourselves in the future. Diolch.

Jack Sargeant now to reply to the debate.

I'm grateful, Presiding Officer. Can I thank the Minister for responding to today's debate and all of those who have contributed? I won't be able to get through them all, Presiding Officer, you'll be pleased to hear, but I'll comment on Joel James, my committee colleague, who started by offering his full support to the petition and also stating that childcare is the biggest single issue for parents with young children in Wales during this cost-of-living crisis. I think that was echoed through the contributions throughout today.

We heard a lot from members of the Equality and Social Justice Committee about their work, and their Chair also spoke. Jane Dodds discussed the link between childcare and child poverty and wanted a refocus on the economic value, and I think Gareth Davies mentioned the same. What this debate has done today, Presiding Officer, is that it has given a clear platform for the Minister and various Welsh Government Ministers to be able to understand the frustrations of parents in Wales. And I think we heard Sarah Murphy suggest that you've had a number of people come to you, not just parents. Peter Fox, you mentioned childcare providers coming to you about the differences and, perhaps, the perceived unfairness of two different offers: one in England, one in Wales. And that's the same for me, with a constituency right on the border region, but also with the Flying Start offer being around the corner on the street.

I know I'm pressed for time, Presiding Officer, but I should say that I'll make an offer to the Minister—. I think what the petitioners will feel is, come April—. And there has been lots of debate about the offer in Wales and England and delivering in Wales and perhaps not so delivering in England—. One of the downsides of politics is, often, that that doesn't reach people in the general public. So, perhaps, as an offer to the Minister, if we could have a detailed written note that we could share with the petitioners—over 11,000 who have signed this petition—we could send to them on that, because I think they will still have questions and they still deserve some clarity on that. The petitioner was quite clear to me—it's important that they get the clarity so that they can understand what's happening in their own democracy. So, if we could follow up on that, that would be great.

I know I am pressed for time, Presiding Officer. I'll just thank everyone again, but thank, more importantly, all the petitioners who signed. I don't think this is going away—I know the Equality and Social Justice Committee will be reviewing childcare and I think the Petitions Committee will have an avid interest in the end of it as well. Diolch.

I thank the committee Chair. The proposal is to note the petitions. Does any Member object? No. Therefore, the proposal is agreed.

Item 10 is postponed.

So, we'll move to item 11: debate on the culture committee's report, 'Behind the scenes: The creative industries workforce'. The committee Chair to present the debate—Delyth Jewell.

Thank you, Llywydd. Thank you for the opportunity to hold this debate today on the committee's report, 'Behind the scenes: The creative industries workforce'. I'd like to thank the committee team, as usual, for its work, which is so important for the committee's own work.

Wales has established itself as a prominent centre for the creative industries in the United Kingdom. The sector sustains over 80,000 jobs and has an annual turnover of around £4 billion. This is worth over 5 per cent of Wales's GDP. It truly is one of the powerhouses of Wales's economy and it is an achievement in which all of us should take pride. Despite the vibrant nature of the industry in Wales, it has become clear that the story of the creative industries is a tale of two industries, if truth be told.

I'd like to place here my tribute to our researcher Robin Wilkinson, whose excellent blog on this issue puts this as 'a tale of two industries'. And as he says, it is, in many ways, you could say, both the best and worst of times for the sector.

The first part of the tale of the creative industries is a real success story. The screen sector in Wales, as we were told by Professor Justin Lewis from Cardiff University,

'is a huge success story',

with Wales

'seen as a kind of global powerhouse in the UK'.

The screen sector in Wales, pre and post the COVID-19 pandemic, has seen significant growth. This provides plenty of job opportunities. Now, by contrast, other parts of the creative industries are struggling a great deal. The arts, culture and music sectors still haven’t fully recovered from the pandemic.

Again, Professor Justin Lewis told us, for example:

'all the underlying trends in the music industry are bad.'

It has been said time and time again, Llywydd, that recovery in the arts, culture and music sectors has been prevented by high energy costs and the slow return of audiences following the pandemic. Now, unfortunately, the additional support provided by the Welsh Government for these sectors, although welcome, has been absorbed by higher than ever levels of inflation.

In our report, we set out a number of recommendations, including building on the positive interventions to date, like well-being facilitators to tackle bullying and inappropriate behaviour in the creative industries, a longer term approach to funding and planning skills development, and ensuring there's good-quality and timely data available to understand equality, diversity and inclusion within the creative industries workforce.

Now, we welcome the Welsh Government’s acceptance of a number of our recommendations, including how the Government is co-ordinating initiatives to ensure sufficient Welsh language skills in the creative industries, working with unions and production companies to identify best practice to ensure workers can work in environments that are free from discrimination, prejudice and bullying, and providing longer term funded support for skills development in the creative industries. We are confident that these actions will help tackle some of the issues we have identified in our inquiry.

The recommendations put forward, though, need to be implemented together if we are to ensure the creative industries in Wales can grow in a sustainable way that is fair to all who work in them. It is a disappointment, Llywydd, that the Welsh Government rejected outright our recommendation that the forthcoming culture strategy should set out support for developing and sustaining the workforce in the arts and music sectors. The arts and culture sectors are crying out for strategic direction. As far back as 2021, the Welsh Government committed to introducing a new culture strategy for Wales. Nearly three years later, some parts of the creative industries in Wales are in crisis—and I don't use that word lightly. We have repeatedly asked when that strategy will be ready. Only last week, during draft budget scrutiny, the Deputy Minister told the committee, and I'm quoting her words here:

'our initial projection of this taking about six months was wildly optimistic. And so that was the primary reason for that—the need to get this right and to consult all of the right people.'

Of course we need to get this right, and we do recognise that, certainly. The Welsh Government also rejected our calls for the culture strategy to include provisions on fair pay and working conditions. The Deputy Minister told us during our evidence session that:

'Within that cultural strategy I would expect very much that expectations will be set out very clearly about what cultural organisations look like in Wales and how they employ staff, and what their working conditions are like'.

So, we were disappointed that that recommendation was rejected. We accept the need to get this strategy right and to consult properly, as I've said, but it has been a number of years in the making, of course. In that time, the music, performing arts, theatres, museums and galleries, they are in a bad place. You only have to see the draft budget settlements to understand that. And things, we fear, are going to get worse for a number of organisations over the next year or two, given the financial climate. And yet there is still no strategy or policy direction on what support will be available for these sectors.

Now, I look forward to hearing what other Members have to say in this debate, and again we're very grateful for the time allocated to this discussion on the content of our inquiry. Thank you.

Can I thank the Chair of the committee, Delyth Jewell, for bringing this report to the floor of the Senedd and all members of the committee and the clerking team for their hard work during this process?

The creative industries in Wales are formed by a rich variety of individuals, organisations, companies and charities. Their combined work plays a vital role in enriching our Welsh culture, heritage and future development, and contributes massively to our Welsh economy, bringing in an annual turnover of £4 billion every year. It's important we recognise the importance of creative industries and the role they play in Wales, and their work is something to be celebrated. But there are difficulties in the sector, especially post pandemic, and it's worrying that the Welsh Government have decided not to incorporate in its culture strategy—and, by the way, as Delyth Jewell mentioned, that is delayed—ambitions for the development and sustainability of the arts and music sectors.

Whilst the Welsh Government have rejected three out of the 13 recommendations, I welcome the acceptance, or partial acceptance in some cases, of the remaining 10. It's positive to see commitments to ensuring sufficient Welsh language skills in the sector and to increase awareness of opportunities for younger people in the sector. It's important that young people wanting to get into the creative industries sector have the opportunity to break into these careers, with the option of both Welsh and English language skills. It's especially important given the findings of this committee's report into a lack of experience in the sector, which has been caused by serious concern for the sector. Some interviewees said, quote,

'it feels like we've gone back ten years'.

The sector suffered massively post pandemic through workforce issues, pay and working conditions, offers of work, opportunities for recruiting and upskilling, and many other issues. And that's especially true of freelance workers. Half of workers lost 80 per cent of their work in 2021, and 57 per cent stopped investing in new equipment.

Cost-of-living issues have also hit the sector hard. Music Venue Trust stated that costs rose 300 per cent across their membership, and this has left the music sector in an uncertain position; 56 per cent of organisations stated that they were very or extremely worried about the pressures that rising costs bring.

The Welsh Government noted unprecedented levels of growth for the sector, which is very promising post pandemic, but that has led to a shortage of staff in the sector, and is something that needs to be addressed as a matter of urgency. The Welsh Government, as stated in the report, must do more to increase the work and experience opportunities for those both in and looking to become a part of these sectors. These shortages are being felt right across the sector. Creative Wales, for example, is a small team, which, in the words of Nia Britton, does 'excellent work' whilst combating the difficult issues faced by the sector.

May I start by thanking the Chair for outlining the work of the committee superbly at the beginning of this debate? I was fortunate enough to be a member of the committee when this work was ongoing, and it was an inquiry that was not only interesting but also important in my view, because, after all, the creative industries and the growth in those industries are extremely important in terms of the Welsh economy. I don't know how many school pupils I meet—they're all gamers, YouTubers; these are the kinds of industries that they're itching to get into. We see on social media that children in our schools learn coding, all of these important skills. This is the future, and it's an integral part of our future as a nation. I do think that there were a number of things, as has already been highlighted, that are exciting happening in Wales, but we're also seeing barriers that are preventing that growth and preventing Wales from taking advantage of all of these opportunities, which means that we're missing out, and also that we're not ensuring that all the people who could be working in this field have the opportunity to do so.

I was very pleased to see the Government accepting recommendation 2 in terms of developing the Welsh language across the creative industries. The evidence that we heard from S4C was particularly important in that regard in terms of the absence of Welsh-medium skills, because, after all, we often discuss the problems in terms of rural poverty or the shortage of good jobs around Wales—well, there are excellent jobs in the creative industries, and the fact that you can do many of these roles from anywhere in Wales, and it doesn't have to be centred here in Cardiff, but can be anywhere in Wales, is extremely important.

One of the things that I have concerns about is the Government's unwillingness to accept the recommendations in terms of the culture strategy. I am very concerned that we're seeing this sector as being separate to culture, because that link is integral, and, if it isn't going to be in the culture strategy, where will the strategy sit for this sector?

I was also concerned, in terms of recommendation 11 being rejected, which covered the role of the Arts Council of Wales in carrying out an urgent assessment of the financial health of arts venues, that the Government isn't taking any sort of responsibility for that and saying that it is a matter for the arts council. Well, the arts council is funded by Welsh Government; they have an annual remit letter, so the Government can instruct the arts council in terms of what it expects in terms of this strategic work, so I don't accept that and I would like to understand from the Minister why they have not accepted that recommendation, and I would ask where the strategy for the sector will sit.

I very much agree with the final point that was made by Heledd Fychan. I, like others on the committee, am very much grateful to the Welsh Government for accepting most of the recommendations, but profoundly disappointed that the Welsh Government has not accepted and has, in fact, rejected, I think, recommendations 1 and 4 in particular.

It is important and it is impossible, in my view, to pretend that we can have a culture strategy that doesn't involve the people who work in the sector. You simply cannot. Culture is about people. Culture is about who we are as a people. A strategy should be looking at the different elements within that whole ecosystem of that sector, bringing things together and looking at how we can maximise the value of that sector to this country, but also maximise the impact that this sector has on all of us. To believe that it is possible to achieve those ambitions without having a clear-sighted, thorough, deep and ambitious strategy for the workforce, for the people, beggars belief. It can't be done.

I would say to the Welsh Government, 'Think hard about these matters', because it's one thing to say—and I've probably said it myself at different times—that we have a high-level strategy that simply addresses some of the major issues, but you don't have a strategy at all if you haven't got the people to deliver it. That's the reality. And what I want to see from Government is far more ambition, far more objectives, far more accountability for these things. And I hope that the culture strategy, when we do see it, will not simply be a whole load of words and pictures, very well produced, very well designed, but that what it will have is vision and ambition pulsating through every page of it, and, at its heart, it must have people.

And, in the same way, on recommendation 4, I understand the devolution settlement. I can assure the Welsh Government that the Senedd understands the settlement. And I can assure the Welsh Government that the committee understands the settlement. We know what is devolved and what isn't devolved. But we also understand the nature of Government, and Government can act as a catalyst, Government can marshal change, Government can be ambitious, Government can be energetic, and Government can bring people together in order to achieve the objectives that I believe the Government shares with us. The Government should not, in my view, be rejecting a recommendation that seeks to ensure that, and I quote,

'the arts, culture and music sectors...achieve equitable pay settlements and outline...additional support'.

That is what Government, I believe, in Wales, should be doing. Because this was a really important inquiry, and it was undertaken, of course, against a backdrop of some quite significant issues. And it was quite a difficult inquiry, in some ways, for some participants and for some witnesses, and I think we should repeat the gratitude that the Chair outlined at the beginning of this debate, to all the witnesses and all those who participated in the inquiry.

I remember attending an event in the centre of the city in Cardiff, where we spoke to a whole range of different people who had tried to make their way in the industry, and what they shared was a fantastic ambition for Wales, for the sector, and for who we could all be. And it was inspiring to spend time with them. It was inspiring to spend time with them. But what we learnt was all the barriers that they were trying to overcome, all the barriers that had been placed in their way.

Being a member of the culture committee has given me the opportunity to learn more about the successes and challenges our creative industries face in Wales, and I'd like to thank everyone involved. At the celebration of 60 years of Doctor Who at the Pierhead building in Cardiff, Russell T. Davies told us how he insisted that Doctor Who would be produced in Wales and how the owners of Bad Wolf studios made it happen, to help grow the economy of Wales—not London, but Wales. We've also seen the success of HBO's House of the Dragon, filmed in my region of North Wales, made possible with support from Creative Wales.

The creative industries, tv and film are rapidly growing in Wales, as referred to earlier, thanks to the hard work of all those involved. It's brought challenges, though. Gabriella Ricci from production company Bad Wolf explained that a shortage of workforce meant that we could not keep up with the demands our productions were seeing in south Wales and the south-west Wales region. I would like to see north Wales reach its potential as a place for the creative industries. We have the talent and we have great locations and educational facilities, and we will be having the Focus Wales music and film event in May, which brings 20,000 people to Wrexham. So, I'm hoping we've got the infrastructure as well.

Our committee agreed that more investment is needed in training and skills. We also need to ensure retention within the industry, and we heard how large numbers of workers are considering leaving due to poor working conditions, which is a serious concern. And as we heard earlier, our recommendation is that Welsh Government work with trade unions to develop best practice for the industry, protecting workers.

It can be tough starting out in the arts, and during a committee visit to Ireland, we heard about their basic income for artists trial, which is taking place over a three-year period. Nine thousand people applied and 2,000 have been randomly selected to take part. Given the precariousness of the arts, culture and music sectors at the moment, due to Brexit, COVID and the cost-of-living crisis, the basic income scheme would give some certainty and a safety net, especially for those just starting their careers.

It is a tale of two halves, though. The small grass-roots venues are struggling with inflationary pressures. People are not returning post COVID and are concerned about rising business rates. I heard on BBC Radio Wales last week a discussion about how the Welsh Rugby Union and the Football Association of Wales support small grass-roots clubs, and it would be great if the successful performers who perform now in stadiums, who started off at these grass-roots venues, could pay into a fund that could support small venues.

The Deputy Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism to contribute to the debate, Dawn Bowden.

Diolch, Llywydd. First of all, can I just say that the Welsh Government absolutely welcomes the publication of the 'Behind the scenes: The creative industries workforce' report? I'd certainly like to thank the committee for its work in this important area.

There's absolutely no doubt as to the value of our creative industries. They are, as we've already heard from other contributors, a critical part of our economy, creating jobs and supporting investment across Wales. They're vital to our cultural identity. They contribute to our social landscape and to a strong national brand that helps to promote Wales and its talent to the world. They're essential to the ongoing sustainability and growth of the Welsh language, and furthering our ambitions as set out in 'Cymraeg 2050'.

Now, in January 2020, actually four years ago today, Creative Wales was launched as an internal agency of Welsh Government to champion the creative industries in Wales. Since then, almost two years was taken up with dealing almost exclusively with the COVID response, and supporting our creative industries through that unprecedented crisis. The pandemic was then immediately followed by the cost-of-energy-and-living crisis, which impacts the sector, as, again, we have heard in some detail today. Despite this, Creative Wales has continued to target support to the screen, digital, gaming, music and publishing sectors, and is making positive progress in what has effectively been only two years of relatively normal operation.

But it’s important to note that, across the wider creative industries, we are supporting the sector alongside key partners such as the Arts Council of Wales. And contrary to what we’ve heard today, we are of course developing a culture strategy, which it seems to me that Heledd Fychan has forgotten is actually part of the co-operation agreement, and that we’ve worked every step of the way along the culture strategy road with Members of Plaid Cymru to deliver where we are so far. As I explained to committee, we’re much further along than we would have wanted to be in terms of timings, because the oversight panel that is working on the culture strategy with us came back and said that they felt that they needed more time to do significant areas of work. I’ve made it very clear from the outset—

Is the Minister taking an intervention from the Chamber?

I can't hear anything in the Chamber.

Yes. Are you agreeing to the intervention, first? From Tom Giffard.

From Tom Giffard? Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you very much, Deputy Minister. You seemed excited to take my intervention. You mentioned you were much further along in the development of a cultural strategy, in your words there. That's not quite the case, is it? Because you mentioned initially that this would not take very long, and we're still three years down the line without a cultural strategy. I understand you mentioned at committee recently that that took some time, that process took longer than you thought, but we still actually haven't got a firm date as to when that's being published. Can you clarify that now?

No, no, sorry, Tom, you've misunderstood what I was saying. We are not as far down the road with the culture strategy as I would have wanted to be because the overarching panel that is working on this with us has come back to us several times to say that they needed to do further work. There were areas, there were gaps, where further consultation and further work with stakeholders was needed. But each and every step that we've taken in the culture strategy has been done in conjunction with our co-operation agreement partners, who have agreed the way forward, and all of this was explained to you in committee recently. So, I’m not going to take any further time from my response or my contribution for that today.

It is also not true to say, of course, that the culture strategy is not a people strategy. It is, of course. The point that was made in my response is that Creative Wales actually sits outside the scope of the culture strategy, and that was agreed with our co-operation agreement partners at the outset, so that should have been readily understood.

The interconnectedness of the creative industries and the arts in Wales is an important consideration in our support for the sector. The recently launched memorandum of understanding between Creative Wales and the Arts Council of Wales recognises this interconnectedness and the need for a holistic approach to our joint work. The document sets out our shared priorities on areas such as skills, diversity and inclusion, and recognises the importance of the freelance community to the sector’s ongoing success. Indeed, the freelance community itself—. Wales was the only part of the UK that agreed a freelancer pledge to work with those people in the industry.

There are other areas in the committee report and its recommendations that call for actions across three sub-sectors where levers and responsibilities differ. Where this is the case, we have sought to separately explain the different positions in our responses to those, and, again, I don’t intend to repeat evidence that has already been provided on that.

But we should be proud of our achievements in the creative industries. As is the case for many things in Wales, the sector punches way above its weight, as is highlighted by the committee’s report. The screen sector in particular is one of our success stories, generating a turnover of £459 million in 2022—an increase of 37 per cent since 2017.

However, as the report also highlights, the creative industries are, of course, not without their challenges, not least the ongoing challenging economic conditions that all businesses are experiencing as the world continues to recover from the global pandemic and contend with rising energy and business costs. But if we are to protect our creative industries, these challenges cannot be ignored. We must meet them head on, and our response to the committee's report sets out some of the actions that we are taking to do this.

The Chair of the culture committee now to respond to the debate—Delyth Jewell.

Thank you, Llywydd. Thank you to everyone who has contributed to today's debate. Before we conclude, I'd like to respond to several of the points raised by Members today.

Tom set out the value of the creative industries. He set out some of the issues facing the freelance workforce in particular and, in terms of the worst of times, costs increasing 300 per cent for some in the music sector. But he also set out where things are going well, the best of times, with Bad Wolf, which is doing so much that we can take pride in in the sector. But there is a shortage of staff, as Tom said, and that's a major issue, and that's why we will need this strategy, which will be so much welcomed when it is received.

Heledd talked about the growth in the sectors that are so important for our nation's future: the gamers, the YouTubers—the skills that will be so important in the future. I feel so old when I talk about things such as coding and so on, because I'm aware that I don't understand how such things work.

But, yes, the new ways of working where people can do things remotely offer so many more opportunities, particularly in those sectors I mentioned, and I think that's something that's really exciting. And who—. Where have I set it out—? No, I've found it now. Forgive me, Llywydd. We do need to see these sectors working as one, not in silos. And thank you to Heledd for her work once again. When she was a member of the committee her experience enriched our work, so thank you, Heledd, for that.

Alun echoed Heledd's final concern that the Government hasn't accepted our recommendation, which has been rehearsed a number of times in the debate, on ensuring the cultural strategy looks at the strategy for the cultural workforce. I agree that culture is about people. It can't be separate from it, and I'm sure we'd all want to see, in Alun's words, vision and ambition pulsating through every page of the strategy. I welcome Alun's passion that was clear in the debate and I'd echo Alun's point that those who gave evidence to us inspired us. On a personal level, I agree with the point about class. It is such a huge barrier to participation in the arts. And I would thank again all those who came to that session at the University of South Wales and all who have given evidence to us. People like them are at the centre, and they need to be.

Carolyn reminded us about one of the major success stories of Bad Wolf and Doctor Who. It shows what's possible. And I'm glad that you quoted Gabriella, Carolyn. Her evidence has been so useful to us. As she said, it's important that all of Wales benefits, not just Cardiff. We need to see jobs being created across the nation. And diolch, Carolyn, for quoting once again the great Philip King. Indeed, there is no metric to measure the priceless value of arts to our nation. So, thank you for quoting his words again.

I thank the Deputy Minister for setting out the importance of these industries.

There's so much for us to be proud of in Wales. These sectors provide immense benefit to us all. The concerns that were raised in evidence too were about shoring up those sectors, of course, and I know that you want to see that happen as well.

On the strategy, I would like to see the Government looking again at including pay and conditions more broadly as part of the strategy, including the arts, culture and music workforce. If that work could be part of it, I think that it would really enrich it. The work on well-being facilitators that the Minister was talking about towards the end there really is something to be welcomed and we're glad to see what the Welsh Government is doing on this. The evidence we received from so many about the effect of bullying on them and how isolated people can feel in this sector because of a lack of HR functions in some of the very small businesses is something really concerning. So, I think that learning from good examples, maybe seeing where HR functions can be shared across different small businesses, is something that will help, we hope, to open out these opportunities for work to so many different people.

It's come up several times during this debate the fact that part of these sectors are doing well, they're flourishing, but others aren't doing as well. I'd just like to quote what Maya Angelou once said:

'You can't use up creativity. The more you use, the more you have.'

And maybe that gets to the heart of the passion that Alun was talking about that's so resonant in people working in the arts and creative sectors. They have so much to give and the more that they give the more that they want to give. But the barriers that are put in their place are heartbreaking, because all of that potential is being lost.

In terms of Maya Angelou's words, that's how we perceive the future of the creative industries in Wales. With the right interventions we hope that more practitioners will be able to participate in all parts of the creative industries sector—industries that are so important to our culture and our soul as a nation. This will lead to the continuing growth of the sector in Wales—growth that is sustainable and fair to everyone who chooses to work in the creative industries.

So, there are a number of things that have been said this afternoon. I hope that this won't—. Well, we're sure as a committee that this won't be an end to this debate and discussion; this won't bring to an end our work on how to support the sectors. I know that the Government would also support that, so we will return to a number of these topics very soon. But thank you, once again, to the excellent team that we have in the committee, thank you to all of the members, and thanks again to all of those who gave evidence to us, who have been so open, and thanks to them for their perseverance throughout the best of times and the worst of times. Thank you.

The proposal is to note the committee's report. Does any Member object? No, there are no objections. Therefore, the motion is agreed.

Item 12 is next, the Welsh Conservatives debate on business rates relief, and I call on Peter Fox to move the motion.

Diolch, Llywydd. I'll start by moving the motion in the name of Darren Millar. I hope all in the Senedd recognise the importance of business, especially the retail, hospitality and leisure sectors, to Wales. The hospitality sector alone directly employs 165,000 people here in Wales and contributes an estimated £4 billion to the economy. Similarly, the retail sector is one of the largest private sector employers in Wales, employing a total of 139,000 people, according to the Welsh Government's own website. These businesses need more financial support, now more than ever, especially after the devastating impact of the pandemic and the ongoing increases in inflation as a result of the global pressures we've all seen. Llywydd, the hospitality sector in particular is crying out for support, with recent figures showing that 63 pubs were forced to close down last year—an average of more than one a week. And we know that that's double the rate we're seeing in England. But, as I have previously said, hospitality venues of all descriptions are not just businesses, they are the social hubs for many communities, as indeed are our shops, particularly in rural areas.

The UK Conservative Government has acknowledged the importance of these facts by providing NDR relief worth 75 per cent for businesses in retail, hospitality and the leisure sector—a move that will support businesses and protect jobs. And we know that the Welsh Government received moneys to offer that same support here. With that in mind, I simply cannot get my head around why the Welsh Government won't pass on the same support—they were given the money. Yes, the Welsh Government has provided some support for businesses in retail, hospitality and leisure, but this support is nowhere near the relief provided in England. As a result of the Welsh Government's decision not to provide the same support here in Wales, businesses will pay almost twice as much business rates than if they were based in England.

It is therefore vital that the Welsh Government extends the business rate relief for the retail, hospitality and leisure sectors, ensuring that Welsh businesses are not penalised and disadvantaged. For years, businesses in Wales have been disadvantaged by the highest business rates in Great Britain, with both small and large businesses paying the same rate, both of which are higher than the rate that small businesses pay in both England and Scotland. It's also a fact that support for small businesses in England and Scotland is more generous than we're led to believe it is in Wales, with England offering relief for properties with rateable values of £15,000 and Scotland providing relief for properties with rateable values of £20,000. Llywydd, it is clear that business and the economy are not priorities of Welsh Labour, sadly. They don't get the importance of the economy to this great country we live in. So, Llywydd, I close by asking you all to support our motion today. Our businesses need our support.

I have selected the three amendments to the motion, and if amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 will be deselected. The Minister for finance to move formally amendment 1.

Yes, formally.

Moved formally. Luke Fletcher now to move amendments 2 and 3.

Diolch, Llywydd. I move the amendments tabled by Plaid Cymru, which look to add to the original motion. Because there's no escaping the effect that this reduction to business rates relief will have, especially on the hospitality sector, a sector that is already operating in a difficult environment for a number of reasons.

To speak to our amendments, the key thing about NDR is that we are talking about a system that simply doesn't work, and that is what amendment 3 seeks to acknowledge. NDR hasn't moved with the times, and that's why we're now in a situation where we pay relief to businesses. I've mentioned the need for reform a number of times. The Government has said it's working on something, so I would be grateful if the Minister can explicitly outline today when we can expect to see anything on reform, because it is overdue.

One suggestion I would make, and I would appreciate some reflections from the Minister on this, is what I would like to see is the Government looking at the proportions that each sector pays into NDR and assess whether some are paying too little or too much. For example, we talk a lot about town-centre regeneration. That's always going to be a challenge while this system exists, but an added challenge comes from out-of-town shopping centres and supermarkets, to pick on just two examples. So, should we now be reviewing the rates that sectors pay, so that, for example, supermarkets pay more into the system in order to then lower the amount that a sector like hospitality would pay into the system? At the same time we do that, I would also argue that we need to also address the imbalance between brick-and-mortar businesses and those ones that operate online. So, some reflections on that would also be welcome.

Now, of course, we understand and hear from Ministers how there is no cash left. So, are these potential solutions that will have an initial administrative cost? Yes, but a huge impact on local SMEs in our communities.

Will you give way?

Yes, of course.

Can I say that online is the real danger to retail, and that’s got to be addressed? The other thing is: how about a rent freeze? As you know as well as I do, the pub companies' continued increase rents make pubs unviable. That’s why a lot of those pubs are closing, Peter Fox—it's because the people who own them are making them too expensive for the people who run them to run them.

I think there is a point to consider there. I’ve talked before in the Chamber, and I know a number of Members will probably roll their eyes at this now, but when I used to work in the sector, one of the things that we would notice with pubs especially was that they'd be hammered essentially by the breweries that owned them simply because those breweries are in debt. So, there's a specific thing there that needs to be addressed around the debts that breweries hold and how that affects local pubs, specifically. But in terms of the suggestions that I’ve put to you, Minister, I would be grateful for some reflections on that in your response.

Now, we know, and our businesses know, that Welsh Labour in Wales boasts the highest business rates in the UK. They are unfrozen and, unlike in Conservative England, rising frequently. Alongside this, the Welsh Government's physical negligence has forced them to look here, there and everywhere for coppers to spare as a result of their own massive overspends on vanity projects, 20 mph blanket bans to name but one. Tonight, as I'm stood up here, there will be Conservative councillors in Conwy County Borough Council trying to persuade the council to do a u-turn on some of these 20 mph bans.

Now, despite only yesterday my emphasising the crucial role of small businesses in Wales, especially with tourism employing 12 per cent of our workforce and contributing approximately £2.4 billion to our GDP, Welsh Labour persists in their determination to reduce business rate relief by almost half. Now, this comes at a time, Minister, when you and I both know a number of hospitality businesses have already closed since the start of the year. With more pubs and things closing—I think it was my colleague Peter Fox who said something like one a week—that tells you a lot about the economy of your nation and where you are failing. When you start to see these kinds of businesses close, it’s obvious that you need to come forward now with a support package, not actually roll the rug from under their feet.

Janet, will you take an intervention?

Yes.

There are local businesses in my region, with one pub owner saying that, basically, this reduced discount is a hammer blow for the industry and for him particularly. Another, 57 Bridge Street in Usk, has also said the Welsh Government is crippling an already struggling industry. Don't you think it's wise for the Government, if they won't listen to us, to listen to the businesses in Wales?

Thanks, Laura. The businesses actually need you now, Minister, more than ever. With increased inflation, food costs and energy costs, they are really in a desperate situation. Shocking figures show that, last year, Wales lost 63 pubs. It is estimated that around 770 jobs have been lost with these closures. At a time when businesses are looking for support, the Welsh Government are determined to double down on Welsh hospitality and tourism by cutting this relief. The often ask me, 'What more do they expect us to take?' As Kate Nicholls, UKHospitality chief executive, said, we're

'Already seeing 10% higher failure rate in Wales'

but with business rate support being slashed to less than half of what it was, that will just accelerate the decline. This represents nothing more than gross negligence, a shambles of a budget that is a death sentence to many businesses. Unlike the UK Government, rather than working on ways to cut national insurance, freeze business rates, maintaining relief, Welsh Labour and Plaid Cymru are busy brainstorming novel ways to bankrupt our businesses.

The rates multiplier for Wales has been set at 56.2p, and that's even an increase—when we used to moan about that figure, you've actually put it up an extra 2.7p. This means that Wales will continue to have these highest business rates. Wales is the only nation to have a flat business rates multiplier, where other nations do have different rates for small and larger businesses. There is no fairness in this current approach to our businesses by you as a Welsh Government. Remember, for every one of our businesses, they usually do employ other people. This is shortsighted, and, again, it takes me and my group to remind you that the Welsh Conservatives are on the side of our residents and, indeed, our business owners.

I have some sympathy with what Luke Fletcher said about the multiplier, and I followed closely the finance Minister's answers a few weeks ago—maybe even last week—when she said that there are plans to look at the multiplier. You can only change it once in a year, and the geographical spread needs to be considered, so I do look forward to hearing responses on that.

But we do need some context to this debate as well, and Peter Fox talked about global instability. It's more than that, isn't it? Let's be frank, it's been 14 years of endless austerity. Austerity began as a political choice when inflation was zero. There was no inflation—

Will you take an intervention?

Can you just give me two seconds? I've only got three minutes as it stands. Inflation was at zero and austerity happened. We've also had Brexit added to that, which were all political choices made by the UK Treasury. So, I'll give you an intervention, then.

Thank you. The waste separation Act now is also another burden for our businesses, because they've now got to separate, put it in different receptacles—another further cost, and you can understand why they ask. Do you actually agree with that—that they've been given this overburdensome bureaucracy and cost once again?

I think local authorities will have a cost but the idea of waste separation is that it makes it easier at the point of recycling for that to happen, and that eventually reduces costs down the line. But I don't think that's about this; this is about the wider context. The International Monetary Fund, for example, has issued a strong warning to Jeremy Hunt against cutting these taxes in March. You mentioned cutting taxes, Janet Finch-Saunders, but what the International Monetary Fund has said is you need to boost spending instead. An IMF spokesman said,

'Preserving high-quality public services and undertaking critical public investments to boost growth and achieve the net zero targets, will imply higher spending needs over the medium term than are currently reflected in the government’s budget plans.'

So, therefore, if you approach a tax-cutting economic policy from the UK Treasury at a time when public services are on their knees, there is going to be a disaster, and that is why this Government is protecting the NHS, protecting social care, and local authorities' budgets in schools; those three areas are being protected as a result of this, but we should also add that the multiplier is being capped at 5 per cent, which otherwise would be 6.7 per cent cross this year. So, the Welsh Government has taken action. That's costing £18 million. You asked where did the differential come in from the Barnett formula. That's where the differential goes. It is happening, and that is a fairer way to do it.

I think it's incredibly difficult, and I think the finance Minister's actually making a very brave choice to protect our NHS. The only way you can have functioning public services—I don't even mean world-class or good public services, but functioning public services—is if those budgets are protected. In my constituency, I've spoken to businesses. They are of course disappointed, but they recognise that this was always a temporary measure and that the multiplier cap is a positive difference as well. So, it's difficult choices being made. I think that is the business of Government and it's very easy to criticise from the position of opposition.

I'm grateful for the opportunity to voice my concerns on the part of small businesses, not just in the Vale of Clwyd, but across Wales. We should be clear that the cuts to business rates relief from 75 per cent to 40 per cent in the retail, leisure and hospitality sector is a punishment for small and medium-sized businesses—family-owned shops, cafes, pubs and restaurants—whereas large corporations registered overseas will be largely unaffected. This is an added burden to the smallest enterprises in Wales, which are the backbone of the Welsh economy. Small and medium enterprises constitute 99.3 per cent of all businesses in Wales. I'll just reiterate that—99.3 per cent.

I heard Members in the draft budget debate making the claim that rate relief is a handout to prop up businesses. We need to remind ourselves that rate relief is not a handout but rather a reduction in the amount that we already take from businesses. These are businesses that have been struggling through COVID and need the state to get off their back to give them room to breathe in order to recover to pre-COVID levels of productivity. A PwC report shows that productivity is lower per capita in Wales than the national post-COVID average. This should be a cause for concern for the Welsh Government, who should be pulling out all of the stops to shore up the Welsh economy. Instead, they are plundering their reserves for vanity schemes whilst the high street continues to perish. The 2021 PwC report also shows that productivity in Wales is buoyed by Cardiff. The figures for north Wales are particularly dire. The more that the Welsh Government asks ratepayers to pay, the less productive those same businesses will be, and more businesses will shut their doors, as we have seen over the last few years. Business rates revenue will inevitably go down. That is not just my opinion; we have heard from business leaders who tell us that the reduction in the business rates relief puts Welsh businesses at a significant disadvantage compared to their English counterparts, where the 75 per cent relief has been extended for a further year.

To close, there has been a growing appetite for an overhaul of business rates more generally, which the UK is rather unique in having. Most European countries do not have business rates. It is a tax on small high-street businesses, with large online vendors and the wealthiest corporations unaffected. But that is more of a debate for another day, I think. So, it almost beggars belief that the Welsh Government sees it as appropriate to cut business rate relief in order to claw back some cash, particularly when they are spending £33 million on the 20 mph roll-out and £25 million of a universal basic income pilot scheme that isn't going anywhere. That is why I will be voting with our motion tonight. Thank you.

The Minister for finance now to contribute to the debate—Rebecca Evans.

Diolch, Llywydd. The Welsh Government recognises the ongoing economic challenges faced by ratepayers, but I think we also have to recognise that all citizens and public services in Wales are also exposed to similar pressures. Non-domestic rates are a really vital part of the local government finance system, raising more than £1.1 billion annually, and that's not a trivial contribution to the funding required to sustain the services that we all rely on, nor indeed is it a trivial contribution to the Welsh Government's overall annual budget. I say to colleagues again: if we're looking to provide additional support in one area, it is really important now at this stage, as we move towards the final budget, to be identifying those areas where you would move funding from.

And as colleagues know, our budget for 2024-25 has been developed in the toughest financial situation that we've faced since devolution, with a settlement from the UK Government that simply isn't sufficient to address all of the pressures on our budget that our public services, our businesses and, of course, individuals are also facing. So, we have had to make some really difficult decisions to refocus our funding towards core front-line public services.

But, despite this context, we'll still provide non-domestic rates support worth £384 million—more than a third of a billion pounds from the Welsh Government in rates support. That is certainly a significant investment in businesses in Wales. Since 2018-19, we've prevented or limited multiplier increases every year, and that has saved ratepayers in Wales hundreds of millions of pounds compared to the revenue that we would otherwise be raising.

Our decision to cap inflation of the multiplier at 5 per cent for next year comes at an additional recurring cost of £18 million to the Welsh budget. That's £18 million next year and every year after that as a result of the support that we are providing through that 5 per cent cap.

We're also investing £78 million to provide that fifth successive year of rate relief for retail, leisure and hospitality businesses in 2024-25. And let's remember that that was always a temporary scheme and businesses would not have been factoring in any relief of that sort into their plans for the next financial year. This, of course, builds on what's been almost £1 billion of support provided to businesses since the onset of the pandemic. A new £20 million capital fund is also being developed to help these sectors futureproof their businesses, and we hope to be able to say more about that fund shortly.

So, through our generous package of reliefs, almost half of all ratepayers in Wales, including thousands of small businesses, benefit from full rates relief. When partial support is included as well, ratepayers for more than 80 per cent of properties will benefit from relief in 2024-25. That equates to 104,000 properties across Wales, or, to put it another way, less than 20 per cent of properties will attract full rates.

Sam Rowlands now to reply to the debate.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. I'm pleased to be able to close this debate on a very important topic that we've discussed here this afternoon. I think all contributors have acknowledged that thriving businesses are the lifeblood of our communities and it should be an absolute priority for Welsh Government to support and enable businesses to flourish across Wales. Now, unfortunately, we're not seeing that at the moment from the Labour Government here in Cardiff Bay, because, as we've heard, slashing those business rate reliefs from 75 per cent to 40 per cent would sadly cause too many businesses to go under and put serious pressure on many others.

Now, in our debate this evening, Peter Fox opened by outlining, rightly, the numbers that make up the economy here in Wales on this particular issue, with the hospitality sector employing 165,000 people and contributing around £4 billion to the economy. I think Peter Fox also highlighted the retail sector employing around 139,000 people as well. These are big numbers and show how important these businesses are to Wales. And, of course, behind every statistic, as mentioned here today, is an individual, a family, a network that relies on the success of those businesses and the creation of jobs, whether it's a family-run greengrocers or a large pub chain, all making a difference in our communities and for people. Luke Fletcher moved the Plaid Cymru amendments and I thought brought some sensible contributions regarding the review of distribution and who pays the non-domestic rates and at what level and how that looks across Wales. The Minister responded to that point to a certain extent. Luke Fletcher did fail to speak to amendment 2, which talked about the level of funding from UK Government, and these benches will always remind Members in this Chamber that for every £1 spent on public services in England, Welsh Government receives £1.20. So, when there's talk of unfair levels of money, there's a 20 per cent uplift to acknowledge some of the challenges here in Wales.

Janet Finch-Saunders shared with us the figures showing Wales lost more than a pub a week in 2023. I thought some Members in this Chamber would have to declare an interest with losing a pub a week through the last year, with 63 shutting their doors. This was more than double the rate in England, costing 770 Welsh jobs. These job losses are damaging for communities, especially as pubs play such an important role in our local areas as social hubs that bring people together and have served communities for decades and centuries. Laura Anne Jones intervened on Janet Finch-Saunders to talk about some specific establishments in her own region, and I think you quoted—. Laura Anne Jones was saying that the Welsh Government are crippling an already struggling industry. It was a quote from perhaps an owner of a pub in your region. And that is, ironically, a sobering analysis from people actually running those businesses in Wales. They aren't the ones sat in their ivory towers. They are on the ground, creating jobs, risking their livelihoods, trying to improve the experience of people in our villages, towns and cities. I really hope that Welsh Government listen to them very, very carefully.

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

Item 13 is next on six nations rugby broadcasting. Tom Giffard to move the motion on behalf of the Conservatives.

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Llywydd. So, what are you doing this weekend? I know, it's a stupid question. It sounds cliché, but every time our Wales team play in the six nations, it is a genuinely major national event. Whether you're in Cardiff with a ticket to watch the game with a daffodil on your head, or you're watching it from home with a cup of tea, it does genuinely feel like a rare occasion where the whole of the country comes to a stop. And you can't put a price on those moments. We live in a world where we have an unlimited number of tv channels, a massive selection of things we can watch on demand, and a massive number of distractions in our lives. The age of the monoculture, millions of us sitting in one place all at one time watching the same thing is over. But that's the case for all but the rarest of events. But it's clear the six nations is one of those. Those communal moments that we enjoy together as a nation, which bind us together as people, are literally priceless. That's why it would be a major mistake for Welsh rugby and for Wales to put the six nations tournament behind a paywall. I've heard some say that that wouldn't really have an impact on the sport, but it clearly would. Just look at another sport, cricket. Many of us remember that 2005 Ashes team that won the urn against Australia. That tournament peaked during the fourth test with an impressive 8.4 million viewers. But that momentum was never capitalised on. The tournament was put behind a paywall, and the final day of the 2009 Ashes only pulled in 467,000 viewers in the UK. Whilst Welsh rugby is clearly an institution, we can't be arrogant enough to think that putting the tournament behind a paywall wouldn't have a similar impact.

I fully agree with the thrust of what he's saying, but, of course, the culture committee's had a letter from Abi Tierney, who said,

'Put simply, the negative financial implications of moving international rugby matches in the Six Nations Rugby Championship to the protected list could have a devastating impact on the whole of the game in Wales in the medium and long term.'

We'll have a chance to question them tomorrow in committee, but what are your initial views on that view?

I think you'll be very pleased to know it's my very next line. [Laughter.] And for those concerned about the impact, like Hefin David, that keeping the tournament on free-to-air tv will have on Welsh rugby's finances, and somehow completely going behind a paywall is best for the game, I completely disagree. In fact, there's a lot more that Welsh Government could be doing on that front, by supporting the Welsh Rugby Union and its regions, in particular by the renegotiation of the terms of its COVID loan, which, as we heard recently, is crippling the regions in particular. But the only way we can make this Welsh Labour Government financially support the Ospreys is if they find them in a field in mid Wales.

It's worth remembering that over two thirds of people in the UK don't have access to a premium sports channel, and women and younger audiences are traditionally the hardest to reach behind a paywall. So, we're potentially excluding some of the very people that we need to reach. We know that there's a clear link between watching sports and being inspired to participate in them, so by reducing the audience watching, we're also reducing the potential pool of people to play them. Going back to cricket, participation fell by 32 per cent over the decade that followed the move behind the paywall. We can't risk doing that to rugby in Wales.

Whilst broadcasting is not a devolved matter, sport is. That's why the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Minister, John Whittingdale, came to this Senedd, to the culture committee just a few weeks back, and he said:

'if the Welsh Parliament argued very strongly that, for the good of sport in Wales, we needed to look again at the listed events, we would look at it, certainly.'

Then, clearly, colleagues, this is an opportunity to make that case, and I can think of nothing stronger than this Senedd, standing together as one united voice, saying that we believe the six nations in Wales should be designated as the class A event that we all know that it is and remain on free-to-air television in Wales.

The irony is not lost on Plaid Cymru, and I'm surprised this wasn't mentioned, that on the eve of this debate, tabled by the Conservatives calling for the six nations broadcasting to remain free-to-air, every single one of their colleagues in Westminster voted against exactly that. So, we completely support this, that's why I raised a topical question last week, but how are we going to ensure that this happens? And how are you going to ensure that your colleagues in Westminster support these calls as well? Because, as you rightly said, we don't have the power to decide this here in Wales, but why aren't Tory MPs in Westminster standing up for Wales? It is hypocrisy if you're bringing forward this motion and yet Welsh MPs are not voting to support it—[Interruption.] You have your own views, but your role here is to also work with colleagues in Westminster to ensure—. Because our MPs will always stand up for Wales; it's a shame that yours won't.

The arguments were well rehearsed last week about why free-to-air is essential, and I was extremely disappointed by the WRU's letter, which was in contrast to Noel Mooney and the FAW's response, when they struck a deal with S4C to ensure that all of Wales's matches were available free to view. Because the other element here—.

And I will turn to Welsh at this point. The other element here is in relation to the Welsh language. The fact that our international matches are available on S4C is extremely important. The fact that rugby clubs throughout Wales—bars et cetera—choose to broadcast through the medium of Welsh and that people hear the Welsh language as a living language and that many people at home choose to view on S4C, with English subtitles, often, does mean that we truly see the Welsh language as one that is relevant to daily life and also as a language that belongs to us all. There are so many learners who benefit from watching sport on S4C.

I would like to know, when you do question the WRU tomorrow, what consideration they give to the Welsh language and are they willing to show the same commitment as the Football Association of Wales has shown. Because the FAW was robust in ensuring that the red wall and everyone in Wales could follow the trials of the Welsh football team. It also inspires the next generation of players, but also inspires people to get involved in all sorts of sports. There's walking football, walking rugby; it's not just about playing for your country, it's about being part of something. And we have seen, with the football world cup, what happened in terms of the participation numbers increasing among women and girls, for example. So, I fully support this, but we need more than empty words. We need action at Westminster and I urge the Tories to ensure that these aren't empty words; you have colleagues in Westminster who can change this—make sure they do so.

I stand before you today not as a Senedd Member, but as a proud son of Wales and a lifelong member of Gwernyfed RFC, and an unwavering rugby fan for many years, for all the highs and the lows that we've had in Welsh rugby.

But, today, we need to address a decision that strikes to the heart of our nation, as a rugby nation: the exclusion of the six nations from the free-to-air category. As a young boy myself, my introduction to rugby wasn't in grand stadiums but on the muddy fields of Trefeca Road in Talgarth, donning the green, white and black shirt for my club—the team spirit, the friends that I've made there, learning to pass off both hands, even though I still do struggle passing off the left, and the big collisions that we do have as well, and my bruised ribs from the weekend can attest to that as well. But it's wider than that; it's about actually watching rugby on telly that fuelled the passion. I can remember watching Neil Jenkins, Rob Howley, Stephen Jones and also the Quinell brothers when I first started watching rugby and that really fuelled my passion for the game. But these memories that I have could not exist if that sport was confined behind a paywall. The decision by the UK Government isn't just about access to elite sport, it's about an opportunity—an opportunity missed, I think. How can we inspire the next generations when the very passion that inspires our young people to take up sport is hidden behind a paywall? I think it would be an absolute disgrace and a real shame for the game in Wales. Just imagine a young boy in Brecon and Radnor or any part of Wales—or girl—imagine their eyes when the stars that they want to see and the dreams that they have are hidden behind a price tag. Sky Sports costs upwards of £50 a month to watch, Amazon costs a huge amount to watch, and a lot of families across Wales simply cannot afford to pay that. So, I think we owe it to those families in Wales to show our six nations on free-to-air.

But let us not forget the economic element of it. In 2015, a while ago now, 40,000 individuals—more of them have flocked to Cardiff in the years since—. That injects a staggering £2 million to £3 million a day into the local economy in Cardiff. A lot of those pubs in the town actually put it on free-to-air tv on the BBC; a lot of them don't have Sky Sports, because, as I said earlier in the week, of the sheer cost of it. But a lot of our pubs and our rugby clubs across Wales don't have access to Sky Sports, and they thrive when this sport is on their tellies.

I think it'd be a great shame if all that collective share of joy, that gasp in those pubs when we have those near misses, and the great—I can't get my words out now—how excited we all are when we actually win a game of rugby. It is a bit rare in this day and age, but we are going to, hopefully, get back this six nations. But can you just imagine a six nations rugby weekend in Wales without those crowds, with it just reduced to silence and people watching from home? I don't want to see that, I don't think the people of Wales want to see that, and I think the Welsh Rugby Union have made a big mistake in the letter that they've issued. The people of Wales want to see the six nations on free-to-air telly, and I think the Welsh Rugby Union should reconsider what they've told us all today. Thank you.

I'm grateful to you, Presiding Officer. I think rugby's played a central part in Wales for over a century. In many ways, it defined us as a nation. Many of the images of Wales would have been associated with rugby, and it's something that we all remember, in the same way as has just been described. I remember my first five nations game. It was in January 1980, when I struggled on to the train from Rhymney, went down to Cardiff—I was very excited, of course—and went into the east terrace to watch Wales defeat France, 18-9; I remember the score. It was a part of who we are as a people, a part of who we are as a country, as a nation. I even remember bumping into the Presiding Officer in Dublin on more than occasion, but that's for another time.

You've only got three minutes. [Laughter.]

Give me five, and we'll do a deal. The five nations, the six nations, is a part of who we are. It defines us. I remember people who wouldn't normally be watching rugby or sport would be tuning in because they'd want to see how Wales were doing, they'd want to see how the team was doing—a part of our culture, of who are, and I don't think you can avoid that.

Now, the arguments, and I've read the letter from Abi Tierney, and it's a good letter, let's not simply dismiss it—. I wouldn't dismiss it, because the arguments about the future are different to the memories of the past. But some things remain absolutely central: Westgate Street on match day is different to the west car park on match day. The fan in Wales is different, in many ways, to the fan elsewhere. The reach of rugby union in Wales is different to the reach of rugby union in other places, and we need to recognise that. We need to recognise it in how we approach these things.

I thought the argument put forward by Tom Giffard in opening this debate, using the example of cricket, is a really important part of this debate, because it is right, and Abi is right in her letter, the WRU need to get the revenue from the game, they need the revenue from tv rights in order to fund the community game. I don't think you can create the divisions between the national team and the community game in the way that some people seek to. It's the community game that needs the six nations available for all to watch freely wherever we happen to be, because it's the six nations and international rugby union that create the heroes of tomorrow, the role models of today. When we were cross-examining Ieuan Evans last year over WRU issues, I could still see him from the east terrace running towards us in that game against England, scoring just before half time, unbelievable scenes in the stadium. We kept the English out all through the second half and won the game.

Memories and who we are are made by these occasions. We talk about culture—we spoke about culture earlier—but culture is about us and defining us. The six nations is part of who we are; it's more important to us than many or most of the other sporting events that are covered by the crown jewels of sport. Six nations is more important to Wales, I would argue, than almost any other one of those sporting occasions. That's not to decry them, but it's to define us and our priorities, and I hope the WRU tomorrow will begin a conversation with us and with Wales, and will ensure that we don't sell tomorrow on the benefit of funding today.

I'd like to start by thanking my colleagues for bringing this debate to the Chamber today. As we all know, rugby is synonymous with our great nation and something we all take great pride in. When the stadium sings and Wales wins, it lifts our nation. It's become a national event, watching our neighbours play rugby, in what I believe is one of the greatest tournaments in the world, drawing in all corners of our communities, bringing family and friends together to watch our Welsh heroes. And certainly some of my earliest childhood memories are watching our team at home, at the pub, at my local Usk rugby club, where my dad, own dad, played rugby. Crucially, with it being on free-to-air television, it has allowed the flame to be lit in Welsh children across our nation, inspiring that next generation, as has been said, to pick up a rugby ball. We could end up in a situation where low-income families who can't afford Sky or Amazon end up not being able to watch Wales live due to the high financial costs. If we put the free-to-air status of our national sport at risk, we also put at risk the future of the sport in Wales. We risk alienating the next generation of athletes, who may not even start playing the game. We risk a whole generation of young people missing out on seeing Wales win the six nations. We risk losing part of our national fabric and limit the enjoyment of watching our national team to just those who can afford to pay for it. This is something that cannot and should not be allowed to happen, especially at a time when we need more people than ever to be inspired to get active and fitter.

There is no better way to be inspired into sport or getting healthier than watching our national team succeed on the big stage. It's not just the next generation who will fail to be inspired, but it's also that this will hurt businesses at a time that they're already reeling from COVID or higher business rates, as we heard in the last debate. The six nations provides a much-needed boost to local businesses, particularly those in the hospitality industry. In 2015, it was reported that 40,000 people travelled to Cardiff to watch the game in the city's pubs, who spend on average £50 to £75 each. This means that these visitors will bring in £2 million to £3 million a day. It would be economic self-harm to allow this to be taken away from our businesses and only allow those with the deepest pockets to air the games. Rugby union is often stated to be central to Welsh culture, with the Encyclopaedia of Wales stating that the sport is seen by many as a symbol of Welsh identity and an expression of our national consciousness.

Quite simply, the six nations should be inclusive, and free for all to watch. There needs to be more investment in rugby and in sport in Wales by this Welsh Government but it should not be reliant on hiding behind a paywall. I hope that everyone will support our motion today.

The Deputy Minister now to contribute to the debate. Dawn Bowden.

Diolch, Llywydd. Well, I think we can all agree from what we've heard this afternoon that, in Wales, rugby is a huge part of our cultural and national identity. It reaches areas far beyond the sport itself, doesn't it? It's in the nation's DNA, and the six nations, bringing our neighbouring countries together to fight for that grand slam, holds a special place in our hearts.

Now, the Welsh Government has always been clear that the six nations tournament on television must remain free-to-air, so that the majority of the Welsh population are able to view the games and savour the highs and lows of our national side together. The value of this really should not be underestimated. For the next six weeks, the six nations tournament will showcase the sport of rugby union and our talented players to the world.

Can I intervene on the Deputy Minister and ask if she is willing to accept an intervention from Hefin David?

Oh, indeed, yes.

Thank you. I hope you can hear me, Deputy Minister.

Fine, yes.

The debate, which I think is going to, I suspect, have unanimous support today is about broadening the game to as many people as possible. Would she therefore be as critical as we should be unanimously about John Devereux's, the dual-code international, statement, who said:

'Every bloody game now of men’s football & rugby for that matter on BBC has a woman summariser in it. Any chance we can have a red button choice, with and without? Just asking for a few male friends of mine!'

I think that comment goes fully against the spirit of this debate today when we should be broadening audiences for everyone across Wales.

Well, I'm shocked by that, Hefin. I think that is appalling, and I would suggest that John Devereux joins that very exclusive misogynist commentator club with Joey Barton. I mean, seriously, what is wrong with men that they just can't accept that women are also interested in sport, play sport, and are just as knowledgeable as them and can comment effectively on it, regardless of which sex or gender is playing? Those women's professionalism in sport speaks for itself. I think that John Devereux just speaks for John Devereux, doesn't he?

So, if I can go back to where we are in terms of the six nations tournament being that showcase that Hefin David has just talked about in terms of the spread and the reach that it will have, by accessing the games on our tvs or our laptops or our tablets, it just maximises the exposure for the sport in Wales and provides that very opportunity that Hefin was just talking about for players to be inspired by that experience.

Having said that, there are complexities associated with free-to-air coverage. Firstly, a list A grouping doesn't in itself guarantee free-to-air coverage, but it does enable it. And it's also important that we respect and recognise the difficult position of the Welsh Rugby Union, which can't make this decision unilaterally. And we should appreciate that, given the benefits of maximum exposure and the financial advantages of exclusive broadcasting contracts, there is a fine balance to strike, and so, it is important that the Senedd has this debate and that the Welsh Government continues its discussion with the Welsh Rugby Union to ensure that that balance is struck.

Because, as the Senedd knows, through our programme for government, we are committed to promoting equal access to sport, supporting young talented athletes, grass-roots clubs and investing in sporting facilities. And we know, from Sport Wales research, that our investment in sport delivers a huge social return and impacts positively on the health and well-being of our nation. And there's no doubt that the six nations will inspire some children and young people to take up the sport for the first time, and will encourage others to continue to develop those skills, hoping one day to emulate the players that they see on their screens.

Of course, access to broadcast rights is also hugely important to our broadcasters. These games attract large audiences, bringing people to channels and ensuring that broadcasters are able to programme content that remains relevant and appealing to audiences. And, as Heledd Fychan said, where content is available on S4C, for example, it increases access to the Welsh language, it brings Welsh into our homes, including homes that may not usually otherwise hear Welsh spoken. And, as Alun Davies quite rightly observed, because of our cultural attachment to rugby union, we recognise that the six nations means much more in Wales than it does in the other five nations.

Figures in the 'Media Nations: Wales 2023' report last year highlighted Wales's love of rugby, with Wales the only nation to have any rugby games appear in the top-10 sporting viewing figures. As the First Minister said in answer to a question about this yesterday, our cultural identity is reflected more in rugby union than it is, for instance, in Wimbledon or in the Epsom Derby, which, of course, are free-to-air. But this shouldn't matter, as the listed events should reflect the needs of the UK as a whole, and I'm pleased to see that this has been recognised by the Welsh Affairs Committee and should be recognised by the UK Government.

Samuel Kurtz now to reply to the debate.

Thank you, Llywydd. It's a pleasure to conclude today's debate.

It's a pleasure for me as a proud Welshman, a proud rugby player—just about—to be able to close this debate this evening. In opening, Tom Giffard talked about the similarities between cricket and rugby in terms of participation once a sport moves behind a paywall. I remember vividly watching the 2005 Ashes with Michael Vaughan, Freddie Flintoff, Kevin Pietersen—people who I know now because of the ability to watch that test series on free-to-air television.

And Heledd Fychan, you see, this is the problem sometimes: we're damned if we do and we're damned if we don't on this side of the Chamber. If we came out and said we wouldn't do anything with regard to this, then we'd be shot down for not having spoken up as a voice for Wales. We come out in favour of something that is pro-Welsh, underlining the 'Welsh' in 'Welsh Conservatives', and then we're called hypocrites. I'll take an intervention, wrth gwrs.

All I ask is that you make sure that those who have the powers actually deliver what you're calling for. Call out the Tory MPs from Wales who voted against this last night.

I think the fact we're holding this debate this evening is exactly the case in point.

Before the vote.

We are clearly, as a party here in Wales on this side of the benches, calling for the UK Government to do something here for us in Wales, which I think should be welcomed by the Plaid Cymru Members of the Senedd opposing us this evening. But, Heledd did raise some very interesting points with regard to the link between the FAW and S4C—

—and the importance of the Welsh language in broadcasting. That's a vital point.

I think that's a really important point, and that could be something that has started from this debate this afternoon and the Welsh Affairs Select Committee's inquiry into this: is there an opportunity for us to have a bespoke model for the Welsh six nations games, similar to what happens in Scotland for the Scottish FA Cup final—free-to-air, just in Scotland? Is this an opportunity for us to start a discussion? Alun Davies is shaking his head, but I think this could be an opportunity to start the discussion, rather than coming to a final conclusion here this afternoon.

Now, if you follow James Evans on Instagram, and I'm sure every one of us here does with gusto. If you don't, you are missing out, because every Saturday, or every Thursday, when the team is announced for Gwernyfed, he shares it on his Instagram, and there is James Evans wearing the No. 7 shirt for his home side—[Interruption.] Lock forward. He's moved further forward; in a couple of years' time, he'll be in the front row. But he's right again, and this is the theme of the evening: the participation or lack thereof if this moves behind a paywall. And James talked quite eloquently about the cost of the subscriptions. If you've got some games going onto TNT Sports, Sky Sports, Netflix and Amazon as well, that's a really difficult balancing act for families to do, to try to bring all of these subscription services into one pay cheque, so that they can watch Wales play rugby.

Alun Davies, it shows, I'm sorry, the disparity in our ages here, where your first game was in the 1980s. [Laughter.] Only because he and I had a joke about our ages in committee earlier this morning, I felt safe in the knowledge that he wouldn't retaliate too brutally. But you're absolutely right that these early memories of rugby games are part of our DNA. That was the language used here again: 'DNA', 'identity', 'part of who we are'. And absolutely the community game needs role models. It might have shown my skill as a rugby player growing up that my role models weren't the players, but the commentators, more than anything else. And I mentioned it last week in terms of Eddie Butler—the late, great Eddie Butler. My favourite line of his in the 2005 six nations was, 'Shave away, Gavin, shave away', when Gavin Henson kicked that winning penalty against England. That's a line that has stuck with me because that game was free-to-air.

Laura Anne Jones talked, again, about the ability of rugby to bring family and friends together, inspiring that next generation. And I'm conscious that I'm really testing the Llywydd's patience, but it's a topic that I'm incredibly passionate about. And I'm not going to draw—. Hefin's intervention on the Deputy Minister, I'm not going to draw any more attention to the name that he mentioned or that the Deputy Minister mentioned. What I would draw attention to is Sarra Elgan, Gabby Logan, Sonja McLaughlan and Lauren Jenkins, four female commentators who are at the pinnacle of their career, at the pinnacle of commentary and presenting, and all credit to them for the role that they do.

The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? There are no objections. And therefore, there will be no vote. The motion is agreed.

We will now move to voting time. Unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, we will move immediately to the first vote. That first vote is on item 8, the debate on a Member's legislative proposal, a Bill to establish structured oversight of NHS managers. I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Mabon ap Gwynfor. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour, 28, 22 abstentions, none against. Therefore, the motion is agreed.

The next votes are on item 12, the Welsh Conservatives debate on business rates relief. I call for a vote on the motion without amendment, tabled in the name of Darren Millar. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour, 14, no abstentions, 36 against. Therefore, the motion is not agreed.

Amendment 1 next. I now call for a vote on amendment 1, tabled in the name of Lesley Griffiths. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 will be deselected. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour, 26, no abstentions, 24 against. Therefore, amendment 1 is agreed and amendment 2 is deselected.

I therefore call for a vote on amendment 3, tabled in the name of Luke Fletcher. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour, 26, no abstentions, 24 against. Therefore, amendment 3 is agreed.

We will finally vote on the motion as amended.

Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour seven, no abstentions, 43 against, and therefore the motion as amended is not agreed.

And so, that concludes voting.

We will move immediately to the short debate.

If Members could leave quietly—. We still have one debate to hear, and that debate is to be introduced by Sarah Murphy. Sarah Murphy, you can start.

Diolch, Llywydd. I'm really pleased to be able to do this short debate today. If I could have called it 'The rock stars of cardiology are in Bridgend', I would have, but I probably wouldn't have got that past the Table Office, so instead I've gone for 'Heart failure' and looking at the innovation that is happening in the Princess of Wales Hospital in Bridgend.

Just to give a bit of background, I was very, very pleased to go and meet with the cardiology team at Princess of Wales Hospital in Cwm Taf Morgannwg health board. Dr Wong, the consultant cardiologist, and Rhys Williams, who is a specialist clinical pharmacist in cardiology, both showed me around what they've created there, which I truly think is, and many consider, some of the best work that is actually happening in Europe. This is why I just really wanted to show it off tonight.

Just a little bit of background when it comes to how serious heart failure is, and I know this is something that touches many people's lives personally or through loved ones. The national heart failure audit said that the prevalence of heart failure is estimated at 2 per cent of the population, with the Welsh population estimated at 3.3 million by July 2024, and this equates to 66,000 people nationally. The prognosis of severe heart failure is worse than the majority of common cancers, with five-year mortality estimated for around 50 per cent of people. And heart failure hospital admissions account for roughly 2 per cent of the overall NHS budget.

The British Society for Heart Failure has launched the 25in25 campaign, with the aim to reduce heart failure mortality by 25 per cent in the next 25 years, through earlier detection of symptoms, improving population health, and timely access to therapies. I also wanted to point out here that there's a wonderful article on how we end women's health inequality in the Welsh Fabian Society booklet. This was written by Gemma Roberts of the British Heart Foundation. She said that women are also more likely to be diagnosed slowly or misdiagnosed, so women not being seen as at risk of heart attack can impact whether women presenting with heart attack symptoms receive a timely and correct diagnosis.

An incorrect initial diagnosis after a heart attack increases the risk of death after 30 days by 70 per cent. And research suggests that women are 50 per cent more likely than men to receive the wrong initial diagnosis for a heart attack. The British Heart Foundation-funded researchers at the University of Leeds also found that women are referred for diagnostic testing much more slowly than men, and the study found that women who had a type of heart attack usually caused by a partially blocked artery are 34 per cent less likely than men to receive a coronary angiography imaging test within 72 hours of their hospital admission. As you would have seen then, I did turn to my colleague Alun Davies, as I believe that you have had some experience with this, very sadly, and so I would like to take an intervention from you now, so that you may be able to talk to us a little bit about what this can be like for people.

I'm grateful to the Member for Bridgend and Porthcawl for bringing this debate this evening. I think it's really important and essential that you've done this, because as one of the 3 per cent of people in Wales who survive an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, my experience tells me that we need to have a far more holistic approach to heart health, and the ability to spot early, treat early, and, then, work with people to overcome the issues that they faced in their lives. And I hope the Minister, in replying to this debate, will pay tribute to the work that's being done in the Princess of Wales Hospital, but will also look towards a cardiology programme that is more holistic than we have at present, which brings together the prevention and the treatment, and, then, the rehabilitation, to ensure that we have that approach that takes care of people who do suffer these issues in their lifetimes.

Thank you very much, Alun Davies. It brings me on, really, to the next section I want to discuss, which is treatment. Guideline-directed medical therapies, known as the four pillars of treatment, can help to reduce mortality, improve quality of life, and reduce the risk of hospital admission due to breathlessness and fluid retention. And these benefits can be seen as early as 14 days after starting treatment. Better outcomes are associated with higher doses, so require repeated visits. Four-pillar therapy also further reduces the need for other potential costly interventions, including implantation of cardiac devices, ventricular assist devices, and cardiac transplantation. Delays, though, in access to these treatments can have significant consequences for patient outcomes, as mentioned above.

Looking at the Princess of Wales model, it's been led by Dr Aaron Wong and is a multidisciplinary approach. Heart failure specialist nurses are part of the team. There's a review of hospital in-patients, providing education to patients and carers, and optimising medicines prior to discharge, an ambulatory review of patients who call the heart failure helpline, or management of their symptoms, avoiding likely hospital admissions and emergency department visits. A multidisciplinary team, working with palliative care, provide advance care planning to patients who are within the last 12 months of their life.

And then it brings me on to what I think is quite unique about this programme, which is the collaboration with the pharmacy department. I had another visit where I got to go around the pharmacy department in the Princess of Wales Hospital. I think, up until that point, I didn't realise what a huge thing it is, really, what a huge department it is, how much they do there. And they work tremendously, and I do think to myself sometimes, if I ever stopped being a politician, I'd love to go back and retrain in pharmacy. I just find it absolutely fascinating, and I think that it's so much more than some people realise, and prescribing pharmacy especially. So, the way that we're boosting up those specialist pharmacists, Minister, I think is a tremendous help throughout our NHS.

What the heart failure pharmacists, like Rhys, are doing is they're providing timely optimisation of the four-pillar therapies—optimisation of cardiovascular risk factors, including diabetes, hypertension and cholesterol. And work from the Bridgend heart failure service has been presented on the European stage. So, again, I just want to say I think that the beauty of this is that Rhys will run his clinic, where people will come in and see him and check their medication and check that they're doing really well, and, then, you've got Dr Wong there who will catch people very quickly when they come in and they present with these issues. He's got the absolute best technology there to do those assessments so much more quickly. They've actually managed to reduce it, I believe, from 12 months down to three months in the Princess of Wales.

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

Diolch yn fawr. Diolch yn fawr, Sarah. Thank you very much for bringing this debate forward. You talked about the rock stars of cardiology in the Princess of Wales Hospital. I was meeting today with the rock stars of orthopaedic day surgery, watching a rather gory knee replacement, but I've no doubt that the way you've described the cardiologists and their innovations is certainly something that would qualify them to be the rock stars of cardiology. So, thank you very much, and thank you for all the interest you're taking on behalf of your constituents. I think developing improvements and innovation in healthcare is a goal we constantly strive for, and I think it's vital to improving the lives of the people of Wales.

We know that heart diseases have a huge impact on the people of Wales, and one of the points I'm really keen to amplify today, as you noted in the book that you read from, is the fact that so many women in Wales suffer from heart disease. The British Heart Foundation estimate that at least 100,000 women are living with some form of heart disease in Wales today. The most common of these is coronary heart disease, with around 45,000 women in Wales living with this condition, and many will be shocked to hear that it causes twice as many deaths as breast cancer. I'll forever be grateful for the presentation made to me by the British Heart Foundation, which demonstrated that women have a 50 per cent higher chance than men of receiving the wrong initial diagnosis following a heart attack, and this was one of the key factors that made me pursue a new focus on women and health in Wales.

I think it's really important that women's health issues aren't all put into a gynaecological category. Women are so often treated differently when it comes to issues like diagnosing heart disease, and I really think this has to change. We've got a long way to go to correct that problem, but we're now at least on the right path with a new clinical lead for women's health appointed recently. There are multiple types of heart disease, which includes coronary heart disease, resulting in the heart's blood supply being blocked due to fatty substances. Worldwide, this the single biggest killer of women.

Another significant heart disease is heart failure, where the heart is not strong enough to pump blood around the body. Over 1 million people in the UK have heart failure. The number of new cases per year is now similar to the four most common causes of cancer combined. In Wales, there are 38,000 people with diagnosed heart failure, with potentially thousands of people living with it and not knowing that they're living with it. The incidence of heart failure is rising, and it's projected to rise significantly, in part due to our ageing population and as a consequence of improved survival rates for heart attacks. We're all very pleased that Alun is still with us to tell the tale, and he's quite right to point out that, actually, for an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, the chance of survival is very slim. So, we're all very pleased that you're still with us, Alun. Currently, 80 percent of heart failure is diagnosed in hospital following an admission with symptoms, and reviews of this group have shown that 40 per cent of these people had symptoms in the months prior to admission that could have triggered an earlier assessment in primary care.

Whilst there's naturally a focus on technological advances, I think it's really important to remember the need for societal developments as well. That focus on prevention, on working collaboratively and consistently, I think, is really important to raise awareness, education, messaging to the public—all of that's going to aid people, I think, to deliver and live healthier lifestyles, whilst also being able to correctly and confidently recognise those symptoms on cardiac issues. To help in this prevention space, the Wales cardiovascular network is working with the British Society for Heart Failure on its 25in25 campaign, and that calls for a national quality improvement initiative to reduce deaths by 25 per cent in the next 25 years, and create a community-based approach to early detection of heart failure. Swansea Bay is the first 25in25 fast-track community in the whole of the United Kingdom, so it's not just the Princess of Wales that is doing good work in this space.

Another important field to consider is end-of-life care for people who are facing heart failure. End-of-life care for heart failure in Cardiff and Vale board is another service that has won awards. They use a method where the cardiologist and the palliative care consultant work together to manage end-of-life care for patients, and I understand that this service has seen very notable results for patients. Before this service was in place, patients were often admitted as emergencies at least five times in their last year of life, and over 80 per cent would die at hospital. Now, since the establishment of this service, the number of unplanned admissions for patients in their final years of life has fallen from five to two, on average, and the length of stay is far shorter because of the care that is available in the home. As well as this, over 80 per cent of patients now pass away at home in accordance with their wishes, and the response of patients and families has been very positive. The Wales Cardiac Network is working with health boards to adopt this end-of-life service, and work has started at Cwm Taf Morgannwg and Hywel Dda on this.

Swansea bay has developed significant sites for heart failure, including a CardioMEMS site. Here, innovative technology is being applied to place a sensor in the pulmonary artery of the patient that can measure the pressure. This technology can demonstrate heart failure developing in the patient, so this can be detected before symptoms become evident, in order to provide appropriate treatment, improve the quality of life of patients and to prevent unplanned admissions to hospital. Cardiff and Vale health board is also leading research that uses a therapy device to treat a condition called HFPEF—severe heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. This is a condition where the heart's muscle doesn't relax fully, which means that less blood flows into the heart and the cardiac output decreases.

With regard to innovation more widely, health and social services policy officials have been working to redirect policy in terms of innovation in healthcare. The Wales innovation strategy was launched in February of last year, and development work led by the Welsh Government has been ongoing since then, supporting the delivery plan, which includes a specific section on our health and well-being mission commitments. There is a great deal to do, but we can be sure that the NHS in Wales understands the importance of innovation and development in cardiology. I'm very pleased to hear what is happening in the Princess of Wales Hospital. We do want to see clinicians having the opportunity to provide technology and devices that save lives, and for the public to receive the information they need to support everyone in the community.

And that brings today's proceedings to a close.