Plenary

The next item will be questions to the Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs. And the first question is from Sioned Williams.

Diolch, Llywydd. And I don't have the question in front of me, sorry.

I'll find it.

And you looked so well prepared, Sioned.

I have the supplementary, but not the question. Sorry.

Thank you, Sioned, for the question.

Coal tip safety falls under the portfolio of the Cabinet Secretary—my colleague—for Housing, Local Government and Planning. Nonetheless, the Welsh Government's coal tip safety programme, including its inspection and maintenance regime and a new disused coal tips Bill, places community safety at the very heart of its objectives.

Diolch. You've no doubt heard the concerns in the press and heard my colleague Delyth Jewell also raise concerns about water collecting in the void left by the Ffos-y-Fran opencast site. So, this isn't really about coal tip safety. The Welsh Government responded, saying it was closely monitoring the situation and its priority is the safety of the local community. So, I would like to emphasise that this must not be considered as an isolated case, because Ffos-y-Fran is one example of a systemic failure of the restoration of opencast mines. Similar problems exist in East Pit in Tairgwaith and Margam in Neath Port Talbot. Water filled voids are a great and long-standing concern to local communities there. These mining voids were never planned geologically, structurally, or hydrologically surveyed to hold millions of tonnes of water. In East Pit, recent earthquakes increased residents' concerns regarding the risks of leaving 40 million cu m of water on an active earthquake fault at around 150m above the valley floor with no constructed dam to retain water. Residents want to see surveys and reports from qualified indemnified engineers and measures taken to address the risks. So, how will the Welsh Government intervene to ensure action is taken to safeguard communities who've been left to deal with the serious environmental aftermath of opencast mining, and how, specifically, do you envisage upcoming Welsh legislation will aid the safety and environmental well-being of communities that contain post-industrial sites?

Thank you, Sioned, and we are very aware of the concerns of residents that have been expressed and we've seen a lot of that in the public domain as well, and in fact, we've had correspondence as well, and we've seen Delyth raise it and I've seen the Member for Merthyr, my colleague Dawn Bowden, has actually written to my predecessor in this role or to the current Cabinet Member on this regard as well. And it's not a new issue; it's not an isolated issue. In fact, looking across the Chamber here at colleagues who represent my region, we have ones within our area that are a legacy that go back to the John Major time within Government. But each one is different; each one is very separate.

In respect of Ffos-y-Fran, we are indeed—. Welsh Government is very closely monitoring the situation and keeping very closely in contact not only with the local authority, but also with agencies on the ground there, because our priority remains—in Ffos-y-Fran as elsewhere—always the safety of the local community. So, we're in regular contact with the local authority, a range of public sector partners. We've been very clear—very clear—that the safeguarding and the restoration of that site remains our objective, alongside our wish to see the full restoration of the site in line with the planning permission.

Now, just for an update for you as well, the leader of the council has provided assurances to Ministers that the water level in the void is not an immediate concern, but, as I say, we have seen this in other instances in different parts of Wales as well, and we can confirm that Welsh Government is providing support to the council to ensure that they're able to access independent assessments on potential flooding concerns and on environmental impacts as well. But we will keep in touch, and I'm more than happy to discuss this further with the Member or any other Members that want to see how this is progressing on the ground and how we are monitoring it, alongside the local authority and other agencies as well. So, thank you.

I thank Sioned for raising this important question. While much of the recent focus has been on the fate of the communities around Ffos-y-Fran, communities in our region have been blighted by remnants of coal mining, both deep coal mining and opencast. Despite assurance, Parc Slip at Margam and East Pit in Neath Port Talbot remain unrestored. The concerns voiced by communities in Merthyr Tydfil have been voiced by communities in Bridgend and Neath Port Talbot for years without resolution. Cabinet Secretary, how will your Government ensure our constituents are not forced to live with the blight of mining activities and that sites like Parc Slip and East Pit are restored to nature at the earliest possible opportunity?

I thank you for that supplementary question, because, in fact, the instance that I referred to in my first response was indeed Parc Slip, which is on our doorstep. Two local authorities involved with it; two local authorities who've had to, alongside, I have to say, interest from wildlife organisations as well, if the liabilities and so on could be sorted out—. But it's been going on for years, and it falls to, then, local authorities to step in, because originally, in that instance, and we've seen it elsewhere, the remediation plans, the funding in place and so on—each one is different, but they weren't put in place. That indeed is the one that stems back to the time, curiously, of the John Major Government. So, we're still having to wrestle with these.

But what we are doing in terms of the legislation, bringing the legislation forward, which will help indeed, is we are planning a disused tip safety Bill as a priority for this Government. We are committed to this and a long-term, proactive regime to ensure the ongoing safety of this part of Wales's industrial legacy as well. We intend to introduce that Bill into the Senedd this autumn, and I know that Members who are raising points here and others will want to see how that Bill can contribute as well to dealing with what is a legacy in different parts of Wales, right across Wales, that we are all now living with that should, to be honest, have been sorted out originally when these plans were put into place, but we're now having to pick up the pieces. But we will work with agencies on the ground, we will work with local authorities, and try, I have to say, as well, to make sure that we don't unfairly burden the taxpayer as well on this. There is a responsibility for these original developers, if they still exist, to actually step up to the mark as well.

Thank you, Hefin. Yes. The regulations in question will increase recycling and reduce carbon emissions by keeping high-quality materials in use for as long as possible. This will reduce waste incinerated and landfilled whilst helping our economy and the resilience of supply chains, and it represents a vital step in tackling the climate and nature emergencies that we face.

Now that the changes have been introduced, charities have contacted me about some of the difficulties that the regulations entail, particularly the cost of multiple new bins and creating the space to store additional recycling waste. So, just to give you an example, I've been contacted by the Aber Valley YMCA in Abertridwr, the First Senghenydd Scout Group, who run the CRAI Scout Activity Park, and Tŷ Hafan, who have a shop in Caerphilly, and all of them have concerns that the multiple requirements that the regulations have for storage of waste are costing them money. For example, the Tŷ Hafan shop in Caerphilly recycles or reuses 90 per cent of its donations and, therefore, although they're committed and passionate about recycling, they are having to take the burden of the additional costs, and you add onto that the fact that municipal tips don't take business waste—not in Caerphilly. So, what can the Welsh Government do to provide that kind of practical help to resolve some of those issues, particularly for those most deserving cases, such as charitable organisations?

Thank you, Hefin, for that question. It's a real practical question as well, with a policy that is very well-intentioned and will deliver real results. It's how do we help those organisations, particularly not the big public sector organisations, but those charitable organisations, third sector organisations, to manage their way through this, as well, by the way, as small businesses as well. Just by illustration, by the way, even though there are some initial costs in transferring to this new system, as we saw with doorstep recycling as well, actually, the projections are that, if we stay as we're currently going, because of the increased costs of collecting waste and the increased costs of landfill and a Bill coming down the line in the UK Parliament that will probably increase that further, we're looking at savings of £124.3 million over the next 10 years in comparison with the status quo. This is before we take into account, by the way, the costs of disposal for residual waste. So, part of this scheme is to actually give that resilience to the sector, anticipating that if we stay as we are it is going to get more expensive.

But you asked specifically about how we can help. Well, we have created—. By the way, first of all, I should say, if you want to get in touch with me, I'm more than happy to direct those individual organisations. But we've created a range of helpful practical resources to help those workplaces, including a detailed code of practice, sector-specific guidance. There are webinars with information online—really helpful, I've looked at them; they're very clear to understand—but also case-study videos, including of the type of organisations you refer to. So, for example, there's one of the case studies on a third sector charity, the Hospice of the Valleys charity shop up in Blaenau Gwent, indeed, showing how they've dealt with it without major upheaval, but just making the change very easily with support, with guidance. So, these resources can help workplaces identify what's good practice, how to do it very practically, in material separation and bin location as well, those practical things, and also how to train and upskill staff—I'm going through this in my own workplace at the moment—and optimising and rationalising systems to reduce waste and to minimise cost. But, as I say, we've got lots of organisations showing best practice. It's very easily accessible, but if you'd like to write to me, I'm more than happy to direct them individually, then, to where they can find that information. Diolch.

Cabinet Secretary, I've not met a business across my constituency that doesn't want to recycle more. However, the businesses that I have spoken to have said, regarding the Welsh Government's engagement with business, 'Yes, they tried, but it didn't reach everybody.' So, there are businesses out there who are not aware of actually what they have to do. There are also hospitality businesses out there as well, like the pubs, who are very concerned that they'll have multiple bins out the back of their properties and they're going to have contaminated waste because people chuck whatever they want to in bins in public areas, and their businesses will be the ones being fined by Natural Resources Wales for having contaminated waste. The businesses that I've spoken to would like a bit more time so they can adapt to these changes, and also recycling companies, so they can actually provide bins with locks on them, so people cannot just chuck any sort of waste in those bins. So, I ask you, Cabinet Secretary: can we have a bit more of a relaxed view as to enforcement around this for 12 months, so we can give those recycling businesses time to provide the bins that those businesses need, and also to give the businesses who are implementing these changes the opportunity to get the bins that they want so they don't foul fall—fall foul—of any of the rules that you put in place? I'm getting tongue-tied this afternoon, Cabinet Secretary. [Laughter.]

James, thank you for that helpful supplementary question. And, Llywydd, just to point out to people, the reason I can't turn around that well is that, fit and healthy as I am, I can't turn my neck—[Interruption.] [Laughter.] But, just to explain, in case you think I'm ignoring you, or you think I'm turning my back on you, I'm permanently like this.

If you turn your back as well, Minister, then the cameras won't see you and the microphone won't pick you up. So, stay looking straight on is my professional advice. [Laughter.]

It's a fact of my life. I can't play cricket either now as well because I can't look down the crease as I can't turn my head.

But, anyway, it's a really helpful question. First of all, it's been 10 years in the making—10 years—and we've already actually put in place a six-month delay in order to refine it in response to previously being asked. I mentioned in response to Hefin David's question the vast range of information that's out there, and, genuinely, James, direct people towards those sources because they will be really helpful. What is really interesting is that, in the surveys that we've done recently, more than three-quarters of the public surveyed, but also, SMEs surveyed, were really in support of this; they want to make it happen. So, we're trying to make it easy for them by actually saying, 'Here's where you can get the advice and so on.' But we have done the delays already.

One other thing to mention in response to that, in terms of the proportionate approach towards the regulation and the enforcement, NRW has already advised that, in line with their regulatory principles, they'll take a risk-based approach to regulation—a fair and proportionate approach. They intend to actually help, advise, guide, educate, if you like, first of all. It was the same as when it came in with the doorstep recycling in houses. Remember the fuss over that, and everybody saying, 'How on earth do we do this?' Now we're just used to it; we do it. So, that advice and support, and a fair and proportionate approach to enforcement will be taken, with an initial emphasis on providing support and guidance to help bring those businesses and workplaces into compliance. But there's practical advice out there, James, and, again, I'd make that offer: if you want to have a chat with me so that we can identify certain businesses who are struggling, I'm more than happy, then, to help guide them to where they can get that support.

Questions now from party spokespeople. The Welsh Conservative spokesperson, Samuel Kurtz.

Diolch, Llywydd, and I warmly welcome the new Cabinet Secretary to his position and wish him well. And I'm grateful, too, for the time that he gave me yesterday to discuss a range of issues. I'm pleased to see as well that the Cabinet Secretary has already been out on farms, some of which were in my own constituency, sadly without me being notified as is standard protocol, alas. But only a few short weeks ago, the largest protest of its kind took place on the steps of the Senedd, as Welsh farmers stood in unity against the Welsh Government's proposals on the sustainable farming scheme, bovine TB eradication and nitrate vulnerable zone regulations. Now, I don't envy the new Cabinet Secretary and the broken relationship between the Welsh Government and rural Wales that he has inherited with this portfolio. Your predecessor met with the organisers of the Welshpool and Carmarthen mart meetings, and can I urge you, please, to do the same? But on the sustainable farming scheme specifically, can the Cabinet Secretary outline what changes he intends to make to incentivise farmers to sign up to the scheme, having been told in no uncertain terms by the farming unions that tinkering won't be sufficient?

Thank you, Sam, and thanks for the welcome to the office. Listen, genuinely, my apologies for not giving you notice last week. There were circumstances around it, which I'm happy to discuss, but we'll make sure it doesn't happen again, and, even with unusual circumstances around it, we will inform you and other Members here as well. So, my apologies.

Look, Sam, I'm not yet deliberately—and I say this quite genuinely—or we're not yet in a position to actually make specific policy decisions and announce the next steps on where we go with the sustainability of farming. By the way, when I say sustainability of farming, I mean that in its broadest terms. It is to do with, as I've said in interviews this week, the sustainability and the vitality of the farm businesses, as well as the sustainability in terms of the climate change and the nature emergencies we face. It's food production and all of that alongside the other imperatives we have to do. That means, on the back of the thousands of responses that we've already had, on the back of the dialogue we've had over seven years, it's time to pause and reflect and then to engage, but not to delay for too long, because the worst thing we can do for farmers, as well as everybody else, is to say, 'Let's inject more uncertainty, more delay'. We need to crack on.

One of the welcome things that we did within the first couple of days coming into office, my colleague the First Minister and I—. I think the first, in fact, formal meeting that the First Minister had in Cathays Park was with the heads of the farming unions. It was a productive meeting, but we stressed to them we are genuinely listening. We are looking at what the responses to those consultations are before we move. When we do move, we will do it together. That is key, and that comes to the heart of the question that you've put. We do not do this without having a wide sign-up right across Wales, right across society, right across all the groups that were interested in this, but especially with the farming community. Because whether it is upland or lowland farms, whether it is intensive or extensive, whatever types of diversified farming, we need them coming with us on this journey because they will deliver that multiplicity of benefits for us. Now, I am confident, quietly, that we can do that, but we need to rebuild that goodwill, trust, faith, collaboration—the Welsh way of doing things—on all sides, which is 'we do this together'. And then, Sam, we can provide the best example of leadership in this in Wales and we can do this. But, yes, pause, reflect, look at the evidence, look at the responses to the consultation, of which there have been many, many thousands, which is going to take us a little bit of time, and then we'll set out how we proceed.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. I'm pleased to hear you mention the need and the recognition of having to rebuild that relationship, and, again, the stressing of sustainability having a wider definition than that just of climate and nature.

Now, moving on to bovine TB, the long-awaited membership of the technical advisory group was announced earlier this week, having first been announced back in July 2022—a full 21 months later, but better late than ever. But it doesn't exactly paint a picture of a Government who are committed to TB eradication. But concerns have been raised that there is no farmer voice on this group, no voice of someone who has been through the horrors of bovine TB on their farm. A missed opportunity, I would say, not to have that specific experience alongside the experience of academia and the veterinarian profession as well, because behind every TB breakdown is a farmer and a family. The human impact and cost can't be ignored.

Now, you mentioned earlier the interviews that you've done, and on Radio 4's Farming Today programme yesterday you boldly claimed that England, where they are at a 15-year low in bovine TB incidence, could learn something from here in Wales, and now this has caused further frustration in the sector, who look across the border and see a genuine and positive reduction in bovine TB. Now, will you follow the science, follow this lead, and deliver the targeted removal of infected wildlife so the industry doesn't continue to attempt to eradicate bovine TB with one hand tied behind its back?

Sam, I think there are two or three key areas within agriculture and farming that are going to be with us for the foreseeable future and that we have to resolve. The future of sustainable farming is one, bovine TB is another. What we do on river water quality is the other big one, if you like, of that triumvirate. We have to do them together. But on the membership of the advisory group, which I attended today, by the way—and thank you for taking the time to meet with me yesterday as well and go through some of these issues—let us say there's probably been some misunderstanding of what that group does and what it's relation is to the board. The board is a much wider stakeholder group including farmer representation on it as ex-officio members. So, we have the farming unions on that board. That's the board that actually sets the steer and so on. But, the advisory group that I met with this morning, when we went around the table and we looked at that—and I'd looked previously at the curricula vitae of these people; these are people not only with direct experience, on-farm experience, by the way, with one of them going back to my early boyhood on the Gower, where he lived and breathed and worked on farms as the on-farm vet, and others around that table as well bringing that same depth of experience—these are not people isolated from rural Wales and the farming community. They bring a wide breadth of very, very expert advice that can then feed upwards to the programme board. I've seen a couple of the headlines on this. I'm happy to meet with whoever's saying this is a waste of time. It isn't. This actually now underpins what we can do in looking at the evidence, looking at the science and going forward.

You mentioned, though, why I referred in the interviews I've done to some of the lessons in Wales. I was out last week on a series of farm visits, and one of them was with somebody you know very well, with Roger and the Pembrokeshire pathways, which I know you've previously had involvement directly with. Some of that is showing us the way forward in some of the things we've done. Over a decade ago, when I was the DEFRA Minister, we saw the evidence, the data, which Lesley will know as well, data showing not only how you could drill down to individual farms or down to herds within a farm, but actually to individual cattle and identify early on. But then, the different thing about the Pembrokeshire pathway project is it brings together, with a degree of autonomy to the farmer, the on-site vet as well as the veterinary service from Wales, alongside the advice from the TB centre of excellence in Aberystwyth, et cetera, et cetera. It's a proper partnership. It's no longer saying to the farmer, 'You are at the whim of somebody coming onto your farm and doing to you whatever they do to you'. It's proper autonomy, and there was real enthusiasm about it.

I'm grateful for that, Cabinet Secretary. Yes, the advisory group does have that experience in terms of practical delivery, but I don't think it should be understated how important it is to understand the farmer's voice in the delivery of TB eradication on farms. Yes, it's a technical advisory group, but it is those farmers themselves who deliver much of this on their farms. So, I think that's where there's a specific point in terms of the farm voice being lost on the technical advisory group.

Yes, you mentioned three topics, and I'll move on to the third, being water quality. It'll be no shock to this Chamber that the recent wet weather has caused real issues for farmers across Wales. Crops haven't been sown, silage is running short and livestock has been turned out onto fields that are already saturated. I'm pleased that, following my letter to you asking what support is available to those farmers most severely affected, you have convened a wet weather summit tomorrow. But, what this also goes to show is the unpredictability of the weather here in Wales and why the NVZ's farming-by-calendar approach is an absolute nonsense, I'm afraid. Do you recognise this and will you scrap this outdated policy, which could make water pollution incidence worse? And will you work with the sector and the exciting technology that's developing to bring forward genuine change that improves the quality of our waterways while giving our farmers hope that there is a future for this industry in Wales, because, Cabinet Secretary, what farmers need at the moment, on all three of these topics, is hope?

Thank you, Sam. We've done the big three issues, and I think we'll be coming back to them. But, just to say, my thanks to my predecessor in this role, Lesley Griffiths, because one of the things that she made clear is that not only have we adjusted currently the nitrate regulations—and we will look to see how those are working or whether there's improvement that needs to be made—we cannot walk away from the fact that so many of our rivers, affected by different types of pollution, but many of them by diffuse agricultural pollution, are under ecological status, and nobody wants that. The public doesn't want it, the farmers don't want it, and so on. So, we will look at how we take that forward. But also, we have the first four-year review of the Water Resources (Control of Agricultural Pollution) (Wales) Regulations 2021 imminently; the team have begun having discussions with stakeholders, including the Wales land management forum sub-group on agricultural pollution, bringing together a wide range of groups on this. So, we do need to look at it, and I'm not going to pre-empt it. Standing here as a Minister, what I am not is the font of all knowledge. That's why we establish these groups to actually go away and tell us what is now the way forward. But on river quality, again, it is working with the farmers and with other stakeholders on a catchment basis to find out how we actually turn those rivers that we have—all of them—back to pristine status. Again, we have to do it together. Diolch yn fawr.

Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Llyr Gruffydd.

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. Can I congratulate the Cabinet Secretary, as well, on his appointment? I know from his previous capacity as a member of the Climate Change, Environment and Infrastructure Committee that he'll undertake his work diligently, conscientiously and, we're all hoping, effectively. And before he gets ahead of himself, those words describe my intentions in terms of scrutinising him, as well. [Laughter.] But I certainly look forward to working with you where that's possible, but also to shadowing you, of course, in your rural affairs brief.

As we know, he takes up the role at a time when the relationship between the Government and our rural communities is at an all-time low: failure to tackle bovine TB, of course; the continued consternation around the water quality regulations; the highly charged and problematic, for many, proposals in the sustainable farming scheme. There's a lot in your in-tray and a lot of work to be done to rebuild the relationship between the Government and the agriculture sector. So, can you elaborate a little bit about how you intend to build those bridges? You mentioned earlier that you will be working together with the sector on the sustainable farming scheme. Of course, that's what your predecessor said. How will your approach differ to that of your predecessors? Will it be different, or are we going to see more of the same?

When the First Minister and I met with the heads of the farming unions, and in subsequent discussions that we've had, we've stressed that we're not going to replicate what we've done already; what we want to do is set up a fairly timely process where we can seek to agree where we agree and identify the knotty issues that require some unravelling and understanding. Maybe some of those knotty issues actually require a bit more evidence base behind them, as well. Thank you for your acknowledgement that I tend to approach my work in a form of diligence and scrutiny—I do, and that's the way I'll apply it, as did my predecessor in this post, as well.

What we've proposed so far—I'll reveal a little bit of leg, okay, but I can't reveal a lot at the moment—is a framework of a scheme structure, based on the work that's been carried out to date. The initial conversation that we've had is that this is broadly acceptable, but what we want to bring forward imminently to those stakeholders, including the farming unions, but also, I have to say, to the wider range of stakeholders, is actually a structure that says, 'Here are some ideas about how we could do the process'. I will be taking a clear ministerial engagement within it, not necessarily at every meeting, but the problematic areas can be lifted up to me, so we can then seek to resolve them. Then, we will move forward.

But I think the first point—and we saw it, curiously, in the climate change sessions that we held in the minutes before I had a call saying, 'Hey, you'd better get up to Cathays Park'—is that there was good agreement over a broad area of things, but then there were those two or three knotty areas. So, we're not looking, as I've said in media interviews this week, to kick it into the long grass, start again, cause all that uncertainty for everybody; we're looking to progress where we can progress and then deal with the knotty areas. But I give the undertaking to all the Members in this Chamber, yourself included and the committee, that we will engage with everybody on this as we bring forward those proposals.

Thank you for that, because I was going to ask about where we go next in terms of process. Maybe timescales are what they are and you might want to elaborate a little bit about that. But the reality is, of course, you repeated again today that taking longer is the worst thing we can do, or that pausing of the roll-out. Well, you just listed to me quite fundamental things that need to happen now in order for you to be in a position to implement the scheme as intended next year. Surely it's impractical, because your predecessor regularly reminded—. You know, I was trying to get some sort of recognition that the clock had run its course, really, on this, and she would at least acknowledge that it was going to be highly, highly challenging. If we're looking at changes to the sustainable farming scheme, as I presume we are, given what you've said, there will be a potential redesign of elements. That will necessitate co-design of some elements, and maybe even further consultation on aspects. Maybe you can enlighten us on whether you intend to consult, depending on the extent of changes. That is going to take time, and time is something that we don't have. So, while you say that the worst thing that we can do is pause the roll-out, surely the worst thing that you can do is to rush it and get it wrong.

I do agree with that, in respect of where we have got some knotty elements. We have to take the time now to properly look at those and see how we resolve them, but also the timescale in which we resolve them as well, and how we do that together, and how we bring all farmers with us on that as well. Some of that may well be to do with things such as proving that a suggestion is the right one, or looking at alternative ideas, but we don't have to take years for that.

Some of that could be done through demonstration as well, and exploring them a bit more. I'm keen to have a look at some of the work that has already been done on alternative options as well, including by our university sector, which is heavily engaged in this. So, what I can guarantee to you is that it won't be long until we reveal much more leg, but I want to make sure that everybody is on board with that.

To come back to the theme that Sam raised as well, everybody has got to be content with the process, and where those knotty issues are, and also where we are in agreement. And I would say, genuinely, without breaking confidences, that the discussions that we have had so far with farming unions have said that the broad framework is the right framework. The high-line objectives are the right ones. Many of the options within it are the right ones.

We have a fixed amount of funding at the moment, which is going to cause continuing discussion as well. We have the funding that we have. But if we can get agreement on that, then I hope that, within weeks, we are able to say, 'This is the course of action and the timescales that we will need to move ahead'. But not everything has to stop, Llyr. There are things that we have agreement on. So, that's why I say that we don't stop and kick everything into the long grass. Let's agree where we can agree and start showing that we have a direction of travel that we are all going in.

Diolch, Luke. A just transition to net zero is central to the work of this Government and in the delivery of our current climate plans. We will ensure that workers and the communities of Wales reap the economic and social benefits in areas such as energy, circular economy, housing and transport.

Thank you for the response.

I will take this opportunity to congratulate you on your new post. This is the first opportunity that I have had.

The need for a just transition and the decarbonisation of our economy is the defining issue of this decade, and it will be the defining issue of the next decade as well—and an issue that is going to require a lot of cross-portfolio collaboration. On the theme of collaboration, I would be interested to understand what conversations you have had with the Cabinet Secretary for Economy, Energy and Welsh Language on fostering new energy systems, with energy being one of those key pillars to decarbonisation. What do you see as the immediate challenges spanning both remits?

Thank you very much. Not only with that Cabinet Secretary but with other Cabinet Secretaries as well, we are having those discussions. Even though the portfolios have been reconfigured, climate change remains in my title because we are still driving ahead on the carbon budgets. We are are in carbon budget 2, and we are looking ahead to carbon budget 3. We know the challenges ahead of us. We will seek to deliver on them with real ambition and with real purpose.

That means that all of my Cabinet colleagues here will all be having discussions, but within their own portfolio areas, and within their own funding streams. With transport, with housing, with local government and everything, we all seek to deliver on our journey to net zero. But in doing that, our focus, Luke, is going to be on what we have always stated, from the First Minister's manifesto commitment, but also long-held: that idea of green prosperity.

We undersell this sometimes—the idea that we genuinely can create green jobs. Those green jobs will be in energy and what we do, and will be in some of those exciting opportunities. But they will also be in the stuff that we were talking about just now. They will be in things such as what we need to do with farm advisory services and Farming Connect, and green natural infrastructure and the army of people we will need to do that as well.

So, I think that, in seeking to move to a just transition, if we are serious about this, we look at every aspect of every portfolio and say, 'Where can we deliver those additional jobs and economic opportunities for every single part of Wales and in every single sector?' That's challenging, but it's exciting, and what will drive it across Government is our need to hit those carbon budget targets. We've committed to them here in Wales, and we will deliver them. We put people right at the front of it. People and communities are front and centre of everything we do.

Reaching net zero, obviously, is very important. I understand your continued commitment to that in your new role, and I think we're all grateful for that. But moving towards that requires a transport network and an infrastructure that is green and clean, and that is not only in public transport, that's private-use vehicles as well. Integral to that, obviously, as we move towards the ban of sale of petrol and diesel cars, is that infrastructure in terms of electric vehicle charging points right across the country. The Senedd's climate change committee, though, in the past, has said, and I quote, that

'the lack of progress on EVs is unacceptable.'

I know the First Minister yesterday talked about the importance of green growth in his statement, but there's not been enough evidence of growth in this particular industry. So, how are you going to work, as the new Minister responsible for climate change, with the Minister for transport to ensure that we've got that modern network, that modern infrastructure that we need, not only for today, but for the future as well?

Thank you for the question. You are right; if we look at the biggest sectors that can provide contribution towards that net-zero pathway, it will be transport, and it will be housing and so on, but it'll also be agriculture, as we were discussing earlier on. But transport is absolutely key, and I know the Cabinet Secretary for North Wales and Transport will have been listening to the points that you've made. It does indeed involve that transition away from polluting forms of private transport, without a doubt, but it's not the entire panacea. We need to make sure that that network of charging points is there, and we are investing in that, with partners, to make sure that that happens.

But it's also what we do with the bus fleet, it's also what we do with trying to have that modal shift of people onto public transport—buses and trains. And it's also to do with the often cinderella thing, although we've massively increased the investment; we've quadrupled investment from the Welsh Government in active travel. Some people will never take to a bike—even an electric bike and so on—but many more people are now. And if you look at the way that European cities have reinvented themselves around active travel, as well as less carbon-intensive forms of travel, it's all of these pulled together. I know my colleague the Cabinet Secretary will have heard you. I'll certainly be meeting with him, and others, to discuss their contribution towards this. But I welcome the support, genuinely. It will be private transport decarbonisation, but it'll also be those wider modal shifts along—I hate to say it—that inverted triangle of the sustainable transport hierarchy, with active travel right at the top.

Thank you, Alun. The Welsh Government is taking an integrated catchment river approach to combat river pollution. It's focusing on co-operation and collaboration with all partners. We have an ongoing strong engagement, including Government, regulators and all relevant partners and sectors in Wales, working together through the river pollution summit process. The next summit will take place in July, and I will be chairing it.

I'm grateful to the Cabinet Secretary for that answer. I'd also like to join others in congratulating him on his appointment; I know his appointment has been warmly welcomed across not just this Chamber but across Wales as well. I'd like to add my words to that.

In many ways, the Cabinet Secretary has answered my questions in his first answer. I hope that we'll be able to—[Interruption.] Not quite. I hope that we'll be able to move forward, bringing people together, because I don't believe that we're able to simply lay the blame for river pollution on any one stakeholder or group of stakeholders. What we need is collaboration and co-operation amongst riparian owners, amongst industries, amongst local authorities, Government, regulators, as well as users of our waterways, to ensure that we have the co-operative management of watercourses that ensures that all sources of pollution are tackled, and tackled fairly and equally, and that we do have the sort of fresh, clean rivers that we would all wish to see.

Thank you for that supplementary. You are right. As you know, my politics are that I'm Labour and Co-operative—I stress that repeatedly. My approach to doing this stuff is that we all do it together or we don't do it at all, whether it's with farming, whether it's to do with challenges on transport, and particularly on challenges with water quality. I've never been a great one for monikers like the phrase 'team Wales', but the Welsh way of doing things, so actually working together, so we don’t point fingers and just yell at each other, but we say the regulator has a role to play, the water companies have a role to play, the anglers’ clubs on the river have a role to play, the farmers and the landowners have a role to play, the builders have a role to play—. And Government, by the way, and agencies like NRW—all of us in there together. And all of us in there together rather than pointing fingers, and actually saying, ‘What’s your contribution? What’s yours? How do we then lift it?’

The great thing is we’ve done this before. We’ve done it with things like bathing water quality. We’ve tackled major ecological and environmental issues and really done it together. Now, on that basis I’m really looking forward, and I thank my former First Minister and previous colleagues for the work that they did with the river summits. There was curiosity whether we would continue on that journey now with the reshuffle. We are definitely continuing on that journey, because we see them as an imperative to bring people together and say, ‘What can we all do to actually deliver the water quality that we want?'

Congratulations again for your portfolio. We do have high hopes for you, and what you've said so far does sound good. Just last year, though, we saw the rivers Usk and Wye named Wales's most polluted rivers. Six of the UK’s most polluted rivers are in Wales. Clearly, things are getting worse, not better, and clearly this Welsh Government to date have failed to get a grip of this issue, and instead chosen to ignore the seriousness of the situation facing our Welsh rivers. It pains me to see my local river, the Usk river, which I used to fish in with my father, green, and with no salmon jumping in it like they used to. I wanted to know today what you are going to do differently. You’ve already spoken to my colleague Sam Kurtz about it, and Alun Davies, but I want to know what steps you’re going to take now. What urgent steps can you do? It’s great that you want to work with stakeholders, great that we share the same aim, to get our rivers back to pristine status, but what urgent steps are you going to take before we get round the table? Thank you.

Well, the Wye and the Usk and the Severn, and some of our other major rivers flowing out of the north and the west, and some of the ones that cross borders, particularly, are some of our greatest challenges, and one of the things that I’m hoping to bring to this, building on the work of my predecessors, is actually to try and strengthen some of that cross-border co-operation as well as cross catchment, because some of these catchments involve two Governments, involve two water companies et cetera. So, I think there’s a real role there, and I want to approach this in a very sensible way of saying, ‘What can we combine?’ But where I would refute what you’re saying is that we’ve done nothing, because we actually have, and we can point to the evidence of where we’ve done it. But we’ve still got so much more to do because, as you say—. Look, I’m a keen walker, canoeist and so on—I know these rivers well, and it dismays me sometimes when you look at them, but then it raises the challenge of what can we actually do to turn it round. So, we have funded, for example, the Wye nutrient management board to development a nutrient management plan for that river. The plan is going to give us a better understanding of nutrient levels in the river and meet the conservation objectives of what is an SAC—it’s a special area of conservation. We’ve made £15 million capital funding available to NRW for wider water quality improvements. We have, as we’ve mentioned already, convened—and this is the way forward—four river pollution summits, which have provided an opportunity to learn from different stakeholders on these catchments about the different work being done, and it won’t be one silver bullet, it will be many issues we have to tackle to address it.

So, what I can guarantee to you is I’ll bring the same energy my predecessors have. It’s a real passion of mine. But I will need to work with all Members in this Chamber as well to ensure that everybody steps up to the mark and is willing to contribute.

Thank you very much, Rhun. Over 99.9 per cent of claimants on Ynys Môn have received a basic payment scheme payment, worth a total of £8.3 million. This support is in addition to our Farming Connect service, which this year has registered over 1,000 people working in agriculture on Ynys Môn.

Thank you for that response. I too congratulate the Cabinet Secretary on his appointment. He will be highly aware of the importance of the agricultural industry for my constituency, and of the very real concerns that exist among farmers on Anglesey, as is the case across Wales, on the vision and plans of the Welsh Government for the sector. It's clear to me at this point, with a new Minister in charge, that we must take stock of that vision and to make fundamental changes to many of the plans in place, and for the Government to work with the sector, which is crucially important, in order to get things right.

So, I urge the Cabinet Secretary today in his first question session to ensure that the Welsh Government does intend to make those changes that are necessary, and to do so swiftly, not only in their plans but also in their attitudes too, and to be real champions for the agricultural sector. And on the sustainable farming scheme, on the NVZs, on tree planting, on TB—there are so many elements here—how does the Cabinet Secretary intend to work with farmers on Ynys Môn and across Wales to ensure that the Government and the industry are rowing in the same direction?

We have to undertake this journey together.

We've got to go forward together.

So, I am travelling the length and breadth of Wales.

I will be visiting myself, as well as my officials, speaking to farmers, listening to farmers, engaging with them, as well as the wider stakeholders out there. I know he, like me, will also have representations from wildlife and environmental organisations who want to see us proceed as well, which has come out of the climate change Committee. I know how widespread the desire is from all parts of Wales to actually get on with this and do it, but we will only do it, as I've said during previous interventions on this, if we do it together. It is the Welsh way. I'm determined that we do this. It will require goodwill on all sides and it will probably require, just for the moment, a little bit of quiet reflection on the consultation that's gone on this, and the responses that we've had, which will take a little bit of time to actually digest, to be honest, and the many conversations.

So, I think we keep that going but then we have to plot out how we are going to move forward, because it is not only the sustainable future of farming in that wide interpretation that I've outlined before—the true sustainability of farming and food production in Wales—but it's also how we face the nature and the climate emergencies as well. We have no time to waste, but we've got to do it together.

Indeed, Mike, diolch. Our priorities on animal welfare are set out in the 'Animal Welfare Plan for Wales 2021-26'. This includes a timetable for delivery against our programme for government commitments and other animal welfare priorities. Our two-year progress report, alongside a written statement, was published in January.

Thank you for that answer. With the Welsh Government's consultation on the licensing of animal establishments, activities and exhibits having recently closed, the outcome of this consultation has the potential to improve the lives of thousands of animals in Wales, including those within animal sanctuaries, rescue and rehoming centres, as well as racing greyhounds by bringing an end to greyhound racing in Wales. What is the Minister prioritising in order to improve animal welfare?

I thank you very much. It really is important that we work with everybody, including those animal sanctuaries that I know he has in his own patch, and also across mine and my colleague Sarah Murphy as well, including Hope Rescue. We are committed to maintaining the highest standards of welfare for all animals kept in Wales in all the situations, Mike, that you just ran across. But this does include the quite controversial issue of greyhound racing, and we recognise the strength of feeling here with a petition that was submitted with over 35,000 signatures. It's a clear indication of the strength of feeling in respect of greyhounds.

So, greyhound racing and its licensing is indeed part of our 'Animal Welfare Plan for Wales'. Now, I can't provide at this stage a specific date for the introduction of any legislation that follows from the consultations that we are doing, but you've seen our commitment, the commitment of the previous incumbent of this post as well, which is still held. So, we do look forward to bringing forward proposals, subject to the normal discussions between Cabinet colleagues, which I understand doesn't mean that I automatically get top dibs, but I will be pushing hard, clearly, Mike.

Finally, question 7, Julie Morgan.

Diolch, Julie. In respect of biodiversity, we are protecting biodiversity through initiatives such as the nature networks, the marine protected areas and the national peatland action programmes, which benefit our terrestrial, freshwater and marine environments. We are also strengthening our legislative framework, including introducing statutory biodiversity targets, as set out in our recently published White Paper.

Diolch. Thank you for that answer, and I'd like to congratulate the Cabinet Secretary on his new post and wish him all the best for the future. And I'm sure he's aware of the successful 20-year-old community campaign to save Llanishen and Lisvane reservoirs and the surrounding area in Cardiff North. At the end of last year I visited Lisvane reservoir with Plantlife Cymru to see for myself the vast number of waxcap fungi species, which make the reservoirs a site of international importance and actually, ultimately, help to save them. Would the Cabinet Secretary agree that this is an absolutely prime example of the community coming together to save a much-loved and biodiversity-rich site that can now be enjoyed, and is being enjoyed, by thousands of visitors every year?

Absolutely, Julie, and it shows what people power can actually do. And just to say to you I know your track record as a supporter of the reservoir action group, to save and then restore Llanishen and Lisvane reservoirs, and the successful conclusion in 2023—what an achievement. People power really does work—grass-roots people power. And your visit with Plantlife Cymru, a great organisation, looking at the red waxcaps—I'll let you into a little secret: I have a very wet garden, it's like a tropical rainforest in itself, and we have, indeed, red waxcaps within my garden as well.

People like Plantlife, Cardiff's local nature partnership developing the local nature recovery action plan, setting out what needs to be done to restore and improve nature in Cardiff—this is the sort of support that we can do, through Welsh Government and through all of us, but also to encourage and incentivise grass-roots organisations and third sector bodies to make a real tangible difference in their local areas. But the success of the scheme of the Lisvane and Llanishen reservoirs was monumental, and it's what we now do to build on the success of that, with all this protecting and enriching and restoring biodiversity around those areas.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary. That brings that question session to an end.

Item 3 is next, the topical questions, and the first of those questions is to be answered by the Cabinet Secretary for Culture and Social Justice, and the question is to be asked by Heledd Fychan

Diolch. My officials continue to work with Amgueddfa Cymru to develop a plan to address the urgent maintenance issues at our National Museum Cardiff. I met with the chief executive yesterday, who assured me there are no plans to close the museum. However, I fully appreciate the seriousness of the situation and the significant investment needed.

Thank you very much, Cabinet Secretary, and first of all, may I congratulate you on your appointment and say how pleased I am to see culture elevated within Government, and welcome now how it's connected to social justice? I very much hope that we can work together constructively and positively to tackle the problems faced by our national institutions.

I also hope that we can all agree in this Siambr that none of us want to see National Museum Cardiff, the headquarters of our iconic national museums, have to close its doors because it is not safe for visitors, staff and our national collections. I am very pleased to hear your response, and a welcome change from some of the responses I've received from your predecessor. I hope we will now see a willingness to find solutions. And as I'm sure you can appreciate from your meeting with the national museum, they are not empty threats from the national museum. It is a very real possibility, and we must, as a Senedd, do everything in our power to stop this from happening to the home of our memory as a nation. And it isn't a problem that appeared overnight either. We need to be clear as a Senedd that there's a £90 million backlog of capital expenditure needed just to bring all of our national museums up to the standard required to care for our nation's collections for future generations.

In addressing the Senedd yesterday on delivering his priorities, the First Minister used the word 'choices' six times, and there's no getting away from the fact that one of those choices has been to cut what was already too small a budget compared to others. And if that isn't bad enough, he was also happy to defend the decision to do so.

Now, the Scottish Government, who are also at the receiving end of Tory austerity, have committed to doubling arts and culture funding. Andrew Green, the former librarian at the national library, wrote recently of the Welsh Government's 'fatal lack of understanding' and 'lack of vision' about the role of culture and the arts in how we live and how we're seen by people outside Wales. Can I therefore ask what reassurances can the Cabinet Secretary give today that such a damning critique is without foundation, and will you commit to working cross party here in the Senedd with Amgueddfa Cymru, as well as our cultural national institutions such as the National Library of Wales, to not only assess the risk to our national collections, but to put in place a plan to safeguard them and commit to adopting a new approach to culture and heritage for the remainder of this Senedd term?

Thank you very much, and thank you for your words of welcome. I too have always believed that arts are the great redeemer of life, so I'm very, very pleased to have been appointed to the culture portfolio, and I quite agree with you, that link between social justice and making sure that we expand the offer to ensure that everybody is able to access art and culture, I think is very welcome, and, certainly, when I met with my senior management team for the first time, everybody together on Monday, you could see the enthusiasm for that.

As I said, I did meet with the chief executive yesterday; I'm meeting with the chair and the chief executive tomorrow. There has clearly been a great deal of work already started before I came into portfolio to look at some specific funding over the next few years to try and help clear that backlog that you referred to. They are very old buildings, they're iconic buildings, but we know—. You only have to look at City Hall, don't you, here in Cardiff, to see the issues there, and I think it's fair to say the chief executive can see that there are similarities between the museum and City Hall. So, it's really important that I get that assurance from the chief executive and the chair about the safety of our collections. They are the people best placed to advise me on that; they're the people to tell me how best to keep safe those collections.

I think we have to recognise the budget situation, and we are where we are, we're only at the start of the financial year now, but what I have made very clear to officials is I want them to continue to work very closely with the museum, with the chair and chief exec, to make sure they bring forward a business plan. I would like to see that business plan certainly by the middle of next month to see what we can then do. I don't have a great budget, as you know, but I don't think it is just a matter for me; I think it is a cross-Government issue, but every Cabinet Secretary will tell you that, but I'm very, very clear that this is an iconic building, these collections are not ours, we just look after them as we pass through, and it's really important that we do safeguard them, and I'm very keen to work with everybody, and I welcome your commitment to that. Thank you.

Can I welcome you to your role, Cabinet Secretary? I look forward to working with you on a range of issues. I also welcome the warm words, I think, we've heard so far about the future of the national museum. Can I also thank Heledd Fychan for tabling today's question on the future of the national museum of Wales? Now, I do feel a bit sorry for Heledd because, whilst she clearly takes a keen interest in the museum, I think she's been undermined here by her own party. That's because Plaid Cymru, in co-operation with this Welsh Labour Government, have recently agreed to a cultural strategy, with their designated Member working with your predecessor to achieve it. Now, that strategy is out to consultation, but can the Cabinet Secretary confirm whether the strategy, as presently drafted by both parties, contains a specific safeguard to ensure the future of the museum?

Well, thank you. The consultation hasn't begun yet, and I've asked to have a pause so that I can look at that document. I appreciate the work that had gone into it by my predecessor and by the designated Member, but it hasn't actually gone out to consultation yet.

Can I also congratulate Lesley Griffiths on your appointment, and also the combining of culture with social justice in your portfolio? I think that's very exciting, and I'm sure the Equality and Social Justice Committee will want to take advantage of that.

I've just come from a public discussion hosted by the Mercury Theatre to inform their work on climate change and our seas, and it illustrates just how important it is to engage with the public on thorny issues like what can we all do about climate change.

Referring to the national museum's challenges, we know that up to 60 jobs will need to go at museums Wales, from what they've said. Voluntary severance schemes are very clunky ways of approaching this, as it inevitably means losing the most employable staff, rather than focusing on reshaping the structure of the museum to meet its identified priorities. Now we have the Social Partnership and Public Procurement (Wales) Act 2023, what discussions will you have or have you had with senior managers to ensure all staff are involved in the best way to meet the museum’s priorities with a reduced budget?

Thank you. I haven't had that discussion as yet, but I mentioned in my original answer to Heledd Fychan that I am meeting with the chair and chief exec to have a much wider discussion tomorrow, and that will, obviously, be part of it. When I did speak with the chief executive yesterday here in the Senedd, I was pleased to hear there hadn't been any compulsory redundancies, because I think that is another way that, unfortunately, sometimes we do lose the skills that are required. So, I was very pleased to hear that. Obviously, I will have a wider conversation, but I think it is really important to remind any organisation that they have a duty to adhere to the social partnership Act, and it's really important that they use that partnership approach, going forward.

Cabinet Secretary, I welcome you, sincerely, to this role. Now, this is an issue that the culture committee has expressed serious concerns about. The risk that's been outlined to the national collections themselves is stark. The associated risk to our national identity and our collective memory is profound. Now, I was heartened just now to hear you say that the arts are the redeemer of life. Now, as the new Cabinet Secretary for culture, will you endeavour to find an urgent solution to this crisis, because, would you agree with me that, if a nation cannot remember where it's come from, it cannot possibly learn from its past nor indeed face its future with hope?

I absolutely agree, and I recognise that I'm going to be a custodian for a very, very short time, and it is really important that we do all we can, but I do think that my officials and the officials working at the museum—. And I have to say their relationship was very pleasing to see; there had been, clearly, a significant amount of work done. They seemed to speak as one voice, really. I thought it was really good, the work that the two groups had done. They know what's needed to keep those collections safe, and I very much look forward, and I'd be very happy to—. I plan to do an oral statement on the priorities within the portfolio to the Senedd, probably next month, and I'd very happy to update you on those further discussions I have. But it's really important that we look at what we can do to help them. Even in these extremely challenging economic times, it is really important that we do all we can.

I'm grateful to you, Presiding Officer. Like others, I welcome the Cabinet Secretary to her role. And also welcome the bringing together, if you like, of both culture and social justice. I think it's absolutely essential and important. And I think we should also make a very clear statement on all sides of the Chamber this afternoon—I'm not sure if this is a point where we want to be trying to score points, Tom. The people of Wales should never be placed in a position where they're told they have a choice between seeing a GP or a van Gogh. Having the access to our national collections, to who we are, is important about not just us a nation, but us as a family, us as individuals, us as a community. And whenever we have these debates, Cabinet Secretary, I'm reminded of the former First Minister and the argument he made in terms of access to free school meals: bread and roses. We're not simply about delivering bread, but bread and roses as well—who we are as a people, as a country, as a nation, as a community. I think that's absolutely essential.

I very much welcome the Cabinet Secretary's commitment to come in here with a statement next month. I think that's important. But I would also like to have a statement on the future of our national collections. The chair of the culture committee has spoken already in this question, and we need a statement on the future of our national collections, but also on access to those national collections, because the grotesque debate we've had over the last few days about whether we would have a national museum open to our people in our capital city simply emphasises the fact that, even when that museum is open, we don't have access to our national collections. I want my 13-year-old boy to grow up understanding his past, and, when he understands that, I hope that he will play a part—Government's terrified to hear this—in creating our future as well.

I don't disagree with anything Alun has said. I'm going to visit the museum on Tuesday. It's probably about two years since I dropped in there, and I went to see the Richard Burton exhibition as the last thing I saw at the museum. It is really important that as much of those collections are on view as possible. Of course it's a family of museums, isn't it, right across Wales; I look forward to visiting all of the seven museums within the family, to see what is there. As you say, it's really important that everybody has access, and it's good to hear the welcome for the joining up of culture and social justice, because I too think that's really important.

Good afternoon, Cabinet Secretary. I would just add to what's been said. Funding of arts and culture is a way of creating a more equal society. Many of us have had the advantages of being able to enter into museums and art galleries for free, so not only do we have the challenge right now of an iconic building potentially closing—I hope for a short period of time—but I also wonder, in your business plan that you're looking to get from your officials, whether you're also going to be able to include in that the issue around charging for museums and art galleries in Wales. I very much hope that they will remain free and open to all. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Thank you, and, certainly, Welsh Government is committed to not charging to go into our museums. As I say, I had a very brief discussion with the chief executive yesterday around that, and she assured me that was still the view as well. I absolutely agree. If we going to have that widening of participation in our iconic buildings and in our museums, it is really important that there is no charge. I think it's fair to say, and this will be part of the conversation I have at my meeting tomorrow, that they are looking at ways—certainly in the national museum here in Cardiff—they can create and generate some income, but charging to go in is not one of them.

Jane, Delyth and Alun have already talked about how the value of culture goes far beyond simple monetary terms, but at the risk of undoing some of that by talking about the value produced by the museum in monetary terms, falling into that trap of only attributing value to things that turn profit, we know from data in 2020 that, for every £1 the Welsh Government spends on the national museum, £4 is generated in additional spending, and that, by all accounts, is a conservative estimate. So, I'm just really interested to understand what work the Welsh Government has done to understand the economic impact of any potential closure of the national museum and any further job losses within the national museum itself.

Well, I'm sure my predecessor did undertake that work. I haven't had the opportunity to have a look at it. We often hear this, don't we, that a pound generates multiple pounds in return, and I think it is very important to understand that there will have to be several impact assessments, but I want to reassure everybody that the national museum is not closing.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary.

The next question is to be answered by the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care, and is to be asked by Altaf Hussain.

Diolch yn fawr. This is a tragic case, and my thoughts are with those who are affected. The health board investigated this incident at the time, and made necessary improvements. I expect immediate action by the health board following the coroner's findings, and I've asked the NHS executive to provide assurance on this.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. It is great to see you back in your job and post. Now, I was shocked to hear about the long list of failures that had such a tragic consequence. My thoughts and prayers are with the Harrison family. The failures of social services, the police, and ultimately the health board, certainly contributed to the death of Dr Harrison, and we must ensure that this can never happen again. Cabinet Secretary, will you conduct an urgent review of security measures, not just at the mental health unit within Neath Port Talbot Hospital, but across the mental health estate, both secure and non-secure? How will the lessons from the poor treatment received by Daniel Harrison be applied to the training of mental health clinicians operating in the Welsh NHS? And, finally, Cabinet Secretary, how will you ensure that all relevant patient information is utilised when mental health assessments are undertaken in police custody? Thank you.

Well, thanks very much, and I'm sure everybody will understand the extreme tragedy of this case and the real difficulties that this family has had to face. And I just want to make sure that there's an understanding that I take all regulation 28 reports extremely seriously, and I do think that there are wider lessons for us to learn, and that's certainly something that we'll be encouraging the health board to undertake. But, also, I have instructed the NHS executive to look at that wider learning.

I can give you a reassurance that a number of key actions are in process, including additional security measures being built into ward F at Neath Port Talbot Hospital, which provide extra locked areas around exit doors. And you're quite right that we need to make sure that those lessons are being learned in other health boards.

I think there is also wider learning that we need to understand, including, crucially—. And we're still waiting for the regulation 28 to be published in about seven days' time. I think the importance of needing to listen to the insights and the information that the family has in terms of delivering care, and the need to deliver care, and how to deliver care, is something that also needs to be taken on board.

Thank you, Minister.

Item 4 is the 90-second statements, and the first statement is from Alun Davies.

I'm grateful to you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Every so often, a superstar appears. Jess Fishlock is such a superstar. April the ninth marked a milestone moment, when Jess Fishlock led her country into the qualifier against Kosovo and became the first Wales player to win 150 Welsh caps. We should all congratulate here on this achievement. It means that she will have featured in 65 per cent of all Cymru games since the Welsh team were fully endorsed by the Football Association of Wales in 1993. It's an extraordinary statistic and something that she should be very, very proud of. Just a few days earlier, Jess had broken Gareth Bales' Welsh goal scoring record, as Wales beat Croatia 4-0 at Wrexham Racecourse.

Both achievements are testament to an exceptional player who has raised the bar and inspired all around her since making her international debut at the age of 16. There isn't a player more deserving to hold these records, because it's not just that she's a superstar at home in Wales, but globally as well. And it's not just her skills on the field that make her such an inspiration to a younger generation of players, but it's also her advice and her attitude. She's a global superstar who has never forgotten her Welsh roots. But she's done more than that. She's supported and helped the LGBTQ+ community on and off the pitch. When she was awarded her MBE, it was to women's football and to the LGBT community, and she was named the Stonewall sports champion as well in December 2020. We should all join together and congratulate Jess Fishlock on what she has achieved for Wales and for the community she represents. Thank you.

Some would say that the expression 'ahead of their time' is used far too often, but, surely, few would argue that it isn’t a worthy description of Zonia Bowen who passed away recently. Like so many of the people who make a special contribution to our nation, Zonia was born outside Wales, namely in Norfolk in 1926. She came here to study French at Bangor University, but it was with the Welsh language and Wales itself that she fell in love following her arrival. Zonia studied Breton too, and she was the first person ever to publish textbooks on learning Breton through the medium of Welsh.

Freedom and independence were a golden thread throughout all of Zonia’s work, and, under her leadership, the Women’s Institute branch of Parc, near Bala, gained its freedom from the WI, because the organisation refused to allow the women of Parc to administer the branch through the medium of Welsh. Those women went on to establish an organisation that has become such an inextricable part of Welsh language culture, namely Merched y Wawr, and Zonia was the organisation’s first national secretary, as well as the first editor of its special magazine, Y Wawr. Zonia campaigned against the burial of nuclear waste in Wales in the 1980s under the banner of the Madryn campaign, and she was secretary of Cyngor Dyneiddwyr Cymru for a time too.

Zonia wasn’t a traditional woman, nor did she live a traditional life. She went against the grain and refused to accept that 'this is how it is, and this is how it has to be'. Thank you, Zonia.

Well, it gives me great pleasure to offer my congratulations to Wrexham football club, of course, which has secured promotion to league one of the English league this week. And what a way to secure that promotion: scoring six goals against Forest Green Rovers at the Racecourse, a ground that is, of course, now, once again, a venue for international games.

Now, Barcelona football club has a saying: mes que un club, more than a club. And that’s, of course, exactly what we have in Wrexham now: a team for the whole of north Wales, a team that packs out the Racecourse every week, with plans afoot to build a new stand to meet the demand from the thousands of new fans enchanted by the story. This is Wales’s oldest professional football club, and the third oldest in the world, playing at the oldest international ground in the world too. A club with history.

But this is a club, of course, that almost ceased to exist due to the mismanagement of certain greedy individuals. It's a club that was saved by its supporters, who were then generous enough to place the club in the care of two actors, who admitted that they knew very little about football, namely Rob McElhenny and Ryan Reynolds. And that faith has paid dividends, hasn't it? After 15 years outside the league, they secured promotion last year to league two, and this year they’ve triumphed once again.

Wrexham football club has always been at the heart of the local community and north Wales more widely. The attention brought by the new owners and the television series means that supporters worldwide are now part of this extraordinary journey. Only a month ago, a group of supporters from Patagonia came over for the first time and received a very warm welcome by the club and the fans.

It's more than a football club. The success is very much deserved after such a difficult period. When the supporters sing 'Yma o hyd'—we’re still here—there is real passion behind the words, 'er gwaetha pawb a phopeth'—despite everyone and everything. And, hopefully, we’ll see more success in coming seasons. I’m sure that all Members of the Senedd would wish to congratulate Wrexham at the end of such a successful season and, of course, wish them all the very best for the season to come.

Next, a motion to elect a Member to a committee, and I call on a member of the Business Committee to move the motion formally. Heledd Fychan.

Formally.

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

Next, a motion to appoint a Member to the Senedd Commission, and I call on a member of the Business Committee to formally move the motion. Heledd Fychan.

Formally.

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

Item 5 this afternoon is a debate on the general principles of the Residential Outdoor Education (Wales) Bill, and I call on Sam Rowlands to move the motion.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I'm delighted and proud to move the motion on the agenda in my name, and so, in opening the debate, we propose that the Senedd, in accordance with Standing Order 26.11, agrees to the general principles of the Residential Outdoor Education (Wales) Bill.

I would like to start by thanking the team of people who have helped me to prepare this Bill and the many colleagues who have offered both challenge and support through the various committees and outside of those committees as well over recent months. In particular, I'd like to thank Senedd Commission staff, some of whom are here today, for their significant efforts, as well as my own team, in addition to those in the outdoor and education sector who've supported me, especially Graham French, Dave Harvey, Clare Adams and Paul Donovan, who provided invaluable sector and academic insight. Also, I'm grateful for the engagement of schools and children through this process. It's their passion and commitment and stakeholders across Wales that convinced me of the importance of and the need for this Bill.

When I introduced this Bill in November last year, I opened by asking a question, and the question was: will Wales lead the way? Since then, we have heard evidence from a wide range of groups and individuals, the majority of whom support the Bill. Indeed, although there are a number of important points to debate, it's been noticeable that almost every person giving evidence, were they for or against the idea of legislation, recognises the value of residential outdoor education and the inequitable access to associated benefits that lie at the heart of the Bill.

The Bill is placed in the context of education, but I believe that it has a much wider span across different portfolios and all areas of our lives. The benefits of residential outdoor education are keenly felt at a personal level and play a key role in broadening young people's horizons and developing their sense of cynefin. But these experiences also contribute to Wales in a wider sense. Health, well-being, cultural capital and the economy are all critical agendas here in Wales and are all boosted by this Bill. Most importantly, however, by making outdoor education residentials free of charge and a guaranteed part of children's education journey, the Bill removes the postcode lottery aspect of access to those personal benefits. I think Members will all agree that no child should miss out because of their personal circumstances, which is why, following a very thorough scrutiny process, this Bill is before you today in its current iteration.

At this point, I'd like to say that I've actually enjoyed the scrutiny process and I thank each and every committee member who's questioned me and my team, and there were certainly plenty of searching questions. Whilst I won't do so again at this point, I have responded in detail to each committee recommendation, and I encourage Members to read my response if you happen to struggle to sleep. I've noted 'accepted in principle' or 'accepted' for many of the recommendations that have been made following this, which shows how productive the scrutiny process has been, and I intend to bring forward a number of amendments at Stage 2 to respond to these. But there are a few key points, though, I would like to draw Members' attention to in the meantime.

The purpose of the Bill, as a reminder, is to enable all pupils in maintained schools to experience at least four nights of residential outdoor education free of charge, with that provision able to be split into several shorter visits if needed. There's been some debate around defining outdoor education, but given the wide range of views on this, I consider that to fix a definition on the face of the Bill would be potentially limiting on its future operation, as any amendment to the definition in order to reflect changes in practice or demand for certain elements of outdoor education would require further primary legislation.

I call on the Chair of the Children, Young People and Education Committee, Buffy Williams.

Diolch, Dirprwy Llywydd. I'm delighted to speak today in my new role as Chair of the Children, Young People and Education Committee. Having been a member of the committee since 2021, it's an honour and a privilege to have been elected Chair. We've conducted really crucial work under the excellent leadership of our previous Chair, Jayne Bryant. On behalf of all the committee, I would like to thank Jayne for being an exemplar committee Chair. We look forward to your continued engagement with us in your new role as Minister for Mental Health and Early Years. I'd also like to add a special thank you to Ken Skates on behalf of the committee for his valued contributions and insight.

Turning to the Bill, I'd like to thank the Member in charge for his opening remarks and his open and constructive approach to our scrutiny. It's helpful to receive a written response to our recommendations ahead of the debate, so thank you for that. I'd like to thank those who contributed to our scrutiny of this Bill. Finally, I would like to thank my fellow committee members for their considered and collaborative approach to the Bill's scrutiny.

While there was unanimous agreement with the Bill's intentions and policy objectives, we could not come to a single view on general principles. Some Members had concerns about the cost of the Bill and potential issues with implementation, whereas other Members felt these concerns could be addressed by the Member in charge during the remainder of the scrutiny process and that the Bill should therefore proceed. I’m sure we will hear some of these different views during the rest of the debate. However, we did make eight recommendations. The Member in charge accepted two in full, two in part, and one in principle. He rejected two and noted one.

I will now turn to some of these in more detail. The Member in charge has been very clear that the current inequality in residential outdoor education provision was a leading factor for introducing the Bill. He described it as a social justice issue; on this we agreed. Yet the Bill as currently drafted excludes some children and young people in education, and therefore does not provide for universal provision. In particular, we heard about how children and young people in education other than at school may particularly benefit from the opportunities provided by residential outdoor education. Many of the stakeholders we spoke to felt this was a gap in the Bill. We felt strongly that this was an area for amendment if the Bill progressed and recommended amendments to include pupils in education other than at school within the scope of the Bill's provision.

The Member in charge accepted this in principle. He highlighted the basis on which he was given leave to proceed, which was to establish a statutory duty to ensure all young people receiving maintained education had a residential outdoor education opportunity. In developing the Bill, he said it was felt that the best way to deliver this was to use the Curriculum and Assessment (Wales) Act 2021. The 2021 Act places different curriculum requirements on children in education other than at school. The Member in charge recognises this is an area where the Bill could be strengthened and we are pleased to see this. We welcome this commitment to further reviewing this issue, including working with the Welsh Government to establish the feasibility of extending eligibility. If the Bill proceeds, we will keep a watchful eye on these developments.

Another critical issue explored in detail by us and the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee was the mandatory nature of the provision. The Member in charge was clear in his evidence to us that children would not be mandated to attend, and that the mandatory aspect was the offer being made by schools. However, any opt-out system would have to be done through the mechanism set out in section 42 of the 2021 Act. The then Minister for Education and the Welsh Language described this as a blunt instrument for this particular job. We agreed and therefore recommended that amendments be brought forward at Stage 2 to put on the face of the Bill that the offer of residential outdoor education was not mandatory to take up. I note that the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee made a similar recommendation calling for the Bill to be amended to include an opt-out mechanism. The Member in charge has accepted our recommendation, although he says he is not sure if an amendment is required, but is happy to explore whether such an amendment would make the intention of the Bill clearer and its effect easier to manage in practice. We welcome this open approach and if the Bill progresses we'll take a keen interest in any relevant amendments tabled for Stage 2.

I call on the Chair of the Finance Committee, Peredur Owen Griffiths.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. I welcome the opportunity to participate in this Stage 1 debate on the second Member-proposed Bill to be introduced this Senedd. Our report comes to four conclusions, and makes 11 recommendations. I’d like to start by thanking Sam Rowlands and his officials for attending our committee and for providing a response to our report before today’s debate. I’d like to congratulate Sam and his team on the level of detail provided on the cost estimates included—easy for me to say—in the regulatory impact assessment. I believe that this approach sets a good example for future Bills. Having said that, it is disappointing that the Member has been unable to accept over half of our recommendations.

Although we are broadly content with the costs included in the RIA, subject to the recommendations in our report, we must also recognise the significant level of funding required for this Bill, set against a backdrop of Welsh Government budgetary pressures.

Before turning to specific recommendations, I’d like to highlight our expectation that funding for all Bills should be considered on an equal basis and to the same standard. During our consideration of this Bill, the Minister commented that it was too 'risky' to commit to forecast costings with no indicative budgets post March 2025, given the current financial climate and the 'novel' approach in funding for one aspect of the curriculum. Our view is that a five-year appraisal period for this Bill is appropriate and is in line with the timescales applied by the Welsh Government in assessing the impact of the Bills it introduces.

Similarly, the Minister also raised concerns that the costs set out in the RIA may not reduce over the five-year appraisal period, due to the current rate of inflation. We are content with the approach adopted by the Member in charge in removing inflation when costing the Bill, as it follows HM Treasury Green Book guidance and is in line with the approach taken by the Welsh Government. However, due to the significant cost of his Bill, we recommend that the Member in charge undertakes further analysis on the potential impact of inflation, and it’s good to see this recommendation has been accepted.

Moving on, it is disappointing that our recommendation to provide further analysis in estimating the benefits of the Bill was rejected. However, we were encouraged that the Member in charge fully supports any post-legislative analysis on whether the expected benefits of the Bill have been realised. The committee also welcomes a commitment from the Member in charge to explore the possibility of including a post-implementation review on the face of the Bill, if the Bill progresses to Stage 2. The inclusion of a robust post-implementation review is good practice and helps provide assurance as to how delivery of the objectives of the legislation will be monitored. Additionally, the committee welcomes the clarification provided by the Member in charge regarding any potential inspection requirements associated with the Bill, including any role for Estyn, and the further information provided on achieving effective monitoring.

The committee made several other recommendations requesting further information, including analysis on the estimated costs in relation to additional learning needs, teacher supply cover, non-specialist items such as clothing and footwear, and tracking pupils’ participation. It is disappointing that these have all been rejected, but we note the reasons given by the Member in charge in his response.

Finally, Dirprwy Lywydd, our recommendation to undertake further work on the cost implications of potential changes to the school teachers pay and conditions document was also rejected. Although this is once again disappointing, as this cost is potentially significant, we recognise the difficulties in making such an estimate and note the reasons given by the Member in charge. Thank you very much.

I call on the Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee. Sarah Murphy.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I would also like to begin by thanking Members for their support in electing me as Chair of the LJC committee. I welcome this new challenge. I really look forward to working with other members of the committee, and also the very good clerking team. I would also like to thank and recognise the work and commitment of the former Chair, Huw Irranca-Davies. Wherever you are, Huw, you will be a very difficult act to follow. I was, of course, not a member of the committee during scrutiny of the Bill, however I would like to thank Sam Rowlands, as the Member in charge of the Bill, and Jeremy Miles, the then Minister for Education and the Welsh Language, for giving evidence earlier this year to inform its scrutiny. I feel that it is important to recognise the work that Sam has put into bringing forward the Bill, and therefore I would like to draw attention to the committee's findings. I would also like to thank Sam for issuing, on Monday, a comprehensive response to the six recommendations the committee made in its report.

The first recommendation of the report relates to the core aim of the Bill, which, as the Member in charge told the committee, is to ensure that a course of residential outdoor education is provided as a mandatory part of the curriculum, although children would not be compelled to attend. The Member in charge's view is that a pupil can opt out of receiving that provision by relying on existing regulations made under the Curriculum and Assessment (Wales) Act 2021. However, the committee found that those regulations do not present an appropriate mechanism for a pupil to opt out of such a provision. It came to that conclusion for two reasons. First, the mechanism would only allow a pupil to be opted out on a temporary basis, and, secondly, a pupil would also be required to support their request to opt out with reasons for a headteacher to consider. Therefore, the committee recommended that should this Bill proceed today, it should be amended to include a more appropriate opt-out mechanism on its face. I note that the Member in charge does not share the committee's view on this matter, however he has committed to explore whether such an amendment could be brought forward at Stage 2 to make the Bill's intention clearer and to make its effect easier to manage in practice.

Recommendation 2 reflects the fact that the Bill, as introduced, does not include a definition of 'residential outdoor education'. The committee's view is that the Bill should include such a definition, although the Member in charge does not agree. In the committee's view, this is for reasons of accessibility and good practice, and including a definition on the face of the Bill is more appropriate than relying on information contained in the explanatory memorandum, or the residential outdoor education code, as suggested by the Member in charge.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Education, Lynne Neagle.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. Can I start by thanking Sam Rowlands and his team for his work on this Bill, and also thank him for his engagement with myself and my predecessor? I'd also like to thank the Chairs and members of the three scrutiny committees for the work they've done on the Bill.

Like my predecessor and from my work as the Deputy Minister for Mental Health and Well-being, I recognise how much learning outside and experiencing the outdoors has to offer, broadening horizons and contributing to good physical health and mental and emotional well-being. These benefits have been widely recognised by everyone in the progress of the Bill to date. Our new Curriculum for Wales recongises these benefits and is designed to ensure that they're realised, not simply at one point in a leaner's journey, but ensuring that they are threaded throughout learners' time at school. That’s why the statutory guidance for the curriculum expects schools to develop learning opportunities outdoors, from ages three through to 16. It is a clear expectation of the framework that children learn outdoors on a regular basis, and this helps them become healthy, confident individuals. It is a particularly strong component of our support for our youngest learners, but it needs to be developed throughout the school journey.

The details of this will differ from school to school, depending on the school space, and the age and development of the learners. This recognises that what engages learners best and is most supportive for them to develop a lifelong love of the outdoors will vary. There is no one-size-fits-all approach. It also recognises that if we want to change children’s behaviours into adulthood, these behaviours need to be built over time, through continuous exposure to the outdoors. This is so much more important than any single intervention.

These benefits are crucial, but, unfortunately, neither I nor my Cabinet colleagues believe that this Bill is the best way to widen those benefits or residential outdoor education at this time. This Bill would place an absolute obligation on the Welsh Government to both ensure provision and fund a residential outdoor experience for every learner of compulsory school age in a maintained school in Wales, with a likely cost well in excess of £20 million per year.

The effect is that the Welsh Government would have to expressly fund residential outdoor education over and above any other aspect of the new curriculum and, indeed, any other education provision. I recognise that the Member has done a great deal of work to scope out the likely cost of this. I am sympathetic to that, as I am aware of how difficult a task that is.

The Finance Committee has acknowledged that there is still much more work to do to establish the real costs, if the Bill were passed. I am grateful, too, that the Finance Committee’s report noted the current budgetary pressures and the significant level of funding that would be required. Furthermore, throughout the Stage 1 evidence gathering, significant concerns have been raised by stakeholders, especially the Welsh Local Government Association, the Association of Directors of Education and our education unions, about the impact on an already stretched financial situation.

Many stakeholders have highlighted the significant change agenda already being managed by schools in relation to implementing reforms, and the risk of additional challenges to our school workload. Delivering the requirements of this Bill would require changes to the terms and conditions of staff in schools, for example, which many believe could have a detrimental impact on recruitment and retention within the workforce.

I note also the significant concerns raised about the capacity of the residential outdoor education sector to meet the provisions of the Bill, especially in terms of Welsh language provision and ensuring equity of provision for those with additional learning needs. As we have heard, the Children, Young People and Education Committee had similar concerns. Whilst members of the committee were unanimous about the intentions of the Bill, they were unable to reach a consensus on the general principles because of some significant worries about its financing and implementation.

I'd like to first congratulate Sam for bringing this forward, and congratulate his Bill team as well on the huge amount of work they've put in, and the high-quality work, as we hear from the finance Chair. I believe this Bill would put Wales firmly on the map for taking a pragmatic but pioneering approach to education and the social development of our young people.

Often in education we see policy makers seeking radical changes to provide our future generation with the best tools to carve their own future, yet we ignore the real building blocks to childhood education, things that are not taught on an e-board, but are learnt in a natural environment, such as confidence, independence and team working—vitally important attributes for future life. And this is something that my colleague Sam rightly seeks to guarantee in our education system with this Bill.

In Monmouthshire, maintaining and subsidising access to outdoor education was a priority for decades. We provided the service with other Gwent councils, but over the years neighbouring councils withdrew their support for no other reason than to make efficiencies. I'd say that was a sad indictment on them. However, we rationalised our provision and maintained the offer, as we had seen the benefits for children for decades. My own children, and no doubt many of yours here, will have benefited from the experiences that they had whilst accessing outdoor education. It's so easy to dismiss things on financial grounds, as we've heard already, and I'm sure there will be Members who will support the merits of the Bill, but have sadly been told not to support due to cost—something I've heard when I brought forward my own Bill, and it's a sad indictment on this place, which doesn't enable backbench legislation to progress.

As I've said before in this Chamber, we need to think of things in different ways. What price do we put on the child's well-being? It is an irrefutable fact that being in the outdoors contributes to increased mental well-being, alongside staying active. And yesterday we heard the First Minister saying how the Government's priority will be on our young people, giving them the best chances in life, he said.

'We will do everything we can in making sure that children can grow up feeling happy and hopeful for their future.'

That was a quote. Surely this Bill would be fundamental to that end, Dirprwy Lywydd. If we can curate a lifelong love of outdoors and physical activity in the next generation, then we have not just left the Welsh public in a better place than we found it, but we will be saving the NHS and other social services tens of millions of pounds in services that assist with mental health and obesity. This Bill is not fanciful; it should be an important part of our educational pedagogy. The proof is in the fact that similar Bills are being brought forward both in Holyrood and Westminster. But we have the unique opportunity to pass this Bill before anyone else does. Let's not just follow the crowd. We need to lead the way and today, Senedd, we have the opportunity to just do that.

May I start by thanking Sam Rowlands for all of his hard work on this Bill? I’ve had the pleasure of being on the Children, Young People and Education Committee scrutinising this Bill. I’ve asked a number of questions of Sam and we’ve had a number of very lively discussions on the issues, and I do believe, as Peter Fox said, that there is benefit in us moving forward with this Bill, and seeing what could be agreed upon through amendments.

I do have concerns, some of them in relation to how we ensure that the economic benefits of this proposal remain here in Wales. Because, if we are going to make this kind of investment, it would be fantastic to think that everyone would have that opportunity and the economic benefits for so many of our communities would be excellent. We heard about the provision that would need to be extended, and what this would mean for many providers who are perhaps struggling to fill their premises throughout the year—excellent, and I hope that would encourage children and young people to encourage their own families to take advantage of these facilities too. So, of course there is a need to ensure, I believe, that this provision is in Wales if we are to invest in it.

I also welcome what Sam said about some of the things he has agreed upon in terms of strengthening the cultural aspects, not just linguistically, but that we do have those benefits also. Without doubt, I very much hope that we would all agree on the benefits that emerge not only from outdoor education, but also residential experiences. I’d also like to thank all of the teachers and teaching assistants in schools who are already supporting this. We do often hear that not every child in Wales has these opportunities, but I also know of schools who do excellent work in ensuring that every child, no matter what their background is, does have this opportunity. And I think it’s important that we recognise that some of the things that this Bill aims to deliver are already being delivered—the problem is that it’s a postcode lottery at the moment, meaning that not every child has those same opportunities.

We must also reflect on what the Minister said in terms of the huge pressures on staff at the moment. They often do this voluntarily, they don’t receive any additional payment for this work, and they do it because they see the benefit of it for the children and young people in their care when they are in our schools.

There were some concerns raised in terms of the Urdd, and the fact that the Cardiff camp, or Pentre Ifan, wouldn’t qualify. And that’s why I would like to see how we can expand that idea of residential opportunities to include getting to know different areas of our nation too. I know about a number of schools from north Wales who do benefit from coming down here to Cardiff in order to visit the national museum, for example, which we were just discussing earlier, and to visit this Senedd too, and perhaps we do need to ensure, therefore, that we don’t restrict residential opportunities, meaning that those kinds of trips could not happen.

I'd first like to start by congratulating and thanking my colleague, the Member for North Wales, Sam Rowlands, for all his hard work on this Bill and getting it to this stage. I agree with what all my colleagues have said so far on this Bill, but particularly with Peter Fox's last words just now that this is a Bill for future generations, and I think that's a very key sentence when thinking about and contemplating this Bill and why we should push it forward.

The ideas and aims of this Bill are admirable, but the benefits are huge—that every child should have the opportunity for an outdoor residential experience. Although I would like the Member, Sam Rowlands, of course—sorry, I can't speak very well—to ensure that all children, and I mean all children, as the new Chair for the children and young people committee has just outlined, have that opportunity, because at the moment certain children are left out. So, it's really vital that we do include those children, because it's actually those children who are missing from that at the moment that are perhaps the most vulnerable and would benefit the most from a Bill of this kind.

As we all know, making sure that children have access to residential outdoor education would have a long-term positive impact on mental and physical health, as well as creating good habits, as the Member has outlined earlier in his speech. It also saves money long term, because, by taking a preventative health approach, it bolsters that mental and physical health for the future—particularly good when we look at ourselves as a country that has appallingly bad obesity rates within children.

It also gives young people memorable experiences, which gives them confidence and teamwork skills, and a variety of other benefits that we've outlined time and time again within our CYPE committee and in this Chamber already, as well as promoting Wales and the Welsh language—there are so many benefits and opportunities there—and also to benefit our Welsh outdoor education centres, as Heledd outlined, and our local economies. The Bill would benefit those children particularly from urban areas who may not usually have the chance to explore the countryside and see everything that Wales has to offer.

It would also benefit children from poorer families, who are often priced out of residentials. In turn, this would help close that educational inequality gap. At the moment, these opportunities are, as Heledd has already outlined, a postcode lottery, and that is not a good place for us to be in here in Wales. The activities offered are challenging and adventurous, and the Bill would enhance, of course, the competencies at the heart of the new Curriculum for Wales, namely healthy, confident individuals who are creative contributors, ambitious and capable learners and ethically-informed citizens.

In principle, this Bill is a lovely idea. We know that the environment a child learns in is crucial at any age. If a child does not connect with nature by the age of 12, they will not do so as an adult. And so, to build a lifelong positive relationship with outdoor environments and nature, learners need continuous opportunities to learn, play and explore outdoors through all stages of mandatory education, and through access to play and leisure.

However, when it comes to legislation, we cannot pursue nice ideas without facing the harsh reality. After more than a decade of austerity, we know that finances are extremely tight. The Welsh Government budget is worth £1.3 billion less thanks to the Conservatives' mismanagement of the economy. Every area of Government is having to make sacrifices and prioritise. Sam estimates the additional cost to the education budget would be £19.7 million a year, so we're having to look at covering teachers, the lodging, transport—it all adds up—and perhaps clothes, as well, that are needed. At a time when schools are having to face extremely difficult decisions, including redundancies, placing additional pressure on the education budget would be unthinkable. School transport costs have risen by 40 per cent, we heard at the Local Government and Housing Committee, due to inflation, and it's really already such a stretch to meet the learner travel Measure. We're trying to look at extending it, but we can't, and we simply cannot cut front-line school budgets to fund this policy.

On top of this, the Curriculum and Assessment (Wales) Act 2021 is already a huge change for education settings. They will need time and support to fully implement that in order to achieve the best results for learners. We also have new additional learning needs reforms coming into place, and I was sitting here when I heard, earlier, Natasha Asghar asking for extra funding for additional learning needs, which is really, really important. There are all these bids going in for the budget, which is so tight. The changes proposed by the Bill will place additional burdens on staff and take away time when they can focus on the new curriculum. I know teaching unions provided evidence expressing their deep concern about the additional burden this Bill would place on the shoulders of teachers.

Residential trips are simply not possible when staffing levels aren't high enough to deliver them safely, when teaching continues for other groups. In order to afford a long-lasting connection to nature and outdoor activities, children need so much more than a singular experience. Fantastic work is being done by schools across Wales to engage children with the outdoors, including outdoor learning areas at foundation phase, Forest Schools and Landscapes for Learning. I visited St Peter's in Wrexham recently, where they had grant funding from the Arts Council of Wales and were learning about their outdoor area, connecting with nature, and they've been working on seagrass projects, which they brought down to the Senedd steps, which was amazing.

It's a pleasure to take part in this debate this afternoon, and I'm pleased to say that I don't share the negativity of the previous speaker in regard to this Bill. And I thank Sam Rowlands for bringing it to the Senedd today, and I've seen myself—you know, you've worked on this Bill in many aspects, not just working on the details of the Bill here in the Senedd, and working with the relevant people and staff here, you've also gone out to different parts of Wales. I've seen you in canoe boats, I've seen you in woodland areas, I've seen you all over the country. So, you've not just done it at a policy and Bill level here, you've also made the effort to go out there and engage with the right stakeholders to form this Bill, and I think that it shows great credit to your commitment to this Bill, which I think should be rewarded and treated with more positivity on the Labour benches over there.

And there are countless benefits of outdoor education for children, and the wealth of evidence for this is watertight. Outdoor education is beneficial for mental and physical well-being, the health benefits also saving money on public services in the long run. It equips children with essential lifelong skills, gives children from urban areas access to the outdoors, and provides children from households for which private outdoor education centres are unaffordable the same opportunity as other children. It's beneficial to children academically and will help close the education inequality gap. We had 44 outdoor education centres in Wales before COVID-19, and over 10 per cent of these closed during the pandemic, so availability is shrinking, and for many parents on lower incomes it is simply not something that they can afford.

But, for me, the most important part of outdoor education is the effect it has on a child's mental well-being. Coming out of a pandemic in which children had been shut indoors for two years, access to the outdoors is imperative. A YoungMinds survey showed that 74 per cent of teachers and school staff agreed that lockdown had a negative impact on the mental health of young people, and the benefits to the human brain of the outdoors and nature have always been self-evident to most of us, but this is also recognised by science. A study by the University of Exeter medical school found that there are strong and consistent benefits for mental health and well-being from exposure to natural environments, and it can be found that the socioeconomic inequality in mental well-being has been shown to be narrower among those who report good access to green or recreational areas.

Emerging from the pandemic, I think we gained a new appreciation for how important social and communal activities are to one another, and how important nature and the outdoors are to our well-being. They are even more important to a developing brain, and we should use this time to rethink how our children should spend their day in school. Sitting at a desk for six hours is unnatural for anyone, never mind a child, and, with this Bill, Wales has the opportunity to lead the way in diversifying the school day and incorporating outdoor education, the benefits of which I have briefly summarised, and I'm sure we'll hear more of in Sam's closing remarks and those of any other speaker in this debate this afternoon.

I'd like to begin by thanking Sam Rowlands for bringing forward these issues for discussion in the way that he has. I do believe, as others have said, that it's obviously very important that the outdoors, connecting with nature and activity, have a very central role in the educational experience of our children and young people, and that does happen in the general educational experience that takes place here in Wales. But I do also believe that, beyond that, the particular experience of residential outdoor activity has a very important part to play, and we see that reflected, I think, in the way that it is available right across Wales in so many of our schools. But that does, I think, bring forward the question, as Sam has addressed, as to the variation and how we can make sure that that opportunity is available more consistently across all our schools to all our pupils, and particularly, I think, to those pupils from more disadvantaged families, and, yes, that does include children educated otherwise than at school. I think it is significant that, as this debate has continued, that particular issue has come more to the fore.

So, I very much welcome, Dirprwy Lywydd, what the Cabinet Secretary has said about continuing to work with Sam Rowlands, so that beyond this particular legislation, these particular legislative proposals, there can be an ongoing dialogue between Welsh Government and the Member as to how we can gain more from the debate that we've had, from the proposals that have been made, and ensure that more of our pupils here in Wales, more of our families, benefit from that residential outdoor educational experience, because I do believe it is powerful.

It's outside the general experience of education, isn't it, which gives it a power beyond that general experience. And because socially it's important, and because it's a new experience for some pupils who haven't, perhaps, stayed away with their families, perhaps don't go on holidays with their families, don't go away for weekends with their families, for those particular pupils, it's something new and very different, isn't it? I do believe it builds confidence, it gains social skills, and that confidence can then rub off on their general educational achievement and the confidence that they have in their journey through life.

So, it has got an important part already, hasn't it, but it could more consistently play an important part in our general educational experience, and it could particularly benefit pupils from families that need that extra help. Finance is a barrier for those families, isn't it? We should find a way. We should ensure that ways are found, so that where the offer is available in the school, but they're unable to take advantage of the opportunity because they simply haven't got the financial means within the family, that those families are helped, so that they have that opportunity as well. And I do believe that's a basic matter of social justice in our educational system.

I call on Sam Rowlands to reply to the debate.

Thank you again, Deputy Presiding Officer, and I think John Griffiths did an excellent job of closing the debate and summarising many issues there, so thank you, John, for your comments at the end there today, and thank you to all Members for your contributions in this debate here this afternoon.

I will just go through a few of the points that Members have raised through the proceedings, and in particular the Chairs at the start, in terms of your comments around the recommendations that either I chose to accept or reject or make other comments on. I was pleased to be able to accept a significant number of the recommendations that you made, and that your committees made, but I do hope you appreciate and accept the explanations that I was able to give for those that I wasn't able to accept. I'm genuinely grateful for the work of the committees in scrutinising this Bill into what, I think, could be an even better piece of work if it's able to progress.

I thank you, Minister, for your contribution today as well, and for your early engagement in your new role in the Cabinet as well. I'm grateful also to Jeremy Miles in his previous role, for his openness and open challenge back to me through this process as well. Whilst not always easy to hear, it's always better to hear it straight than it is to go around the houses. I am hopeful for that continued future opportunity to work together on residential outdoor education, especially in relation to things like adventure learning frameworks, support for teachers and their training, and also mechanisms for supporting financially challenged families as well.

I would push back on comments made, Minister, in regard to the financial implications outlined in the Bill. We heard from the Chairman of the Finance Committee that, actually, the RIA, which I outlined in my explanatory memorandum, was actually an example that Welsh Government could look to follow in terms of its level of detail. And I'd also push back slightly on what was described as 'legislative weaknesses'. I believe I've addressed the reasons for the framing of that Bill, and I've been able to accept adjustments and I've accepted future amendments if the Bill is able to proceed as well.

As for other Members, in your contributions, I'm certainly grateful for what was said. Peter Fox, you outlined the benefits of outdoor education, and part of your role in a previous life, as it were, of making sure that those centres were able to stay open for those young people because you appreciated the benefits they made. You also challenged us, as a Senedd, to reflect on how we approach Members’ Bills now and in the future, in terms of allowing that progress and allowing that future scrutiny as well. So, thank you.

Heledd Fychan, you highlighted the economic benefits to Wales of a Bill like this, and I hope you have been able to see my acceptance of many of the points you've raised throughout this time, around the cultural and language benefits of a Bill like this. Yes, there may be more strength that could be added to this, but I absolutely accept the comments you’ve made over recent months on how this could be strengthened even further. Laura Anne Jones, you were able to highlight how a Bill like this is creating inclusiveness for people, and actually helps to support the closing of the attainment gap for young people—a really important point.

The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? [Objection.] I have heard objection, and therefore I will defer voting under this item until voting time.

Item 6 this afternoon is the debate on the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee report, 'Nuclear energy and the Welsh economy'. I call on the Chair of the committee to move the motion, Paul Davies.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd, and I move the motion tabled in my name. The report we are debating today relates to a one-day inquiry that the committee held last October, which looked at the economic impacts of new nuclear energy developments here in Wales. The committee focused its attention not on the arguments for and against nuclear power, but on how Wales could be a future nuclear powerhouse should nuclear energy developments in Wales progress. I know that some Members will have strong views on nuclear power, but this report and indeed this debate is not about the pros and cons of nuclear power; today's debate is really about the economic potential Wales has in this area.

The committee wanted to learn more about the opportunities that there are for the sector, and any barriers to its growth, and there were concerns about investment, jobs and skills, and the prospects for the communities most closely affected. It is important to recognise that there are differing views on whether nuclear power should be part of the overall energy mix in the UK, but it's a vital element of the British energy security strategy, and for Wales the development of former nuclear sites in north Wales is a critical economic issue.

As the committee report explains, there is huge potential for the nuclear industry here in Wales. A successful nuclear industry would provide thousands of high-quality jobs and billions of pounds' worth of investment. And this is not just for north Wales, where the industry is already a big local employer, because the skills needed and the potential for nuclear-related manufacturing activity can generate benefits throughout Wales. Nuclear development could provide an enormous economic stimulus, and would certainly help establish strong trading relationships across the world.

Since the committee reported back in February, the Chancellor has announced that the UK Government has reached agreement with Hitachi to acquire the Wylfa site. When the committee report was published, it was made clear that decisions on both Wylfa and Trawsfynydd, which are reserved to the UK Government, were urgently needed. This was especially the case because the 'Civil Nuclear: Roadmap to 2050' plan, published by the UK Government in January, had not mentioned either site.

The news about the Wylfa purchase was long awaited, and has been welcomed by most. Stakeholders told the committee that Wylfa was a strong contender for future nuclear development to help the UK achieve its energy-security and net-zero goals, and Trawsfynydd was also recognised as a site with great potential. So, although the purchase of Wylfa is an important step forward, full details of the UK Government's plans are still needed, in particular when it will confirm the designated sites for future nuclear projects, the kinds of technology to be deployed, and the time frames for implementation.

The committee's first recommendation was for this information, and so we wrote to the UK Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero. I welcome the generally positive tone of the Secretary of State's response to our recommendation and the indication that work is moving ahead to more clearly define the nature of future nuclear projects. However there are still no clear answers, with future decisions to be made, I quote, 'in due course'. I do welcome the fact that Great British Nuclear, the new UK Government arm's-length body that supports the industry, is said to be working closely with the local community in Ynys Môn, and I look forward to the further updates promised over the coming months.

Now, the committee visited Ynys Môn last summer and heard how important a new nuclear power station could be to the community. However, we also heard that hopes about nuclear developments have been dashed in the past, and so managing expectations was something that was stressed to committee members. The committee understands that people in north Wales want clarity on what the future holds for them. Certainty is the key to building confidence, to secure the necessary investment in skills, to build strong and resilient supply chains, to secure high-quality jobs and to provide direction for the Welsh nuclear energy industry in the future.

Our report provided just a snapshot of the sector and its ambitions for Wales, and we set out a series of recommendations to support the UK Government and the Welsh Government to realise Wales's nuclear development potential. If the sites in north Wales are chosen to be part of the next generation of nuclear reactors, the Nuclear Industry Association tells us that it could bring tens of thousands of additional jobs to the area. And so, the committee's report urges the Welsh Government to be ready to ensure there are maximum benefits to the Welsh economy once the decision to go ahead with nuclear in north Wales is made.

During the inquiry, members asked a lot of questions about the Welsh supply chain and the Government's response sets out a clear rationale for identifying realistically where the benefits can be had most easily and where more effort may be needed for Welsh businesses to break into the supply of components, goods and services. This picks up on a key point raised in evidence gathering that it's about showing Welsh businesses where the opportunities are, and, also, where they are not, so they can see where to divert their efforts to building skills and winning business.

One of the key challenges identified by the committee is the need to increase workforce skills for the nuclear sector. Great British Nuclear said that the increase in skills needed for the sector was breathtaking, which led the committee to call on the Welsh Government to set out how it will work with the education and skills sector to establish a workforce that is ready.

The Welsh Government's response also acknowledges the significant scale of that workforce challenge. The Cabinet Secretary says in his response that the Welsh Government was not invited to participate in the nuclear skills taskforce, but that officials have been in touch with taskforce members and that the taskforce's report is likely to make generic recommendations about the types of skills needed. Therefore, more clarity is going to be needed about the UK Government's plans for Wylfa and Trawsfynydd before much more detailed workforce planning can therefore take place.

Indeed, the committee report also highlights that any new nuclear projects would likely bring in many workers from outside of north Wales and this could bring pressure on local housing stock. The committee has urged the Welsh Government to work closely with local authorities and housing planners if nuclear investment goes ahead. The Welsh Government must engage closely with local and regional partners and communities to ensure that housing stock is not overwhelmed in the initial stages and that there is a clear long-term plan for maximum benefit to people living closest to these sites.

Dirprwy Lywydd, I welcome the Welsh Government's positive response on these issues and the indication that it will encourage a strong team ethos and a co-ordinated partnership approach to getting the best for Wales from nuclear projects. The example of the Somerset Larder project set out in the Cabinet Secretary's response is a good one, showing how it's possible to drive significant local benefits and economic growth through collaboration. Of course, the Welsh Government must step up to make sure that this potential investment is successful. As much work as possible needs to start now to make sure that the workforce is skilled, specialised and ready.

In closing, I'd like to thank everyone who engaged with the committee's one-day inquiry and also thank the team who supported Members with it. I look forward to hearing Members' views and I commend this report to the Senedd.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I'd like to thank the committee clerks and all those who gave evidence to the committee.

I think, from the outset, it's fair to say that, as a committee, we are aware of the criticism that has come our way over this report, but I would reiterate what the Chair has already said: that the terms of reference of this inquiry weren't to weigh up the pros and cons of nuclear energy. Had it been an inquiry on that basis, then the report would have looked a lot different. However, I do think it is worth reflecting on some of the comments made within this place and outside of this place and perhaps consider how we might actually be able to hold an inquiry on energy more broadly, perhaps in partnership with the climate change committee—I'm conscious that the Chair is sitting right next to me—that does look at what the make-up of energy generation should look like in a future Welsh economy. I think, actually, it would be quite timely, because of the indication from the First Minister of the central role energy will play in his own economic vision through moving energy to the portfolio of the Cabinet Secretary for the economy—a move I welcome, by the way. I have my concerns around nuclear for a number of reasons, specifically on the opportunity cost element, but that's why I think a wider inquiry would be of benefit, so that we can discuss this and hash out those elements of nuclear.

I did want to highlight a specific thing in our report that I think touches on a wider issue within our economy—something, actually, you could pretty much copy and paste into the reports about other sectors of the economy pretty easily. The Chair has already mentioned it, and that's the skills gap identified. Whether we are talking about nuclear or green technologies, this is a prevailing issue. So, I would welcome some thoughts from the Cabinet Secretary in his response as to how we get to grips with the wider skills shortage. Because only a few months ago now, the First Minister—then the economy Minister—was proposing significant cuts to the apprenticeship funding, one of the primary avenues available to us to address skills shortages. I hope he is able to set out a skills strategy, a comprehensive one, co-produced with the FE sector. And I've mentioned it before: some of that work has already kicked off with Hefin David's report, so I'd like to see how we might be able to implement some of that work. We can't downplay the importance of having a strategy when it comes to skills, and I hope that the Cabinet Secretary will be able to share some welcome news on that front.

Again, I'd like to thank the committee clerks and I'd like to thank the Chair, as well as all those who gave evidence to our inquiry.

My thanks to our committee Chair for his leadership throughout this inquiry and the clerking team for their work in drawing this report together.

I'm an advocate for nuclear energy, and while I don't think that is controversial, I think it's worth looking at the 'why'. When uncertain times lie ahead with continued war in Ukraine and ever-rising tensions in the middle east, having energy security for our country is of paramount importance. None of us, I'm sure, want to be reliant on foreign powers and complex supply chains for our electricity if we don't have to be. Members will also know that I'm a passionate advocate for renewables, especially floating offshore wind in the Celtic sea. But a strong electricity supply relies on variety, with nuclear offering a unique opportunity around base-load generation.

We don't want to live in fear of blackouts, nor do we want to live with a national grid that is incapable of meeting our day-to-day needs. What we do want, however, is a source of power that is reliable, low carbon, and that can easily be used in conjunction with our developing renewable network, helping maintain our grid's balance and energy supply. That is exactly what the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee report lays out, along with a raft of other benefits of particular interest to me as the Member for Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire, where we already have a number of relevant skills. Just take a walk around Hinkley Point and you'll be sure to hear the Pembrokeshire accent: the wider economic benefits of nuclear can be seen.

I won't talk about how many other businesses could develop and be supported by such a strong hub of economic activity, as that would speak for itself, but I will talk about how much of a lasting impact such nuclear infrastructure would directly provide. Just one small modular reactor, or SMR, for example, could provide 400 to 500 jobs while in operation, many in servicing and maintenance, plus the many jobs that would be created in construction. And many of these SMRs could be built. Just to emphasise the economic benefit of nuclear, it is estimated that for each person employed, he or she would generate £102,300 gross value to GDP, over twice the average amount compared to other industries. However, the report does lay out some of the difficulties we could face if we are to get the full benefit from nuclear for our communities and economy, and that comes down to having the right skills and training, as has been mentioned.

While some of those skills are available, as I also mentioned earlier, luckily, about 80 per cent of jobs are not nuclear specific, so there is a chance for people in other industries to change career path. However, we need to ensure that this does not impact on the development of other industries, especially renewables. But it's not just the current workforce that will benefit; we need to think about our future workforce, one where young people can have the confidence to take up apprenticeship opportunities knowing that they have a long and valued career ahead of them.

I very much welcome the report from the committee and the opportunity to debate it this afternoon. As I've said consistently when I've campaigned on the need for pension disinvestment, we have to move away from our reliance on fossil fuels. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change are clear that the decisions we take in the next 10 years will define the climate for the next 10,000 years. In my view, we should be working with UK Government counterparts to move away from fossil fuels and ensure nuclear is a significant part of our energy mix. The next generation of nuclear power production presents a tremendous opportunity for Cymru, as do the next technologies in our renewable sector.

The UK's existing civil nuclear industry contributed £700 million to the Welsh economy in 2021, directly employing 800 people and supporting a total of 10,700 jobs across Wales. In December 2022, Rolls-Royce SMR shortlisted a site in Deeside to produce components for small modular reactors, and this is exactly the sort of high-skilled, well-paid roles that I would like to see the Welsh Government and the Cabinet Secretary working to attract to my area. I hope the Minister can update us on this matter this afternoon. As well as attracting that type of work, it builds on the work of engineering giants Boccard, who, again, have sited their first major nuclear production facility in the UK close to the Airbus factory in Broughton, with 200 well-paid, highly skilled jobs that are always welcome in Deeside.

As we face the challenges of increasing electricity generation to power electric cars, to power heating systems and so on, Luke Fletcher is right, we also face a skills challenge. One of the barriers to ensuring the skills are in place is the uncertainty that the industry faces. Welsh workers, the Welsh supply chain and Welsh training providers do have the potential to contribute far more to the UK's nuclear agenda, but they need to see a clear commitment to the new projects and to have confidence that the investment in time and money is worth it.

The scale of the nuclear workforce challenge is significant. The sector has a current shortfall of 9,400 people, but it needs to grow from 83,000 to 123,000 by 2030 to service and support the expected demand. This is why the report from Paul Davies's committee is so timely, and the Cabinet Secretary's response to the report is welcome. We must give the industry the certainty it needs to thrive and to help reach net zero and create well-paid jobs in Cymru. Diolch.

Just a few comments from me. I'm grateful for this report from the committee. I don't believe there's anything unexpected in its findings or its recommendations. Briefly, what we have is a realisation that there is economic benefit that can come as a result of investment in nuclear energy production, but that such developments bring a series of challenges along with them, and that we have to be ready for those and be aware of them. And that is the work that I was involved in on Ynys Môn in relation to Wylfa—trying to highlight the potential for economic benefit on one hand whilst working hard on the other hand to safeguard our broader interests. And the report points to some of those, and the social pressures, not because it's a nuclear development—that would be true of any development—but because it is a major development. One of those is the pressure on the housing sector, and that is specifically referred to in this report too. And also the challenge, as we've heard from others this afternoon, of ensuring that it's the local workforce and local skills that are prioritised, and safeguarding other businesses that could lose staff, which is a major challenge when these kinds of developments do take place.

Now, at this point, I'm voicing my frustration that so much of this work, of course, has already been done in relation to the Hitachi Horizon project on Ynys Môn, and there were so many local partners involved with that. I think of the excellent work done by Grŵp Llandrillo Menai and the work done by Anglesey council, led by Llinos Medi there. And, of course, what we saw was a Conservative Government failing to support that, which meant that all of that work was undone, and we are now back at the starting point. Sam Kurtz mentioned hearing Pembrokeshire accents in Hinkley—well, I can assure you as a Senedd that there are many Anglesey accents too, because there were apprentices who had started working on the Wylfa Newydd project and those were forced to leave their homes in order to work at Hinkley, and that is something that we should deeply regret, and that, again, because of the failings of the UK Conservative Government.

Let's be clear that any development in Wylfa is many years down the line. We know that, in an election year, it would be desirable for some to believe that there is going to be an announcement now, or about to take place, but that is not the reality of the situation, and that's why the committee is entirely right in saying that we shouldn't raise people's hopes. And that's something that I am very clear on. I was at a briefing with Great British Nuclear exactly a week ago, and they explained where we're at now, having not decided even what kind of development could take place in Wylfa, although the site has been purchased recently. So, yes, the UK Government have made a mess of their nuclear plans, and the committee is right to note that we still don't have a clear idea of what those plans are. But I say this as a key final point—something that I and others raised in that meeting with GBN—local communities have to be central to any decisions taken. As with any energy development in Wales, we must ensure that Welsh interests and the interests of Welsh communities are always safeguarded.

As someone more positive about nuclear than the previous speaker, I'd like to thank Paul Davies, the Chair of the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee. He states in the report that a successful and modern nuclear industry here in Wales will provide thousands of high-quality jobs whilst unlocking billions of pounds-worth of investment. Look at Ynys Môn: Wylfa Newydd will bring investment of around £20 billion for a large-scale plant, 8,000 construction jobs, and 800 steady-state quality careers would be created. But I have to put on record, yet again, my thanks, as a Member for Aberconwy and the jobs that will hopefully come to Aberconwy as a result of this, to our own little atomic kitten, Virginia Crosbie MP. The work she has done on this is actually making sure that major support for the UK Conservative Government is forthcoming. For example, the UK Government's British energy security strategy named Wylfa as a key site for one of its eight proposed new nuclear plants. The UK Government's UK-wide future—[Interruption.] I know you don't like mention of the UK Government, but credit where credit's due. The UK-wide future nuclear enabling fund was launched—

Will you take an intervention?

Of course.

Just to point out, there's no mention of Wylfa or Trawsfynydd in the latest documentation from the UK Government. You mentioned the jobs created by large nuclear in Ynys Môn. For the record, I would favour a smaller, modular option. But there is no decision, so you have to recognise that this is years away.

Let's just wait and see. Patience. Most recently, the UK Government announced that Great British Nuclear is buying the Wylfa site as part of a £160 million deal. That momentum will come under this Conservative leadership. I am very hopeful of a decision soon. As the Rt Hon Claire Coutinho MP, Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, stated in her response, the UK Government is making a concerted effort to support development decisions, improve investor confidence and provide the greatest certainty that's needed.

In comparison, the committee is rightly questioning, in recommendation 2, the role of the Welsh Government. The clear impression that I am getting from the response provided by Jeremy Miles is that you want a decision by the UK Government before doing more with the levers that you already have at your disposal. That should not be the case.

When considering that Alan Raymant told the committee that trying to develop both Wylfa and Trawsfynydd in north Wales at the same time would probably not be feasible in the context of current skills shortages, the challenge for the Welsh Government to tackle is clear. And who has been responsible for making sure that we have those skills over the last 26 years? The Welsh Government, propped up by Plaid.

As Bechtel rightly stated, it is imperative that Wales builds a strong workforce to meet new nuclear demand. Of course, Bangor University has now started a general engineering degree, and new training facilities have been provided at Coleg Menai in Llangefni, so as to offer courses in engineering, fabrication, welding, mechanical engineering and power engineering.

However, apprenticeship uptake has been in decline for the past five years, with 43 per cent of vacancies in STEM roles, and we do still have a massive shortage of applicants with the required skills. There is amazing potential for our nation's young people to step up to the plate, but we must ensure that our education system is providing them with the best possible opportunities to secure STEM skills and careers.

In short, we need a review of this Welsh Government's curriculum and apprenticeships policy, so as to ascertain how we can deliver better. And like the Minister wrote in his response, if Wales is to contribute to addressing the broader UK nuclear skills deficit, I believe that a solid commitment can and should be made by you today that Wales will contribute to addressing the broader UK nuclear skills deficit.

Finally, I would invite the Minister to provide some much-needed clarity on funding for Cwmni Egino. While the UK Government is ramping up investment for nuclear, overseeing the biggest expansion in 70 years, the Welsh Government appears to be reducing support. The First Minister is directly accountable. It was, of course, during his tenure as Minister for Economy that it was planned to cut financial investment for Cwmni Egino.

Cwmni Egino.

Yes. Thank you. How much Welsh taxpayers' money—

Janet, you need to conclude now, please.

—did the Welsh Government give in 2023-24, and also 2024-25? I have met with Andrew Bowie MP, Minister for Nuclear and Renewables, and I can assure you that any indication that Trawsfynydd is not being considered is wrong. Indeed, it would be premature for the Welsh Government to take a decision on cutting any funding for Cwmni Egino.

Janet, conclude, please.

So, clarity on what Welsh Labour has done is now urgently required, and in this Welsh Parliament here today. Diolch.

The committee took oral and written evidence from pro-nuclear organisations and individuals, but none from anti-nuclear or a sceptical view to give a balance. I hear what the Chair said earlier, but I want to do that now. There were no comparisons to alternative renewable technologies of wind, wave or solar. So, why wasn't evidence sought from experts and interested parties on such questions as, 'Why should such reliance be placed on the voices of an industry that consistently fails to deliver on cost and on time?', 'Why should Ynys Môn and Gwynedd become a nuclear plant to satisfy the needs of the nuclear industry and the UK state?', 'Why continue when nuclear is in retreat globally?'

A typical reactor will generate 25 to 30 tonnes of high-level nuclear waste annually. It can remain radioactive and dangerous to human health for thousands of years. Nowhere has a satisfactory long-term solution to waste disposal been found, so why produce more? Energy security is being touted, but there are no uranium reserves in the UK, current uranium reserves are expected to be depleted by the end of the century and new uranium reserves are hard to find. As a result, uranium prices have been rising steadily, with estimates predicting a doubling of prices by 2030.

As extreme climate events become the norm, sea levels will rise, and there will be more disruptive storms and storm surges, bringing into question the operational safety, security and viability of coastal nuclear infrastructure. Inland nuclear has also other problems: wildfires, episodic flooding alternating with lower river flow and raised water temperature, impacting reactor cooling and discharge.

Expert planning officers found that Wylfa Newydd failed to meet some of the United Nation's biological diversity standards, and also listed concerns over the project's impact on the local economy, housing stock, health, culture and the Welsh language. Hinkley Point's estimated bill costs in 2016 was £18.2 billion, but updated costs are now £31 billion to £35 billion. EDF has estimated that it could cost up to £46 billion, another £10 billion cost hike and another four years to complete—most likely longer.

The lifespan is expected to be just 60 years. Meanwhile, the UK Government have given licences to new gas fields for fear, they say, of blackouts. Nuclear will never fill the energy gap on its own. And meanwhile we burn more fossil fuels because we're not investing enough in the renewable technologies, storage and infrastructure, energy efficiency, or the insulation of homes, which would allow for quicker, cheaper mitigation of climate change and help people's budgets.

Including planning and approval, one nuclear station takes up to 17 years to build, with construction taking approximately 10 years. On-costs and decommissioning costs are a bottomless pit. So, given the development timelines for new reactor designs, they are not likely to have a significant impact on carbon dioxide emissions reductions for decades, and, as a result, their relevance to the climate argument shrinks.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Economy, Energy and Welsh Language, Jeremy Miles.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. May I thank the members of the committee for their report, which comes at a very important time in the development of the nuclear industry in the United Kingdom? And this is particularly timely in Wales with the news that the UK Government is in the process of purchasing the Wylfa site from Hitachi.

As the report states, nuclear isn't an issue that is devolved, so it's the UK Government that is responsible for driving new investment in nuclear projects. I understand there are a range of stances—Carolyn Thomas has voiced some of them—but the Welsh Government is in general broadly supportive of nuclear projects in Wales, but costs must be borne in mind.

As these developments are driven forward, we want to ensure the best benefits in terms of the economy and social issues. But we want to consider the negative impacts too that come as a result of major infrastructure projects, such as those outlined by Rhun ap Iorwerth.

The committee report contains two major findings and six recommendations. The first finding is that an urgent decision is needed with regard to the future of Wylfa and Trawsfynydd. The second is there's a lack of clarity from the UK Government with regard to what to do next, which is preventing a joint effort to prepare the workforce through developing skills and training. I agree entirely with both of those findings.

The report's first recommendation builds on the conclusions and calls for a decision sooner rather than later from the UK Government on project siting, along with clarity on how and when a project is likely to be brought forward in north Wales. A commitment to north Wales is something that we have been seeking from the UK Government since the cancellation of Horizon’s Wylfa Newydd project. The effective silence on any new project detail has impacted significantly on our ability to plan for any new activity, and the ongoing delay also affects the perception of deliverability in potential host communities and can eat away at any future project’s social licence to operate. Recommendations 2 to 4 focus on requests for the Welsh Government to explain how it will work with a variety of key partners, including the UK Government and local authority partners, to support the Welsh supply chain, to undertake local workforce planning, and to address housing needs and pressures that may arise with large-scale infrastructure projects. There is also a call for the Welsh Government to outline how it will work with others to manage expectations around any new proposals. I support these recommendations and will address each in turn.

Should new projects emerge for Trawsfynydd and Wylfa, we will strive, as we always have done, to develop a pragmatic approach to working with major developers and strategic partners, including the UK Government. On the Wylfa Newydd project, we worked with Horizon and regional stakeholders on issues that were best addressed through a multi-agency approach, including, for example, on housing needs and pressures, which we did along with local authority partners from Ynys Môn and Gwynedd councils and relevant regional housing associations, and we would seek to reintroduce similar collaborative working on any new nuclear project in north Wales.

On issues of supply chain support and workforce planning we have a platform to build on. We worked with the nuclear advanced manufacturing research centre on their fit-for-nuclear supply chain development programme between 2015 and 2019, and funded access for around 70 Welsh companies. We also provided significant further education sector funding investment for new training facilities, which both Carolyn Thomas and Rhun ap Iorwerth have mentioned, at Coleg Menai in Llangefni. That’s now able to offer a range of engineering-related courses, all with relevance to nuclear and the wider energy sector.

With respect to managing expectations, let’s be clear: the responsibility for managing expectations lies principally in the hands of those capable of realising those expectations, which is the UK Government. However, new nuclear presents opportunities for significant economic change and so we will seek to play our part in encouraging proportionate preparation within host communities. While we initially created Cwmni Egino to target opportunities at Trawsfynydd, we are in ongoing discussions with the UK Government on a potential early stakeholder management role for Cwmni Egino on any new Wylfa project.

I call on Paul Davies to reply to the debate.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd, and can I thank Members for taking part in this debate this afternoon? We've heard some really interesting contributions from Members today, and a constructive response from the Cabinet Secretary. Now, Members have understandably commented on the UK Government's future plans and the opportunities for Wales, and I want to make it clear and reassure Janet Finch-Saunders that the committee will be following future developments very closely, and I look forward to the Cabinet Secretary for Economy, Energy and Welsh Language keeping the committee updated on these matters.

Now, as Luke Fletcher said, this is not a report about the pros and cons of nuclear power. This was a one-day inquiry to look at nuclear power and the Welsh economy, and we were limited in terms of the oral evidence that we could take. And I hear what Carolyn Thomas said, but I want to make it clear once again that we didn't look at the arguments for or against nuclear power; we just looked at the economic impacts of potential future nuclear developments.

Now, as Luke Fletcher also touched upon, whilst energy is not within the committee's remit, the economic potential of the sector is, and so it was wholly appropriate for the committee to hold this inquiry, but his suggestion of a joint inquiry on energy could well be something we could look at in the future.

Now, of course, clarity is very much needed from the UK Government over its plans. Further information is crucial to support forward planning around skills and housing, as well as to give certainty to the community on Ynys Môn. Although views on the merits of nuclear energy may differ, Members are united in wanting the best economic outcomes for Wales of decisions taken by the UK Government on new nuclear projects, and I agree with the leader of Plaid Cymru—as well as benefits to communities, these projects can bring challenges to those communities, and as a committee we did touch upon some of those challenges.

Jack Sargeant mentioned the importance of highly skilled jobs. There is a huge demand for the skills necessary to work in the nuclear industry, and many of those skills are also transferrable to other growth areas, including jobs for green growth and the move to net zero. Jack Sargeant also referred to skills shortages, which several witnesses told the inquiry was a real concern and a barrier to delivering nuclear ambitions. Alan Raymant of Cwmni Egino said the Horizon experience in north Wales had shown that gearing up local colleges to take on apprentices can be done, noting many of these were now working, of course, as we've heard from other Members, at Hinkley Point.

Of course, certainty is vital to scale up skills programmes, but it's clear that more work needs to be done. I welcome the Welsh Government's commitment to work with the UK Government and its various partners in Wales, as well as with communities in north Wales who are most closely affected, to upskill our workforce and deliver maximum benefit to Wales.

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

Item 7 today is the Welsh Conservatives debate on the Public Services Ombudsman for Wales, and I call on Sam Rowlands to move the motion.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and I move the motion in front of us today in the name of my colleague Darren Millar.

Frankly, this is a debate we shouldn't have to have. The Public Services Ombudsman for Wales is supposedly in place to be an impartial and unbiased arbiter of cases involving elected councillors and public services across Wales. It should have the confidence of the people and be utterly dedicated to the truth, in a rigorous and impartial and fair way. Unfortunately, we now know that this simply has not been the case. After revelations that the head of investigations had been, over a long period of time, making torrents of politically motivated, hostile, aggressive comments on social media, it's clear that the ombudsman has a real problem.

The media coverage has focused on the overtly anti-Conservative comments, including the use of obscene language, but it is worth remembering that non Conservative politicians and parties—aside from Labour—were also in the firing line. Independent councillors, of which there are many in Wales, also feel like they've been unfairly treated by the ombudsman. This includes several independents on Bridgend County Borough Council, who've gone public with their concerns, and it has now even led to the independent chair of Monmouthshire County Council standards committee resigning, as he feels undermined. So, with the top investigator having been exposed for her pro-Labour bias, is it any surprise that non Labour councillors feel like they've been stitched up?

I had been heartened to hear that there would be an investigation, but who was originally chosen to lead it? A man who was a Labour leader of a council, a Labour parliamentary candidate and the chairman of the Society of Labour Lawyers. It's almost beyond belief, but then you do remember we are in Labour-run Wales, where this behaviour is just par for the course. I am pleased that eventually the individual in question has been removed from this role, and I'm sure that someone else can be found to take up this role, who hopefully isn't a former Labour council leader.

But two things must happen for the ombudsman to build back credibility, which has currently been squandered during this entire sorry episode. Firstly, the ombudsman must reopen every single investigation during the five years this person worked for the ombudsman to ensure that the correct decisions were reached, and if that's not the case, that justice is actually served instead of whatever benefits the Welsh Labour Party. Secondly, there must be a full and thorough investigation by a Senedd committee into the ombudsman and the way the whole organisation operates from top to bottom. We must understand the terms of the departure of the former head of investigations. We need to know the exact extent of how deep the rot is. This Senedd, which, after all, is central to the appointment process of the ombudsman, must send a message loud and clear that bias of this nature is totally unacceptable, and that, as a Chamber, we'll stand up and back fairness, back impartiality, and stand up for what is right. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

I have selected the amendment to the motion. I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Culture and Social Justice to move amendment 1, tabled in the name of Jane Hutt.

Formally.

I'm contributing today in my role as Chair of the Finance Committee. As Members will be aware, it's not common practice for committee Chairs to make contributions during opposition debates. However, given that this motion seeks to instruct the Finance Committee to urgently review the operations, processes and investigations carried out by the Public Services Ombudsman for Wales, I would like to briefly outline the committee's role and responsibilities in holding the ombudsman to account.

The committee is responsible for oversight of the work of the ombudsman under Standing Order 18A, and the committee conducts annual scrutiny sessions looking at the ombudsman's performance, as well as approving the annual budget and requests for supplementary funding. The very nature of the ombudsman's work means that its ability to undertake investigations independently of political interference is essential. This is a long-standing principle for ombudsmen internationally and is essential in order to provide an effective, respected and robust investigations system.

I would also urge caution in the Senedd considering operational matters within the ombudsman’s office. It is not our role to monitor the day-to-day running of the office, nor should we be challenging the ombudsman's decision, as that would undermine the integrity of the office and investigations process. However, the ombudsman is ultimately accountable to the Senedd, and it is right for us to take action when serious concerns arise. [Interruption.]

Will you take an intervention?

Go on.

I appreciate the point that you make about the independence of the role, but surely it is the duty of every elected representative in this Senedd to challenge the ombudsman when they make blatantly wrong decisions, as was the case with the appointment of the KC, who had clear political party links, to investigate a concern about political party views of an individual in an inappropriate office that was paid for by the public purse. Surely it's our duty to challenge those things, not just to allow them to go unchallenged, which is what you're suggesting.

If you'd let me finish, I would have got to that bit, so bear with me a second.

In this instance, it is clear that there are questions to answer, particularly around fairness and impartiality, as set out in the motion before us today. I would therefore like to reassure Members that the ombudsman spoke to me as soon as possible as the news of the story broke about the member of staff in question. We've also received correspondence from her outlining recent events and the next steps, which has been published on our webpage and shared with Members. I also want to let Members know that the committee will be discussing this matter at our meeting next Wednesday, including deciding on any further action to be taken. This follows the correct and proper channels to take in this Senedd when concerns regarding the ombudsman are identified and require further consideration. Diolch yn fawr.

The ombudsman provides an excellent service to the people of Wales. It investigates concerns raised by individuals regarding the service they have received from public bodies, especially from councils and health boards. I, like many Members, refer constituents to the ombudsman. The result of an ombudsman investigation in ABMU led to the following changes:

'We fully accept the recommendations made by the Ombudsman, and can give assurances that several important changes have been put in place over the last three years.

'It remains that because of the small number of adult congenital heart disease...patients in Wales, the surgical service continues to be provided in specialist centres in England, like the one at Bristol.

'However, the management and processes supporting these patients have now been considerably tightened, and access to pre-surgical tests within Wales much improved.'

A success for the ombudsman and, much more importantly, for patients in Wales.

Political neutrality is difficult to find. My biggest surprise was that the person concerned was a supporter of the Labour Party as opposed to the large number of Plaid Cymru and Conservative Party supporters holding a number of positions. The previous ombudsman, Nick Bennett, was a former Liberal candidate. The wider question is: should the ombudsman investigate complaints against elected councillors? My view is that the service, which is excellent at dealing with complaints about the provision of services, is not suited to dealing with complaints about politicians. Speaking as someone who was complained about, the people undertaking the process had little understanding of the political nature of councils. As we know, many complaints are politically motivated, and the number increases as you approach local elections, and they're often by people standing against sitting councillors who then make complaint after complaint about them in order to try and muddy the water.

The Senedd has the office of the standards commissioner to investigate complaints against Members. I believe we should have the same type of office that deals with complaints about council members. In Scotland, if you're not happy with the action of an MSP, councillor or member of a public body, you can make a complaint to the Ethical Standards Commissioner. The Senedd needs to look at creating an ethical standards commissioner who would only deal with complaints against councillors and members of public bodies. Whether this would also include dealing with Members of the Senedd is a matter, I think, that's worthy of debate.

But having a group of people who are very good at one thing, investigating complaints against public services—and we've all had results from our constituencies that have been very good results when the ombudsman has investigated those—to then investigate actions by politicians is fundamentally wrong, and does not work. There's the lack of understanding of how robust discussions can be in a political environment. And I still hold concerns about what happened here regarding Leanne Wood, who made a reasonable comment about probably the most obnoxious man in Wales, and she was then reprimanded for it. So, I think it really is important that we have somebody investigating politicians who understands what we go through and what we do.

Firstly, I'd just like to say I'm pleased that Sinead Cook, the senior investigator in this question, has resigned, and it is beyond doubt that this is the correct decision. I'm also pleased that the Public Services Ombudsman for Wales has decided against their appointment of former Labour council leader, James Goudie KC, to lead the review—a choice that was so inappropriate, I think many assumed it was probably a joke. I won't spend time explaining why the appointment was inappropriate, but it's pretty plain for everyone to see that the review would have been a total charade, with Labour politicians marking their own homework.

I think all of us were dumbfounded by these outrageous appointments, but I'm interested to know from the public services ombudsman whether this was coincidental or deliberate. And if it was the latter, did they seriously think that no-one would notice? Most importantly, this is not a flash-in-the-pan scandal. This has seriously eroded trust in what is supposed to be an independent watchdog. I have referred constituents to the public services ombudsman for redress, so how are my constituents supposed to have confidence that their grievances will be taken seriously if they were represented and referred by a Conservative politician, for example?

Cultural and ideological left-wing bias in our institutions is nothing new. It has been a feature of British public institutions since at least the 1970s. There is a wealth of evidence for this across academia, the BBC and the civil service, such as the biased King’s College counter-terrorism course for civil servants that was condemned earlier this year. But partisan, party-political bias as flagrant as this is rare, and it is concerning, and it goes without saying that this falls way below the standards expected of a body like the ombudsman. It demeans and debases the important work that they are assigned to do.

The Public Services Ombudsman for Wales should represent everyone in Wales, but aside from bias, the vitriolic and abusive language used was incredibly concerning, with bigoted language aimed at a sitting Member of Parliament by the head of investigations at the watchdog. Their position of seniority and the attempted whitewash investigation begs the question of how deep the rot is in this body. What sort of culture exists within the ombudsman if these are the attitudes that exist in the upper echelons of the body, if this is the language being used by senior officials?

Impartiality is important for senior officials in any civil service role, but it is paramount in a body like the ombudsman, which is supposed to investigate maladministration. Public trust in the public services ombudsman has collapsed, and the only way this can be rebuilt is by dissolving the watchdog and replacing it with a new body that puts safeguards in place to stop this from happening again. Thank you.

We're supporting this motion, and I was with you part of the way, but I lost you then in the second part, I have to say, because—. I'll say 'thank you' for bringing this motion forward. I think, in an age of declining trust in these kinds of institutions, it's more important than ever that we uphold the highest possible standards, particularly in those bodies that are meant to scrutinise conduct in public life. It's never been more important. And that does include a strict adherence by such bodies to the principle of political impartiality, and in that respect recent revelations surrounding the office of the Public Services Ombudsman for Wales have been deeply, deeply regrettable and damaging.

I welcome the fact, though, that the PSO has promptly committed to an independent investigation into the allegations, and whilst there were very legitimate issues around the suitability of their chosen candidate to lead that investigation, it's good to see that the ombudsman has now responded to those concerns. She made it clear, and I heard her say this on the radio, that she wasn't aware of the extent of Mr Goudie's links with the Labour Party prior to his appointment as the head of that investigation, and once those became evident I think it's right that we acknowledge that the correct decision was made. Yes, there should have been more diligence—I get that—but when it did come to light, she acted, and we should at least recognise as much.

Now, more generally, I think it would be helpful if the Minister in her response could actually clarify whether the terms of departure of the former head of investigations would have been covered by the UK guidance on public sector exit payments. It would be good to hear whether that is the case. We, here, also believe it is appropriate, as is reflected, actually, in the motion, that the Finance Committee undertakes a comprehensive review of the operations of the PSO in the interest of restoring public confidence in the body, and I understand, from hearing what the Chair said, that that is something that they will be considering at their very next meeting.

But unlike the characteristically unhelpful interventions of the Secretary of State for Wales on this matter, who has called for the PSO to be wound down—and we've heard that again from the Member for the Vale of Clwyd—I don't think that the best course of action is to rashly throw the baby out with the bath water. In fact, I would like to pay tribute, and let's pause here for a minute. I would like to pay tribute to the hard-working staff, the wider staff team at the PSO, who have been dragged into this unfortunate episode through no fault of their own, and it's vital that we don't allow this issue to completely tarnish the reputation of the PSO—a reputation that's been cultivated over almost 20 years. The Welsh public will be best served by careful and measured scrutiny and refinements to the service, rather than this scorched earth policy that we're hearing coming from the Tory benches, and particularly from the Secretary of State.

Would you take an intervention?

Very briefly, then, because I've got two seconds left.

I wouldn't disagree with you about the hard work of the ombudsman's office, in particular—

Well, let's hear it then. Nobody has said it yet.

Well, I'm saying it now. In terms of their support with individual cases, which all of us in this Chamber have had to engage with them about, and of course it has been refreshing to see the speed at which there has been action. Clearly, there are issues with social media policies et cetera that need to be addressed, and there obviously has been a problem with the due diligence in terms of Mr Goudie KC's appointment. I will say, though, that I'm very surprised that James Goudie himself did not disclose those things, and I think there ought to be a duty on him or anybody else who is appointed to undertake such investigations. Would you agree with me on that point?

Yes, I would; yes, I think that's a fair comment. But I suppose the PSO would say we are where we are and she did what she felt she had to do, but there is a wider question about diligence et cetera, which I referenced earlier.

I'm out of time, I know, Llywydd. I was going to regret that the Conservatives haven't shown this degree of scrutiny and angst around some of the actions of their own Westminster Government when it comes to appointing BBC chairpeople who set up loans for former Prime Ministers and the like, but there we are, we know it now, don't we? That's form, isn't it?

The Cabinet Secretary for Culture and Social Justice to contribute, Lesley Griffiths.

Diolch, Llywydd. The Welsh Government is one of the bodies in Wales that falls within the remit of the Public Services Ombudsman for Wales. We have no role in their appointment, the funding of their office or any oversight of their operations or funding. It would not be appropriate for the Welsh Government to comment on any of those issues. So, the specific question Llyr Huws Gruffydd asked me: we don't oversee the ombudsman, we had no say in or involvement in the departure terms of the member of staff, and perhaps it is something that the Finance Committee could explore at a future date. However, the ombudsman does play a key role in the investigation of complaints against councillors under their ethical code of conduct. This is a function that Welsh Ministers determine and place upon the ombudsman. Therefore, Welsh Government has an interest in the function being undertaken to a high standard and free from political bias.

The Welsh Government strongly supports the work of the ombudsman as an independent investigator of complaints where something has unfortunately gone wrong with public services in Wales. We have our own complaints policy, which has been improved by the ombudsman, and where complainants are still dissatisfied, having gone through the process, and refer their case to the ombudsman, we work openly and constructively with the ombudsman to try to resolve matters. That is absolutely as it should be.

The Welsh Government also strongly believes in the importance of public servants in Wales, whether they are officers, officials or civil servants, behaving with complete political impartiality in their responsibilities. This includes not doing anything in their lives outside of work that might cause that impartiality to be called into question. So, we share the concern that has been expressed regarding recent events. We would not seek to advise the ombudsman on how she should respond to those events.

Although there have, of course, been further developments since the original motion and the Government's amendment was put down, the Welsh Government's position remains the same. We would, however, want to be reassured the ombudsman has taken the matter very seriously and that she has set appropriate action in hand to prevent a recurrence.

We also believe it is important that the ombudsman should report back to the Senedd, through the Finance Committee, on the action taken and the outcome. This will then enable the Finance Committee, on behalf of the whole Senedd, to be satisfied with the results of their action. Our proposed amendment to the motion is designed to achieve this objective. Diolch.

James Evans to reply to the debate.

My hand doesn't work that fast writing, Llywydd. Diolch, Llywydd, and thank you very much to everybody who has contributed to our debate today.

In public office, it is vital that all public officials are held to the highest possible standards. The public must be assured that when complaints are made about people, they will be investigated impartially, and it's unfortunate that we've come to a situation where we've had to table this debate today, because the standards in the ombudsman's office fell far below the standards that we expect and that, also, the wider public expect.

Sam Rowlands opened the debate highlighting the biased views and the obscene language that was expressed by one investigator at the ombudsman's office, and some people feeling across Wales that their cases have been unfairly looked at and they have been mistreated, and people having to resign because of that mistreatment. Sam also highlighted the review that is taking place and that the QC that was appointed to lead that review was also a leader of a Labour council and also quite prominent in the Labour movement, and I'm pleased that the ombudsman has taken action to remove that individual.

Peredur Owen Griffiths highlighted to us then the work that the Finance Committee does in its scrutiny of the work of the ombudsman, and he highlighted that it is their role to scrutinise them, but not their operational decisions. But Darren Millar then intervened about that and challenged that, but Llyr Gruffydd did also clear that up as we went further on.

Mike Hedges thinks this ombudsman is a good thing, and I don't dispute—a lot of people do think the ombudsman is a good thing—but I think you slightly missed the point of what this debate is about, around the impartiality of the ombudsman. But I do think the point you did make about an independent body looking at political figures and councillors and Senedd Members is perhaps something that is worth investigating and looking at perhaps at a future date.

Llyr Gruffydd, I'd like to thank you for your thoughtful contribution, yet again highlighting political impartiality. You highlighted that the ombudsman is aware of these problems, that they acted when they had to, especially around when the QC was appointed as well, when the ombudsman was aware of everything that was taking place, and that she took action to remove that individual and actually put somebody in place now who is going to be impartial and not of any political bias at all. But you also highlighted the staff who work at the ombudsman's office, and I think that's something that's really important for all of us to recognise. A lot of hard-working people work in these offices to do a great job for the people of Wales, and just because there's one bad egg in the group doesn't mean that everybody else should be tarred with the same brush.

The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? No. The motion is therefore agreed.

The next item is the Welsh Conservatives' debate on transport, and I call on Natasha Asghar to move the motion. Natasha Asghar.

Thank you so much, Presiding Officer. I'm pleased to move this motion today, which aims to see the Welsh Government accept responsibility for past failings in the transport sector, and review policy areas in order to provide a much-needed boost to our infrastructure and economy.

Firstly, I would like to start by congratulating the Cabinet Secretary on his new role. I very much look forward to working with you in a productive manner to improve transport across Wales moving forward. I do believe, sadly, that you have inherited a really sorry state of affairs when it comes to transport here in Wales. I am in frequent contact with people right across our country who sadly are not getting used to these policies, as many Ministers have indeed claimed in the past, and they are still as despondent as ever, if not more so than before, considering the strength of public opinion that has been ignored and swept under the carpet time and time again.

It will be no shock to anyone in the Chamber that, on this note, I am going to start with the default 20 mph speed limit policy. Cabinet Secretary, it was incredibly positive to hear your priority when it comes to the 20 mph policy, and that is that you are going to be listening. I was also pleased to hear that you have reached out to leading protesters, in fact, the leading protesters of the 20 mph groups to arrange a meeting, and it's refreshing to hear of this real positive action that's going to be taking place—not just words—right from the get-go, and the willingness that you've had to have those much-needed open conversations.

As you will be aware, this policy has been hugely unpopular throughout Wales, especially when considering the record-breaking petition to rescind it, which has reached just shy of 0.5 million signatures. I've seen some Members in this Chamber roll their eyes, but almost 0.5 million people signing a petition against this policy when the population of Wales is just over 3 million is an extortionate amount, and cannot be ignored.

This takes me to my second point: as far as I can see, there is no evidence anywhere in the world of 20 mph limits solely reducing casualties or collisions on the road. When there are indeed reductions in the speed limit, such as 20 mph zones, there are other factors that could and would be responsible for mitigating the impacts of reducing casualties in collisions. We must also take into account that the threshold for 20 mph zones in Wales is 10 per cent plus 4 mph and, therefore, only 4 mph below the original default limit of 30 mph. This means that many of the positive impacts of driving at a speed 10 mph lower have been dampened down by the increased flexibility and confusion about the extra 4 mph. As I have said on numerous occasions in this Chamber in the past, there are many better ways to educate and improve road safety then spending £33 million of taxpayers' cash on a potential 4 mph change, and, at times, not even that.

I've also heard from countless constituents that the change in speed limits has in fact caused increasingly dangerous driving, with sudden braking and tailgating indeed seeing a huge rise, and the numbers seem to be going up and up. We must also address unintended consequences of the default 20 mph limits, with pedestrians and cyclists feeling safer and taking less care when crossing roads because of this. Indeed, frustration and dangerous driving, overtaking and many drivers paying more attention to their speedometers rather than the road in front of them are happening more and more.

And finally, Cabinet Secretary, I must address the figure of £92 million, which was quoted by the Welsh Government as how much would be saved by the NHS as a result of this policy. Sadly, very limited evidence is indeed in place as to how this figure was actually calculated and has been released to me and, indeed, to the public. This is an incredibly difficult notion to quantify, and we are unlikely to ever know what specifically caused the accident or what the travelling speed was compared with the impact of speed, for example. Also, the information currently available on this figure is very vague. So, will you please commit to publishing a detailed breakdown of how it was reached, in a bid to be more transparent and upfront, not just with me, but with the public as well? I would certainly agree that we need to reinforce education for both pedestrians and drivers about safety and control on the roads. Driving slowly does not wholly represent control, and we all know that reaction times and awareness have a huge part to play too.

This brings me nicely to the Welsh Government's decision to axe all major road building. We all know that investment in infrastructure brings economic growth, prosperity and connectivity, which each and every single one of us here wants to see. We also know that by stopping all new major road projects across Wales, the exact opposite has been happening over the past three years. This is bad enough when noting the state of our roads and the congestion across south Wales, let alone when noting the condition in the north.

As a Member for south-east Wales, I am very shocked that I'm going to be saying this, but I do feel fortunate for my region, to an extent, that we do receive a larger share of investment from the Welsh Government when it comes to transport infrastructure. However, I cannot help but feel that this is unfair. Cabinet Secretary, I know that you hail from north Wales and have suggested that you would consider building new roads, so I'd really like to ask you today in front of everyone: do you have any specific projects in mind? And if so, do you have any particular timelines for these projects that you have spoken of in the past? We really do need to invest in our road network and see some signs of reintroducing these improvements and projects for the sake of our connectivity and growth, and in many cases for road safety too.

Our motion here today calls upon Welsh Government to invest in our buses and trains to make these public transport services more competitive than travelling by car. I recently visited Japan and was astonished to discover that their annual average delay per train is one minute, just one minute, when Transport for Wales, on the other hand, had a million minutes of delays last year alone. This represents a desperate need for the right investment and guidance to improve services for the sake of our commuters. Whilst we would all love to see an increase in active travel, cycling and walking are simply not feasible at all times for each and every single person in Wales, and we need to have a viable alternative to everyday use of our cars. I hope Members across the Chamber will support our motion today for the benefit of everyone in Wales, who deserve a better service and more understanding about the reality of commuting than what they have been receiving from the Welsh Government to date. Thank you very much.

I have selected the two amendments to the motion. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 will be deselected. I call on Delyth Jewell to move amendment 1.

Thank you, Llywydd. I’m grateful for the opportunity to discuss these important issues, and I’m grateful to the Conservatives for bringing forward this debate, and I move the amendment.

Major change is needed. We are not where we need to be when it comes to transport. And those paying the price are passengers, of course, today and tomorrow. Transport is all too often too expensive and difficult to access. In 2022, Sustrans found that 40 to 50 per cent of families spend more than 10 per cent of their income on running a car. We need to see fewer people using cars, but a lack of sufficient investment has meant that large numbers are dependent on their cars, because no alternatives are available to them.

The price of bus tickets has increased at the same time as services are being cut. Communities are being isolated. And underinvestment in our bus industry poses a significant risk to rural areas and the Valleys. Half of our stations are not accessible for disabled people. Our stations and the routes to them aren’t always safe for those made vulnerable by the way our society is planned.

And where the train lines begin and end, where the roads run, that matters. The lack of connectivity between the north and south of Wales is a stark metaphor for how Westminster hinders our progress, because there can't be many other countries in the world where a journey getting from one end of the country to another means having to go first in the opposite direction via a different country. But that is what comes of decisions over transport being made by people outside Wales. We will never be the priority for Westminster, only a place to travel through on the way to another destination or, indeed, on the way to power.

Will you take an intervention?

I will.

Transport has been devolved for a long time. Forget rail transport, for a second, what about roads? What about roads? Why haven't we got a better road connecting north and south Wales? Our roads are absolutely dreadful and your former leader, Ieuan Wyn Jones, was responsible for transport for a full five years, as Deputy First Minister and economy and transport Minister in this place, and didn't make any progress on addressing that problem at all. What do you have to say to that?

Diolch, Darren. There are plenty of ways in which, as I've said, we're not where we need to be, and that is a failure of successive Governments to do enough on this policy. But, in terms of roads, if we look at where those major roads go to and from in Wales, they go through Wales; they're not for the people of Wales, it's to make journeys easier to get to and from the other ends of that—[Interruption.] But, if we look at those main arteries, this is a historical reason that goes back to where those journeys have always started, and I don't think—. And I really would take contention with the idea that you said, 'Forget about rail for a moment.' I will get on to that point exactly. All of this will only change when all decisions on transport are made for Wales in Wales. And, Darren, on this point, we have lost out on billions of pounds through paying for HS2 when not a mile of track enters our national borders. We have paid towards impoverishing ourselves and neither Sunak nor Starmer sees the need to right that wrong. Westminster, Darren, will always prioritise Westminster, never Wales.

Now, I would have expected the Welsh Government to do differently. Our amendment calls on the Government to reconsider its decision not to challenge this HS2 designation legally, not to pursue a case in the courts. Now, I understand that the Counsel General has told Rhun ap Iorwerth that this won't be happening. This cannot be the end of the line. Those billions would pay towards revitalising our transport infrastructure, building those connections, which Darren and I have just been talking about, within our own nation. That has to be reconsidered. If we want to get to where we need to be as a nation, we have to demand what we're owed, with the billions of pounds that Westminster owes us. Diolch.

The Cabinet Secretary for North Wales and Transport to move formally amendment 2.

I move, formally.

Diolch. John Griffiths.

Diolch, Llywydd. As we discussed earlier during our question sessions, climate change demands substantial change to our transport system here in Wales, and particularly we need a modal shift from road use to use of public transport and active travel, and that is an absolute driver, in the climate emergency, for transport policy here in Wales.

In south-east Wales, Llywydd, we've had the Burns commission and we now have the delivery unit, and that sets out plans for five new train stations in south-east Wales and associated works to support that. And that, then, would make a major contribution to getting traffic off the M4, easing the congestion and the associated problems. But that, of course, requires major investment. Rail infrastructure is not devolved and that money needs to come from the UK Government. So, when we hear Natasha Asghar, as we heard earlier, talking about problems with our rail service and the investment that's necessary, then we really need that investment to come from the UK Government, because they have the responsibility for rail infrastructure in Wales and we've had a paltry share of that investment compared to the rest of the UK. So, I very much hope that, when we get our UK Labour Government before very long, we will see that investment coming through and we can make the sort of progress that we will need to make after all these years of a lack of investment from the Tories at the UK level.

And with active travel, Llywydd, we need more consistency, I believe, across Wales. We need to make sure that all parts of Wales and all local authorities in Wales are really helping us make this change to active travel. I'm glad to say that, in Newport, we have an organisation called Momentwm, which provides cycle training and is helping that effort to get people cycling and, indeed, walking with the new routes that are available. One example of the difference it can make is that we need a new cycle route that links the Glan Llyn housing development with the nearby retail park. At the moment, that area is heavily congested on the roads, and I know many people who would use an active travel link to cycle and walk to the stores and shops but currently feel that they have no alternative but to use their cars.

Finally, on 20 mph, I can't believe how negative Natasha Asghar was. It would seem that it's not going to save lives, it's not going to prevent injuries. It's such a negative approach. The people I speak to recognise the value of 20 mph, but they want to see it on the right roads and appropriate roads, and that's what the review will deliver. People do want it. They want it in the right place.

Connectivity across Wales is absolutely fundamental. It is fundamental to allow our businesses and families to get around. Residents living in the south of Monmouthshire have felt the impact of rising congestion as a direct result of Labour's failure to provide sufficient infrastructure, or to improve what is already in place. This is exacerbated by the economically damaging 20 mph limits on roads that just don't need them. Every day in Chepstow, for example, it completely gets gridlocked, mainly because it's the gateway to Wales and is the access point to and from the M4, with thousands of cars a day accessing the road network from Gloucestershire, via Chepstow, on the A48, which has been dropped to 20 mph. This is a clear example of where Labour's inaction has completely lacked foresight, and has left a town gridlocked and severely polluted as a result. Thanks to their road-building freeze and negative mindset about transport infrastructure, any hope for a bypass for Chepstow has been severely delayed. The town desperately needs a bypass, and it has to come forward. The Welsh Government needs to work with stakeholders and the UK Government to make it happen. It's a daily occurrence to see traffic congestion backing up from halfway across the old Severn bridge. It's almost a two-mile queue, and I was stuck in it twice last week. The Welsh Government had pledged at public meetings to put local traffic measures in place and to improve public transport to alleviate congestion, but talk is cheap and we still see nothing.

Llywydd, I used Chepstow as an example for this debate as a town desperate for infrastructure, but one that is ignored, like many other communities across Wales, by this Labour Government. The Government's desire to get us out of our cars, on to our bikes, or using our severely limited public transport is a wishful dream that ignores the reality of daily life and commerce. The new First Minister and Cabinet Secretary have an opportunity to change the dial. We need to see the shelved road schemes back on the table to boost the economy and get our congested roads moving once again. And the country definitely needs Labour to move to a targeted approach to 20 mph and scrap the current, ill-thought-out policy, as it is at the moment. I encourage all Members to support our motion.

We need to prioritise investing in maintaining our existing highway infrastructure. It's rapidly deteriorating through ever-dwindling budgets over the last 14 years, further exacerbated by increasing floods. They are in a dire condition. The strategic road network in Wales alone has a £1 billion backlog, and it was estimated four years ago that locally maintained structures had a £1.6 billion backlog. With so many competing pressures on local authority budgets, and some having to make in-year savings, we need to go back to providing ring-fenced grant funding for highway maintenance, just as there was a couple of years back. I'm aware that one local authority had run out of funding last month for patching potholes and had to wait until April. Reactive maintenance of potholes is only a temporary measure. Highways need steady investment to avoid extensive and expensive reactive repair, closure and increased user risk.

I'm hoping that some of the active travel funding, which has trebled and is still ring-fenced as grant funding, can be used this year, as we cannot build many more designated cycle routes, which cannot be maintained, when cyclists are facing dangerous sunken gullies and potholes on roads, which is where the majority cycle. It's very different in north Wales and rural areas to areas such as here in Cardiff, and there has to be a balance.

Delivering public transport is expensive and has been hit by inflationary pressures. To level up the perception of the north Wales—south divide, I would like to see some pilots in north Wales as part of the north Wales metro. We could trial capped fares, targeted interventions regarding publicity and information, using 106 agreements from developers to give new residents a free integrated transport pass for a year—this has happened in Chester. A friendly and helpful bus driver and rail platform assistant is invaluable and makes all the difference between people having confidence to use public transport. For many over 60, concessionary passes are not being used, and there has been a fall in usage since COVID. So, with the help of the Older People's Commissioner for Wales, Age Cymru, local authorities and other organisations, there could be a targeted campaign to provide information, to give confidence, concentrating on an area.

Regarding 20 mph, we need to move forward in partnership with councils who have—. Sorry, going back to public transport—I missed a little bit off—I'd like to look at capped fares as well, going forward, to trial capped fares, and also maybe looking at young people as well.

Regarding 20 mph, we need to move forward in partnership with councils who have collated lists of roads to be made up, but are awaiting the new guidelines. They don't want to have to do TROs twice, and they need to be reassured regarding liability, should flexibility be applied to increase speeds regarding the character of the road. [Interruption.] I'm short of time.

The Cabinet Secretary to contribute—Ken Skates.

Diolch, Llywydd. I am very, very grateful to all Members for their valuable contributions today, and I very much welcome the opportunity to respond to the debate with something of a flavour of the transport policies and priorities that I'll outline in greater detail next Tuesday. Indeed, there are, I think, aspects of the Welsh Conservative motion that align with those priorities and that reflect much of what we've heard across the Chamber today.

It's now more than a year since the Welsh Government published its response to the roads review, and, of course, it's right that we reflect, take stock and take time to listen—to listen to each other, to our colleagues in councils, at Westminster, in town and community councils and, above all, to the citizens that we serve. Since the roads review was published, we've continued to build roads, and the work currently under way at Dowlais as part of sections 5 and 6 of the A465 dualling is evidence of that, as well as being, I think, an incredibly impressive piece of infrastructure from an engineering perspective. We will continue to build new roads, whether that's to address localised congestion, pinch points and poor air quality, to improve safety, or, for that matter, to adapt our road network to the kind of extreme weather that we're now seeing here in Wales with alarming regularity. We will build new roads.

But, above all, we will build better than before. We will do so in order to meet the obligations that the last Government rightly introduced to address the climate crisis. We'll build better than before by utilising new construction techniques being pioneered internationally that reduce embedded carbon, by reducing the impact on ancient woodland, as we're now seeing being implemented in Llanharan. And we'll also do so through designing in bus priority routes for better walking links from the outset of our designs.

And I've also been very clear that I want to listen on 20 mph. Since my appointment, I've been meeting with transport cabinet members and with local government leaders from across Wales. We've agreed to work in partnership in the coming weeks and months to deliver a national listening programme, to engage with elected representatives, with businesses, communities and citizens across Wales, including, in my view crucially, children. There is, I believe, a growing consensus in this debate that we can at least build from that 20 mph is right around our schools, hospitals, nurseries—

If I can cut across the Minister, an intervention is being sought by Andrew R.T. Davies. Do you want to take the intervention?

With pleasure, yes.

I welcome the Conservative back to the Government, and that's very pleasing to see. But could I just check with the Minister, as he talks about this conversation that he and the Government are having around 20 mph, what is the backstop for that conversation, because people do want to see a conclusion one way or the other, and, obviously, radical changes to the policy?

I say to Andrew R.T. Davies that next Tuesday I'll be making an oral statement on transport priorities, where I'll be outlining measures that will be taken in the coming weeks and months in regard to all matters related to transport, and particularly to 20 mph. But I must say again that I really strongly feel across the Chamber there is support for 20 mph in those areas where it's appropriate, especially where children and the elderly are at risk. I think in such areas it all makes sense, it all makes people feel safer. But we do need to make sure 20 mph is truly targeted in those places, as we always promised it would be. And we'll need to work exceptionally closely with our partners in local government, with town and community councils, and indeed citizens, in order to achieve that. Changes will be done with and for the communities that we all serve, with the voice of citizens right at the heart of all we do.

The Welsh Conservatives and Plaid Cymru both referenced public transport, and of course I recognise the need for continued investment. Indeed, I was part of the Welsh Government that first committed to wholesale transformation of our rail network in Wales, with £800 million investment in brand-new trains. It’s worth remembering that will put Wales near the top of the table when it comes to new trains, whereas in the past we’ve been near the bottom of the age profile with our fleet. Then there’s also the transformation of the devolved core Valleys lines, which will deliver a turn-up-and-go service, a metro service, which will undoubtedly transform lives across the region. And also—make no mistake about it—I want to see more investment in public transport in north Wales, including making sure that the UK Government are true to their word when it comes to investing in rail infrastructure, because it’s they, not us, who are wholly responsible for that.

But as I think everyone in this Chamber knows, comparing the development funding for north Wales with investment in the core Valleys lines is not comparing like with like, and that’s because ownership of the CVL has been transferred to us, so we have the powers to invest there. North Wales remains the sole responsibility of the UK Government in terms of rail infrastructure. Additionally, the Cardiff capital region city deal is investing in the transformation programme. The north Wales growth deal is not structured the same. It cannot fund equivalent rail projects and so we are completely reliant on the UK Government to provide all of the funding for rail enhancements that they themselves are responsible for. I hope to convince Ministers in Westminster to fund what the north actually needs, and I’ll work with them and others to deliver a bespoke transport network for the north as well as the south-west and mid and west Wales.

Tom Giffard now to respond to the debate.

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Llywydd. Can I start by thanking the new Cabinet Secretary in his role, and welcome him back into Government on behalf of the Welsh Conservative group? Can I particularly welcome the tone I think he used in his response, which was much more constructive and conciliatory than we've been used to, quite frankly, on transport policy in recent years? I particularly welcome his reflection that he wanted to listen on 20 mph in certain areas. I think you cited hospitals and schools as being places where 20 mph tends to be sensible. That's been our position here on the Welsh Conservative benches for some time, and I'm glad to hear you say that as well, Minister. I also want to welcome you repeatedly saying at the beginning of your remarks that we will build new roads, and I think that will be a reassurance, I hope, to people like Peter Fox and his constituents in Chepstow who are looking for that assurance from a Welsh Government that will listen and will engage on this issue.

Just to respond to a few points made in the debate, Natasha Asghar opened by saying that the Minister had inherited a sorry state of affairs, and, unfortunately, she's right. We've seen some of the anti-motorist measures that have been introduced by the Welsh Government in recent years. Professor Stuart Cole recently said that public transport facilities should have been put in before any other anti-motorist legislation, and he's absolutely right, because we need only look at the performance of Transport for Wales to see what public transport provision looks like here in Wales. We heard from the First Minister yesterday claiming it was the best-performing operator around, but the reality is they're ranked the worst in the UK for customer satisfaction, and that includes remarks about punctuality, reliability and service frequency.

Can you just elaborate on this anti-motorist legislation? I've not seen it yet, I've not heard about it. What are you talking about?

Can I suggest you speak to your constituents, who have raised a number of issues about the previous approach we've seen on road building, the previous approach we've seen on 20 mph, and the powers given to them in previous legislation for road charging in the future? I hope that that doesn't come to fruition and I hope that the change in approach referred to by the Minister today is a sign of things to come, but that is not what we have seen in recent years.

Delyth Jewell mentioned, for some reason, that all of Wales's transport woes in recent years have been as a consequence of Westminster in some way, but those TfW figures that I've just read suggest that the problem isn't Westminster, the problem is the Welsh Government that they've been propping up for 25 years.

I hope that you will correct the record. I did explicitly say that this had been the failure of successive Governments in Cardiff as well as in Westminster, and I did say quite a number of ways in which this needs to improve. But Westminster does owe us those billions.

I appreciate the point of clarity around the Government here in Cardiff Bay that you've obviously been propping up for a number of years, including serving in that Government.

John Griffiths mentioned transport issues in Newport. I think if I spoke to his constituents, they would tell me that the biggest transport issue in and and around Newport is the cancellation of the M4 relief road. And we heard from Peter Fox that that is not the only project that has not been progressed that's causing issues in that part of the world, and the Chepstow bypass as well. I'm sure other Members will have examples in their areas of those transport projects that were not progressed with.

Finally, Carolyn Thomas mentioned the condition of roads and potholes. That is a massive issue and Carolyn is absolutely right. So, I'm sure she will be as aghast as I am that the Welsh Government spent £33 million on signs to go next to the roads, rather than improving the condition of those roads in the first instance.

I welcome the comments from the Minister today. I hope it signals a change in approach, a change in tack from the Welsh Labour Government as it comes to transport policy here in Wales, but I would urge Members today, to send that signal that things are changing, to support our motion.

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

That brings us to voting time, and unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, we will move immediately to our first vote.

That first vote is on item 5, the debate on the general principles of the Residential Outdoor Education (Wales) Bill. I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Sam Rowlands. In favour 25, no abstentions, 26 against, and therefore the motion is not agreed.

The next vote is the vote on the Welsh Conservatives debate on transport. I call for a vote on the motion without amendment, tabled in the name of Darren Millar. Open the vote. In favour 15, no abstentions, 36 against. That motion is not agreed.

Amendment 1 is next, therefore, tabled in the name of Heledd Fychan. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 will be deselected. A vote on amendment 1. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 10, no abstentions, 41 against. And therefore, amendment 1 is not agreed.

Amendment 2 is next, in the name of Jane Hutt. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 27, nine abstentions, 15 against, and therefore amendment 2 is agreed.

The final vote is on the motion as amended.

Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 27, nine abstentions, 15 against, and therefore the motion as amended is agreed.

That concludes voting, but does not conclude our work for today, because there will be a short debate, and that short debate is by James Evans.

If Members can leave the Chamber quietly, then James can commence his short debate.

Diolch, Llywydd. I'd like to give a minute of my time to Cefin Campbell, Russell George, Sam Kurtz, Janet Finch-Saunders and Rhun ap Iorwerth.

Today, I want to discuss the impact of renewable energy infrastructure on our rural communities in Wales. Wales is known for its breathtaking landscapes, rolling hills, charming villages and its sense of peace. This beauty attracts thousands of tourists each year, and it's a vital part of our rural economy. However, large-scale windfarms and their pylons threaten this. While renewable energy is crucial, we can't ignore the potential harm that these projects can inflict on the very communities they're supposed to help. Imagine this: you wake up to the consistent sound of a hum of a turbine blade. Some residents have described this sound as similar to a plane consistently being overhead. This isn't science fiction, it is the reality for many living near windfarms. Studies show that wind turbines can disrupt sleep and concentration with low-frequency noise. These colossal structures also alter the visual landscape, potentially impacting tourism and residents' sense of place. This is particularly concerning for areas that rely on scenic beauty, like some of the proposed areas for turbines and pylons in my constituency in Brecon and Radnorshire. Furthermore, the colossal size of these structures can cast long shadows, unsettling shadows—a phenomenon known as shadow flicker—further disrupting the peacefulness of rural areas.

Large-scale renewable projects can drastically change the character of the countryside. A study found statistically significant negative impact on property values near onshore windfarms. While some landholders benefit from leasing land, a decline in property values can have a ripple effect on the entire community. With one in seven jobs in Wales dependent on tourism, this sector is a major contributor to the rural economy. Tourism is key in many rural parts of Wales, providing much-needed jobs, supplementing farm incomes and bringing spend in communities that keep businesses viable. When the draw for tourists is the natural beauty and aesthetics and the tranquillity, it is clear that large-scale wind turbine developments and pylons will adversely affect and impact these areas. It will impact jobs and local businesses and all those industries associated in the rural economy.

Perhaps the most concerning aspect is the feeling of voicelessness amongst residents. Many communities fear that they have little say in the decision-making process surrounding windfarm development. Consultations, if they happen at all, can often feel like a mere formality. A 2023 BBC investigation revealed numerous instances where residents felt their concerns about noise, aesthetics and potential health impacts were disregarded. With any such infrastructure projects, there are statutory planning processes to follow. I had hoped that this would be a significant safeguard, but I have my doubts, and I give you the example of Hendy windfarm: the final decision was taken by Welsh Government Ministers under the development of national significance process. It ignored local community feedback, county councillor representations and the basic principles of 'Planning Policy Wales'. It even disregarded the recommendations from Planning and Environment Decisions Wales officers from within the Welsh Government. All that pain for the community. And despite it being constructed in 2021, the site is still not operational and it is not generating any electricity. If the developers believe that their plans are appropriate for the area, then why not let the local planning processing run its due course? By classifying these developments as developments of national significance and giving Welsh Ministers the final say, this averts a well-established planning procedure in local authorities that has the necessary safeguards in place to ensure communities are protected from large corporate interests. As the Campaign for the Protection of Rural Wales has said, they are concerned for communities who are battling against big corporates like David and Goliath.

When it comes to pylon infrastructure, 'Planning Policy Wales' clearly states that, where possible, the preferred option is for undergrounding of cables, yet in many developments, we are told this is simply not financially viable. All these developments should be designed, in the first instance, to comply with 'Planning Policy Wales'. They cannot use costs as an excuse to circumvent the planning policies here in Wales, and I think Welsh Ministers need to be a lot stronger in following their own Government's guidance that's set out in planning law.

James has kindly given five speakers one minute each to conclude the time. Cefin Campbell.

Diolch yn fawr iawn. Thank you, James, for giving me a minute, although I should possibly want 10, but I'm just going to stick to the time.

Plaid Cymru have no objection to onshore renewable projects. However, we have to ask questions about the scale and the size of some of these windfarms that are being proposed. But my main concern is the fact that many of these klondike companies moving in as some kind of green rush at the moment are proposing to build pylons criss-crossing the whole of Powys, Ceredigion and Carmarthenshire, and so many campaign groups—and I met one last week in Llandovery—are opposed to the desecration of our wonderful landscape. And as it happens, a week today I went to see a demonstration in Llanybydder of a company based in west Wales who are very successful in Europe in terms of cable ploughing. So, rather than the pylons going across the land, these cables are able to be put underground with very little impact on the environment, and put back in this place without you actually seeing any difference being made.

So, that's the way forward, and I'm asking the Minister whether she would do a cost-benefit analysis, comparing pylons with undergrounding. And she has promised to do that, so I'd just like to ask when we can get that report. Sorry, I'm looking at the wrong Minister; I beg your pardon.

Can I thank James Evans for bringing forward this short debate? And I agree with everything James has said, and very much welcome Cefin Campbell's comments as well. For many years, or certainly since I've been a Member of this Senedd, I've had long-held views in terms of the over-proliferation of wind turbines in one particular area of Wales. I'm not against a single turbine. I'm not against windfarms where they're appropriately located, but I am against the over-proliferation of windfarms, with hundreds of turbines, with, as Cefin Campbell, the zigzagging of infrastructure across the beautiful mid Wales countryside, where that is needed. We need our beautiful countryside: it's our unique selling point in regard to tourism in mid Wales.

But I'd very much pick up on what James Evans has said in regard to planning policy, because Ministers have said on a frequent basis that the Welsh Government policy is that there should be underground not overground transmission. But that doesn't actually translate into Government guidance. So, I hope that the Minister can really clarify that, when Ministers make that statement, that it is backed up policy, because it doesn't seem to be the case at the moment.

I'm grateful to the Member for Brecon and Radnorshire for giving me a minute of his time. And to develop the point around infrastructure that he and Russell George and Cefin Campbell have made, in Hundleton, we have the opportunity with the Celtic sea for floating offshore wind. And the onshoring of the cabling and infrastructure is causing concerns to the community, who rightfully welcome the opportunity that the Celtic sea brings, but think, 'Let's think rationally, let's not dig up one road for six months to lay one cable for one project, and then, within six months, dig that same road up again for the next project. Let's think holistically how we can bring that offshore infrastructure onshore in a sustainable and sensible way that allows the community to continue with their day-to-day lives without the disruption that that brings, and also to then unlock the opportunity that the Celtic sea brings as well.' So, hopefully, the Welsh Government, in terms of the secondary infrastructure around renewables, can offer some clarity to a community like Hundleton and the excellent county councillor, Steve Alderman, there.

Again, I thank James for bringing this really important debate forward. We do have a real problem in our rural communities, and, as has been mentioned, in terms of the tourism values for communities where that is their only industry. We know the Welsh grid needs modernising, and that we have very poor or little infrastructure in Wales. And it must be extended. But have we not an opportunity here to create a network that is sustainable and manageable? We the Welsh Conservatives actively endorse the goal of achieving 100 per cent renewable electricity generation in Wales. However, we also believe this objective should be pursued without resorting to the most basic option. Pylons criss-crossing land in this day and age—we can fly man to the moon, and woman to the moon, but we're talking about going backwards in terms of putting pylons.

Indeed, the most comprehensive cost comparisons of pylons versus undergrounding is actually based on a 2012 report. Whilst the report found the cost of installing new power connections underground is always more expensive than installing overhead lines, that finding may no longer be valid. So, I believe in what Cefin Campbell said as well, and Sam Kurtz, that given technological advancements since 2012, including techniques like cable ploughing, urgent action is needed by the Welsh Government now to determine if undergrounding new electricity lines is more costly, and by how much, than using pylons.

So, I would ask the new Cabinet Secretary—and we've seen a fresher approach from the new Minister for transport than we've had before, and the tone—. I have every confidence in you now, Minister, that you will actually, now, perhaps be able to give us some reassuring news here today. Diolch.

Diolch yn fawr iawn. I'm grateful to James for bringing forward this debate. Planning is important here. We need to be able to control the scale of developments. We absolutely have to say 'yes' to undergrounding of cables, but it has to be more than just planning and deciding which pylon goes here or which wind turbine can go there; it has to be about why something is being proposed. Who is benefiting from it? Is it the community itself that's benefiting from a particular development or the multinational companies who are extracting profits from our communities? In my constituency it's solar that's the problem; thousands of acres in danger of being covered over in solar panels. I love solar—I've got my own panels—but there is a better way of doing it than losing farmland. We could be keeping the profits locally. That is so important. We have huge potential in renewables, but it has to be on our terms.

Congratulations to Rhun, who actually kept within the minute.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Economy, Energy and Welsh Language to reply to the debate—Jeremy Miles.

Diolch, Ddirprwy Lywydd, and can I thank James Evans for bringing this debate and for colleagues who gave us five instalments of Just a Minute, without any hesitation, repetition or deviation? It's a pleasure to respond to this debate as the Minister responsible for the economy and energy, and with apologies to those colleagues who are hoping for a response from Julie James, I think.

We all understand that we need to move to a low-carbon energy system if we are to achieve our net-zero targets. We've also been clear that we want to see the profits and benefits remaining in Wales in order to ensure that transition is fair and that it strengthens the economy, creates jobs, and supports social change in our communities.

Energy is crucial to our economy, and I look forward to publishing the details of my priorities for the economy over the next few days. As a Government, we are committed to improving the well-being of future generations across the whole of Wales, including in our rural communities. I want to take this opportunity, therefore, to highlight what's already been done and to announce what we will be doing in future in the area of renewable energy.

We have set ambitious targets in terms of renewable energy in Wales. They will ensure that our communities have affordable energy that is clean in the long term, and that there will be economic opportunities from the great investments made here in Wales.

The former climate change Minister set the following targets: that 100 per cent of the electricity that we use every year is renewable by 2035 and that at least 1.5 GW of the capacity of renewable energy is in local hands by 2035.

Our 'Future Energy Grids for Wales' report shows that demand for energy in 2050 in Wales will be three times as much as it is today, and therefore we need to plan now to meet the future needs of our economy and the broader needs of Wales in the future. We need to strengthen the electricity network in order for communities across Wales to be able to use low-carbon technologies such as heat pumps, solar panels and electric vehicles. We also need to link renewable energy projects together. That means that we need to transform the energy system and to do so very quickly.

Transforming to a smart flexible system that uses renewable energy will not only reduce emissions in the energy sector but will also assist in decarbonising the whole economy and will create opportunities for Wales to retain that wealth in its local communities.

In 2020, the Welsh Government published our policy statement on local ownership of energy generation, which included definitions of local ownership, shared ownership and community ownership. We published guidance for developers and stakeholders and decision makers on how to meet our expectations, including in relation to transparency and participation of all stakeholders. We also announced that we would be joining the sector in setting up a renewable developer on behalf of the people of Wales in Trydan Gwyrdd Cymru.

Looking ahead, we know we have more work to do to work with industry to retain more value in Wales as we work to meet our renewable energy targets. Building on the work from the renewable energy deep-dive, I want to work with—

Minister, could I make an intervention? You mentioned a moment ago that you'll set up the energy company here for Wales. Can you confirm or deny here today whether you've had any conversations with Green GEN Cymru or Bute Energy about taking over any of their products into public ownership?

I'm not able to confirm that. I don't have that information. Building on the work from the renewable energy deep-dive, I want to work with industry on a sector deal. A sector deal will clarify how this Government will support industry to deliver on our targets while setting out how new investment will benefit Wales. I want to work on removing barriers to retaining benefit and value in Wales and to make sure that Wales is an even more attractive place for new investment. A key barrier to new investment is grid. Upgrading Wales's grid is essential if we are to have an energy system fit for purpose in the long term, and this necessitates new infrastructure for energy networks. The 'Future Energy Grids for Wales' report provided a top-down overview of the pathways that need to be planned, developed, integrated and put into action in order for the energy system in Wales to meet our net-zero targets. It emphasised the need for us to ensure we are renewing, reviewing and planning our energy system on a whole-system basis, considering the strategic development of infrastructure. But we also need to work from the bottom up to understand the local needs and opportunities that a low carbon energy system can bring.

I'm pleased to confirm today that Welsh Government-funded work to create local area energy plans is now reaching the final phases of development. The 22 plans, drafted by local authorities in Wales, are currently being finalised, and these will shortly be taken forward into four regional energy plans and then into a national energy plan for Wales by the end of this year. This work is providing the evidence to develop an optimised system that will use the minimum level of infrastructure to operate efficiently and meet our electricity needs. While energy networks in Wales are part of the UK-wide system and the UK Government decides how it's planned and funded, the Welsh Government is using the levers available to us through planning and our ability to work directly with Ofgem and the network operators to ensure that our requirements are reflected in the UK-wide plans.

I recognise that renewable energy and connecting infrastructure proposals, and, in particular, as discussed today, the resulting landscape change, can, of course, be controversial and they require careful consideration. I want to assure you that the planning process for the determination of such projects is rigorous, robust, transparent, and, critically, affords opportunities for extensive examination of the issues raised by local communities. We understand and appreciate that communities near emerging development proposals, especially where proposals are for large-scale schemes such as windfarms and transmission infrastructure, can be seriously concerned by the scale and the nature of these schemes. Communities will be heard and decisions will be made balancing the climate emergency and the needs of communities for the long term, ensuring that projects for today are built for future generations as well.

Thank you. I'm really pleased to hear about that group you talked about, but will that include the likes of people who care for the countryside, such as the Campaign for the Protection of Rural Wales? Will they be involved in that group—people who are willing to be able to put across their views in terms of their concerns about how large-scale infrastructure will impact the countryside?

So, what the group needs to do is to help us build that understanding of the impact of the various options, taking the full extent of those impacts into account and building that deeper understanding of the possible alternatives, the possible approaches, to how we can deliver on that and devising a set of principles that will provide that basis and then drawing on that and an evidence base to support those principles. And through this approach, we will champion Wales having the infrastructure that we need for the future, but delivered in the right place and in a way that minimises cost to the public, but also protecting the environment for the future.

This is going to allow us to gain further evidence to understand the options available to deliver on our targets. There are difficult issues to balance along the way, but I'm committed to ensuring that we are able to make the most of the opportunities from clean energy, and I hope James Evans is assured that rural Wales is very much at the forefront of our thinking. We'll be looking to our rural communities to have an open dialogue on opportunities for the future, making sure the skills that we need are available in those local communities and that our supply chain can benefit in the long term from these projects, and ensuring, by doing so, a just transition.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary and that brings today's proceedings to a close.