Plenary

Item 2 is the questions to the Cabinet Secretary for Education, and the first question is from Julie Morgan.

The National Music Service for Wales is enabling every child and young person, from the age of three to 16, to benefit from opportunities to play a musical instrument, including through schools programmes such as First Experiences and Music Pathways.

Thank you very much for the answer, and I really welcome the national music service and the schools programme, but as the Cabinet Secretary will know, I've been involved in the campaign to save the junior department of the Royal Welsh College of Music and Drama, led by Rhianon Passmore and others across the Chamber, and the royal Welsh college is due to make an announcement next Friday, 19 July, on the outcome. And just to repeat, more than 400 children attend the junior conservatoire. It's the only service of its kind in Wales, providing teaching in both Welsh and English, and more than 50 per cent of the children receive bursaries because of the family income. And, of course, these children come from all backgrounds and go on to represent Wales in orchestras and theatres across the world. If the junior department is to close, Wales would be the only country in the UK not to have a dedicated junior conservatoire, meaning that our young people will be at a significant disadvantage. And, obviously, the conservatoire does fit in as the development from the national music service. I know the Cabinet Secretary met the college principal, and we did discuss it in business questions yesterday, but I wondered if she could tell us what the result of that meeting was.

Thank you very much for the supplementary, Julie. I know that the proposals to close the junior department at the Royal Welsh College of Music and Drama will have caused apprehension for all those involved. It is important to remember that the college is an autonomous body responsible for its own academic affairs. They have said that they remain fully committed to providing opportunities in music for young people and to creating pathways into professional training and will be continuing to deliver a number of areas of project work, including a series of weekend immersive workshops in music, the National Open Youth Orchestra residency and holiday courses in production arts.

I did indeed meet the college principal on Monday. I had a helpful discussion with her. I’m assured of her and her team’s commitment to youth music services, and while the financial pressure that the college is facing, in common with many universities in Wales and across the UK, is one of the factors surrounding the current proposals, there is also a real commitment to ensuring that youth activity is futureproofed, inclusive and national in scope. And while the current provision is incredibly valuable to those who benefit from it, the vast majority—almost 80 per cent—live in Cardiff and the surrounding south-east Wales area. There are, for example, no students from north Wales and Ceredigion.FootnoteLink And in terms of the bursaries, the figures I've received show that 24 per cent of young music students receive a bursary. As the Member has highlighted, there is a process that is ongoing, and the college are due to make an announcement on 19 July.

One of the things I do find striking in your response to Julie Morgan’s question is the fact that 80 per cent of musical students who use the college of music and drama live in Cardiff and the surrounding area, so when you meet with the college, do you stress the importance of providing musical education opportunities to all prospective pupils across Wales? No matter where they live, everybody should have equal access to musical education if they so wish to take part in that field of study. So, what work is the Welsh Government doing with the musical sector in order to provide equal opportunities for people all across Wales, no matter where they live?

Thank you very much, Gareth, and, yes, indeed, that was one of the issues that I discussed with the principal. If we’re talking about a national conservatoire, then it does need to be a national service, and the college is very mindful of that, and although they’re going through this process at the moment, they are considering how they can make sure the service is extended to young people in all parts of Wales.

I wouldn’t want you to think that because of what I just said about the royal college being focused in the south-east that we aren’t offering musical opportunities across the whole of Wales. Our national music service provides a range of programmes for schools across Wales, which include First Experiences in primary schools, Music Pathways in secondary schools and the wider music tuition and live music experience strands, and these initiatives are also supported by the Charanga Cymru digital music platform, which has, to date, been accessed by over 1,000 schools in Wales, and, to date, we’ve invested over £13 million in the national music service. I was able to go and join them for a celebration recently, and it’s really excellent, but you do make an important point that music should be available to children and young people across Wales.

I want to pay tribute also to Julie Morgan for her work and support for the cultural life of Wales.

So, it's important to recognise, as the Cabinet Secretary says, the groundbreaking significance of the first national music service, and in particular, I wanted to just pay tribute to Mari Pritchard for her innovative leadership. And you've mentioned some of the pan-Wales programmes that are actually rolling out very successfully.

My question today pertains obviously to that very important progression pyramid, at the forefront of the national plan for music, and the necessity of the Royal Welsh College of Music and Drama having a programme for more able and talented pupils, and many of those are from Valleys constituencies. I suppose important to note, then, that the national music service is not placed, and was never intended, to cater to that cohort and it's also clear that the Royal Northern College of Music is also a venue for some of our north-Walian pupils, and it is important that the college does roll out programmes in hubs as it can and is placed to do so.

So, will the Cabinet Secretary reassure this place that the national music plan is still viable in terms of a Saturday junior department school, and that all is being done to secure reinstatement of a proper junior department and a new future funding model suitable for a conservatoire, such as we have across the United Kingdom, which funds the junior department? And will she urgently assess how this has occurred and press the need for, yes, a junior bilingual department pipeline to the conservatoire of Wales?

So, I look forward to meeting with the Cabinet Secretary to seek to redress this situation for the distraught pupils, in terms of both their musical progress and the gap that they now have and their safeguarding issues, and for those tutors who are now looking outside of Wales—the land of song—for their future employment. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Rhianon, and obviously I'm aware of your strong commitment in this area and I’m very happy to meet you before the end of term to discuss this. As I’ve said to Julie Morgan, there is a process ongoing and the royal college will be making an announcement based on its consultations. I have been assured that they’re committed to providing continued opportunities for children and young people. The figures I’ve seen don’t suggest that there are that many children and young people using the service from the Valleys. As I said, 80 per cent are from Cardiff and the surrounding south-east Wales area. I know that they are committed to trying to make sure that there is an inclusive offer for the whole of Wales.

I agree, Cabinet Secretary, that it’s very important that we have an inclusive offer, but 50 per cent of the pupils who use this service are receiving bursaries because of their income circumstances. So, Cardiff may seem like a wealthy city—it is not. There are huge areas of deprivation and these young people are using this service. And it is a little bit difficult to see how a three-year-old would be able to travel from Pembrokeshire or north Wales in order to take part in the junior conservatoire, and I think that a great deal of rethinking needs to be done on this matter.

And I’m very disappointed to hear that the principal has refused to meet Jim Walker, who founded this service back in the middle of the 1990s, and doesn’t appear to be taking account of the proposals coming from the staff to reduce the length of the conservatoire, which would instantly save 20 per cent or more, depending on how much they reduce the actual service. Because to destroy it completely means it will no longer exist, whereas, if we could reduce the service to make it sustainable in the short term while there is a shortage of funding, it would give us the opportunity to find alternative sources of funding to enable all of these deprived young people—50 per cent of them are those on low incomes—to become professional musicians in the future, if that is what they chose to do. But, if we eliminate this, there is no conservatoire for young people in this country, and to simply say, ‘Well, just because it doesn’t exist in north Wales, we need to cut its legs off’, absolutely—. I wondered if you could tell us whether you have spoken with the Cabinet Secretary for finance, who is no longer in the Chamber, or indeed the Cabinet Secretary for culture, to come up with a solution before the plug is pulled on the wonderful work that’s been going on for nearly 20 years.

Thank you, Jenny, and, as I said to Julie Morgan, the figures I've received show that 24 per cent of young music students receive a fee bursary. And there is no question of there not being provision for young people in Wales. This is a question of—. All universities are experiencing financial difficulties, lots of them are looking at their operating models. But, as I said to Julie, this is not just a financially driven exercise; this is also about looking at that inclusivity and how those services are delivered across Wales and how they are as inclusive as possible.

There is a statutory process ongoing, and I can’t really comment on what the royal college—which meetings the royal college—have accepted or not accepted. I know that they’ve committed to responding to the consultation by 19 July after they’ve reviewed all the submissions they've received, and then there'll be a further announcement.

I do have to say to the Member, in relation to her reference to the Cabinet Secretary for finance, that we do need to consider the huge financial pressures we’re under as a Government. We went into this budget round with a £1.3 billion shortfall. That has had implications. That was out of our control, because it was due to the lack of investment by Westminster. The budget in Wales for education is still £700 million less than we would expect it to be. So, there does have to be a recognition of the really difficult financial issues we’re grappling with across the Government.

The safeguarding of young people is of paramount importance to the Welsh Government. Every school must demonstrate effective safeguarding policies, procedures and practice. When commissioning activities from another organisation, or allowing them to use premises, schools should ensure that providers have robust mechanisms in place to protect children from harm.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for that response. I have grave concerns regarding the issue of holiday clubs and the safeguarding procedures that should be in place. It has come to my attention that protocols may not always be straightforward and in place to address safeguarding when it comes to holiday clubs using school premises. Depending on the description of the holiday club, some operators are not legally obliged to register with Care Inspectorate Wales. Whilst schools can lease their premises to private holiday club providers, parents assume that the school’s own policies, including safeguarding, relate to the holiday club whilst they operate on the school premises, but, in reality, we know that isn’t the case, as the holiday clubs just lease the school buildings—a fact that many parents are not aware of. With all of this in mind, what consideration is the Welsh Government giving to tightening these loopholes and ensuring that all the necessary safeguards are put in place when it comes to our children?

Thank you very much for that question, Peter. And, as you rightly indicate, settings registered with Care Inspectorate Wales must have regard to the national minimum standards for regulated childcare, and that includes specific standards relating to safeguarding, to ensure children are safe from harm, abuse and neglect and that parents are confident all possible steps to safeguard them are taken.

The national minimum standards were updated in May 2023 to include enhanced arrangements for safeguarding training for all staff working in registered childcare and play settings. We are currently reviewing the exceptions Order, which sets out the services and settings that do not need to register with Care Inspectorate Wales or comply with the childminding and daycare regulations. And that work is being taken forward.

You may be also interested to know that we are following up on key recommendations from the ministerial review of play. That means we are currently looking at what support and guidance is provided to unregistered childcare provision in terms of safeguarding. The code of safeguarding practice is being promoted amongst play settings to raise awareness of safeguarding issues, and that code provides advice on reasonable steps that anyone offering a service or running an activity can take to create safer environments. And a review and refresh of the code of safeguarding practice has commenced. That will include information to build awareness and understanding of abuse, neglect and harm and the vital steps to take where this is happening or suspected. And we’re also going to refresh and widely promote the accompanying staying safe guide for individuals, parents and carers.

Questions from the party spokespeople now. Conservative spokesperson, Tom Giffard.

Thank you very much, Llywydd. Good afternoon, Cabinet Secretary.

Cabinet Secretary, we’ve seen many Ministers in your role try to reverse the slide in academic performance in our education system in Wales after 25 years of this Welsh Labour Government. Time and again, we’ve seen Welsh Government Ministers launch new curricula, strategies, plans, all aimed to take Wales from the sad position where we are the bottom of UK-wide Programme for International Student Assessment league tables in every subject every time we've been assessed. But the evidence tells us that all of them have failed, so what confidence can you give the Senedd that you will succeed where your predecessors haven’t?

Thank you very much, Tom. I know that you weren’t here last week for my statement on curriculum reform update, where I set out some of the measures that we’re going to take to ensure that our ground-breaking Curriculum for Wales achieves for all learners. I firmly believe that our approach through the new curriculum is the right one: a purpose-led curriculum to engage all our children and young people in relevant learning, but I have acknowledged that some schools need more support with that. Last week, I set out the kinds of measures that we would be taking to ensure that we support schools who need additional help with that. That doesn’t mean restricting or stopping the schools who are flying with this; it means providing additional support around things like curriculum design, assessment, progression, and also putting literacy and numeracy on a statutory framework, and that’s all going to be part of an attainment plan that we’re pulling together as a Government. I’ve been clear that raising attainment is a top priority for me. The First Minister has been clear on that as well. I recognise we’ve got lots of work to do. It’s not just about PISA, as I said last week; we need to make sure that our attainment is aligned to our new curriculum. But this is a top priority for all of us.

Thank you. I’m glad you mentioned your new guidance, because that was my next question. In launching that new guidance you admitted, and I quote, that

'leaders and practitioners need additional detail and support to help them make the most of those opportunities, particularly in areas like progression and assessment.'

End quote. But it does beg the question as to why that detail wasn’t present in the first place, Cabinet Secretary. We know that some of these changes have placed a huge amount of pressure and workload on our teaching staff as well. The NASUWT stated in an interview on Monday they were hearing real concerns of teachers leaving the profession because of the stress, pressure and lack of support they’re having to deal with as a result of the changes made by this Welsh Government. In some surveys, up to 80 per cent of teachers feel this way, and that of course worsens the teacher recruitment crisis in the sector and makes it even more unlikely you’ll be able to succeed in turning around our record low PISA results, where those predecessors have failed. So, do you accept that mistakes were made in the initial implementation of the curriculum and that they have placed an unfair pressure on our teaching staff?

Well, it does feel a bit like groundhog day, because I have answered a lot of these questions last week when you weren’t here, but I’m very happy to go over this again for your benefit. Minimising teacher workload is a priority for this Government. We’ve got a strategic workload group set up with various workstreams underneath it, which our trade union partners are all involved in. I’ve been very clear since coming into post that I recognise we are asking a lot of our school practitioners. But there is also a huge enthusiasm for our new curriculum in Wales, and especially in primary schools. The evidence suggests that lots of schools are really flying with it. It does take teaching and learning to a high level. It is a different way of doing things. Teachers told us, when we were developing the new curriculum, that they wanted that agency and that respect as practitioners to be able to do their job as educators, and that’s what we’ve tried to give them. But, since coming in to post, I have recognised what schools have said to me, that some of them do need more support with that. I think that’s particularly the case at secondary level, where schools are still very much focused on the current exam system that we’ve got, and we have said that we will put that into place. I actually think the new curriculum is one of the answers to the recruitment and retention challenges we’re facing with schools. This isn’t about standing in front of kids transmitting information, this is genuinely educating kids, it’s assessing them in a person-centred way and ensuring that every learner is able to meet their potential. I’m not a teacher, but I think, if I was, I would find that very exciting and appealing.

You've mentioned it twice, so I'll address it: I was not here last week, and I'm very grateful to Joel James for covering for me last week, but I did prepare the remarks Joel James made on my behalf and I've reviewed your responses. So, you don't need to bring me up to date, Cabinet Secretary. I am more concerned about bringing our students up to speed with their competitors in the rest of the United Kingdom, and now there's clearly a problem in the burden that the curriculum is putting on our teaching staff, and I think you acknowledged it, but I'm not entirely sure, and those union surveys paint that bleak picture too. But what also concerns me is that the Welsh Labour Government isn't following the evidence in terms of the approach that actually raises those PISA scores and those standards. The Institute for Fiscal Studies report into the Welsh Government's new curriculum said

'declines have happened in essentially every country that has adopted such skills-based curricula'.

And yet that's exactly the model the Welsh Labour Government has chosen to adopt by prioritising a skills-based approach over the knowledge-based learning approach we know that works. Indeed, countries like New Zealand have had to backtrack on the same approach, forced to move away from a skills-based curriculum because the evidence clearly showed that it was not improving educational standards.

Cabinet Secretary, we all want our young people to get the best possible start in life, so they can achieve their potential as they leave school and move on to the world of work. But, to do it, we need to follow the evidence about what works. And yet, almost everywhere that this approach has been tried, it has been proven to fail. So, why is it that the Welsh Government is pursuing this approach over one we know that works?

Well, you constantly raise the IFS report, and, as I keep having to explain, the statistics about PISA that were highlighted in the IFS report relate to children and young people who have not been through the new curriculum. We're also doing everything we can to make sure that we do learn from other countries where they have gone down the road of curriculum reform. I answered questions last week to Cefin Campbell about how we are watching what's gone on with the curriculum for excellence in Scotland and making sure that we avoid falling into some of those pitfalls, which included providing too much detail to schools.

I think we have to remember as well that it is early days for curriculum reform. It is still being rolled out in all our schools. We've got a formative evaluation, which is ongoing, which is updating us as to how things are going. The evidence from Estyn suggests that primary schools are doing really good work with the curriculum. Yes, some schools need more support, but there is good support for the new curriculum. I think it's what's needed to ensure our children have that purpose-led, engaging education in Wales, and we are committed to doing what is necessary to make sure that it is delivered effectively in schools.

The Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Cefin Campbell.

Diolch, Llywydd. As you know, Cabinet Secretary, the latest financial allocations for Welsh universities were released yesterday, which show a significant reduction once again. Now, here are some of the figures, just to shed light on the very real situation that they are facing: Aberystwyth University, a reduction of £1.1 million; Swansea University, £2.4 million; Cardiff, £3.7 million; Bangor, £0.6 million; Trinity St David's, £0.8 million. As we know, these funding cuts are just not only numbers on a balance sheet; they represent a severe blow to our universities' ability to provide high-quality education and support to our students. Now, these cuts will force universities to make difficult decisions, potentially leading to staff redundancies and reduced investment in essential resources and facilities. We also risk losing vital academic programmes and research initiatives that not only enrich the students' education, but also contribute significantly to the economy and wider society. So, given that the university sector is being battered and bruised from every angle, on that basis, do you agree with Cardiff University's assessment that the funding model for our universities is broken?

Thank you very much, Cefin, for that question. I do want to recognise that I know this is a really challenging time for higher education institutions not just in Wales, but across the UK. While the HEFCW funding allocations are difficult for institutions, those reductions in higher education budgets were published in the final budget in March, and I know that the sector has been planning in the context of constrained finances. Institutions have also felt the impact of changes to student visas and inflationary pressures, and that's a UK-wide issue.

Just to assure the Member, I do meet regularly with sector leaders and have had ongoing, constructive discussions about how to manage sector stability, and I do appreciate the university leaders are taking tough decisions to manage their budgets. Indeed, I met Universities Wales and Professor Paul Boyle yesterday to discuss this. I think it is important to also recognise that Welsh Government funding via HEFCW is just 10 per cent of the total funding that goes to the sector of Welsh providers. We're also seeing pressures under, as I said, overseas student fees, cost of living and reductions in other, outside funding that universities receive. For example, they took a big hit on their European funds. But I do recognise the pressures that they're under. That was also one of the reasons why we agreed to the increase in student fees to £9,250, and I'm continuing to have that dialogue. I've also asked for an early meeting with the new Labour Government's education team so that we can talk about the pressures affecting higher education across the UK.

Thank you very much. Just two points following on from your response: one, you have an opportunity now, as there is a new Government in London, to, hopefully, influence and change this visa programme that has certainly had an impact on the ability of overseas students to come and study here in Wales. The second point, of course, is that the greatest burden will fall on our students, because it's inevitable that there may be an increase in tuition fees and also a reduction in the services provided to students.

But the risk is that we will see more job losses happening. Already, universities have talked about redundancies, both voluntary and compulsory. Aberystwyth spoke recently about the loss of some 200 jobs, and Swansea around 190 jobs. So, no university wants to take these decisions, but, in terms of the continued viability of these universities for the future, they have no other choice but to make these difficult decisions. Do you accept, therefore, that job losses are inevitable because of these cuts, and, if so, what plans will you put in place in order to mitigate the damaging impacts that these cuts in our universities will have on the local economy and on jobs directly?

Thank you, Cefin, and you're absolutely right that the whole approach to immigration of the previous UK Government and the very unwelcoming climate that has been created have had an impact, a major impact, on overseas student recruitment, and that has caused very significant difficulties for universities in Wales, and we're not out of the woods on that yet. The migration advisory committee review obviously came out with favourable findings, and I'm looking to have an early discussion about the new UK Government's response to the MAC review, because we've got an opportunity with overseas students to try and pull this back before it becomes very much more challenging.

As far as I'm aware, the universities have had voluntary redundancies so far. Obviously, all redundancies are difficult. I'm being kept regularly updated with the position in our universities, but I'm not aware that any are compulsory at the moment. What I said yesterday to Universities Wales is that we need to keep in close contact on this and for me to follow what's going on so that we can respond appropriately, but I recognise this is a challenging time. Our budget reduction was made due to the huge pressures that we faced as a Government, in our budget. So, it's been a difficult time and, as a result, a lot of the universities are reviewing their operating procedures, but I will keep Members informed.

I understand that your cuts are as a result of the Tory cutbacks over many years, but now is an opportunity to change that around, and I'm hoping, in a year's time, when we have further questions on this, that the situation will have changed. But, your shortsighted approach in the meantime means that the role of higher education as a driver of economic growth and social mobility will be badly affected, because our universities are hubs of innovation and development and underfunding them is a disservice to our future as a country. If we believe in a robust and well-funded higher education system that can deliver world-class education and research, then investment must be at the heart of that to create a better future for Wales, because, if we don't, it means putting Wales at a competitive disadvantage, as other regions continue to invest in their higher education systems. Plaid Cymru will always fight for the resources and support that our universities need to thrive, and we call on the Welsh Government to step up, as well, to fulfil its responsibility to protect and promote higher education. So, is it your Government's policy to let our higher education sector wither, or will you finally step in and support this sector in crisis?

Thank you, Cefin. As I said in my first answer to you, Welsh Government funding provided via HEFCW is barely 10 per cent of the total sector funding for Welsh providers. The challenges that they're facing are due to a range of factors, such as overseas student funding, changes in commercial revenues and research income. We want to do what we can to support our university sector, which is why we are maintaining such a close dialogue with them and why we took the decision to raise the student tuition fees following the budget last year.

You also referred in your previous question to students paying the price. I wanted to remind the Member that our student financial support package in Wales is the most generous in the UK. So, even though tuition fees will be going up, that will be covered by our student financial support offer. So, within the really difficult financial constraints we are facing, we are doing our utmost to support our university sector.

I think it's also important to remember that post 16 is not just about universities, and this is also about our further education and making sure that we hold on to those children and young people, as well. We've got Medr coming onstream now. That gives us an opportunity to have a more strategic approach across the sector to post-16 education, not just in universities and colleges, but also in our school sixth forms.

Question 3 [OQ61406] is withdrawn. Question 4, Laura Anne Jones.

The responsibility for the employment of teachers lies with local authorities and governing bodies; Welsh Ministers are not able to intervene. Although local authorities and governing bodies are responsible for school staffing, we continue to monitor the situation across Wales and work with schools to minimise the impact on learners.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. That's quite a disappointing response. All of us in this Chamber would agree that teachers form a vital part of society, educating the next generation of professionals who will be responsible for the future of our country. Last year, an alarmingly high number of teachers in Wales faced redundancy, whilst schools in Wales saw the worst PISA results in the UK. I know that you don't put a lot of weight on those PISA results, but they are vitally important and show us as the poor man of the UK.

Just from some of the data that was released in my region of South Wales East, at least 46 members of staff were made redundant last year due to headteachers struggling with rising bills or cut budgets. And this resulted, of course, in larger class sizes, cutting the curriculum offer for exams, and combining year groups, as well as, of course, the effect on ALN learners. Teaching assistants, who despite being underpaid are invaluable, are often the first to go when budgets are tight, so they are, of course, falling by the wayside. Meanwhile, there is a continuing recruitment crisis in some subject areas. Can the Cabinet Secretary reassure this Chamber that she is looking into addressing this issue and has a plan in place, alongside those LAs, to bolster teaching assistants in classes, and to ensure that there is enough money in school budgets for more teachers, not fewer?

Thank you, Laura Anne, for that supplementary. As I said in my original answer, the employment of school staff is a matter for local authorities. Employing bodies must ensure that sufficient, suitable staff are employed or engaged to work at the school to provide education appropriate for the ages, aptitudes and needs of the pupils. We've just had the figures for the amount of money that local government has invested in schools this year, and actually that's very encouraging, as it shows a 7 per cent increase, which I'm very heartened by, given the financial pressures we are all under.

I do find it quite extraordinary, really, the lack of self-awareness for attacking us on financial pressures faced by the sector when our budget, when we went into this budget round, was worth £1.3 billion less because of your Conservative Government in Westminster. Our current budget is worth £700 million less because of your Conservative Government in Westminster. Despite that, we took the really difficult decisions to protect our health service, our social care service and local government to fund our schools. I hope that now we have a new Labour Government in Westminster that values our public services and that values our children's future—it's not going to happen overnight because of the legacy that they have inherited from 14 years of Tory Government—that we can start to see that investment in our public services. You'll be aware that we had a manifesto commitment both at the UK Labour Party level and here in Wales to prioritise investment in our teachers.

There's no doubt that the situation with teacher numbers is critical, particularly so in the Welsh-medium sector, where the situation is even worse. The fact that Aberystwyth University has decided not to continue with its teacher training course is only going to make things worse, particularly for Welsh-medium schools in the Dwyfor Meirionnydd area that I represent, for example, which are reliant on Aberystwyth University in providing those teachers for our schools. So, what discussions have you had with Aberystwyth University on that issue, and what will you do to ensure that more Welsh-medium teachers will come through our system?

Thank you, Mabon. You'll be aware that the decision by Aberystwyth University to withdraw from initial teacher education was following the independent process that is undertaken for us by the Education Workforce Council. That's not something that we do in the Government, and Aberystwyth University decided not to appeal against that. Our efforts were focused then on trying to support the people who were registered to do their ITE training at Aberystwyth—from memory, the numbers were about 21 people—to make sure that they had alternative provision.

You do make a very important point about the need for there to be a really good supply of Welsh-medium teachers. That's not just for Welsh-medium schools—you know, in my constituency I see schools struggling, and it's vital that we have that. That's why we've got our Welsh in education strategic plans, and the new ones will be coming in for me to have a look at this month. You'll be aware that my colleague Jeremy Miles will be introducing a Welsh language education Bill very shortly, which will put in some statutory duties around increasing the numbers of Welsh speakers, and that will require a step change in our approach to the Welsh-medium workforce.

The additional learning needs statutory framework secures additional learning provision for ALN learners underpinned by a whole-school approach to mental health and well-being. The Curriculum for Wales is designed to break down barriers for all learners, giving teachers more flexibility to best meet the individual needs of each child.

Thank you for that, but I have to say that I'm seeing more and more parents of children with additional learning needs contacting me these days very concerned about the cuts that are happening—we are seeing a loss of one-to-one support in the classroom across Wales at the moment—and, very often too, I have people telling me that they can't access places in schools for those with learning needs.

You will know that the Additional Learning Needs and Education Tribunal (Wales) Act 2018 was supposed to address and tackle many of the challenges that we've heard about in the past, but instead of having more pupils getting an early diagnosis, and as a result being given the support that they need, it appears to me that more are finding it difficult if not impossible to get the diagnosis that they need and, in light of that, the support that they deserve. Indeed, even if they do get a diagnosis, they very often then contact me telling me that the support needed isn't available. So, why do you think that that's happening, and, indeed, what are you as a Government doing to put that right?

Thank you very much, Llyr. Just to start by saying that children and young people should not need a diagnosis to receive additional learning provision. We've been very clear with schools and local authorities about that. We've also invested very heavily in our implementation of ALN, which is still an ongoing process. There are still children transferring from the former special educational needs process to the ALN process. So, in this financial year, there's been £56 million spent on ALN implementation and ALN provision in both pre- and post-16 education, and increased resources in schools to implement the system and lead whole-school approaches to embed inclusive education. And, as I've said to other Members, we also protected the core local government settlement, which funds schoools.

There is more work to be done around implementation, and I've been very clear about that, when I went before the committee and when I responded in debate here. There is some really good practice in Wales, but there is more that we need to do to ensure consistent implementation across Wales, and that's something that I'm working on at the moment. That includes the need to ensure better joint working between education and health, which you probably remember from the scrutiny was one of the core issues we wanted to improve when the legislation was passed. So, there's more work to do. We've had encouraging feedback from Estyn, and they're currently conducting another thematic review. We've got an ongoing evaluation as well of the ALN system, but, as I said to the Chamber previously, I want to drive a programme of work to ensure consistent implementation of the ALN system across Wales, as well as ironing out some of the legal issues that have arisen with the code of practice and the legislation.

Our sustainable communities for learning programme is fully aligned with the town-centre position statement and 'town centre first' principles when considering new schools and colleges. The location and links to town and city centres are considered key to improving access and supporting increased footfall.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. Albany Primary School is a really important community school in the heart of my constituency, with excellent leadership, a dedicated staff team and a governing body who've not let the physical state of the building get in the way of the quality of teaching and learning. But this Victorian school is causing a huge amount of challenge to the local authority who are struggling to fix the roof and other essential repairs. The pupils have had to put up with three years of scaffolding in their playground, which is already tiny and contains almost no green space. Millions have already been spent on this building and it's still not fit for purpose.

How can the twenty-first century schools programme be applied to inner-city schools like Albany, which continue to serve a community where there's a considerable population of young people, but there is no spare land to build on, unless we were to decant them onto a park and then move them back in afterwards? What would be your proposals for a school like this, which can't be unique to only this part of Cardiff?

Thank you, Jenny, and it's great to hear about the positive work that you described at Albany school. The sustainable communities for learning programme supports a wide range of projects and is about more than providing new-build schools, and we have delivered major refurbishment projects to improve existing facilities, particularly where there's limited opportunity to rebuild. The programme is fully aligned with our community-focused schools policy to ensure the projects are delivered in collaboration with families and the communities they serve, to maximize the benefits of our investment.

It is, of course, for local authorities, though, to be responsible for developing their investment priorities as they are best placed to understand the needs of their communities. The programme is also supported by a range of supplementary capital grants to invest in our schools that are not included within the programme, and over the last three years we've allocated £60 million in capital funding to support the delivery of community-focused schools, and £5.4 million of this funding has been allocated to Cardiff Council. We allocated £108 million to support repairs and maintenance across the school estate, £11.8 million of which was allocated to Cardiff Council. But it is the local authority that's responsible for developing their investment priorities as they’re best placed to understand the needs of their communities.

Following the publication of the revised statutory guidance on school uniform and appearance policies, governing bodies were asked to review their existing school uniform policies. I am continuing to raise awareness of the statutory guidance with schools.

Thank you. As you will know, while the guidance is statutory, the schools don't have to implement it. It's still optional—it's guidance, rather than there being an obligation for governors to implement the policy. This means that some schools are still insisting on a school uniform that disregards the guidance, such as by demanding logos on everything, having an expensive blazer as part of the school uniform, or insisting on a coat of a specific colour. This all contravenes the guidance. This creates great financial pressure for families, especially those who may have two or three children in school, and the school uniform grant does not go far enough if the guidance is not followed. There is not enough money available for them to be able to buy everything that's needed. So, how do you therefore intend to strengthen the policies to ensure that schools not only consider the guidance, but implement it fully? Do we need to make it statutory?

Thank you, Heledd. Well, the guidance is statutory already, so schools and governing bodies do have to have regard to the guidance. The amended statutory guidance states that branded uniform, including the use of logos, should not be a compulsory requirement for pupils. It also includes the advice that schools shouldn't have single-supplier arrangements with particular contractors. I have just sent a letter out to all schools in Wales to remind them that the guidance is statutory and to remind them of the impact on families where they are struggling financially. As you know, we've got our school essentials grant, which is not a small sum of money. We've invested £13 million in that in this financial year.

We're also doing lots of work around poverty proofing. In the letter I've sent to schools, I've also reminded them of the work that Children in Wales has available for them to support them in that. So, the guidance is statutory and I do expect schools to observe that guidance.

In my oral statement to the Senedd on 14 May, I stated good mental health will be the platform on which our education system will be built. The Curriculum for Wales, together with our statutory guidance on a whole-school approach to emotional and mental well-being, support this ambition.

This question was prepared for me by a young person in Caerphilly who attends school and is in sixth form. She described how a member of her family has struggled adapting to secondary school due to social anxiety, and as a result started regularly refusing to go to school, which made her attendance drop below 50 per cent. The parent has regularly met and worked with the school and the local authority to try different approaches to encourage her child into school. Sometimes, this has helped in the short term, but overall, it hasn't. The parent has been threatened by the school with prosecution, despite doing all they can to try and improve the situation. Does the Cabinet Secretary therefore believe that there is more the Welsh Government could do to allow schools to provide more support for children and families struggling with mental health and attendance issues, particularly before it gets to the point of fines being imposed and parents finding themselves at the distressing point of risking prosecution?

Thank you very much, Hefin. I'm very sorry to hear about the difficulties that the young person you referred to is having. I'm sure you recognise that mental health is a top priority for me and for the Government. That's why, despite our financial constraints, we've continued to protect funding for our whole-school approach for mental health, which we are investing around £13 million in this year. The Minister for Mental Health and Early Years and I are continuing to drive progress on that.

I do recognise, though, that there is more work to do. I think it's important to be clear that we've said that fines should only be used as a last resort. It's much more important to work with families, and fixed penalty notices should be the final part of a wider package of intervention and support strategies to improve attendance, and that should include support with mental health and well-being in line with the statutory framework we've put in place, underpinning our whole-school approach to mental health. Children do need to see school as a safe and welcoming place.

I should also say that we have seen an increase in the numbers of children and young people who are having difficulties attending school due to what we call EBSA, emotionally-based school avoidance, and our Welsh Government guidance on that asks schools to make sure that they've completed the assessments and take a graduated response to EBSA that involves early diagnosis, a whole-school approach, communication with families, and building on strong relationships in schools.

Finally, question 9, Joyce Watson.

The Eco-Schools programme runs in 75 countries with almost 50,000 schools engaged, making it the largest environmental education programme in the world. In Wales, approximately 90 per cent of schools have engaged with the Eco-Schools programme, with 60 per cent of schools having achieved the green flag accreditation. In this, the thirtieth year of our involvement, Wales has one of the highest participation rates in the world.

It's a really good news story, Cabinet Secretary. The Eco-Schools programme is hugely impressive, and you've already taken some of the information I was going to give back to you—that 90 per cent of schools have taken part. But I think it's really heartening to see so many young people being given the opportunity to learn and take an interest in environmental issues in their schools and communities. They really get it and they really enjoy it. They learn in an outdoor space, sometimes without even realising they are learning, and they take it home as well. I think for a small nation, it is pretty impressive that we have the best outcome in the world in terms of participants per population in this programme. What I'm asking of you today, Cabinet Secretary, is if you'd join me in thanking all those people who've made this possible within our schools, within organisations like Keep Wales Tidy, and all those individuals and pupils. It's always nice to end a session on a good news story, and this is a fantastic news story.

Thank you very much, Joyce. I wholeheartedly agree with your comments and would like to take this opportunity to place on record my heartfelt thanks to all the staff, teachers, pupils, and organisations like Keep Wales Tidy, that represent Wales's commitment to leaving our planet in a better condition for future generations. I was lucky enough recently to experience this first-hand from the young people from some Mid and West Wales primary schools that Eluned Morgan had invited in for her Climate Challenge Cymru Earthshot event. I was blown away by how engaged the children were. I think, as adults, we can all learn a lot from them in terms of their enthusiasm for really getting to grips with this environmental agenda. Thank you very much for those positive comments about the Eco-Schools programme.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary.

Item 3 is the 90-second statements. We only have one statement today, and that will be from Cefin Campbell.

Thank you very much. As a resident of the Tywi valley, perhaps I should declare an interest in boasting about the incomparable beauty of the area, from the summit of Garn Goch to the incredible castles, Dinefwr park and the botanical gardens. However, it is my pleasure today to celebrate one of the area's other attractions, namely Aberglasney Gardens near Llangathen, which are stone's throw, as it happens, from where I live, as the site celebrates 25 years since the gardens were restored and opened to the public.

There is ancient history associated with this wonderful estate, dating back to the middle ages, with references made in Lewys Glyn Cothi's poetry at the turn of the sixteenth century, where he refers to its 'nine green gardens'. Over the centuries, the gardens and the manor house have been home to many colorful characters, from dignitaries to poets, artists, great drinkers and teetotalers, and even the occasional ghost, if local stories are to be believed. Despite the fact that the estate faded into oblivion in the twentieth century, the fortunes of the gardens and the estate were transformed in the late 1990s, with the start of the restoration work, which was broadcast to homes across Britain on the BBC's A Garden Lost in Time programme.

Now, the manor house, the glorious gardens and the incomparable Elizabethan cloister garden are one of Carmarthenshire's main attractions. So, warm congratulations to the garden, its staff and volunteers on reaching this notable milestone, and I wish every success to the garden with the celebrations and to the future.

Item 4 is a motion to note the annual report on the Senedd Commission's official languages scheme for 2023-24. I call on Adam Price to move the motion.

Thank you very much, Dirprwy Lywydd. I’m pleased to present the Senedd Commission's annual report on its official languages scheme for 2023-24 before the Senedd today. Members of the Senedd will be aware that the Senedd Commission is required, in accordance with the National Assembly for Wales (Official Languages) Act 2012, to submit an annual report on its work.

This year, the official languages team has undertaken a survey of Welsh language skills across the staff of the Senedd Commission. The results of this year's survey are positive and an indication that the decision to introduce a linguistic courtesy system in the fifth Senedd has created solid foundations, and, as I state in my foreword to the report, they show the potential that the institution has to continue to aim even higher for the future. The team has also started analysing the results of the survey, together with the language plans of the individual services. This will allow us to monitor bilingual capacity across the institution and offer assurance that we are capable of providing first-class bilingual services.

Last year, I undertook to consider the support available to Senedd Members to enable them to use Welsh in proceedings. It's important that we support Members, whether they be new Welsh speakers or fluent Welsh speakers, to be confident in using their skills regularly, and that the conditions and support are also in place for the staff who support them in preparing for Senedd business. However, the data in this report show a similar pattern to last year in terms of Welsh contributions and in terms of its use in writing within our parliamentary administration. My priority, therefore, is to put steps in place to try to restore performance to previous levels in the first instance, which will hopefully result in more use of the Welsh language orally and in writing in committees and in Plenary meetings, and when introducing business.

I am proud to report to the Senedd that we have begun to tackle this in earnest, and I would like to thank the members of the chairs’ forum for the support received for the initial steps at a meeting on Monday. This coming Monday, I will be discussing a paper with my fellow Commissioners on this and other matters relating to the Welsh language with regard to our work in the short, medium and long term when looking towards the seventh Senedd.

Senedd reform offers us an exciting opportunity to look back at what has been achieved since the passing of the official languages Act, and to look towards the future, challenging ourselves to ask what more needs to be achieved and what our ambition is during the next chapter. It will be an opportunity to ensure that our ways of working, our ethos, and our legal framework guarantee that the use and status of the Welsh language as an equal language is central and prominent in the work of the Senedd, and that we're accountable to all of the citizens of Wales for the role that we are playing in the national cross-party effort to plan a future for the language.

Before closing, I would like to draw Members' attention to a few successes that provide further proof of our ethos and culture as an inclusive institution. The report includes a few comments from individuals who have taken advantage of the learning Welsh provision available to Members, support staff and Commission staff. On this point, maybe I should declare an interest given that my brother Adrian is a member of the tutoring team.

It's a pleasure to hear about the way that the lessons have brought people together and created a sense of belonging while we are still trying to understand our new ways of working, which often include more remote working. Hearing conversations in Welsh is an integral part of the working day, with those who receive lessons eager to use their skills and provide first-class bilingual services. Many thanks, therefore, to all the staff of the Commission for their efforts and dedication.

Finally, I would like to thank you, Senedd Members, for your support and willingness to engage with us to discuss and improve. We will continue to listen to your views and comments in order to ensure that we maintain the highest possible standards and continually look for ways to improve. I look forward very much to the questions that you have. Thank you.

May I thank the Member for moving this motion this afternoon and for the points that he has made? I only have a few points to make this afternoon. I'll start by saying that we as Welsh Conservatives understand the importance of the Welsh language, and also the importance that we as a Senedd have as an exemplar for people across Wales in terms of what you can do through the medium of Welsh and using Welsh day to day. In terms of Welsh language levels, I think the main thing for me was confidence. I know the words, but I don’t always have the confidence to speak Welsh. I think the Dirprwy Lywydd might be in a similar position to me in terms of the language. The most important thing I can say over the three years that I’ve been here is that I’ve developed the confidence to use the Welsh language more and more, and I think the Senedd is responsible for that, so I’m very grateful to the staff and everyone else who has assisted in doing that.

In reading the report, there were a few points that I wanted to pick up on. I welcome the fact that, in terms of the survey you mentioned, we've seen an increase in the number of people at levels 1 to 3. Now, that is something that's to be welcomed. And you say in your report too—and I only have the English version in front of me, so there's a slight irony there, but you do say:

'This indicates that the decision to introduce Courtesy-level Welsh in the last Senedd has provided a solid baseline on which to build'.

So, could I ask you what exactly you will do next? You've delivered the courtesy level, you've got those initial skills in place, but what are the next steps and how will you build on that?

Another thing that you've seen is some flatlining in terms of levels 4 and 5 in terms of those who can speak Welsh. So, there's perhaps more to be done there. So, what do you see as the challenge in that regard for the future in order to get those numbers up too?

You also mentioned the next Senedd. We know that there will be more Members—we'll be up to 96—and that means that we will have to do things completely differently next time. There are a few points here: this is going to put pressure on our staff because there will be more people wanting to use the Welsh language, so that will place more pressure on the services available, and that's hugely important. So, what assessment have you made of that? And what does the Senedd need to do in the future so that they can cope with that and ensure that the service is still in place—the service that we've used to date?

Also, I wanted to say that when you come to the Senedd for the first time following your election, it's something of a whirlwind—there's a great deal happening all at once. You have to set up your IT, you have to sort out your staff and jobs and so on and so forth. So, how do we ensure that newly elected Members know what's available in terms of the lessons and so on and how they can use the Welsh language, and that that isn't lost in some welcome pack and that people only discover it a year or two years into their term?

The final point that I wanted to make: there was a nice line in your foreword—a good question—and I wanted to throw that question back at you. You say:

'I want us to challenge each other and ask: what more needs to be done to ensure that we can engage fully and without hindrance in the business and work of the Senedd in Welsh, as is currently possible in English? How can we ensure that Welsh is truly equal to English in our proceedings and in the administration of the Senedd? And most importantly, how are we accountable to the people we serve—the citizens of Wales—for our performance and play our part in the national, cross-party effort to plan the future of the Welsh language?'

So, I'll throw that one back at you: as the Commissioner responsible for official languages, what's your assessment of the answer to that question that you yourself posed in your report? Thank you.

You had only just started in this role a year ago when we asked you some questions. And obviously, there was a discussion at that time around the disappointment around some of the barriers that we face in terms of the use of the Welsh language.

There are great things to celebrate here and I think that we have to note that, and it's great to hear Tom acknowledging that. And I also know, having been in committees where I'm often perhaps the most confident Welsh speaker there, it's great to see other Members, such as Hefin David here clearly using the Welsh language when he is able to, but also supportive in that regard. But it's often that there's only one confident Welsh speaker in a committee and that then has an impact on what kind of language the committee does use. So, I was pleased to hear you talk about the Chairs' forum.

One of the things that does concern me often is how we support the staff who support us within the Commission to feel confident to draft reports in Welsh, and how, then, do we use technology to enable other Members to understand that report? There's always this idea that everything has to be in English first, and then, when it comes to the final report, there will be a Welsh version. Well, it's very important, I think, that we do empower those who want to work through the medium of Welsh to be able to draft through the medium of Welsh. And we're very lucky now, and I'm not talking about Google Translate—there are many other different ways to empower staff to feel that they can draft through the medium of Welsh. So, that’s one of the elements I’d like some clarity on, if I may.

One thing that would be beneficial, I think, is understanding the current barriers Members feel, and I was going to ask whether you had considered undertaking a survey of the elected Members to understand their use of the Welsh language. Certainly, after seeing last year’s report, I’ve tried my level best to introduce everything in my name through the medium of Welsh—not always, sometimes there’s an urgent issue that needs to be submitted and staff members need to do that on my behalf. But, certainly, we as a group—. The majority of our motions and amendments are tabled in Welsh, and that does stem from the fact that this report showed clearly last year how deficient some of our processes were, and maybe there was a certain amount of laziness and that we do need a kick to remind us to do that.

I think that there's a challenge too—there are many organisations who contact us as Senedd Members asking us to table questions on a variety of subjects. I would say that there’s a challenge for them to provide those questions bilingually, and that it’s not just up to us—if they want to engage with the Senedd, they need to consider that there are two official languages, and that both languages are used.

I’m delighted to speak on this issue, or to try to do so at least. I’d like to say 'thank you very much' to my Welsh language tutor, Jordan. He is an excellent and enthusiastic tutor and he’s helped me a great deal with my Welsh language skills. I usually have Welsh lessons in the Senedd online every Friday. Last summer Jordan arranged additional lessons for me, and last month I took my first Welsh language examination, and this summer, I have a workbook that I’ll be using.

I’m learning Welsh because I’d like to use more Welsh, both in the Chamber and in the community too. When I was in school in Flint, I studied Welsh but never took examinations. I restarted learning when I was living in London. My father’s family are from the Ffynnongroyw area, which is currently in my constituency. My grandfather was a first-language Welsh speaker, but my grandmother was from Liverpool. Unfortunately, they didn’t speak Welsh to each other, and my father never learnt Welsh. As a result, had my father been a Welsh speaker, then he wouldn’t have met my mother at Holywell Grammar School. [Laughter.]

So, I’m delighted to be learning Welsh, and I try to use as much Welsh as I can when possible. I support the Welsh Government’s programme of having a million Welsh speakers by 2050, and the official languages scheme also supports that. Thank you.

Thank you very much, and I, I’m sure on behalf of everyone in this Chamber, congratulate Hannah on the progress that she’s made with the Welsh language in a very short period of time. So, huge congratulations to you.

I'd like to congratulate the Commissioner for putting a clear focus and emphasis on the Welsh language at the beginning of the report. But I do have some concerns about how the Welsh language is being promoted and used in this institution. The report mentions cases where it was not possible for individuals to use their language of choice, where correspondence was not sent bilingually. I would venture that the report is referring to the Welsh language in that sense, and not the English language. But 'language of choice' is the term used, and that's different to all comparable institutions and other democratic bodies in Wales. This Senedd operates under a legal framework that places an emphasis on promoting the language of choice, rather than promoting the Welsh language. But everything that we know about linguistic planning in Wales, and indeed Wales’s national language policy, emphasises the promotion of the Welsh language.

Unfortunately, the current framework, which leads to the promotion of the language of choice rather than the Welsh language, is undermining those efforts and is a very odd thing to be doing, in truth. So, I would like to get your response to that. Is it time for us to start thinking about changing that, and that the Senedd joins the same policy and legal framework as every other public body? That is in order to see the Welsh language growing in this institution. Because we have seen a reduction. Heledd Fychan has mentioned the reduction in the number of written questions submitted in Welsh, which has fallen from 4 per cent to 3 per cent, and then to 1 per cent this year. Oral and topical questions also show the same pattern, and there has been a further decline in the use of Welsh in Plenary meetings.

Some specific points arising from the report: we would question whether the figure of 34 documents prepared internally by committees in English only is correct. I think it would be much higher, because draft reports by committees, which are numerous, are usually still prepared in English only, and are then translated at the final stage, namely just before publication.

In terms of the standards commissioner, I can say from experience that I and staff members whom I know about have had to engage with the commissioner verbally in English. Under the current legal framework, I don't think that there is a right to use the Welsh language. We need to look at the capacity of the office of the standards commissioner to be able to work in Welsh without having to rely on translation, and whether it might be necessary to add to that capacity. Discussing sensitive issues is so much more effective if you do so in your mother tongue directly with a staff member rather than through a translator.

I call on Adam Price to reply to the debate.

Thank you very much, Dirprwy Lywydd, and I'm very grateful to all Members who have contributed to this debate. As one Rhydaman boy to another, I would say, Tom, that your Welsh is excellent. It's something that I have to tell myself as I look in the mirror. It's very important that we develop confidence amongst each other, and in all the linguistic diversity of Wales. There are different dialects and different ways of speaking Welsh, and they must all be reflected here. That's an important part of the message.

I think, in terms of the points that you make on induction, the Welsh language should be a central part of that induction process, so we will certainly look at that as we prepare for Senedd reform. In terms of language skills, one of the things that I'd be eager to look at is to take the kind of approach that we took with Commission staff, and to look at gathering that data, with the agreement of everyone, looking then at Members and Members' staff too, so we can have a comprehensive picture across the whole Senedd. So, that is one way in which we can build on the good experience that we've had in terms of courtesy level Welsh and so on, by extending that, and the skills survey and that work, across all of our parliamentary staff, as it were, including Members.

And then, in terms of building on the experience, well, Tom, you almost answered your own question. Now, we have laid foundations, but we now need to look at building on those foundations at every level, in terms of how we can create domains where there is more internal communication and administration through the medium of Welsh, for example. Because that is a practical approach in assisting people to improve their language skills even more. Many congratulations to Hannah on her success in her exams. And it's fantastic to see more and more Members using the Welsh language in the different fora that we have.

Yes, we will be looking specifically, as I said—. There is now a range of ideas that we have in terms of how we can increase the use of the Welsh language in committees. And we will be trialling those and looking at progress over a period of six months. I think—. I will write to the different Members, particularly Siân. You asked a number of detailed questions, and I won't have the answers in front of me now. But just a few more general comments I'd like to make. I do think that, as a Senedd, now is the time for us to look at the framework in general. Siân's point as to whether we treat both languages equally, rather than promoting Welsh—. Now, we don't have a problem in the Senedd in relation to the English language. But we do have Welsh tutors, so, in a way, aren't we already promoting? But the legal framework that we have doesn't take us along that particular path. So, we need to look at that.

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 today is a debate on the Culture, Communications, Welsh Language, Sport and International Relations Committee report, 'Six Nations Rugby Championship broadcasting rights'. And I call on the Chair of the committee to move the motion—Delyth Jewell.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. The committee has, for some time now, been investigating public broadcasting in Wales. A key part of this work was our inquiry into the rights to broadcast the six nations championship. The debate over whether the six nations matches should be listed for full broadcast on public broadcasting channels has been going on for some time. In 2009, a review by the UK Government suggested that Welsh games in the championship should be broadcast on public broadcasting channels, acknowledging the importance of the game in Wales. Unfortunately, on several occasions, the Government in Westminster has been reluctant to change the situation. However, the door was left ajar last autumn, when the Government Minister Sir John Whittingdale told the committee:

'We've always said that if the Welsh Parliament argued very strongly that, for the good of sport in Wales, we needed to look again at the listed events, we would look at it, certainly. So, it's not closed.'

As such, we decided, as a committee, to explore the question of whether the six nations should become a group A listed event, by speaking to the Welsh Rugby Union and rugby and broadcasting experts in February 2024. During the course of our evidence gathering, we encountered a number of different challenges, and I will mention those briefly. Dirprwy Lywydd, a perfect storm of market dynamics in broadcasting live sport has seen more and more events go behind a paywall. Public service broadcasters are facing significant budgetary constraints, be this from long-term cuts to the licence fee, or a downturn in the advertising market on broadcast television. Increasing production costs are compounding both these factors.

The advent of global streaming services also means that the value of sports broadcasting rights has increased. For example, in 2021, the BBC and S4C lost the live broadcasting rights to the autumn internationals. And, more recently, the chief executive of World Rugby indicated that future world cup matches may also go behind a paywall.

Yet there is clear demand for rugby internationals to remain on free-to-air channels. Wales is the only UK nation where rugby internationals appear in the top 10 most watched programmes, as was the case in both 2022 and 2021. Despite this demand, there is a financial problem, and this is how the committee has been weighing up these different issues. The funding challenges facing Welsh rugby are well known. The Welsh Rugby Union told us

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

Media rights alone account for £20 million of the union's total revenue of £90 million. The WRU was of the view that retaining tension in the market—that is, for competition to remain between public and on-demand broadcasters—would allow for sufficient income to be generated for the game in Wales.

Now, alongside the funding challenges, we also considered the impact that any changes in broadcasting could have on participation. We were told by the WRU previously that there is a downward trend in the number of people playing rugby, particularly in the men's game. The broadcaster Huw Llywelyn Davies told us, and I quote him,

'I think, that there are fewer people watching rugby on television and that has a detrimental impact on the game in Wales, because there is a link between the number watching on television and the number who play'.

However, Professor Richard Haynes encapsulated this perfectly when he told us:

'If you can't see it, you can't be it.'

We were also told provision of Welsh-language broadcasting was essential. All witnesses were supportive of this, and, on this issue, Seimon Williams, the author and rugby columnist, told us, and again I quote him,

'It has to be accessible and easy to reach, and of good quality.'

So, the simple question facing us as a committee was whether or not the six nations rugby championship should be made a group A event or not. This was not a straightforward question for us to consider, and we weighed up a number of factors, as I said, in our deliberations. I have touched on some of these already today. There is a significant challenge in balancing the competing needs of generating sufficient income to allow rugby to thrive while also maintaining the broadest reach and, in turn, ensuring enough people participate in the sport. That is a tension. Nevertheless, the unique role of rugby in our national life was the deciding factor for us. While Wales has performed strongly in an array of sports in recent years, rugby holds an undeniably special resonance in our cultural life. The committee believes that this special resonance must be protected to ensure that future generations are able to connect with rugby without having to pay for the privilege. Rugby is a game that has been embraced by the working classes of Wales since the end of the nineteenth century, and it has helped to tell Wales's story as a nation on the world stage. It is difficult to calculate how much poorer our culture would be if we were to lose that strong connection with the game.

We welcome the Welsh Government's support for our recommendations. We also welcome the steps it has taken to date in raising the issue with the UK Government. It is unfortunate but understandable that we have not received a response from the UK Government on this issue, in view of the general election being called last week. Despite that, the UK Government has told the Welsh Government that it noted the devolved nature of sports policy. It also noted that it would be open to the Welsh Government to comprehensively evaluate whether there is currently the right balance between those different elements. In this regard, I would ask now the Cabinet Secretary, in her response, to outline how the Welsh Government intends to undertake such an evaluation. I would also like to ask the Cabinet Secretary, given that we now know that there is a new Government in Westminster, how she will raise this matter with the new Secretary of State. The Cabinet Secretary will know that she has the full backing of the Siambr on this matter, so I would encourage strong and proactive approaches on this issue immediately, before the rights for the next tournament are agreed. Thank you.

Thank you to the Chair and committee clerks for bringing forward this debate today. The UK Government has said that a listed event is one that is generally felt to have a special national resonance and which contains an element that serves to unite the nation. For Wales, rugby union is that sport. Through the highs and lows, rugby brings people from across Wales together, and it has done so for generations. Once the game became popular in the nineteenth century, Wales embraced it and made it our own. Unlike in our neighbouring nations, the game in Wales is firmly a working-class sport, bringing together local communities. From 1900, Wales won the Triple Crown six times in 11 years, drawing tens of thousands to watch. Rugby also helped to promote Wales on the international stage, taking on the world's best and winning. Many of us will have recent memories of Grand Slam glory; the years 2005, 2008, 2012 and 2019 going down in the history books. We have those memories thanks to free-to-air television. Throughout that time, we have had many incredible players, immortalised not only for their dedication to the sport but also to Wales. In the words of Ken Owens:

'The history of the jersey stretches back almost 140 years. It’s never your shirt: it’s the nation’s jersey...you have a responsibility to do your best for the nation'.

Players are role models for so many aspiring athletes, and it is so important that young people have the opportunity to watch their heroes play on the television. Rugby is embedded in our culture, and nothing quite compares to hearing 70,000 fans singing the national anthem, 'Hen Wlad fy Nhadau', in harmony at the Principality Stadium. Travelling fans take our language and songs with them, and I remember smiling at videos of 'Sosban Fach' and 'Calon Lân' being belted out by fans across France during last year's world cup. People want to learn the songs and language, and viewers across Wales are connected to the game in sharing a united pride, thanks to watching it on tv. The Wales versus France six nations rugby match, broadcast on BBC1 on 11 March 2022, was the most viewed programme in Wales for one year, with an average audience of 652,000, and I would certainly argue that such a high viewing number reflects special national resonance. Six nations matches also provide a huge boost to the cash-strapped hospitality sector, which is still recovering post pandemic. Allowing international rugby to fall behind a paywall would be too much of a burden for all those and far too many to bear.

I do acknowledge the difficult financial situation the WRU finds itself in, and note their concerns about losing tension in the market for tournament broadcasting rights. But there is a real risk here that avoiding action will leave us dropping the ball. We must ensure future generations can connect with the game without having to shell out for the privilege. They are the next generation of players and we would not want to see a drop-off of people taking up the sport due to a paywall, just as we have seen with cricket—as Alun very often mentions. But they're also the next generation of fans, united by a shared love of the game and pride in our nation.

Could I thank the Chair of the committee and the clerks for their work on this report? Although I am now back as a member of the culture committee, I was not a member when this work was undertaken, and so I'm very pleased to see the thorough work you have done, because, after all, this is a subject that inspires the imagination and very strong opinions as well among many of our constituents. And without exception, in my experience in any case, everyone who follows our national rugby teams believes that everyone should be able to follow Wales’s fortunes in the six nations championship free of charge and in their language of choice here in Wales.

Of course, I do understand and recognise, as the Chair did and the committee did, the need for the Welsh Rugby Union to make money. But I also hope that the Welsh Rugby Union understands the importance of the fans in terms of its business model, and also the importance of broadcasting these games in Welsh, and why having a viewing option in Welsh on a platform such as Amazon Prime is not the equivalent of broadcasting on S4C. I know of a number of people who lack confidence in their Welsh language skills or who are learners, or who have no Welsh whatsoever, who always watch the rugby on S4C. And I also know of a number of rugby clubs and pubs throughout the country that show the games live on S4C, thus normalising the use of the Welsh language in the community and hearing the Welsh language as a relevant language—places like Clwb y Bont in Pontypridd, where no-one has a problem watching the game in Welsh. These are the kinds of things that keep the language alive and relevant. And we've seen previously the Football Association of Wales recognising the importance of that in announcing partnerships with S4C. So, we have to see the WRU responding more strongly in terms of that as well.

You mentioned in your opening remarks, Chair, the fact that the Cabinet Secretary had written to Ministers in Westminster. Obviously, there is hope now, and if she has not already written, I hope that she will write very soon to the new Ministers on this issue. With one of the DCMS Ministers representing a seat in Wales, where rugby is undoubtedly a central part of the community, perhaps there is an opportunity to ask the Government to reconsider this issue. I am also pleased that the committee has noted the importance of these games in terms of the hospitality industry as well. As we know, COVID has been a very challenging period for a number of the clubs and pubs in our local communities, which are often the heart of those communities. So, I am very pleased that you've placed the emphasis on that.

So, why not take today as an opportunity to re-state the Senedd's opinion on this matter and re-state the intention to achieve a solution and commit to working with a new Government in Westminster to make this a reality? It is a subject that many people will want us to voice opinions on, but they will want to see action as well. Carolyn has already mentioned what happened with the cricket, for example. No-one wants to see that happening. And we were discussing with the Cabinet Secretary this morning the importance of sport, the arts and culture in terms of the preventative side, and many people are inspired by seeing sport on television to undertake those sports themselves. For example, we focus on the men in the six nations very often, but seeing the women play as well is very important in terms of people having those role models to want to partake in activities of that kind. So, I do greatly hope that we will be united as a Senedd on this, but now we need action from the Westminster Government.

Thank you to you as committee Chair, Delyth, for bringing this issue to the Senedd today.

And special thanks, actually, to the Culture, Communications, Welsh Language, Sport and International Relations Committee—the longest committee title, I think, in the history of 25 years of devolution—for what is actually, looking at it, a simple prospect, a simple inquiry: should Welsh rugby six nations games go behind a paywall? But in that simple question there is a complexity of answers, of unknowns and un-understandables that are thrown up by that, especially around the financial element for the WRU.

And it's well rehearsed in terms of those of us who follow rugby and regional rugby in Wales, and I'm sure some speakers who will follow me will talk about this in depth as well, about the financial impact that professional rugby in Wales at the moment is facing, and I do sympathise with that. I do have sympathy with the financial element of it, and how professional rugby in Wales, when the game turned professional in the mid-1990s, chased after high-paying contracts, rather than understanding the infantile nature of the game in terms of professionalisation, and we were chasing the southern hemisphere, New Zealand, who were de facto professional for at least 20 years before the game turned professional itself. I understand that that has come home to roost in terms of the financial aspects of it.

But I still come down to the pure, simple cultural element of the six nations and that game of rugby to us here in Wales, and I remember when we discussed this back in January, I reiterated my favourite line, ‘Shave away, Gavin, shave away,’ from the late, great Eddie Butler, as Gavin Henson kicked that kick. Even back before then in 1999, it was the Rugby World Cup, granted, but I remember the television in school being wheeled in in 1999 to watch the opening ceremony at Ysgol Wdig. I was in school; I was—how old was I in 1999? Younger than most would have been in this Chamber. But I remember that cultural element of Tom Jones and Shirley Bassey at the opening of the world cup in the Millennium Stadium, now the Principality Stadium—there, showing how sponsorship is changing the financial element of the game, with the Millennium Stadium now having a sponsorship right. But those cultural elements stay with us; they stay with us as individuals, especially here in Wales, and I do think that the recommendations within this report are quite clear.

Recommendation 2 leads in quite clearly to the first recommendation, in that the Welsh Government should make representations to the UK Government to try and ensure that this is moved into the top tier. So, Cabinet Secretary, in your response, I'd be grateful to know if you have made that request to the new UK Government, or if you're intending to make that request, and how you intend to go about doing that.

The Member's recollection of the professional game going into the world cup in 1999, and my recollection of going professional was going to rugby league in those days. Hefin David.

A bit of editorial from the Dirprwy Lywydd there. [Laughter.] I remember it was 1998, the England games were actually on Sky, so when Wales played England at Twickenham, that was actually on Sky, and I've got a lot in common with Rishi Sunak, as my dad wouldn't let us have Sky either, and we had to listen to it on the radio. [Laughter.] Now, I'm pretty convinced—. That's all I've got in common with Rishi Sunak. I'm pretty convinced that had the rest of it not been on tv, my interest in the developing world of rugby union probably wouldn't have been as stimulated, so there's certainly that issue that's already been raised. The beauty of the six nations as well, as Carolyn and I were just talking about, is that it takes you from that grim winter into the fresh spring, the whole tournament takes you through, and Cardiff buzzing with it, although, these days, I watch it at Gilfach workies—

—in the heart of my community, opposite my office.

So, it's important to me that communities continue to have access to six nations coverage. Now, I asked for recommendation 3 to be inserted because I was a member of the committee when this was prepared, so my recommendation 3 is effectively a plan B. I'll read you the recommendation:

'In the event that the Six Nations Championship is broadcast on pay-to-view platforms, the UK Government should introduce protections for the hospitality industry including a compulsory contractual clause that allows for reduced pay-to-view subscriptions for pubs and clubs with a rateable value below a specified amount. This should be done following consultation with the hospitality industry to determine the most appropriate approach.'

Now, the reason I raise this is because I've met with Mark, Jan and Eric, who run the Gilfach workmen's club, and they told me that they pay £514 a month for the hospitality subscription to Sky TV, and one of the biggest draws in the workies is the premiership football. So, that is a big draw on evenings when they can play the football. There is a premium price, obviously, for broadcasting it in a club, and they do get a slight reduction, but it's a voluntary reduction. There's no law that says they have to have a reduction based on the size of the club. So, if they were then to add the six nations to a different pay-per-view platform, it wouldn't be covered by Sky, so they'd have to have an additional fee every month just to get it, say, for Amazon, and then if, say, the snooker was to go the same way, the world championship snooker or the darts, which are also very popular, they might have to buy another subscription. Well, Gilfach workies simply can't afford that.

So, I think we need a statutory measure if it does end up going to the group B events and it does end up going pay-per-view; we must have a statutory measure to allow those pubs and clubs in communities like mine to have a very much reduced fee, especially if they were already subscribing to other platforms at the time, so they simply couldn't afford to keep it going. Yes.

Thank you very much, Hefin, for taking that, and I appreciate your recommendation 3. I think it's a really valuable one, and it's a request to the UK Government. Did you in your deliberations within the committee, and forgive me for not knowing, look at other measures that are in Welsh Government's control around mitigating the potential cost that could be there? I'm thinking of business rates.

Well, business rates are an issue that's ongoing, and something that I'm sure the finance Minister who is in the room now will be listening to, but no, we didn't go into detail on Welsh Government measures, we were looking at the six nations from the perspective of the A and B lists, so it was specifically about that. But I do think that if you are going to have alternative venues within communities, the Welsh language included, showing these games, then there has to be the ability for those clubs in communities of lower incomes to be able to provide them, and this is a massive challenge for places like Gilfach workies. So, going to pay-per-view could actually deprive whole communities of the opportunity to watch these and also deprive communities of the communal opportunity to watch these. So, I'd like the Cabinet Secretary specifically to address that and address that with the UK Government, and perhaps there may be levers that the Welsh Government could pull in that regard. Sam Kurtz has suggested that too.

But I think, just to summarise, it was a balanced argument, wasn't it? We are thinking about the deal that the WRU are trying to get. If they go to the BBC, and the BBC and ITV know that they are the only players in town, then it does affect the rate they're able to get from those broadcasters, so there is that consequence as well. I did get the impression from the chief executive and the chair of the WRU at the time that they wanted it to be free-to-view if they could possibly do it, but they wanted to keep that option on the table to take it to pay-per-view in order to get the best possible deal they could, and who can really blame them for that in the current financial climate for Welsh rugby?

I'm grateful to the Chair and to the staff of the committee as well for helping and supporting us with this inquiry. It was, of course, John Whittingdale who suggested we initiate this inquiry. As far as I'm aware, it's the first time that any committee here has initiated an inquiry at the request of a UK Government Minister. I'm glad to see that John Whittingdale survived the great clear-out last week. Perhaps he will also have an opportunity to read this report.

In many ways, the conversation that we've had has been a conversation amongst us as a nation rather than political parties and politicians, because I think all of us have enjoyed different occasions around the six nations. Carolyn reminds us of the 2005 grand slam; I remember it took me four days to get back from Edinburgh after we'd won up in Murrayfield and I nearly missed the Ireland game, but that's an anecdote for another occasion. But all of these occasions—[Interruption.] Not now. All of these histories are about our personal histories, as well, about who we are as a people and who we are as individuals and communities. I'm sure that every single one of us in the Chamber here has got similar anecdotes about the way in which the six nations championship has changed and shaped our memories.

So, it is not simply a game, but a cultural inheritance in all sorts of different ways. I remember Graham Henry speaking of absolute shock when he got to Edinburgh for the Murrayfield game, the first time he'd managed Wales up there, and he said that he couldn't understand why there were all these Welsh people walking down Princes Street. Of course, by the time we got to Murrayfield, we couldn't understand why we were there either. But it was quite a remarkable cultural expression as well, and, of course, having lost to Ireland and to Scotland that year, we went on to win in the Parc des Princes and, of course, beating England in Wembley, as well.

These things are part of who we are. I want my son to enjoy it, and I want the grandchildren of Members here to enjoy it, as well. I think the arguments that Abi Tierney made in her correspondence to us, and then made by the WRU in oral evidence, were powerful arguments. I don't think our love of the game and our love of the experience and our history and our anecdotes and our stories should ever blind us to the real economic issues facing the WRU and the future of the game. And so, it is an argument with which we have to engage; it is something that we have to take seriously. And I think the arguments that Abi Tierney made were very powerful arguments; they were enormously powerful arguments. But I must also say to the WRU that Westgate Street is very different to the west car park, and the experience of Welsh rugby fans is that it is something that we share together as a nation. Simply saying that this will help us make the sums add up, I believe, and I fear, is an inadequate response to some of the challenges facing rugby union today and in the future.

We are at a difficult time in our history. We do look at the local game, the grass-roots game, we look at the regional game, and, in the last week or so, the national game, and we're not seeing success. But the greatest challenge I believe we have is persuading young boys and girls to play the game in the first place. How many games of grass-roots rugby are cancelled because teams cannot raise sufficient players? How many times have we seen, in all our constituencies and areas we represent, games cancelled because there simply aren't enough people to play? And how many times have we seen deserted rugby fields with a game going on that nobody's watching? We need to address the real crisis in Welsh rugby and that is ensuring that the game exists for future generations, and I believe that exposure to the six nations championship is fundamental to that. I have used the example of Glamorgan cricket, and possibly overused it, shall I say, but it does raise fears within me that the more we take the game away from the screens, the more we take it away from our communities and from the people who enjoy watching the game, and the less it becomes our national sport.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Culture and Social Justice, Lesley Griffiths.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and thank you to the committee, under the Chair of Delyth Jewell, for bringing this debate forward. It's very clear from every Member's contribution that we all agree that rugby in Wales plays a very important role in our sporting, cultural and national identity. The six nations championship in particular resonates deeply with many communities, families and individuals across the country. I don't think there's any other sporting event like it.

First and foremost, the six nations championship is more than just a series of rugby matches; it unites Wales in a celebration of sport, tradition and national pride, and, for many, watching these games is a moment of collective joy and excitement, shared with family and friends. Making the six nations free-to-air ensures that everyone, regardless of their financial situation, can feel part of this shared experience. This inclusivity strengthens community bonds and fosters a sense of belonging.

From an accessibility standpoint, keeping the championship free-to-air is crucial. Pay-per-view or subscription-based models can be prohibitive, excluding those—usually those poorest in our communities—who cannot afford the additional expense. In many households, especially during challenging economic times, discretionary spending on entertainment is often the first to be cut.

The provision of coverage in English and Welsh enables audiences to enjoy the tournament in their language of choice. Welsh coverage is a vehicle to highlight the Welsh language, reinforcing its relevance and inspiring both fluent and new speakers to use it more actively.

The broadcast of sporting events, such as the six nations rugby championship, in pubs and clubs also brings much-needed revenue to these establishments, providing a financial lifeline to many sporting clubs in Wales, establishments currently experiencing incredibly difficult times. By keeping the matches free-to-air, we also ensure that rugby remains accessible to all fans, old and new, nurturing a love for the sport across generations.

Through our programme for government, we are committed to promoting equal access to sport, supporting young and talented athletes and grass-roots clubs and investing in sports facilities. We know from Sport Wales research how our investment in sport delivers a huge social return and impacts positively on the health and well-being of our nation. The six nations inspires children and young people to take up the sport for the first time, and will encourage others to continue to develop their skills to one day emulate the players they will see on their screens. This will help the WRU to deliver against its new, ambitious strategy, which aims to, amongst other targets, develop inspiring competitive clubs and national teams, foster a thriving and sustainable community game and accelerate development of the women's and girls' rugby ecosystem that Heledd Fychan referred to.

Will the Minister take an intervention? So, just to confirm, you will be writing requesting that the Welsh six nations games do stay on free-to-air to the new respective Minister within the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport.

The first thing I'll be requesting is a meeting—I think it's really important to meet to face to face—and then I'll draw the agenda up. If it's not possible to meet in the very near future, I will certainly write specifically on certain topics, and this one would be one of those, because, as you say, it will soon be February, and we need to find out where we currently are.

I do appreciate there might be concerns from the WRU's point of view about potential revenue that's lost from not selling broadcasting rights to the highest bidder, but I think it's really important that everybody considers the wider picture here, and that includes the WRU. Increased viewership can drive higher sponsorship, advertising revenue, and brands seeking to capitalise on the large engaged audience. Additionally, there's a lot of goodwill that can be generated from being accessible to all. I really think that can enhance a sport's brand value and long-term sustainability.

Furthermore, free-to-air broadcasting supports national identity and pride, and rugby, particularly the six nations, is more than just a game; it's a narrative of history, of rivalry and of unity. Allowing unrestricted access to these matches helps maintain and nurture the cultural fabric that binds our communities across Wales together. I think it's a celebration of heritage too, where past and present converge on the playing field, and everyone, I think, deserves a front-row seat to witness it. So, let's look to preserve the spirit of rugby and ensure its thrilling moments can be cherished by all. Diolch.

I call on Delyth Jewell to respond to the debate.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. I thank all the Members who took part in this debate, and I should have said at the start of the debate that I thank the committee team for their work on this.

Carolyn, in this debate, firstly outlined the unique cultural significance that rugby has to our psyche. When Carolyn was reliving some of the famous victories, there were whoops from the Chamber—that says it all, doesn't it? I loved the puns, Carolyn—we must not drop the ball; let's get it over the line. Is that a pun? It's a pun, yes. [Interruption.] Llyr just said, 'As long as she doesn't kick it into touch.' Ba-dum tish all round.

Thank you for that, Carolyn. [Interruption.]

No, I'm not going to quote all of these.

As Heledd said, rugby is a game that fires the imagination. Supporters, of course, are very important to the business of the WRU—I agree with that—and I thank Heledd for emphasising how important live rugby broadcasting is for the Welsh language, to hear the Welsh language as a normal language that is relevant to everyday lives. That's something that you can't put a price on, and I hope that the Westminster Government, as Heledd said, will reconsider the situation as it was previously.

As Sam set out, this, yes, when you look at it first, does seem like a simple question, but, as Sam has pointed out, it perhaps hides complexities, and we as a committee too had sympathy, certainly, with the WRU's position. Ours was not a glib response in any way to the concerns that were raised. And thank you for quoting the late, great Eddie Butler; his words are always wonderful to hear. There is a need to look pragmatically at how to ease the burdens on the WRU, and we are very alive to that, but, as Sam had pointed out, that shouldn't take away from the cultural significance of this game and that being able to be available for all, for future generations as well.

Hefin, who knew you had so much in common with Rishi Sunak? For anyone who missed the beginning of the debate, I'm not going to give context.

Don't put that on a leaflet. [Laughter.]

I'm just going to leave that there. I'm not going to give context. It was about Sky. I'm not going to do that to Hefin. It was about Sky. It was a joke. But Hefin did indeed push for recommendation 3 in this report, to ensure the protections are there for the hospitality industry as a plan B, and we were united as a committee in support of that. Long live Gilfach workmen's club. Had I mitched off school in lunch hour when I was in sixth form, that would have been my local, but I was obviously far too sensible for that all the time, so I'm happy to put that on the record. But no, long live the working men's club. Now, possibly—.

As Alun was saying—

—possibly this is the first time that a Senedd committee inquiry has been sparked by a UK Government Minister's suggestion. The anecdotes that so many Members have shared or, tantalisingly in the case of Alun, the anecdote that was not shared, of the missing four days in Scotland, which I think we all want to hear at some point—but those anecdotes, they do shape our memories. And I agree with Alun that rugby is not simply a game, but a cultural inheritance.

Now, the WRU's arguments were powerful, as Alun and others have pointed out. There are real economic issues facing the game. We have to engage with them, and the way to help that through, surely, as Alun points out, is encouraging young girls, young boys to get involved in the game. And, again, I go back to the words of one of our witnesses to the inquiry: you can't be something that you can't see.

Diolch to the Cabinet Secretary for your response to the debate. It is those shared experiences that are at risk of being lost. And, yes, Welsh coverage does inspire new speakers.

It's priceless for Welsh.

And when it comes to evaluating sport broadcasting, I was glad to hear that you'll be seeking further advice on that, and I think it's also welcome that you'll be writing to the new Secretary of State. Obviously, I’d implore you to do that with urgency.

Now, this is indeed a matter not just for politicians, as the Cabinet Secretary said, but for the people of Wales in a celebration of our heritage.

So, Dirprwy Lywydd, it's only a matter of months since the Siambr spoke with one voice in calling for the six nations championship to remain free-to-view. It is clear from the contributions made today that this view remains. As I mentioned earlier, rugby has a very special place in the conscience or the psyche of the Welsh people. We have all experienced the unique atmosphere to be enjoyed on a six nations weekend in Wales on Westgate Street or wherever, that passionate hope that this year will be our year, the elation that comes in the wake of victory and the shared grief of defeat. The opportunity to say,

‘I was there’.

Rugby is more than a game. It is part of our heritage as a nation, and it's our duty, therefore, to ensure that the next generation can enjoy the same experiences. Ensuring that the six nations championship continues to be broadcast publicly is key to that. Thank you.

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

Item 6 today is the Plaid Cymru debate: devolved powers and funding. And I call on Rhun ap Iorwerth to move the motion.

Thank you very much, Dirprwy Lywydd. This motion was tabled in the midst of the general election campaign, an election where Plaid Cymru put an uncompromising emphasis on the priorities of Wales and put Wales's interests first. The fact that that message has permeated into communities the length and breadth of Wales is reflected in Plaid Cymru's best-ever result in a Westminster election.

It was also a very successful election for Keir Starmer's Labour Party, providing a clear mandate for them to govern. And this, I hope, is something that Labour in Wales will consider: that there had been a fall in the Labour vote in Wales, of course.

The question for any party following electoral success is what they do with the mandate that has been provided to them. Without doubt, the four Plaid Cymru MPs will use the approval of their constituents to hold the Labour Government to account on all of the issues that we cover in our motion today. But the new Labour Government is duty-bound to respond to that scrutiny and to take note of the wishes of the people of Wales.

Much has been made of having two Labour Governments working side by side. I’ll be the first to welcome co-operation, certainly. Labour promised change, including a change in the relationship between Welsh and UK Governments. It was long overdue. But the warm words of a party once in opposition must translate to deeds of a party now in Government. Let me quote the previous First Minister:

‘Too often we see the UK Government act in an aggressively unilateral way, claiming to act on behalf of the whole UK, but without regard for the status of the nations and the democratic mandates of their governments.’

We see muscular unionism instead of working towards a genuinely constructive and collaborative relationship between the Governments of the UK. The former leader of Labour in Wales quite rightly derided the contemptuous attitude of the previous UK Conservative Governments, but in this moment of recess, if that's what it truly is to be, let's broker a new deal. When the First Minister phones Downing Street, let's have that guarantee that the Prime Minister not only picks up the call but that he puts Wales's calls into action too. Just a few minutes ago, we heard the culture Cabinet Secretary here say that she would be asking for a meeting with the DCMS. If that could be arranged early, great, if not, she'd write. Well, surely, the benefit of having two Labour Governments, we are told, is that those meetings should be able to be arranged, and swiftly.

There is a great deal that we can agree with in the Government's amendment. Yes, the chaos of the previous Conservative Government has left real challenges in terms of the public purse, and, yes, there's a need for Governments in Wales and Westminster to work together in order to strengthen devolution. But what is astonishing—and it is truly astonishing—is that the Welsh Labour Government doesn't feel that they can support the Plaid Cymru motion without amendment, and they are willing to be seen deleting things that they themselves support, or I should say, things that they have supported in the past: equality for Wales with the other devolved nations; restoring the Welsh budget to the levels of the 2021 spending review; the devolution of the Crown Estate, policing and justice—all of these things are things that Labour Members in this Senedd have supported, and every one is rooted in that fundamental principle of financial fairness, democratic fairness, economic and social fairness for Wales.

The Government amendment confirms what Plaid Cymru has always pointed to as the main difference between ourselves and Labour in Wales: that when it comes to fairness and ambition for Wales, they will more often than not choose to dilute our asks and dampen the scale of aspiration that we hold for the future of our nation. So, when Labour Welsh Secretary Jo Stevens blames Liz Truss's mini-budget, a terrible mini-budget as it was, but when she blames that entirely for being the reason that there's no money for HS2 consequentials, she betrays her true views that, for Labour, this isn't a matter of principle, it's just about cash. Yes, there's a vital financial recompense at the heart of that issue, but righting this wrong is a matter of fundamental fairness for Wales. I'd expect a Labour Welsh Secretary to fight for that justice, not sweep the issue under the carpet.

If Labour wanted to give Wales its fair share of HS2 spending, then they could have put it in the 'non-negotiable' column, surely, when costing their manifesto. Instead, they deprioritised it, and as a consequence, deprioritised economic justice for Wales. Similarly, if Labour did really care about the devolution of justice and policing, they'd listen to the experts—the Brown commission, their own Brown commission, the Independent Commission on the Constitutional Future of Wales, the Commission on Justice in Wales—rather than resort to dismissive and, frankly, insulting language claiming that it would be tantamount to fiddling around with structures and systems, as described by, again, the new Secretary of State for Wales.

And what about the Crown Estate? Its assets in Wales, valued at more than £600 million in 2021, yet all profits go directly to the UK Treasury. If it's good enough for Scotland, where those powers have now been transferred and the revenue from Scottish assets now go straight to the Scottish Government, why wouldn't a UK labour Government want the same for a Labour Government in Wales? The only explanation is that the UK Labour Party—and, remember, it's they who hold the strings, not mere Welsh Labour politicians here in the Senedd—place a greater premium on holding powers in Westminster than empowering Wales and its people when it comes to the practical application of the power that they now wield.

When pressed to spell out Labour's commitment to further devolution, the previous First Minister said an incoming UK Labour Government would have to balance competing priorities. Of course they do, but who's making the pitch for Wales when deciding on those priorities? There will have been Welsh voices in the room when the Labour manifesto process was being undertaken. Surely, wouldn't they have been arguing for the sorts of policies we in Plaid Cymru have long argued for, and which Labour, under Mark Drakeford, came to agree with us on? Or was there no Welsh voice, or perhaps there was, but it was ignored? I was under the impression that Labour Members here agreed with us on fair funding and on HS2 consequentials. Regrettably, we've seen scant evidence in Labour's election manifesto, certainly little during or since the election, that anyone within the Labour Party at Westminster has been advocating for Wales's fair share.

I have selected the two amendments to the motion. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 will be deselected. I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Finance, Constitution and Cabinet Office to formally move amendment 1.

Yes, formally.

I call now on Peter Fox to move amendment 2, tabled in the name of Darren Millar.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd, and, yes, I move our amendment in the name of Darren Millar.

For all of the political knockabout for the last six or seven weeks, it's good to live in a country where the peaceful transition of power has happened so smoothly and amicably; this is not something that any of us should take for granted. And I also want to wish the new Prime Minister the best of luck, and as his predecessor said, his success is our success, and I genuinely hope he succeeds for the good of Wales and the rest of the United Kingdom.

Yes, the Labour Government has won a historic majority in last week's general election, and the Conservative Party has to listen hard to voters and rebuild, just as Labour did following their huge defeat in 2019. That said, there are some real concerns under Welsh Labour here in Wales that can't be ignored. It is clear that voter turnout has fallen and that faith in our democracy here in Wales in particular is wavering, and I'm not surprised, considering the scandals surrounding Welsh politics over recent weeks, coupled with Welsh Labour's historic record of failures, especially when it comes to managing our Welsh health service and our economy. So, it is vital that the Welsh Government, moving forward, focuses on what matters to the people of Wales. Plaid, in their motion, are asking for £700 million to restore funding that was forecast in 2021—a lovely thought, but I say it's probably an out-of-touch pipe dream. But it's worth a try, and I hope it comes off. We mustn't forget that the UK Conservative Government has allocated Welsh Government with record levels of funding, with the largest settlements this year that Wales has ever had. Had the Welsh Government made the right choices on how they spent it, well, we may not be in the mess we are.

It would be refreshing in next year's budget round not to hear the Welsh Government blaming the UK Conservative Government for everything and its dog; they will now have to grin and bear what is delivered in the future, from their own UK Government, and I doubt very much that all they've hoped for and imagined for will come flowing down the M4. But we'll see. And let's not forget that it was the Conservatives who worked with Welsh Government to agree the revised fiscal framework that resulted in the premium providing £1.20 being made available for every £1 spent in England, and that will never drop, because of that negotiation, below £1.15. And we should not be distracted by looking to devolve additional powers to Wales, chasing matters that the vast majority of people in Wales do not care about, such as management of the Crown Estate. I would have grave concerns about policing and justice being devolved. The track record of this Welsh Government on delivering major, key services is poor to say the least; they haven’t got the capacity to take on something so fundamental as the justice system and policing. Rather, we need to focus on delivering what is devolved here well, creating a better—

Will you take an intervention?

Yes, certainly, Rhun.

I’m grateful to you for taking an intervention. We’re talking here about powers that are already devolved. Policing, for example, is not only devolved to Northern Ireland and to Scotland, but even cities in England. Why do you think that we are incapable as a nation of controlling these matters? I agree with you on my attitude towards the current Government that we have, but we’re talking here about Wales taking these decisions into our own hands.

Well, thank you for that, but what I’m saying is we haven’t got the evidence that the Labour Party, who are currently the Government in power—

Well, I hope they’re not going to be there for long.

Well, they’re here at the moment. We cannot entrust them with further devolved powers. They cannot manage well what they’ve already got. We need to see them be able to deliver well on education—[Interruption.] We need to see them be able to deliver well before we consider giving more to them. The Centre on Constitutional Change conducted a survey in December 2023 on devolution in Wales and Scotland. It found that less than half of the Welsh respondents agreed that devolution has benefited their nation, and only a third saw devolution as beneficial for their local communities. Now, I am an advocate of devolution, but we have to get what is already devolved right before we go looking for more. Thank you.

If you have no faith in this Senedd to take decisions, then that’s quite questionable as a contribution, to be honest. As Rhun said, we don’t believe that the current Welsh Government is right in terms of its ambitions for Wales, but people can vote a Government out; that’s what we hope will happen in 2026. We shouldn’t hold this Senedd back because of who is in Government currently. So, it’s good to know that the Conservatives have given up on 2026 already; we certainly haven’t.

Insisting on fairness for Wales: that’s what’s at the heart of our debate today, and being ambitious for Wales, and I very much hope that every Member of this Senedd would agree on that principle. It’s very disappointing, given the theme of this debate and the fact that we’re at the threshold of a new chapter in Westminster, how few Members are here from other parties, because this is an important debate; it’s a debate on issues on which we are agreed. Most of us are agreed that Wales should have fairness and that we should have further powers.

Fairness for Wales means an equal opportunity for everyone living in Wales, and every community in Wales, and the means to prosper, fairness so that decisions on the future of Wales are made here in Wales and decisions of this Senedd are respected, not ignored, by the UK Government.

Asking for fairness and respect should not be contentious, but again, time and time again over the past 25 years, and even in recent weeks during the Westminster election campaign, we’ve heard MPs representing seats here in Wales, including the new Secretary of State for Wales, refusing to act on some of those issues that would secure fairness and respect for Wales. After all, after 14 years of the destructive Conservative Government, Wales desperately needs a Government that will respect this Senedd. We’ve seen Brexit used as an excuse for Whitehall to take decisions away from us and to undermine our Parliament. The deserved demise of the Conservatives therefore gives us a crucial opportunity to put devolution back on track, to move forward rather than being held back.

Over recent years, we’ve heard many Labour Members in Wales talking lyrically about the possibility that their party will take the reigns in Westminster. The former First Minister provided us with an assurance at the end of last year that a Labour Government at the UK level would deliver the investment needed for our public services. He made some bold statements about the firepower that a UK Labour Government could deploy on behalf of Wales. His successor was strongly of the same view. Responding to questions as First Minister for the first time, he told us about the great pledges made by Keir Starmer in terms of restoring powers and funding stolen from Wales. But it became very clear during the electoral campaign that a change in Government at Westminster wouldn’t definitely lead to the change that we desire or rather insist upon here. Pledges on further powers, which were already weakened by the Gordon Brown report, were even more diluted in the manifesto, plans for the resetting of inter-governmental relations put at risk immediately, and a manifesto that has a complete lack of ambition on any of the issues that we are already agreed on as a Senedd and have been for many years. 'Change' has to be more than an empty slogan. It has to mean something. And with Keir Starmer now in 10 Downing Street, we must insist on that change that Wales so desperately needs, not just hope for the best.

I welcome this important debate, calling for the extension of Welsh devolution, a call I wholeheartedly support. For more than a decade here in Wales, we have put up with the meagre crumbs off the Conservative Westminster table. Whether it's giving London’s financial district more levelling-up funding than the whole of Wales, or failing to sign off £1 billion for the electrification of the north Wales coast line, we have had to put up with Tory Prime Minister after Tory Prime Minister treating Wales and its Government with nothing more than contempt.

With the election of a UK Labour Government, we are already seeing, in the first few days, the resetting of that relationship for the better, building on a foundation of mutual respect, and that includes the UK Government's welcome commitment to review the out-of-date Welsh fiscal framework. And I welcome that there has been a meeting of a council of regions and nations.

Here in the Senedd, it's our job to make the most of that positive sea change, not just in supporting any of the UK Government's plans to further devolve power, but also putting forward the case for them to go further. We must recognise that the election of a new Government provides us with opportunities, including manifesto commitments to restore decision making to the Welsh Government over post-EU structural funds, to devolve non-Jobcentre Plus employment support funding, and to explore the devolution of youth justice and probation services. But we must also recognise that the demands on that Government will be coming from all quarters. The new Government has inherited serious financial difficulties caused by the total economic mismanagement under the Tories. [Interruption.] Yes.

You know the three things you've just mentioned there now, you do realise that it's a dilution of what the Government here and what Labour in Wales have promised. So, it's not really at the level where you, as a party, would want to see it. The Labour Party in London are diluting—

I'm just speaking here as a Member of the Senedd.

Yes. So, the Labour Party in London are diluting what you've promised here.

The—. Sorry, I forgot where I was up to. [Interruption.] Yes. The new Government has inherited—thank you—serious financial difficulties—

You've got it now, carry on.

I'm okay, thank you. It includes the highest tax burden on Welsh households since world war two. We must accept it will take time for public finances to recover. However, I think prudential borrowing to build council houses will reap benefits and would hope that the UK Government will look at doing that and we can have some consequential funding to do that as well. In addition to the proposals in this motion, I think there is both cross-party support and Welsh Government support for the granting of prudential borrowing powers to Wales. The granting of prudential borrowing powers, alongside the demands of the motion, would provide the Welsh Government with the power to be a true partner to the new UK Government, to transform our country for the better.

So, where there is common cross-party support in the Senedd, as I think there is in devolving the Crown Estate, increasing the Welsh Government's budget and devolving police and justice powers—as I've already said—then it is in all of our interests to unite in the Senedd to campaign for the granting of these powers. And after all, if we as elected politicians in Wales are not willing to bang the drum for the ability of this Senedd to have democratic power over more of our country's affairs, then who will?

I would simply say to the naysayers: if you don't want more powers for this place, if you don't want to fight for fair funding, then why are you here? If Members are content with being managers then there are plenty of opportunities outside of this place. Because I fear that this manager attitude and lack of ambition is rife—evident with the Crown Estate. Despite repeated assertions of support from the Welsh Government for the devolution of the Crown Estate, it remains neither a priority for the First Minister nor even an afterthought for the UK Labour Government. And this lack of urgency only undermines Wales's potential to harness its natural resources for the benefit of its people.

As expressed in the motion, we're advocating for Wales's full control over its natural resources, taking control of the £835 million Crown Estate in Wales, aligning projects with Wales's needs and ensuring benefits from investments are returned to Wales. Fundamentally, our call is to see the devolution of powers over the Crown Estate, and it's about democratic control of our resources, it's about the power to act according to Wales's economic needs, and it's about responding to climate change. Devolving the Crown Estate will allow us to set the terms of future energy projects within the estate's borders. This will ensure that all initiatives align with our environmental goals and community needs, paving the way for sustainable practices and long-term energy security.

Now, in Scotland, they've had control over the Crown Estate since 2017, which has already delivered millions to the Scottish Government. Wales must be given the same control over its own natural resources, so that we then can control and directly benefit from the profits of energy projects on Welsh land and sea bed, because the asset value of the Crown Estate in Wales is £853 million. The Crown Estate in its entirety made a record £442 million net revenue profit in 2023. That was £129 million higher than in 2022. Estimates have also suggested that new offshore windfarms in Welsh waters could generate £43 billion in rents. Imagine what we could do with that cash.

Across the North sea, Norway has done more than imagine. It has long used its own natural resources to build wealth for the benefit of its people. The Norwegian sovereign wealth fund is now estimated to be worth $1.6 trillion, which is an equivalent of $295,000 per Norwegian citizen, and made profits of $213 billion in 2023. A study from PwC in 2008 found that the UK could have built up a £450 billion fund had it put tax receipts from oil and gas into a similar fund—a missed opportunity over a decade of austerity-driven cuts that have decimated Wales, decimated public services, destroyed communities and destroyed lives. We are on the cusp of a green boom, and we need to set the terms of that boom for the benefit of our people.

I'd like to thank Plaid Cymru for tabling this motion today. Whilst I appreciate the intent behind this motion, I am going to have to highlight the concerns that I have with it. Firstly, let us consider the proposal to increase the Welsh budget by £700 million and to restore it to the levels set during the 2021 spending review. Let me be clear: this is something I'm not against. But it is important to recognise that the financial landscape has significantly changed since 2021. The UK Government at the time had to respond to unforeseen challenges—the COVID-19 pandemic, the impacts of the war in Ukraine—and all that led to budgetary adjustments that needed to be made right the way across the United Kingdom. Whilst it is essential that Wales does need to receive adequate funding, demanding arbitrary increases without considering the current economic climate, I think is not the best approach and is a little bit irresponsible. What we need to have are fully costed financial increases that are sustainable, going forward. Funding fluctuations year on year do nothing to help with long-term budgetary planning for the Government here in Wales.

The Labour Government here, though, has been saying since I arrived in the Senedd, along with other Members here since 2021, that a new UK Labour Government would open the taps and that we would have more funding coming to Wales—proper funding coming to Wales, and Wales would have its funding restored. So, I can't wait to hear what the Cabinet Secretary's response is going to be to this, because I'd love to know when the new UK Labour Government is going to set out its priorities for Wales and also its funding priorities, because you've been asking for it, so we'll soon see whether Jo Stevens and Keir Starmer are going to answer.

So, moving on to the elements in this motion asking for more powers for the Senedd, as my colleague Peter Fox said, the Centre on Constitutional Change conducted a survey in December 2023 on the devolution settlement in Wales and Scotland, and of the people it surveyed, nearly half believed that devolution hasn't benefited Wales. And that should alarm all of us in this place. And a third said that there has been no local improvement to their area. And they say that it's time to focus on effectively using our existing powers and not chasing after more. I think that if we're going to strengthen devolution here in Wales, we need to give people out there faith that the powers that we currently have are being used properly in terms of education, health, economic development and other areas that the Welsh Government has control over.

The motion also calls for the devolution of the powers of the Crown Estate and its assets to Wales. In 2021-22, the Crown Estate generated £312 million for the UK Treasury. And I think that, if you listened to Plaid Cymru, you would believe that Wales doesn't get any of that funding at all. Some of that funding—. Actually, a portion of it comes back to Wales to fund our public services, and it's funded centrally by the UK Government as it comes out, because that's where all the expertise of managing this service is: it's in the UK Government. If you devolve that down to Wales, the Welsh Government have to go and create a whole new department with whole new expertise to manage that, and that comes with a cost in its own right.

How do you think they manage to get consistency between England and Scotland?

Well, Scotland had the devolution of policing long before, and actually its own criminal justice system long before as well, so the system is slightly different.

But crime is crime, isn't it?

It had its own law system before the rest of the United Kingdom. Scotland's had its own, and so I think that argument isn't very relevant to this; it is a different kettle of fish that you're talking about.

But I do think that devolving these areas does risk creating discrepancies and inefficiencies across the system. I don't see it currently, and I'm not seeing the evidence—. I thought you were going to make an intervention then, Peter, as I saw you hovering forward in your seat.

Will you take one, James?

Well, maybe. Yes, go on, then.

Even though policing is devolved to Scotland and Northern Ireland, they do rely on the police national computer, so there are interactions between police forces, and there have to be—there have to be. So, despite those areas being devolved to those nations, they do work quite collaboratively.

Well, as a proud unionist here, the United Kingdom works well when it's all working together. That's Wales, England, Scotland and Northern Ireland. That is the best way for our United Kingdom to work, together and not divided. [Interruption.] I thought someone else was going to make an intervention then.

So, in conclusion, I am of the opinion, on powers, that the Welsh people want us to get on with delivering with the powers that we currently have. It's been said in surveys that have been done that we don't do it properly now, and I think chasing more powers will create more confusion—more confusion for the electorate. And I think what our focus in opposition should be, instead of calling for more, it should be holding the Welsh Government to account more effectively for actually the powers that it currently has.

The Labour Party has been rowing back so quickly on its commitments in terms of policing and justice that perhaps they should bid for late entry to the Olympic Games. [Laughter.] I've never seen a change happen so swiftly, from the Thomas commission report, of course, it was all supported by the Welsh Government; everything was to come to Wales. We then saw consensus on the independent commission, of course, with a former Westminster Member of Parliament for Anglesey a member of that commission. It then went down to policing, probation and youth justice. Yes, it did. After that, the Brown report, which took policing out of the equation, but we still had probation and youth justice. And here we are, having reached the end of the journey, and what is left? Well, even youth justice seems to have gone now.

So, what is left is considering—considering—the devolution of the probation service, but—wait for it, wait for it—in the context of negotiations that are happening across England and Wales. So, it's not even devolution at a national level to Wales, but saying, 'Well, you'll get the same as we're going to do in Middlesbrough and in other parts of England, and so on.' So, that pledge has virtually turned to dust now, if we're entirely honest. That is, the kinds of arguments that we're hearing don't make any sense at all. That is, the new Secretary of State said, during the campaign:

'No-one would be forgiven for trying to rip up and reconstruct the Home Office and the Ministry of Justice at a time when crime is blighting our streets'.

So, just follow the logic of that: the very institutions that have led to this situation, where crime is blighting our streets, are the very institutions that should maintain and retain the powers. Look at the terrible scandal that's happening in Parc prison at the moment; the level of the incarceration of our ethnic minority communities in Wales—the highest in the world, it seems; certainly in western Europe. Are these the institutions, the Home Office and the Ministry of Justice, that we trust actually to deliver criminal justice policy?

And as Jenny Rathbone said, we never get progressive change out of the Home Office, and you referenced, I think, the power of the right-wing press: even Labour Home Secretaries find it very difficult to defeat that. There's an innate conservatism at the very heart of the institution. The very famous story about Jack Straw, when he was first appointed as Home Secretary, and he was invited up to see the Permanent Secretary in the Home Office—very generous of the Permanent Secretary to find the time in his diary to see the new Home Secretary—on the seventh floor. He invited him in, and he said to the new Home Secretary, 'Go and look out the window. Tell me what you see.' And Jack Straw was looking out and he said, 'Well, I just see blue sky.' 'Wrong,' he said. 'Wrong. Imagine an Exocet missile coming through that blue sky, shattering everything, because that's what it's like in the Home Office.' The nature of the institution is that it is incredibly defensive, conservative, waiting for the next bad headline always, and therefore wants to deter any reforming Home Secretary from any programme of change. And indeed, even Conservative Home Secretaries made exactly the same point, from a very different political perspective—they talked about the inertia of the institutions within the Home Office and the Ministry of Justice.

That's why we need to wrest control, because we'll never get the progressive change, the radical change that we need to deliver better security and community safety in our communities and better justice for our people. Don't trust those institution; they've failed the people of Wales in their own terms, and that's why devolution is urgent. I don't want to see it done in a phased way; we need it now.

When you speak to senior police officers in Wales, they are calling for it. These are not politicians; they are saying from an operational perspective, 'We need it, because we have ideas actually, from around the world, that we could implement here in Wales, and deliver progress for our communities.' And as Gareth just said—I'll send you a membership card, Gareth, look—we can have devolution and we can still have cross-border co-operation in terms of our policing; the model is already there. By the way, cross-border co-operation in the world that we are facing now in terms of serious organised crime cannot even stop at the borders of the United Kingdom, so we need to always have that, but we can have that and have democratic decision making and better policy here in Wales.

Inter-governmental relations have not been very good during the last few years. I'm sure that the Conservatives here would be ready enough to admit that. Since Brexit, Westminster has worked hard to undermine devolution. There was no consideration of the Welsh Parliament when passing laws such as the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020. There has been no communication either. We all remember Mark Drakeford on S4C, saying on the documentary programme

'Dear me, he really, really is awful'

about Boris Johnson. Liz Truss never called at all, and Rishi Sunak didn't get in touch about important issues for Wales, such as Tata. I'm genuinely pleased that Keir Starmer, during his first days, did visit the Governments of Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland and met with the mayors of England. That's not difficult, it's a matter of courtesy. But that courtesy has been absent in recent times. Now, it is action that matters.

As the comments about clear red water showed, the fact that the same party is in power in Westminster and in Cardiff Bay does not necessarily lead to agreement. We have already seen this.

The Counsel General has again reiterated the Welsh Government’s commitment to the devolution of justice, while his London-based colleague calls it 'fiddling around'. As Adam Price said, they're rowing back very quickly.

There is a wealth of evidence to show that a new set of devolved powers are not only desirable, but necessary for the benefit of the people of Wales. Our current devolution settlement has us chipping around the edges of some of the most important issues we face. We need to be tackling them head on. We must reject compromises just to keep London-based parties happy. The devolution settlement in Wales has been a series of unworkable compromises. This has left us with a devolution settlement that is anything but settled. Compromises to please others cost Wales and cost the people of Wales. I very much hope that our Welsh Labour colleagues will not be aiming to please the higher-ups at the UK Labour Party, but will instead work to pressure them into doing what is absolutely best for the people of Wales. We need a Welsh and a UK Government that work together for the people of Wales, rather than to appease some MPs.

New Labour set out in 1999 what works for a modern Government, and they said it needs to be evidence-based policy making. Now, on Peter Fox's argument that powers should be allocated on performance, then Westminster should have been stripped of all its powers years ago, and James Evans should know from knocking doors that people have no faith in Westminster either. I'd be more than happy to give him a history lesson about the Welsh legal system that existed for centuries and that we had our own separate courts system until 1830, but I won't go down that route right now.

Along with a reset in relationship with the devolved Governments, I hope we will see a rejection of some post-truth narratives that have been pushed by some high-ranking Tories. I hope comments such as 'people have had enough of experts' are now soundly rejected. If the Labour Party are against the devolution of justice and against the devolution of the Crown Estates, then I ask the Prime Minister, who is a highly regarded and respected and senior barrister, to show us the evidence. Why is he against this? Tell us, Keir Starmer, why you think Lord Thomas, Rowan Williams and Laura MacAllister are wrong.

I want to see Wales finally being able to be a living laboratory for policy development, a Wales that is able to enact radical policies, to truly be the envy of other nations. This is possible, this is within the gift of this new UK Government. Give this place the powers to release Wales to finally reach its full potential. Diolch yn fawr.

The Cabinet Secretary for the constitution to reply. Rebecca Evans.

Thank you. I'm delighted by the results of the general election and what it will mean for the people of Wales. After 14 long years of Conservative UK Government, which has acted as an aggressive competitor rather than being a constructive partner, we now have a major opportunity to reset relations and begin a new era of partnership, with two Labour Governments working together on a shared vision for Wales.

The Welsh Government has consistently made the case for a UK Government approach that backs a stronger Wales in a fairer United Kingdom. One of the first things that the Prime Minister has done is travel to meet the leaders of the devolved Governments in person. This in itself shows a desire to reset a relationship that's been severely strained over recent years. What is clear is that the Prime Minister wants to take a more mature and co-operative approach to inter-governmental relations and this is something that we very much welcome. Proper partnership working is the only effective way to deliver positive change across all four nations.

The Prime Minister's visit to the Senedd earlier this week wasn't just a signal of intent; the new UK Government has very much hit the ground running and the Prime Minister and First Minister discussed a number of key areas where we can work effectively together from day one. Nowhere is this more important than in the future of Welsh steel. We now have a committed partner at a UK level that shares our vision, and we're working at pace to find a solution that guarantees the maximum number of jobs. Looking ahead, there are real opportunities for us to work together across a range of areas, including on a new industrial strategy that could open up major opportunities for investment and jobs across Wales. And I had the opportunity to discuss this with the new Chief Secretary to the Treasury this morning.

The new UK Labour Government will also restore decision-making powers for the Welsh Government over structural funds. These powers were taken away by the Conservatives, who left Wales with less say over less money. It's a very clear example of how the Labour Government will turn the page after years of the Senedd being bypassed and undermined. And the council of nations and regions proposed by the new UK Government has the potential to provide a renewed structure for inter-governmental working and will bring together, on a more regular basis, leaders and decision makers across the UK to the benefit of us all.

With the new UK Government focused squarely on delivering economic growth and a new approach that backs Wales's green growth potential, we can unlock more ambitious opportunities across Wales. We have a new commitment to repairing and extending devolution after a sustained period of attack to bring about a new era for the Senedd and the Welsh Government. I'm looking forward to working closely with the new UK Government to lay the groundwork for sustained economic growth, investment in public services and to shape a prosperous future. At the same time, we have to recognise—

Will you take an intervention?

Of course.

Can you explain why the Labour Party has rowed back on the promise to devolve policing and justice?

We've been very clear—and I am going to come on to this—that devolution in these areas was always going to be a process, and we've set out the key top priority areas that we'll be looking at in the first instance. But I also want to be really clear with colleagues that the Welsh Government's position on these issues hasn't changed one iota. The Welsh Government has been very clear that we accepted all of the recommendations of the constitutional commission's report, and we still absolutely accept those. And there are several things for us to be getting on with in that report, such as democratic innovation, and so on. So, our position on that and our position on the Crown Estate—none of that has altered. But what we do know is that we're six days into a new UK Government. One of the colleagues on the Plaid benches referred in the debate to this being—and I wrote it down—the end of the journey. This isn't the end of the journey, this is the beginning of a new and exciting journey, and as we've set out on a number of occasions, we see devolution in these areas as being very much about a process. But I will come onto some of these things in a bit more detail.

What I did want to do was just to recognise the damage that's been done by the Conservatives, meaning that the fiscal position of the United Kingdom is very difficult and the new UK Government is taking on a tough situation that can't be turned around immediately. One of the first steps taken by the new Chancellor, Rachel Reeves, has been to ask Treasury officials to provide an assessment of the public spending position and this will be presented before the UK Parliament summer recess.

There's no getting away from the fact that, as our amendment highlights, Welsh households have felt the full impact of the mismanagement of the economy by the previous UK Government: increasing mortgages, rents, energy bills, taxes—they've all left families right across Wales struggling to make ends meet. We have to be honest with the public, and the UK Government has been honest with the public, that there is no quick fix to these problems. It will take time to turn things around, and failing to acknowledge that, I think, would just add to and fuel the cynicism that there is around politics.

Despite the challenges, I do know that, in the new UK Government, we will have a new and willing partner that wants to work collaboratively with us to ensure that we have the right tools that we need to deliver our shared aspirations for Wales. There is cross-party support across this Senedd for our proposition that the budget flexibilities afforded to the Welsh Government are insufficient, and we're keen to work with the Chancellor and her team to address this, as well as to ensure an equitable approach to funding across the United Kingdom. Again, this was part of my discussion with the CST this morning.

Rhun ap Iorwerth to reply to the debate.

Thank you very much, Llywydd, and thank you to everyone who has participated in this debate. Apart from the contributions from these benches, I have to say how disappointed I am in the contributions.

I'm disappointed today not just in the lack of confidence in Wales that I hear from Members from the Conservative benches—I guess we're used to that, but have some confidence in the opportunities that devolution offers us. But the main disappointment is in listening to the Minister speak. And I'm sorry to say, but I have to tell you how that sounded from where we're sitting. It sounded as if we have a Welsh Government Minister essentially reading out a Downing Street speech.

This is a Welsh Labour Government that sounds as if it has decided to stop speaking its mind; a Labour Government that had come with us on a long journey on the devolution of crime and justice and on the devolution of the Crown Estate, and now it's decided to park all that. And I can't imagine your Labour supporters, Labour Members, even, in Wales—how disappointed they will be that here we are with a Labour Minister and Labour Members about to vote on a delete-all motion, deleting a motion calling for a funding uplift for Wales. You don't want it. A delete-all motion calling for the deletion of calling for treating Wales on an equal footing with Scotland. The disappointment in Labour ranks will certainly be something that will come back to bite this Government.

Carolyn Thomas talked about banging the drum for Wales. All I hear is beating of a retreat, to be honest with you, and so soon after that election. And, yes, the Minister said that she was delighted with the result of the election—of course she was delighted with the result of the election, but that delight has got to be surely more about counting the number of seats, as large a number as that was; it has to be in what that could offer to Wales, and I'm hearing a Labour Government in Wales backtracking on one issue after another.

We were told that muscular unionism would end with the onset of a Labour Government at Westminster, but Keir Starmer, from where I'm looking, is still flexing away. Peter Fox reminded us that we'd been through a period of political knockabout, but all I saw time and time again was the knocking back of Welsh aspirations. You have senior Labour figures who are now Ministers in Government—Jo Stevens, Stephen Kinnock, Nick Thomas-Symonds—all batting away, dismissing the ideas of additional funding for Wales on crime and justice, or on the Crown Estate. But it's not just, of course, those in Sir Keir Starmer's team who are grateful to be Ministers in that Government now; it's Labour Members here who have decided today to put their hands up and say, 'We are now going to be less ambitious for Wales because we have a Labour Government on a UK level.' It's Labour here in Wales that have decided, rather than flexing for Wales, that they will delete all. Please back Plaid Cymru's motion today.

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

Item 7 is next, the topical questions. The first is to be asked by Andrew R.T. Davies and to be answered by the First Minister.

Thank you for the question. Could I start by thanking the Llywydd for agreeing to move the time for the topical question, so I was able to undertake a visit on the anti-racism action plan, but also for giving permission for a longer-than-usual initial response to the topical question, so I can take Members through this in more detail and on the record?

First of all, I want to start by recognising the Member for Delyn Hannah Blythyn's bravery in making her personal statement to the Senedd yesterday. I recognise again the proud contribution that she made in Government. Like the rest of us, I am pleased to see her back in the Chamber, and I do share her sentiments on the kinder politics that we want to see here in Wales. In addressing the difficult circumstances in which she left Government, I reiterate that personal well-being has been at the front of my mind throughout, and that continues today, as difficult as it is.

In early May, we received a photograph of a fragment of an iMessage chat from a journalist and were asked to comment on its contents. It was from one group chat set up for one day in August 2020, with 11 Welsh Labour Ministers and Deputy Ministers as members. It is, of course, vital for the functioning of Government that Ministers have trust in each other at all times, and that private discussions remain private. For these messages to be provided to a journalist is a breach of that trust.

I spoke to my Cabinet after the messages were leaked and there was a consensus that the trust of Ministers had been breached. I indicated that I was examining the evidence closely and that if the person responsible for the photograph was identified then they could not stay in the Government. Having crosschecked the photograph with the full set of messages, it became clear that the photograph could only have been of one Member's phone. I want to make clear once again that I would rather not go through this detail in public.

Ministers are of course responsible for the security of their data. Once I was in possession of that evidence, which amounts to a breach of the ministerial code, I had to take the difficult decision about whether the Member could remain in the Government. That decision is mine and mine alone as the First Minister. Having reflected, I came to the conclusion that the nature of the breach of the ministerial code and the strength of feeling within Cabinet about the leak was such that the Member could not remain in the Government.

I spoke to Hannah face to face on 16 May and asked her to leave the Government. This was not an easy decision, but I believed then and believe now that it was the right one. At that meeting I confirmed that I had evidence to support the decision. A further meeting to go through the evidence was subsequently arranged with the Member in north Wales on 24 May. Unfortunately and understandably, Hannah was not able to attend as she had been signed off.

I want as well to address the specific concern about the regard given to well-being and welfare. As is already in the public domain, I sought advice from the Permanent Secretary on the process I should follow and this was followed in full, including the need to have regard to the regulation 28 report issued by the north Wales coroner in July 2019 and the Welsh Government's response. My focus and that of the Chief Whip and indeed other ministerial colleagues was and is around well-being. A number of steps were taken to ensure that Hannah could access support as and when required, and that continues to this day.

This has been a very difficult experience for everyone involved and I recognise the impact that it has had. I hope, now that the Member has had the opportunity to address the Chamber, that we can move forward. As I said in my letter to Hannah in May, I believe there is a route back to Government in the future, and that remains my view this afternoon.

Thank you, First Minister, for that detailed response to my initial question and I agree entirely with the fact that, obviously, any Cabinet is formed at the request of the First Minister, and those who serve in that Cabinet are entirely at the discretion of the First Minister. That is not in dispute. But the evidence that was put forward in the personal statement yesterday by the Member indicated some worrying traits in the way this was handled.

The Member said specifically, and so I'll ask you to confirm this if this is the case—. Was the Member at any time informed that she was under investigation? Secondly, was any evidence given to the Member during the process that she could see and address before she was removed from the Cabinet? And further, she makes the point—and these are in the Member's own words—

'at no point was I advised or was it evidenced that I may have broken the ministerial code.'

Those are three very specific points that were in the Member's statement to the Plenary yesterday. I'd be grateful if you would clarify and provide answers for those three specific points. And would you confirm whether you will make public the evidence that you have based your opinion on? Because despite, obviously, what you've said today, there are two conflicting accounts of what went on during this unfortunate episode, we'll call it, because it has affected many people, but none more so than the Member herself, and obviously I think the Chamber deserves the respect to have that evidence and be able to see for themselves exactly the train of events that led to the removal of the Minister from the Cabinet.

As I've said in the statement, I made clear in both Cabinet and, indeed, in a Labour group meeting that if I could identify who was responsible for the photograph, then they couldn't stay in the Government. I'm very clear that it was, in my view, a breach of the ministerial code, and that was made clear in the letter that returned after the meeting. I intended to go through the evidence during the face-to-face meeting, but, understandably—and there is a human point about this—that was not possible. I also understand, as I say in the statement, why it wasn't possible to have a subsequent meeting as well. Again, the evidence was and is straightforward, and the offer has been made to provide it again to the Member.

On determining whether there was a breach of the code, it is the First Minister's responsibility to determine that. There's no way of avoiding that responsibility and making a choice about the right thing to do for the Government and for the country, rather than a matter of convenience for me, and that's the way that I have chosen to act throughout this.

A redacted version is already in the public domain. I don't intend to publish any further information. As I've made clear on more than one occasion, there's a need to think about the interests of other people. I won't publish the information unless every person involved is content for that to happen. I don't think that it actually adds to the choice made or, indeed, the impact of the choice made and the fact that Members in the Government must be able to trust each other for the business of Government to continue in a way that any one of us would expect for this Government, or any other.

Most of us were here yesterday when the Member for Delyn gave her personal statement, and across the benches in this Senedd we all owe it to each other to look after one another, and we all appreciated how difficult it would have been for Hannah to speak yesterday. She spoke with bravery, and I think we owe it to her also to be pursuing this today. I wrote to the First Minister yesterday seeking the publication of evidence, and we have now this opportunity through this question to pursue things further.

One thing still worries me. The First Minister has explained this afternoon one part of the process specifically relating to how a Minister is dismissed, and we know why the First Minister went through that process. I still, I'm afraid, remain unconvinced about the process through which the First Minister came to a conclusion that the evidence that he had in his possession was strong enough to warrant the dismissal of a Minister. And I absolutely agree that a First Minister should be able to make the decisions on the hiring and the removal of Ministers, and that trust is at the heart of those decisions.

But we do know, because the Welsh Government's ethics director wrote to the Public Accounts and Public Administration Committee to say so, that no leak inquiry was commissioned or undertaken. So, what was the nature of the leak inquiry? Was that a leak inquiry that was conducted essentially by the First Minister himself with a close team, or was this another process under the ministerial code or other governmental procedures that the First Minister could hopefully elaborate on today?

We essentially, though, still have two fundamentally different versions of the same event. We have the First Minister saying that the evidence was clear in his mind, and we have a Member making it very, very clear that she denies that. I'm not in a position to be able to take sides, but what we need to do is be clear that we have all that evidence in the public domain that will allow the Welsh public to come to a decision of their own.

So, does the First Minister agree—? And I reiterate what I said in that letter yesterday that we need to see full publication of the nature of that process that he followed, which gave him that evidence and what that evidence is. Does he still agree that failing to act with absolute transparency on this continues to undermine faith in his leadership?

I think there's more than one thing here, and I think the way the Member ended reiterates where he starts from as well. I have been clear, upfront and honest throughout. I've been clear and I've reiterated in today's statement about the fact that, once I'd reached a conclusion, there was a need to make a choice. And only I could make that choice as the First Minister about the functioning of the Government and the trust that is required between Ministers that is essential. I've made clear in today's statement that the process for doing so was actually a simple one. I think the Member's search for complexity just belies the straightforward factual nature of where we are.

Having set out the straightforward nature, you are then left with an inescapable choice to be made. That's the choice that I have made, and it really does put the Government and the interests of the country ahead of my own personal interests. It would have been much easier if I had simply asked other people to get on with it and act as if there wasn't the challenge that plainly was there. I don't think I'd have been doing my job if I hadn't addressed the issue that really was a very active concern amongst Ministers and beyond. That's the way that I have chosen to behave, it's the integrity I bring to my approach to every job I've undertaken and I will continue to undertake.

To start off with, I'm content for my name to be unredacted.

Did Andrew Davies explain why he sacked Nick Ramsay as a committee Chair, when he was on a train back from Europe? Did Leanne Wood explain why she sacked Dafydd Elis-Thomas as a committee Chair? Did Mark Drakeford explain to me why he gave the Chair of the committee I chaired in the last Senedd to Plaid Cymru? Two current Ministers were removed from office previously by former leaders—one's nodding at me.

How can the First Minister be sure that photo editing or video editing were not used on what he's seen?

I think most of those questions are for other people, and to be fair, Mike Hedges already indicated—. I spoke to Mike on the day when the photograph was made available, because I thought it was possible he could be identified, and I did not wish him to see that without being made aware, which is why I spoke to him, because I thought it was the right thing to do. The other questions on the manner in which other people have chosen to make changes to their team are matters for other people.

I'm afraid, though, that, with the image, I think it's not a credible explanation to suggest the image has been manipulated. That wasn't the conclusion that I reached. It's a real conversation that took place, and it's confirmed, because more than one set of images exist. And I've set that out in the statement—the ability to crosscheck confirms the identity of which phone the photograph is taken off. It's as simple as that.

I'm afraid we're still left in this intensely difficult position whereby we have two conflicting accounts of what happened, which are seemingly impossible to reconcile, and we can't leave that just there, unresolved. It's not fair in terms of the individuals concerned, but it also harms the collective reputation of the Government and of this institution. The reference that the First Minister gave to the photographic fragment that he described—and he said that a redacted version has been published—there's nothing in that redacted image that would lead anyone to draw the conclusion that he did, that it has to have been Hannah Blythyn that leaked, and that's why we do need transparency, to understand the basis for the decision. You can’t get that from the redacted image, so we need to understand what led the First Minister to draw his conclusion, which Hannah Blythyn contests.

And could I say this? When we’re in a position like this, where we have two conflicting accounts, it’s not enough for one of the authors of those accounts to be judge in their own court. What we do in circumstances such as that is we have an independent process, an independent arbiter. This is precisely what the Labour administration in Westminster is promising to do: it’s going to strengthen the process of the independent adviser in the ministerial code precisely to avoid situations where there is a conflict of interest in terms of actually getting at the truth. So, can I suggest to the First Minister, adopting the principle that Labour is going to enshrine in Westminster, let’s have an independent report so that we can get at the truth of what actually happened in this case?

I think there are probably three brief points to make. The first is that, when complaints are made under the ministerial code, the First Minister does not always seek advice; some of them are straightforward to deal with. The usual practice is one that does not always lead to reports being published. Ultimately, though, the First Minister, whoever that person is, has to make a choice. In terms of this issue, there isn’t a conflict of interest; there is a simple responsibility to make a decision. I remind the Member again of what I said in the statement: having crosschecked the photograph with the full set of messages, it became clear that the photograph could only have been of one Member’s phone.

I thank the First Minister. The next question will be answered by the Cabinet Secretary for Economy, Energy and Welsh Language, and will be asked by Luke Fletcher.

Both I and the First Minister have had discussions with the new UK Government about Tata Steel, and we look forward to working together with them closely going forward.

Thank you for the response, Cabinet Secretary.

For weeks now, in response to any question on Tata and Port Talbot, we were told to wait for a UK Labour Government. Well, we’re here now and still none the wiser about what the plan is. It was an interesting exchange yesterday between the leader of the Conservatives and the First Minister, where the First Minister denied saying that there was an oven-ready plan for Port Talbot. Now, he was right to say that, because he never did say those exact words, but, to be fair, he did say that he would expect an incoming Labour Government to have a plan for Tata. It doesn’t seem like there is one, and I’m afraid that the comments by the Secretary of State for Business and Trade this morning on Radio Wales didn’t do much to allay those fears. On delaying the proposed closure date of the second blast furnace, he accepted that Tata’s position has been very unmoveable. So, what does the Cabinet Secretary make of this? Tata have been signalling for months that they were unwilling to renegotiate. We’ve seen that in their interviews. We’ve seen that in their evidence to the economy committee here in this Senedd. So, what have you been doing to prepare for this situation?

Now, let’s look at this in the whole: let’s look at the comments from Tata, let’s look at the comments from Governments across the last few months. I’m afraid the logical conclusion leads to the closure of blast furnace 5 in September. So, it’s time to level with us: is the Government committed to keeping blast furnace 5 open, or is it now focusing all its resources and time into securing future investment? Actions and words seem to indicate that that is the case, and, of course, if it is the course of action, then workers and their communities deserve to know.

Well, I’ll remind the Member: the general election was held last Thursday. The results came in on Friday. I most recently met with unions and the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, Jonathan Reynolds, this morning, and with the Secretary of State for Wales, Jo Stevens, this afternoon, to discuss the situation at Tata Steel. I’ll be attending the transition board with the Secretary of State for Wales tomorrow. The First Minister and the Prime Minister discussed Tata during the Prime Minister’s visit to Wales earlier this week, and conversations had been had over the weekend as well as part of the introductions. Time is clearly of the essence, but, in the less than a week since this UK Government was formed, the difference between the engagement that this Labour administration has had and the previous Tory Government has had could not be more stark. I am in absolutely no doubt of how very high up the agenda steel making and the situation at Tata Steel is for this Government, and that the negotiations will now be taking place in earnest. It's important to recognise that it will simply not be appropriate to bring forward much of the detail of any commercial discussions with Tata Steel while they're ongoing, and Members, I think, will understand that. But, to be clear, we want to see a new level of priority attached to jobs, to investment and to primary steel production, and I am confident that this is the view and the level of priority that will be given to this by the new Labour Government.

Can I thank the Member for bringing this question forward? It's important we look at where the future lies with Tata. Last Thursday, election day, No. 5 was shut down. On the same day, the people of Port Talbot and the wider region voted for hope and optimism by putting a Labour Government into place. Now, it is important that we, therefore, support that hope and optimism, because, without that, we would have seen the No. 4 shut down as well—possibly last week, the way they were going, but definitely later on.

And Jonathan Reynolds this morning, I did listen to his comments, and he actually acknowledged that they had been unmoveable, but he was hoping to make them move, because he has said that there's now a new plan in place, there are now new discussions in place, and that the opportunities to look at how we can put forward the money and investment—. There's more money on the table now. The previous Government didn't put anything other than the £500 million and no conditions on it. So, now we have more money on the table, opportunities to actually put in place conditions that protect jobs and conditions that give hope and opportunity for more steel construction. And he also highlighted this morning that he believes steel is a crucial element of the economy.

So, do you agree with me that, without this Labour Government, there would have been no hope, there would have been no ambition, and that we would have seen No. 4 close down in September? But, at this point in time, there are opportunities for negotiation, there's money to have that negotiation to support the changes and, without that, we wouldn't be where we're going. And I do hope that the UK Labour Government does now take that chance, and I hope Tata take that chance as well, because now is an opportunity to actually lengthen the transition period, because, at the moment, we all know it's a cut-off. What he clearly said this morning: we want to ensure that the transition period works for workers and the communities. That means lengthening it, that means, whilst we move to decarbonising, to green steel, we also see jobs maintained in Port Talbot, steel making maintained in Port Talbot, so that we can keep that going. Do you agree that's the right way forward?

I thank David Rees for that question. I do agree that's the right way forward, and the way he described it, as a transition that works for workers and for the community, is exactly what we want to see, and what we have already seen, in fact saw in the days before the election, actually, in terms of the joint working that we had to work with Tata, to work with the unions, in relation to the critical situation that was faced at that point in time. That has provided the space and the opportunity for these discussions to take place. And there's a new level of funding, a new level of expectation and a new level of urgency that this UK Government has brought to those discussions. And I wish we'd been in this position a year ago, to have a Labour Government then, able to work with Tata, because the truth is that we've come into these discussions late, haven't we? Had we had a Labour Government a year ago, we would have had much more space for those discussions. But I'm pleased and I'm glad to say that that space has been created, and we now need to see those discussions taken forward with urgency.

Cabinet Secretary, I've listened closely to your answers to Luke Fletcher and to David Rees, and I'm seeing the reality here of the difference of having to govern—the UK Labour Government having to govern—and not now be in opposition. And I think, in coming back to Luke’s initial question, and in talking to Dai Rees’s questions about transition, has this Welsh Government now admitted that it is content with blast furnace No. 4 being shut? Because, when Dai Rees talks about transition, that is the transition away from blast furnace steel making towards electric arc steel making. So, is that an admittance now from this Welsh Government, with the UK Government, from Jonathan Reynolds with his 'very unmoveable' comments that he made this morning—is that an admittance that blast furnace steel making is to end at Port Talbot?

Let me be clear that we want to see a smooth and a just transition to more sustainable steel making in the future. That has been our position throughout. That continues to be our position. And, in fact, Jonathan Reynolds's comments this morning were not unmoveable. He was displaying a level of commitment to the negotiations, to the discussions, and reminding us all of the new level of funding that's been brought to these discussions, a new level of expectation, a new level of priority attached to jobs, to investment, and that commitment to primary steel making. That's what we need to make sure is at the heart and centre of the discussions in the coming days and weeks.

Cabinet Secretary, as we know, Tata's operations in Wales are centred on Port Talbot, but there are various other sites, of course, including Llanwern. In terms of that transition, as you've described and David Rees has described, the new level of investment will offer opportunities for those other sites, alongside Port Talbot. I'd just like your assurance, as I've asked you many times, that Llanwern will feature in those plans and in that investment, because we have that long history of steel making at Llanwern. It's a very important site, which offers many opportunities, and of course we have quite a young workforce and many apprentices eager to play a part in green steel in Wales in the future.

Yes, I can give John Griffiths the assurance that he is looking for. In the discussions that we have had as a Government throughout, we have looked at the effects of the planned changes in Port Talbot on Llanwern, on Trostre, on Shotton and Caerphilly and those sites, and those works play a full part in the discussions that we have been having, and we are in fact seeking clarity on some aspects of the impact on those plants. I do want to say to him that the investment that we are looking to see is investment in all steel-making production right across Wales, just in the way that he's asked for in his question.

Lastly, Sioned Williams.

Diolch, Llywydd. We were frequently told by Labour politicians that a change in Westminster of Government would, in your words, change

'completely the context for steel production in the UK.'

You said that the view of the Welsh Government is that

'a better deal, both for steel and for the workforce, is available and should have been the kind of deal negotiated between the UK Government and Tata.'

So, what deal? What did you have in mind? The First Minister said, of the previous UK Government plans,

'the outcome we are facing and the loss it represents was preventable, and is still preventable'.

Well, how? There must have been a plan, because it was costed, wasn't it? Keir Starmer said how much he was going to spend, or how much more he was going to spend, so how can you cost a plan without there being a plan? It's not good enough to say that the Labour Government in Westminster is new, because your Labour Government isn't new. So, what work did you do with those costings in mind? Constituents who face losing their jobs, and who are, quite frankly, losing hope, have contacted me after every such statement we've heard, saying, 'What is going to be done?' 'Change' was the slogan for Labour's election campaign, so what has changed, in practical, not rhetorical, terms, now for the steelworkers and contractors of Port Talbot who rely on Tata Steel, their families and their communities, or are their futures, and our ability to make primary steel, still being allowed to be subject to the whims of a multinational company?

Well, I would just remind the Member of the points I've already made in relation to the answer I gave to Luke Fletcher. We are days—less than a week—into the term of a new Government, which brings with it a new level of commitment to steel making, to steel production, to the economy, to industrial strategy. This is a changed landscape for steel. I don't think that people watching this debate will expect a Labour Government elected less than a week ago to have concluded discussions with Tata within days. Those discussions are ongoing. I have been very clear that the level of engagement, and the level of pace, urgency and resource committed to those discussions, is significantly higher than we saw under the previous Government, and I would ask the Member to allow that space to happen, so that those discussions can reach what we all hope will be a fruitful conclusion.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary.

Next, we have voting time and, unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, we will proceed directly to voting time. This afternoon's votes are on item 7, the Plaid Cymru debate on devolved powers and funding. I call for a vote, first of all, on the motion without amendment. Open the vote. Close the vote. The result of the vote is as follows: in favour 12, no abstentions, 41 against. Therefore, the motion is not agreed.

We will now vote on amendment 1. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 will be deselected. I therefore call for a vote on amendment 1, tabled in the name of Jane Hutt. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 27, no abstentions, 26 against. Therefore, amendment 1 is agreed and amendment 2 is deselected.

The final vote will be on the motion as amended.

Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 27, no abstentions, 26 against. Therefore, the motion as amended is agreed.

The short debate is next. Today's short debate is to be introduced by Carolyn Thomas.

And, as Members leave quietly, I'll allow Carolyn Thomas to start her contribution when she feels there's sufficient quiet in the Chamber. Carolyn Thomas.

Diolch, Llywydd. I'd like to give a minute of my time to James Evans and also to Luke Fletcher. Thank you. I'd like to begin by thanking Billie-Jade of the RSPCA and Dewi at Dogs Trust for their help providing research and evidence in support of this debate, 'The pawfect place to call home—providing safe accommodation for pets in Wales.' For many people, their pets are part of their families, providing them with mutual companionship, comfort and positive mental health benefits. According to the RSPCA, more people in Wales consider themselves animal lovers than any other UK nation. People across Wales recognise the benefits of owning a pet, including keeping owners healthy by boosting their immune systems and encouraging them to get regular exercise. It is shown that older people who regularly walk their dogs have better mobility in their homes, and growing up with pets improves children's social skills, also encouraging responsibility and compassion from an early age.

Whilst pets provide us with so many benefits, animals are currently facing more challenges than ever against the backdrop of the cost-of-living crisis, with as many as one in five people in Wales worried about the cost of feeding their pet, and, very sadly, one in 10 are currently cutting back on their own necessities in order to feed their pet. We have also seen the cost of vet bills skyrocket recently, and this, coupled with a reduction in people paying for pet insurance, is a serious animal welfare concern. As many households fall on hard times, all avenues must be explored to ensure that pets are able to stay in good homes where they are loved.

The UK is also in the midst of a housing crisis, and we know that 53 per cent of households have a pet, but just 8 per cent of rental properties are advertised as pet friendly. A lack of pet-friendly homes is one of the key drivers behind people handing over their dogs to rehoming centres in Wales, and, during a three-month period, 118 people inquired about handing over their dogs to the Dogs Trust, citing a change in accommodation or rental agreement as a reason for wanting to relinquish their dog. The mental health repercussions for both pet and owner caused by this forced separation can be devastating. It's also totally unnecessary; evidence gathered by the Local Government and Housing Committee found that pet owners in fact make excellent tenants, as they are more likely to stay in a rental accommodation for an extended period of time, and the vast majority of the landlords find no pet-related damage to their property whatsoever. Making pets the legal default in tenancy agreements would allow more renters to keep or adopt animals and enjoy the many benefits pets provide. Sadly, the lack of pet-friendly rental accommodation also exacerbates the horrendous situations for pet owners who face domestic violence, making it even harder to find somewhere to escape to. Animal abuse occurs in 88 per cent of families where physical abuse of children has been reported, and pets are often used as blackmail in domestic abuse cases.

The Cats Protection lifeline service is a free and confidential fostering service for cats whose families are fleeing domestic abuse so they can rest assured their cat will be taken care of until they are safely reunited. Referrals are handled by a specialist and experienced team. They support owners referring to the service, arrange to collect cats and organise foster placements through a wonderful network of dedicated lifeline volunteers. And the Dogs Trust delivers a similar free specialist dog fostering service to help people escape domestic abuse. It's called the Freedom Project. These services do incredible work and give survivors time to escape abuse and set up a new home without worrying for the safety of their beloved pet.

Reforming private rental pet clauses would also be positive for animal welfare establishments such as sanctuaries, rescues and rehoming centres that are currently struggling with increased costs at a time when fewer people are in a position to commit to pet ownership. As it stands, many establishments of this nature are full to capacity, with this including the RSPCA in Bryn-y-maen in north Wales, and last year, the centre found new homes for 349 animals, including dogs, cats, rabbits, ferrets and more. With there being so many rescue animals in need of forever homes, it's vital that people are actively encouraged to consider adopting a pet as opposed to shopping for one. And you could also try fostering. This also suits somebody who would like to own a pet but is worried about being tied down or the cost, and, very often, rescue centres will cover vet bills and help with food costs for foster homes. Fostering a dog isn't a lifetime commitment; it's a commitment to saving a life. The regulation of sanctuaries, rescues and rehoming centres by the Welsh Government would also ensure that the temporary homes that rescue animals are held in have good welfare standards and that those who provide the care for these vulnerable animals have the skills, experience, knowledge and funds to do so.

We have discussed greyhound racing and the need for a ban in Wales extensively in the Siambr. The newest data from the Greyhound Board of Great Britain shows that more than half of retired greyhounds—and usually, most of them are less than five years of age—are handed over to charities upon retirement, and this is the equivalent of thousands of dogs. Bringing an end to this cruel sport in Wales would create fewer dogs in need of rehoming at the end of their racing careers while also protecting animal welfare and easing the burden on rehoming charities.

During these challenging times, it's more important than ever that people are ensuring that they're in a position to commit to pet ownership, have undertaken relevant research, and that the decisions they make are not guided by trends or how a pet looks like—that they're a fashion statement—before they're given a home.

Can I just say, Carolyn, it's lovely to see one of these short debates on an issue I know that you, Luke Fletcher and a lot of other Members in this Chamber really care about, which is the welfare of our pets right the way across Wales? I'd also just like to thank you for giving me a minute of your time to talk about this. I'm probably halfway through my minute already, Deputy Presiding Officer.

But one thing that does concern me, and you've raised it, Carolyn, is people buying pets, whether that's dogs, cats or exotic pets, without actually knowing the caring responsibilities that come with some of these animals as well. I think that's something that, perhaps, the Welsh Government—I know, the Deputy Minister, it's perhaps not in her portfolio; it's probably with the portfolio holder for rural affairs and climate change—could actually work on, with a public awareness campaign around responsible pet ownership. That is where we see the problems arising, isn't it, with young children being bitten, having life-changing injuries, pets having to go into rehoming centres, because people don't fully understand how much commitment those pets actually need to nurture them and look after them. One point that I always like reiterating to people, which is very important to me, is that when you go out and buy a pet, they are not just for Christmas, they're not just for five minutes and they're not just the latest fashion trend; they are something that's going to be with you, like my late last dog was—she was with me for 14 years; I'll not talk about it, because I'll start crying, but she was with me for 14 years—and it's one of those things, they are members of your family, and you've got to look after them right the way through. And I always say to people as well, 'Don't go out and buy dogs that you see on the different selling channels, like Facebook or whatever. Go and get a dog from a rehoming centre, if you can.' There are lots of good charities out there that rehome all types of dog, and they all need a good home and a good life. But thank you very much, Carolyn, for bringing forward this very important debate today.

Thank you, Carolyn, for giving me a minute of your time. I'd like to touch on two specific areas here. One of them is private rented accommodation, specifically the challenges faced by homeless people with pets. Now, most homeless accommodation doesn't allow pets, so, a lot of the time, those who are homeless but with a pet are faced with the decision of either giving up their companion, who, more often than not, has been through thick and thin with them, or remain homeless. Now, that's a terrible decision to have to make, and I would hope that the Government could do something around ensuring that those with pets who are facing homelessness aren't put at an unfair disadvantage when trying to get accommodation and trying to get off the streets.

I'd also echo something that James said around responsible pet ownership. I think there does need to be a campaign around awareness of the different breeds of dogs—you know, different breeds of dogs have different needs; the needs of a chihuahua are going to be very different to the needs of a German Shepherd. And I think, sometimes, decisions are made based on how cool that particular breed might look. I knew exactly what I was getting into when I went for a whippet; I knew they would be lazy and I knew they would be quiet—perfect for me, very similar to me—but we need to make sure that people know what they're getting into, that they're able to handle that dog, handle the needs of the dog and handle the temperament of the dog. Otherwise, we're going to see scenarios, as we've been seeing lately, crop up too often.

And I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Finance, Constitution and Cabinet Office to reply to the debate. Rebecca Evans.

Thank you. And thank you very much to Carolyn Thomas for raising this issue, which is so close to so many people's hearts. I'm really glad to have the opportunity to respond on behalf of the Cabinet Secretary for Housing, Local Government and Planning to the debate this afternoon. I just want to recognise that, for so many people, pets are more than just animals; they're family members and they provide us with companionship, comfort and unconditional love. And it's our responsibility to ensure that their safety and welfare is there at all times, and particularly so when circumstances render their current homes uninhabitable or unsafe.

Evidence shows us that pets, especially cats and dogs, can reduce stress, reduce anxiety and depression, ease loneliness, encourage exercise and playfulness, and even improve cardiovascular health. And caring for an animal can also help children to grow up more secure and more active. And perhaps most importantly, though, a pet can add real joy to life.

In Wales, we understand the value that people place on their pets and it's understandable that people looking to rent homes in the private sector want to find appropriate accommodation that provides sanctuary not just for themselves, but also for their pets. Under the Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016, landlords and contract holders can agree additional terms covering the keeping of pets. Welsh Government has issued guidance setting out that any pet clause should allow a contract holder to ask for permission to keep a pet and the landlord is not allowed to unreasonably refuse the request. Of course, having a pet is a serious commitment and providing safe accommodation for them is crucial to their well-being and their health. The safety of the accommodation is as relevant for the pet as it is for the owner.

The Renting Homes (Wales) Act makes clear the obligations on a landlord to ensure that, at the start of and during the entirety of the occupation contract, the dwelling is fit for human habitation, and these regulations set out no less than 29 matters and circumstances to which regard must be had when determining whether a property is fit to live in. And these include damp, cold and sanitation and specific requirements, such as the installation of working hardwired smoke alarms, carbon monoxide alarms and regular electrical inspections. All of these provisions provide safeguards against risks, harm and potential danger for contract holders in Wales, including their family and their pets.

I know the ability of pet owners to access private rented sector accommodation is an issue that the Local Government and Housing Committee has heard evidence on, as part of its ongoing inquiry into the private rented sector. As was highlighted in her evidence to the committee, the Cabinet Secretary for Housing, Local Government and Planning has expressed her support for the RSPCA's best practice guidance for pets in private rented properties. Along with the Homes for All guide, this best practice guidance has been shared with private landlords and agents through Rent Smart Wales. The guidance offers a unique opportunity to promote to the sector some of the key issues that should be considered regarding the keeping of pets in private rented accommodation, simultaneously breaking down the stigma and fear that some landlords have in allowing this.

Thank you, all. That brings today's proceedings to a close.