Plenary

The next item will be questions to the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care. The first question is from Carolyn Thomas.

In light of the global shortage of healthcare workers, all nations across the UK face workforce challenges. This impacts the length and breadth of Wales. In recognising the need for action, in January 2023, we published our national workforce implementation plan, which set out actions to improve recruitment and retention, including improving staff well-being.

Thank you for the answer, Minister. This month, thanks to Welsh Government investment support, the new North Wales Medical School at Bangor University has welcomed its first intake of students, which includes a mix of school leavers and graduate entrants. North Wales Medical School will grow over time to graduate up to 140 newly qualified doctors to join the NHS workforce each year, creating new pathways for students to achieve their dream of joining the medical profession, and, hopefully, making their homes in north Wales—beautiful north Wales—as we all want to see. Minister, do you agree that this is a fantastic example of the Welsh Government's commitment to encouraging those interested in a career in healthcare to train, work and live here in Wales, in north Wales? And how do you intend to work with our new UK Labour colleagues in Westminster to help close the gaps in our health and social care sectors as well?

I thank the Member for that important question. The establishment of the new medical school in north Wales will, obviously, enable us to train more medical students here in Wales, but also will ensure that we can distribute training opportunities and, hopefully, the provision of well-qualified doctors right across Wales as well.

The experience that we offer students in Wales routinely tops league tables in terms of excellent student experience, and I think that's something that we can be proud of. And students also play a really important role in service delivery, through their placements across Wales as well. I think it's really important, as we've discussed already in the Chamber today, to maximise the benefit of the investment that we are making through employing and retaining newly qualified professionals. I think that the new medical school is good news for students, it's good news for the people of north Wales, and for Betsi Cadwaladr health board as well.

The issue surrounding recruitment and retention is very much a non-political matter, and as a former employee of Betsi Cadwaladr, the line of 'Train. Work. Live.' in north Wales is nothing new in that regard, because it was always something that was spoken about. I'm pleased that the medical school will hopefully create inroads to achieving that, and that you can live and work in an environment where you earn as you learn, if you like. Because that's something that, essentially, was a big barrier in my early career in the NHS. It was actually the glass ceiling breaking in, and actually having training opportunities within the workforce.

But I’d just like to ask a question around the training and development of current staff within the NHS and what support and guidance you would give to health boards in that regard, because it is important to remember that seeking an educational alternative to some of these professions is not always financially equitable to do and it takes a lot of sacrifice and dedication. So, I’m keen to look at avenues that the Welsh Government can explore—an earn-as-you-learn development scheme internally within the NHS that can create more fluidity within the workforce, but then also have protected time for professionals so that they don’t become disillusioned within their careers and then, essentially, they’re not leaving the health service, so that 'Train. Work. Live.' can actually run deeper than just warm words. Thank you.

The 'Train. Work. Live.' campaign has been a very successful campaign, actually. I think that, last year, a total of 199 new GP trainees were recruited to schemes across Wales, which is a good number. I think the Member is right to say that it is important that we provide, as well as good training and education opportunities for healthcare professionals of all sorts to qualify, the addition of initially 80 new student training spaces in north Wales, increasing to 140. That will make a significant contribution to those overall numbers, and that’s in north Wales; there’s obviously been an expansion as well in south Wales.

But the Member is right to say that, critical, I think, both in terms of the provision of care and maintaining currency in terms of skills, are also those incentives that encourage people to stay in the health and care sectors, which is a critical priority for us. That does depend on being able to offer, as we do, an attractive package of ongoing training and education and a clear pathway from undergraduate to postgraduate training through that person’s career. So, I think that that commitment to retention—we now have a retention lead in each local health board area—with a planned dimension, in the workforce implementation plan, underpinned by that strong commitment to ongoing professional development and training, is really critical.

Health boards in Wales have, since 2008, been required to have sustainable travel plans in place for patients and staff at their main hospital sites. Monitoring arrangements are in the hands of the health boards, and the plans are not submitted or monitored by Welsh Government officials.

Thank you. Anyone who has tried parking at a hospital knows what a nightmare it can be, and the research also shows that, in most cases, the majority of staff at a hospital live within close distance and work within office hours, and yet drive. And we know that travel planning, when monitored and supported properly—which, it sounds from the answer, is not always the case at the moment—can be successful in reducing the number of people driving to hospital, which can then free up car parking spaces for visitors. We know that, in order to reach our broader climate change targets, we need to reduce the number of car journeys that are made, and last week’s Wales Net Zero 2035 report said that big employers like the NHS have a key part to play in incentivising walking, cycling and public transport for work journeys. So, what more can the health and care sectors do to make their contribution to tackling the climate emergency and to easing the congestion at hospital sites?

I thank the Member for that question. I think what motivates his question is the contribution that the health service can make to the broader ambitions that we have as a country in relation to our net-zero goals and responding to the climate emergency. But I also think it's an important lens to apply to the sustainability of the health service itself and the behaviours that it can model, both to its staff and its patients, and to its partners more broadly.

As I said, since 2008, those requirements have been in place. We reaffirmed those in 2018 through a Welsh health circular, setting out the requirements on organisations to have those plans in place. Those requirements remain extant. I know that health boards are using a range of incentives to encourage staff to use active travel—so, bus pass schemes, cycle-to-work schemes, lift sharing, and so on. The decarbonisation strategic delivery plan for the NHS in Wales, which was launched three years ago, follows closely the guidance in the active travel plan for Wales, to make sure that active travel is factored into decision making, in particular in the context of new developments. But I think it is true to say, having made enquiries with health boards, that it is a variable picture in relation to the publication of those active travel plans. And I think, given the publication of the Welsh Government's active travel plan for Wales 2024-27, it's timely to issue a reminder to the organisation of the requirement to have plans. So, I have asked officials in my department to do that.

Cabinet Secretary, the lack of bus services to the Grange hospital continues to be a major issue for many of my constituents across south-east Wales. In 2023, it was announced that a new direct bus route would run between Blackwood and the hospital itself. But, some seven months later, the service was axed when the Welsh Government withdrew their funding. As I'm sure you're well aware, Cabinet Secretary, there are lots of issues with the Grange hospital, including lack of accessibility. This service was hugely beneficial to my constituents, particularly those who don't drive, or, indeed, following treatment, and now they're having to focus by enduring lengthy journeys involving multiple buses. So, Cabinet Secretary, do you agree with me that urgent improvements must be made immediately so that residents can indeed access the Grange, and what discussions have you had with the transport Secretary about addressing this issue, going forward? Thank you.

Well, the transport Secretary and I are of the same mind in relation to this. We both recognise how important it is to have bus services that enable families, communities to be connected to services, as well as to each other. I think the point that the Member makes highlights one of the challenges that we face in the current model that we have for the delivery of bus services, which I think, by any realistic measure, can be said to be broken and requires huge levels of public subsidy, without delivering really the public good that we need it to do. That is what lies behind the legislation that we plan to introduce to the Senedd, which will enable us to re-regulate the bus network in Wales, which will provide the opportunity for us to make sure that services are delivered where they are required, rather than where they are simply profitable for bus companies.

Following on from Natasha's question—

—and not to rehearse the same argument, because the Grange is something that is not best served with some of the public transport links that have been there, and, obviously, that bus service that Natasha talked about was jettisoned after six months, could you go into a little bit more detail about what those discussions with the Cabinet Secretary for transport are looking like, and also what are your thoughts with regard to the bus Bill, when it comes along? How will the NHS feed into feasibility studies for where those routes need to be and how you need to link up hosptials across the south-east and across Wales to the bus service?

That's an important consideration. I think making sure that services to which the public need access are supported by provisions in the new legislation, obviously, is critical. I think there'll be an opportunity to discuss in more detail what that looks like when the legislation is brought forward. So, the Member may have to bear with us for a little while longer.

Questions from the spokespeople now. The Conservative spokesperson first of all, Sam Rowlands.

Diolch, Llywydd. Cabinet Secretary, the First Minister has said that she's ready to use the private sector in the Welsh NHS. Are you ready?

Well, the Welsh Government has made use of private sector capacity for the common good, if you like, for many years. We recognise that the priority that the Government attaches to reducing waiting lists means that we will have to look at whatever options are available. I actually think that, in the long term, what we want to see is making sure that we have the level of innovation and learning from best practice within the public sector, but there have been times when we need to deploy private sector capacity to help us in those public goals.

Thank you for your response, Cabinet Secretary. As Welsh Conservatives, we have consistently called for greater partnership working with both the private and third sectors to, as you say, supplement and assist the NHS here in Wales, which sadly is creaking after a quarter of a century of Welsh Labour rule. So, I'm glad that you agree with a Welsh Conservative idea and have taken that on as well. As a new health Cabinet Secretary, I do hope we see a more cohesive and positive approach from you to utilising both the private and third sectors in order to support, as you say, those languishing waiting lists that we see here in Wales at the moment. In relation to those waiting lists, I didn’t get an answer yesterday from the First Minister on this issue. So, can you tell me what targets you’re setting for the reduction of those NHS waiting lists?

Well, just to be clear, I think the Member, if I may say, is somewhat wide of the mark if he thinks that I share the Conservative view on how to run the NHS. And to be clear, the principle that the Welsh Government has applied in making use of private sector capacity is that it shouldn’t be at the expense of the long-term capacity of the NHS, which is fundamentally different from the approach that Conservative Governments have taken in England over the last 14 years.

The targets that we’ve published in relation to waiting times are the targets that are in the public domain, against which we report on a monthly basis. The most recent figures, of course, came out last month. What I want to make sure is that we can, with a level of priority that this Government is attaching to reducing those waiting times, make better progress against the targets that we have already set. As the Member will have seen from the information published last week, there is a variable picture between health boards in relation to different measures, different services, and the challenge and, I think, the opportunity for us is to make sure that those parts of the organisation that need to do more to meet their targets are able to learn from those that are doing better. Each health board is doing well in some areas, and each health board has areas they need to work on. So, having that collaborative approach, that collaborative innovation, across the system, I think is a critical part of the solution.

Yes and, as you say, that collaborative approach is really important, but, sadly, I don’t think we’ve seen it enough. And a live example I can give you is that, for glaucoma operations in Wrexham at the moment, patients there are waiting three years on a waiting list for a disease that clearly has a massive impact on their daily lives. If you live in Cheshire, it’s a four-week wait, just across the border, because the health trust there has a partnership arrangement with a private sector company to deliver those operations. A four-week wait in Cheshire, a three-year wait in Wrexham. So, there are huge opportunities.

In terms of those targets that we mentioned, as well, it is disappointing that it seems as though many of the targets that are in place are not worth the paper that they’re written on. And the consequences of those targets not being met seem to pretty weak, to say the very least. And it is remarkable, as we heard again yesterday from the First Minister about this collaboration between the Welsh and UK Governments on cutting waiting lists and working together, it is remarkable that it was so light on the detail of what the collaboration should look like, because you would agree, I’m sure, that cutting waiting lists is surely one of your top priorities here in Wales—it’s what the people of Wales want to see. So, why is it that there does not seem to be a concrete plan for cutting those waiting lists?

Well, I think there is a plan for cutting those waiting lists. The point that the First Minister was making yesterday reflects the point that I have just made to the Member in my reply now, which is how important it is for the health service to look to best practice both within other parts of the organisation and also further afield, just as all the public services that we’re responsible for here in Wales take inspiration from best practice wherever that is. And the point that the First Minister was making was that where we have seen, in parts of NHS England in this particular case, successful strategies for supporting reductions in waiting lists—and, absolutely, targets aren’t being met in England either, but there are elements of progress—the question is how we can work together to learn from that. Some of those will work, perhaps, for us in Wales, and some of them will not, but I think having that collaborative approach, where we can learn from things that have worked, is just sensible.

The Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Mabon ap Gwynfor.

Thank you very much, Llywydd. Well, I’d like to welcome the Cabinet Secretary to his new role once again, and we all wish him well as he seeks to tackle the huge challenges that exist within the health sector.

Of course, Llywydd, the current Cabinet Secretary is the sixth member of the Labour group to hold the health portfolio and, indeed, the third this year. But despite this merry-go-round of ministerial appointments, the record on health is the same. Every Minister or Cabinet Secretary in turn has talked about reducing waiting lists, and we’ve heard that again this afternoon. But, ultimately, they leave the job with the waiting lists having grown longer. So, what will you do differently?

Well, I think, if you look at the longest waiting lists under my predecessor, the First Minister, we’ve seen significant progress over the past two years, with progress in achieving the target, with 67 per cent fewer people on the longer waiting lists than there were two years ago. We've seen over the past three, four months that we've rowed back a little bit on that progress. So, what that demonstrates is that we need sustainable progress for the future.

So, there are many things in the system already to tackle this. The first is new, innovative ways to tackle some of the challenges. So, we're looking at what more we can do to ensure that we use operating theatres more effectively, how can we create clinics so that less complex surgery can be undertaken more swiftly, without overnight stays, what further use can be made of AI, for example. So, there is innovation in the system already. What I want to see is that we see more and more of that happening. I've already talked about how important it is that we learn from successes within the system more swiftly, that we can see where the successes are and then share them and spread them more swiftly than we’ve done in the past.

We've also seen—what the Prime Minister has been saying over the past few weeks—how much of a priority reducing waiting lists is now. So, that means that we’re reprioritising within Government as a result of that. But, at the heart of all that work, I think, is better collaboration within the health service and between the health service and, for example, local authorities, but other partners too.

Warm words, but the same outcome, I’m afraid, is what we’ll see. Now, the Darzi report states the failures in the English health system, a system that the Labour Minister Wes Streeting and his PM Keir Starmer say is broken and is the fault of the previous Tory Government. They say that they’ll take responsibility for fixing it. On every metric, the NHS is performing worse in Wales, yet here this Government denies any responsibility and blames everybody else, from health managers to the public, for various failings. So, instead of taking responsibility to fix this, instead of a statement to be scrutinised in the Senedd, we get a headline from the Labour Party conference that this Government plans to outsource its responsibility for the NHS to Westminster. We await the actual substance of the agreement with interest, but is this not simply a case of the Welsh Government abdicating responsibility? Does the Cabinet Secretary agree that this is an admission that 25 years of Labour in Government in Wales has been an abject failure when it comes to running our NHS?

I think the Member’s rhetoric is getting rather ahead of the facts of this matter. I think, just to repeat, if he didn’t hear my response to the earlier question, what the First Minister announced in the conference was a different approach whereby I think, and I think the Member would agree with me, all aspects of the work that we are responsible for here in the Senedd should learn from good practice both in Wales and wherever else it can be found. The First Minister was describing a partnership approach so that we can do more of that in the future. There is no question, as I’ve made really clear in all the interviews I’ve given since I became the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care, that we are all accountable for our roles and responsibilities within the Government and within the health service. Each of us has a different part to play, and each of us is responsible both for working with each other and being accountable for those outcomes.

The problems in the health service have been known for years, of course, with warnings given of a shortage of GPs and a shortage of nurses and others in the workforce for a decade and more. The lack of action on these warnings has a direct impact, therefore, on the health and well-being of people on a daily basis today.

Consider the story of Rhythwyn Evans from Tregaron. Four years ago, having been inspired by Captain Tom, Rhythwyn raised £50,000 during the pandemic for the Hywel Dda health board by walking around his bungalow. Now, Rhythwyn is receiving care in a bed at Tregaron hospital, at the very time when the board is considering closing those beds there. This follows the closure of the Dyfi ward in Tywyn, closing the minor injury units in Llandrindod, Brecon and Prince Philip in Llanelli overnight, and considering closing the paediatric unit in Bronglais, all because of a shortage of nurses and an inability to staff these facilities, and quite contrary to your rhetoric of providing care closer to home. So, what will you do differently to ensure that we have the necessary workforce in place in order to ensure that these patients receive care in their community?

Well, more people are employed by the health service now than ever before. The GP figures are consistent, after a significant increase. There are recruitment challenges in parts of the health and care service, as is the case across the United Kingdom The work that we've been doing to recruit is seeing success. We have more places now for nurse training than were filled last year. Everything isn't right. I have acknowledged that. I have acknowledged that there are specific needs. But we have seen successes in some of our work. We haven't reached where we want to and we've seen challenges in the system. But it's clear from the discussions that we've already had today what our commitment is as a Government in terms of training more doctors, training more nurses, recruiting more dentists and other healthcare professionals. There is work to do, but we do have plans in place for all of those things.

We continue to make progress on the actions set out in our response to the recommendations in the committee report, and we will provide a full update to the committee early in 2025.

Thank you very much, Minister. According to the NHS Confederation, the suicide rates in disadvantaged areas of Wales are between two and three times higher than they are in more privileged areas. Sixty-one per cent of adults in Wales say that their financial situation has a detrimental impact on their mental health. Quite simply, poverty destroys lives, poverty has an impact on health, and poverty kills. How is the Welsh Government going to tackle the poverty that impacts the health of so many in our nation and leads to many suicides? Thank you.

Thank you very much for the question. As with my predecessors, preventing suicide is a priority, and, as part of this, there is the new funding agreed for mental health, with additional funding for targeted support to this agenda, and this funding has transformed the infrastructure in Wales to prevent suicide and self-harm. This includes strengthening the local multisectoral partnership arrangements through regional co-ordinators and driving national action with our national suicide and self-harm prevention leads. In 2022, we also introduced the real-time suspected suicide surveillance in Wales to provide information to help partners to target prevention, ensure support is made available and to respond when needed. And, as part of developing our new suicide and self-harm prevention strategy, which is due to be delivered shortly, we are reviewing our governance arrangements to strengthen our ability to collect and analyse evidence in relation to suicide and self-harm. And to draw specifically on what you were asking about targeting people from particular backgrounds, we are also reviewing how we draw cross-Government and cross-sector partners together to help shape actions, including across health, housing, transport, education, social services, policing and custodial settings, welfare and employment. This is something that impacts communities and is something that Welsh Government takes incredibly seriously, and we are doing all that we can to tackle this. Diolch.

I too would be very interested to see what actions have been taken on the back of this report into these inequalities. I don't know if you're aware, Minister, but, in Aneurin Bevan health board, even if you're put on the NHS urgent list for mental health counselling, someone still has to wait months and months just for a telephone appointment for counselling, the alternative being to wait a further seven months for a face-to-face counselling session. Are you aware, Minister, that there seems to be a massive disparity across the Welsh health boards in terms of these waiting lists for counselling? And I'd be interested to know if you've begun to address this, because it's all very well talking about the importance of mental health, but how are you going to ensure that mental health counselling is getting the staff and the resources that it needs, particularly on the back of the success of '111 press 2'? Because the demand for these services is increasing, but it's very worrying that there doesn't seem to be the funding available to support that increase in demand, and people cannot afford to go private. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Yes, as many people in this Chamber will know, because you were with me, I actually sat on the Health and Social Care Committee when we undertook this inquiry. I heard all of the evidence, and I'm really glad that I did, now being in this role in Welsh Government. To reiterate, really, we are absolutely committed to tackling the inequalities in access to and outcomes from mental health support, and our approach continues to be informed by the recommendations in that very report. As I mentioned as well, we have the mental health strategy coming; it is imminently coming. We had 370-plus responses to it—a huge amount came in, many of them reflecting what you said, absolutely, and that's why we're taking it very seriously in what we set out in the strategy with those targets, but also sharing that best practice across the health board. I'm very dismayed to hear this, though. I would welcome it if you would write to me afterwards so that I can look into this further with that specific health board. But I also wanted to say that the implementation of our final published strategy will take a rights-based approach to ensuring that everyone has the best mental health possible and that they will be able to get the right service at the right time. Diolch.

Primary care services are busier than ever, delivering more advanced clinical services than before the pandemic across the various professions, fulfilling our commitment to bringing care closer to home. There are now around 2 million patient interactions each month, and we continue to monitor demand and support service delivery.

Primary care serves as the first point of access for many residents, leading to high demand, with record numbers since the pandemic. Members of the multidisciplinary teams, including care navigators, will face a challenging winter, with residents already reaching out to my office about difficulties booking appointments, especially during the eight o'clock rush. Although the majority of residents have no concerns or problems with the care they receive, their experience in trying to make appointments is falling short. What specific support can be provided to primary care staff to increase appointment availability? Does this include improved digital systems and, if so, how can we ensure that residents, particularly elderly residents, are supported in the transition to digital platforms? Additionally, what other measures are in place to prevent further bottlenecks as winter pressures continue to rise?

Firstly, let me say I'm disappointed to hear of the experience that you're reporting that your constituents have had. It's obviously important that the public are able to have timely access to GP services. As the Member will know, the general medical services contract that governs GP services has been amended to improve access to GP services. That's now a part of the new contract, and it's a requirement for GP practices to have appropriate telephony and call handling systems in place—so, a mixed offer, addressing the point that the Member raised in her question about accessibility for all patients. And that should avoid, and it's intended to avoid, the need for people to call back multiple times.

So, that is now already a provision in the GP contract. I think there is a case for monitoring, clearly, given what you have been saying, for enhancing the monitoring, of those arrangements. On a self-reported basis, the practices tell us that about 97 per cent across Wales are complying with that, but I've asked my officials what more we can do to assure ourselves that the picture on the ground is as it should be, in accordance with the contract.

You asked in particular about digital and the role that digital has to play in the future mix in terms of access to GPs. The NHS Wales digital app is being rolled out across Wales, as you know, and GP practices can actually use that to book appointments—routine appointments, effectively—for things like annual reviews for chronic conditions or ordering repeat medication. So, by doing that, it can free up other capacity for people to access appointments and reduce the number of phone calls that people have to make for that. So, it has a role to play, but it's part of a mixed offer.

Finally, in terms of the support that we are giving as a Government, we have been investing our funding to enable staff to be taken on—additional capacity, effectively—and I think we can see the evidence of that in a number of practices where we have people supporting clinicians to deliver that access, and helping patients navigate the kind of care that they need, which quite often may well not be a visit to the doctor themselves.

Cabinet Secretary, while the strains on GP services are well documented, the pressures being placed on community pharmacies are not often talked about. We are telling the public to choose well, to see a pharmacist before a GP, and a GP before A&E, but we're not following up that advice with adequate resources. As a result of the strain pharmacies find themselves under, many are considering a work-to-rule protest, only opening for the hours contracted by the NHS. This would be an understandable move yet a devastating blow for primary care and our entire NHS, especially as we move into cold and flu season. Therefore, Cabinet Secretary, what discussions have you had with the sector to ensure that they are properly resourced for the invaluable work they do for our NHS?

Well, the Member will wish to know that the negotiations for contracts, including for GMS, but also for primary care providers, have started today, so we hope that they will go forward in a constructive way and enable that support to be provided. The Member is right to say that a critical way to ensure the resilience of primary care provision, which is so important, is that mixed model, and he is right to say that, in order for that mixed model to work, there needs to be sufficient resource and accessibility for those other points of access that we were touching on yesterday in the statement in relation to winter preparedness, the increasing importance of access to community pharmacies.

The figures I have in front of me suggest that there were over 20,000 common ailment service consultations at a pharmacy in Wales in each month of the last year, which is a very significant increase. And we have independent prescribing pharmacists now delivering around 11,000 consultations monthly, so we can start to see the shift in the direction of non-GP surgery provision. As I say, the negotiations for those new contracts have started today, and I hope they will reach a successful conclusion soon.

Primary care in the Holyhead area has suffered a great deal following the pandemic, and also during the pandemic. It's going to be five years, within a few days now, since the closure of Longford Road and Cambria surgeries, with the health board having to take them over and create a single new surgery. But we made the case then on the need for a new multidisciplinary surgery in Holyhead, and in principle we won that debate very early on. But it's taken until now, five years hence, for the outline strategic case to go before the Betsi Cadwaladr board, and I'm very pleased that it is going before the health board tomorrow. I'm confident that they will give their blessing to that part of the plan. I appeal, therefore, to the Cabinet Secretary not to delay, to give a clear sign that the Government is willing to provide the financial support to ensure that this can proceed to the next stage, so that it can be delivered swiftly, because the people of Holyhead and the surrounding area deserve no less.

I know that Hwb Iechyd Cybi has been successful in recruiting GPs recently—that, of course, is to be greatly welcomed. The situation can be very challenging, can't it, when gaps appear that are difficult to fill, and that is so important. So, we'll wait to see what emerges from the meetings of the Betsi Cadwaladr board, which will be happening later this week.

We published our policy approach to the care of critically ill patients in October 2021. We expect health boards in Wales to apply clinical guidance from the Faculty of Intensive Care Medicine and the Intensive Care Society. The NHS executive’s relevant clinical network supports health boards to operationalise this guidance.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. Earlier this month, I had the opportunity—very humbling, it was—to visit the fantastic ICUsteps support group in Abergavenny, and it was extremely moving. I didn't realise, until that point, the trauma of people who've gone through intensive care. It's an invaluable support group, and it's run by patients, relatives and healthcare professionals who have experienced ICU wards. They provide ongoing support for patients following their discharge from hospital. I think there are only a couple of these operating across Wales, and it's something I would certainly advocate, because these people valued it so, so much.

It's sad that the experience of being in ICU can be incredibly traumatising, as I said, for both patients and relatives, with many patients having no recollection of any of their experiences and having to face the difficulties of recovery. Some even told me that they contemplated taking their own lives. This is often exacerbated by poor communication down the line from GP to hospital, from hospital to hospital, and hospital ward to hospital ward, to GP. The whole trail of a lack of communication was something that came up many times for many people there. So, with this in mind, Cabinet Secretary, what consideration has the Welsh Government given to improving both mental health services and practical support for those who have experienced the trauma of ICU? I would encourage you to perhaps look into the ICUsteps support group—it's a fantastic support group.

Well, firstly, I'm sorry to hear the experience of those individuals as they reported it to the Member. I was not aware of the group to which the Member refers, and perhaps if you would be happy to write to me, I would make myself more familiar with the work that they do, and perhaps even meet with them.

In relation to the work that we can do at a national level to try and address the sorts of challenges that the Member is describing, I mentioned in my initial answer the role of the clinical networks that the NHS executive put in place, and the point of those is to try and standardise delivery on the basis of best practice across Wales in a range of different practice areas. There is a particular one that has been launched in relation to critical care, major trauma and emergency medicine, and that has developed a service specification for recovery after critical care, which all health boards should be working to. They've also established—mindful of the point that the Member is making about variation—a peer review programme that can help health boards to identify gaps in the kind of provision the Member is referring to, to then try and improve that service delivery. So, that work is work that we can do at a national level, through the executive, and there's an implementation and peer review programme that goes with that. There's doubtless more work to do, but I look forward to hearing more about the group that you mentioned.

The decision was made by the Welsh Health Specialised Services Committee, which had responsibility for the commissioning of specialised services on behalf of health boards at the time. The assessment was made that the level of demand in north Wales was below the recommended minimum size for a mother and baby unit.

A great deal of concern has been expressed about this plan, and I believe that there is a better way forward than that which is currently being considered. It appears that two beds won't be sufficient in terms of meeting the demand. Statistics from 2018 demonstrate that mothers have not attended units out of the area because of the distance they would need to travel and they would be separated from their families, and of course Welsh-medium support is also needed. Delay is being seen now in the Chester plan, which gives us an opportunity to reflect, I believe, on the true needs of mothers and families in north Wales who do need support. This includes looking at the evidence, of course, doesn't it? But I have asked and asked again, and the modelling that you have mentioned that was undertaken previously, that hasn't seen the light of day; I haven't seen it, and I have been searching for it for a very long time. So, could you access this modelling, share it with us, and can we have a further conversation based on clear evidence about this plan? Thank you.

Thank you very much. As we know, up to 20 per cent of women experience a mental health problem in the perinatal period, and these can range from moderate to severe, and the most severe will require pathways that do not include in-patient treatment in a mother and baby unit. But in the role of commissioning specialised services on behalf of health boards, WHSSC at the time estimated that there would be demand for eight beds across Wales—two in north Wales and six in south Wales—and the recommended minimum number of beds to sustain a unit is six beds. As we discussed when we met—and I really appreciate that, because I know that you're extremely passionate about this, as am I—the statistics that you use from 2018, I believe things have very much changed since then, and I'm basing that on the fact that I've met with the people who deliver this service, and they do not believe that there is a requirement for any more than two at the moment.

However, I do take this very seriously and so, following your correspondence, I have engaged with officials, the NHS Wales joint commissioning committee, as they are now, and clinicians in Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board to explore the points that you have raised regarding the appropriateness of the Chester unit and to consider any potential alternatives. To inform any decisions about future provision, I have asked the JCC to undertake a comprehensive demand-and-capacity review of mother and baby unit provision in Wales as soon as possible. This will not only capture placements made within a mother and baby unit, but it will also include an assessment of where an in-patient placement was felt appropriate but did not happen, with a clear rationale of why this was the case, as you requested. The results of this work will be made available to you. And I also want to say that the JCC would also ensure that robust arrangements are in place to quality assure any placements that are made by Welsh residents. Diolch.

Can I thank the Minister for that very full response, which I thought was very well considered? The one element of the response that you didn't refer to, which I was hoping that you would make mention of, was the fact that, whilst I appreciate that work has been done looking at the number of beds that might be required to serve the population in north Wales, we've always had a situation where the population, frankly, makes it difficult to sustain a mother and baby unit. I've known that for many years and, in fact, I can remember being on the health committee when we considered these matters in the past. However, on a cross-border basis, there clearly is a sufficient number of people, but it seems to me that every time there's cross-border provision needed, it's always on the other side of the border. And I just wonder whether there could be some collaboration with the various health organisations in the north-west of England to see whether there's a possibility of having a unit further across the north Wales coast, which might better serve those populations who are an incredible distance from Chester and for whom making a decision to go into a unit is already difficult, but may well be best for them, and then their needs are not being best represented by that significant distance.

Thank you very much, and this is also something that I discussed with Siân Gwenllian who raised this as well, about, 'Why can't we build it in north Wales and then we can commission the beds?' But, unfortunately, this is something that Chester have had in the works for a very, very long time and they are so far along in it now that it will be delivered, their unit, next year, regardless of whether or not Welsh Government commissions beds there. I take on board what you were saying, though, about the future and what we do with future services and how there may be an element of residents feeling like, 'Well, this always seems to be the case.' So, I will take that on board and look at what else is coming down the pipeline for the future.

But I also just wanted to say that the statistics that were quoted in 2018 were awful, and I believe that the reason why they're much lower now is because we've had investment in the community perinatal mental health teams, and also the development of the integrated care pathway, so that there's that preventative work. When I met with the women who are delivering this service in north Wales, they said that they're doing clinical audits now where they really go back through people's records, they sit down with women before they go in to give birth, they'll talk through their triggers with them, and all of these kinds of things, so it's the most supportive environment that they can possibly be in. And I'm hoping that the reason why we're seeing—. To be honest, there's not the need, and I don't want to wish for a need to fill those beds. So, I'm hoping that it's because of the work that's been done in the community, which, ideally, is where we want women and their babies to remain. Diolch.

Whilst this was a review of services in England, we are committed to learn from incidents to improve the quality and safety of mental health services, and we have invested over £2 million in the NHS executive to drive these improvements through our strategic programme for mental health.

Thank you for the response, Minister, but unfortunately you will know all too well that there have been similar recommendations made regarding similar cases in Wales, such as those raised by a constituent of mine, Barry Topping-Morris. Barry worked within the NHS and revealed inadequate practices and poor risk assessment and discharge arrangements in a local mental health unit almost 20 years ago. He continues with his work to improve safety measures in mental health services, despite never receiving an apology for the dire consequences that speaking out had on his career at the time. He outlined this recently in a Nation.Cymru article about his experiences. Sadly, we do see these repeats of recommendations, and the emotional and financial cost, as well as the cost to lives and families, is devastating, because mental health services are just not able to address the concerns and recommendations. So, Minister, how will you ensure that Wales prioritises improvements in services for patients with mental health conditions, so that we do not see a repeat of the calls for these lessons to be learnt again in the future?

Thank you very much for that question, and I am terribly sorry to hear about your constituent. I do applaud and welcome anybody who is able to share their lived experience. What I would like to say is that I promise that it's making a difference. It is really making a difference, because the Welsh Government held a mental health ministerial summit in November 2023 on in-patient mental healthcare, and a second ministerial summit will be taking place now in November. The summit brought colleagues from NHS organisations across Wales together to discuss the challenges and to commit to firm plans for safety improvements and the long-term transformation of acute mental health care. And then we have recently consulted on our draft mental health and well-being strategy, which will set out those improvements over the next 10 years. But the really crucial part here is that on Tuesday 1 October, my colleague the Minister for Children and Social Care will be launching the single unified safeguarding review in Wales. This has received extra resource and clinical leadership, which will drive the change. The key part, which relates to your question, is that this process will remove the need for multiple reviews when any life is lost or significantly impacted through abuse, neglect or violence. And for every review, practitioner-led learning events and the use of what is being considered a world-leading Wales safeguarding repository will ensure targeted identification of learning and key themes. Because, as you said, there is not the time to go through each of these and the recommendations. That will also include those critical matters relating to mental health homicides. Diolch.

I met the chair of the health board this week and discussed the health board's achievements, including the 80 per cent reduction in the number of patient pathways waiting over two years since March 2022, the improvements in mental health performance, and challenges related to fragile services, primary care and financial balance.

Cabinet Secretary, I'm glad that you've mentioned waiting times, because one area of improvement that is very much needed is in relation to bone density scans, or DEXAs, as they're more commonly known, as constituents have contacted me to say that they have been waiting for over a year to receive their results. I appreciate that specialist scans can take some time to gather results and to be fully interpreted, but I'm sure you'll agree with me that a wait of over 12 months is just unacceptable. Patients awaiting results are understandably frustrated, and it's crucial that they get their results as quickly as possible. Therefore, can you tell us what the Welsh Government is doing to ensure that patients who are waiting for the results of their DEXA scan are not having to wait over a year for it, and what reassurances can you offer to patients that this is something that the Welsh Government will prioritise, going forward?

I'm sorry to hear of the Member's constituents' experience of that, which is unacceptable. He will know the priority that this Government attaches to reducing waiting times. There are clear targets against which we expect health boards to perform, but the service is under incredible demand, and also the pressure of resources. But he will know from exchanges in the Chamber today, and over the course of the last week, just how important this is to us, and the fresh approaches that we are hoping to bring to it. There is, as I mentioned in an answer to a question earlier, some level of variability across Wales in relation to some of the waiting times targets. I would like to see less variability, and I would like to see a situation where if we had the best performance applied across all health boards across all measures, we would be making good progress towards our targets. But please give your constituents reassurance that we take this very seriously indeed.

I thank the Minister.

The next item would have been item 3, but no topical questions were accepted today.

Item 4 is the 90-second statements, and the first statement this afternoon is from Julie Morgan.

September is Gynaecological Cancer Awareness Month. In Wales, around 1,200 people are diagnosed with gynaecological cancer every year, and 470 people die. The five most common types are cervical, ovarian, endometrial, vaginal and vulval. Different gynaecological cancers have different symptoms. They can include bloating, pelvic pain and bleeding between periods. Some cancers can present late, such as ovarian cancer, with non-specific symtpoms. Despite the prevalence of these cancers in Wales, women often feel that they are not listened to by healthcare professionals. Symptoms can often be dismissed, underestimated and misdiagnosed, which can lead to cancers progressing unnecessarily. This was the experience of Claire O'Shea, who was misdiagnosed with irritable bowel syndrome when, in fact, she had a rare and aggressive form of uterine cancer.

Claire's cancer diagnosis came two years after first raising her symptoms with her GP. The delay means that Claire now has incurable stage 4 cancer, which has spread to her lungs, liver and hip bone. Because of her own experiences and hearing those of other women, Claire has set up Claire's Campaign to promote change—a change to the culture of dismissing women's voices in healthcare settings, a change to the gender bias seen by many women when they raise concerns attributed to emotional or psychological issues, a change so that women are heard. Diolch.

This year, Theatr na nÓg, rooted in the Valleys and based in Neath, celebrates its fortieth birthday. The organisation brings to life inspirational stories of Welsh characters who achieve the extraordinary, like their new play The Fight, about Cuthbert Taylor, a boxer from Merthyr Tydfil banned from the British boxing title due to the colour of his skin. Founded in the early 1980s to meet the needs of West Glamorgan communities, the company believes in accessible, high-quality live theatre for all.

Welsh history, the Welsh language and our culture in all of their diversity are central to their productions, from school shows to national tours.

In the last decade, they’ve expanded their reach with UK tours of Tom, Eye of the Storm, a Welsh Shirley Valentine, and Operation Julie. And during the COVID pandemic, they produced online content, including a hit Welsh language Christmas song, 'Hwyl yr Ŵyl', and an Advent calendar for schools, safeguarding the jobs of 158 freelancers on 16 projects.

Throughout this time, the ethos has remained the same—the belief that people of all ages and backgrounds should be able to experience accessible, live theatre of the highest quality that has the power to excite and engage audiences of all ages with stories that have universal appeal. Over 1 million people have experienced a na nÓg production. Pen-blwydd hapus, Theatr na nÓg, may you continue to ignite the imagination of the nation. The people of Neath are indeed fortunate to have a company that's so successful, engaged and of high quality in their community.

I'd like to take the opportunity this afternoon to pay tribute to a very special person form Wrexham, who was tragically killed in Ukraine in August. Ryan Evans was working with Reuters news agency in Kramatorsk in the east of the country, just 16 miles from the front line, when the hotel in which he was staying was hit by a Russian missile. Ryan was a security adviser for Reuters, and was staying at the hotel with a team of fellow journalists. The strike injured many of his team, including, sadly, a Ukrainian cameraman who was left in a coma with life-changing injuries.

As a former pupil of Ysgol Morgan Llwyd in Wrexham, he is fondly remembered by staff and pupils alike. After leaving school, Ryan joined the Royal Welsh regiment at the age of 17, where he served in Iraq as well as Afghanistan, rising to the rank of corporal. Upon leaving the armed forces in 2010, he started working as a close protection officer accompanying British diplomats on missions to many countries including Libya, Tunisia and Syria. More recently, as a close protection specialist, he accompanied journalists into some of the most hostile environments and war zones.

His last trip was one of over 20 that he'd made to Ukraine since the conflict began, always on a mission to ensure the utmost safety of his co-workers. Reuters paid tribute to Ryan, describing him as a world-class security operator. He'd worked extensively in Israel this year, as well as in Gaza and the West Bank, providing protection to journalists. He recently covered security for Reuters staff at the Paris Olympics and he was a trained paramedic, helping injured civilians on numerous occasions.

Sadly, Ryan leaves his widow, Kerrie, and four children, and I’m sure all of us at the Senedd would like to extend our deepest condolences to them and his wider family in their huge and painful loss.

The next item, item 5, is a motion to amend Standing Orders on consent in relation to UK Parliament Bills. I call on a member of the Business Committee to move the motion formally. Darren Millar.

I move.

The motion is moved formally. The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? There is no objection, and therefore the motion is agreed.

Item 6 is next, a debate on the Standard of Conduct Committee report, 'Fourteenth report to the Sixth Senedd under Standing Order 22.9'. I call on a member of the committee to move the motion. Peredur Owen Griffiths.

Thank you, Llywydd. As a member of the Standards of Conduct Committee, I formally move the motion.

The committee considered the report of the standards commissioner in relation to a complaint made against Natasha Asghar MS regarding a tweet that used imprecise and inaccurate language when describing the 20 mph speed limit. The Standards of Conduct Committee considered the commissioner's report carefully, and our report sets out the committee's judgment as to the sanction that's appropriate in this case. The facts relating to the complaint and the committee's reasons for its recommendation are set out fully in the committee's report.

I would like to take this opportunity to remind Members of the importance of paying close attention to the recommendations of this committee and the findings of the standards commissioner as they relate to the interpretation of the code of conduct and the standards expected of Members more generally.

I would also like to remind Members of their personal responsibility regarding the consideration of any potential interests before participating in committee business. It is incumbent on Members to declare any relevant interest and, where necessary, to excuse themselves from proceedings. The motion tabled invites the Senedd to endorse the committee's recommendation. Thank you.

I can't quite believe that we're standing here today debating the use of the word 'blanket' when there are much bigger issues at hand to be dealing with. But heigh-ho, here we are. Having sat on the standards committee, I know how hard all of the Members from various political parties, as well as the Chair, the clerks, work alongside the commissioner tirelessly looking into complaints in relation to Members. However, today, I, Natasha Asghar, solely and respectfully object to the ruling that I have breached three rules within the code of conduct. To say that I brought the Senedd into disrepute by using the word 'blanket', for me, is purely absurd.

Let me be abundantly clear to everyone today: from the get-go, I make no apology whatsoever for standing up for my constituents and residents across Wales when it comes to the Welsh Government's 20 mph speed limit policy. As I have said before, with 97 per cent of former 30 mph roads dropping to 20 mph as a result of this policy, it remains my opinion that this is a blanket approach. And that's just it, Presiding Officer: it's my opinion. That's what I'm trying to get across.

I'm just going to—. Just for Members to be aware, of course, that the standards commissioner has—[Interruption.] Please, I don't want any comments from the side. The standards commissioner and the standards committee have said that the use of the term 'blanket' in the context of the 20 mph policy is imprecise and inaccurate, and that Members should think very carefully about using imprecise and inaccurate words to describe policies. I have, in fact, changed my own mind on the use of the word 'blanket'. I allowed it to be used in this Chamber for a number of months, but once the standards commissioner and the standards committee had ruled that it was an imprecise and inaccurate way of describing the 20 mph policy, I have changed my view and it is not correct to use it in that context in this Chamber any more. That is my view, and I am the Llywydd. I ask you all to respect my view on this, and the view of the standards committee, and I ask you to show that respect today, Natasha Asghar.

That's fine. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I take my job incredibly seriously. I love my region of south-east Wales and have the utmost respect for the Welsh Parliament as an institution. Presiding Officer, I acknowledge the report, and, once again, as I said, thank the committee and standards commissioner for their time, but I do have to say that I do feel it within myself to be able to stand up against, for this particular policy, for this particular issue. It is something that I’m passionate about personally and professionally as well. So, I want everyone to remain and rest assured that I will continue to tirelessly campaign against this disastrous policy, regardless of others embarking on desperate attempts to stop me, and I hope to be able to move on from this and focus on my job, which I take incredibly seriously. Thank you.

The Chair—. Not the Chair, sorry; a member of the committee to reply to the debate.

Thank you. I was concerned there that I had a new job. The Chair, of course, is in the Chamber.

I'd like to thank Natasha for her comments and I do note them of course. Our report is clear and is presented with cross-party recommendations, so I call on the Senedd to accept the recommendation. Thank you.

The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object?

Was there an objection? No objection.

The motion is therefore agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Item 7 is the Welsh Conservatives' debate, and, believe it or not, this is on 20 mph speed limits. The debate is to be presented by Natasha Asghar. Natasha Asghar.

Thank you very much, Presiding Officer; you did catch me slightly off-guard there.

When I promised the people of Wales that I would stand up for their feelings and be their voice in the Senedd in my role as shadow transport Minister, I meant it—sometimes even to the point where it gets me into trouble, as you've all clearly seen. It’s been a year since the roll-out of this policy and, despite Labour Ministers telling us all that the people of Wales would eventually get used to it and that the uproar surrounding it was pretty much down to people just not liking it, I think we now know for sure that this was purely a firefighting move in an attempt to downplay public sentiment. I have said on multiple occasions that the anger and frustration towards the policy aren’t going anywhere. And this statement isn’t just my opinion; it is backed up by the fact that a recent YouGov poll has proven that seven out of 10 people still oppose the default 20 mph policy.

Now I would commend the Cabinet Secretary, the new Cabinet Secretary, on his renewed approach—a more pragmatic, sensible stance, with an emphasis on, and I quote him, common sense and taking the public with you, as opposed to telling them what they need to get used to. And whilst I was pleased to see a change in the draconian-style roll-out, including a listening programme to incorporate people’s views, much physical change is yet actually to come to fruition. Just shy of 500,000 signed a petition calling for the policy to be scrapped—the petition that broke all Senedd records and laid bare quite how unpopular this policy actually is. Never in the history of a Welsh Parliament—in fact, this Welsh Parliament—has a listening tour been ignited in Government as a result of such an unpopular, divisive policy, and I think that says it all.

This policy kick started a year of scandal and controversy and potentially the most out-of-touch series of events we’ve seen from Welsh Labour as of yet—£33 million to implement it and a £9 billion hit to the Welsh economy. In fact, this £9 billion figure, in theory, could have indeed footed the bill for the recent NHS staff pay rises and would have therefore helped alleviate this so-called £22 billion black hole that we haven’t stopped hearing about.

Cabinet Secretary, as a direct consequence of this policy over the last year, we have seen an entire village isolated from bus routes, delivery drivers having to work overtime, a record-breaking petition, a cycling race shortened and altered for the first time since its inception in 1981, 10,500 submissions to the councils for roads that should be changed back to being 30 mph, countless protests, and the list just does go on.

We have heard a lot about change since the Labour Party’s general election campaign in May 2024, but you’re going to need more than a tagline to see some change across Wales after 25 years of Welsh Labour around here. But this is just it: what the British people are about to be reminded of are things that the people of Wales have been living with for a quarter of a century and have seen exposed even more so in the past year. ‘You’ll own nothing and be happy’ is the phrase that comes to mind. People are expected to be happy with 20 mph and get used to these huge changes and costly policies when economic inactivity in Wales is the highest in the United Kingdom, educational outcomes in Wales are the lowest in the United Kingdom, the number of Welsh students going to university is indeed falling. One in four people are on waiting lists in Wales, and they are at an all-time high, with seven health boards indeed in special measures. You're constantly cash-strapped as a Government, yet £1.6 billion has been wasted on projects that have never reached the finish line under Labour's watch. Almost one third of children in Wales are living in poverty. Sadly, I could go on. Is this honestly a record the Welsh Labour Government can be proud of? If we continue like this for another 25 years, I sincerely dread to think what Wales is going to look like. Whether it's avoiding scrutiny by comparing Keir Starmer to Donald Trump, or passing the buck down the M4, this Government seriously, sadly, hates accountability.

I have selected the two amendments to the motion. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 will be deselected. I call on Peredur Owen Griffiths to move amendment 1, tabled in the name of Heledd Fychan.

Thank you, Llywydd. I move the amendment.

The revisionism that has been going on during this debate is quite remarkable. After all, there was initial cross-party support for a movement towards 20 mph. This is not a new policy.

Oh no there wasn't.

It—. We've seen the photos.

Come on. Come on, Members. I can do better than a pantomime, please. Allow Peredur Owen Griffiths to continue.

It has been implemented in places across Europe, and, as much as they won't want to mention it in their debate, it's been introduced in Conservative councils across England. Plaid Cymru, Labour and the Tories all agreed that more 20 mph roads were appropriate, would bring benefits, and we have realised those benefits. In the first three months of 2024, we've seen a significant reduction in road casualties on 20 mph roads across Wales. Serious injuries and fatalities dropped by 23 per cent, with the total number of people killed or seriously injured on 20 mph and 30 mph roads falling from 101 to 78, compared to last year. Even when including minor injuries, there's a 26 per cent overall reduction in casualties. This has saved our NHS a considerable amount of money. This marks the lowest quarterly figure for road casualties in Wales outside the COVID pandemic period. This shows the positive impact of these speed limits on public safety, our communities and our NHS.

However, what has gone wrong here is this Labour Government's implementation. I regret the way the implementation has happened and the divisive debate that has ensued. It has eroded trust in our relatively new democracy, and it is regrettable. There has been inconsistent implementation on which roads and areas have been impacted most by this policy. The public has legitimate concerns. As an aside, a question that was posed to me recently was why only 10 mph intervals in speed limits were there, and why 5 mph increments were not adopted. And that goes to the implementation of appropriate speed limits in appropriate places.

Understandably, there are strong feelings surrounding the issue because this Government has failed to properly consult and engage with people in Wales. By excluding the local voice from decisions regarding their communities, it was set up to be flawed. It is frustrating that there were such—

Will the Member give way?

Yes.

Thank you. I appreciate what you're saying there, but, then, if you are so concerned about the implementation of this and that the Welsh Government didn't consult properly, why, then, did Plaid Cymru support the policy, knowing that there were issues with the implementation and not consulting with the people of Wales properly?

We supported the policy, but then we had the amendment here to say that we needed that consultation locally, and that has, eventually, been done. There was such—. The delay by the Welsh Government in acting on that Plaid Cymru amendment, supported by the Senedd, that empowered communities to review and make further exceptions, as well as a review of the guidelines for local authorities—. As usual, the Welsh Government works best when it does listen to Plaid Cymru. However, how much time, money and frustration would have been saved had Welsh Government acted on this amendment sooner?

We are now slowly moving forward in the right direction. The way the Conservatives have gone about this debate has been hostile and it has sought division. As we provide more voice to local communities to influence the policy in their area, we need to ensure our local authorities are properly resourced. This resource should enable collaboration between communities, local government and Welsh Government, so I urge the Welsh Government to work closely with our local authorities across Wales to ensure this review process is properly resourced and implemented for the benefit of the people of Wales. Diolch yn fawr.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Transport to move formally amendment 2. Ken Skates.

Formally.

Diolch. Mike Hedges.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. Well, what do we know? We know that reaction time reduces with speed, that stopping distance lengthens with speed—read your highway code—that the higher the speed, the greater the damage to people and a motor vehicle, that road casualty figures have reduced following the introduction of the default 20 mph, that insurance companies are considering reducing premiums due to the reduced speed limit. According to data from the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents, at traffic speeds of 30 mph to 40 mph, the risk of pedestrian deaths as a result of collision with a vehicle is over five times more than at speeds between 20 mph and 30 mph. There’s consensus among the people I talk to that 20 mph is a suitable speed limit on estate roads and through areas of terraced housing. This is a view strongly held by people who are living on these roads.

When I travel to my office in Morriston, it’s exactly one mile, but the sat nav tells me it will take five minutes, which is an average speed of 12 mph, as it did before the speed limit was reduced. Outside the motorway system, the road system consists of A roads, which are major roads intended to provide large-scale transport links within or between areas and unclassified roads, B roads that are roads intended to connect different areas and to feed traffic between A roads and smaller roads on the network, and unclassified or unnumbered roads, which are smaller roads intended to connect together unclassified roads with A and B roads, often linking housing estates or villages to the rest of the network. These are similar to minor roads on an Ordnance Survey map, and are sometimes known unofficially as C roads. Some of these roads are under 50m long. Unclassified roads are local roads intended for local traffic. The vast majority of roads in Britain—over 60 per cent of them—fall into this category. Areas of older terraced housing and council estates, or houses that don’t have a drive, mean that people cannot drive safely at over 20 mph. There’s parking on both sides of the road, as people seek to park near their home. Even with newer estates, where there are drives, cars still park on the road, especially where drives are very steep, having a significant slope, or for convenience.

Roads that are main roads, or A and B designated, should be dealt with on their merits, allowing 30 mph unless passing directly in front of an entrance to a school or a shopping area. Whilst individual councils will decide the speed limit on each road, I would hope councils will address these roads.

I was contacted by a constituent who lives in Manselton on a road that is already 20 mph. They accepted that a 20 mph speed limit is needed in residential areas and said that they did not wish for their road to go back to 30 mph, which it had not been for the last 20 years. The talk about 20 mph speed limits as a new invention, never been done before; if you go around areas—and I see people who represent, partly, Manselton—you will see, within Manselton, you’ll see in Hafod, that probably over half—well, actually, over half in Manselton, just under half in Hafod—were 20 mph before we had the movement to default.

I’m pleased to be taking part in this debate this afternoon. It’s now over a year since the 20 mph was introduced in September last year. Perhaps we should take a moment to reflect and recollect the events of the past year since the law was introduced, and I’m happy to give you a summary.

The policy was the brainchild of the former climate change Minister Lee Waters, who’s in the Chamber this afternoon, who's admitted that mistakes were made and a more commonsense approach was needed. We’ve also heard from the First Minister that the way the 20 mph law was implemented created problems, in her own words. The new Cabinet Secretary for transport acknowledged that some roads should never have been changed to 20 mph. And we know from the Welsh Government’s own research that the policy will cost the Welsh economy £9 billion. And of course, the nearly 0.5 million petition signatures calling for the default 20 mph to be repealed. A YouGov poll found that 70 per cent of Welsh people opposed the 20 mph speed limit change. So, if the policy has no support from the Welsh public and lacks support from a cohort of Welsh Government Ministers, why continue to save face, clinging to this policy that no-one, including those who oversaw its introduction, agrees was a success from its beginning in this Chamber to its roll-out across the country?

The impact on businesses across Wales has been severe. We know from the tourism barometer that tourists are being put off travelling and staying in Wales because of the 20 mph speed limit change. Deliveries are taking longer; emergency service response times are poorer, if they could get any poorer; and bus services have been disrupted, including an Arriva Cymru service in my consistency that had to remove stops from its route to maintain punctuality—the most notable one being the Tweedmill factory outlet in St Asaph. I'm pleased that's to be restored, but there are still other bus stops that remain excluded from the bus timetable for only this reason, and that was quoted by Arriva Buses Wales themselves. So, 20 mph is but one of a series of Welsh Government policies that are holding Wales’s economic prosperity 'sausage', or should I say 'hostage'?

From 20 mph to the tourism tax—[Laughter.] It took a minute. From 20 mph to the tourism tax, to slashing business rates relief, the Welsh Government behaves as if it’s deliberately trying to sabotage the Welsh economy. The forecasted £9 billion that the 20 mph policy will cost the Welsh economy is hardly in keeping with Keir Starmer’s plan for growth.

Will you take an intervention?

Yes, please.

How much does the Welsh economy get affected by accidents on roads that slow traffic down? As somebody who spent an hour travelling along the A4234 yesterday, I have a personal interest.

I wouldn’t have those figures at hand, but maybe if you liaise with your local health board, Mike, down in Swansea then they might be able to enlighten you with some more figures around that, but I don't have them on me, unfortunately, so I wouldn't be giving you an accurate answer there.

The former Minister for climate change also claimed previously that the default 20 mph would reduce pollution where there is smoother driving behaviour, but the evidence demonstrates that the opposite is true, with air quality sensors detecting an increase in nitrogen emissions at 50 per cent of locations. Local authorities have received thousands of requests to revert 20 mph roads back to 30 mph, but the requests are not being met. The new guidance from the Welsh Government issued to local authorities provided false hope that there would be a more commonsense approach, and this has not been forthcoming. Still, only 0.6 per cent of roads in Denbighshire are exempt from the 20 mph speed limit, and I have raised this in the Senedd and with Denbighshire County Council, but there appears to be no intention of making the exemptions that people want. I've put that partially down to the political make-up of the council these days, and then also the complexities of navigating the Welsh Government's guidance on that. So, I think it's two-fold in many ways in that respect.

So, the initial consultation back in March 2022 that rejected 20 mph was ignored, feedback from trials was ignored, the research from Belfast showing a poor evidential base was ignored, and the 0.5 million people who signed the petition to repeal 20 mph were, indeed, ignored. People do not like having their freedoms restricted in the name of keeping them, and despite the First Minister making clear that her relationship with Sir Keir Starmer is as close to Donald Trump, they certainly share the same nanny-stateist mindset. If the First Minister is serious about being a listening Government, I'd advise that she should listen to the 70 per cent of Welsh people and repeal this damaging unpopular policy, rather than just PR stunts. Thank you very much, and I look forward to hearing the rest of the debate. Thank you.

Llywydd, I've believed for a long time, and still believe, that a default 20 mph policy is the right one, and I believe that the Welsh Government was right to introduce it, and the review is also the correct thing to do. And following that review, I am sure some adjustments will be made, reflecting the views of local people as to which roads should revert back to 30 mph, and obviously we will see the outcome of that exercise in short order.

I do think, Llywydd, that it's fairly extraordinary that we've heard from two Welsh Conservative Members with very little—in fact, I'm not sure any—mention of road safety. It's so obviously important, isn't it, that a policy introduced primarily to improve road safety should be viewed and examined in the light of what's happened since in terms of road safety? But obviously there are some inconvenient facts there, in the post-implementation experience, as far as the Welsh Conservatives are concerned.

So, we have two quarters of data now, post implementation of the default 20 mph limit, compared to the similar period before commencement, which shows lower speeds, fewer casualties and reduced vehicle damage claims. That's some pretty strong evidence, I would suggest, in terms of the success of the policy in lowering speed, preventing accidents and reducing deaths and casualties. So, in Wales then, for that six-month period following roll-out, compared to the previous period before commencement, taking 20 and 30 mph roads together, we see casualties reduce from 1,191 to 840—a fall of 29 per cent. And, at the same time, casualties on other roads also reduced, which I think speaks to the experience in Bristol and Brighton, for example, where they found that having extensive 20 mph speed limits reduced speed generally, because it changes driver behaviour generally on all roads, with the obvious benefits that follow from that.

It is extraordinary, isn't it, that we've heard virtually nothing around that post-implementation experience in terms of road safety, in terms of deaths, casualties and collisions from the Welsh Conservatives? I'm sure that people following this debate today, and what we've heard from the Welsh Conservatives up to this point today, will be struck by the lack of mention of what may be seen by many as inconvenient facts for those Welsh Conservatives.

When it comes to some of the financial aspects, Llywydd, we know from esure, the insurance company—we all know that insurance companies are hard-headed, they operate in that real world of finances and financial advantage for those that are in business, to make a profit—they are reducing policy premiums by some £50 for those of their customers who are in these extensive 20 mph limit areas. It's estimated that if 20 mph was rolled out right across the UK in the way that it has been in Wales, that would result in some £1.4 billion-worth of savings for motorists who would be affected in that way. In Wales, that would result in savings of tens of millions of pounds. I give way.

Thank you, John Griffiths. I do appreciate you accepting the intervention. You speak about insurances. We've had thousands of people across Wales who have received tickets, and as a consequence of those tickets, points. I'm sure you can appreciate when you're talking about insurance claims, one thing that I think, Presiding Officer, a lot of people fail to understand is that insurance companies, if you have points on your licence, will never lower your rate, it will only go up. So, there are thousands of people across Wales who have got tickets for going over the 20 mph limit, however that may be. But talking about insurances coming down is not going to be evident for so many people across Wales because they're only going to go up.

Well, that's a pretty extraordinary intervention, really, isn't it? People right across Wales and right across the UK break all sorts of speed limits, unfortunately, and of course they face the consequences when it comes to the law of the land and insurance premiums. Obviously, that's the case generally for speed limits. We expect people to observe the law and observe speed limits, and I would hope that the Members opposite would expect the same sort of behaviour also.

Could I just close, Llywydd, by mentioning the need for enforcement and greater enforcement, and we will see that as we proceed, coming to the points that the Member has just mentioned? Of course we expect compliance with speed limits. I would like to mention one of my constituents, Clare Kenney who lives on Caerleon Road in Newport. In the section of the road that she lives on, there is a 20 mph limit. She has asked for greater enforcement, because when monitoring took place, it showed that there was a reduction in speed, which was very welcome, but that there were still motorists exceeding that 20 mph limit, and she rightly expects the enforcement that at least some of the Members opposite seem to object to. She wants her children to be able to walk to school safely, to be able to play safely and for elderly people and more vulnerable people on that stretch of Caerleon Road, where there are shops, bus stops and housing right up onto the road, to be able to live their lives with the greater road safety that 20 mph delivers. So, I mentioned that example because, although there will be this review that we all know about, Llywydd, we must maintain that 20 mph limit on those roads where that road safety benefit has been delivered and must be delivered as we move forward.

Determined to pursue its road safety policies, the Welsh Government ignored all inconvenient evidence to the contrary. It dismissed the authoritative independent 20 mph research study published by the UK Department for Transport in November 2018, which found that the speed at which people drive is influenced more by the look and feel of the road rather than whether a 20 or 30 mph limit is in place, and that there was no significant safety outcome in terms of collisions and casualties in residential areas based on the post-implementation data. Following this, they also dismissed the 2022 study from Queen's University Belfast, Edinburgh University and the University of Cambridge that found that reducing speed limits from 30 to 20 mph had little impact on road safety. They claimed in September—

Will you give way?

Oh, yes. One intervention.

You keep misrepresenting the Northern Ireland Belfast study, which was not based on a set of 30 mph roads. It was based on a set of existing 20 mph roads, and what they said is an area-wide speed limit, like the one we introduced, would be more effective, which is what we've done. You keep misclaiming what this report says.

They found that reducing speed limits from 30 mph to 20 mph had little impact on road safety. You dismissed that.

They claimed in September 2023 that, in Spain, which already had 20 mph as their default position, deaths and accidents had fallen despite the Spanish interior Minister having stated the preceding January that, comparing the figures for 2022 with 2019, the last pre-pandemic year without mobility restrictions there, 2022 represented more deaths than in 2019, and that, when it comes to cyclists, the number of fatalities also increased. Although subsequent road accident data for Spain during 2023 did show a slight decrease in fatalities, this was a reduction of just three for the whole of 2022. And vulnerable users, including motorcyclists, pedestrians and cyclists, experienced a 9 per cent rise in fatalities.

To say that the indiscriminate 20 mph speed limit has been unpopular would be an understatement. As we know, 469,571 people signed the Senedd petition, 'We want the Welsh Government to rescind and remove the disastrous 20mph law', the largest petition in the Senedd's history, and Welsh local authorities have received requests for thousands of roads to revert from 20 mph to 30 mph. A separate petition, launched in Buckley, Flintshire, the north Wales 20 mph pilot area, reached nearly 86,000 signatures. A survey of North Wales Live readers found that just 12 per cent of respondents support Labour's plans to change the default speed limit in residential areas to 20 mph, with 88 per cent opposing the plans.

When the Welsh Government's 20 mph default speed limits were put to the people in September 2023, opposition was 61 per cent. Just two months later in December 2023, a YouGov ITV Wales poll found that opposition had risen to 70 per cent. With the one-year anniversary of implementation of the 20 mph legislation in Wales approaching, a YouGov poll last month showed that seven in 10 Welsh people still opposed this.

In June, the Cabinet Secretary for Transport and North Wales issued a written statement in which he said that new road collision data shows that casualties have reduced on roads since the introduction of the new 20 mph speed limits in September last year. What he didn't say was that the new data he quoted for the last three months of 2023, compared with the same period in 2022, actually showed that, even with the limited exceptions to the default 20 mph limits applied by local authorities acting in accordance with Welsh Government exceptions criteria, the number of people killed or seriously injured on 20 mph roads had risen by 800 per cent, from under 5 per cent to 36 per cent of the total, whilst the number killed or seriously injured on 30 mph roads had fallen by 88 per cent, from 49 per cent to just 5 per cent of the total, with the number of motorcyclists and cyclists killed or seriously injured both increasing. Further, overall road casualties had increased by over 13 per cent.

I think, a year on, it's fair to say that the 20 mph policy has been much criticised, but it's a policy that is succeeding in achieving its outcomes. The data so far shows that average speeds are down, as we said they would be. Collisions on all roads are at their lowest since the COVID lockdowns. Casualties are down by 32 per cent, which is the single most effective road safety intervention that has been made. And lives have been saved: six fewer deaths in the first six months compared to the year before.

The Conservatives say that the policy has been disastrous. I think that these are results that we can be proud of. Has our approach been perfect? No, it has not. I commend the Cabinet Secretary for all his work in the last six months to engage with communities and to apply common sense where it is needed. Once that process is complete, I hope that the police can start to enforce those areas where speeds are not coming down, and that we can all get behind the message that on streets where people and traffic mix, it should be a little bit slower and a whole lot better.

I am interested in the Conservatives’ plan to scrap the speed limit and in their alternative. Natasha Asghar says that 20 mph should apply on roads where there is a large pedestrian activity, such as outside busy places of worship, schools, playgrounds and high streets, hospitals, or places where other vulnerable road users may be encountered—and she confirms that from her position. They call that a commonsense approach, whereas the approach supported by two-thirds of Senedd Members is characterised as draconian.

So, let’s compare their approach and our approach. The Tories say that the speed limit should be 20 mph outside hospitals. Our guidance says that 20 mph should apply within 100m of hospitals. The Tories favour 20 mph outside schools and playgrounds. The guidance says that 20 mph should apply within 100m of any educational setting. So far, so good. The Tories support 20 mph on high streets. The guidance says that we expect streets within 100m of retail premises to be 20 mph. The Tories want 20 mph outside places of worship and places where other vulnerable road users may be encountered. Our guidance says that 20 mph is appropriate close to community centres, which includes churches, and within 100m of residential premises.

So, there is no difference of substance. The difference is purely about politics. It’s purely about opportunism. Support for 20 mph in this Chamber started with a Conservative. It was David Melding who did the running originally, with the support of Tory colleagues. When we brought the report of the expert taskforce to the Senedd, which recommended that we take a default speed limit approach—

Will you take an intervention?

Let me make some progress. It had the support of the Tory leader at that time, and the bulk of the Tory MSs. It was only when they sensed an opportunity to turn this into a wedge issue that they changed their position. They now say that they want to scrap the law that has resulted in a 32 per cent fall in casualties. Darren.

I'm very grateful to you for taking the intervention. I was the policy director at the time that these matters were discussed, and I can assure you that it has never been the policy of the Welsh Conservative Party to support default 20 mph speed limits. What had been the case was that, in certain communities, members of the public were asking for 20 mph to be the default in their estates, and there were some occasions where that was supported by individual MSs.

I campaigned for 20 mph speed limits outside a couple of local schools in my own constituency, but I have never voted for default 20 mph speed limits. Some of the Members on these benches voted to support a pilot proceeding in order that they could be better informed about whether this was the right approach. And of course, when the evidence was published on the outcome of those pilots, they made it clear that that was not something that they supported—

Thank you. Lee Waters to continue.

It's a matter of public record that the 20 mph taskforce report, which came to this Chamber and had the support of the bulk of Conservative Members—excluding Darren Millar—recommended a default speed limit approach, and that was supported by two thirds of the Members of this Senedd, including a number of the Conservatives who are here today. That is a matter of fact.

You are now saying that you want to scrap the law, even though I can see no discernible difference between your alternative and ours. You want all the signs that you said we wasted money on to be pulled down. You say the legal orders that councils have worked hard to put in place should be ripped up. And instead of having one simple process to cover a whole area, they want to see a brand new legal order for every street—so, a new traffic regulation order for every road where there's a school, hospital, place of worship, playground, high street, and place where other vulnerable road users may be encountered. Each of these orders, Llywydd, would have to be drafted afresh, each one consulted on, each one passed through a separate process. And bear in mind, these cost £15,000 each—[Interruption.]

I can't hear the contribution. Can we hear it in its detail and in full, please? Lee Waters.

They want a new road traffic regulation order on all of these roads, at £15,000 each, and they say that we're the ones wasting money. Far from a bonfire of regulations, their commonsense approach is a confetti cannon of red tape splurged across Wales. The real difference between us is that we are putting saving lives before politics. The real difference is that we have not set out to confuse or mislead. The real difference is we've not been dishonest or demonstrated moral turpitude, as the standards commissioner has found against the spokesperson for the Conservatives. And the real difference is, because of our approach, casualties are down by 32 per cent. This Christmas, Llywydd, there will be families who get to sit down together, around the dinner table, that would not have been able to had the Conservatives succeeded in blocking the change. That's the difference between us.

The default 20 mph speed limit across the majority of residential roads in Wales has faced some of the most significant criticism to legislation I have ever witnessed. What was intended to improve road safety and reduce emissions has instead sparked widespread frustration, condemnation and opposition from the public, our local businesses and local authorities. Thirty-three million pounds has been spent on its implementation, which, as you can imagine, has angered those who feel that these moneys should have instead gone into our failing health service, or into our education budgets to fund the woeful shortage of teachers.

One of the fundamental issues with its implementation was the distinct lack of consultation and engagement with those it would be affecting, i.e. our motorists, our carers, our workers, our residents, our emergency services, and, of course, our local transport systems. Such is the reputation of this very flawed legislation, there are now reports that visitors are in decline, for fear that they could be fined or gain points on their licence. And if you don't believe me, speak to the hospitality industry, who keep being asked, even before people make bookings, and then sometimes people are cancelling those bookings.

In defence of this policy coming forward, the then Minister Lee Waters passed the buck of responsibility for doing it to our local authorities charged with amending the road speeds and the appropriate signage. I don't condone this, but many of these signs were defaced or vandalised, such was the anger and frustration from people who have never ever engaged in any criminal activity.

Some of the problems relayed to me by constituents are that they, when sticking to the limit, are being aggressively tailgated by very frustrated drivers trying to navigate the constant changes in speed limit. I've got a road in Aberconwy that is 60 mph, then 40 mph, then 20 mph, then 60 mph, and people are really finding it difficult. Some are even ignoring the new restrictions, raising concerns that adherence to Welsh law is in decline, and that roads may be becoming more dangerous. There is even now doubt around whether the supposed reduction in emissions has happened, and that they have actually increased, due to many driving at a lower gear ratio. So, I might ask the Welsh Government: what have you done about this?

In north Wales, the 4 bus route between Bangor and Holyhead requires an extra 11 minutes in each direction, while buses 14 and 15, between Llysfaen and Conwy, need an extra five minutes each way. Indeed, Arriva have had to alter some bus routes in Aberconwy, causing a mountainside village to be completely cut off from the main bus route.

Only last week, I highlighted to the Cabinet Secretary for transport that this legislation has a shocking reputation across the UK. In May, the Cabinet Secretary made a statement explaining that guidance was needed for which roads needed to be exempt, and that he would be supporting local authorities in doing that. The reports the next day in the media were 'Cabinet u-turn', or something, on this policy. Well, that was wrong. However, we are a year on from its implementation, and, despite the warm words from Ken Skates, we still have a default 20 mph on many of our roads.

Janet, you need to conclude now, please.

—on the Labour and Plaid benches, but they've been largely absent during most of this—

Janet, you need to conclude, please.

Yes. It is time for change and for a slick, quick, commonsense rollback, thereby allowing our motorists a choice and the freedom to enjoy their liberty.

Janet, conclude, please.

I implore you to vote with us today. Together, we can reverse the current direction of travel and get Wales back moving. Diolch.

We carried out a speed limit review when I was a cabinet member in Flintshire. You have to do them so often because of new developments, accidents and petitions, local petitions. It took about five years to do, drawing up plans, consulting, writing and advertising legal notices, putting all the signs in place and working through the anomalies, because you do get anomalies. With any major speed limit review, there are anomalies and variables to be worked through afterwards, which could be based on further challenges with accident data and character of the road.

There is no appetite for local authorities, who are the highway authority, to scrap the 20 mph, which has been in place a year, and to start again. They just haven't got the resources. I stand by the north-east Wales authorities who said that the initial guidelines were too strict, limiting what could be made up to 30 mph, a point I made time and time again over, trying to resolve it. They had to evidence that a route is not used by walkers and cyclists, but the Welsh Government criteria did not define how many walkers and cyclists, which they felt they needed. And I felt at the time Welsh Government should have listened to the concerns of local authorities, as they are the delivery bodies of the legislation. So, if they say there is an issue, Welsh Government needs to work with them to resolve the issues at the early stages, as it's happening.

It's the local authorities who must deal with the liability of their decisions, based on interpretation of the legislation. It needs to be as clear as possible should there be a challenge if there's an accident, or if residents question why there is not a similar restriction in the area that they live in. The density of 20 houses within 1 km is too high and needs to be removed, going forward. This was recently agreed by Welsh Government officials and the 20 mph task group, as well as other stakeholders at meetings I attended.

The roll-out of 20 mph and the density issue has been a particular concern in north-east Wales, where there is a lot of inter-urban connectivity and ribbon developments of houses along these arterial routes, which are an issue. You can travel from one town centre to another with the speed limit continually being at 20 mph because of the density of houses built along the road. That's the case from Buckley to Mold, which is why we have a lot of complaints from Buckley. This has also caused an issue for bus timetable compliance in the region, and a return to 30 mph for some of the arterial routes will be welcomed by the industry. We also need to include some roads that haven't been made 20 mph, and I feel they should be.

Will you take an intervention, Carolyn? You list many of the complexities there about local authorities trying to navigate some of the guidance, and obviously there's a disparity between local authorities, and obviously resources is an issue that you've highlighted as well. Would it just be easier if we scrapped it and just went back to 30 mph, because all those complexities would just fade away?

No, that's—. No. I did say it's a complex issue. It took five years when we did a speed limit review locally, so it would just take too much time to start again, so we need to work with what we have now.

So, a local road that is outside riding for the disabled, there's a blind summit—they would like to have 20 mph there, but it doesn't hit the criteria, because they don't have street lights or the density of houses. So, there are some roads that need to actually be included in the 20 mph, so that needs to be looked at as part of the guidelines going forward, and flexibility. It's the same in Tywyn and by Alyn Waters.

This is now a crucial time. The Welsh Government needs to work with all local authorities—. I think I've got time to take another intervention.

Okay. Thank you very much, Carolyn, because I'm intrigued by your thinking that north-east Wales has got one single set of problems, because, looking at the statistics, Conwy has 149 roads where they've queried it, and then Flintshire has 956, and I just think the difference in two very similar areas has something to do with the competency of the local authority concerned and the amount of effort they've put into analysing what makes for sensible solutions.

Can I just come in? Can I just come in? You're saying competency—thank you. That's not fair, okay. I've worked with highway officers as a cabinet member, and in Wrexham, Denbighshire, Flintshire, highway officers need to have black and white legislation for them, as I said, should there be an accident there, so they can stand behind this black and white legislation, it's clear to them, such as—. Like planning officers as well, they need to have black and white guidelines. And they were concerned about applying that flexibility to it, which maybe some areas have. So, Wrexham, Flintshire and Denbighshire, they do have this inter-urban connectivity and a lot of density of houses, so, if that criteria of density is removed, it will make it a lot easier.

This is now a crucial time. The Welsh Government needs to work with our local authorities to reassure highway officers that there has been a change and flexibility can be applied, with those authorities that are concerned about their liability or flexibility, based on the character of the roads—under the old highway legislation, you could make some exceptions, based on the character of the road—as they go through this critical period—

I have given you some additional time for the interventions.

—I will sum up now—assessing roads—I took two interventions—that have been put forward—

I've given you additional time for those interventions.

—thank you—for exemptions based on local knowledge and bus industry knowledge. Thank you.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Transport and North Wales, Ken Skates.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd, and I'd like to begin by thanking the Conservatives for bringing forward this debate today. And whilst we've tabled several Government amendments, I would like to reiterate to the Conservatives what I said in response to questions last week, and that is that I don't think that we're too far apart on this issue, the only difference being that we have a different route to ensure that we have the right speeds in the right places.

This policy was brought in to make places safer, and police data clearly and unequivocally shows that collisions on 20 mph and 30 mph roads have reduced since the introduction of 20 mph, the lowest on record outside the COVID pandemic period. Now, it's only been in place for a year, and there is some way to go, and I anticipate numbers may fluctuate, but I think it's encouraging to see that things are moving in the right direction. And if Members are in any doubt of the figures, then I invite the relevant committee here in the Senedd to conduct an assurance review of them. And Dirprwy Lywydd, as many Members have already said today, every casualty reduced makes a real difference, and I would hope that all Members in this Chamber agree that any policy that saves lives is a good thing.

Now, highlighted by today's debate, it does continue to divide opinion. I accept that. Members and I had the opportunity to acknowledge the petition back in May this year in response to the Petitions Committee debate, and I'll repeat what I said then to everyone that has signed the petition: I can guarantee that we are listening. Earlier this year, I announced a three-phase plan for 20 mph, which included a national listening programme, and over the summer we engaged with people, businesses and communities right across Wales to share views particularly on roads that should retain the 20 mph limit and which should revert back to 30 mph. Members have identified that more than 10,000 people have identified routes that should change, and this input has been vital in shaping the next steps.

Now, following completion of the first two phases of our plan, the listening programme and working in partnership with councils, we've now entered the third phase: making changes on the ground. Our updated guidance acknowledges that 20 mph is suitable where people regularly mix with motorised traffic, including in built-up residential areas and near schools and hospitals. For main roads that service strategic routes, a 30 mph limit can be set, provided it's safe to do so. So, our revised guidance introduces a framework to support councils to make more balanced decisions, and if councils decide to adjust speed limits on specific roads, they'll commence the process of the statutory traffic regulation orders, providing another opportunity for public engagement, and this will ensure that decisions remain transparent, and that communities continue to be involved in these local choices at every stage. We've also made, as Members are aware, funding available to support local authorities to make changes, and we'll continue to support them through this process.

Cabinet Secretary, will you take an intervention from Darren Millar?

Yes, of course.

I'm very grateful for your taking the intervention, Cabinet Secretary. I know we have our differences on many matters, but one of the things that we also need the Welsh Government to look at in terms of road safety is the speed limits on the trunk road network. We do have many areas where there are inappropriate speed limits, with the speed limit being far too fast; I've raised many of them in this Chamber with you and your predecessors in the past, but there seems to just be no action to address them. Why is it that you force local authorities to comply with very short timescales to react to changing limits on these default roads, but you're not using the same passion and energy as a Welsh Government to get to grips with the inappropriate speeds on your trunk roads?

Well, can I thank Darren Millar for the point that he's made and welcome the fact that a Conservative is pushing for safer speeds on our roads, lower speeds, where appropriate? I can guarantee Members that once this particular policy area is settled, the attention of our officials will then switch swiftly to ensuring that the right speeds on our trunk road network are in place, and that will include those communities that Darren Millar has raised concerns about in recent months.

Dirprwy Lywydd, thank you for the opportunity to respond to this debate.

I call on Peter Fox to reply to the debate.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd, and thank you, everybody who has contributed today. As I said in other contributions in this Chamber about this and other things, leadership requires the ability to admit when things are wrong. Decision makers have to be honest and find solutions to put things right, and, fair play, people have acknowledged that they've got this wrong, but we need to now put it right. The simple truth is this whole thing has been handled poorly. As we've heard, almost 0.5 million people told us so and signed a petition, the largest petition in the Senedd's history. And we've heard from Natasha, in opening this debate, that we can't ignore people, and she will continue to stand up against this policy, as she's done all the way through. Anger and frustration, she says, still remain, and we can feel that. We can feel it in the Chamber today. Seven out 10 people still oppose the policy, and she reminded us of that petition of 500,000 plus people, the £33 million-worth of investment, the implications for the economy, and how other wasteful projects have happened in the same vein.

Peredur supports 20 mph and suggested that a reduction in accidents has happened. He gave us several statistics. We've heard lots of statistics today, often contradicting each other. But he went on to criticise the Labour Government's handling, and I think we can all agree with that, that there was poor consultation. Sam Kurtz intervened and asked, 'Why did Plaid Cymru support a policy when they knew the consultation hadn't taken place and it would fail?' We didn't really get a successful answer to that.

Mike Hedges spoke of stopping distances, et cetera, and the importance of those, and that there may be a benefit in insurance premiums. That was challenged, as we heard, later on. And we agree with Mike. Everybody agrees in this Chamber that 20 mph should be in place on those residential streets. Nobody disagrees with that and never have, as I recall. But the key issue is around the default. And we agree, though, that roads should be dealt with on their merits.

Gareth Davies pointed out the need to take a moment to reflect, to remind us of the past and how Ministers acknowledged things weren't handled well. He pointed out the impact on our tourism and our business services and how the new guidance gave false hope because nothing is actually seen to be happening on the ground.

John Griffiths supports the policy, as he's done many times before, and supported a need for a review, recognising again that there were issues, but pointed out that road safety didn't seem to be important to the Conservatives. Well, that is absolute rubbish. It certainly is. He believes the policy is a success.

Mark Isherwood said the Welsh Government ignored all of the credible data, dismissed research from Belfast, Cambridge and Spain. We need to rescind this law. He gave compelling evidence and data, again contradicting many of the other things we've heard here. And I welcome what the Cabinet Secretary said at the end, about perhaps needing a committee to review the data and get to the bottom of this.

Lee Waters, a year ago, and much has been criticised, but he says the data says that casualties are down and six lives have been saved. He acknowledged it hasn't been perfect. But then he went on—and this is often the case in here—to conflate 20 mph with the default. And there are two different things. None of us are unhappy with 20 mph in appropriate places, in zones, as was played out. The issue we had was the fact it was levelled as a default across 97 per cent of all 30 mph roads. I was putting 20 mph limits in around schools years ago, and many other authorities have done that, and that's what's happened in England. Many 20 mph zones, where appropriate, but they didn't slap a default on everywhere else in their counties, and that's the contentious bit. So, it's very easy to conflate, to misconstrue the situation and our argument, when the real issue for us is the fact it was a default. And Darren clarified our position, and I welcome his clarity on that.

The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection, and therefore I'll defer voting on this item until voting time.

Item 8 today is the Plaid Cymru debate on the Welsh Government's priorities. I call on Rhun ap Iorwerth to move the motion.

Thank you very much, Dirprwy Lywydd. This debate has been tabled by Plaid Cymru for a simple reason, to emphasise to the Welsh Government that establishing priorities and telling us that they have priorities isn't enough in and of itself, without a strategy that can ensure implementation, or at least give us some hope of seeing implementation.

We saw a listening exercise over the summer by the First Minister, and the admission, I assume, that her predecessors hadn't been listening, and the First Minister came back to the Senedd last week and announced, to all intents and purposes, what is quite obvious to everyone, that the people of Wales are unhappy with lengthy waiting lists that are growing longer every month in the NHS, that education outcomes are moving backwards, and that the economy is underperforming. Where have Labour-led Governments been for 25 years?

There is that increasing feeling here that there is a failure by this Government to understand the need for plans and policies to transform things in key policy areas. The problems are obvious to everyone: 20 per cent of the Welsh population are waiting for treatment; key industries are shrinking; steel, as we know, has suffered such a grievous blow; the Welsh economy continues to drag behind that of other nations of the UK; the latest PISA results show a further decline in our education standards; Welsh universities are finding it more and more difficult to make ends meet. These are issues where we need to see solutions and proposals for new solutions. But it is worrying, given that, that it took a listening exercise over the summer for the Government to accept and to come to terms with the truth, which is apparent to the people of Wales, and it makes one wonder whether they have been paying any heed to the concerns of the people of Wales—concerns that we, of course, have been voicing time and time again over recent years.

It's fair to say that there was quite a bit of cynicism about what exactly the purpose was of the listening exercise embarked upon by the First Minister this summer. It's good to listen, as a point of principle, of course, and we should always be listening, but the First Minister signalling that her predecessors hadn't been listening? That's one useful admission, perhaps, but in the absence of her own ideas, what exactly was she consulting on?

But let's give her the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps it could help to sharpen minds about the practical steps required for a change of direction, to demonstrate that the First Minister was indeed serious about overseeing a refreshed approach in Government, which would be music to the ears of so many Welsh voters who have rightly concluded that the business-as-usual approach of Labour over so many years is simply not an option now.

Sadly, though, I think that business as usual is precisely what we have been given again. The all-too-familiar tendencies, I'm afraid, of Labour in power in Wales are writ large over every facet of the statement that was made last week. Problems being listed, yes, but without any real notion of new solutions. Vague pronouncements at best that plans are being developed for an unspecified point in the future. Milestones, timescales and targets for delivery are conspicuously absent.

And we also see these bad habits on full display in the Government's amendments to the debate motion today: a

'commitment to set out in due course'

the relevant details on how priorities will be delivered. And, you know, such a lack of vision and urgency as to how to get to grips with the major issues of the day would be damning even for a party newly established in Government, but from a party that's been in power for a quarter of a century and which owes so much of its success to a Welsh electorate that are desperate now to see change, it is pretty inexcusable. And need I remind Ministers that it's 18 months only until the end of this Senedd, and our opportunity afterwards, of course, to have real change?

A word on co-operation. I was reading back the Record of the Senedd yesterday, and the First Minister said to me,

'I just wonder whether you actually want us to work together',

that is, Welsh Government and UK Government. Listen, I've been actively calling on the First Minister of Wales to use the leverage that she says she has in order to try to get the UK Government and Keir Starmer—I think, is that No. 26, 27—to work with Welsh Government and enable decisions to be taken. On child poverty, as Sioned Williams, my colleague, mentioned yesterday, Eluned Morgan believes she has as much clout with Donald Trump as she has with Keir Starmer—her words, not mine. And perhaps the Counsel General would like to comment on that. Does she agree with that take on how little influence Welsh Government actually has?

So, to bring us back to the original intention of this debate, what is the purpose of having ambiguous priorities without any attempt to offer us a route towards delivery? The truth is that empty rhetoric and a lack of direction from this Labour Government in the Senedd, as we saw in the First Minister's statement last week, have led us into some sort of no-man's land in so many different areas that are hugely important to the people of Wales. By supporting this motion, the Government could show that they can accept that they are on the wrong track in many key areas, because it's clear that they are, and that they also have the agility to change direction, despite how little time they have left in this Senedd to do that. Let us start today. If the Government can’t do that and prove that it has the ideas, the ambition, that fire in their belly to make the most of what devolution has to offer, it’s about time that they stepped to one side for those who are willing to do that.

I have selected the three amendments to the motion. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendments 2 and 3 will be deselected. I call on the Counsel General Designate and Minister for Delivery to move formally amendment 1.

Formally.

I call on Mark Isherwood to move amendments 2 and 3, tabled in the name of Darren Millar.

There is much in this motion to commend it. Clearly, it is regrettable that, after 25 years in Government, this Labour Welsh Government could not identify the priorities of the people of Wales without conducting the listening exercise initiated by the First Minister, and any milestones, targets and delivery dates are absent from her statement of priorities. But of course, we’re used to that. It’s also absolutely right to call on the Welsh Government to set a timetable for reducing NHS waiting lists, publish a delivery plan based on the people’s priorities, including but not limited to milestones, targets, and delivery dates, and introduce an updated programme for government and legislative programme. However, considering that Plaid Cymru has propped up most Labour Welsh Governments since 1999, voted for many of their draconian policies—such as 20 mph—and also continually calls for further powers for a Government that fails to best utilise the powers it already has, this motion seems somewhat, dare I say, hypocritical at best.

The motion is right, however, to highlight the mammoth waiting lists in NHS Wales. Last week, waiting times figures in Wales showed another increase in people waiting on NHS waiting lists—nearly 800,000 procedures now on those waiting lists, and in excess of 600,000 people in Wales waiting to have one or two of those procedures. Two-year waits have increased again for the third consecutive month to 23,418 in Wales, compared with only 120 in England, with 50 times the population. The then health Minister, now First Minister, promised to eliminate these waits by March 2023 but failed to meet that target. The number waiting over a year for any appointment is now 160,000, but given that Wales has a population of just over 3 million people, this reflects very badly on the Welsh Government’s stewardship. Only 48.2 per cent of red calls, the most serious, received emergency ambulance response within eight minutes in July, and performance against the 62-day target for people starting cancer treatment was just 56.7 per cent. These waiting lists are likely to get worse this winter because the Welsh Government is not listening to the hundreds of thousands of fuel-poor pensioners in Wales who will be adversely affected by the Labour UK Government’s cuts in winter fuel payments. I move amendment 2 accordingly.

The previous First Minister waxed lyrical during the general election campaign about the benefits for Wales that two Labour Governments at each end of the M4 would bring to Wales and the influence that Welsh Labour would have. However, as previously referred to elsewhere today, the new First Minister recently likened her influence on Keir Starmer to her influence on Donald Trump. Notwithstanding this, the Welsh Government could use their claimed inter-governmental channels to press the UK Government for consequentials from HS2 for Wales, and to proceed with the electrification of the north Wales main rail line. I move amendment 3 accordingly, although having been a Member here last time there were Labour Governments in both London and Cardiff, I do not hold my hopes high.

It's disappointing, isn't it, that we had a statement last week from a First Minister who was saying that she was listening who isn't present to listen to a debate on those priorities. There's precious listening there. For several years, the Welsh Government has been saying that Wales and this Senedd don't receive the funding that we should be receiving from the UK Government. We agree with that as a party and have called time and time again on the UK Government to provide fair funding for Wales. Up until the general election this year, it appeared that it was to be a priority of this Government to ensure fair funding for Wales. Indeed, how many times did we and the people of Wales hear from the Labour Party in Wales how different things would be once there was a Labour Government here and in Westminster? That started to change during the election, certainly.

Let's remind ourselves of what the then Minister for finance, Rebecca Evans, said in a letter to the UK Government last November, as the then Conservative Chancellor finalised the UK's autumn statement. She called then for fair funding for Wales, as well as significant investment by the UK Government, including for coal-tip safety and rail infrastructure.

What's happened since then? A common theme from yesterday's debate when we asked, 'What's changed in recent weeks?' In the four priorities outlined last week and that appear in the amendment put forward by Labour today, where does fair funding for Wales appear? Why are you proposing to delete that element from our motion? Where is the demand for the £20 million towards remediation of coal tips? It was previously the view of the Welsh Government that refusing to do so was indefensible. Is that still the case? Can we have that confirmation? Because we very much doubt that, during the Labour Party's data grab, which was otherwise known as a listening exercise, funding didn't come up as a major concern for the people of Wales. I doubt that coal-tip safety did not come up, that people don't feel that that £20 million still needs to be delivered by the UK Government.

For priorities to mean something, there has to be intent to exhaust every possible avenue to ensure they are achievable. Rhun ap Iorwerth was right to criticise the third point in the motion put forward as a replacement one by the Welsh Government:

'notes the First Minister’s commitment to set out in due course further detail of how the priorities will be delivered.'

There hasn't been an election in Wales. You've been in Government since 2021 here and for 25 years. Why can't we know how these priorities will be delivered right now?

We do need to know why Welsh Labour now support austerity, because that's the reality of the vote last week. I cannot imagine that Welsh Labour would have voted the way that you did last week around the withdrawal of the winter fuel allowance if it had been a Conservative UK Government doing so. Why are you not fighting for fair funding for Wales? What has the new UK Prime Minister, Keir Starmer—we'll add to the number count—said when the Welsh Government have approached him, or haven't you even bothered to try and influence? The meek acceptance of the insufficient lot we receive from Westminster therefore typifies the lack of drive at the heart of this Government. We've been calling for targets and measures for years; that's the least the people of Wales deserve. We need a Welsh Government that will stand up for Wales now that we have a UK Labour Government.

There is a danger of underdelivering on what they purport to be their priorities, and it's difficult to envisage how further erosion of resources as a result of UK Labour's austerity agenda can lead to any improvement. So, more than anything, I would like to know, in the Government's response today, how will you propose to deliver fair funding for Wales? Why has it been deleted from the motion? Can you confirm that fair funding for Wales and fighting for Wales is still a priority for this Welsh Government? Because it doesn't seem so.

It's easy to take for granted the positives of what's been achieved over 25 years of the Senedd. Here's a selection: the right to buy ended; investment in energy-efficient homes, new schools, classrooms and outdoor learning areas; investment in community facilities; the all-Wales coastal path; free school breakfasts and universal free school meals; scrapping school league tables; free bus passes for over 60-year-olds; investment in rail; free prescriptions and free hospital parking; the UK's first carrier bag charge and the third best in the world at recycling, capturing the material to be reused in Wales, growing the industry and creating energy; the Welsh language; the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015; and nature-friendly policies.

The election of Eluned Morgan as Wales's new First Minister has brought with it a welcome opportunity for the Welsh Government to refocus its political priorities for the remainder of the Senedd term. Combined with the election of a UK Labour Government, here in Wales we now have a valuable window of opportunity to make the most of these circumstances to renew our commitments to the Welsh public and get to work unleashing the potential of our country.

As chair of the cross-party group on public transport, the area of policy that I think provides the most exciting and abundant opportunities working across Government is, indeed, public transport. A successful public transport system can bring Wales wide-ranging social benefits. We've just had announcements to increase rail services in north Wales by 50 per cent, and thanks to Wales's own rail company, Transport for Wales's investment of £800 million, capacity has increased by 40 per cent, with more rolling stock due next year. Affordable, efficient and high-quality public transport can have a hugely positive effect in the fight against climate change by removing the need that many have to travel around by car, leading to significant reductions in carbon emissions.

In a world in which social isolation is becoming an increasing problem, public transport acts as a catalyst for social inclusion, connecting communities and providing groups most at risk of isolation with the opportunity to get out and about. It also opens up development, networking and economic opportunities that can lead to sustainable economic growth, putting money in people's pockets—[Interruption.] I give way.

I agree with your final point about the importance of public transport. We've seen more bus routes cut in Wales than any other part of the UK, so do you think that is a record of success of this Government?

It's tricky for Wales, because we have a lot of rural areas, don't we? In England, there are densities of populations, so it's far easier. I know we need to do more, and people in Wales rely on bus transport, so I'm just hoping, going forward—. I'm just going to touch on this now, okay?

We've talked about social isolation—buses and public transport open up networking and economic opportunities and sustainable economic growth, putting money in people's pockets. We don't have to look far to see the positive results of investment in affordable, high-quality public transport across Europe; from Luxembourg to Malta and from France to Estonia, Governments are beginning to reap the long-term rewards of investment in world-class public transport systems. The rewards come back, don't they?

It's for these reasons that I'm delighted to see that connecting communities through transformed public transport and fixing our roads is one of the four key priorities that Eluned Morgan has committed to driving forward. As a former deputy leader of a county council and cabinet member for transportation, I know how important well-maintained roads and highways are, as well. Whether we're using a bicycle, bus, car or walking, everyone benefits from well-maintained services and pavements free from potholes, which have sadly become a ubiquitous feature of Britain, following 14 years of Conservative Government funding cuts.

The Welsh Government's upcoming bus Bill and the removal of the Thatcherite ban on municipal bus companies will give communities a direct say over bus services and routes. As has been the case across Europe, public transport is uniquely positioned to provide a renaissance of development of connectivity, which also acts as a vital weapon in the fight against climate change, inequality, social isolation and the cost of living. I'm checking to see how many minutes or seconds I've got left to respond to Mabon.

With the bus Bill going forward, and the amount of funding that we have got, I am hoping that, working together with our communities and local authorities, we will be making sure that we have got bus timetables that work for our local communities, and making sure that we use the funding that we have got in the best way possible, working with operators and, hopefully, working with local authorities, so that they can become transport operators themselves and run their own municipal bus companies. But, working cross-border with the UK Government, making sure that we get money in, to have funding for delivering this. Thank you.

What should be our priorities? What is change? Well, I would start with delivery, and it would be remiss of me not to take the opportunity to call on the Cabinet Secretary for the Economy to focus on delivery and set targets for the Welsh economy when she sets out her priorities over the next few weeks. In the last economic plan set out by a predecessor, we saw no targets whatsoever—nothing to measure delivery. Now, at best, this is simply dodging scrutiny, and, at worst, it signals a rudderless Government. So, if successive economy Cabinet Secretaries and Ministers refuse to set targets, how can we assess whether Welsh Government policy is working or having the desired impact.

Now, in fairness, early Welsh Government got it right. They set targets for the economy, such as targets for productivity, narrowing the gap with the rest of the UK to 90 per cent. Now, that was at a time when they didn’t have any real power to effect change. But, of course, that isn’t the case anymore. There are things that the Welsh Government can do, and targets should be reflective of that change.

There is no denying that the picture painted of the Welsh economy isn’t a positive one, but it requires us to demonstrate that we are serious about getting out of this quagmire. Now, targets go some way in signalling that intention.

When it comes to health, the only consistency that we've seen from this Government is its utter failure to achieve any targets and to turn its back on its pledges. The Government has been great at generating headlines on eradicating two-year waiting lists and one-year waiting lists, and people read those headlines and are left open-mouthed as they wait years for treatment.

Efforts to improve disastrous diagnosis and cancer treatment targets have failed entirely. The recent report by Audit Wales shows that every health authority is breaking its duty to balance its budget and, indeed, that most have failed to do so over the past three years.

I have absolutely no doubt that the First Minister is sincere about her wish to see the NHS put back on its feet. It is something that every single one of us in this Chamber wants to see happen as soon as possible. But you can’t build effective governance on good intentions alone. That’s why, when the Government unveiled supposedly fresh approaches to old problems, as was the case last week, it’s difficult not to feel an intense degree of frustration. We have been here before, and we know how it ends.

And without this relentless focus on actually translating warm words of intent into tangible action and outcomes, the inevitable consequence is a complete loss of authority, to the extent that we are now in a position whereby the Government is outsourcing the management of healthcare to Westminster. As my colleague Rhun ap Iorwerth rightly stated, it’s nothing short of a complete dereliction of responsibility and a betrayal of what devolution has meant to deliver for Wales.

Finally, there is one glaring absence in this Government’s priorities, with no reference whatsoever to one of the biggest and most immediate challenges facing us today—that of the care sector. The care sector is too often viewed as the cinderella service, compared to the health service, and this Government’s priorities underline that completely. Both are intrinsically linked and, for one sector to succeed, it depends on the other. There is clearly no value set on the work of unpaid carers, who make up 10 per cent of the population, and whose work is valued at over £8 billion in Wales—money that this Government would otherwise have to find, if not for these carers. Until this Government properly recognises the importance of the care sector, then any programme of government can have no credibility.

The First Minister noted last week that raising standards in education was one of her priorities. But, truth be told, she didn't have to travel around Wales or be some kind of Mystic Meg to come to that conclusion. And, after decades of failure in this area by the Labour Welsh Government, one after another, this should have been obvious.

This afternoon, I want to discuss the 2022 PISA results and the Government's total failure to hit its recruitment targets for teachers in Wales, which together underline the significant challenges facing the education sector here in Wales. As we've heard time and time again in the Siambr, in 2022, Wales saw the worst PISA results ever, falling below the level of other nations in the UK and below the international average. Truth be told, our performance in mathematics, science and reading has been deteriorating since 2018, and at a greater rate than the other UK nations. The recent IFS report provides a comprehensive analysis of the PISA results in Wales, which demonstrates that these lower scores in Wales can't be solely attributed to higher levels of poverty. Indeed, children from disadvantaged backgrounds in England score around 30 points more on average than their contemporaries here in Wales. In England, the performance of children from disadvantaged backgrounds is either above or similar to the average level of every child in Wales, regardless of their social background. And it's sad to note that the lowest performance level amongst pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds across all UK nations is seen almost entirely here in Wales.

It's also worth noting that spend per pupil is similar in Wales and England, which shows that financial investment is not the only factor. This demonstrates clearly that the Welsh Government is destroying the life chances of so many of our young people. The decline in educational standards is obviously a matter that the Government has known about for many years, yet, here we are, after seeing further decline, having to ask this question: do you, as a Government, have a response to the challenges facing education in Wales? Do you have a strategy to tackle the decline? It's clear, from scrutinising your recent record, that you have failed that test.

I now want to move on quickly to teacher recruitment. Recruitment of teachers, especially in priority subjects, is yet another area where we see the same old failed delivery and mismanagement from Welsh Government come to the fore. It was only yesterday that we read about a school in Monmouthshire, Caldicot School, packing in 60 pupils in a mathematics class because of the shortage of specialist teachers—no fault to the school, but it's the way Welsh Government are failing the next generation of children.

In the 2021-22 ITE intake, in only one of the eight priority subjects was the target met and, overall, the number recruited was far below the set target by almost 300 teachers. In physics alone, the target was 61 students, but, unfortunately, we only saw three becoming trained in physics last year. So, it's clear that more needs to be done to attract teachers into priority subject areas.

So, Dirprwy Lywydd, in the absence of clear milestones and targets in terms of improving PISA results, and hitting the recruitment targets for teachers, it's vital that we have, from the Welsh Government, an action plan with clear targets in place, with specific milestones set out and with an achievable timescale, because pupils and parents in Wales deserve far, far better than this. And if the Welsh Government isn't prepared to deliver, I can promise you this: Plaid Cymru, in 2026, will be ready to improve and raise standards and attainment levels for children in Wales.

By putting iechyd da first on the list of priorities, Eluned Morgan's Government has clearly recognised the importance of improving our performance in health, fully realising that this is the biggest challenge to reduce the waiting lists for procedures that can only occur in a hospital setting. Twenty three thousand waiting for more than two years is far too long, and we need to break this down by health board to understand where and for what procedure the problem lies. Many of these requests for secondary care are for diagnostic services, where GPs are not sure whether the issue the patient has brought to them is routine and easily addressed in primary care, or whether there is something more concerning going on. Clearly, in doctors' minds, there is always the possibility of cancer or some other really serious issue. Early identification is always the most important thing for a good outcome and for recovery.

Clearly, anyone who needs an operation that can only be done in a hospital requires them to have a bed to recuperate in, and that involves health and social services working together on speeding up the process for getting people out of hospital whose medical treatment no longer requires them to be in hospital. A great deal of work has been done on improving the number of community nursing teams that are available. We had three pilots just before COVID struck, and we've now got 62 district nursing teams operating in our communities. I've seen at first hand just how effective they are at ensuring that people can be assessed for ongoing health needs in their own home, which is much better and clearer on their needs than if you were trying to assess them in hospital.

This is a really complicated issue, and that is why it's absolutely right that we should be sharing good practice across our borders. We can't simply be blind to what's going in other parts of the country, and as long as we're working with people whose aim is to maintain a public health service, I'm very happy to do that. What we didn't want to do was work with the Tories whose only objective was to privatise the national health service, but, unless we improve our national health service, then we are going to be faced by people voting with their feet. And we have to work with individual people, all our staff, many of whom are exhausted as a result of COVID and drained of additional resources. We have a very challenging situation, but we need to recognise that situation and ensure that we're doing something about it, because otherwise people get very frustrated and will want an even more radical change than I know Plaid is assuming. We have to face down the anger and frustration that was expressed in the general election, with so many people in 13 constituencies voting Plaid as their second choice—excuse me, Reform as their second choice—because this indicates that there is a genuine frustration with the rationing that's been going on over the last 14 years, and people need hope that there is going to be change. And I am positive that we are going to get rapid change. There's already been quite a lot of change from the UK Government, and we're going to see a lot more.

When she set out her priorities, the First Minister said she would build a fairer, greener and more prosperous nation, a Wales where every young person can feel happy and hopeful for the future. Well, if that's the case, the Welsh Government must set out, as our motion makes clear, detailed plans and targets to make that happen, and we need to see a demonstration of the actual power in this so-called partnership in power with the UK Labour Government, and nowhere more than in its efforts to tackle child poverty, which, of course, are central to these stated aims—a Wales where every young person can feel happy and hopeful for the future.

Yn fy nghyfle olaf i holi’r Prif Weinidog blaenorol, gofynnais iddo a fyddai Llywodraeth Lafur Cymru yn galw ar ei chwaer Lywodraeth Lafur yn San Steffan, a oedd newydd ei hethol, i gael gwared ar y cap ar fudd-daliadau a'r terfyn dau blentyn. Pan wnes i hynny, roedd yr anhrefn o fewn Llafur yng Nghymru yn golygu bod ein cenedl ni heb Weinidog oedd â chyfrifoldeb dros dlodi plant. Fe wnes i gyfeirio at adroddiad gan Brifysgol Loughborough a oedd yn dangos bod mwy na 65,000 o blant yng Nghymru yn cael eu heffeithio'n uniongyrchol gan y polisi hwn. Ond y cyfan a gawsom gan y cyn Brif Weinidog oedd ailadrodd agwedd Keir Starmer fod twf economaidd yn hanfodol mewn perthynas â sut y dylid mynd i’r afael â thlodi plant.

Wel, wrth gwrs, mae twf economaidd yn hanfodol i greu mwy o gyfoeth, ond dyw twf ddim o reidrwydd yn arwain at degwch economaidd-gymdeithasol. Ac mae twf, wrth gwrs, hefyd yn cymryd amser, tra bod bron i un o bob tri phlentyn yng Nghymru yn byw mewn tlodi a dim targedau tlodi plant statudol. A nawr mae gan Gymru Brif Weinidog arall. Galwais ar Eluned Morgan, pan gafodd ei hethol, i roi trechu tlodi plant ar frig yr agenda ac i sicrhau mai ei cham cyntaf oedd adfer targed i roi terfyn ar dlodi plant.

Currently, the Welsh Government's child poverty strategy infamously contains no targets and, as such, has been roundly criticised by the children’s commissioner, the Senedd's Equality and Social Justice Committee and numerous children’s organisations and anti-poverty groups in Wales.

When the target was dropped by the Welsh Government in 2016, it was stated that this was because UK Government policies made the target unachievable. They had said that their ability to reduce child poverty in Wales was, and I quote,

'clearly dependent on actions taken by the UK Government'.

But now we have a new Government who are promising delivery. Eluned Morgan is going to be, in her words, when she addressed us here on her election in August, 'a leader focused on delivery', and she's even got a delivery Minister in case her Cabinet need reminding that their job involves delivering. So, you'd think, therefore, that targets could be quite useful to measure that delivery. But when I asked if those child poverty targets would be reinstated, because, thankfully, the Tories are now history, and with them, you'd expect, their cruel and failed austerity measures, like the benefit cap and two-child limit, I have been told by the First Minister to take it up my with MP.

Perhaps the delivery Minister, the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice and the First Minister should listen to the words of Chris Birt, an associate director in the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, who was head of the Scottish First Minister's policy and delivery unit. He knows a thing or two about tackling child poverty, and he told the Equality and Social Justice Committee, when we were scrutinising the draft child poverty strategy, that one of the things that is key to a successful strategy is delivery. You need to know what are the actions in it, how they'll be measured. Because, otherwise, how will we know if they're working? He gave the committee such valuable insight into how the statutory targets in Scotland and the target-driven overall child poverty approach there works. And he also reminded us that one of the main barriers to making progress on tackling child poverty is the decisions of politicians. The Welsh Government have made a decision not to set statutory targets, a decision not to call on the Labour UK Government to scrap the cap, a decision not to prioritise feeding all children from low-income families in our secondary schools, a decision not to ensure the poorest children are fed in the school holidays.

I've spoken on this issue more times than I can remember during my short time as a Member of the Senedd, because it's absolutely vital to ensuring Wales's prosperity. Because this inequality we've all become so used to is not only morally repugnant, but it's also disastrous for our nation. The flimsy rhetoric we've heard so far doesn't constitute a plan for ensuring a fair and prosperous Wales for all its citizens. We need concrete action, demonstrable progress—

You must conclude, please.

—and targets by which we can measure the delivery of real change.

I call on the Counsel General and Minister for Delivery, Julie James.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I want to thank everyone for their contributions this afternoon. As always, I have insufficient time to answer each point in detail, but, as always, I will try to address the general themes.

Last week, in her first Plenary and her first FMQs, the First Minister set out the priorities of this Government, reflecting that those priorities were the priorities of the people of Wales, as has been acknowledged by many of the speakers this afternoon. The First Minister made it clear that these were shaped by conversations held over the summer, and will shape what we as a Government will focus on over the last 18 months of this Senedd term, building on the considerable achievements that we have already accomplished, as set out by my colleague Carolyn Thomas, amongst others. As the First Minister said, it's important that we listen to everyone and not just those with the loudest voices. This ensures that we can focus on what matters most to the people of Wales. So, I want to thank everyone involved in that listening exercise. This is why, over the next 18 months, we will prioritise the practical changes we can make to continue to improve our NHS, our economy, our schools and our communities. We will set out in due course more detail on how we will be delivering on those priorities and commit to providing regular updates to the Senedd on the progress of those. We know this will require a whole-Government effort, which is why it is important that we make sure our resources are effectively directed to the delivery of these priority areas.

The First Minister has already stated that she will hold a Cabinet session each month specifically focused on delivery, and that my role as the Minister for delivery is designed to provide additional capacity to bring people together to find innovative and creative ways to drive that delivery in the short time we have left. Without delay, that work has already begun.

The Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care has, in his first week, met with the NHS chair to set out the Government's priorities and expectations. He also attended the ministerial cancer summit, hearing about improvements to cancer outcomes. The Cabinet Secretary for Economy, Energy and Planning launched a consultation last week seeking views on the new infrastructure consent regime, enabling local communities to better understand decisions that affect them.

Over the summer, we saw progress with strong exam results in the top grades across a range of subjects, and last week the Cabinet Secretary for Education announced the roll-out of free school meals to all primary school pupils had been delivered ahead of schedule, providing over 30 million additional meals since its launch—something we owe to the co-operation agreement and an alliance of progressive parties across this Chamber, something we should remember when we're thinking about the way forward.

Would you take an intervention?

Of course.

Would you say then that you're like-minded on the two-child benefit cap?

Well, I haven't seen the whole of the budget yet, so I'm not in a position to say. I do take the point you make, of course—we'd all like to see some changes, but you have to see the whole thing, the whole picture, and I'm just reporting to you what it feels like already. The change inside the Government is palpable and real. I still remember the scars as skills Minister that I faced over the apprenticeship levy, when the £110 million we should have had in Wales was reduced to -£11 million as a result of skilful manipulation of the Barnett formula. You should not underestimate the difference that that kind of policy can really make. The renewed inter-government relationships, the memorandum of understanding on the Sewel convention, an updated fiscal framework, restored decision making over post-EU structural funds to the Welsh Government, and actively exploring the devolution of youth justice and probation are amongst the many things that we are currently discussing. On HS2, we will continue to work with the UK Government to ensure a fair approach to the application of Barnett in relation to rail funding. We would welcome a review of comparability with the Department of Transport and of the Network Rail investment pipeline processes, for example.

We've always said we would support the electrification of the north Wales main line, and I’d just like to add, as an aside, since I come from there, also of the main line to Swansea, but our focus must be on the immediate rail priorities for north Wales and elsewhere in Wales and our partners across the border. Network Rail received no formal remit or funding from the previous administration at Westminster for development work for the electrification of the north Wales main line. Contrast that with what we recently confirmed—a massive boost in rail capacity for people, businesses and communities in north Wales, to be delivered in 2026. We will work closely with the UK Government to develop an agreed pipeline of rail infrastructure enhancements across Wales, including improvements for north Wales via the Wales rail board.

There are many other examples that I could use. We've already started to work very closely with the UK Government, for example, on how we can deliver a better system for social house building. There are many, many things we can do together to help the industry come together, because it's not just about planning and money—it is actually about an attitude towards building that makes a real difference on the ground, and there is a real difference, as I hope everyone in this Senedd understands, between, for example, houses for social rent and affordable housing. To have a Government that actually gets that difference at the UK level makes a substantial difference to the way we can deliver here in Wales.

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

Thank you very much, Dirprwy Lywydd, and thank you to everyone who’s contributed to this debate this afternoon, and to the Minister for her response. I think speaker after speaker has taken us through the clear evidence that sets out a lack of a plan and a lack of direction from Government. As I said earlier, this motion is an appeal to Labour Ministers to acknowledge the need for a plan and the need for a change of direction. Spokespeople on these benches have been able to highlight different policy areas. We are facing very real challenges, which require an urgent response, and, although the people of Wales are desperate for change—I'm sure about that—and are becoming more and more frustrated as time passes, better late than never, so let us see what those plans are.

I'd hoped to have been presenting this motion to the new First Minister. It's a response to her statement on her priorities, after all. I wanted her to hear and respond, in fact, to those concerns of ours that the ambiguity of the statement that she has given us about her priorities is a major problem. Instead, the Minister for delivery responded. The Government's own motion, of course, admits she has nothing to oversee the delivery of yet. 'We'll set out, in due course, further details of how priorities will be delivered' is what we have been told. We had a list of meetings that had taken place, descriptions of some things that had already happened. We've heard that there has been a change of tone. I hope that doesn't mean something more comfortable, because I want there to be a good relationship between Welsh Government and UK Government, and I actively encourage that, but I want a tough, constructive challenge always from Welsh Government to UK Government, and that's what it doesn't feel as if we are getting currently.

Even now, on the lack of planning, on the lack of a clear programme, three and a half years into the life of this Senedd, all we have is, on health, for example, a promise to cut waiting times—well, we know we need to cut waiting times—a better women’s health service—I know we need that; Delyth Jewell is such a champion on that—better access to social care—yes, we know that needs to happen. But there's no outline even, essentially, of how that is going to be done. So, we won't be supporting the 'delete all' motion that’s been put forward by the Labour Government, essentially saying, 'It's all in hand', because it's not in hand. The evidence that all of our constituents feel suggests, clearly, that it's not in hand. The Conservatives: we'll agree with their first amendment, that Welsh Government, it says, isn't hearing the extent to which the winter fuel payment cut is hitting pensioners. There is one delivery that Labour can be proud of there—an idea put forward by the Conservatives to cut the winter fuel payment, delivered by Labour in Government. We won't, though, support the second Conservative amendment, which removes our call for fair funding for Wales. Why the Conservatives would actively want to remove a call for fair funding for the people that they represent, you will have to ask them.

For the second time this year, we're holding to account a new First Minister for Wales. Time is short—an admission of that in the concluding comments of the Minister for delivery. Now, on the bright side, time is short because an election is just over 18 months away, bringing the possibility of real change. Plaid Cymru will be asking people to trust us to deliver on our vision for Wales, as the other parties here will. But of course, the truth is that every month that people spend on a waiting list, every month lost in improving education standards, every month of a lack of dynamism in Government on the economy, is bad for the communities and bad for the constituencies that all of us represent. So, support our motion today and say it really is time for a new direction, a clear plan, targets, measurable—it's time for action.

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

That brings us to voting time. Unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, I will proceed directly to voting time. The first vote is on item 7, the Welsh Conservatives' debate. I call for a vote on the motion without amendment, tabled in the name of Darren Millar. If the proposal is not agreed, we will vote on the amendments tabled to the motion. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 14, no abstentions, and 37 against. Therefore, the motion is not agreed.

I now call for a vote on amendment 1, tabled in the name of Heledd Fychan. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 will be deselected. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 10, no abstentions, 41 against. Therefore, amendment 1 is not agreed.

I now call for a vote on amendment 2, tabled in the name of Jane Hutt. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 27, no abstentions, 24 against. Therefore, amendment 2 is agreed.

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

Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 27, no abstentions, 24 against. Therefore, the motion as amended is agreed.

We will now move to a vote on item 8, the Plaid Cymru debate. I call for a vote on the motion without amendment, tabled in the name of Heledd Fychan. If the proposal is not agreed, we will vote on the amendments tabled to the motion. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 10, no abstentions, 41 against. Therefore the motion is not agreed.

I now call for a vote on amendment 1, tabled in the name of Jane Hutt. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendments 2 and 3 will be deselected. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 27, no abstentions, 24 against. Therefore, amendment 1 is agreed and amendments 2 and 3 have been deselected.

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

Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 27, no abstentions, 24 against. Therefore, the motion as amended is agreed.

That brings voting to an end. We now have a short debate, so if Members are leaving, please do so quietly.

We'll move on now to the short debate, and I call on Hannah Blythyn to speak on the topic that she has chosen. Hannah.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd, and can I say at the outset that I'd like to give a minute of my time to Mike Hedges and to Luke Fletcher?

I'm bringing forward this short debate at a time when we know that the economy right across the UK faces many challenges—a perfect storm fanned by the flames of economic austerity, a global pandemic and the ensuing cost-of-living crisis. The facts and the stats certainly speak for themselves, but Wales and workers were feeling the pinch of a toxic combination of slow growth, high inequality and the steady erosion of workplace rights long before the cost-of-living crisis struck. Unfettered capitalism letting the markets manage themselves and the rolling back of workers' rights is not the vehicle for achieving dignity at work and greater prosperity for our people and places. We need an economic system that empowers people, not exploits them. We need to use every lever available to us to unlock the economic potential of our communities and our country.

The reality is that the major macroeconomic levers are outwith the power of the Welsh Government and this place, and the fiscal truth is that we need greater financial firepower to make and maintain sustainable and substantial investments in our communities. So, I could have used this debate to call for fairer funding for Wales or the devolution of the Crown Estate, which could be a game-changer and begin transformational change. But, as the saying goes, politics is the art of the possible, and I'll focus today on what we can do with the devolved levers we do have to help make our economy work better for workers and for Wales, from planning to procurement and taking the next steps when it comes to our social partnership approach, training for the jobs not just of today but tomorrow, teaching not just new skills but providing the opportunity to reskill throughout your working life, and for experience to be better passed on from one generation to the next with the potential for a phased path to retirement, alongside supporting the workers of the future. Technological change is transforming workplaces, and those with the fewest skills are most at risk from things like artificial intelligence. So, we need to work with the trade unions to ensure that both the green and technological transitions happen with the workforce not to them. After all, there can be no environmental justice without economic and social justice too.

Whilst recognising the need for protections and processes within the planning system, there must be more that we can do to better use planning to enable economic development that has social, economic and environmental value. Whether that is a streamlined system for projects that fulfil certain criteria or strengthen expectations and accountability around social value and community benefits, we need a greater return on private investment in places and for the people that live in them. And what else can we do with the tax-raising powers we do have in Wales? Some non-domestic rates to newer possibilities, can they better offer a means to incentivise and drive local economies?

It is understandable to want to attract inward investment to Wales, but it's best done in a way that is anchored in our communities. Too many times we have witnessed major names coming here in receipt of public money, only to up sticks, sometimes within the decade. And whilst we naturally want to create as many decent jobs as possible, it must be about the quality of those jobs, not simply the quantity. Public money should not go to companies who do not align their own principles with the Welsh Government’s position on fair work. The economic contract has evolved, but in my view, it could and should go much further. Any organisation receiving public funds should, as a minimum, be committed to paying at least the real living wage, offer all of their workers contracted hours should they want them, and allow access to trade unions and promote trade union membership.

Dirprwy Lywydd, there is much I could cover on this topic this afternoon, but as this is a short debate, I’m going to focus the remainder of my contribution on the role of public procurement, because I know the economy Secretary is a big fan of procurement, like myself, and also on the power of the public sector to effect broad economic change and the potential of a community wealth-building approach to economic development and regeneration in Wales.

The Social Partnership and Public Procurement (Wales) Act 2023 was the first piece of primary legislation on procurement in Wales, and I should probably declare an interest at this point, as the Member who took through that legislation. But when the procurement part of that law is enacted, it will mean that public bodies will be required to carry out socially responsible procurement, putting environmental, social, economic and cultural well-being at the heart of Wales's annual procurement spend. That presents a huge shift from how procurement has been traditionally viewed, through the lens of bureaucracy and the financial bottom-line, to procurement as a means to achieve shared prosperity. Public sector-led procurement has the opportunity to shape and influence so many of the activities that our public services deliver, and ensure that public spending reaps maximum local, economic, social and environmental benefit.

We know that public finances are under severe pressure, but arguably, in times of economic challenge and fiscal restraint, the power of procurement becomes even more important. We need to make sure that every pound spent on public service provision and procuring goods and services reaps maximum value and benefit. The public sector is central, not just as simply providing the services that we all depend upon, but as a key economic driver. It's where we get the most leverage around fair work and delivering provision in a way that brings broader benefits. Welsh Government's programme for government commits to exploring where services and contracts can sustainably and affordably be brought back into a strengthened public sector.

I suppose I'll make a declaration here: I'm about to rejoin Unite. A lot of the work that they've been doing around the steelworkers has brought me back into the fold in that sense, but also the work they're undertaking now in giving representation to the hospitality workers across the UK. Obviously, back in the day, when I was in hospitality, I was a member of Unite, so I'll be looking to rejoin to support that effort.

I have to say I agree with a lot of the stuff that's been said already: inward investment and the way in which we do it has to change. We're in a situation right now where we give money away to multinational companies, and we see, then, what happens down the line. In Bridgend, you've got Ford, you've got Biomet now more recently, all upping sticks after receiving Government money. The same can be said for Tata, as well: Government money has been given to Tata, and we're still losing 2,800 jobs directly in Tata, and potentially then 10,000 if you account for the job losses within the supply chain.

The one thing I would add—and I talk about this a lot—is this: the economy, what is it about? It's about people, and that's what we should be focusing on. Wales won't be an economic superpower. We're not going to be rivalling the likes of the US and China in a traditional sense, and that's completely fine. But if we start measuring what is of value to the people in our economy—so, whether they have a fulfilling life and work in jobs that they actually enjoy, whether they have disposable income and have a life that they can enjoy—you'll find quite quickly that the rankings, worldwide, of global economies changes, it almost flips. The G7 is no longer the G7; the G7 is further down the list because of the lack of focus on people.

So, I agree with a lot that's been said already, but I think the way in which we measure economic success has to change. We have to be more people focused and we have to start thinking about how we measure happiness, how we measure fulfilment within the economy, because that is the real test of whether an economy is actually delivering for people on the ground.

Can I also add that I'm a very proud trade unionist?

Thank you, Hannah Blythyn, for giving me a minute in this debate. I agree with everything you've just said. We've had a growth in exploitative contracts, not just zero-hour contracts, but many with low guaranteed hours, sometimes as few as five or eight per week, at the minimum wage—visit a high street near you. We've also seen the privatisation and contracting out of key services such as homecare. If the private contractors can make a profit by doing a function cheaper, then it must be based on either reduced conditions of service of the employees or reduced hours of the employees; there's no other way of doing it cheaper. No company with exploitative terms or conditions of service should have Welsh Government financial support. That really is important.

The second thing I'll say is that Welsh Government funded bodies and local authorities should, at the end of contracts, look to bring contracted-out services back in house. And finally, I will say that—and I wrote about this recently—the number of companies that have come to Wales for five or 10 years, had substantial Government grants and then walked away again is a disgrace.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Economy, Energy and Planning to reply to the debate—Rebecca Evans.

Thank you very much, and thank you to Hannah Blythyn for raising this short debate today on the importance of economic growth and workers' rights. In my new ministerial role, I'm really clear on the need to utilise cross-Government powers in the economy space. We need to think openly and creatively to maximise economic growth opportunities, and I think that really came through strongly in everything that Hannah was saying, particularly about how we use all the levers that we have and how we use them well to deliver real change. The economy impacts on all areas of our lives and it is important to consider how we utilise our levers as a Government to spread wealth and to tackle some of the deep-rooted causes of economic inactivity. We can take important steps within our devolved powers to ensure that wealth distribution covers all regions and is of benefit to all workers.

I'll be making an oral statement on 8 October and that will set out how we are focusing on economic growth and working closely with the UK Government to help maximise opportunities in Wales. And this, of course, will include how we go about delivering on the First Minister's priorities on growing our economy and green jobs. We have to be clear on where we're building from and that's why I do agree with the position of the Chancellor, who has brought a much-needed focus to the need to develop growth based on the strong, secure foundations of stability, investment and reform and forged through a new partnership with the private sector.

We have faced over a decade of austerity from a Conservative Government, but now we do need to take on the challenges to kick-start growth and to ensure stability and sustainability for the longer term. Having a UK Labour Government will aid the delivery of our economic mission and our four national priority areas: just and green prosperity; a platform for young people, fair work, skills and success; stronger partnerships with stronger regions and the everyday economy; and investing in growth. These priorities remain the bedrock of our approach and they do align with the UK Government's mission-based approach.

At the core of our delivery strengths in Wales are our partnerships and our regions. Economic growth and a focus on workers' rights can only be achieved in partnership—ourselves, the UK Government, the private sector, the public sector and trade unions working together. And obviously, I want to pay tribute to Hannah for the absolutely leading role that she's played in this space for many years, and, of course, to declare my own interest here as a member of Unison and Unite.

We know that locally rooted leadership is important because it means that decisions taken over investment and services are informed by regional and local priorities. Our regional economic frameworks help to bring together partners to agree a clear approach. Our commitment, through corporate joint committees, which embeds powers around economic well-being, will help regions to work together to be more responsive to local needs and challenges, and to understand the potential that makes each place unique. That's why we'll go on investing in long-term partnerships capable of linking innovation and skills to better pay and well-being. In sectors like aerospace, the creative industries and energy, our partnerships have built lasting careers that support stronger family finances in many of our communities.

Our Business Wales and Development Bank of Wales services provide sustainable, effective support and finance, and our services for small businesses are close enough to understand local economies and the needs of entrepreneurs, and are big enough to make an impact. This is helping to bring ambitions to life and fuelling possibilities for people, businesses and communities across Wales. Our new local government finance Act helps to modernise both our non-domestic rates and our council tax systems, and it establishes a series of changes to improve the tax systems, making them fairer and work better for the future needs of Wales, by ensuring that local taxes reflect economic circumstances more regularly.

As the global economy changes, we will maximise our devolved powers, clearly demonstrating that we are a pro-business and pro-worker country, underpinned by a reputation for, and a commitment to, fair work and well-being. I think that this came through really strongly in Luke Fletcher’s contribution this afternoon. Our approach as a country that is committed to a well-being economy has to really mean something.

So, we are working with Governments such as Canada and New Zealand as part of the WEGo group—that’s the network of well-being Governments group—to understand the key priorities for a well-being economy. We want to position Wales as a leading nation in our approach, and to innovate and place a specific focus on the role of business, place and people to meet a range of needs.

A key part of our well-being economy is our focus on fair work and social partnership, and that’s why our Welsh way of social partnership working has led to the development—and I don’t need to tell Hannah Blythyn this—of our new social partnership and public procurement Act, in which she was so instrumental. This offers significant potential to cement our social partnership in Wales by putting a duty on public bodies to engage with trade unions when they are setting out what they will do to comply with the well-being of future generations Act.

Our social partnership approach is underpinned by the benefits of employers and trade unions, working as partners in a spirit of collaboration, shared commitment and mutual respect. This benefits employers as well as trade unions, and I think that that came through really strongly in Mike Hedges’s contribution, particularly when he was talking about zero-hours contracts and so on.

A good relationship with a trade union can help a business with safety issues, so that fewer days are lost as a result of work-related injuries and occupational illnesses. It can also help to organise training and learning and development, including access to the Wales union learning fund, and it can be a vital factor in contributing to a more engaged and productive workforce. For those reasons and others, we encourage all employers to work in social partnership, for their benefit and that of their workforces. This includes using our economic contract to encourage trade union access.

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