Senedd Cymru (Welsh Parliament), 24 March 2021

313 contributions from 44 members. The official report.

Statement by the Llywydd

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

Welcome to this final Plenary session of the fifth Senedd. Before we begin, I want to set out a few points in this meeting, as I've done in all other meetings. A Plenary meeting held by video-conference, in accordance with the Standing Orders of the Welsh Parliament, constitutes Senedd proceedings for the purposes of the Government of Wales Act 2006. Some of the provisions of Standing Order 34 will apply for today's Plenary meeting, and these are noted on your agenda. I would also remind Members that Standing Orders relating to order in Plenary meetings apply to this meeting.

1. Questions to the Minister for Health and Social Services

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

Our first item today is questions to the Minister for Health and Social Services, and the first question is from Janet Finch-Saunders.

Janet Finch-Saunders (Conservative, Aberconwy)

1. Will the Minister make a statement on the development of a north Wales medical school? OQ56475

Vaughan Gething (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)

Yes. In June 2020, I created a task and finish group to explore the feasibility of proposals put forward by Bangor University and Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board for a north Wales school for medical and health sciences. This work has now progressed to the development of a full business case, and, as you'll know, my party has pledged in the forthcoming election to see that to a successful conclusion.

Janet Finch-Saunders (Conservative, Aberconwy)

Thank you. Since Welsh Labour were voted back into Government in May 2016, the number of patient pathways waiting over 36 weeks to start treatment has increased from 4,078 to 50,143. You have overseen a 1,130 per cent increase over five years. Now, whilst we realise the pandemic has worsened the situation, the scene was already bleak here in north Wales. By February 2020, the number of treatment pathways waiting over 36 weeks had already reached 11,296. Fast-tracking the development of a medical school is a major part of this solution. Even the Royal College of Physicians Wales has long supported the expansion of a medical school. And as they told me only this week, there are ongoing major trainee rota gaps in every one of our hospitals, and this cannot continue, as it has a direct impact on quality of patient care. Earlier this month, you kindly issued a written statement on medical education in north Wales. Whilst I welcome the fact that a total of 19 students began their studies on the C21 programme in the 2019-20 intake, the number actually fell to 18 students in the intake the year after. What steps will you take to improve awareness of opportunities in north Wales and ensure that there is an expansion rather than a decline in the number of students receiving medical education here? Diolch.

Vaughan Gething (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)

Thank you for the question. I think it's time to put the record straight on some of the allegations made by not just this, but the regular Conservative Members. Before the pandemic, we saw the best waiting times position in six years, until the year before the pandemic. We then saw not just in Wales, but in every part of the UK a decline as a direct consequence of tax and pension changes introduced by the Conservatives at Westminster. You'll see that direct correlation in every UK nation—don't take my word for it, go and talk to the British Medical Association about the direct impact that had on their members and on the ability to continue making progress on waiting times.

When it comes to the points about the medical school and medical education in north Wales, this Government has a good track record on making decisions to expand opportunities to undertake medical education in north Wales. We're committed to not just seeing through the task and finish group and the work on delivering a business case for north Wales, but, of course, as I've indicated, there's a clear manifesto headline pledge to see that to a successful conclusion if Welsh Labour are re-elected to lead the Welsh Government again by the people of Wales.

We also have a good record on doctor training in north Wales on a whole range of areas. For example, on general practice, we now regularly fill a significant number of GP training posts. In fact, we overfill those training posts, including regularly filling all of the GP training places available in north Wales as well. So, on our track record, we have a good track record, and on our ambition for the future, I think the people of Wales will continue to place their trust in us and I look forward to their verdict on the first Thursday in May.

Jack Sargeant (Labour, Alyn and Deeside)

Minister, a medical school for north Wales is something that I have long called for and is something that is particularly important for the north Wales region. Do you agree with me that it's a Mark Drakeford-led Government that is committed to delivering this and that the only way that this is affordable and deliverable is with him as First Minister?

Vaughan Gething (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)

I completely agree, and the Member's right to point out that Welsh Labour have actually done the hard yards in Government to expand medical education and training opportunities in north Wales. We've done that successfully. It's a clear, headline, direct manifesto pledge: if you vote Welsh Labour, then we will see through to a successful conclusion a medical school in north Wales—more opportunities to train and stay in Wales, and, crucially, they'll work alongside the medical schools we already have in Swansea and Cardiff, in providing what I believe will be high-quality medical education, and to keep doctors training in Wales, and for them to stay to train, work and live in Wales.

Mandy Jones (UKIP, North Wales)

Minister, during the referendum campaign, and well after, I always felt great disquiet as one of the major arguments for remaining, and then for thwarting the vote, was how the NHS may be affected by an exodus of workers in the NHS. It is almost as if civic leaders and politicians were celebrating the fact that other countries' health services and training were being plundered by the UK, and I never really got that point of view. Do you agree with me that a medical school in north Wales will be a part of the drive to self-sufficiency in the NHS, taking responsibility for training our own workforce, if you like, and that has to be a really, really good thing? Thank you.

Vaughan Gething (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)

Well, I think the Member's points are broadly absurd. When it comes to the position about the referendums and our past, actually Brexit has been and done and we're out of the European Union whether we like it or not. That's the reality of where we are, and it will have an impact on our ability to recruit from current European Union member states. And I don't share the Member's view that this is about plundering other parts of the world. We see people who train here in the UK who go and work in other parts of the world as well. And I should remind not just the Member, but everybody that the NHS has always been an international success story. If we had not recruited people from around the world, then our NHS would not have delivered the breadth of care that it has. It would not be the embodiment of the most popular and trusted public institution in this country. Go into any hospital within Wales and you will find an international cast delivering high-quality healthcare, changing and improving our country, not just as workers, but as friends and community members—people who we live alongside and whose children go to the same schools as ours. I'm very proud of our international links. I look forward to maintaining those international links to both recruit and to help other parts of the world, and I look forward to building on the successful track record of this Government in recruiting, training and retaining more of our staff right across the health service—those nurses, doctors and other therapists and scientists as well that we all have come to rely on even more than usual in this past year.

Neil McEvoy (Independent, South Wales Central)

2. Will the Minister make a statement on care home deaths from COVID-19 in Wales? OQ56498

Julie Morgan (Labour, Cardiff North)

The Office for National Statistics has reported 1,643 registered deaths involving COVID-19 to Welsh residents in care homes up to 5 March. This is around 21 per cent of all deaths involving COVID-19.

Neil McEvoy (Independent, South Wales Central)

On 13 March last year, you issued a directive to all health boards to postpone all non-urgent elective activity to allow them to prepare for the expected increase in workload in dealing with the pandemic. Those were the words of your Government to me in a letter. At the same time, the Welsh Government was clearing NHS beds by sending patients from hospitals into care homes without them being tested. It was a staggering thing to do. The results were fatal and brought great tragedy for many families. As of February 2021, your own Government statistics show that deaths in care homes since March 2020 are 43 per cent higher than the same period two years ago. Your party is now calling for an independent inquiry into the UK Government's handling of the pandemic in London. Propel, in 'Our Contract for Wales', has committed to implementing an independent inquiry in Wales on day one after the election in May. Given the outrageous numbers of avoidable deaths in care homes and your Government's actions having made the problem much worse, do you accept that there must be an independent inquiry into your own Government's handling of the COVID crisis?

Julie Morgan (Labour, Cardiff North)

I thank Neil McEvoy for that question. It is obviously an absolute tragedy what has happened in care homes, and my sympathy and the Government’s sympathy is with all the residents and the families who have been affected. There is no question about the tragedy that has occurred. I think the Member will recognise that most individuals who reside in care homes in Wales are the older, more vulnerable members of society, and they are one of the groups that is most at risk from the serious consequences of contracting the disease.

The analysis that's been undertaken by Public Health Wales, looking at the risk factors for the outbreaks of COVID-19 in care homes, suggested that the effect of discharge on outbreaks in care homes was very low. And, also, there's been recent research by Swansea University that has tracked patients from hospital through discharge into care homes, and that's estimated up to 1.8 per cent of discharges from hospitals into care homes could have been carrying the infection. The factors that influenced the outcome was really the size of a care home in both the number of the registered beds as well as the prevalence of COVID-19 in the community, and that had the greatest impact on the number of deaths. But, whatever caused this, it is a tragedy and, of course, I support an investigation into when and why this happened. I think that's absolutely the right thing to do and we must learn from what has happened.

Darren Millar (Conservative, Clwyd West)

Minister, one of the things that is helping to protect care home residents, of course, is the success of the vaccination programme in care homes across Wales. But there are individuals who will have received their first dose in a care home and then returned to a different care setting, sometimes their own home, without having had a second dose. What action is the Welsh Government taking to make sure that those individuals are properly tracked so that they can get their second dose? I've had a number of constituents in my own area who do not appear to be getting their call-backs for those important second doses to give them the full protection that the vaccine can provide.

Julie Morgan (Labour, Cardiff North)

I thank Darren Millar for that question. The vaccination programme does continue to progress well. In care homes, nearly 96 per cent of care home residents have now received their first dose of the vaccine, which is great progress. He makes an important point about people moving to different settings and ensuring that the follow-up dose is given, and we will certainly take steps to ensure that we alert settings to that possibility so that people can be followed up. I haven't been notified of any incidents myself, but if the Member has been notified of these incidents it's obviously very important that those are followed up.

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

Questions now from the party spokespeople and, first of all, the Conservative spokesperson, Angela Burns.

Angela Burns (Conservative, Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire)

Diolch, Presiding Officer. Thank you. Minister, your recently published COVID-19 forward plan, I think, is a very fair summary of the situation that we face in Wales today. I think it neatly outlines the challenges that are faced by health and social care. But I also feel it is very short on some key solutions that we need to be seeing. So, for example, could you please explain what specific plans you have in place to deal with the ever worsening waiting times crisis in elective surgery?

Vaughan Gething (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)

Well, those plans and detail have been worked through with clinical leaders. I was very fortunate to have a really useful conversation with clinical leaders and the NHS chief exec last week, and we went through the deliberate ways we're trying to change where we are. So, when the plan talks about needing to change some of our ways of working, it recognises that we can't go back to trying to buy activity and just to have a deal with the independent sector. So, we're going to need to have some local answers, some regional answers and some nationally directed answers. There isn't a hard-and-fast operational delivery plan now. That comes on the back of the framework and that will come in the plans not just from health boards, but, as I say, needing to make sure that there are local and regional overlays on them.

The other reason is that we're not out of the pandemic yet. So, actually, the lists are going to get bigger before we're at that point. That's partly because, as you'll know, we have a position where the NHS can't work to the same operational efficiency, because we still have additional measures in place, testing and PPE requirements, and we're also still in a position where we're not able to turn back on all of the elective activity that is still paused because—and, again, you'll know this because I know you look at the figures—our critical care units are still at more than 100 per cent. So, you can expect more operational plans to be delivered, whoever the next Government is, and that work will be done by clinical leaders, together with health boards, and whoever is the next health Minister will then have to decide how to get behind those and make choices about areas where health boards need to act on their own or together, and it will, I believe, require a necessary element of direction from whoever the next health Minister is.

Angela Burns (Conservative, Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire)

You talk about the importance of operational plans, and I agree with you that it's very important to work with all the stakeholders to draft operational plans that are really deliverable. Of course, to make those operational plans really sound, you've got to have good data and really up-to-date coherent information and I'm really pleased that your COVID-19 forward plan does recognise that and, in fact, I think you have a whole chapter on how we can improve and use our data. Therefore, will you also listen to the calls of organisations, such as the Royal College of Surgeons, who are asking for not just modelling and publishing of projections on the numbers of people who need an operation in Wales—because they say that is not clear and we're not clear how many elective surgeries and other operations were postponed or completely cancelled because of the pandemic—but also asking for you to publish monthly planned surgery activity levels for the health boards in Wales to encourage the restoration of surgical activity and ensure equity of access to surgical services for patients? In other words, holding the health boards to account on this matter.

Vaughan Gething (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)

Well, the Royal College of Surgeons were at the meeting that I described with clinical leaders and actually the guidance that they've issued has been helpful in allowing some activity to continue in different parts of Wales, but it reflects the reality of where we are on the ground with, not just COVID, but with other harms that are coming in. Because I think part of this is, you're right about data and understanding what that data is, but it's also still then the judgments and the understanding of where people are on that waiting list. There'll be some people who are a higher clinical priority and it's the understanding of how that's taken through to deal with people to avoid the greatest amount of harm, and that will be different in different areas of the service. And, again, the Member will know that in some parts, delaying treatment can lead to irreversible harm, for example, on sight loss. In other areas, it can lead to discomfort and deterioration in that person's well-being, if you're waiting for a joint operation, for example. But that harm may be recovered. So, it's both understanding how to prioritise the waiting list and then to understand how you fairly judge the level of activity that each organisation is undertaking.

So, I'd be more than happy to continue the conversations that we already have with the Royal College of Surgeons on how we can be open and transparent about the levels of activity that are being restarted, but not to use as a simple, 'You're somewhere on a league table and you just have to get somewhere else', because, as I say, the pandemic isn't finished yet. When we move beyond the pandemic, then, yes, I think there'll be more and more data and more and more expectation in terms of my response to your first question: how have we managed to gear up different ways of working to deliver the required levels of activity whilst, of course, at the same time, taking care of our staff who will be exhausted when the pandemic is finally over?

Angela Burns (Conservative, Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire)

I'm afraid this is where I have a slight difference with you, because everybody talks about 'when the pandemic is over', and I actually think we've gone past that—we've gone past the crisis. We're now in a situation where this is endemic. We're going to have a situation where we're going to be in this position for a long, long time to come. We can't keep saying, 'Oh, we're just in a crisis; we're just in a crisis—how do we handle that?' We've got to look beyond that.

I thought that the COVID-19 forward work programme did have some really good things in it, but it comes back to some of the issues that we really found out when we did the cross-party parliamentary group on how to deliver health and social care. There's a lot of, 'We know what the challenges are', but not a lot of, 'How are we going to solve them?' And you yourself have just mentioned our exhausted staff in the NHS and social care services. And I listened to the director of the Royal College of Nursing last night at the commemoration event, talking about how exhausted and traumatised so many of the staff in the health and social care sectors are. And I do worry, reading this COVID-19 forward plan—it talks about, 'We do have a workforce deficit'; well, it's more than just a small workforce deficit. How are we going to be able to manage that on top of creating that space to allow those who have been working so hard over this last year and who are so exhausted—how are we going to allow them the time to recover and get back and start picking up all of these elective surgeries? And there wasn't much talk about recruitment policies, retraining policies, retention policies. You know our plan, we've got a very strong recruit, retain, retrain policy. I didn't see much of that. Can you give us some overview of how you're going to be able to bolster that hard-working but shattered workforce?

Vaughan Gething (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)

With respect, I don't think we are at the point where COVID is now managed and endemic. I think that's where we will get to, but I don't think we're there yet. As I said, when critical care is still operating at over 100 per cent of its capacity, and we still have significant numbers of COVID-positive patients in our hospitals, we're not there yet. But I do think we're well on track to do so, and each easement that we unlock means that there's another area of activity that can be restored in wider life and it puts us further on the path to then being able to deal with a new normal situation for our health and care system. So, I think perhaps we're at different perspectives about when the point is when more normalised activity can restart, and, with respect, I don't think the figures bear out that we're at that point now.

I do know, though, that the reality of how we manage and look after our staff is hugely important. So, you will see comments about that in the recovery plan. In terms of the detail of that, I think that's for manifestos for the election. We've got a really good track record, though, on the numbers of staff that we have recruited, trained and retained over this last term and beyond. We've managed to increase the NHS headcount by more than 10,000 over this Welsh Parliament term. That shows the benefit of consistent recruitment, retention and training. So, I think people can trust our record, because it's a strong one.

But, even with that, and even with the benefit of the future investment that I expect you will see in our manifesto, we still have a really significant task in caring for our staff and not setting unrealistic expectations about how quickly the huge backlog that exists here will be eaten into and moved away. I think this will take a full Welsh Parliament term. That's the honesty that I think the people of Wales need to hear. That's the honesty that I think our staff need to hear as well, that we're not going to expect them to suddenly wipe away all of the huge backlog that has built up necessarily to prevent people from losing their lives in this last year, and you'll hear more from us, from Welsh Labour, when it comes to the manifesto launch, and I think you'll hear plenty about future recruitment and retention for our staff that will be funded and entirely deliverable.

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Rhun ap Iorwerth.

Rhun ap Iorwerth (Plaid Cymru, Ynys Môn)

Thank you, Llywydd. Well, in the final health and care question session in this Senedd, may I take this opportunity to thank the Minister and his officials for their collaboration over the years? We haven't always seen eye to eye, but whilst I've been very willing to support the Government when I think they've got things right over the past 12 months, I know that the Minister will understand the importance of scrutiny and will appreciate the role of an opposition party in trying to influence policy and changing direction when we need to do that. That's why, when the Minister said there was no case for a medical school for north Wales, we were determined to continue to campaign on that, and we're pleased to see the change of mind there.

To COVID now, the situation in Wales is improving, and that's positive. There are problems in Merthyr Tydfil and in my constituency, as it happens, and we need to support those areas now. There was a strong team of volunteers out in Holyhead this morning providing COVID tests, going from house to house. I was one of them, as it happens, but it's a cause of concern for me that the process is overly reliant on volunteers and places a huge strain on the staffing resources of the local authority. Would the Minister agree that we need to look at means of providing greater support to councils as they undertake tasks such as this one, because if there are interventions like this required in various communities, then I fear that that's going to be difficult to deliver?

Vaughan Gething (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)

Well, I think there are lots of lessons to learn, not just from what we're having to do today and in the days ahead around Holyhead—not the whole of the county of Anglesey, but around Holyhead, and the same in parts of Merthyr. We also have learning to take from the pilot that was undertaken with the three local authorities across Cwm Taf Morgannwg with a greater amount of community testing, and you will have seen, I'm sure, the really positive review of that community testing programme. And, actually, within that, we've managed to have a more successful engagement of the public in that community-wide testing than the pilots in Liverpool and Glasgow, I believe. That's really good news. We managed to highlight that, because of that, we think we'd identified more cases and prevented more admissions, including, the likely prevention of a number of deaths.

That does mean, though, that we need to learn about how we need to support local authorities. Some of that is about mutual aid, some of that is about the ongoing discussion we have between health, local government and the Welsh Government about how we support them. And I can honestly say that I've found local government leaders regardless of their party to be constructive and honest, and we have not always agreed at every point, but we have come to what I believe have been sensible answers to carry matters forward, and as ever, we're still learning as we go through. The good news is, though, that the spikes in Holyhead and in parts of Merthyr appear to be evening out with a fall in the case rate in Merthyr in the figures today in particular. That's good news, not just for everyone with the potential of opening up with more travel around Wales, but good news for those communities in those areas that are looking forward to the next stage in our path out of lockdown.

Rhun ap Iorwerth (Plaid Cymru, Ynys Môn)

This week is a week of commemoration and reflection exactly a year since that first lockdown. The UK Prime Minister's admitted that he made some wrong decisions in dealing with the pandemic, but I'm not going to ask that question of the Minister. What I want the Minister to do is to look back at the 20 years and more of Labour control of the NHS leading up to the pandemic. One lesson that we've learnt is that health and care services in Wales aren't resilient enough to deal with the pandemic. Does the Minister accept that no other Government can afford to leave crucial services in such a vulnerable position again?

Vaughan Gething (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)

At the start of the pandemic, health and care and wider public services were still recovering from a decade of austerity and you'll recall the very difficult choices that the Government and Members in supporting budgets have had to make in moving money around. The prioritisation of the health service I believe was the right thing, but that caused real difficulties for local government in every part of the country as it meant a reduction in local government income. Just because the cuts that they had to deal with weren't of the scale that colleagues in England had to face, they were still nevertheless incredibly difficult and left our public service partners in a less-than-even-handed manner than you'd want them to; the resilience they had was less than it should have been. The same with the police, of course, who have been key partners in the pandemic response with a significant reduction in the workforce and front-line policing as well.

So yes, we were more vulnerable than I would have wanted us to be at the start of this pandemic. Despite that, what we have seen from local public service leaders is a real willingness to work together and it's a real plus that it's drawn health and local government together with other partners because of the necessity, and I believe that's good ground for those people to work together.

We disagree on whether there should be a significant reorganisation of health and social care responsibilities. My view is that's the wrong thing to do—with an unfinished pandemic—to have a big reorganisation. But I do think that there are good grounds to not just praise the response of health and local government together, but to want to build on that in the sort of joint working that we have frankly found not as easy as we'd wanted to on the scale and the pace we want to see for the transformation that is still needed to make sure that health and social care are a genuinely sustainable system working with each other.

Rhun ap Iorwerth (Plaid Cymru, Ynys Môn)

You have to remember that the health and care sector in Wales went into a decade of austerity off the back of decades of neglect by successive Labour and Conservative Governments in Cardiff and at Westminster. It's clear to me that health and care services in Wales were not prepared for this pandemic. Public health and the care sector in particular had been neglected. Pandemic planning, we know, was woefully short of where it should have been right across health and care. There was far too much dependence, I think, on the sheer dedication of staff who'd always be prepared to go the extra mile to care for patients, but were overworked and undersupported. That's why COVID recovery now can't be about bringing us back to where we were before. I don't want reorganisation, either; I want a new focus and it's why Plaid Cymru wants to lead transformation of health and care in Wales and after 20 years and more of the failure to bring about the transformation that health and care in Wales needed before COVID, will the Minister agree that there is no reason for people to believe that Labour can lead that transformation after COVID either?

Vaughan Gething (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)

I think it's a rather foolish attempt to try to rewrite history on what's happened with the health service and funding and public services. I remember as a young man growing up with 18 years of the Conservatives in Government in the UK. I remember the creation of devolution, I remember the significant injection of public funds into health and other public services that came about with the return of a Labour Government in 1997. This institution benefited from a very different approach to public expenditure and investing in public services because there was a Labour Government across the United Kingdom, and there's no point in trying to claim that wasn't the case—it's factual, and that's why we saw a significant investment in public services, just as it's factual that we've seen a decade of austerity with a Conservative Prime Minister and Chancellor. Those are just the facts.

When it comes to pandemic planning, our planning was geared up towards something more like a flu pandemic, which was in the top handful of risks to the United Kingdom. We then found something that didn't behave quite as the flu has done, so we've all had to learn—not just here, but right across Europe—and I think the attempt to try to have a uniquely critical view on pandemic planning here in Wales is somewhat misplaced, but there are views for the public to make their choices on within that. We have seen a tremendous response across public services and from the public themselves, and the private sector, who have supported our national health service. I think that the people do broadly trust and appreciate the leadership that this Government has provided for Wales through the pandemic, and, when it comes to who you trust to complete the unfinished task of seeing us through this pandemic, I'm confident the people of Wales will recognise the role Welsh Labour has had in doing that, and renew their faith and their trust in us to lead our country forward and to have real ambition for how we can rebuild a better Wales.

I've enjoyed our conversations across this particular forum. I don't know if you have a supplementary question later on, but we have not always agreed, and I look forward to the people of Wales making their own judgment on who should serve in this role and others after the election in early May.

John Griffiths (Labour, Newport East)

3. What further steps will the Welsh Government take to tackle health inequalities in Wales? OQ56499

Vaughan Gething (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)

It is a central ambition of this Government to do everything we can to address unacceptable inequalities in health outcomes between our most and least well-off communities. We will continue to take a whole-Government approach to tackling the root causes of health inequalities.

John Griffiths (Labour, Newport East)

Minister, health inequalities in the UK and Wales are very, very concerning. Men in the most deprived communities live, on average, 10 years less than those in the least deprived, and, for women, the difference is almost eight years. And in terms of healthy years of life, the difference is almost 19 years, and that applies to both genders. So, with that sort of background, that's why the Royal College of Physicians in Wales got together around 30 organisations to look at this situation, and they were looking at research that showed that the social determinants of health or ill-health—housing, education and poverty—can be more important to health outcomes than healthcare itself or, indeed, lifestyle choices. So, in looking at this situation, they believe that there should be a more strongly cross-cutting approach from Welsh Government to involve all Ministers and all departments in changing what needs to be changed to address this totally unacceptable situation.

So, I heard what you said, Minister, in terms of a whole-Government approach, but, in terms of those suggestions and proposals from the royal college and those 30-odd organisations, will you carefully consider what they think is needed in deciding how we can make further inroads into these longstanding issues and problems?

Vaughan Gething (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)

Yes, and I think the Royal College of Physicians report is a useful reminder of the need to have cross-Government action, because most healthcare inequalities don't come from healthcare activity, they come from those determinants outside. It's why, for example, the World Health Organization has recognised the direct healthcare impact of our improvements in housing quality. The reality that having a good-quality warm home makes a real difference to your health is something that has been recognised internationally, and praised for our approach here in Wales. I'm pleased to say you can see that continued leadership from Julie James as our housing Minister, improving housing quality stock and the environmental footprint as well. You see it in the work across education, the work we've done and the conversations yesterday with Kirsty Williams and the Chair of the Children, Young People and Education Committee about that broader approach to children and young people's health, and their health literacy for mental and physical health. You'll see that in the work that Ken Skates has undertaken on the economic contract, making sure that mental and physical health are understood as key outcomes from a good working relationship, where people have good work, good terms and conditions. If you look at healthcare inequalities, they always match over economic inequalities as well. We've made some progress, progress that I think we can be proud of. We know that there's much more to do and a real opportunity to do so as we look to rebuild Wales after this pandemic, to finish the job with the pandemic and rebuild a better, fairer Wales.

Laura Anne Jones (Conservative, South Wales East)

Thank you, Minister. Yes, it's very true that it has to be a cross-cutting, cross-Government approach to this to tackle this significant problem. The pandemic has thrown into sharp focus the issue of health inequalities in Wales, and exposed the consequences of longstanding failure to tackle the problem. Tackling the social causes of health inequalities, as you said, has never been more urgent, and the true scale of the implications of the pandemic for the health and well-being of people in Wales may not become clear for a number of years yet.

Tackling the inequalities in our BME communities specifically, how, Minister, are you looking into significantly improving healthcare provision for our BME communities, healthcare provision that respects cultural differences and recognises the many languages that are spoken amongst our communities, so that we really can create equality in provision?

Vaughan Gething (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)

Well, on the specific issues around Black and Asian origin communities here in Wales, we've done quite a lot in recognising our need to improve our services, whether that's mental health or physical health. We've learnt even more and are doing even more work through the pandemic—for example, the work of Professor Emmanuel Ogbonna in understanding more about those inequalities, the work of Professor Keshav Singhal in undertaking the risk-assessment work, a first within the UK that's being rolled out to other parts of the private sector, but also in the vaccination roll-out as well. And it's perhaps appropriate to mention, given that John Griffiths asked the initial question, the work that John Griffiths and Jayne Bryant have done together with Newport City Council, with the health board, on encouraging more people to undertake not just their vaccinations, but the broader re-engagement of the health service and our broader care systems with different communities that aren't always as close to other parts of the country when it comes to accessing good quality healthcare. So, progress is being made not just on a single issue, but to take that forward more generally.

When it comes, though, to the challenges of healthcare inequalities, I would say to the Member, and any other Conservative who wants to try to claim they have no responsibility in this area, that every objective analysis shows that the Conservative policies of austerity and the attacks on benefits and support for working-age people, including in-work benefits, have had a serious impact on increasing poverty and inequality, especially on the reductions in the gains made over the first part of the last 20 years in reducing child poverty, which have all been lost thanks to choices made by her party. So, perhaps some self-reflection on the role of Conservative policies and the reality that we have had to fight back to undo the damage that her party has chosen to cause.

Helen Mary Jones (Plaid Cymru, Mid and West Wales)

I wonder if the Minister agrees with me that siting really world-class healthcare facilities in our poorer communities can contribute to addressing health inequalities. And if he does agree with me in that regard, would he join me in congratulating Carmarthenshire County Council and all the other partners in the development of Pentre Awel in Llanelli, which will be sited right in the middle of some of the poorest wards in Wales? I'm sure he'll be aware that this will include a clinical care centre delivering multidisciplinary care, a clinical research centre and a well-being skills centre, focusing on the health and care training, focusing that training particularly on recruiting from within those communities. So, I hope that the Minister will join me in congratulating all of those involved, and wonder if he agrees with me that these kinds of projects can make a real difference in communities where they're needed most.

Vaughan Gething (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)

I'm happy to say that I've discussed the matter with the constituency Member for Llanelli, my Government colleague, Lee Waters, and more broadly the challenge of investing in communities across the country. And it's a good example of how local health and care services can and should be drawn together to deliver better quality facilities, to invest within that community and to deliver better services, in exactly the same way as the recently-opened Mountain Ash facility that recently I saw with the council and the local Member for Cynon Valley—the lobbying and the effectiveness of that shows it isn't just health; it's health working with other partners to deliver better facilities. And again, it goes back to the significantly improved relationships between health and local government through the crisis, but before that as well, and there's a real opportunity to carry on investing in local healthcare and delivering much better facilities where they're most needed.

Angela Burns (Conservative, Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire)

4. What action is the Welsh Government taking to improve access to cancer treatments following the COVID-19 pandemic? OQ56492

Vaughan Gething (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)

We published 'Health and Social Care in Wales COVID-19: Looking Forward' on Monday 22 March, and the Member's already referred to that document. That sets out the approach the NHS will take to recovering services such as cancer. We've also published a quality statement for cancer that sets out the scope for continued improvement to cancer services in the years ahead.

And this probably will be the last question I deal with from the Member, and I do want to say that we have certainly not always agreed, but I have always valued an honest and a straightforward approach, and our agreements have always been on a trusted basis, where we know where we disagree and any matters that have been shared in confidence have always been treated in that way, and I wish her well for the future.

Angela Burns (Conservative, Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire)

Thank you very much, Minister. I do appreciate your words. That's very kind of you, and I would reciprocate by saying thank you for your transparency and honesty on some of the occasions that we've had to look at some of the very tough situations that are facing our health and social services.

Of course, one of the very tough situations facing us is the provision of cancer treatments to people through the pandemic. Now, Wales has been without a cancer delivery plan since the end of last year, and, on Monday of this week, the Wales Cancer Alliance, who were hugely unimpressed with either your quality statement or your COVID-19 forward work programme, starkly warned that cancer care in Wales is at risk without a new cancer strategy. The delivery plan that you had was 21 pages long and it's been replaced by a statement that's around three pages long. I've had a read of it; it's full of nice commentary and very much little else. To quote the cancer alliance,

'the quality statement lacks a clear roadmap for how cancer care can improve so that Wales can catch up with the best performing countries and, ultimately, save more lives.'

Most damningly, they go on to say that they do not believe

'this is a sufficiently detailed response to the current crisis in cancer care, nor does it point to a sufficiently bold ambition for cancer services in Wales.'

Minister, you talked about having a real ambition for Wales in your answer to Rhun ap Iorwerth, so can you please tell us a little bit more of what is that real ambition for cancer services, and how do you respond to this rather damning indictment of your Government's plans to treat cancer over the coming years, if you should be so fortunate as to form the next Government?

Vaughan Gething (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)

Well, we have actually already started on the path of improving outcomes for people with cancer. If you look at not just the numbers but improving outcomes in Wales, we've kept pace with other parts of the UK, and, bearing in mind that Wales is an older, poorer part of the UK, you would expect to see a potential gap in that improvement in outcomes. That shows the progress we've made. You'll also be aware of the choice that I have made to have a more transparent approach to understanding where we are on delivering people the care they need with the new single cancer pathway, and I think that will lead to improvements. We've worked on that with both cancer clinicians and the Wales Cancer Alliance.

We signalled in 'A Healthier Wales' that quality statements would be the next stage in making sure that separate delivery plans are sat within the centre of accountability, planning and progress within our organisations. So, the quality statement sets out the outcomes and expected standards that we will see. It's not intended to be a delivery plan, an operational plan in itself. There will, though, be an implementation plan developed in the coming months, with the Wales Cancer Alliance and clinicians contributing and taking part in that. The NHS exec will then ensure that that is delivered in the central part of where health boards deliver as well. Part of our challenge was in having a separate plan, separate to the other planning and implementation processes within the health service. This will make sure that cancer services are in the centre of that, and clearer accountability. So, you can expect to see the implementation detail from health-board level plans, from Velindre plans, and also from national oversight as well. So, you'll see two parts in taking this forward to replace the previous delivery programme, and I believe that will reinforce the ambition we all have for high-quality cancer care, and I believe that will be a trusted way to deal with the improvement we all want to see in cancer services and outcomes.

David Rees (Labour, Aberavon)

Minister, I heard what you just said, but I've got a constituent who has contacted me who has suffered with breast cancer, has now been diagnosed with secondary breast cancer—she's not yet 30—and has indicated her disappointment at the quality statement, because she indicates that there is no real data on people living with secondary breast cancer in Wales and there's only one specialist nurse on secondary breast cancer in Wales. Now, I've read the quality statement, and as you quite rightly pointed out, there is a reference to a rolling implementation plan to be developed—a three-year rolling plan. But, I suppose people want to know exactly what that means. So, when can we get exactly the detail of that plan so that people understand what delivery will be required by the health boards? And also, in the quality statement, it talks about the workforce, but the report from the cross-party group on cancer highlighted the concerns about the workforce; when can we have a detailed plan on how you're also going to implement and increase the workforce to ensure that these delivery services are there and working for the people?

Vaughan Gething (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)

Well, I think you're asking a number of different questions there, so I'll try to deal with where we are with the implementation plan first and its relationship to the cancer quality statement. The implementation plans will have to set out how they'll meet the outcomes and standards that we have set out in the quality statement, and that's the point. So, every health board will have to set out how they're meeting those expectations and the NHS exec will also have a role as, if you like, the central guiding hand that the parliamentary review called for, and we set out our response in 'A Healthier Wales', the long-term plan for health and care. So, that's the path that we're on and you will then see that framework and it will be open, because health boards will need to publish what they're going to do.

We'll then also have greater transparency and data from the single cancer pathway and the figures that we'll be providing on each stage. Cancer is a multifaceted challenge and it cuts across a range of other areas of treatment. So, when we talk about the workforce, it's not just the cancer workforce, because many of the surgeons we're talking about also undertake other surgery and the diagnostic workforce we're talking about undertake other diagnostics as well. For example, the centrally directed improvement programme on endoscopy, that will definitely benefit cancer services, but a range of other services too. So, I think sometimes it's difficult just to say that there is only a cancer workforce. We, of course, need to think about areas where we want to see continued improvement that are more specifically cancer, but it also affects the wider service as well.

I'm confident that, when you and I stand on a manifesto to seek re-election to this place, there'll be plans within there about reinvesting in the workforce and having more of our staff—taking account of the record-breaking levels of NHS staff we have already—that I believe will set out a pathway to continue the improvement in cancer services that we've seen over this last term, and to address the real and significant backlog that has built up in cancer services and the rest of our NHS, as a necessity in our response to the pandemic in this last year and more.

Leanne Wood (Plaid Cymru, Rhondda)

5. Will the Minister make a statement on improving health services for people in the Rhondda? OQ56505

Vaughan Gething (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)

Thank you. Cwm Taf Morgannwg continues to respond with agility and innovation to the demand and pressure of the pandemic to maintain and improve health services. The health board is planning for the continued provision of essential and key services alongside caring for patients affected by COVID-19. And the Member will be aware of the Rhondda cluster of GPs and the way that they have managed to reorder the way they deliver treatments to ensure that they take account of the needs of the pandemic.

Leanne Wood (Plaid Cymru, Rhondda)

A year on from lockdown and a lot has changed. The beginning of 2020 saw many of us in the Rhondda and beyond fighting for consultant-led A&E services to be retained at the Royal Glamorgan Hospital. Your Labour Government centralisation plans are now, thankfully, off the table, and hopefully, this time, it's for good.

The past year has shown how vital hospital capacity is and how important local health services are and we need to learn those lessons. In Plaid Cymru, we want to go further and establish a cancer diagnosis centre in the Rhondda, so will you support that? And, have you now come round to supporting consultant-led emergency medicine in hospitals like the Royal Glamorgan being retained indefinitely? And if you have, will you commit now that, if you are in Government following the election in May, you will rule out bringing back these A&E closure plans full stop, indefinitely, they will not be on the table in future as far as you're concerned?

Vaughan Gething (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)

The Government never had a plan to close A&E consultant-led services; the health board had to deal with the reality of not being able to recruit staff. It is a matter of success for us all that the health board has successfully recruited sufficient doctors, including consultants, to make sure that that service recovers. And, actually, I should say that seeing other Members from across the Cwm Taf Morgannwg area on this call, it's a reality that that service would have collapsed without the support of consultants from other parts of the health board. When I visited the Royal Glamorgan, I met consultants from the Princess of Wales who had come to that hospital to make sure that the service continued, that it did not collapse. That maintained a service and gave the health board room to go out and recruit again, which they did successfully. There is no need, therefore, to revisit this issue because they have sufficient staff. The challenge is to keep on recruiting and retaining staff in that area, to make sure that services aren't just local but that they are high quality, and the future of health and care services here in Wales will mean we constantly need to refresh our workforce and to look again at the best way to deliver the best quality care. Most of that care will be local. Ultra-specialist care will need to go into specialist centres; I would certainly travel for the best care for me and my family. But I don't believe any of us should be under any illusion that there is a threat to consultant-led A&E services. As we speak now, or going into this election, I hope that people in the Rhondda and beyond will recognise and accept that assurance of the future of consultant-led A&E services.

Huw Irranca-Davies (Labour, Ogmore)

6. Will the Minister make a statement on the future of primary care provision in the Llanharan area? OQ56476

Vaughan Gething (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)

Thank you. There is a need for a further development of primary care provision within Llanharan. There are significant housing developments planned in the area. Although there is sufficient primary care capacity at present, as those housing developments progress, more capacity will inevitably be needed, and I recognise the Member's long-standing interest in this issue.

Huw Irranca-Davies (Labour, Ogmore)

Minister, thank you for that answer, and I genuinely want to put on record my thanks to Cwm Taf Morgannwg University Health Board and to Rhondda Cynon Taf council and a couple of the local councillors—Roger Turner and Geraint Hopkins—who have worked with me in partnership through a series of meetings, over the last not just 12 months but two, three, four, five years, in order to scope out the potential development for a new health and well-being centre in the Llanharan area. As you say, the population has grown, it is still growing, and even though the provision there is well served by local GPs from Talbot Green, Pontyclun, Pencoed and so on, there will be a need for more. So, I am delighted that we're at the stage now where we are being told that there is a real willingness to look at the provision of a centre.

Minister, could I ask you: if you are returned, and if you are still in that same role going forward after the election, would you work with me, work with the health board, with RCT and with local councillors to actually make real that concept of the type of thing we've seen in places like Gilfach Goch and others, where it's not just GPs, but it's occupational therapists, chiropractors, district nurses and midwives, working out of a centre locally for the good and the well-being of all the people in Llanharan and the area?

Huw Irranca-Davies (Labour, Ogmore)

Yes, I'd be very happy to do that, and as you know, I've met with yourself and Councillor Geraint Hopkins, and others, to discuss the challenges in the local area previously. I think you're right to set out a multidisciplinary future—general practitioners working with other healthcare professionals, nurses, other therapists, in delivering a wider suite of services. I think it is important to again draw on the partnership that the health board will need with the council, as well, in understanding what those services are. It may be health and services outside health that make a Llanharan centre much more attractive to the local population and actually delivering services that people need, exactly in the same way the example in Cynon valley, in Aberdare, exemplifies that. I think there's more of that in the future, and you can expect to see more of that, I hope, in the manifesto that I expect us both to stand on. And I look forward to seeing what the voters say, and then, whoever the new First Minister is, and whether I return here or not, depending, of course, on who is in the First Minister's office.

Delyth Jewell (Plaid Cymru, South Wales East)

7. Will the Minister make a statement on COVID-19 infection rates in South Wales East? OQ56500

Vaughan Gething (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)

Yes. There has been a gradual decrease across South Wales East in both infection and test-positivity rates. Continued support for the restrictions in place is essential if we are to maintain this broad downward trend.

Delyth Jewell (Plaid Cymru, South Wales East)

Thank you, Minister. Merthyr has had a startlingly high incidence rate over the past few weeks, though I am glad to see the numbers levelling out. I know the health board has identified that some likely reasons for why we saw that spike would have been some extended households mixing and people not following social distancing rules. One of the strengths of our Valleys communities is our closeness, but during the pandemic we've actually suffered because of those close ties.

Minster, there will be a minority of people who have been taken in by misinformation on the virus, and I'd ask you, firstly, how you are trying to counter that misinformation spreading on Facebook, working with the health board. There will also be many families who just find it very difficult to survive on the self-isolation payment, as it currently is, who rely on grandparents for childcare, people who are afraid that they'll lose their jobs if they don't turn up for work. So, could I ask you, finally, what extra support you are considering giving to communities like Merthyr where a minority of people seem to be really struggling?

Vaughan Gething (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)

You'll be pleased to know that I've discussed all these issues with the constituency Member Dawn Bowden and the concerns about how the community is supported to make the right choice, but then actually how you try to persuade people to be honest if they have acquired COVID and they recognise themselves they've been acting outside the rules. That's part of the key role that our test, trace, protect service has in both signposting people to go and get those isolation payments—lots of people aren't applying for them when they could do—to make sure they get all the support that is there, both financially, but also the wider support to make sure that people can successfully self-isolate, and to recognise that if a whole community supports the restrictions and acts in a way that's within them, we're much more likely to continue to suppress coronavirus rates and to find a sustainable way out of the current position. It's good news that rates have fallen in Merthyr in today's figures—a pretty significant fall; we need to see that continuing for the future. And, actually, we are working alongside the council and their officers, as well as local elected representatives, as well as the health board. So, the expansion and availability of community testing is part of that. It's about encouraging people to come forward and for them to have the confidence that, if they do test positive, they will be supported to undertake their isolation with financial and other means. There'll be more of this that we need to do, because, as we progress out of lockdown with more easings, we can expect there to be localised bubblings up of transmission. This is a good test for us about how successful we could be in supporting people to help all of us to finally see an end to the pandemic.

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

And finally, question 8, Paul Davies.

Paul Davies (Conservative, Preseli Pembrokeshire)

8. What is the Welsh Government doing to improve health services for the people of Pembrokeshire? OQ56478

Vaughan Gething (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)

We're working together with the health board, and Hywel Dda University Health Board is planning for the continued provision of essential and key services, alongside caring for patients affected by COVID-19, as well, of course, as working towards the delivery of wider, more routine services, where and when it is safe to do so.

Paul Davies (Conservative, Preseli Pembrokeshire)

Thank you for that response, Minister. Now, unfortunately, urgent cancer referrals dropped dramatically between April and December 2020, and Cancer Research UK has made it clear that when these patients do enter the system, it will cause significant capacity problems in diagnostics. Indeed, we know that the percentage of patients starting their first definitive treatment within 62 days of first being suspected of cancer is 65.9 per cent in the Hywel Dda University Health Board area. Now, I listened very carefully to the responses you gave to my colleague Angela Burns earlier, but given Cancer Research UK's warnings, what is the Welsh Government doing to specifically plan for a diagnostic workforce that can cope with any increased demand in the future? I heard you saying that the workforce needs the right support, but what are you doing specifically to support the workforce, so that steps can then be taken to increase the number of people starting their treatment within 62 days, and that people in my constituency can get the urgent treatment that they need?

Vaughan Gething (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)

Well, the Member will be able to see the additional post that we funded, and that we've secured people to come and undertake training in through the diagnostic workforce across Wales. We are in a strong position with our vacancies and recruiting people into those to train another generation. You'll also recall the investment that I've made in the diagnostic workforce and in the training of that diagnostic workforce. There's a training centre in Huw Irranca-Davies's constituency, I believe, in Pencoed, where you will see these people who welcome the investment, and the fact that it helps them not just to come here in the first place, but to stay here as well. So, I think we have a good track record on the practical improvements in the workforce. You'll see more, when it comes to manifesto time, of the detail of improving and increasing our workforce, but, as I say, we end, even after the continued effects of austerity, with more than 10,000 extra NHS staff through this Welsh Parliament term. It's a strong track record that I believe people in Wales can trust as we look forward to the future to rebuild better and fairer services and a better and fairer country and, as I say, I look forward to the verdict of the public when it comes to the elections in early May this year.

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

Thank you, Minister.

2. Questions to the Minister for Mental Health, Wellbeing and Welsh Language

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

The next item is questions to the Minister for Mental Health, Wellbeing and Welsh Language, and the first question is from Dai Lloyd.

David Lloyd (Plaid Cymru, South Wales West)

1. Will the Minister make a statement on supporting wellbeing and mental health in South Wales West? OQ56485

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

There is a range of mental health support available in South Wales West, in terms of services that are provided not just by the third sector but also by the NHS. This includes the sanctuary service in Swansea Bay, which has been developed by mental health services together with the regional partnership board for West Glamorgan and the mental health charity Hafal.

David Lloyd (Plaid Cymru, South Wales West)

Thank you for that, Minister. Could I ask what progress has been made in treating emergency mental health problems, just as we deal with physical health problems in an emergency? With a heart attack, for example, a GP can phone a hospital doctor directly, and get urgent access that very same day for the patient as a matter of urgency. We used to be able to do that with mental health emergencies 20 years ago, but no longer. We've lost that direct link between the GP and the psychiatric specialist in hospitals. What hope is there of restoring that old connection?

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

Thank you, Dai. I know that a lot of work has been done in terms of emergency services, and that's where we've been focusing our work at present in terms of mental health. Because what was happening was that we were in a situation where, when people picked up the phone, some of the only services available, particularly after 5 o'clock in the afternoon, were emergency services. And very often, the police or the ambulance service often isn't the best place to deal with mental health problems. That's why great work has already been done, under the umbrella of the concordat, to ensure that we look at this in detail, and that we collaborate with the third sector, and that there is provision in place. Because what we have realised is that, for the majority of people who came into emergency services, maybe mental health services, in terms of pure mental health services, is not what they needed, but perhaps more social and economic support. So, that work is being done.

I'm sure you will be aware that Swansea Bay has been undertaking a pilot scheme in terms of one contact point for mental health, by phoning the 111 number. And that will now be expanded to Cwm Taf Morgannwg health board. Another thing that's worth emphasising is the fact that we do have a scheme that helps to transport people who are suffering from mental health problems. It's not appropriate, of course, to take people who are suffering from mental health problems in a police car, for example. That's why we are piloting a new programme in this area as well.

David Rees (Labour, Aberavon)

Minister, yesterday I raised concerns about support for young children, and children going back to schools, who have struggled, I think, during this pandemic, and how we can be sure that there are sufficient resources available for them to be able to benefit from talking therapies, therapists and counsellors. I'm deeply worried that we are still short of those numbers of counsellors and therapists within that area. What can you do to ensure that, as children go back to schools, as we face probably the next 12 months of challenges for some of these children, there will be sufficient therapists, and talking therapists in particular, available to meet the demand that this will bring?

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

Diolch yn fawr, Dai. I'm really anxious about this situation. We know that the children's commissioner has found that about 67 per cent of our children from age 12 to 18 are suffering with some form of anxiety at the moment. And of course, being out of routine is going to cause an issue for many people, and I do hope that we'll see those levels come down now, as children go back to school.

But there will definitely be a group that will need continued support. That's why we've got a comprehensive approach now to looking at children and young people. We know that 80 per cent of problems relating to mental health start when people are children or young people, and that's why it makes sense for us to focus on this. We've got a whole-school approach, so there is significant additional funding being put into schools, and we're also extending our support to early help and enhanced support, which will be rolled out from July next year, to make sure that all of the different services are working together so that children don't bounce around the system.

A lot of that work can be undertaken by the third sector. I've been on a call, actually, this morning; we had our second meeting of the oversight and implementation group for Together for Children and Young People. One of the aspects we were looking at this morning is have we got the right workforce in place, because it's clear that we have to keep on driving up that development. So, that work is ongoing. It's happening. We probably need to do more, but, obviously, we will keep an eye. The fact that we've already injected altogether about £9 million into this area I hope should give you a degree of comfort that we're heading in the right direction.

Jack Sargeant (Labour, Alyn and Deeside)

2. What plans does the Welsh Government have to assist people suffering with anxiety post lockdown? OQ56488

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

Diolch yn fawr, Jack. We've committed an additional £4 million next year to improve access to non-clinical support for low-level mental health issues like anxiety, and this is going to build on funding we've provided this year to improve support, including the roll-out of online cognitive behavioural therapy.

Jack Sargeant (Labour, Alyn and Deeside)

Thank you for that answer, Minister. I'm sure we have all spoken to people who are experiencing anxiety for the very first time, unsure about what is happening to them, and certainly unsure about what support is available to them. Many residents in Alyn and Deeside, and across Wales, have barely been out since this time last year. They are not only anxious about coronavirus, but they are actually anxious about going out into the world. For some, this anxiety will be more extreme, and may well lead to panic attacks, something that I have only experienced once in my life, shortly after Dad died, and something I wouldn't wish on anybody. What plans does the Welsh Government have to address this, and to ensure that the NHS is fully equipped to help people, young and old, from all walks of life, with anxiety, including those that would not recognise the signs and how to reach out?

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

Diolch yn fawr, Jack. Thanks very much for all you've done to champion the issue of mental health. Since you've been in the Senedd, you really have been one of the foremost champions of this issue. I'd like to just underline my thanks to you for also being so honest about some of the issues that you've struggled with. Thank you very much, because it does help people to talk about it. I must say that there are very few positive things that have come out of the pandemic, but I do think the fact that people seem to be talking about mental health—that the stigma, I hope, will be reduced as a result of this. Because, frankly, there can't be many people who haven't been touched in some way in terms of anxiety during the pandemic. They haven't known about whether they're going to keep their jobs, they haven't known whether their parents are going to contract the virus, they haven't known whether their children are going to suffer from going backwards in terms of academia—all of these things lead to anxiety. I think everybody now can relate to anxiety in a way that perhaps not everybody did before. So, that is clear.

What we've tried to do, Jack, is to make sure that people are aware of what help is available if they suffer these panic attacks. Obviously, we have the CALL a mental health helpline, which is available 24 hours a day. We've put increased capacity into that. As I say, we've got this online cognitive behavioural therapy. But one of the key things that was really important for me when I was first appointed was how easy is it to get access, to know where you can go for this stuff. And what you see now—I hope that all Senedd Members received a copy of the e-mail that I sent to make sure that everybody knew that, now, every single health board has to make it absolutely clear what support is available in their region. It has to be accessible in a really easy way. So, there's plenty of support out there, but we just have to make sure that people know where to go and signpost that support. Diolch yn fawr, Jack, for everything you've done on the subject.

Nick Ramsay (Conservative, Monmouth)

That was a very comprehensive answer, Minister. Can I also take the opportunity to commend Jack Sargeant for the huge amount of work he's done in this area of mental health, which is so important, particularly during the months of the pandemic and lockdown? It was a pleasure previously working with Jack's father, Carl Sargeant, in the Senedd on a range of issues. He was passionate about those issues and I'm pleased to see that Jack has carried on in the same vein in championing issues that really matter to the people out there in our communities.

Minister, it's likely, as you've just hinted at, that we're going to see an increase in the number of people needing community mental health support for those suffering anxiety and depression, as one of the significant public health consequences of the pandemic, and it looks like that could go on for a considerable length of time, and at considerable cost. What discussions have you had with the vice-chairs of local health boards across Wales, or, indeed, with the health Minister, liaising with those health boards—those who are responsible for community mental health and primary care—to ensure that local NHS services are going to get the focus they need? Because clearly they've not just been under strain during this pandemic, they're going to be under strain for some considerable time to come, trying to cope with the aftermath of this challenging time.

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

Diolch yn fawr, Nick. Certainly, that community mental health support is absolutely critical, and I think that it is important that we try and give that support, as far as possible, as close to home as possible, because, generally speaking, mental health support is not something you can just fix once; you have to have an ongoing relationship, you have to keep working on it. That's why actually giving that support in the community is much more valuable, and that's certainly what we're trying to do.

I've met with the vice-chairs now on a couple of occasions since I was appointed to this role, and I've made it absolutely clear to them the direction of travel that I would like to see things going in. One is that we need to really divert more money into tier 0 support—that early, early support—so that we don't see these problems developing and becoming more complex and more difficult for us to treat. So, early help is absolutely critical. The second thing is that we really need to divert more money into supporting children and young people as a proportion of the budget. So, those are the two messages that I've made absolutely clearly to the vice-chairs, as well as, of course, underlining their responsibilities to make sure that all of these services are available through the medium of Welsh.

Bethan Sayed (Plaid Cymru, South Wales West)

I'd like to thank Jack Sargeant for tabling such an important question today, and also to pay tribute to his father, Carl Sargeant, who helped me when I had a number of anxiety problems as a result of a negative and destructive relationship I had in the past. He was very supportive of me, and without his support, I don't think I would have come out as strongly as I have done.

But my question is on eating disorders. I've spent my whole career campaigning on this issue, and we've heard from Beat Cymru, who have done laudable work in this area, that eating disorders have got worse during COVID. That anxiety, that feeling that they don't have the services available to them, and that they don't get the support that they need, is something that is very grave at the moment. I understand what you say, Minister, about talking about mental health, but people have had enough of talking; they want action. And there is an absence of services on the ground for people with all sorts of different mental health problems.

So, it's an appeal to you, on my last day in the Senedd, to ensure that those services are improved for the future, so that people don't have to access private services in the future, so that they don't feel that their lives get so bad that they want to bring their lives to an end, so that new mothers can get the support that they need. That's my appeal to you as a Government now and to any future government that may come forward in May.

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

Thank you, Bethan, and thank you for everything that you've done in this area. I know that this is something that you've been campaigning on for a long time. Certainly, one of the things that I am concerned about is the fact that we have, particularly in the area of eating disorders, seen an increase during the pandemic. That's something I've asked my team to focus on.

We need to understand that this has been more of a problem. We have put more money into it during the pandemic, but I have asked to see whether we need to provide more funding for it, because I am concerned about the situation. What's very clear with this disorder is that you have to intervene early. If you don't do that, the problems can be very serious indeed, and so, once again, the solution, from my perspective, is to ensure that that funding is available for organisations such as Beat, which do such excellent work.

One of the things we need to ensure is that more people at a primary care level are willing to send people to Beat while they're waiting, perhaps, to see someone in the health service, if there are any problems in terms of waiting for a long time. We need that early intervention while people are waiting and that doesn't always work. Once again, I have asked for that to be addressed.

But I want to thank you also, Bethan, for everything that you have done in terms of perinatal care and mental health. I know that you've done excellent work in that area, and thank you very much for everything that you've done during this Senedd. It's been a very long period for you and I know that you've had a profound effect on this Senedd, and thank you very much for everything that you've done.

Ann Jones (Labour, Vale of Clwyd)

We'll turn to spokespersons' questions now, and the first up this afternoon is Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Siân Gwenllian.

Siân Gwenllian (Plaid Cymru, Arfon)

Thank you very much, Dirprwy Lywydd. I welcome the news that the Welsh Government will launch the second phase of the cultural recovery fund, providing more assurance to the arts and culture sectors. There is one aspect that the sector has raised with me already, namely the accessibility of the programme. Do you have plans in place to ensure that the application process is fair, particularly to individuals who do not have the means to win the race, as it were, and I am talking specifically here about individuals with disabilities or illnesses that make it difficult for them to fill in forms quickly, and also individuals with care or work responsibilities that mean that they can't be available to sit in front of their computer at a specific time?

And secondly, in terms of the fund, performance schools have failed to make full use of the support available from Government across the various sectors. It seems that they don't tick the right boxes in order to benefit from the funds that have been put in place. So, will you consider enhancing the access to the culture recovery fund in this second phase in order to ensure that these unique and important organisations can be supported?

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

Thank you very much, Siân. First of all, I'm just so pleased that we've been able to announce this additional funding. This isn't something that happens in England in the same way, and certainly the help that we've been able to provide to freelancers is something that has genuinely been appreciated because none of that is happening in England. Certainly, I was aware during the first phase that there was a problem because there were so many people and the process was difficult for some people to complete in time. So, by the time we go through all of the phases, we were confident that everyone who needed and wanted to apply had the opportunity to do that. So, no-one missed out. Maybe, in the first round and by the end of all the phases, we will have ensured that everyone who needed to apply will have had the opportunity to do that. So, I do hope that we won't see the problem that we saw during the first phase, not because of any problems that were deliberate, but just because of the capacity of the system to cope. So, we're in a different situation now. We know who applied the first time, so it'll be much easier because we'll have that information to hand. So, I do hope that the accessibility of the process will be much better.

And thank you very much for asking about the performing schools. I wasn't aware of that, and so I will go back and ask what the situation is with those.

Siân Gwenllian (Plaid Cymru, Arfon)

Turning now to another area that forms part of your portfolio, namely major events, I'm given to understand that the Government has commissioned an independent report on the major events strategy. I understand that work did start way before the pandemic hit and that it has also been completed, but that the report has not been published. Can you explain why that report wasn't published and can you give us some kind of flavour of what that report contained? And will you publish the report—I know there isn't much time left now before the election period—or will this report simply be left to gather dust on a shelf?

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

Thank you very much, Siân. As you're aware, we did commission this before the pandemic struck, and, obviously, if there's anything that's been affected by the pandemic, well, that's major events, and so, to a certain extent, part of the problem is that a lot of the report was written before the pandemic. So, evidently, we needed to adapt that in the face of the pandemic, because the support that the sector needs now is completely different to what they would have needed before the pandemic. So, we have asked the author of the report to consider that, and so the report is still in the hands of the author and we're waiting for the author to come back to us before we can publish the report. But I do hope—. I have been pressing to get that report published for some time now.

Siân Gwenllian (Plaid Cymru, Arfon)

So, hopefully it will see the light of day and we will see the recommendations in terms of the future direction of this work.

If I could turn, finally, to the need, in my opinion, for an entirely new strategy for the arts and culture sector in Wales, I think that supporting a vibrant and innovative creative industry with strong support will help Wales to adapt to the post-COVID landscape in many ways. But the problem at the moment is that Government departments are working in silos, and, in moving to the next Senedd, the arts, our language, the Welsh language, and our heritage should have status across Government, and these issues—the Welsh language, the arts, culture and sports—need to be at the heart of public policy and action by central Government and local government and drawn into economic development, to health, education, the environment, and so on and so forth. Do you, therefore, agree, in terms of the arts specifically, that we need a new, holistic strategic direction that is inclusive in order to develop this sector so that it is truly at the heart of everything that the Government does?

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

Well, I think that the fact that we did launch Creative Wales and that we've moved forward with that project, and the fact that we have understood that this industry is something that does contribute in a profound way to our economy—. If you look at the increase in the number of people who work in the arts, there's been an increase of about 50 per cent over the last decade. There has been an incredible increase, and there's scope for us to expand further. One of the things that we've done is to focus on trying to ensure that training is provided in the right places, and I think that we can go further on that. I do understand what you say in terms of the risk that we're working in silos, and, certainly, I hope that, if we all come back next time, this is something where we'll see more work across the Government.

In terms of the Welsh language, I've taken a paper to Cabinet recently to emphasise the fact that we have to go much further than we've gone so far and that we have to ensure that there is a responsibility on every Government department to mainstream the Welsh language. Of course, I hope that, when we do return, there will be a new action programme and that every department in the Welsh Government will be expected to contribute in some way in order to show what they are doing in terms of moving things forward as regards the Welsh language.

Ann Jones (Labour, Vale of Clwyd)

The Conservative spokesperson, David Melding.

David Melding (Conservative, South Wales Central)

I thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. Minister, can I start on the engagement we've had? I've enjoyed shadowing this brief. We had briefings during the first lockdown on the cultural challenges ahead in terms of getting finance out. I do, however, want to talk about mental health and I was encouraged by your references earlier to the NGO sector. Will you join me in commending young people who take their mental health seriously, and also take the help that's available from schools and organisations like the Scouts, who are now involved in it?

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

Thanks very much, David, and thanks to you for all the work you've done not just on this portfolio, but also for your work over so many years. You truly have been an absolute cornerpiece of the development of this institution, and I'd just like to note my personal thanks to you for everything you've done, not least for making sure that the Conservative Party have stayed with devolution, and, hopefully, they will continue in that vein in the future. So, diolch yn fawr iawn, David, for everything you've done. You really have made a remarkable contribution to Wales.

But also, I'd like to take this opportunity to talk about—I hope you don't mind, because you talk about the work that's been done in keeping in touch on the cultural side of things—the remarkable work that's been done by my colleague Dafydd Elis-Thomas during his remarkable period. It is such a great way for him to end an elected political career that has, of course, spanned decades and decades, and his contribution to Welsh life has been truly remarkable. The history books will be written some day, and I hope that they will note the incredible achievement of his work over so many years, first of all as, I think, the youngest Member of the House of Commons, going in at about 27, years and years in that chamber, never failed to champion the cause of Welsh devolution and certainly making a remarkable contribution here in this institution, not least as Presiding Officer, where he really put his stamp on that job, but also, of course, ending his political career in this institution, championing the causes that I know he loves so much.

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

Thank you very much, Dafydd, for everything you've done for us in the Senedd, but also for our nation.

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

David, thank you very much for your question on young people as well. Of course, it is crucial that young people take their mental health seriously. I'm really pleased, actually, that so many of them are taking this seriously now. They seem to be talking about it a lot more. I think that it is a really, really difficult time for young people. Many of them have not had access to their friends for a long time, they've not had access to the routine that they were used to, and, of course, the other thing that none of us had to deal with when we were young is the absolute tyranny of social media. I do think this is something that we have to take seriously and that we have to help these children to develop resilience in the face of something that none of us had to experience at such a young age. I know that we have put in substantial support to help young people. I know that there's more that we need to do, but I can assure you that the Welsh Government is absolutely clear that we need to move forward even further in this space than we have done, with the whole-school approach and the whole-system approach and of course, the reform of our curriculum, which, of course, has mental health as central to the core of what it's trying to achieve.

David Melding (Conservative, South Wales Central)

Thank you for that generous reply, Minister, and I certainly would like to join you in the tribute you made to Dafydd Elis-Thomas.

I also want to commend Mind, who are working closely with Hafal and other organisations. I think the mental health sector is outstanding in its co-operative work—the umbrella bodies really pack a punch because they work together. One of the main things they're asking us to focus on—whichever party becomes the next Welsh Government—is to look at the need for an anti-stigma campaign. Now, I'm disappointed in the sense that, I think, for all of the Assembly and Senedd elections of the past, this has probably been raised and it's still a real issue. So, do you join me in hoping that whoever is in Government in May will put this at the top of the list?

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

Absolutely, David, and can I tell you that one of the joys of being in this job has been for me meeting regularly with those third sector organisations who do such a terrific job on the front line in our communities, and Mind and Hafal are two of those organisations that have made a really significant contribution? One of the key things for me is that we have to make sure that we're not just measuring hitting targets in terms of timetables. We have to get a sense of what are the outcomes like as a result of that intervention, and so listening to what people have to say is absolutely key, and certainly something that I was very happy to do earlier this last week was to speak and to listen to children involved in the Cardiff and Vale youth health council and also, on the weekend, the national youth stakeholders group, because I really think that listening to people who are making use of our services is absolutely crucial, because we need to know from them what works, and if it works.

But certainly, in terms of the stigma, you will be aware that we as a Government have determined that we want to continue to support Time to Change Wales. I was absolutely shocked that the Conservative Government in the UK decided to cut that programme in the middle of a pandemic. It really was a shocking decision, I think, by the Conservative Government, but I can give you an assurance that we will continue to fight the stigma associated with mental health, and I do hope that that is something that has changed during the pandemic—that people are more prepared to talk about their anxieties and to realise, actually, that they can reach out and people will understand that this is something that is absolutely not out of the ordinary anymore.

Ann Jones (Labour, Vale of Clwyd)

It appears we seem to have lost David Melding for his third question. David, can you hear me?

David Melding (Conservative, South Wales Central)

Yes, I've been reconnected. Can you hear me, Deputy Presiding Officer?

Ann Jones (Labour, Vale of Clwyd)

Yes, that's fine. You've got one more question as spokesperson.

David Melding (Conservative, South Wales Central)

I will proceed to my final question. It did cut out when I think the Minister was going to launch an attack on the Conservative Party—

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

Anti-Tory party, which is a good time for you to cut out, there, David.

David Melding (Conservative, South Wales Central)

I think you were focusing on the UK party rather than the Welsh Conservative Party, but I don't want a harsh finish to my questions. Can I just say that I have been encouraged by the Welsh Government's participation with the Charity Commission in the programme Revitalising Trusts, which you may know looks at dormant accounts, basically, and tries to transfer those moneys where appropriate to active charitable purposes. Do you agree with me that, in promoting this excellent programme run by the Charity Commission, mental health charities should receive a very high priority?

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

Yes, absolutely, David. I would agree with you that that makes absolute sense, that some of that money should be directed to those mental health charities. So, I would support you in that.

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

Thanks very much once again, David.

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

Thanks very much for everything you have done for us in Wales as well.

Helen Mary Jones (Plaid Cymru, Mid and West Wales)

3. Will the Minister outline proposals to strengthen Welsh as a community language in Mid and West Wales? OQ56486

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

Thank you very much, Helen. The Welsh Government are allocating £1.2 million to the mentrau iaith in mid and west Wales in 2021-22 to promote and facilitate use of Welsh in the community. We are also implementing recommendations of a community audit to strengthen the Welsh language across the communities of Wales following COVID.

Helen Mary Jones (Plaid Cymru, Mid and West Wales)

Thank you for that response, Minister. I know that you're highly aware of just how hard the mentrau iaith and other community groups, and Menter Cwm Gwendraeth Elli, are working, and how much they suffered last year by losing events that are so very important to them—the festivals, the community events that are hugely important to them in terms of providing opportunities to use the Welsh language, but are also important in terms of the income of those organisations. I'm pleased to hear of the investment that has been made, but does the Minister agree with me that the next Welsh Government, whoever that may be, should prioritise support for these community organisations in order to ensure that they can survive until they are in a position to generate more of their own income, because it's far from clear that they will be able to stage those kinds of community events during this summer either?

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

Thank you very much, Helen Mary, and certainly we're aware of the great work that the mentrau iaith have done in recent years. One of the things that we've done in the pandemic is to ensure that we've had a community audit to see what the impact has been on the Welsh language from the pandemic, because a lot of groups have not been able to meet during this period, and the mentrau iaith have helped us with a lot of that work of ensuring that we know what's happening on the ground. I'm pleased that we've been able to provide additional funding to the Llandeilo centre—£0.2 million in March to Menter Dinefwr—so, we've been able to provide funding to them, and I do hope that that is a step forward.

But one of the things that we've done as a result of that audit is that we brought a group together, and nine recommendations have now been produced. And one of the things that we hope to do is to give the mentrau iaith a new shape—we've done this with the mentrau iaith—to ensure that they do move together so that they do understand that an important part of their work is to do with economic development, not just to go out into communities and promote the Welsh language. Trying to maintain and develop jobs in the area will become a part of their core work in the future. We have been working closely with them on that, and we do hope that that will help to stabilise them for the long term.

Suzy Davies (Conservative, South Wales West)

This is the most appropriate question for my final question in the Senedd. When I married, I moved to a Welsh-speaking village in mid Wales and I decided to be brave and to use my very basic Welsh-language skills in order to develop my own skills and to bring my children up as bilingual citizens. Since getting to the Senedd, I have been my party's spokesperson and hopefully I've been an example to all Welsh learners that you don't have to be correct every time to get things right.

Minister, I would just like to thank you for the good working relationship that we've had over the past few years. Sharing realistic ambitions for the growth in the use of the language, the understanding of the role of the learner and the workplace in that vision has made things easier. So, it's no surprise perhaps that this is my question. The use of the Welsh language by working mothers will be crucial to the success of the 2050 strategy. In addition to spending more time with their young children, we know that women are more likely to support children with their schoolwork, and they are more likely to socialise with other families in schools and play centres. The way that we socialise in the workplace too is built on listening and sharing by conversing. So, how are you picking up on the best things in the way that women socialise and communicate in your next language plan?

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

Thank you very much, Suzy, and you really are a model of what we're trying to deliver with the Welsh language strategy, and you're someone who has developed confidence in your use of the Welsh language, and I thank you for contributing not just in terms of learning and practising your Welsh, but also speaking Welsh to your children, and they are also helping us to reach 1 million Welsh speakers. So, thank you very much for that.

Certainly, in terms of working mothers, I know that the work that you've done for a long time has emphasised this need to ensure that learners become a part of what we're trying to deliver here, and workers. The fact that you're emphasising the role of the mother and the role of women is something that we do recognise. That's why, for example, we have brought a new policy forward in terms of language transfer within families, and we do recognise that the role of mothers in this sense is vital; starting from the start and trying to get people to think, before they have children, which language they want to speak to their children.

But one project that we have progressed during this session is the Working Welsh programme. I know that that is something that you are very supportive of, and of course it's been very difficult to do that during a pandemic, but I do hope that we will have an opportunity to return to that, which was a success. But just to emphasise my thanks to you, Suzy, for everything that you've done during this Senedd and everything that you've done for the Welsh language, and I'm sure that your contribution is going to be seen as something that's made a difference, not just here in the Senedd, but on the ground as well. And thank you very much for everything that you've done.

John Griffiths (Labour, Newport East)

4. What are the Welsh Government’s policies to build partnerships for good mental health in Wales? OQ56497

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

Partnership working is a fundamental part of our 'Together for Mental Health' strategy. It's underpinned by national and local arrangements with a range of partners, including NHS, public health, local authorities, police, and the voluntary sector, as part of the multi-agency approach needed to improve mental health.

John Griffiths (Labour, Newport East)

Minister, a major issue is men's mental health and their tendency not to talk about their feelings and problems, as we've discussed many times. So, it is important to reach men with the right messages through a variety of means and organisations, and of course to have good role models. Given the profile and reach of professional football, I do think there's a strong role for our clubs in playing their part, and I'm very pleased that the team I support, Newport County Association Football Club, have shown very strong initiatives in this area. Two years ago, they became the only club in Wales—and only the fourth, actually, in the English Football League—to sign the Mental Health Charter for Sport and Recreation. They now work with a variety of organisations in the city to take forward policies for good mental health. They have players as mental health ambassadors, including talking about their own difficulties and experiences. County in the Community ensure that community activities incorporate good mental health messages. There's a 'well-being Wednesday', where social media, and indeed, the club's website, are used to get across information and advice. They do a range of activities during Mental Health Awareness Week. It really is, I think, a good example to sport in Wales in general, Minister, and I wonder if you will join me, when circumstances permit, in visiting the club and discussing these initiatives and how they can be built upon for the future.

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

Diolch yn fawr, John. Certainly, I know your commitment to Newport and to this important issue is something that is worth underlining. I felt very privileged to be able to speak to some people in the community of Newport last week to discuss this very issue of mental health, so thank you for organising that.

Certainly, this is one of the things that I was focused on before I became Minister for mental health, starting a campaign called 'I pledge to talk', working with Mind Cymru, in mid Wales, when they found that there were three cases within a very short space of time, in a small community, where men had committed suicide. The ripples of that through the community were immense. It's absolutely clear that we've got to get men to talk, and we have got to learn to listen as well. Certainly, there are some great examples of this happening. So, we've got Men's Sheds, which I think is a great initiative, but I think football clubs have a really specific role here, because they are able—. There's the kind of Heineken effect; they can reach parts that others can't reach, and in particular, perhaps, to reach out into the younger age groups that perhaps may not want to confront mental health issues. I really commend them for, really, the active role that they've taken in really taking on this issue, and certainly I'm very pleased to see that they're doing this. We'll have to see what happens after the next election to see if I'm still in this role, but certainly, if I were, I'd be happy to attend.

But certainly, in terms of what happens next, look, I am really focused on the fact that children's activities are allowed to start again on 27 March. I think sport, being outside, is so good for people's mental health, and, as someone who has undertaken to do 10 km a day during Lent, it's partly to make sure that, actually, you get into a routine, it's to make sure that we get up and get moving, and I think there are a lot of people who could benefit from that kind of discipline and getting into a routine, and I think football clubs would be great at that.

David Melding (Conservative, South Wales Central)

5. What services are in place to support people suffering from panic attacks and anxiety? OQ56493

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

There is a range of support in place to help people who suffer from anxiety and panic attacks. These include Welsh Government-funded resources such as Reading Well Wales, online cognitive behavioural therapy and our community advice and listening line helpline. A range of support is also available from our voluntary sector partners.

David Melding (Conservative, South Wales Central)

Thank you for that answer, Minister. We were talking about stigma earlier, and, can I just say, when, in the Chamber, I talked about my own experience during political service of panic attacks, it had the biggest response of anything I've ever done in my career? Well over 100,000 likes on the social media that I put out on that, and I think this demonstrates—. They were worldwide, incidentally. It just demonstrates the need for us to talk about this, but also to improve services. So, I was encouraged by the cognitive behavioural therapy course that's been developed—I think it's called the SilverCloud. Now, it's in its early stages; I just wonder when we are likely to see the evidence from that programme and the take-up and effectiveness of it. But, given that Welsh Government modelling suggests that there could be an increase of up to 40 per cent in the demand for primary care mental health services, where most anxiety services would be, obviously, delivered, it seems to me that online—[Inaudible.]

Ann Jones (Labour, Vale of Clwyd)

We seem to have lost David—

David Melding (Conservative, South Wales Central)

—are an essential part of the—[Inaudible.]

Ann Jones (Labour, Vale of Clwyd)

We seem to have lost David; I think he's got a bad connection, so—. No, I'm sorry about that. I think we're going to move on. If we get David back, I might manage to see whether we can get an answer for his question. Can we move on to question 6, Mark Isherwood?

Mark Isherwood (Conservative, North Wales)

6. How is the Welsh Government supporting the arts sector in North Wales? OQ56477

Dafydd (Independent, Dwyfor Meirionnydd)

Diolch, Mark. The Welsh Government, through our partnership with the statutory arts council, provides funding on an annual basis to support the arts across Wales. The £63 million cultural recovery fund has been essential to support many organisations, and probably the best example in north Wales is the initial investment of £3 million that we have provided as a Government for Theatr Clwyd.

Mark Isherwood (Conservative, North Wales)

Diolch. I'm glad you mentioned that, because Theatr Clwyd's capital redevelopment project in Mold is designed to secure Wales's biggest producing theatre for future generations. As Arts Council of Wales states, Theatr Clwyd is crucial to the well-being of people in north Wales, through its high-quality and appealing programme of shows and its excellent outreach work in areas like dementia and youth justice. But it also provides jobs, attracts visitors into Wales and raises the profile of Welsh theatre with its high reputation across the UK.

In 2018, they were awarded £1.2 million towards development of the plan, when the First Minister acknowledged in writing that Theatr Clwyd had national significance and encouraged them to continue with the development of the scheme. A successful planning application for the grade II listed theatre building followed in 2019. The Arts Council of Wales confirmed their next £5 million of support in April 2020, in spite of the pandemic, and last autumn, as you say, Welsh Government agreed to release £3 million over two financial years to keep the project moving up to construction. Construction is due to start in spring 2022, with commitments needed by autumn 2021 to ensure progress and eligibility for raising further funds. How do you therefore respond to concerns that Theatr Clwyd will be in serious danger of closing without Welsh Government funding for this, and needs to ensure that decisions on this are not delayed?

Dafydd (Independent, Dwyfor Meirionnydd)

I accept the responsibility that I currently have as arts Minister for Theatr Clwyd, but also as somebody who has supported the theatre since it was first established, and I entirely agree with what you've said about its contribution. But there are other arts venues across the north, like Galeri in Caernarfon, Ucheldre in Caergybi, Pontio in Bangor, Frân Wen, Theatr Bara Caws, Mostyn, Dawns i Bawb, Ruthin Craft Centre and, of course, Canolfan Gerdd William Mathias. We have a whole range of arts venues and arts activities that we are committed to support, and these are all part of the arts council's Arts Portfolio Wales. And I very much welcome the way that the arts council's capital lottery fund works alongside the arts council's Art Portfolio Wales, and I sincerely hope that this—well, I am certain—that this will continue, because Welsh Government understands, as we've heard today, that culture is central to the activity of devolved Government.

Ann Jones (Labour, Vale of Clwyd)

Thank you very much, Deputy Minister.

3. The Senedd Cymru (Representation of the People) (Amendment) Order 2021

Ann Jones (Labour, Vale of Clwyd)

Item 3 on the agenda this afternoon is the Senedd Cymru (Representation of the People) (Amendment) Order 2021, and I call on the Minister for Housing and Local Government to move the motion—Julie James.

Julie James (Labour, Swansea West)

Diolch, Llywydd. I move the motion to approve the Senedd Cymru (Representation of the People) (Amendment) Order 2021. The Order makes technical changes to the process for nominating candidates for the Senedd elections scheduled for 6 May. The changes set the deadline for nominations as 4 p.m. on 8 April, so that nominations can be processed and published in a timely fashion, and enable candidates who do not reside in Wales to specify a UK parliamentary constituency on their nomination forms, where they do not wish their home address to be published. These changes are made in order to ensure that the election can continue in an orderly fashion during the pandemic. Diolch.

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

I call on the Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee to contribute. Mick Antoniw.

Mick Antoniw (Labour, Pontypridd)

Thank you, Llywydd. We considered these regulations at our meeting on Monday morning, and our report contains two merits points. Our first merits point notes that the Order amends the home address form, which allows candidates to request that their home address not be made public on nomination forms. Where this is used, the candidate must provide the name of the Senedd constituency within which they reside. The amendments made by the Order allow candidates who reside outside of Wales but within the UK to provide the name of the UK parliamentary constituency within which they reside. This change applies to the 2021 Senedd election only, but the explanatory memorandum notes that it will need to be incorporated into a revised or new Order for subsequent Senedd elections.

Our second merits point relates to the consultation undertaken by the Welsh Government. Whilst we welcome the fact that a consultation has been carried out before this Order was made, the explanatory memorandum does not mention any discussions with constituency returning officers. We did ask the Welsh Government to confirm whether it had any discussions with the constituency returning officers, and, if so, the outcome of those discussions. In response, the Welsh Government told us that the regional returning officers are responsible for liaising with the returning officers for the Senedd constituencies in their region to ensure a consistent approach to the administration of the Senedd election throughout their region. The Welsh Government therefore consulted them on this basis.

In addition, one of the regional returning officers is the chair of the Wales electoral co-ordination board, which has the role of ensuring consistent electoral administration and practice across Wales. The Welsh Government also told us that it consulted the Wales branch of the Association of Electoral Administrators, which represents election professionals across Wales, and the Welsh Government's response to our reports confirmed that the views expressed during these discussions were considered before the Order was made. Diolch, Llywydd.

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

Thank you. I have no further speakers. Does the Minister wish to reply at all?

Julie James (Labour, Swansea West)

No. No, thank you.

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

Therefore I will ask whether the motion should be agreed. Does any Member object? I don't see or hear any objections, and therefore the motion is agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

4. The Welsh Elections (Miscellaneous Provisions) Order 2021

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

Item 4 is withdrawn.

5. The Public Health (Protection from Eviction) (No. 2) (Wales) (Coronavirus) Regulations 2021

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

So, we'll move to item 5, the Public Health (Protection from Eviction) (No. 2) (Wales) (Coronavirus) Regulations 2021. And I call on the Minister for Housing and Local Government to move the motion—Julie James.

Julie James (Labour, Swansea West)

Diolch, Llywydd. In my written statement of 17 March, I informed Members that I had laid the Public Health (Protection from Eviction) (No. 2) (Wales) (Coronavirus) Regulations 2021—the subject of today's debate. I also indicated that I would be laying today, under the negative procedure, the Coronavirus Act 2020 (Residential Tenancies: Extension of Period of Protection from Eviction) (Wales) Regulations 2021. Taken together, these two sets of regulations will further extend, until the end of June, the current protections we have put in place. These protections prevent, in most cases, bailiffs or High Court enforcement officers from executing possession warrants or eviction notices, and also require landlords to serve a six-month notice before seeking possession.

The exceptions to these arrangements will remain very limited—for example, domestic violence, anti-social behaviour or trespass. The restrictions on the enforcement of possession orders by bailiffs or High Court enforcement officers will remain subject to regular review during the period they are in force to ensure they remain necessary and proportionate. Extending these protections will ensure tenants are able to stay in their homes whilst coronavirus restrictions remain in place. This will protect public health by reducing the number of people who are evicted, or at risk of being evicted, into homelessness, and particularly street homelessness, where their potential vulnerability to the virus, and the likelihood of them spreading it, is increased.

These measures will also reduce the current pressure on housing and homelessness advice and support services, which might otherwise struggle to cope due to current pandemic-related demands and the availability of temporary and move-on accommodation. Notwithstanding the limited lifting of some other measures, the protections afforded by these regulations remain crucial, particularly in the context of the potential for new variants of the virus increasing its transmissibility, or the severity of its impact, or a potential third wave of infections. I recognise that extending these temporary protections for a further period of time may cause difficulties for some landlords in the private rented sector. However, my overriding priority must be the protection of public health at this time.

Members will wish to know that other administrations share this view. The UK Government has recently announced that similar restrictions in England will be extended until the end of May, whilst the Scottish Government has announced that the arrangements there will be extended until the end of September. I therefore urge Members to support the motion. Diolch.

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

The Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, Mick Antoniw.

Mick Antoniw (Labour, Pontypridd)

Diolch, again, Llywydd. Again, we considered these regulations at our meeting on Monday morning, and our report contains four merits points, some of which will, of course, be familiar to Members.

Our first merits point notes that these regulations engage a landlord's rights under article 1 protocol 1 of the European convention on human rights. And we note that exceptions are included in the regulations that allow for evictions in certain circumstances; the regulations are made only for a specified period; they are to be reviewed on a regular three-weekly cycle; and are made in the context of the current health emergency. In addition, we also note the Government's consideration of the proportionality of these regulations in the explanatory memorandum.

Our second merits point notes that there has been no formal consultation on the regulations, and our third merits point notes that no regulatory impact assessment has been prepared. In making our third point, we draw attention to the explanatory memorandum attempting to set out a summary of the potential impact of the regulations, which does provide some qualitative assessment of their impact.

Our fourth and final merits point highlights that these regulations extend by approximately 12 weeks the period of time by which a landlord will be unable to seek possession of their property for unpaid rent. So, we therefore highlight that, in combination with previous regulations passed in January 2021 and in December 2020, landlords will have been prevented from recovering possession due to unpaid rent for a significant period of time. The arrears of rent for some landlords may have a significant adverse economic impact on them and, as such, we note that the explanatory memorandum contains the Government's assessment of this risk. Diolch, Llywydd.

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

I have no other speakers in this debate; I'm not sure if the Minister wishes to reply. Julie James.

Julie James (Labour, Swansea West)

No, thank you, Llywydd.

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

Therefore the proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? I don't see or hear any objections, and therefore the motion is agreed.

6. Topical Questions

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

Item 6, topical questions. No topical questions were accepted.

7. Motion to amend Standing Orders: Consolidation Bills

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

Item 7, motion to amend Standing Orders on consolidation Bills. And I call on a member of the Business Committee to formally move. Rebecca Evans.

Rebecca Evans (Labour, Gower)

Formally moved.

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

The Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, Mick Antoniw.

Mick Antoniw (Labour, Pontypridd)

And I welcome the motion, which, if agreed, will put in place procedures that will further enable the Senedd to improve the accessibility of Welsh law. Our committee began considering the Welsh Government’s plans for the consolidation of Welsh law early in 2017. We scrutinised the Legislation (Wales) Bill, prior to it being passed by this Senedd in July 2019. Notably, it places a duty on the Counsel General and the Welsh Ministers to prepare at least one programme for each Senedd, beginning with the sixth, that will include activities that are intended to contribute to a process of consolidating Welsh law.

Having a Standing Order procedure that will facilitate the introduction and scrutiny of such consolidation Bills is a crucial part of the process of improving the Welsh statute book. Given our role in scrutinising the Legislation (Wales) Bill, the Business Committee consulted with us on a draft version of the Standing Order. I would like to take the opportunity to thank the Business Committee for its response to the comments we provided in our correspondence in 2019.

So, turning to the proposed Standing Order itself, the exercise of consolidation should involve existing law only. I draw Members’ attention to paragraph 24 of the Business Committee’s report, which summarises the extent of proposed Standing Order 26C.2, and what a consolidation Bill may do. We set out a number of points in relation to this specific part of the Standing Order when we wrote to the Business Committee. I welcome the reiteration from the Business Committee that there will be a clear and important role for the responsible Senedd committee to assess and judge what is appropriate and within the parameters of proposed Standing Order 26C.2. Consolidating Welsh law will be a substantial task, and the responsible committee’s role and the work involved should not be underestimated.

I would also like to highlight the prospect of two consolidation Bills progressing in parallel as a package, which is documented in the Business Committee report. The first would be a principal consolidation Bill, and a second Bill would contain consequential amendments to existing legislation in light of the principal Bill. Amending stages for two Bills would need to happen consecutively, and it is anticipated these Bills would stand or fall together.

In our correspondence with the Business Committee, we acknowledged comments made by the Counsel General that there will be a process of learning as the first consolidation Bills are brought forward. We agreed with the Counsel General there should be a review of the procedure after the Senedd has scrutinised the first consolidation Bill, to ensure that the Standing Orders and procedures are fit for their intended purpose.

And I'd just like to conclude my contribution by saying that the accessibility of the Welsh statute book is not an issue that only affects us as Members as we undertake our duties here. Improving the accessibility of Welsh law will not only help legal practitioners working in Wales, but accessibility of the law and access to justice go hand in hand. Diolch, Llywydd.

Mark Reckless (Conservative, South Wales East)

I'm pleased that we're debating these many items on Standing Orders separately. I didn't request that by signifying an objection to their grouping in order to extend the fifth Assembly unnecessarily—we want to see the Assembly abolished, not continue artificially and unnecessarily. So, I do though believe that a lot of these Standing Orders are very substantive, and there are a range of different issues that I think deserve separate debates. And there are also prepared, I think, excellent documents for Business Committee on each of them that also deserve attention.

On consolidation, I initially thought that consolidation of the law was probably a sensible and not very controversial thing. And of course, there are provisions for the consolidation of laws at Westminster. However, having reflected further, I no longer believe that's the case, and I think this consolidation Standing Order will, for starters, ease the path to more legislating by this place, and I don't support that.

The Chair of the committee referred to the importance of consolidating Welsh law, but, of course, we don't have a separate jurisdiction in Wales. We have the law of England and Wales, as applicable in Wales. And I think that point draws into question many of the other points I've made about why this is such an obviously good and non-controversial thing to do, to assist users and improve access to justice and accessibility, et cetera.

I think, in the Business Committee paper, paragraph 2 puts the case from the other side quite well. It refers to the fourth Assembly's Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee having considered this in its report 'Making Laws in Wales.' We get a definition of consolidation, or at least described consolidation of law as,

'taking an area of law that has fallen into disrepair as a result of layers of amendments and modification, and producing a single clean text, in accordance with best contemporary practice.'

Now, I'm not really sure if that's true. Clearly, as laws get amended and changes are made, and there are amendments and modifications, that can increase complexity, and it can make the laws harder to use, both for legal practitioners and in terms of accessibility to the public, but often that's a factor of the growing complexity of the law, rather than necessarily just reflecting that it's coming from different statutes or different places. As that happens, of course, it increases the risk of ambiguity or contradiction, but to the extent that happens, the consolidation of law becomes a controversial process because it is potentially resolving or at least having an influence on those ambiguities and contradictions. And when the committee says it would lead to a single clean text, I just don't believe that's true in the context of devolution, and a shared devolution.

What it would lead to, in most areas, is a text for Wales and then a different range of texts for elsewhere in the UK, or at least for England, and over time it becomes possible that the interpretation of those two different bodies of law becomes different, or that it becomes very difficult to be sure that you're looking at the right law in terms of the case law, because if you have a judge who interprets things in a particular way, but is doing that in Wales, it's not clear if that then gets picked up by judges in England interpreting the law of England and Wales as applicable to England there. And, of course, there's far more interpretation in terms of volume going on in England. And if those things from the previous legislation were consolidated or referred to, it can then become very challenging for the lawyers and the practitioners to actually pin those changes back onto what's happened in Wales, and whether those changes—. Some of them may be binding, but they've been made with reference to other statutes and other provisions that have ostensibly been consolidated into a single clean text, but it's not a single clean text because the law continues to exist as it was in England. And that, to me, really brings all this into question, and we intend to oppose this new Standing Order to ease the path to this type of further legislative behaviour.

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

Thank you. I have no further speakers on that item. The proposal is to amend Standing Orders in relation to consolidation Bills. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there is an objection, and we will defer voting until voting time.

8. Motion to amend Standing Orders: Departure from the European Union

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

Item 8 is next, a motion to amend Standing Orders relating to departure from the European Union. Again, I call on a member of the Business Committee to formally move the motion. Rebecca Evans.

Rebecca Evans (Labour, Gower)

Formally moved.

Mark Reckless (Conservative, South Wales East)

I think this may be my favourite of the items we're discussing today, amending our Standing Orders to reflect our departure from the European Union. It's a relatively short report that went to Business Committee. It says, 'Had the committee'—and this is the External Affairs and Additional Legislation Committee—

'Had the committee consider that it did not, it could make written representations—'.

That relates to subsidiarity. I assume that sentence should read, 'Had the committee considered that it did not, it could have made representations—'. And it then goes on:

'to the relevant House of Commons or Lords committee with a view to having those representations incorporated into a reasoned opinion to be submitted by that committee to the relevant EU authorities.'

So, that relates to subsidiarity and, supposedly, a legal process for ensuring it was applied. What isn't in the paper is whether that process was ever used, and if so, whether it ever had any effect. But the paper then continues,

'Subsidiarity is grounded in the Treaty on European Union and ceased to apply in the UK on exit day.'

Now, I disagree with that phrase very strongly. Subsidiarity is taking decisions at the lowest possible level, and the process of leaving the European Union didn't end subsidiarity; it vastly increased subsidiarity by moving a huge plethora of powers that had been exercised at the European Union level so that they're instead exercised either at Westminster or by us in Cardiff. I mean that's an increase in subsidiarity, not the end of it. Of course, it was a concept that John Major pushed to get inserted into the treaty at Maastricht, and I would question how much it has ever had real applicability in the European Union, and certainly in practical terms, if not the specific statutory terms described, there's going to be an awful lot more of this subsidiarity now we're outside the European Union. But it is, of course, sensible that we remove this now redundant provision, if it was ever not redundant, from Standing Orders.

The other issue that this arises is: what about the External Affairs and Additional Legislation Committee? I remember, when I was on Business Committee for a period at the beginning of this Assembly, that the committee was described, at least unofficially, as the Brexit committee. And I'd understood that it was there to help with the huge amount of legislation that had to be reconsidered in light of Brexit and to ensure that our statute book appropriately dealt with the requirements of Brexit and the amount of work that was going to involve. So, I agreed to the establishment of that committee, but I'd understood it was a temporary committee for this Assembly, with that as its focus. And we were told that, in the fourth Assembly, committees were so overburdened and there was so much legislation that we needed this additional legislation committee that could be combined with looking at Brexit. But I'm not sure how much it has been used for that, or really whether the pressure of legislation justifies having a further committee, and Brexit, as we've heard earlier, is now over. So, why do we still have this committee? And should we have any references in Standing Orders that imply it should in any way continue into the sixth Assembly or Senedd?

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

I have no further speakers. The proposal is to amend Standing Orders in relation to the departure from the European Union. Does any Member object? No. There are no objections, and therefore the motion is agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

9. Motion to amend Standing Orders: Early Business Following a Senedd Election

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

We move now to item 9, a motion to amend Standing Orders relating to early business following a Senedd election. Rebecca Evans to move the motion formally.

Rebecca Evans (Labour, Gower)

Formally moved.

Mark Reckless (Conservative, South Wales East)

We were told in the Business Committee paper regarding withdrawal of a nomination neither the First Minister nomination or Presiding Officer election procedures make specific provision for a nomination to be withdrawn, and both Standing Orders use mandatory language in requiring further rounds of voting in the event of no candidate being successful in a particular round of voting. So, of course, they don't contain specific provisions relating to withdrawal of candidate, because it has mandatory language requiring that process to go to completion, and if you stand for one of these positions under our Standing Orders, you commit to seeing that process out. And if following a tie a political deal is made, so some Members of the Assembly would change their vote in a future ballot, we should have that future ballot so that we can see them changing their vote, and so that is public, and crucially we should respect and apply our Standing Orders. And I'm afraid in this case, that didn't happen.

Llywydd, you told us that Standing Orders couldn't consider every conceivable scenario and, in such situations, it is your responsibility to interpret the Standing Orders. But these Standing Orders required no interpretation. As the Business Committee said, they use 'mandatory language'. You decided that language was unreasonable and you decided to do something else, and, as a consequence of that, the leader of Plaid Cymru, your party, didn't have the embarrassment of having a further vote and losing that vote, having gone into this process under those agreed Standing Orders that, then, I'm afraid, were disapplied part of the way through. We don't support these changes. We thought that was a sensible process, the problem is that it wasn't applied. You shouldn't codify to respect a precedent when that precedent, at least in my view—and I haven't heard a contrary view at all that's convincing—was not compliant with the Standing Orders then in force.

The other very important issue, I think, here—and I find it harder to assess this issue, but it is very, very important—is in terms of Standing Order 6 and particularly Standing Order 8, the one in respect of the First Minister. I'll take Standing Orders 6.9 and 6.10 as an example, rather than Standing Order 8. Where you have two Members who are standing, then it's just whichever gets the greater vote that becomes First Minister, but then if three or more stand, there's a different provision as to what the hurdle is to become First Minister. That strikes me as very strange. It's not clear why the number of initial candidates should reflect the hurdle required to become First Minister. It's a really, really serious issue that, if we do have three or more Members standing, there's then a requirement for one of those Members to get a majority of all voting, including abstentions and potentially spoilt ballot papers, rather than the plurality, particularly given that that differs from when there are two candidates. I think that's a very strange provision.

On balance, we oppose these changes, firstly for the other change I was just discussing, but also, on balance, for this. Because if we were to keep this and we were to have Standing Order 6.10, at least as it applies to the First Minister, it is such that, without it—without the change—if there were, say, an Abolish group of Members in the next Assembly, so long as we ensure that there were three or more Members standing and that there weren't otherwise, then by virtue of spoiling ballots and participating but abstaining, we could potentially prevent the appointment of a First Minister, if there was plurality but not majority support for the leading candidate. So, we'd still have an Assembly or Senedd, but no First Minister and no Welsh Government under him, which would be something that would be a positive move, as we would assess. Hence the possibility of blocking a First Minister appointment and leaving the situation in limbo—perhaps the UK Government could step in and assist us—would be one that we would welcome.

For that reason, we won't vote for these changes, but I certainly understand why other members of the Business Committee have proposed them, given the huge and really important inconsistency between the situation and hurdle that applies where there are two or three or more Members who'd initially like to be First Minister; and, of course, the situation is analogous for the Presiding Officer.

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

I have no further speakers. The proposal this time is to amend Standing Orders in relation to early business following a Senedd election. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there are objections, so I will defer voting until voting time.

10. Motion to amend Standing Orders: Sub Judice

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

The next item is the motion to amend Standing Orders in relation to sub judice. I call on a member of the Business Committee to formally move—Rebecca Evans.

Rebecca Evans (Labour, Gower)

Formally moved.

Mark Reckless (Conservative, South Wales East)

These are also, I think, potentially quite important amendments and I'm not sure why they're being made, entirely. Some of them I think are sensible, like the references to the commissioners and ombudsman. Removing those and having a general provision rather trying to update for each specific commissioner or ombudsman seems sensible.

But at the moment, we have a rule that allows the Presiding Officer to decide that a matter that relates to active judicial proceedings can be raised. And our Standing Orders have stated that if the Presiding Officer is satisfied that the matter clearly related to a matter of public importance, or a ministerial decision in question, then the matter can be raised, and I think that that's sensible. Without that, we have a situation where anyone can lay a judicial review claim—you can file one of those and there's precedent that the cost through to permission stage should be no more than perhaps a couple of £1,000 and that can sometimes take several months—and after the laying of that claim, that's then active proceedings in the court, and, as a legislature, we can't discuss any issue that that relates to.

I think that that's far too wide, particularly in the field of judicial review that questions the decisions of public authorities. If a Minister decides something that's a matter of political controversy and some of us support it and others don't, and we want to continue discussing the merits, this change in the Standing Orders would seem to provide for that discussion of elected Members to be cut short just because, say, one private citizen decides to issue a claim of judicial review. That can't be right, in my view. There is a carve-out in the new Standing Order proposed, but it's much narrower. And yes, of course, legislation, or subordinate legislation, we should discuss, but why on earth can't we debate a decision that's been made by a Minister that's controversial just because someone else is so opposed to it that they launch a claim of judicial review? There's a reference,

'except to the extent permitted by the Presiding Officer',

but it's a much narrower carve-out. Situations in which the Presiding Officer should consider allowing debate to continue even if there is a matter before the courts are now set out, and when they're not set out I think it will become much harder for a Presiding Officer to allow that sort of discussion to continue.

Clearly, at the moment, it's right that we've got the restrictions on matters going before a jury or a family matter case, but for other cases where you have a judge or judges sitting, particularly in the field of judicial review, the idea that we as legislators can't debate or discuss any such matters I think is wrong. The chance of that judge or those judges being prejudiced on account of our debate is I think nugatory and it's something they could easily deal with. To rule out this whole field of discussion for us I just think is quite wrong. We've got perfectly sensible ways of dealing with this issue at the moment—we've an item later on it—and I think those methods should continue, rather than changing these Standing Orders in a wholly unnecessary way.

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

I have no further speakers. The proposal is to amend Standing Orders in relation to sub judice. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there are objections. I will defer voting until voting time.

11. Motion to amend Standing Orders: Recall of the Senedd

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

We move now to item 11, a motion to amend Standing Orders on recall of the Senedd. I call on a member of the Business Committee to formally move the motion—Rebecca Evans.

Rebecca Evans (Labour, Gower)

Formally moved.

Mark Reckless (Conservative, South Wales East)

I think these amendments are broadly sensible. Currently, we're only able to have a recall at the request of the First Minister, subject to the Presiding Officer's decision. It's her decision, but as it reads currently, I believe it can only be taken at the request of the First Minister. To preclude any recall of the legislature unless the head of the executive desires it doesn't seem to me to be right, so I support these changes. It opens up another head for recall—that the Presiding Officer may take the initiative to recall but, when he or she does so, it should be having consulted the First Minister and the Business Committee. I think that's broadly sensible. I had reflected on whether it might also be sensible to require at least consultation with the Business Committee on the first head for a recall when it's proposed by the First Minister, but on balance, if the First Minister and the Llywydd are in agreement, I'm content for the change to be made, because I think it's an improvement bringing in this second head for a recall. Thank you.

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

The proposal is to amend Standing Orders in relation to recall of the Senedd. Does any Member object? I don't believe there are any objections, and therefore the motion is agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

12. Motion to amend Standing Orders: Membership of Committees

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

Item 12 is next, a motion to amend Standing Orders on membership of committees. I call on a member of the Business Committee to formally move—Rebecca Evans.

Rebecca Evans (Labour, Gower)

Formally moved.

Mark Reckless (Conservative, South Wales East)

Again, I think, on balance, this is a change to Standing Orders that I support. I think it's regrettable that we've lost the underpinning of the UK legislation that provided that if we couldn't reach agreement by two thirds on the constitution of our committees, then D'Hondt should apply. I think that gave an underlying backstop and security to the process, which to a degree is lost. But I think it's better to have it in Standing Orders than not to have it at all. While my preference would be for it to be a UK Act of Parliament judicable in the courts of England and Wales, that isn't the case, given the, in my view, regrettable change that's already happened. Given that, I think it's probably a good idea to have this backstop in Standing Orders, so that if we can't reach agreement on committees with a two-thirds majority, then D'Hondt applies. I think this is one of the rare instances where I think I approve of the Labour and Plaid Cymru Members exercising their two-thirds majority to try and bind future Assemblies or Senedds, because this was UK legislation, and unfortunately it was lost and it's being reinstated and re-entrenched with a two-thirds majority as the UK Parliament had initially provided for. So, on this one, I think that the proposal is a good one, even though it's binding a future Senedd. Thank you.

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

The proposal is to amend Standing Orders in relation to membership of committees. Does any Member object? No, I don't—[Objection.] Yes, I apologise, there is an objection. Apologies. I didn't see you. There is an objection, and we will therefore defer voting on this item until voting time.

13. Motion to amend Standing Orders: Miscellaneous Changes

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

Item 13 is next, a motion to amend Standing Orders, miscellaneous changes. A member of the Business Committee to formally move—Rebecca Evans.

Rebecca Evans (Labour, Gower)

Formally moved.

Mark Reckless (Conservative, South Wales East)

It's good to see at least one other Member engaged in the process to the extent of objecting, even though I seem to be alone in speaking to these debates. This section on miscellaneous changes I thought was particularly interesting. There's a range of different Standing Order changes, in actually quite disparate areas, but on these I'm afraid I'm not able to insist on separate debates, so I will deal with them as a group.

We have the Senedd pension scheme, and I can understand why this change is proposed to the extent that the current Standing Orders appear to contradict the arrangements we have where the remuneration board has taken responsibility for appointment of the trustees to the pension scheme, yet we still had this Standing Order 1.7, which puts in place an apparently competing process. I'm not clear why we have the remuneration board doing this. These are scheme rules, and the pension scheme is for the benefit of its members, current and future pensioners, and the trustees' job is to look out for their interests properly within the law. So, given that, why do we have this independent body, the remuneration board, determining how people should be appointed to represent members' interest? I think, as with the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority at the House of Commons, with the remuneration board that we have here, it's probably a good principle to have this separation between Members and an independent body making decisions over Members' rations, so to speak, but that doesn't appear to be what's engaged here.

Our pension contributions are being paid, the system is set up. I'd like to see the pension scheme better managed, with a greater focus on returns. I have particular concerns about the emphasis on the index-linked gilts and the failure to have an agreed allocation towards UK equities, which have been performing much more strongly of late. But surely there is an interest of Members to manage that scheme well, and an interest of the Commission to see it managed well, so that future contributions of taxpayer funds may be minimised, and that would seem to be well done, I would have thought, with the trustees under the general law representing the interest of the members, and that's quite proper within it. So why we don't do that and we have an independent body determine that instead is not clear to me. But that is currently an apparent contradiction between those. I don't see that as a reason for opposing this, although if it were possible to have a vote on this specific Standing Order, rather than having had these grouped in such disparate areas, I might have taken a different view.

Another area that is interesting here is the difference between the constituency and the list Members. We say in our Standing Orders that constituency and regional Members should be treated equally and are of equal value. Some Members seem to cast doubt on that sometimes, but that's the provision in Standing Orders, and I think it's the right one. Yet we have the Standing Order that has a provision with regard to resignation that only references section 10 of the Government of Wales Act, and not section 11, and that then means it applies to the constituency but not to the region. But I'm not wholly sure why this Standing Order 1.9 is required. It has a provision where it says 'or otherwise' anyhow, so there is a broad discretion and I don't see why we need to go beyond the statute reference to vacancy in order to determine through the common sense application of English and a necessary reference to the courts when a vacancy has occurred, and given it is in legislation, that would presumably trump the Standing Orders interpretation anyhow, so I'm not sure that this Standing Order is required. In my view, it may be redundant and would perhaps be better erased, but given it is there, I think it is better that it does refer to both the regional and constituency provisions in the Act on a consistent basis, so I don't propose to oppose it.

I also think it's a sensible thing to remove the Business Committee Chair from the reference—I think there was quite a bit of discussion when I joined the Business Committee at the beginning of the term around that—and to the extent the Business Committee is chaired by the Presiding Officer. It does seem proper that it shouldn't be part of the party balance, notwithstanding the Presiding Officer's potential membership of a political party. Thank you.

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

I have no further speakers. The proposal is to amend Standing Orders to make miscellaneous changes. Does any Member object? No, I don't see any objections, and therefore, the motion is agreed.

14. Motion to amend Standing Orders: Temporary Standing Orders

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

Item 14 is next, the motion to amend temporary Standing Orders, and I call on a member of the Business Committee to formally move—Rebecca Evans.

Rebecca Evans (Labour, Gower)

Formally moved.

Mark Reckless (Conservative, South Wales East)

So, we have a range of temporary Standing Orders that this applies to. I think it probably is appropriate on this occasion that they are taken together, and firstly, the extension on proxy voting for parental leave; I think that was brought in as a temporary provision. My view has been that proxy voting—and I speak really in circumstances without considering COVID where there is an assumption of physical meeting and presence in Cardiff—is I have thought that we should allow that proxy voting for maternity or paternity leave or other appropriate parental leave under statute, potentially, and our own contractual arrangements. But if we do have that, it has quite an impact between Government and opposition, and I think we do need this narrow exception because of maternity and paternity rights. It doesn't seem right to me to exclude those individuals from voting in connection with their job. It's good to see the UK Government having made a change recently in respect of the UK Ministers in that scenario, and I think it's right that we do have this. Personally, I think this particular narrow aspect of proxy voting only should be made permanent, but short of that, I think the extension from April to August is a good one.

But I think the remote participation that we have, I think it does change the balance between Government and opposition, because Government needs to have its votes to get its business through; it can't risk losing a vote by not having people able to participate in voting, so to the extent that we vote remotely from our homes, rather than being required in Cardiff or potentially voting remotely wherever we happen to be, I think that is a benefit to the Government, because it makes it easier for them to get their business. It doesn't have that hurdle of having to have all its Members in Cardiff at a particular time for when a vote may occur. So, there is that change, and I don't support a wider extension of proxy voting because of that.

We're extending the temporary Standing Orders in respect of, from my understanding, both the hybrid and the entirely remote working; I'm not sure why we're still doing entirely remote working rather than hybrid working, as they are in Westminster, and to the extent that may continue for the UK Parliament into May or June, I think it's appropriate we should have the potential at least for the hybrid option to continue. I've had discussions with some party colleagues around the remote voting; my feeling is perhaps that you should in a Parliament meet physically, and some have actually thought that remote participation is good, and we should make it the standard, because that would allow our building to be repurposed for more productive and useful purposes, and could save significant sums of money for the taxpayer. On balance, though, I think the hybrid and remote options—certainly the hybrid is the one I prefer, so continuing those temporary Standing Orders for at least a shortish period beyond the election is probably the right thing to do, at least in terms of having that option to provide for the hybrids. So, on these temporary Standing Orders, we do propose to support their extension. Thank you.

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

There are no further speakers. The proposal is to amend Standing Orders in relation to temporary Standing Orders. Does any Member object? No, I don't see any objection, and therefore the motion is agreed.

15. Motion to amend Standing Orders: Definition of Political Groups

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

Item 15 is next, a motion to amend Standing Orders on the definition of political groups. I call on a member of the Business Committee to formally move, Rebecca Evans.

Rebecca Evans (Labour, Gower)

Diolch, Llywydd. I move the motion to amend the Standing Orders on political groups. After much discussion and debate, this amendment seeks to make clear not only the threshold for the formation of groups, but also the underlying principles. It sets out that a political group is a group of at least three Members belonging to the same registered political party that won at least one seat at the previous Senedd election—or, three or more Members not satisfying those criteria who have notified the Presiding Officer of their wish to be regarded as a political group and satisfied the Presiding Officer that exceptional circumstances apply. At their core, what these changes seek to uphold are the principles of democratic accountability and stability in our Senedd, which are critical to the way our institution is perceived and operates. The changes do not prevent new groups being formed, but they do offer a more robust system of checks and balances.

Being recognised as a group brings significant privileges, and in the interests of the integrity of this institution, it is only right that there are at least some minimum tests in place. If this motion is agreed, the Presiding Officer must issue guidance to Members under Standing Order 6.17 on the interpretation and application of Standing Order 1.3(ii).

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

Mark Isherwood. I can't see Mark Isherwood at this point. If he—ah, yes. Mark Isherwood, did you have a problem with your broadband?

Mark Isherwood (Conservative, North Wales)

Yes, I had thought it was on. I apologise.

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

Right, okay. So you have been listening to the debate. Mark Isherwood.

Mark Isherwood (Conservative, North Wales)

Thank you. This proposed amendment to Standing Orders, I regret to say, can only be described as nasty, high handed and domineering, exercising arbitrary and overbearing control over others. As the Business Committee's report on this states:

'This proposal does not have the unanimous support of the Business Committee. The proposal was made by Rebecca Evans MS (the Trefnydd) and supported by Sian Gwenllian MS who, in accordance with Standing Order 11.5(ii), together carry 39 votes on the Committee. Mark Isherwood MS and Caroline Jones MS, comprising a total of 14 votes, do not support the proposal and support retaining the current Standing Order.'

On the pretext that, quote:

'The Fifth Senedd has seen unprecedented fluidity in the membership, formation and dissolution of political groups',

an unholy alliance between Labour and Plaid Cymru claims that this level of fluidity is undesirable, and that the automatic creation of new political groups in what is supposed to be this people's Parliament, should be restricted to those consisting of three or more Members belonging to the same registered political party that won a seat or seats in the most recent Senedd general election, unless the Presiding Officer is satisfied that exceptional circumstances apply. Well, although this proposal would be as much to the partisan benefit of my party, as to Labour and Plaid Cymru, it is clearly targeted in an entirely unseemly and unfitting way, exhibiting the mindset of the playground bully rather than the responsible politician who recognises that the measure of a representative democracy is how it treats the minorities within.

Effective checks and balances within representative democratic systems are essential if those systems are to sustain, yet this proposal seeks to undermine this fundamental principle. As my colleagues in the Welsh Conservatives' official opposition have said to me, we should stick to the current arrangements. These already give the Llywydd some discretion and are fair to small parties. New parties can and do emerge in vibrant democracies like Wales, as has been demonstrated throughout the Senedd's existence. And, ouch, this is gerrymandering at its worst, where gerrymandering is designed to give political parties an unfair advantage and keep bad incumbents in power—a dictionary definition; I'm not alluding to anything in person.

I therefore say to the Members opposite: before you follow your voting party whips on this matter, please therefore ask yourself whether this is really the road you want this young Parliament, this Welsh Parliament, this Senedd, to travel down. I hope not.

Caroline Jones (UKIP, South Wales West)

My group strongly objects to these proposals as we feel they are anti-democratic. The upshot of these proposals will deny independent Members the opportunity to work together on common issues, deny independent Members the ability to feed into the workings of this institution, and deny independent Members the same opportunities as those in established political parties, the very political parties that we have rejected and, increasingly, so have the Welsh public.

Independent Members need more support, not less, as they do not have the benefit of a party machine behind them. And I've heard the argument that independents cannot form a group because they do not share the same political beliefs, the same ideals, and that is a fallacy. We all share the strongest belief that the people who elect us are the most important; not party leaders or big donors—the public. So, we all have a common goal to hold the party in charge to account.

That is why we are seeing more and more independents in office, and why the traditional parties combined represent just a third of the electorate in this Senedd. We will see more and more independent Members in future, and I therefore call on Members to reject these proposals in the interests of fairness and democracy. Diolch.

Mark Reckless (Conservative, South Wales East)

It's good to have some colleagues to debate with on this one. Thank you to Mark Isherwood and Caroline Jones for their contributions; I suppose I should also thank Rebecca who was kind to me in her remarks. I'd also like to apologise to the Welsh Conservatives because when I first heard of this extraordinary proposal from Business Committee, I was misinformed that the Conservative business manager had supported it. I found out that wasn't true, so I apologise wholeheartedly for my initial error in responding to this news. I thought he made a very good speech earlier.

And reading the report from Business Committee, and I've seen the clerk who's written it, the 'case against' amendment—paragraphs 12 to 14—is really very eloquently put. I can't say the same for the 'case for' amendment, but I think the reason for that, I mean, Mark Isherwood described it as nasty, high handed and domineering. But what I would emphasise is that Plaid Cymru and Labour appear to me to be abusing their two-thirds majority in the current Senedd in order, in effect, to bind a successor Senedd. They fear they will not have that majority; together, no doubt, they'll cobble up something else, but without a two-thirds majority they'd be unable to change Standing Orders, so they've decided to use their two-thirds majority in the fifth Senedd to determine what the Standing Orders should be for the sixth Senedd in these very, very controversial and very partisan areas.

I note that a previous proposal to increase the minimum size of a group from three to four hasn't made it through to the final version. I'm not sure if that's because the Abolish the Welsh Assembly Party is now polling at a position where we're projected to get four seats, so it was thought it was no longer necessary or helpful to make that change, but in any event it stays at three. I've no particular argument of principle about the size a group should be, but I'm content with three.

Mark Reckless (Conservative, South Wales East)

We've also lost some of the extra proposed guidance that was initially proposed. We were told that it could also stipulate that the Llywydd can take into account whether a group has a significant and demonstrable democratic mandate for formation and whether it shares a political philosophy that would be clear to the electorate. I'm not sure how a Presiding Officer is meant to determine those things, and it's good, at least, that that bit hasn't made it through. However, we do have guidance that's already—. I mean, I thought the Llywydd should be drawing up guidance under these Standing Orders, yet the guidance has already been drawn up before the Standing Order changes have been passed. And under the proposed new Standing Order 1.3A, we're told that the Llywydd should provide guidance that relates to new Standing Order 1.3(ii), but the guidance that the Llywydd has already presented as an annex, purportedly under 1.3A as it should be, actually applies at least in part to 1.3(i). So, we're already in a confusing situation. The guidance says:

'By-elections may also change the Senedd's political make-up in a way that makes it appropriate to recognise a new group.'

Well, that applies, at least in part, as I said, to 1.3(i), which defines a political group as

'a group of at least three Members belonging to the same registered political party that won at least one seat at the previous Senedd election'.

So, if a party wins one or two seats, but doesn't have the three for a group, it will be unable to form a group, but, if it later wins a by-election, it will be able to form a group under 1.3(i). So, why, Llywydd, have you published guidance purportedly under 1.3A that's meant to relate to 1.3(ii), yet relates at least in part to 1.3(i)? I'm afraid it's typical of how we apply our Standing Orders and the sort of attitude that we see to them in this place. I believe it's inappropriate to give the office of the Llywydd such wide discretion, exercise of which would inevitably draw its holder into party political controversy. Perhaps that's what's desired. I wrote to the Llywydd on 23 February with some of these points. I haven't had the courtesy of a reply.

After all, as drawn, the proposed changes to Standing Orders might be read by some as if designed ex post to prevent the formation of the Brexit Party group, of which I was part. I would argue that major parties betraying their voters by promising to deliver Brexit but then blocking it did constitute a national crisis or major event that changes group affiliations. Arguably, most Conservative supporters deserting their party to vote for the Brexit Party in the May 2019 European elections, which the Brexit Party won, constituted a split in a registered political party, but would you as Llywydd consider it such? We saw you delay recognition of that group for a week, purportedly to check with the Electoral Commission whether it was a registered party, despite the register of parties being a public document online, updated in real time and available to all.

Today, we've seen on behalf of, I assume, Caroline Jones, that it's now been made public how you responded to her, berating her on the formation of the Brexit Party group and saying you expected better of her. Yet these Standing Orders propose to give the Presiding Officer discretion to decide whether a group should be formed, purportedly on the basis of guidance, which is already contrary to the Standing Order it's meant to be done under, but the reality is it would be a discretion, and it would be exercised by a Presiding Officer, I fear, according to that Presiding Officer's own personal political opinions, whether about Brexit or anything else, and that is not how a Parliament should operate. It is wrong. These issues simply should not fall to be decided on that basis.

We're told that a national crisis would justify a change to party affiliation. Does COVID fall within that? Is it okay to have different groups because of that? What about if a major political party is taken over by an anti-semite as a leader? Is it okay then for Members to form a different group, or are they expected to stay in the same group and support that party at the election and say, 'He should be Prime Minister of the United Kingdom', as we saw in 2019? I don't think it should be a matter for a Presiding Officer to decide, or for guidance, or for Business Committee—two-thirds majority there at the moment, but probably not in future—to use. It should be a decision for elected Members, answering to their electorate in a democracy.

The provisions on independents are outrageous. I mean, if, in a general election, individuals get themselves elected to this place as independents—a very high hurdle—if three or more of them do that, why on earth should they be banned from having a group? It's just a protection of the vested interests of the established parties trying to squeeze out competitors. The hurdle is already very high for independents to come in and, if three of them do, the idea that they shouldn't be allowed to form a group, but potentially could if they later won by-elections, makes absolutely no sense whatever. These provisions are unfair; those who are putting them forward, those who are drafting guidance that's inconsistent with them and have shown their own bias on these things before, should not be doing this. We're opposed to them. Thank you.

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

Siân Gwenllian to reply to the debate—Siân Gwenllian.

Siân Gwenllian (Plaid Cymru, Arfon)

Thank you very much, Llywydd. It was interesting to hear a catalogue of Mark Reckless's various analyses of different constitutional matters within the Senedd. I thank him for taking such an interest in the Standing Orders of our national Parliament, an institution that he and others here this afternoon, unfortunately, want to abolish, of course, contrary to the mandate of our people. It's not the interests of our national Parliament and our nation that have been addressed in this debate thus far.

But, in turning to item 15, I do believe that it's important that we take the two clauses in these changes to the Standing Orders in relation to the formation of political groups together. They work as one, with the first safeguarding the rights of minority parties to form groups automatically, and the second providing discretion to the Llywydd to allow the formation of groups that don't have a clear mandate. The second clause provides sufficient flexibility for the Llywydd as circumstances change.

Therefore, the new Standing Orders will not prevent the formation of new groups. But what will be in place will be a far more robust system. This change will provide greater transparency and an improved system, unlike what's been possible during this Senedd term, and, in doing that, it will safeguard the reputation of our national Parliament. The change also highlights the importance of democratic accountability and will create greater stability for the institution in future. There's been a great deal of thought and discussion about the very wording contained within this change, and I would encourage everyone who wishes to retain the reputation of our Parliament and to maintain its stability to support this change.

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

The proposal is to amend Standing Orders in relation to the definition of political groups. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there are objections, and I will defer voting until voting time.

16. Debate on the Standards of Conduct Committee Report—Report 05-21

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

So, item 16, a debate on the Standards of Conduct Committee report, report 05-21. The Chair of the committee to move the motion—Jayne Bryant.

Jayne Bryant (Labour, Newport West)

Diolch, Llywydd. As Chair of the Standards of Conduct Committee, I formally move the motion. The committee considered the report from the acting Commissioner for Standards in relation to a complaint regarding the conduct of Helen Mary Jones MS. This matter was referred to the Commissioner for Standards by the Member herself. The Standards of Conduct Committee gave the commissioner's report careful consideration and our report sets out the committee's findings and recommendations as to the sanction of censure that is considered appropriate in this case.

The facts related to the complaint and the committee's reasons for its recommendations are set out in full in the committee's report. The committee also noted and gave credit to the Member for making a self-referral to the commissioner, admitting a breach of the Members' code of conduct. Following the drafting of the report, the Member wrote to the committee with a full apology to the Senedd and complete acceptance of the committee's recommendation. This is annexed to our report.

This will be the last complaint report brought before the Senedd by the Standards of Conduct Committee in the fifth Senedd. In line with the decision of the Business Committee, and as set out in the Llywydd's letter to Members, which was laid before the Senedd on 17 March, the Standards of Conduct Committee will cease any further activity as we enter into the recess and election period. As a committee, we have acted on all reports to us. However, there are matters outstanding that have not completed all stages of the procedure. It will be for the successor committee to determine and publish in due course.

The position from the start of the recess will therefore be as follows: any reports received from the Commissioner for Standards, or appeal decisions received from an independent legally qualified person, will be acknowledged by the committee secretariat. Any such report will be held confidentially, pending the establishment of a Standards of Conduct Committee in the sixth Senedd. Uncompleted consideration of any complaints against a Member who is returned at the election can be resumed by the standards committee of the sixth Senedd. If there are unpublished reports relating to breaches by a Member who is not returned at the election, then it will be for the incoming standards committee to arrange the publication of those reports. The original recommended sanction may no longer be available when asking the Senedd to note the reports. It will also be a matter for the incoming standards committee to publish any anonymised reports where there has been a formal investigation by the commissioner but no breach on the part of the Member has been found. I ask the Senedd to endorse the committee's recommendation.

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

I have no speakers in this debate. I assume the Chair doesn't want to reply to the debate. Therefore, the proposal is to note the committee's report. Does any Member object? No. The motion is therefore agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

17. Motion to Approve the Code of Conduct for Members of the Senedd

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

The next item is the motion to approve the code of conduct for Members of the Senedd. I call on the Chair of the standards committee once again to move the motion—Jayne Bryant.

Jayne Bryant (Labour, Newport West)

Diolch, Llywydd. It is with great pleasure that I ask the Senedd today to adopt the revised code of conduct, laid in the Table Office on 17 March 2021.

The fifth Senedd has seen a significant increase in complaints against Members of the Senedd, and it's against this backdrop that a key part of the Standards of Conduct Committee's work has been the production of a revised code of conduct and accompanying guidance. In redrafting the code, the committee has sought to provide greater clarity on the standards that are expected of Members and to better align the code with the dignity and respect policy that was adopted by the Senedd in May 2018. In order to do this, the committee has considered its experiences and the recommendations of the reports by the standards commissioner, and acting standards commissioner, over the course of this Senedd, spoken with a number of stakeholders, including former standards commissioners, consulted with the public, as well as all Senedd Members, and conducted research into the use of codes of conduct in both local and national Governments within the UK and internationally. The redrafted code has two main elements: first, a number of overarching principles of conduct that Members must observe. In addition to the well-established Nolan principles, we have included an additional respect principle, which states:

'Members must not behave in ways that reduce equality of opportunity, must always respect the dignity of other persons and must not engage in discriminatory or unwanted behaviour.'

By including this principle, we want to send a clear message that this is a key tenet of public life applicable to Members of the Senedd and is a starting point to address the very real concerns in relation to dignity and respect that have been raised across society during the course of the Senedd. To accompany the high-level principles, the second element of the code has a series of 24 non-exhaustive rules that will specify, in clear and succinct terms, the conduct that Members must observe. The revised code will come into force at the commencement of the sixth Senedd, and I would like to take this opportunity to remind all those Members standing for re-election that the code applies 24/7, from the point you are elected as a Member of the Senedd.

The committee believes that this revised code now reflects the contemporary standards expected of those in public life. We are recommending, in our legacy report, that the code is reviewed at the mid point of the next Senedd, in light of experience, to ensure it remains relevant to the political constitutional and cultural context in which we, Members of our evolving Senedd, operate.

I'd also like to take this opportunity to put on record my grateful thanks to the committee secretariat who've been excellent, particularly Meriel Singleton who has been outstanding throughout. Furthermore, I'd like to thank all members of the committee who have worked together throughout this and taken on many additional meetings to get things done. Thank you. I ask all Members to agree with the motion as tabled and adopt the new code of conduct.

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

I have no speakers, and therefore I will ask whether the motion should be agreed. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, I see an objection, and we will defer voting under this item until voting time.

18. Debate on the Finance Committee Report: Inquiry into the implementation of the Wales Act 2014 and operation of the Fiscal Framework

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

The next item is item 18, a debate on the Finance Committee report on the inquiry into the implementation of the Wales Act 2014 and the operation of the fiscal framework. I call on the Chair of the committee to move the motion, Llyr Gruffydd.

Llyr Gruffydd (Plaid Cymru, North Wales)

Thank you very much, Llywydd. I'm very pleased to be speaking in this debate today on the inquiry by the Finance Committee into the implementation of the Wales Act 2014 and the fiscal framework. And I'd like to thank, at the outset, all those who have contributed to this inquiry, and to the Minister for Finance and Trefnydd for her response to our report. We made 12 recommendations, and we're very pleased the Minister has accepted 11 recommendations in full, and the other in principle. I'd also like to thank HMRC and the Senedd Commission for their responses to our report.

In 2014, we saw one of the biggest changes ever to the Welsh devolution settlement. The Wales Act 2014 provided for the devolution of powers over taxation, including Welsh rates of income tax, the land transaction tax and the landfill disposals tax. In order to enable the powers in the 2014 Act to be implemented, the Welsh Government and the UK Government reached an agreement in the form of the fiscal framework. The fiscal framework also covers the borrowing limits of the Welsh Government and its tools for budget management, and it also deals with spill-over effects in terms of policy and implementation arrangements. As we approach the end of the Senedd, we felt it was important to reflect on the way in which these powers were introduced and the effectiveness of the fiscal framework.

As part of this inquiry, we extended several invitations to the Secretary of State for Wales and to the Chief Secretary to the Treasury to provide evidence. We're grateful to the Secretary of State who has engaged with us on this inquiry and in relation to the financial recovery post COVID-19. However, we are disappointed that the Chief Secretary has refused our requests. The Wales Act 2014 is fundamental to the devolution settlement, and the roles of the Welsh Government and the UK Government are intrinsic to the delivery of the objectives of the Act. While we're grateful to the Secretary of State for his contribution, it was only the questions relating to his responsibility that he could answer, of course. Therefore we were unable to understand the position of the position of the UK Government on a number of significant fiscal issues, including the process of tax devolution and the creation of new taxes, transparency in the process of engaging with the Welsh Government over funding decisions and the means of challenging such decisions, the potential for reviewing the Barnett formula, and also there was no opportunity to consider increasing borrowing powers.

Following that, I wrote to the Chief Secretary on these issues, and we received his response last night. Unfortunately, many of these matters remain unresolved, and the fact that the Chief Secretary refused to attend a meeting has undermined the value of the process of fiscal devolution. His letter also fails to address how the Senedd is supposed to scrutinise the fiscal arrangements of the UK Government for Wales if the Chief Secretary is not willing to attend to answer questions from the Members on that issue.

We started this inquiry during the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, and the evidence that we received, alongside the practical issues that emerged in terms of the funding arrangements throughout the pandemic, have shown that the Welsh Government and the UK Government must review the funding mechanisms urgently. The financial response to the pandemic has resulted in a significant amount of money being spent at a UK level, which has raised a number of issues regarding how the fiscal framework and the Barnett formula operate in Wales.

Llyr Gruffydd (Plaid Cymru, North Wales)

The committee acknowledges the unprecedented level of uncertainty regarding the UK Government’s budgets and its spending reviews over the past few years as a result of factors such as Brexit, the UK general election and the COVID-19 pandemic. While we understand the difficulties of providing multi-year settlements under the current circumstances, we are concerned that the Welsh Government, for the past three years, has had to produce a draft budget on the basis of a funding allocation for a single year, which of course makes it difficult for the Welsh Government to make funding plans and decisions over the long term. This is an issue that we would have wished to raise with the Chief Secretary. However, we are pleased that the Minister has agreed to our recommendation to continue addressing the need for greater certainty through multi-year funding allocations and clarity on the timing of UK fiscal events with the UK Government.

In 2019, the Public Accounts Committee of the UK Parliament recommended that the Treasury should address the lack of transparency over funding decisions, and the Treasury accepted that recommendation. However, we found that the arrangements for funding Wales are complex and that they lack transparency. We heard about the lack of engagement between the Welsh Government and the UK Government in the period leading up to the spending review. This lack of transparency also makes effective scrutiny more difficult, as it is hard to achieve a clear understanding of the funding available to the Welsh Government.

We welcome the response by the Minister, who noted that the Welsh Government would fully support increased transparency over funding decisions and that the Government would go even further by suggesting that funding arrangements that are jointly agreed should replace the current system, thereby bringing to an end bilateral deals and agreements and bringing clarity to the fiscal arrangements within the UK.

In addition to our concerns over how funding decisions are made, we are also concerned that the current process of challenging decisions via the Joint Ministerial Committee is inadequate. Essentially, the UK Government acts as judge and jury in this process, and we believe that there should be an independent adjudication process.

The committee has made a number of recommendations relating to the funding flexibility of the Welsh Government in previous reports during budget cycles. We continue to support calls for flexibility around end-of-year reserves to allow the Welsh Government to be more strategic in its long-term planning. The current pandemic has made the case for this flexibility even more emphatically. The fiscal arrangements for Wales were not designed for a global pandemic, and it's vital that we consider how we can make swift changes to ensure appropriate responses, when this is needed, from devolved governments. Having said that, we are pleased, of course, that the Chief Secretary has agreed to the Welsh Government’s request to carry some of its additional COVID funding forward into the next financial year.

While awareness of fiscal devolution in Wales is increasing, we did hear that awareness of devolved taxes is low among businesses and professionals. Also, our digital engagement exercise showed that awareness of the fiscal powers devolved to Wales is low among the general public. And that is particularly concerning, the fact that most people weren’t aware of the Welsh rates of income tax, even though most people will be paying them regularly. I reiterate the comments, therefore, that I've made previously in this Chamber, namely that the Welsh Government and the Senedd need to do more to raise awareness of these issues.

And we're pleased that the Minister agrees that it's important to continue raising awareness of Welsh taxes and that she supports the important role that the Senedd has in educating, engaging and informing the Welsh public on fiscal devolution. I am pleased to hear from the Senedd Commission that raising awareness is a part of the communications and engagement strategy of the Commission and that it will continue to work with stakeholders on this issue.

The evidence that we received suggested that there should be a review of both council tax and non-domestic rates, and that now is the opportunity for Wales to put in place tax arrangements that are more progressive. The committee welcomes the work undertaken by the current Welsh Government to explore the feasibility of replacing council tax and NDR with a local land value tax, and its commitment to examining how the revaluation and reform of council tax in Wales would affect the tax base and household incomes in order to make council tax fairer and more progressive.

The 2014 Act provided the Welsh Government with the ability to seek competence to introduce new taxes, and the Welsh Government asked the UK Government for competence over vacant land tax back in 2018, but by the time of the last Plenary meeting of the fifth Senedd today, this competence still has not been devolved. In fact, we heard that the Welsh Government’s experience to date in seeking competence over additional tax powers has not been easy or straightforward. While we recognise the first attempt at seeking competence for a new tax is likely to take longer because of the steps that need to be taken to iron out the process, this is not a particularly controversial tax, and I’m sure none of us here expected the process to take so long.

We did ask the Secretary of State whether the process for devolving competence to introduce new Welsh taxes is fit for purpose, and we appreciate the fact that he is willing to take this matter up with the Treasury, but, in closing, we must emphasise again this is exactly why we were eager to speak directly to the Chief Secretary himself, which is an invitation that he has rejected. Thank you.

Alun Davies (Labour, Blaenau Gwent)

I'm grateful to the Chair for his introduction. I should also say we've been grateful for his leadership as well throughout this Senedd, as, since he took over as Chair, he's led the committee in a way that has, I think, demonstrated the power of the committee system and also the power of his own example as Chair. We're very grateful to him for that, and grateful also to the committee secretariat and research staff for their hard work. I hope they know that it's greatly appreciated.

The Chair, in his introduction, made our points with great clarity, and I think the committee report is clear in its conclusions, and many of the points made in that report and the recommendations agreed by the committee require little further explanation. Like other members of the committee, I'm grateful to the Minister and the Welsh Government for their generous approach to the report and in accepting some of our key recommendations.

The committee congratulates the Welsh Government on the implementation of the new taxes devolved to this place. All the new tax structures appear to have bedded down relatively easily and with little or no disruption. I have seen little or no evidence of difficulties experienced either by our institutions or by taxpayers as a consequence of the changes to the taxation system, and this is important, because this demonstrates that we can change fundamentally the tax structures of the United Kingdom and do so without the disruption that many people fear and that certainly some politicians seek to stoke and to create those fears. It's been done relatively straightforwardly and relatively easily, and done for the first time in that way, and I think that's a fundamentally important point to make.

There is one aspect that hasn't worked, of course, and that is the process that was described by the Chair in the closing part of his remarks over new taxation. It hasn't worked because the UK Government has stopped it working, and I think we need to be very clear about that as well. Some of us, Deputy Presiding Officer, are long enough in the tooth to remember the dreadful days of the legislative consent Orders and motions that we spent time discussing in the 2007 Senedd. I fear that we are returning to those days having learned none of the lessons of those days, and certainly it provides those of a particular disposition with an opportunity to frustrate the will of the people of Wales, the will of the Welsh Government and the will of our Parliament, and I think that is something that we are seeing played out at the moment. But we're planning to participate in this debate.

I also want to turn my attention to the correspondence we received this morning from the Chief Secretary to the Treasury. It is in many ways, Deputy Presiding Officer, an extraordinary letter. It is at different times arrogant, superficial, pompous, condescending, disdainful, scornful, bombastic—I could carry on, but I won't test everybody's patience by doing so. But it is, more than anything, an entirely inadequate response to the issues raised by the committee, and in many ways, it underlines the points that were made earlier today by the three finance Ministers of Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. It makes the case more powerfully than I ever could for a fundamental reworking of the financial framework of the United Kingdom. Deputy Presiding Officer, listen to the language that is used by the financial Secretary in this letter. In paragraph 10, 'Financial flexibility':

'I have provided significant additional flexibility this year'

he says—'I have provided'. And it goes on in paragraph 11:

'I provided an unprecedented upfront funding guarantee'.

And he carries on:

'I also agreed the Welsh Government could carry forwards...Barnett-based funding.'

This demonstrates clearly that there is no conversation, no negotiation, no democracy, and little accountability in our financial frameworks and financial structures in the United Kingdom. This has to be unacceptable to anyone who believes in the future of the United Kingdom and the future of democracy and accountability in the United Kingdom. The financial structures of the UK and the relationships between the Governments on these islands cannot be determined by the whim of a single Minister, whoever that Minister believes he might be. In concluding, Deputy Presiding Officer, I hope—I noticed that face—that we will be able—I will be quick—to see this report not as a finishing point, but as a starting point for the financial structures of the United Kingdom and democratic reform and renewal.

In closing, I wish you, Deputy Presiding Officer, a very long and happy retirement. I will miss testing your patience if I am re-elected to the next Senedd.

Ann Jones (Labour, Vale of Clwyd)

Thank you very much. Can I say I probably would miss challenging you to stick to time? But there we go; one I think I failed on. Mark Isherwood.

Mark Isherwood (Conservative, North Wales)

Diolch. As our report states, the Wales Act 2014 provides the legislative framework to devolve tax and borrowing powers to the National Assembly for Wales, as it then was—now Senedd Cymru or Welsh Parliament—and the Welsh Government. These powers provided the Welsh Government with further tools to vary the level of tax and spending in Wales. In December 2016, the Welsh Government and UK Government agreed a new fiscal framework, which in particular supported the devolution of stamp duty land tax, now land transaction tax, landfill tax, now landfill disposals tax, and the creation of Welsh rates of income tax. Our report states that

'evidence to the inquiry, alongside the real life issues experienced with the funding arrangements throughout the COVID-19 pandemic has shown that the funding mechanisms need to be urgently reviewed by the Welsh Government and the UK Government.'

Although the Welsh Government's budget of approximately £18 billion a year is primarily funded through the block grant received from the UK Treasury, approximately 20 per cent is now funded from devolved tax revenue, and it is essential that this increases the accountability of the Welsh Government to the people of Wales. As our report states,

'The Barnett formula is used to calculate changes to the block grant based on increases or decreases in UK Government spending in areas where public service provision in Wales has been devolved'

and has

'long been subject to calls for reform'.

It was modified as part of the Welsh fiscal framework agreement to include a needs-based factor, providing the Welsh Government with at least £115 per person for every £100 per person of equivalent funding in England, explicitly recognising the higher-level spending need in Wales. However, the 2020 UK spending review confirmed the Welsh Government will receive £123 per person in 2021-22 for every £100 per person in England, equating to around £1 billion more than the Welsh Government agreed was fair to Wales relative to England. Our report states that

'It was proposed that a periodic review of relative need in Wales would keep the needs-based factor up-to-date to ensure that Wales receives appropriate funding. The potential for reviewing the Barnett formula is an area the Committee intends to consider further with the Secretary of State.'

However, as the Secretary of State for Wales said when we questioned him on this two weeks ago,

'we are currently working to a system that was agreed by Welsh Government, and it's therefore, in our view, unnecessary to revisit. What we're able to do with some of the funds and initiatives that we've been talking about this morning is basically have a lot more on top of what Barnett provides, and, again, I see that as a really positive step forward for Wales'

and

'Treasury's made the Barnett consequences available in advance, recognising that not to do that would just put delays in the system and therefore prevent Welsh Government's ability to get money to places that need it urgently.'

In its response to our report, as we've heard, the Welsh Government accepted all but one of its 12 recommendations relating to fiscal devolution and Welsh taxes. However, it only accepted in principle the committee's recommendation regarding the accepted recommendation by the UK Parliament's Public Accounts Committee that the lack of transparency over funding decisions is addressed, stating that although it would fully support increased transparency over funding decisions, it is for HM Treasury to ensure it meets any commitments made to the UK Parliament's Public Accounts Committee.

After I asked the Secretary of State in committee two weeks ago what engagement he had had with the Welsh Government or Treasury regarding those Welsh Government claims that the mechanism for devolving competence to introduce new Welsh taxes is not fit for purpose, he said he'd be very happy to take that up with the Treasury. As the Chief Secretary to the Treasury states in his response to the committee's report, the UK spending framework is

'designed to enable the UK Government to manage spending on a financial year basis, including the impact of Welsh Government spending.'

He said he's provided

'significant additional flexibility this year recognising the challenges faced'

and he's

'agreed the Welsh Government could carry forwards into 2021-22 any Barnett-based funding above the guaranteed £5.2 billion as well as any repayments of business rates relief—all on top of the Wales Reserve arrangements.'

As he also states, however, that it's imperative that the Welsh Government uses the extra resource it receives from the needs-based formula effectively, and

'the block grant adjustment arrangements help to increase the Welsh Government’s autonomy and accountability, while being shielded from UK-wide impacts',

a key and critical point. Thank you.

Rhun ap Iorwerth (Plaid Cymru, Ynys Môn)

There's a great deal to be welcomed in the Finance Committee's report. I would like to put on record that I'm not a member of the committee, and haven't been for some time, but I'd like to thank Llyr Gruffydd for his work in chairing the committee, and the team supporting him. I have missed being a member of that committee.

Given that the 2014 Act has been operational now for five years, and we are looking forward to a rebuilding period post COVID, I think this is a good time to review where we stand when it comes to fiscal powers held by Government. On paper, at least, this has been a very significant period in terms of the development of powers and the fiscal powers of the Welsh Government. It was a very significant step forward that we as a Senedd are responsible not only for spending money in Wales, but also for generating that money, and that's the situation we want to be in, of course.

I do recall that, when the Welsh rates of income tax were first discussed in the Senedd, I and others said that we looked forward to seeing how the Welsh Government would use its powers for taxation, and I think it's fair to say that developments have been limited. To be fair, recent attempts to introduce a vacant land tax have been made more difficult through the unwillingness of the UK Government to engage on the introduction of such a tax.

But if you look at something like council tax, then in reality very little has been done to tackle the unfairness that we know exists with council tax, and this report refers to that. Yes, the Government has taken certain steps to mitigate the impact of council tax on the poorest in society, but very little has been done to review and reform the tax itself. The Minister said last week that any reforms would take a full parliamentary term—and that’s quite true; it’s a huge task—but you have more chance of reaching the end of your journey if you make a start. Yes, there has been some research work, there’s been some mapping done, but the handbrake is still tightly applied. I would remind the Senedd once again of the evidence that exists from the IFS, for example, on problems with council tax—the poorest 10 per cent in society pay some 8 per cent of their income in council tax and the richest 40 per cent pay just 2 per cent. We must tackle this issue as a matter of urgency.

Moving on now, the pandemic has once again highlighted how inappropriate the current fiscal arrangements are. Plaid Cymru and I agree with the committee’s findings that we need to increase borrowing powers and that it would be positive to see greater flexibility introduced in terms of the Government’s opportunity to draw funding down from reserves, for example. I do think that this lack of flexibility, as has been noted on numerous occasions, has been a problem during this exceptional past 12 months and has prevented the Government from taking actions that I know that Welsh Government would have wanted to have done. But also, on the other hand, it’s important to note that even given the limited powers that we have, Ministers at times have failed to use those powers. What we need, I think, more than ever, is a Government that is willing to push the boundaries of the current fiscal arrangements. I see very little evidence that this Labour Government truly wants to push those boundaries.

In looking at recommendation 10 in the report, that places an emphasis on an issue that we’ve been aware of for some time, which has become more prominent recently, namely the need for more multi-year funding settlements. I’m sure we could all agree on the need for clarity on the timing of the UK Government’s main fiscal events. Yes, COVID has thrown a spanner in the works in that regard, but in moving forward this does need to be a priority in order to improve the current situation.

As the report points out, public engagement on fiscal issues is also very important and recent work done to increase awareness of the fact that the Welsh Government does now have the power to vary rates of taxation must continue into the next Senedd, as recommendations 1 and 2 note. To conclude, Deputy Llywydd, in the next Senedd, I think there’s a great deal of work that needs to be done in order to improve the fiscal capacity of the Welsh Government, and as we come out of this pandemic, the next Government will need to be willing to push the boundaries of the current fiscal arrangements and be willing to use the powers where appropriate.

Rhianon Passmore (Labour, Islwyn)

It's been a privilege to sit as a member of the Finance Committee of Senedd Cymru/Welsh Parliament, and this is especially so when it comes to the piece of work of this committee looking at the Wales Act 2014, which within it saw the biggest changes to the Welsh devolution settlement in over 800 years. I do wish to thank the Chair for his hard work and to my fellow committee colleagues for working together assiduously, despite ideological and political differences, and I do take my proverbial hat off to the Chair in this regard.

It was reassuring to hear evidence that the administration of devolved taxes is working well, including that of the Welsh Revenue Authority, who have played a vital role in the successful implementation of Welsh taxes. However, as has been stated, there are issues that this report seeks to highlight—matters of great importance to Wales. I would like to focus my remarks today to conclusion 5 of the report, namely:

'As well as the need for transparency in funding decisions made bythe UK Government, the Committee believes that there needs to be an independent process for challenging these decisions.'

I note, in reference paragraph 276 of the report it states,

'The Committee is concerned about the mechanism used by the UK Government to make funding decisions and the Welsh Government’s means of challenging such decisions. There needs to be transparency of funding decisions made by the UK Government, and the Committee believes that there needs to be an independent process for challenging these decisions - the current route of challenging decisions via the Joint Ministerial Committee is not satisfactory as it is not an independent adjudication.'

As Welsh devolution matures, 21 years into existence, the need for the UK Government to show greater respect and understanding of the powers of the Senedd Cymru Welsh Parliament are all too evident. And briefly, if I may, the UK Secretary of State for Wales—and I do emphasise 'for'—was indeed an affable chap, but comprehensively failed to answer the questions put. Though, in fairness, the chief officer of the Treasury failed to materialise for this committee and further failed to deliver any transparency to our scrutiny from Wales via post, it seems. And at a critical time of EU transition and the UK reclaiming of EU structural funds, this, in my view, is fundamentally an insult to this place, and it strengthens the virement of the former fiscal autonomy of Wales back to Whitehall. This is exemplified—and contrary to the Secretary of State's words—with Caerphilly County Borough Council, formerly objective 1, 2, 3 and 4, not being included in the UK's latest funding rounds. So, it will be a matter that no doubt will feature in the coming election and in the sixth Senedd Cymru, when it is elected—a matter of great importance to Wales.

Ann Jones (Labour, Vale of Clwyd)

Thank you. Can I now call on the Minister for Finance and Trefnydd, Rebecca Evans?

Rebecca Evans (Labour, Gower)

Thank you. I welcome the opportunity to support the motion before us. The introduction of Welsh taxes, the extension in borrowing powers, and the implementation of the fiscal framework have been significant developments for this Senedd term. The Finance Committee's report is a timely reflection of what has been achieved to date, and, more importantly, of what remains to be done. The report highlights a range of key and, in many cases, longer term issues. I am pleased to accept 11 of the 12 recommendations and to accept in principle recommendation 11, where delivery is the responsibility of HM Treasury.

Recommendations 1 to 3 address the challenging issue of raising awareness of Welsh taxes among citizens and organisations. While the 14 per cent increase in awareness of Welsh rates of income tax is encouraging, I agree that the Welsh Government should continue to progress this work, engaging, where appropriate, with HMRC and the Senedd.

As reflected in recommendation 4, there are important interrelationships between taxation and other policies, and one of the most critical is the way in which we strengthen the Welsh tax base. A summary of the Welsh Government's recent work in this area is summarised in my latest Welsh tax policy report, published earlier this month. However, this will remain an important consideration for the future.

I am pleased the committee agrees, in recommendation 5, that the Welsh Government should have the legislative powers to act quickly and where necessary to respond to tax policy changes. This flexibility should prevent the loss of tax revenues and distortions of economic behaviour.

My written response to recommendation 6 provides an update on the work to explore the feasibility of replacing council tax and non-domestic rates with a local land value tax. Further detail is given in my report, 'Reforming Local Government Finance in Wales: Summary of Findings', which I published at the end of February.

I was pleased to set out, in my written response, the Welsh Government's view on devolving capital gains tax to Wales, as requested under recommendation 7. Concerns about unintended consequences, practical challenges, and the possible impact on Welsh revenues, together with our experience to date of the process of devolving new taxes, means that this is not a tax that we propose to seek to have devolved at this particular time.

In response to recommendation 8, we have been working with the UK Government and others on the design of a longitudinal income data set that would enable the tracking of the impacts of Welsh rates of income tax. We expect HMRC to take this forward in the next six months. I have provided a written response to recommendation 9 asking how we review HMRC's work to minimise coding errors. While I've been pleased to have seen the reduction in errors over the past year and a half, this will remain an important issue to monitor. Recommendations 10 and 11 reflect the important role and responsibilities of the UK Government in providing the Welsh Government with clarity and certainty about funding. We are continuing to make the case to the UK Government for multi-year spending reviews and for more certainty and notice about the timing of UK fiscal events, as set out in recommendation 10. I very much agree with the committee's recommendation 11 that there should be greater transparency over funding decisions. However, it is the responsibility of HM Treasury to meet its commitments to the Public Accounts Committee. In response to recommendation 12, I accept that the Welsh Government should publish its calculations about consequentials received from UK Government spending announcements. Although, as highlighted in my written response, lack of clarity from the UK Government can often make it difficult to estimate the impact outside of fiscal events.

I also welcome the five conclusions reached by the committee in its report. I endorse its commendation of the Welsh Revenue Authority, which has played such an important part in the process of introducing Welsh taxes, in particular the success of its technological investment. I am pleased to note the committee's consideration that the Welsh Government's tax strategy has ensured, on the whole, that Welsh taxes are fair to the businesses and individuals who pay them, and this is a key principle for Welsh taxes. I'm grateful for the committee's support for increasing capital borrowing limits, for greater flexibility in using the Wales reserve and for greater transparency in funding decisions made by the UK Government, and these are all areas that we've been pursuing with the UK Government.

I would also like to update the committee that I have yet to receive a response to my letter to the UK Government with regard to the establishment of free ports in Wales, which I sent on 4 February. The letter expressed the Welsh Government's willingness to engage constructively with the UK Government and set out the conditions that would need to be met. These include ensuring our commitments to fair work and that protection of the environment would be upheld and assurance that any free port in Wales would receive the same funding levels as will be provided in England, and I'm disappointed that I've yet to receive a response.

So, in closing, Llywydd, I am very grateful to the Finance Committee for its report and for the thorough and constructive way it has undertaken its role in scrutinising the implementation of the Wales Act 2014 powers over the past five years. Diolch yn fawr.

Ann Jones (Labour, Vale of Clwyd)

Thank you. No Members have indicated that they wish to make an intervention, and therefore, I call on Llyr Gruffydd to reply to the debate.