Plenary

Item 2 today is questions to the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care. The first question will be asked by Peter Fox.

We believe these proposals will ensure every patient receives individualised advice on prevention, increase capacity to provide treatment to those with disease, establish pathways that enable people with elevated levels of oral disease to receive treatment, improve quality and ensure there is always capacity for new patients.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. I think the latest proposed changes to NHS dentistry in Wales have the potential to be damaging to patient well-being. Under these proposed changes, patients can be moved between dental surgeries to receive their treatment, rather than having one constant place of dentistry. This means that, say, a patient in Chepstow may be asked to go for an appointment first thing in the morning as far away as Brynmawr, which could be incredibly difficult for many elderly and vulnerable people, especially those in rural constituencies such as mine, where public transport is unreliable or infrequent.

I was especially concerned to see that the consultation has not been widely publicised, with many of my constituents only finding out about it when they visited their dentist. As a result, I've had several people, especially elderly people, contact me. The consultation has now closed, but what assessment has the Welsh Government made of that particular proposal on those most vulnerable people, especially in rural communities?

I don't accept the premise of the Member's question. I don't believe that that will be the consequence of the reforms in the contract that is being consulted upon. He is right to say that the relationship between you and your dental practice is important for people, in particular with chronic conditions, like tooth decay and with gum disease. Under the current system, as the Member may know, once a course of treatment has been provided, there is no requirement, in fact, for that practice to continue to see you again for a check-up or further treatment. But I will give the Member the comfort that the only people who I think might see a different dentist are those who are entirely healthy, and this is no different to any other part of the NHS.

On his point about distance to travel, he will know that, when registering to access the dental access portal, patients are able to say how far they're willing or able to travel, and that will obviously be taken fully into account.

I'm surprised to hear him say that he thought the consultation was not widely promoted. I think it's one of the largest consultation responses to any Welsh Government consultation, with over 6,000 responses. And I'm sure many of his constituents would have participated in that; I very much hope so. It suggests to me that people right across Wales have engaged with the consultation. It's probably premature to engage in the detail of our response to that, but I will be making a further statement after the recess in relation to the consultation responses and next steps, so I hope you'll find that helpful.

The Welsh Government is committed to improving access to GP services across Wales through additional capacity funding and our review of the access standards. The ‘Train. Work. Live.’ scheme continues to support and incentivise GP recruitment for areas, including north Wales.

Thank you for your response, Cabinet Secretary. The fact that more than 100 GP surgeries have shut across Wales since 2012 is one that should deeply concern every Member here. It has a terrible impact on the health and well-being of our constituents. And this is no different in north-east Wales. Residents in Gwersyllt recently told me that they have a lack of adequate GP services, making them less healthy, and they recognise that they're putting pressure on emergency services and hospitals, especially at the Maelor in Wrexham.

You will be aware, Cabinet Secretary, that a recent comprehensive review by University of Southampton found that patients have a strong preference for direct consultations with a GP, with an emphasis on in-person appointments. So, given this patient preference and the outsized impact that a good GP service has on reducing pressures at the hospital front door, how are you ensuring that north-east Wales is prioritised when it comes to that training and recruiting of GPs in the years and decades ahead?

Well, the number of GPs in Wales is broadly stable, actually, over both the short term and the long term, and we've seen, actually, an increase in clinical staff, who are a key part of the wider practice team, which GPs tell us, and patients tell us, are an important part of making sure that patients have the access that they need to GP services.

The primary care model for Wales, as he will know, is key to ensuring the care that patients need and it emphasises that the GP is not the only first point of contact, and, obviously, patients are increasingly becoming aware of that. He's right to say that providing access to GP services is crucial in being able to make sure that patients have the care they need, and also, in the way that he was saying in his question, that other parts of the NHS don't pick up, if you like, that additional pressure. And I accept the point that he makes in relation to that in his question.

As part of the 2024-25 contract agreement—so, just for the year gone—we committed to review the access standards that have been in place for a number of years to strengthen compliance with what we would probably all describe as 'the 8 a.m. bottleneck'. We have seen progress in relation to that, but I've tasked health boards to verify the evidence that practices provide to them of compliance with those standards and to make sure that those standards are being maintained.

I think one of the challenges has been that, as pressures have increased on GPs, as demand has increased, in particular over recent years, that ability to provide continuity of care, in particular to those patients who may be managing more than one chronic condition, or may be particularly frail—it has not been possible to continue with that, and that creates additional pressures for those practices, and, importantly, for those patients as well.

So, as of April this year, we’re working with GP practices on what we call a quality improvement approach, where practices can identify that cohort of patients who can most benefit from continuity of care, and provide that increasingly to them, which should help stabilise part of that pressure. I would like to think that, over time, that can once again become a routine expectation for more and more of us, though he will appreciate that that will take some time.

Several GP surgeries in my constituency of Wrexham now use a triage system that requires a form to be completed online. Of course, many constituents are still digitally excluded, with no access to the required technology. What action is the Welsh Government taking to ensure GPs, but also the health board, support these patients?

Well, the Member will know that I mentioned the access standards in my earlier answer, and they require GP practices to provide a number of different ways of engaging with the practice. So, those are already part of the standards, and that’s what I want health boards to monitor compliance with in a more proactive way than we have required them to do in the past.

The Member is absolutely right to say that not everyone feels comfortable or is able to engage only with digital channels. What I would say, though, is the more people we can get to engage through digital channels, that naturally frees up capacity elsewhere to support those patients who won’t want to do that, or won’t be able to do that. So, as we see the uptake of the NHS app, for example, one of the things patients say to me is, 'Well, I’m not sure I’ll be that familiar with how to use it.' It’s actually pretty straightforward. However, for every one person we can get to use the app, that’s another element of capacity in the system to support those patients that the Member rightly says we need to make sure are served in the same way.

Questions now from the party spokespeople. The Welsh Conservative spokesperson first of all—James Evans.

Diolch, Deputy Presiding Officer. Cabinet Secretary, your own waiting list reduction ambitions depend on ensuring there is sufficient anaesthetist capacity, given that most operations simply cannot proceed without them present. The Royal College of Anaesthetists's latest workforce report shows that Wales is 120 anaesthetists short of what is needed. That’s a 17 per cent shortfall. It is estimated that this shortfall alone could be preventing around 90,000 operations and procedures each year in Wales from taking place. So, can you set out what assessments you have made of the impact of this workforce shortage on the Welsh NHS’s ability to reduce waiting lists, and what concrete steps are you taking to address this gap, so that more Welsh patients can get their operations done?

This is a matter that I have discussed with the royal college, in relation to pressures on the workforce. I agree with the Member that making sure that we have the workforce in place, in the right roles, with the right skill set, is obviously important in our ability to deliver on the ambitious plans that we have to continue the progressive reduction that we’ve seen in waiting times for patients right across Wales.

I am confident that the plans that we have for the year ahead, which will get us to a place where there are no patients waiting for two years, or we’re back on the eight-week diagnostic target, and that we take 200 patients off our waiting lists—that those plans are deliverable, with the configuration of workforce that we have in place at the moment. He is, however, right to say that that is something that we need to make sure remains under review. We have an arrangement, as he knows, to commission education and training places right across the NHS workforce through Health Education and Improvement Wales, and we will work with them to make sure that the needs of the NHS are met.

Cabinet Secretary, one of things as well that is stopping operations, because nearly 90,000 surgical procedures were postponed last year, with many patients arriving for surgery, who were in a poor state of health to begin with, due to issues like smoking, undiagnosed diabetes, frailty, people being overweight, which does lead to cancellations, complications and longer stays in hospital—. We know that early screening and prehabilitation turn waiting lists and drive them down, because people aren’t waiting as long to get seen.

I know the Welsh Government has made some progress in implementation. But I’m just wondering what further work you’re doing on this area, around prehabilitation, to make sure that people are fit for operations, because, as I said, we are seeing far too many people presenting who are not fit to be operated on, and when they are operated on, they’re sat in hospitals for far, far too long, which is bedblocking, and actually stopping the day cases, which we need to see, to make sure we can get through that waiting list quicker. So, I'd just like to know what further work you're doing in this area.

The Member will remember, a few weeks ago, when I made the announcement in relation to our ambitions over the course of the next year, that part of that was a new approach towards, firstly, the keeping of appointments—700,000 appointments missed for out-patients last year—and also making sure that the system is more proactive about identifying those patients who are not yet ready for surgery, and intervenes more quickly to put them on a pathway to get them fit for surgery. It is in nobody's interests for patients to be in the situation that the Member described in his question. It doesn't work for the patient, it doesn't work for the NHS, it doesn't work for other patients who might be readier for that surgery. What we also know, from the patient's point of view, is that patients who go forward to surgery in that context take longer to recover, spend more time in hospital, and the outcomes are less good. So, it's a really important priority for us to get right.

What he will know from the announcement I made a number of weeks ago is that the system will identify patients who are not yet ready for surgery and then put them on that pathway to improve their health, whatever that may be, and it can be a range of things. He will also know that we now have in place a single point of contact arrangement for patients waiting for surgery. So, they have somebody they can speak to about how they can get ready, how they can be fit, how the additional needs that they may have can be met, before they are ready for that intervention, that treatment.

Thank you. I do agree it doesn't work for patients, Cabinet Secretary, as you said, because too many people are waiting too long. But I hope you agree with me, Cabinet Secretary—. My Welsh Conservative colleagues and I all agree with an NHS that is free at point of delivery, which supports patients right the way across the country, no matter what their circumstances and how they access the system. I have been alarmed by Reform UK's version of moving our NHS to a French-based insurance system, actually asking people, the most vulnerable people in our society, to pay for their healthcare, or if they've got pre-existing conditions, not getting health insurance at all, allowing those people to suffer and die on waiting lists just because it doesn't fit a certain political narrative of Reform. So, I hope you'll agree with me, Cabinet Secretary, that there are no plans—. I know my party have no plans to move to this model, and I'd hope that the Welsh Government also has no plans to move to this model, because I do not want to see our NHS being sold on the stock market just to further Nigel Farage's own political career.

Well, the Welsh Labour Government believes in a public NHS, free at the point of need, available to provide care when it's needed, not whether people can afford to pay for it. That has been our continuing position; it will remain our position. Actually, I think what we see Reform proposing is in fact the end of the NHS. I don't believe for a second that Nigel Farage supports anything that is French based. In fact, what we'll have is a situation where premiums are unaffordable, conditions are uninsured, the end of free prescriptions, the end of the NHS, where health is based on wealth—a return to the 1930s. What this Government wants to see is to look forward to the 2030s, with an NHS fit for the future, providing the care that we all need.

Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Mabon ap Gwynfor.

Thank you very much, Dirprwy Lywydd. Some weeks ago, you said in response to a question from my colleague Peredur Owen Griffiths that there are, and I quote,

'times when the NHS faces exceptional pressure,'

and during these times,

'local escalation measures are enacted.'

But in the first quarter of 2025, every emergency department in Wales reported patients receiving care in unsafe and inappropriate places, with almost half waiting for an internal bed, according to the Royal College of Emergency Medicine. The anecdotal evidence, as is clear in the report 'Ending corridor care in Wales', from the Royal College of Nursing Wales, states the same thing.

Despite all this, the Welsh Government doesn't gather or publish official figures on care in inappropriate places. So, what assurance do you have as Cabinet Secretary that corridor care is the exception rather than a daily practice? How do you know that it's an exception when no data is gathered? And will you listen to the RCN and the British Medical Association, who are calling on the Welsh Government to start recording and reporting openly on corridor care in Wales?

Well, elements of this information is already being gathered. One of the challenges we've discussed with the RCN and the BMA—and I'm meeting with them very soon again—is the definition of what is being discussed. But it's clear to me that there's too much of this happening. It doesn't happen—. It doesn't—. The Member is right to say that this should be happening as an exception. But it is clearly happening more often than that, and that is not acceptable. What we have seen over the past few months is progress being made in terms of the ability to transfer patients from ambulances to emergency treatment rooms more swiftly than has happened in the past, which suggests to me that there is progress being made in the system, slowly. But it isn't swift enough. I don't want to see this happening at all, but the pressure on our health service at the moment does mean that it is happening more often than it should be. I will be meeting with the RCN and the BMA in the coming weeks to discuss the deliberate steps that we can take in that regard.

Thank you for that response. You will know, Cabinet Secretary, that the RCN and the BMA have set up a petition, and in it they insist that the Welsh Government, and I quote again, make receiving care in a chair for more than 24 hours a 'never event'. The Welsh Government itself says that every never event

'has the potential to cause serious patient harm or death'

but that does not have to have happened for it to be categorised as such, you say.

Does the Cabinet Secretary therefore believe that keeping a patient in a chair for 24 hours is not a serious incident that can cause real harm? If never events, according to the Welsh Government, require a full inquiry and measures to be taken immediately and lessons to be shared, why isn't the same done in terms of care in a chair? Doesn't it make sense that having this as a never event ensures the safety of patients and forces the service to learn from mistakes in order to prevent the same mistakes from happening again in future?

This question has a similar response. The definition of a 'never event' is more complex than the example that the Member gives. But that is not tantamount to saying that it is acceptable that people receive treatment in that kind of circumstance. It's not acceptable. So, the two definitions are working towards different purposes. But I want to be clear with the Member: I'm not for a second saying that we don't need to tackle this; of course we do need to do this. There is a requirement for every health board to do this. We are seeing successes and progress in the system, as I say, but it's not swift enough.

Thank you for that response. The six goals for timely and emergency care of the Welsh Government describe the urgent and long-term priorities for emergency care as, and I quote, ensuring that patients receive the:

'Right care, right place, first time'.

It's clear to me that you've lost the confidence of the RCN and the BMA in terms of corridor care. To regain that confidence, would you agree to chair meetings on the six goals for emergency care personally, until sufficient progress has been made to put an end to corridor care in Wales?

Finally, Dirprwy Lywydd, it's possible to amend the list of never events, and that has happened before. As you've mentioned, it depends on the definition, and you can make that definition. To ensure that lessons are learned when things do go wrong, and in order to reduce the risk when it happens again, would the Welsh Government agree to add 'patient in a chair for 24 hours' to the list of never events?

I've responded to that question already. I don't feel that any level of the health service feels that I don't take enough of a personal interest in these matters. I had a meeting yesterday that dealt with preparations for winter pressures, but also the pressures in emergency rooms and on the ambulance service. I have another meeting next week on the same topic. So, I'm certain that the system understands how much of a priority this is for the Government, and for every health board too. We are seeing progress, as I said, but we need to see that more swiftly than at present.

Young carers are a priority. While we must do all that we can to ensure their care of family members is recognised and valued, we must also ensure that this is not to the detriment of their education or any other aspect of their lives.

I've seen a young carer in my family who does a fantastic job. Last week, I attended a panel event in the Pierhead organised by the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, and young carers were present in the audience. Some of the audience members spoke of the challenges they face as young carers and how the support and respite they receive is crucial to their own health and well-being. There's the Sparrows ALN Group in Caerphilly, which I've mentioned many times, Valleys Daffodils in Caerphilly as well—absolutely instrumental to young carers, as well as the parents of disabled children. There's a patchwork of formal and informal support networks across Wales that exist to support young carers like that, and there are many others, and local authorities have both an important role in fostering and encouraging them, but also identifying where they are. So, what more can we do to ensure local authorities contact individual young carers directly to make them aware of these support networks, whether they're private, public or voluntary, and make sure that they know that they're available to them in their locality?

Can I thank Hefin for that supplementary question, which is really important? Because any of us that have had any contact with unpaid carers, whether they are young carers or adult unpaid carers, will know that there are too many that are struggling to receive the support that they need. We know that there is a statutory obligation for local authorities to undertake carers' assessments, and that is not happening in the most consistent way right the way across the country. And we've identified that through a piece of research that we commissioned towards the end of last year, actually, through the Association of Directors of Social Services Cymru, which was a kind of rapid review of what support was available for unpaid carers. And as a direct result of some of the recommendations that came out of that review, I've now established a work stream under my ministerial advisory group for unpaid carers, which is looking very specifically at that and how we can improve both the consistency and the provision for unpaid carers, because there is a lot of support out there already. You've already identified some of the things that we've got out there, I should say, both formal and informal.

I've talked in this Chamber many times about the direct support that Welsh Government is putting in over and above what are the statutory requirements of local authorities—so, the short breaks scheme, the carers support scheme. We put on a young carers festival every year, we've got the young carers ID scheme for young people, helping them at school, and we did run a very specific social media campaign that was aimed at young carers in particular, and that finished towards the end of June this year. But it was a social media campaign directed at young carers themselves, because sometimes, and this is not just true of young carers, but this is true of a lot of unpaid carers, they don't identify themselves as being unpaid carers. They don't realise that that's what they are. So, that social media campaign was about helping them to understand that that is what they are, and that there is support out there for them, if they were to look for it. And I'm hoping that the work that we're going to be doing now, this workstream we're going to be doing now, in my ministerial advisory group, will report back to me in the autumn with some very specific recommendations about how we can improve that access and support.

Good afternoon, Minister. I was at the same event with Hefin, and I, James Evans and Sioned Williams were on the panel, hearing about the experiences of young carers. There are around 30,000 young carers here in Wales, and, actually, in the gallery there is a young person here called Cathy, who has a young carer herself, so is looked after by somebody who is young. One of the issues that Cathy was talking to me about is the young carers ID card, and neither she nor her carer were aware of the young persons ID card. So, we see straight away an inconsistency in terms of the roll-out, the awareness, the promotion of the young carers ID cards, which are essential in order to ensure that they access services and other provisions for them. One of the barriers is that we have it rolled out as the responsibility of local authorities. So, I'd like to ask you whether you would consider, and perhaps your group might consider, hearing from young people like Cathy and the person who looks after her, to look at how the access to a young carers ID card could be better. But one of the issues is about bringing it into the Welsh Government, so that, actually, there is no inconsistency and that it's actually fairer. The other issue that was raised was about protected characteristics for our young carers. That is key in order to allow them to get access to the services and not be discriminated against, and to have that extra foot in the door. Diolch yn fawr iawn, Dirprwy Lywydd.

Well, can I thank you, Jane, for that supplementary? And I know how passionate you are about unpaid carers, whether they're young carers or adult unpaid carers, as are many people who have asked me questions on this subject across the Chamber. You're absolutely right: the young carers ID card, if used consistently and effectively and comprehensively, can be life-changing for a young carer, to not have to explain themselves everywhere they go, and just have the ability to show a card or a lanyard—I think they do it in different ways in different authorities; some have an app on their phone and so on. The school will understand and that helps in terms of the school being able to manage their learning experience, how they manage their homework and all sorts of things. It helps them with access to a GP, to pharmacies—you know all these things, Jane.

So, what you're asking is not dissimilar to Hefin's question, which is really about the consistency of approach in ensuring that the support that is out there gets to the people who need it. So, I'm very happy for that to be fed in to the ministerial advisory group workstream on this, because we're looking at all the aspects of support for unpaid carers. There are unpaid carers and unpaid young carers themselves on the ministerial group, so I would anticipate that they would also feed that personal experience in, but I'm happy to hear from anybody who wants to make some direct representation to me. In fact, I was in a school in your constituency talking to young carers, Ysgol Gyfun Cwm Rhymni, just a few months back. And having that 1:1 conversation with a young carer about their personal experiences is really something that I think everybody should do, because that's when it really hits home.

Young carers often face long-term disadvantages affecting their health and social well-being, and it is therefore vital that their health and well-being are assessed and routinely reassessed by either social workers, care workers or occupational therapists in a timely fashion. As you may be aware, Stats Wales data for 2023-24 shows that, of the 2,366 contacts made by or on behalf of young carers to statutory social services across Wales, only 1,677 received advice or assistance in the same time period. In Cardiff, just 28 per cent received support in the same year; in Merthyr, 23 per cent and in Caerphilly, 22 per cent. Minister, I'm sure you'll agree that long waiting times for assessment and support can be distressing. Therefore, do you agree with me that, in order to reduce these, there should be a report on waiting times for young carers from when they're first identified to when their carers' needs assessment has been carried out? And what appropriate time targets for providing needs assessments should also be set out? Thank you.

Can I thank Joel James for those points? And they're very, very important and valid points. Again, it is a consistent theme that we've heard this afternoon, both from Hefin David and from Jane Dodds. It's about making sure that people who need the support, that unpaid carers who need the support, get that support and get that support in a timely fashion. So, I don't disagree with anything that you're saying, Joel. I would reiterate what I've already said. I do have a ministerial advisory workstream, it's looking at all of this, the support available to unpaid carers and how that can be delivered in a more timely and consistent way, and I'm more than happy for your comments and suggestions to be fed into that work as well. Thank you.

I meet regularly with the Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs to discuss a range of issues, including those affecting water across Wales. I’m pleased that Wales maintains excellent drinking water quality, with 99.96 per cent compliance with standards.

Thank you for that reply, Cabinet Secretary. I'm sure that you're aware of the situation in the north of France, where public health officials have taken the extreme step of banning people from drinking tap water because of the dangers to human health. This is not due to some bacterial contamination or a leak of toxic chemicals; it is down to the fact that the groundwater and aquifers are full of forever chemicals. The levels detected in the drinking water are 20 times higher than what is considered safe. France and many other European countries are about to impose a strict 0.1 µg per litre limit. Here in the UK we have no statutory limit at all, just guidance. As investigations by Watershed have also found, sewage slurry spread on farmlands across Wales, as well as England and Scotland, contained higher levels of per-and poly fluoroalkyl substances, which then enters our watercourses. Cabinet Secretary, given the danger these chemicals pose to human health, will you work with the UK Government to ensure that we have strict limits on levels in our water supplies and work towards a ban on PFAS, as we have done with microplastics? Thank you.

I thank Altaf Hussain for that question. He will know that the Drinking Water Inspectorate is the regulator that is responsible for ensuring drinking water quality across Wales and, if standards are breached, then the DWI has legal powers to investigate, take enforcement action, including against water companies, as I'm sure he'll know. We were able to welcome the annual report from the DWI last year. It recognised the consistently excellent quality of drinking water in Wales. We're awaiting their latest annual report in the coming weeks, which will cover the 2024 calendar year. He will probably be aware of some of the recommendations and requirements in that last report in relation to the improvement of infrastructure by water companies, and we expect those measures to be complied with.

I know the Deputy First Minister has met recently with water companies in relation to that. He may have noted that, in that report, the chief inspector for drinking water recommended updating Wales's drinking water regulatory standards, based, as you would expect, on the most recent scientific evidence and international guidance and experience. Welsh Government officials are considering those recommendations carefully at the moment. It's quite a complex area, as I think his question was an illustration, and that will require, in the way that he was suggesting, working with the UK Government on that in a closely co-ordinated way.

Excuse me.

Community hospitals are an essential element of the health care model needed to deliver high-quality, sustainable care across north Wales. Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board recently launched a formal review of services at Penley and Tywyn community hospitals to ensure that these hospitals meet local need.

Well, they have indeed, and I wanted to ask you about that, because whilst we have seen improvement in some places, I'll grant you that, we have, of course, over a longer term, seen a steady decline in the number of community hospital beds in my region of North Wales. Denbigh, recently, was halved, and we've lost community hospitals altogether in Flint, Llangollen, Prestatyn and elsewhere. You mentioned Penley hospital there—that was, of course, closed suddenly on Christmas Eve last year. We've been told it's a temporary closure, but a public consultation has now been launched on its future and it has, understandably, raised a number of concerns locally. So, I was going to ask you to give us an assurance here today that Penley hospital will not be closed permanently, and, hopefully, that you could tell us what action the Welsh Government is therefore taking to reverse this long-term trend, in terms of decline in community hospital bed provision across my region.

I'm grateful to the Member for acknowledging the positive developments in community provision at the start of his question. He will know that, in his region, new technology is being trialled in Dolgellau and Barmouth community hospital, allowing people to access urgent medication out of hours; there's the reopening of the minor injuries unit at Dolgellau and Barmouth again, and the minor injuries unit at Tywyn Hospital. I'm pleased to say that, in June, the health board's Well North Wales programme received national recognition in the Journal of Public Health for its innovative work in co-producing health and well-being services with communities in high-needs areas, and that co-production, I think, is a really important part of how we address some of the pressures that the Member referred to in his question.

I can give him the assurance that I meet regularly with the chair of the health board. I have discussed with him that the board must engage with the community to develop a coherent long-term plan for the future of service provision in Penley and also in Tywyn, and he also shares that view. As he said, the board has agreed to launch a public consultation to support this work, and I know that no decisions have been made in relation to either of these sites, and that the December board will be considering those options.

I have long been a champion of Llandudno hospital. It was a pledge and a promise I made to the late Sir Wyn Roberts, who actually, whilst he was in Parliament, made a lot of the infrastructure that we see there today. But it's something I've also pledged to my constituents, because it just is an amazing hospital. I've pestered, I've gone on street protests, to keep and safeguard this hospital. Now, look at Ysbyty Gwynedd, Glan Clwyd and Wrexham Maelor. When you look at their waiting times for A&E, these are the figures stated, but I can tell you that sometimes it's a lot worse than this: only 56.8 per cent were seen during the four-hour target in Gwynedd, 38 per cent in Wrexham, 38 per cent—nearly—in Glan Clwyd. The progress of patients through the emergency department is being hampered by other delays in the hospitals. I know people waiting two days on a chair sometimes, on corridor care. The pressure could be reduced through transferring some patients to wards in community hospitals, expanding services at minor injuries units, such as Holyhead, Porthmadog and Llandudno. The latter, for example, saw 95 per cent within the four-hour target. Will you look again at the marvellous and integral part these community hospitals play? Will you review their provision? And let's see fewer delays and more action, more patients going through the hospital process by integrating the MIU provision better. Thank you.

The Member will have welcomed the response I gave to Llyr Gruffydd in relation to the reopening of minor injuries units and the developments in community provision across the health board area, which I think shows good progress, but I think, and the health board also thinks, that more needs to be done. I'm particularly struck by her support for Llandudno hospital. I was able to be there only a few weeks ago to see the exciting construction of a new orthopaedic centre there, which we anticipate will open later this year and will make a significant difference in relation to relieving pressure on those people waiting for their hips, their knees and their shoulders to be done. That's going well, and I'm sure she'll welcome that facility when it opens later this year.

I don't disagree at all with Janet Finch-Saunders. I think community hospitals do provide excellent services, if you look at the minor injuries services they provide, and also meeting the needs of an ageing population and many other things as well.

You did mention in your earlier answer that you have regular discussions with Betsi Cadwaladr health board, and you outlined some of the excellent work being done across north Wales community hospitals in your original answer to Llyr Huws Gruffydd. I think it's really important that those discussions do include plans for the health board to extend provision, particularly around north-east Wales. Many people don't wait as long as Janet Finch-Saunders said at the Wrexham Maelor Hospital, but I do think some additional services in the community would take a lot of the pressure off.

I agree with the Member in relation to that point, certainly. What we know is that the way we can make sure people have access to secondary care when they need it is to make sure that they don't have to go to hospital unless they absolutely need to, and having those facilities distributed differently in community settings is an absolutely critical part of that. What I've been encouraged by, in my discussions with the chair of the health board, is the recognition on the part of the board that they need to engage the public fully in how services can be offered differently in that way. There are difficult choices and conversations that are necessarily part of that, but I think that commitment to working with the public, with communities, on how services can be adapted to better provide more resilient services for the public is really encouraging. And as I mentioned in my first answer, there has been some external recognition for the good co-production work that the board is already doing in some of that work.

Our long-term plans for mental health and well-being have been set out in the recently published 10-year strategy and delivery plan. The NHS Wales planning framework for 2025-28 outlines the high-level ambition for our health and care system, including in mental health, and our key expectations in delivery.

While the Welsh Government has extended independent mental health advocates to all in-patients receiving mental health care, a legal loophole means that these services are not classed as regulated services under the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014. As a result, independent mental health advocates are not legally required to report safeguarding concerns, even in cases of abuse, neglect or serious risk. Given that these advocates are often the only trusted contact for vulnerable patients, this lack of a duty undermines safeguarding law, public confidence in advocacy and the safety of those most at risk. There are also concerns about conflicts of interest as services are commissioned by the same bodies they may need to challenge.

What action, if any, will the Welsh Government therefore take to close this loophole by regulating mental health advocacy services, introducing a legal safeguarding duty for independent mental health advocates, and reforming commissioning arrangements to ensure that advocates can act independently and without fear of reprisal, thereby upholding Wales's commitment to rights-based, trauma-informed mental health care?

I'm grateful to the Member for raising that important question. I will commit to discussing that very point with my officials and I will write to the Member and let him know what is currently under way and what more we feel we can do.

Standards for bereavement care, which underpin the national bereavement care pathway for pregnancy and baby loss, have been developed in consultation with parents and healthcare professionals, and they will be published shortly. The national clinical network for maternity and neonatal services will then oversee the implementation of the pathway in NHS Wales.

Thank you for that response.

First of all, I'd like to welcome the announcement by the UK Government that the Employment Rights Bill is going to be amended to give parents the legal right to take time off from work to grieve if they experience pregnancy loss at any stage of the pregnancy, instead of just after 24 weeks of pregnancy, as it is at the moment. So, I think that this is very welcome news. I also welcome the national bereavement care pathway that the Cabinet Secretary mentioned and the national framework for the delivery of bereavement care and its vision for a compassionate Wales where everyone has equitable access to high-quality bereavement care.

However, the pregnancy and baby loss charity Sands says that these pathways do require a dedicated programme of development and implementation to be embedded in all healthcare settings, and this obviously includes providing training, supporting healthcare staff, developing toolkits, evaluation and above all, as the Cabinet Secretary has already said, including the voice of bereaved parents in the ongoing development of the pathways. So, could the Cabinet Secretary explain how the Welsh Government will ensure that the pathways are properly implemented across all health boards, following the funding for the Sands-specific support for the Wales maternity and neonatal network expiring in September?

Sands is a crucial partner to the work that the Welsh Government, through NHS Wales Performance and Improvement and the broader NHS, is doing in this space, and it's with their support that the five pathways are currently being produced in the way that the Member described. Those are being developed at the moment. I know that the networks within NHS performance and improvement are working with stakeholders, again including Sands, on how those can be delivered and rolled out. Sands has, as the Member said, been provided with funding as part of this commission to engage with families, which is absolutely critical in this work, and to provide training for staff to ensure sustainable implementation. The network is working with Sands to monitor progress and assess further support needs to make sure that we ensure that these pathways are successfully delivered, and I know that my colleague Sarah Murphy intends to make a statement shortly in relation to that.

And finally question 8, Russell George.

The court recently upheld the joint commissioning committee's decision in respect of the relocation of the air ambulance bases. We are aware that an application to appeal the court’s decision on 19 June has now been filed, so as this remains active litigation, it's not appropriate for Welsh Ministers to comment specifically at this stage.

Thank you for your answer. Of course, people in mid Wales, as you can imagine, were deeply disappointed by the decision, following that judicial review outcome, to close Welshpool and Caernarfon bases on a permanent basis. As you've said, health Secretary, there is an appeal to ask for permission to challenge that decision. But as part of the original proposal to close these bases, so-called mitigation measures were announced. These included rapid response vehicles to be located in areas around mid Wales, these vehicles having additional equipment on them. In my view, that is completely unsatisfactory mitigation, no substitution for a full air ambulance service, but this is the proposal that was put on the table. So far, there's been no further information about this proposal. The JCC, the body that was supposed to make the decision, were supposed to have delivered plans by the end of September last year. They haven't happened. There have been no costings and no further operation. Cabinet Secretary, if you're not prepared to step in and ensure that these two important bases in Welshpool and Caernarfon are not closed, can you at least provide an update on the proposed rapid response vehicles?

The Member will appreciate, of course, that this is an operational decision for the JCC, not a decision for Ministers to make themselves, and that's for very good reason. I know that the JCC intended to provide a detailed response once it had had the opportunity to look at the judgment fully and review the implications of that. Obviously, in light of the appeal being lodged, I assume that may impact the timing of comments from the JCC in relation to that, and I'm sure that the points that the Member has made in the question will be the sorts of things that the JCC will comment on.

I would just say that although he mentioned the closure of two locations, of course there is a proposal for there to be a base in north Wales. As I understand it, one of the current challenges in the system is that a service isn't capable of being provided at night, for example. So there are a range of potential improvements that the plan would be able to make. I think it is important to see that rounded proposal when we discuss and debate these questions. But I think in terms of being drawn into the detail of that, for the reasons I've given, I think that would be premature and inappropriate for us at this point.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary.

Item 3 is the topical questions. Only one topical question has been selected today, and that will be asked by Andrew R.T. Davies.

The Welsh Government continues to work closely with the company and will support the affected employees. We have a proven partnership approach and support network including the Department for Work and Pensions, Careers Wales and the local authority employability team that provides advice and guidance and retraining packages through ReAct+.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for that response. This is deeply disappointing news. This is obviously part of a wider announcement that Dow have made across their operations across the globe, and 800 jobs are to be lost in Germany as well, but that doesn't soften the blow of the 220 redundancies that have been announced on a plant that—if you enter the town from the eastern side—dominates the landscape and has been part and parcel of the fabric of Barry since the 1930s.

Can you give some assurance today that in the time that these announcements were first made, and to the announcement that was made yesterday, the Welsh Government engagement with the owners of Dow has given you confidence that the viability of the entire plant is secure, and that they are committed to the remaining jobs on the site, and ultimately, the 220 jobs that are going to be lost will receive the full support of retraining and any other support that the Welsh Government normally deploys in these occasions when jobs are lost? Because obviously, these jobs aren't being lost straight away, thankfully; it is going to be a period of two to three years, and so it is a long-term commitment that the Welsh Government needs to make to make sure that each and every one of the 220 affected knows that there is that help and support there.

I’m very grateful for the chance to talk about this in the Chamber this afternoon. Clearly, this news is going to be really worrying for the workforce in Barry and also for their families and the wider community. The Member is absolutely right that the company has been very clear that this has been in response to global economic factors, but that is no comfort at all, of course, if you’re one of the members of the workforce affected.

I can confirm that the Welsh Government, through officials, has been in contact with the company for some time, and we have been working closely with them. I am pleased that the result, following the group consultation, has been that the number of affected staff has decreased. That’s partly down to the creation of a new engineering hub at the Barry site to support future operations, and I think that does give some confidence to the intentions for the future. So, I think that that is something that we can welcome, clearly, in a really difficult situation.

I’m also really pleased that Dow has said that it’s committed to supporting its employees and they’ll work with the consultation team on how they can continue to provide support to those who are seeking onward employment. Measures such as a £5,000 training allowance for all impacted employees or outplacement support to assist with career transitions are very much welcomed. And, of course, the Welsh Government, as always, stands ready to assist in any way we can.

I'm pleased, Cabinet Secretary, to hear that the Government has been working closely with Dow. Clearly, this is a significant blow and I am thinking of those employees and their families at this time. This is something that we are hearing far too often at the moment—hundreds of jobs being lost, and jobs that are very much needed within the local economy. In terms of the discussions you've had, have you started to discuss the use of the site after 2029, to see whether there is hope of looking at alternative options there on the site? Also, looking at the new industrial strategy for Wales, do you think that we need this now? Because we are seeing this as a regular story, and in areas such as Barry, they will want to know that there is hope that there is the possibility that if they do retrain, there will be posts available for them to remain in Wales.

Thank you very much for raising that. Again, this is a really difficult time for all of those workers who are affected. I think the fact that there is time for decisions to be made is really important, and those individual discussions that the business will now be having with employees will be really important as well. I think that we need to make sure that we maintain the skills that have been developed at the site. Certainly, looking towards the industrial strategy and the areas of growth, we need to be ensuring that people who do have skills are able to use those skills in different fields, but then are also able to reskill into other fields if necessary. We do have a really strong track record in terms of working with individuals who are affected by situations such as this with that proven partnership approach including the DWP, Careers Wales and the local authority employability team. We'll be making sure that all of that support is available as normal. As I say, we have been in touch with the company for some time, including a conversation between the First Minister and the UK president.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary.

Item 4 is the 90-second statements. The first statement this afternoon is from Hannah Blythyn.

On 4 July 1952, tragedy struck at the Point of Ayr colliery, as six men were killed during the sinking of the No. 3 shaft. On that fateful day, the ground was soft so compressed air was pumped down the shaft to support the side walls. However, it seeped through the shaft walls and could be seen bubbling up in the dock area at high tide. To counter this, pressure was increased steadily but eventually the airlock on the top of the shaft could no longer cope with the pressure and it blew off. This caused the shaft to flood and the walls collapsed onto the men working below. Five men died underground. The inquest reported death by drowning with no means of escape. Another man died on the surface when the airlock blew off.

The 1952 tragedy was the last serious accident at the colliery and had a significant impact on the surrounding community, many of whom worked at the Point of Ayr. Seventy-three years to the day, last Friday, the community once again came together at the Ffynnongroyw mining memorial, as a new panel was unveiled to commemorate the six men who lost their lives: James Nicholas Thompson, 43, Prestatyn; Samuel Dempster, 37, Prestatyn; Percy Maisey, 33, Ffynnongroyw; Edward James Hill, 31, Deptford; Goronwy Jones, 30, Holywell; Patrick Joseph McPartland, 28, Dyserth. Retired members from the Point of Ayr were joined by comrades from other collieries, alongside community representatives and relatives, including the daughters of one of the men who died. There is now, rightly, public recognition and a platform for reflection after over seven decades.

We will remember them.

On 29 June, we had the sad news that the world-famous opera singer and tenor Stuart Burrows has left us at the age of 92. It is a privilege today to pay tribute to him and to celebrate his extraordinary career.

Stuart was born in Cilfynydd, near Pontypridd. As a child, he was given a taste of performing when he sang soprano solos, at that time, at the local Methodist chapel. He could even be heard singing out of this bedroom window, as his neighbours would attest. Although he shone on the rugby field as a youngster, attracting an offer from Leeds Rugby League Club, he went on to study at Trinity College Carmarthen, pursuing a career as a teacher before joining Welsh National Opera in 1963.

In 1965, his big break came, when he was chosen by Stravinsky himself to perform the main role in Oedipus Rex in Athens. He then went on to perform on the most prestigious stages worldwide, including La Scala, the Met and the Royal Opera House. By the 1970s and 1980s, he was starring in his own series, Stuart Burrows Sings, for the BBC. Also in the 1980s, he recorded an album, Favourite Songs of Wales, giving Wales and the Welsh language an international platform.

Despite all of the touring, Wales was his lifelong home, and he was president of a number of charitable organisations across south Wales, also raising funds on their behalf. So, thank you to Stuart for his contribution to the arts here in Wales and beyond, and for sharing his glorious voice with the world. Our thoughts are with his family at this difficult time.

Wales's women play in their first ever major international tournament in football at the Euros in Switzerland. It marks a success story in the growth and success of women's football in Wales—still the fastest growing part of the sport. There is still much, much more to do, but women's sport has grown over the last two decades in particular, and will continue to grow—a marked contrast to my time when I was my son's age 40 years ago.

Our greatest football player was born in 1987. At that time, women's sport, beyond tennis, gymnastics, athletics and whatever was covered in the Olympics, was not a main feature on our tv schedules. There simply were not the same role models that our team of today provides.

That makes the journey and the success of Jess Fishlock even more remarkable. She's helped to win five titles in five different countries—more than five titles, actually—and has been recognised as the MVP in the United States, the biggest professional women's football league in the world. A man with similar achievements would be worth millions, and he would have been a household name for many years.

She is much more than a footballer, of course. She's a consistent advocate for equality and tolerance. She is, unsurprisingly, very proud to be Welsh. She is an outstanding ambassador for Wales, well beyond the world of sport.

Jess Fishlock is, apparently, the first woman footballer in Europe to feature in a full-pitch mural, as the Minister acknowledged today. That mural is in Splott park, in my constituency. Jess isn't just from Cardiff. Even more importantly, she's from Llanrumney, a proud community that I am privileged to serve.

I thank Jess and her teammates for their success in reaching the Euros and all that they have done, and will do, to inspire a future generation of women and girls. I hope that this Senedd will choose to recognise their achievement and welcome them here in the future after the Euros have finished.

We wish them all well at this evening's game.

There is excitement on Anglesey this weekend, as 84 athletes and 21 coaches start the 16-hour journey to Orkney to compete in the twentieth Island Games. The games, held every two years, welcome competitors from islands across Europe and beyond, and it's always exciting to see our athletes competing in a wide range of sports, representing Anglesey. Back in Guernsey in 2023, the Anglesey team had their most successful games ever, winning 18 medals, but I know full well that this year's team will be determined to break that record once again and come home with an even bigger haul of medals.

I will take this opportunity to congratulate Martin Jones and Henley Moffatt specifically for being chosen to carry the flag in the opening ceremony on Saturday, as well as carrying the ceremonial water—water from Anglesey that will be symbolically mixed with water from the other islands; it's our version of the Olympic flame.

To each and every one of the competitors, many congratulations on your selection to represent the mother isle in Orkney, and I thank all of the coaches, organisers and volunteers for their work behind the scenes. And now, with the hard yards done on the training ground and all of the equipment having been packed safely, all that's left to say is: best of luck to the Anglesey team. Do your best and enjoy yourselves. Anglesey is proud of each and every one of you.

Thank you, all.

Item 5 is a motion to note the annual report on the Senedd Commission's official languages scheme for 2024-25. And I call on Adam Price to move the motion.

Thank you very much, Dirprwy Lywydd. It gives me great pleasure to present the Senedd Commission's annual report on its official languages scheme for the year 2024-25 to the Senedd today. Members of the Senedd will be aware that the Senedd Commission is required, in accordance with the National Assembly for Wales (Official Languages) Act 2012, to table an annual report on its work to provide bilingual services, including any complaints or cases where the scheme has been contravened. This will be the final time that we consider the Senedd Commission's work in relation to the official languages Act in this Senedd term.

In addition to the usual work, this has been a year of strategic preparations for the seventh Senedd. In last year's debate on our annual report, I referred to the fact that I would be discussing matters involving the Welsh language, with a view to our work in the short term, the medium term and the long term in looking towards the next Senedd, with my fellow Commissioners soon after the debate was held. Indeed, that discussion was of assistance to the official languages team in planning its work, in preparation for the seventh Senedd, and in looking at any steps that could be taken as a result.

One of the most important commitments I gave as part of that preparatory work was to consider the legal framework for official languages in the next Senedd. That commitment continues, and we will be initiating the process by consulting with Members of the Senedd soon after recess, to seek their views, in a more formal and structured manner than usual as we transition from one Senedd to the next, on the official languages scheme itself, on the support available to Members and their staff and also on the legal framework, as I mentioned, that underpins the current arrangements.

There is an opportunity here for us to look back at what has been achieved since the official languages Act was passed and to look towards the future by challenging ourselves to build on our reputation as a truly bilingual organisation, and to play a vital and unique part as the primary democratic body for the people of Wales in the cross-party effort to plan a future for the Welsh language.

I mentioned last year, too, the work of assessing capacity and skills levels across Senedd Commission staff, and I also mentioned the importance of undertaking a survey to this end among Members, their support staff and their groups. We decided to incorporate this work in the induction process for the seventh Senedd, and I'm pleased to confirm that we will be gathering meaningful information about language skills, chosen language, and ways of working in terms of the language, in oral or written communication. This will enable us to target services and resources better, ensuring that Members can work in a way that is tailored to them and is appropriate for them as individuals. And on a more holistic level, it will mean that we can plan intentionally and proactively to achieve the aim of making Welsh a natural operational language in the seventh Senedd and to measure the impact of our interventions.

On that point, I would like to refer briefly to the work that will be done as part of the chairs’ forum review of the effectiveness of the committee system in the sixth Senedd. The use of the Welsh language, be it in terms of the support available, or in proceedings themselves, will be an intrinsic part of the review. The recommendations will help to form the basis for the establishment of the seventh Senedd’s committees. This work will also build on the developments over the past year to encourage committee members, and all of those who contribute to committee work, to feel more confident in using Welsh, including producing a new script for committee Chairs to encourage contributions in Welsh.

On that point, I would like to welcome any comments by fellow Members.

May I thank Adam Price for opening the debate today? I just realised as you were speaking, Adam, that we’re wearing the same thing today, which seems to be a uniform for those participating in this debate tday. So, we’re certainly on brand. [Laughter.]

It's important to start by saying how wonderful it is to hear people using the Welsh language across this Senedd in Cardiff Bay, and how important it is that people do use their Welsh language skills, and it doesn’t matter what level of Welsh they have. That is something to be welcomed, and it is something that constantly develops and grows, and that’s something to be warmly welcomed.

I did an interview yesterday with someone who was doing a piece of work on the Welsh Language and Education (Wales) Bill that we passed either last month or the month before. And one of the questions asked of me was, 'What’s the best thing about the Government and the Senedd’s policy in relation to the Welsh language?' And I said, clearly, that it’s the one thing that is non-political. Every party in the Senedd supports the Welsh language and wants to see its growth, and that crosses party lines. And that is hugely important and is something that we need to secure for the next Senedd too.

There are a few points in the report that I want to highlight, and I do want to thank everyone who was involved in developing this report. I apologise, I only have the English version before me, but there is a section on the skills strategy, where it says that

'We are already laying the groundwork for a comprehensive language audit across the organisation, to be carried out in the Seventh Senedd'.

So, may I ask how that work is progressing, and what does it look like at the moment? And what will it look like in terms of not only the work that’s happening here in this building, but elsewhere too? Of course, we have staff working for the Senedd, and for us as Members, who aren’t always located here in Cardiff Bay, so what support will be available for those people working elsewhere?

And the second point that I wanted to raise was on the strategic preparation referred to in the report, in order to ensure that

'provision remains robust, effective, and appropriate for the future.'

So, in terms of knowing that there will be more Members in the next Senedd, what kind of level do you anticipate in future?

What do you anticipate?

What do you anticipate will in future, and how can we as Members provide support in order to ensure that, although the Senedd will grow, the level of support available, not only to Members, but for our staff, and for Commission staff too, can be maintained in relation to the Welsh language, and that we can develop the language on our estate in the Senedd and, hopefully, across Wales? Thank you.

I thank the Commission and Adam Price for their work on this. I think it’s very important that we do note this annual report. Certainly, there was one action point that we observed as a group following last year’s report, namely that we introduce more amendments and motions through the medium of Welsh, and I would hope that that is reflected in the progress that we've seen. I think that keeping a weather eye on that is important for every group. Clearly, we know that we've done that as a group at the moment—we don't receive that level of detail in the report.

One of the things that I would ask is whether the Commission has considered that we receive more information in terms of which parties are tabling through the medium of Welsh and so on. Because perhaps then we could perhaps work with groups to raise their confidence, and to demonstrate also some of the things that have been trialled in this Senedd, for example with Copilot, and how easy it is to produce material in both languages now, and how we use new technologies. I know that some people are perhaps nervous about tabling or presenting things in Welsh, or bilingually, because they're not confident in their written Welsh, although they contribute in Welsh. Is there a way we can then remind people of the resources that we have access to, including staff, for example Cysill and so on?

It's been interesting for us as a culture and Welsh language committee in terms of the range of resources available now to support people to use the Welsh language, but perhaps we're not all aware of all that's available. Perhaps one of the things to consider as you prepare your recommendations for the seventh Senedd is that that should be part of the training provided too: what are the range of resources available that enable more people to be able to table through the medium of Welsh. Because things like statements of opinion and topical questions are very low in number, and we see a decline in that. So, that's one suggestion maybe—something that we could put forward to facilitate that.

It's concerning, I believe, seeing the level of contributions in terms of committee proceedings, that there has been that decline. I see that it has stabilised over the past two years, but we had this discussion last year, didn't we, in terms of how we're going to remind committee Chairs, how we're going to be encouraging witnesses and so on to be using the Welsh language. I welcome what you said regarding the work that will happen with the Chairs' forum, but perhaps it is something that we could all reflect on for the remainder of this Senedd too.

Clearly, one of the major things that's happened this year, which isn't mentioned in this report, but is something that is, I think, of importance for this Senedd to note, is, of course, the Welsh Language and Education (Wales) Bill, and the fact that that was drafted in Welsh in the first instance, and the first time, we believe, that all of the Stage 3 proceedings took place through the medium of Welsh. There are things to celebrate there as well in terms of how we can normalise the use of the Welsh language beyond our work, including in terms of the legislative process. So, what lessons will the Commission be taking from this Bill, and how will you therefore as a Commission be working with the Government to ensure that it is possible for more Bills to be worked on in Welsh, as the original language or the language of drafting, in future? It would be good to hear that it's not just when it's a Bill about the Welsh language that this happens, but that we normalise that across a range of legislation and all of the topics that we cover—that that is then possible in future.

Thank you very much for the report. I'm very pleased to hear about the audit that you mentioned—an opportunity at last to reassess and to align ourselves more appropriately in terms of changes in policy and direction in relation to the Welsh language. Much of that has happened, of course, since the establishment of the Senedd. But the risk in continuing with our own official languages Act is that we isolate ourselves entirely from the major change that standards have brought about in all other comparative bodies. It's almost as though we're too shy in the Senedd to commit entirely to work proactively and confidently in promoting the Welsh language. And, of course, there are some parliamentary authorities, such as the standards commissioner and the remuneration board, that operate without any legal duties placed upon them in relation to the Welsh language.

I sit on a board chaired by your fellow commissioner, Joyce Watson, on the creation of a family-friendly and inclusive Senedd as we look forward to the seventh Senedd. The intention is to publish a report by the end of this year. I think that the remit and the way that that work is to be undertaken does provide quite a good model for your own review, if I could be so bold as to make that suggestion. So, I would urge the Commission to act urgently to put the appropriate arrangements in place for this review, with a clear timetable and remit set out, so that we know exactly what to expect once that work is concluded.

I was also pleased to hear about the committee review being undertaken by the Chairs' forum, which will include looking at the use of the Welsh language. I have to say, as one who does use the Welsh language in this Chamber 100 per cent of the time, I'm not always entirely comfortable using the Welsh language on all occasions in a committee context. That is partially because of the technology. You see people putting on their headphones the moment I start talking, and then they remove them, and there are all sorts of rigmaroles, and you lose the flow of the conversation at times.

I'm sure there must be better technologies available now in a committee context, where the Welsh speaker doesn't feel that they are interrupting the flow of the conversation by contributing in Welsh. It makes us as Welsh speakers feel that we are disadvantaged in committee settings. I think it's better in the Chamber, and working virtually has also changed things. One doesn't think twice about using the Welsh language virtually, but we do need to look at committee activities. Thank you.

I call on Adam Price to reply to the debate.

I'm very grateful to my fellow Members for their comments and contributions. There will be some questions that I will have to respond to in writing. I'm speaking like a Minister now, aren't I—preparing, perhaps, hopefully. [Laughter.]

But, just to say at the outset, yes, Tom, I'm very pleased that we are wearing the same uniform, because it does make the point for us. We come from the same town, we speak the same language. As far as the Welsh language is concerned, I do think that we are one team, aren't we? We do want to see the same objectives. It's a good thing that that is something that is treasured by all of us as an organisation.

In terms of the holistic survey, which will again be in that spirit of one team, it's important that everyone who is part of the organisation—not just Commission staff, but support staff, group staff, Members, and so on—should all feel part of that bilingual ethos and this mission to ensure that both languages are given their due place. That's why we're going to have that truly comprehensive survey for the first time, and we're working on the detail of how that is going to work in practical terms now.

Tom raises a very important point. That is, we'll need resources for a larger Senedd in terms of bilingualism and the official languages scheme. Of course, as the wider planning work on capacity progresses, I'm sure that that will be an element that we will focus on.

Yes, it's important to note our successes. Having that Welsh Language and Education (Wales) Bill, which went through every legislative stage entirely through the medium of Welsh, was a historic thing, and, of course, we do want to see more of that. It's a matter, of course, for the Government to decide to draft through the medium of Welsh. I hope that more of that will happen. But the Commission then ensures that the resources are here so that we as a Senedd can contribute towards a process that will be undertaken entirely in Welsh.

With regard to the review of the legal framework, yes, we will take that suggestion on board about the template provided by that other review that you mentioned. I think that that is a very positive suggestion. It is important, 15 years or so after the National Assembly for Wales (Official Languages) Act 2012, that we review that to see whether it's fit for our needs now and in future.

There are many successes to celebrate, but, as Heledd said, there is a great deal still for us to do. We will look to provide the information on a group basis that you referred to, just so that we can all look to see where we are when it comes to the level of contributions in Welsh and so on, where that is useful for groups.

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

Item 6, a debate on the Standards of Conduct Committee report, 'Twenty first report to the Sixth Senedd under Standing Order 22.9'. And I call on the Chair of the committee, Hannah Blythyn.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. At the outset, I wish to declare that I am a member of Unite the Union, and have received financial sponsorship from them.

As Chair of the Standards of Conduct Committee, I formally move the motion.

The committee considered the report from the commissioner for standards in relation to a complaint made against Eluned Morgan MS for failing to declare a relevant interest before taking part in proceedings in Plenary on 17 September 2024. The Standards of Conduct Committee gave the commissioner's report careful consideration, and the report sets out the committee's findings that, although the committee considers the Member to have breached the code of conduct, it does not consider that any further action is warranted.

The facts relating to the complaint and the committee's reasons for its recommendation are set out in full in the committee's report. Whilst the commissioner found that there is nothing to suggest that the Member's registered interest had any influence on her contribution to the proceedings, the Standing Order requirement is that the relevant interest 'might reasonably be thought' to have influenced the Member's contribution, and not whether it had actually done so. Therefore, the committee would like to take this opportunity to remind all Members of the need to declare a relevant interest during proceedings to ensure transparency and openness. The interest should be relevant to the proceedings and be reasonably thought by others to have influenced the Member's contribution.

The complaint is timely, as the committee's ongoing inquiry into the registration and declaration of interests allows us to consider if any changes are necessary to ensure greater clarity around the rules. The committee noted the broadness of the current provision, and intends to consider whether the guidance for declarations could be amended to clarify situations when declarations are not required, or how they are recorded.

Finally, Dirprwy Lywydd, it is regrettable that details of the committee's decision were shared with the media before the publication of the report. And I would like to make clear to anyone engaged in the standards process the need for confidentiality and the importance of it in maintaining the integrity of the process and, ultimately, this place. The motion tabled invites the Senedd to endorse the committee's recommendation. Diolch.

I have no other speakers. So, the proposal is to note the committee's report. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is objection. I will therefore defer voting under this item until voting time.

Item 7 today is the debate on petition P-06-1525, 'Preserve the unique character of the Monmouthshire and Brecon Canal for the future generations of Wales'. And I call on the committee Chair to move the motion—Carolyn Thomas.

Diolch, Deputy Presiding Officer. On behalf of the Petitions Committee, thank you for the opportunity to introduce the debate today. A few weeks ago, on a Monday afternoon, the Petitions Committee travelled to Goytre Wharf between Pontypool and Abergavenny to meet some of the people behind today's petition. We heard the passion that people have for the canal, the problems they are experiencing this year, and we heard about the history that has flowed along the 55-mile route for more than 200 years. We saw the pathways and community facilities that have grown up along the route. We met some of the 20 people who live on the canal, people who want certainty that there will be enough water, so they can continue to live there. We met people who use it as a place to relax and escape from the stresses of day-to-day life, charities and organisations that use it for events. We met the local councillors keen to find a way to protect a vital community facility. We met the businesspeople who provide boat hiring and refreshments, who want certainty so that they can make the investments they need to develop their businesses in a competitive tourism market. We saw the rich biodiversity of a well-established ecosystem that is symbiotic with the river. We heard how it forms part of the Blaenavon world heritage site designation, and we met the Canal and River Trust Wales, who have been buying in millions of litres of water to ensure that the canal can flow and doesn't risk drying out, which would be catastrophic to the structure, making it unsafe.

The petition debated today was submitted by Councillor Jan Butler. A second petition, submitted by Mark Flood on behalf of the Preserve and Protect the Mon and Brec Canal group, couldn't be accepted, as it covered the same ground. The petition text reads:

'Preserve the unique character of the Monmouthshire and Brecon Canal for the future generations of Wales. The Mon and Brec is one of the most picturesque and tranquil waterways in the UK winding through Bannau Brycheiniog National Park and through many rural and later urban communities as it makes its way from Brecon, through Talybont on Usk onwards through Goytre Wharf towards Newport. It provides the lifeblood to residents and communities in its path and attracts approximately 3 million visitors a year who make significant contribution to the local economy enabling these communities to thrive.

'Since its inception by Act of Parliament in 1792, the canal has depended on water abstracted from the River Usk and its tributaries. The Usk at Brecon provides 80 per cent of the water required. The water is not consumed as it is returned to the water once it has travelled along the route, and until recently, water abstraction did not require licences. For 200 years, it has been free of charge. The canal, managed by the Canal and River Trust Wales, a charity, is now required by Natural Resources Wales to obtain a licence and limits water abstractions. Without a daily supply of water through its locks, the canal will quickly become inoperable and closure will be inevitable. The consequences to the livelihood of our community's natural environment and local economy are unthinkable. An unmanaged canal can lead to catastrophic failure and destruction of properties in its path. Dŵr Cymru and NRW have indicated they will supply support water but at prohibitive costs, which the charity cannot afford.'

The petition has received a massive 13,847 signatures. While the canal is over 200 years old, the problems facing the canal are new. This is the first year when new regulations relating to water access have been applied, limiting the amount of water that can be abstracted from the River Usk to feed the canal. The licence from Natural Resources Wales allows a lower level of extraction than has historically been allowed. Within 10 days of these regulations coming into force earlier this year, there was a problem. Previously, it was managed by the Canal and River Trust. They have calculated that, if the licence water restrictions had been in force in the last 20 years, the canal would have only been open for four summers. For the two-month period from 4 April to 9 June, CRT needed to purchase 376 million litres at an estimated cost of £0.25 million, and this is not sustainable. It also means that money is not available for the vital maintenance that is required to ensure that the canal remains navigable and that the leaks get fixed.

I too want to thank the petitioner for bringing forward this very important petition today. I want to be clear with Members and the Cabinet Secretary: the Monmouthshire and Brecon canal is on the brink of closure, and it's not because of drought, and it's not because there's no demand, but because the licensing decision is completely unworkable in practice.

For 225 years, this canal has taken water from the River Usk to operate. It supports nearly £30 million a year for the local economy, and it is the most visited attraction in the Brecon Beacons National Park. It is central to the lives of the communities all along its route, from my constituency all the way down to the constituency of my colleague Lynne Neagle. But now, because of the water extraction licence imposed by Natural Resources Wales, the canal's future is hanging by a thread.

And let's just break this down. The canal needs around 18 ML of water per day to function properly. The new NRW licence restricts the amount of water that can be taken, particularly in the summer when the canal is busiest, to levels below what is needed to operate. It doesn't account for the reality of evaporation, leakage or the historic patterns of use.

What has happened? Within two weeks of the licence coming into force in March, water levels on the canal dropped to nearly unusable levels. The Canal and River Trust, a charity already under pressure, has been forced to pay up to £40,000 a week to buy water from Dŵr Cymru Welsh Water just to keep the canal open. This is not a sustainable position. The Canal and River Trust have made it clear that it cannot afford to keep paying £1 million a year to buy water for the canal that has historically had the water as part of its natural ecosystem. And let's remember, the Canal and River Trust does not pay for water anywhere else across England or Wales.

If nothing changes, we will see boat hire businesses go under. We'll see tourism businesses drying up. And we'll see people lose jobs, pubs and shops lose trade, and the communities along the canal lose a central part of the social and economic life of my constituency. We'll see wildlife along this 35-mile green corridor lost. The canal itself is home to 112 protected species, yet the licensing decision failed to consider the canal's ecology as part of the same ecosystem as the River Usk. We also risk the future of Torfaen's canal restoration strategy, linked directly to the regeneration of parts of Cwmbran, falling apart if water cannot be guaranteed to flow.

And let's talk about the people who work on the canal, like Dai Tugg, who has made his business on the canal in my constituency. He has shown off my constituency to thousands and thousands of people across the years, and I think it would be an absolute travesty if a business like his had to go to the wall because of a decision made by NRW. But let me be clear: this isn't a marginal issue, or an issue about abstract technical water management debates, this is about livelihoods, heritage, wildlife tourism and community health and well-being.

Will you take an intervention?

Yes, I will, Jenny.

NRW is between a rock and a hard place, because the reason they're having to contain the amount of water that's being taken out of the Usk is because of the impact on the nature and the wildlife in the Usk. And surely this is fundamentally down to the fact that we collectively haven't husbanded our water resources over the years.

I don't disagree with you. I think a lot more work does need to be done improving all waterways, but what I do not want to see happen is one waterway being destroyed just to keep another one going. I don't think that's the most appropriate way to manage our waterways across Wales.

Cabinet Secretary, let me be honest: this is a problem caused by NRW's licensing decision and by a lack of joined-up thinking, and it's been made worse by the failure, I think, of this Government to bring people around the table to step in and sort it out. Almost 14,000 people, some of whom are in the gallery here behind us, signed a petition calling for us to protect the future of this canal for future generations, and all those people expect action. They do not expect excuses. What we've been hearing is buck passing between different organisations, saying, 'It's nothing to do with us.'

Rubbish.

It's not rubbish, Cabinet Secretary. I'll happily take an intervention from you if you want to. You'll speak later—well, that's fine. Let's keep quiet for now then. [Interruption.]

We need NRW, the Canal and River Trust, Dŵr Cymru and local authorities around the table—[Interruption.]

Order.

—because we need to find a practical, affordable and fair solution to the problem. What I think we need to do is get Welsh Government to direct NRW to pause enforcement of the current licensing restrictions while that workable, long-term solution is put in place. I think that's entirely reasonable. The canal and river have existed for over two centuries, and we are seeing improved nutrient levels in the River Usk, and I think that we shouldn't be using that as a reason not to put water in the canal.

We do need that joined-up strategy, and we are facing the real prospect of the first operational closure in England and Wales due to the Government's inaction. So, Cabinet Secretary, I think the time is now for you to act. I think it's time for you to step in, because if you don't, businesses will close—

The Member must now conclude.

I will conclude now, acting Presiding Officer. Businesses will close, our ecology will be damaged, and a lifeline of our communities will be gone, and all we will see is a dry ditch running through constituencies across Wales, and I think that will be an absolute travesty for our communities.

I thank the committee and the petitioners. The Monmouthshire and Brecon canal, or the ‘Mon and Brec’ as it's known among local residents, is a key part of our national heritage, because this waterway is a witness to over two centuries of rich history, from Dadford, Outram and Crosley’s engineering vision to the labour of the navvies who cut its course out of the hard ground; from the iron, the coal and limestone transported to fire Blaenavon’s blazing furnaces to the burgeoning communities on the banks of this vibrant artery; from its decline and displacement by the new technology of the railways, to its restoration, revival and renewal towards the end of the twentieth century. Today it's a flourishing commercial, cultural and environmental hub, a thread that, in total contrast with its origins, now stitches together human society and nature in harmonious co-existence.

The fact that the canal is on the brink of total destruction is a reflection of how seriously we neglect our heritage and our landscapes. And it is a powerful and visible reminder of the price that is paid as a result of the climate emergency. It's inevitable that similar problems related to water shortages will arise again with increasing frequency in coming years. I fear that the Government's response has been disappointing to date. Not only is it a response that has showed a lack of understanding, perhaps, of the canal's wider value, but it's one that ignores the reality that it is within the Government's gift to at least review Natural Resources Wales's relevant licensing requirements.

The introduction of further flexibilities could be considered in terms of Dŵr Cymru's payment mechanisms for canal trusts. On top of that, the new regulations regarding water extraction are based on deficient rationale. They set the need to safeguard the River Usk ecosystem, which is, of course, so important, but it sets that against the need to maintain a healthy water level on the canal, which ignores the fact that the canal is itself an important ecosystem. I reject that assumption entirely. There is a sustainable balance to be struck here, and the price of not achieving that will be far greater than simply losing a waterway; it will mean the loss of a whole way of life for the businesses, the communities and the wildlife that call the canal home.

The interim solution is something that I welcome. It has been agreed between the trust and Dŵr Cymru to keep the canal in operation for the near future. Again, that is to be welcomed, but a solution that costs over £100,000 a month to a charitable trust is clearly not sustainable. So, I encourage the Welsh Government to demonstrate that firm and proactive leadership that is needed on this matter, to develop a solution that ensures that future generations can enjoy the canal before the waters run dry for another one of our treasured cultural and historical assets.

I became very interested in the Mon and Brec canal after a meeting with my constituents, Fiona and Steve Burt, who spend much of their time living on a 58 ft narrowboat, and they imparted to me their enthusiasm and their love for the canal, for the way of life and the privilege they feel to be able to live in our wonderful Welsh environment on the canal. And of course, as Carolyn Thomas said in her introduction, there are people who are living there permanently. It is an absolutely unique place that I have visited over the years.

The Mon and Brec has been part of our landscape for 225 years, and it does provide vitally important tourism income, which has been mentioned, for the towns and villages and the other businesses along the canal. And it is absolutely essential for the ecology and wildlife that are so dependent on it. The changes made to the abstraction licence mean that, according to the River Usk catchment abstraction management strategy, abstraction from the Usk is only likely to be possible for 51 days of the year, and this will probably be during the winter months. And, of course, this is the time when the canal itself will already be filled by rainfall. This is not enough to sustain the canal, and that is why the arrangement with Dŵr Cymru is so important.

However, as has already been said today, the costs of the abstraction agreement are prohibitive, and it has been reported that it is costing approximately £100,000 per month. As it stands, the canal is not commercially viable, as it supports only 400 boats with an average licence fee of £1,000 per annum. It is maintained primarily by the charity in accordance with its charitable objectives. So, really, the right commercial decision for the Canal and River Trust could be to close the canal. And I think the threat of this must absolutely ring alarm bells with us all in the Senedd and with the Government.

I understand that the arrangements between Dŵr Cymru and the Canal and River Trust are classed as commercially sensitive, but would the Cabinet Secretary consider supporting the trust's call for a mutually fair, non-commercial arrangement, so that we do not risk losing this absolutely fantastic, unique waterway in Wales? I do not feel that we can stand by here and let that happen.

Firstly, I'd like to very much thank the petitioner, Councillor Jan Butler, for the initial petition, which gained over 14,000 signatures. And a big thanks to the many people who turned up today on the Senedd steps to air their voices and share their concerns—concerns that we all share. There was cross-party support on the steps today, recognising the importance of this valuable asset. It's a jewel in the crown of what Wales has to offer. And it's a sad day when we are having to come here to argue for the future of our canal, one of the most fantastic bits of environmental asset we have, which is under jeopardy.

As we've heard, and we will be repeating the same issues, we've heard of the licensing placing limits on the amount of water that we can extract from the River Usk. But it's strange, isn't it, that we follow one environmental aspiration with little consideration of what we're doing to another environmental asset. This holistic view, it doesn't seem to happen where we can look at everything in the round, and then we find ourselves with these real issues. We shouldn't be looking to have to supply water now or pay for water that has been free for 225 years. We are further advanced than that. We should have had systems in place to maintain these assets for future generations. So far, the trust, as we know, is committed to purchasing water until March 2026, and it's obvious no charity can continue to do that forever.

So, what is the future? If left, the canal is going to dry out, become inoperable. But it's not just drying out and making it inoperable. Look at the drastic ecological impacts, as well as the huge economic consequences. It's astonishing that the canal does not have the same level of conservation designation as the River Usk, despite playing a vital role in Monmouthshire's—in my case—natural beauty and biodiversity. So I would encourage Natural Resources Wales and the Welsh Government to consider the waterways being treated in similar ways. I know they might not be able to treat it exactly the same, but to be given parity in the focus that they need.

As we've heard, the Canal and River Trust in Wales estimates that the canal supports 77 hectares of area habitats, with 46 hectares of woodland and 7 hectares of grassland, 58 km of watercourse habitat and over 33 km of native and species-rich native hedgerow. And data shows, as we've also heard, that there are 1,339 species recorded in proximity of the canal corridor, comprising 112 different priority species, meaning that the canal has the highest number of priority species of any canal in Wales. The canal also plays an incredibly important role in the wider rural economy, supporting, as we know, 276 jobs and an estimated output of some £30 million a year. So, the Welsh Government needs to step in and provide a long-term solution to the crisis that the canal is facing. No responsible Government would risk the future of such an essential environmental asset.

Can I thank all of those who have joined us today from the area and for your campaign? Because without your campaign and without you bringing this to the attention of so many people—including myself—we would not be here. Thank you for arranging for the petition and thank you for the meetings that we've had as well; it's been really appreciated. I'm proud to speak in support of this petition and for the 14,000 people who've signed it. Their message is clear: the Brecon and Mon canal matters.

The canal is actually the single most visited attraction in Bannau Brycheiniog. It has attracted, as we've heard, over 3 million visitors, so it is absolutely critical to the area. It is far more than a waterway. It is a living, working part of our national heritage. A 35-mile green corridor winding through the heart of Bannau Brycheiniog and onwards to the communities of Cwmbran and Newport. For 225 years, it has served our people. Connecting villages, supporting industries, offering sanctuary for wildlife and generating both well-being, as Peter Fox has mentioned, and economic prosperity. And now—which is why we are here this afternoon—we risk losing it.

The canal is facing an existential crisis. Since the implementation, as we've heard, of the new water abstraction licence in March 2025, water levels have already dropped to near non-navigable levels. The new restrictions from Natural Resources Wales limit what can be drawn from the River Usk—a source that has supplied over 80 per cent of the canal's flow for more than two centuries. The Usk is a designated special area of conservation, and we must, of course, protect its biodiversity. But the canal, too, supports 112 protected species and acts as a vital ecological corridor, with the highest number of priority species on any Welsh canal. The decision to prioritise one habitat over another has created a false and deeply damaging dichotomy. It should not be a zero-sum game. The Usk and the Mon and Brec are not rivals. They're independent ecosystems, two arteries of the same living landscape, shaped together for over 200 years, and we must protect both.

We do celebrate all of the businesses, all of the tourist industries along the canal, but also, as has been mentioned by Julie Morgan, those people who literally live on the canal. For those that bought houseboats, many of them permanent residents, falling water levels means not just inconvenience, but potential homelessness. Already the Canal and River Trust, a charity, is being forced to purchase emergency water, as we've heard.

The canal is a testament to our industrial past, built by an Act of Parliament in 1792. I had to make sure I got those numbers right—1792. It has enabled the transport of coal, iron, and limestone, as we've heard from Delyth, through the valleys and hills of Wales. It would be an appalling irony if, on the two hundred and twenty-fifth anniversary of the canal's completion, we let this thread of history be severed by short-sighted policy and our institutional inflexibility.

It was very good to speak to petitioners on the steps of the Senedd earlier and hear from them first-hand how greatly they value the Mon to Brec canal, how much it means to them, including people who live on canal barges, people who volunteer and do so much work to enhance and help develop that canal for all the communities that live along its route, to hear about its importance for heritage, for our industrial history, for nature, being that green artery through our communities.

Personally, I use the stretch at Newport. Although it's in my colleague Jane Bryant's constituency of Newport West rather than Newport East, I use it regularly. I run along the canal, I walk along the canal, I cycle along the canal. I've seen kingfishers, herons, nesting swans and a variety of wildfowl and many other species as well, testifying to its ecological and biodiversity importance.

We've heard so many compelling reasons in this debate, I think, haven't we, in terms of why we need to support this petition and ensure the future of that canal. One thing I'd like to add to that is the usage of the canalside. In Newport, for example, big social housing estates in Bettws and Malpas use that canalside to walk, to cycle into the city centre in Newport. Big sections of the population enhance their own everyday life experience by using the canal in that way.

A lot of the work to the canalside has been done by committed volunteers over very many years. If we're not to have that thriving canal with water along its route and make as much of it navigable as possible, then to get that enthusiasm, to get that commitment from volunteers is going to be considerably more difficult, I think. We need to support them in the work that they do that allows that artery, for health and well-being and active travel, to be available for substantial sections of our population along its route. It just has so much value in so many different ways, doesn't it? And we've heard powerful testament to that here today in this debate.

I really do hope that the Welsh Government can find a way, in working with partner organisations, to ensure that all the good work that's gone into enhancing and developing the Mon to Brec canal, over so many years, is not hindered and hampered by the difficulties that we've heard about in this debate today. We really do need to find a way to support the petitioners, understand the value of the canal, and make sure that it's not just preserved and protected, but it's enhanced for the future.

In its two hundred and twenty-fifth year, it was a real joy to visit the Monmouth and Brecon canal, and I don't use the word 'joy' lightly. A lovely lady at the canal, who had significant caring responsibilities at home, told me that she felt an incredible sense of calm at the canal, and that was also my experience. There was some sort of tranquillity to the place. You felt better standing beside its still waters. The canal, as others have already said very eloquently, is far more than a man-made waterway. It's a home for some, and it was a pleasure to meet some of the barge owners who live on the canal. It's a business for others, and we had the opportunity to meet business owners who work on the canal itself and along the canal.

It's a place of leisure for many, and a location where nature thrives. It's such a shame, as others have already said, that the new licensing requirement for water abstraction is threatening all of this. People, as Jane Dodds has already said, are facing losing their homes, their jobs, their retreat from the strain of life. The current emergency water provisions are only a limited fix, as others have already said again, and this is coming at great expense to the charity responsible for the canal. It simply cannot last. It's diverting important resource away from the maintenance and the safety of the canal, canal users, and the safety of people who live alongside the canal.

The canal attracts millions of visitors each year and brings in a huge amount annually to local businesses. But walking around, you couldn't help but notice how nature was thriving there. You can read the figures, but you've got to go there to really experience it and marvel at how a man-made waterway has become such a beautiful part of the natural environment in that part of the world. Failing to protect this canal would be to lose a living piece of Welsh history. We have lost so many important signs of our past. We've lost the majority of the Glamorgan canal. But there is no reason why this canal cannot be saved. In fact, more than that, it needs to be saved. Its beauty and its tranquillity should be enjoyed for centuries to come.

The canal came into existence following a UK Act of Parliament. Today, the Petitions Committee, the petitioners themselves, and, it sounds, cross-party support across the Senedd, is asking the Welsh Government to step in, to work with others, and to preserve this incredible resource for future generations. Diolch yn fawr.

I now call on the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs, Huw Irranca-Davies.

Diolch yn fawr iawn. Can I just begin by thanking all those Members who have contributed to this very important debate today, and also those petitioners who added their name to the petition, and those who turned up today? I spoke to a few of them outside on the steps of the Senedd. It was a real delight to speak with them.

It is a very important debate, and everybody who's contributed to the debate today spoke with passion about the canal. And just to say, from a Welsh Government perspective, from a personal perspective as well, I recognise the Mon and Brec canal is vitally important for all of the reasons that have been outlined today: the people who live on it, who take their recreation alongside it; those who benefit from the tourism multipliers that come from it; but also the wildlife corridor that it is; and so many other benefits as well. We recognise that entirely. But also there's the cultural heritage that the canal represents as well. And I think the spirit that people have spoken with today, and which the petitioners have brought forward, echoes, I have to say, the original spirit of those pioneers who protected and safeguarded the current network of canals across the UK, which back in the postwar years seemed doomed to being, indeed, dry ditches—people like Tom Rolt and others, who literally put themselves in canals and paddled up waterways that were bogged down and were dirty and full with rubbish and weeds, and they reopened them year after year after year. So, that spirit is still going strong and I welcome that spirit.

And I recognise this very well as well, because, of course, I was the former Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Minister with responsibility for canals and waterways. It's important to mention that, because one character that hasn't been mentioned within this today is actually the role not just of Welsh Government but of UK Government. I was the canals and waterways Minister in the UK Government. Now, we have responsibilities here in Wales, but there are also responsibilities for the UK Government, so I think in the way forward, we need to think about bringing all the players together—all of the players together—to actually look at the solutions, and I'll touch on that in a moment.

Can I say as well that I know this canal very well? I know it intimately. I've literally paddled every stretch of this in my Canadian canoe. I've walked and cycled it. I've camped along it. I've stayed in the hostelries along it. I know it very well. I've used the canal boats alongside it as well, over many years. It is a great asset and we do need to protect it.

But what this fundamentally comes down to is that the canal relies on a sufficient supply of water to function. This is industrial heritage, but it's now actually a modern tourism and recreational facility as well. It requires water to function. Now, for many years, as has been pointed out, the canal's operators, the Canal and River Trust, abstracted from the River Usk to maintain this supply. However, in 2018, NRW removed the abstraction licence exemptions for navigation purposes to ensure that the licences complied with environmental directives, such as the habitats directive. And just to remind Members, the habitats directive is very important. It is designed to protect special areas of conservation, as you were saying earlier on there, like the River Usk. I've been on that River Usk, actually working on the improvements. The money that we're putting into the improvements on that from the top of the catchment to the lower—. I don't think anybody in here is saying we shouldn't be looking after the River Usk. We have to do that as well, and the habitats directive is important. So, actually, James, the idea of suspending this and going backwards and saying, 'Well, that doesn't matter for another 12 months or two years or three years'—I don't think you'll find support across the Chamber for doing that. However, there is a way forward.

Now, James and Peter, and all those who contributed, can I just say, if there was an easy answer, we'd have done it already? It isn't an easy answer. What this will require is bringing people around the table together and looking at solutions that we can devise together. And this will require putting heads together of all the players within this space, which I'll come to in a moment. But there are fundamental issues facing the canal, which require long-term solutions. With those 14,000 petitioners, I understand fully the strength of feeling that's arisen because of these challenges, but I think those people who attended, the petitioners that I spoke to on the steps, will want us to actually—. The leadership that is needed is actually to bring people together and look for those solutions, not simply to point fingers at one person or another. Let's work together and find the solutions in a very Welsh way.

I'd just like to correct you. I never once said that we should trade one off against the other, I said that they should be worked at together. Just to correct what you said.

Indeed, but you did suggest suspending this for a year.

Because it isn't working now.

This is not a conversation, this is a debate.

Look, I share the common goal that we're trying to strive towards. It's very important to note that many of the potential solutions may primarily fall within the remit of several actors directly involved in the management of the canal and its historic infrastructure.

So, just to outline this: the general management of the canal network lies with the Canal and River Trust, and my thanks for a conversation—

No, I don't think that the Deputy First Minister has got time. He is over time already. So, I'm asking him to look to conclude, please, Deputy First Minister.

Sorry. Crikey. Okay. Sorry, my apologies, I thought I had more time. My apologies. Okay, some of those players will be the Canal and River Trust, the UK Government, local authorities along the canal, Natural Resources Wales. Other agencies will need to be brought together. I've held several meetings over recent months to better understand the challenges that the canal faces, to understand what might be in scope as possible solutions. The committee will be aware of some of the first positive steps towards this goal, with the temporary solution, a short-term solution to supply the canal with additional water over the coming year. This is a lifeline for now and, although we're not involved in these commercial negotiations, we're pleased to hear of this short-term solution. But also there are discussions ongoing on other solutions as well, with Dŵr Cymru and the canal. And I met last month with Natural Resources Wales and Dŵr Cymru to listen to further ideas and possible longer term solutions.

But the way that we take this ahead—. I fully support the intention behind the petition. So, I just want to reassure Members that Welsh Government is actively engaged with finding a solution and facilitating that broader dialogue with key partners, which is crucial. So, I am meeting with local authorities and other political representatives and agencies imminently—and I mean imminently—to discuss and to scope out next steps, and I'm happy to issue a further update to Members once a way forward has been agreed. We all want the canal to prosper, but we want the Usk to prosper too. So, we've got to find a solution that's workable and sustainable for the people of Wales now and for the future as well, and this will require balancing support for the canal with addressing the urgent environmental challenges that threaten the ecological status of the River Usk. But thank you to all of the petitioners, all of the Members who have spoken today. Let's see if we can work together to find a solution that is sustainable and for the long term. Diolch yn fawr.

I now call on Carolyn Thomas to reply to the debate.

I'd like to thank Members for their contributions. I'm not going to go through them all, because I know that time is limited and we've taken longer than was allocated for this, but I think that it was really important as well, so thank you. I'd like to thank the Cabinet Secretary for his response, and I'm delighted that the Deputy First Minister has already invited stakeholders to get around the table and work together to find a solution. Those stakeholders: NRW, Dŵr Cymru Welsh Water, CRT, local authorities—we need to include the users, the commercial operators group, the group as well. They need to be a part of that stakeholder group, please, as well.

I'd just like to say that CRT managed the water themselves before they were told that they couldn't extract. So, when the water levels were low, they closed the gates and they managed it. So, I really hope that they can come together and find a solution, but thank you for the leadership. You were right as well; I received a letter from the MP Ruth Jones to the Welsh Affairs Select Committee asking what they're going to do about it, because it's cross-government. Some 20 per cent of CRT funding comes from DEFRA. I hope that when the committee comes to reconsider the petition after the summer recess, we will be able to tell everyone who lives, works, relaxes and enjoys the canal that a way has been found to preserve and protect the Mon and Brec.

The canal has survived 200 years of tumultuous history, and given the passion of the stakeholders—and many are here today; thank you for your efforts in bringing it to our attention and for all the work you've done—and the strong desire of everyone here to preserve and protect a special place, it should not be beyond us to find new ways to ensure that it can continue to thrive for 200 years more. Diolch. Thank you.

The proposal is to note the petition. Does any Member object? There is no objection. Therefore, the motion is agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

We'll move on to item 8, which is the debate on the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee report, 'The Foundational Economy'. And I call on the Chair of the committee to move the motion—Andrew R.T. Davies.

Thank you, acting Presiding Officer, and I formally move the motion standing in my name on the order paper this afternoon. I'd like to start this afternoon by noting that this piece of work predates my time as Chair of the committee, so I'd like to put on record my thanks to your good self, acting Presiding Officer, for the work you did when you chaired the committee and all the work that you undertook on this particular inquiry.

The foundational economy, as Members here will know, includes hairdressers, GPs, care workers and the people who work in our local shops, et cetera—in short, 60 per cent of businesses that are headquartered here in Wales. These are jobs that you will find in every community across Wales with foundational economy workers providing vital services to their friends and neighbours. They are the jobs that are hard to outsource or offshore and create the backbone of our economy and represent 40 per cent of the workforce. But most people working in the foundational economy probably have no idea that they are. I think if you spoke to someone in the barbers or in the GP waiting room and you told them, 'I've just read a fantastic report that the Senedd economy committee have just put together on the foundational economy'— thank you, Hefin, for nodding in agreement—their first question would be, 'What is the content? What is it about? What is the foundational economy?' And that's not an unreasonable question. That is why part of our first recommendation is that the Welsh Government must work with practitioners to create a simple one-line definition to increase awareness of the foundational economy, and I am pleased to say the Welsh Government accepted this recommendation.

The foundational economy is an area that is often overlooked by policy makers. It does not attract as much attention from politicians or from policy makers as some other parts of the economy. The foundational economy gets on with it—and despite Government, as opposed to being accelerated by Government. That said, the foundational economy has been part of the Welsh Government's approach to economic development for nearly 10 years.

In its latest economic mission the Welsh Government commits to strengthening the foundational economy. To achieve its aims, the Welsh Government must take evidence-based practical steps and turn ambition into reality. This report contains 10 recommendations that will support that goal. The committee heard about some great examples of best practice when gathering its evidence. For example, Members heard about the work done by Castell Howell and others to support children to eat more Welsh-produced vegetables in schools and to create sustainable, locally sourced menus for conferences. They also heard about Aneurin Bevan health board's grow-your-own approach to recruitment, where the health board is finding people in their local community with the right attitude, the right outlook and who want a job supporting their friends and neighbours. These people may not have the qualifications and that creates a barrier; a problem for the individual who can't work where they would like, and a problem for the health board who can't recruit to fill the vacancy. So, instead of trying to attract workers from elsewhere to fill the need, the health board is training them up.

Recommendations 2 to 5 are aimed at ensuring the Welsh Government is in a position to identify, promote and support these and other good practices occurring across Wales. These include developing key performance indicators that will help Welsh Government achieve these aims, supporting the bottom-up development of the foundational economy interventions and ensuring it replicates best practice from other cross-cutting policy areas in its approach to the foundational economy, using this to assess how well organisations are meeting foundational economy goals. I am also pleased to say the Welsh Government accepted these recommendations. We're doing a lot better than last week's report, Minister; well done. [Laughter.]

Recommendation 6 is the call on Welsh Government to outline how it will improve the long-term financial support available to successful foundational economy initiatives, and I am pleased to say that this was accepted.

Recommendations 7 and 8 are based around the use of the Welsh public sector pound to support the foundational economy in improving procurement methods. Again, both these were accepted. I particularly look forward to seeing how the Welsh Government uses its powers under recent procurement legislation to support small businesses.

Recommendation 9 is designed to replicate the successful grow-your-own workforce initiatives the committee heard about. This too was accepted.

Finally, recommendation 10 was aimed at the Welsh Government using its devolved levers to improve terms and conditions in the public and private sectors. One of the challenges for the foundational economy is that some of these jobs are often low quality or low pay. Improving the quality of the jobs in the foundational economy will greatly improve the life of many people here in Wales. This recommendation was only accepted in principle, so I'd be interested to see what the Government proposes to do in this area.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary for her positive response to this report and our recommendations. I now hope that the Cabinet Secretary will put these recommendations into practice to help our foundational economy thrive, and to improve the lives of the people of Wales. I look forward to the contributions from Members today and from the Cabinet Secretary. Thank you, acting Presiding Officer.

Samuel Kurtz.

Thank you, temporary Presiding Officer.

And my thanks to Andrew R.T. Davies and, indeed, to you, Paul Davies, as Chair of the committee during this inquiry, to all of the witnesses who gave evidence, and to the committee clerking team for bringing this together. It is a lean report; I have it in my hand. And as Andrew R.T. Davies referred to, we're in a better place this week than with our previous report last week, with recommendations being accepted or accepted in principle by the Government, which is to be welcomed.

The first recommendation may sound technical—adopting Professor Karel Williams's dual definition. And didn't Professor Karel Williams give some colourful evidence to us at some points? Looking at Luke Fletcher, it's the first time that I've ever heard swear words in a committee session, by Professor Karel Williams. But he really sold the reasons behind it. It was actually very forceful evidence from Professor Williams. Indeed, his dual definition, which includes both essential local services, like care, utilities and housing, and also broader well-being factors, such as affordable essentials, social infrastructure and climate resilient enterprise, that clarity over what counts as the foundational economy, means that a care co-operative in Saundersfoot, through to a builder in Whitland, can all see themselves in Government policy, rather than wondering where they fit in the box. I'm pleased that Ministers have accepted this outright and that the new definition went live in April.

The second recommendation presses for hard-edged metrics and a delivery plan. Indeed, I really love a key performance indicator. Government has accepted this in principle and promised a prospectus in the first quarter of 2026—not that there's anything else happening in 2026. The document must move beyond warm words to those measurable targets that I mentioned, such as local spend retained, real living wage accreditations achieved, carbon saved—just some examples. Because rural constituencies like mine, Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire, can't afford just another strategy that is glossy in itself, but just gathers dust on a shelf.

Recommendation 3 champions bottom-up, quote, 'alliances of the willing', a term that we heard quite often from Professor Williams in his evidence—giving local innovators the freedom to try ideas first and report later. Government's acceptance here, and its pledge to scale up the community of practice model tested in the food sector, is very good news.

Another point was that the prescriptive nature of grants sometimes is a difficulty. That was evidence given to us. How narrow certain grants can be means that, actually, that money, if it's grant money, could be better spent if it was given without some sort of constrictions on it, because those on the ground know how best to spend that money, because they're the ones in the thick of it. So, sometimes, the prescriptive nature of grants isn't always what's best, in terms of returning value for the taxpayer.

From the outset, I'd also like to join the Chair and Sam Kurtz in thanking the previous Chair of the committee for his work during this inquiry. I'd also like to extend a 'thank you' to the current Chair as well, to fellow committee members and the clerks, in particular, for their work in putting this report together. Of course, I'd also like to thank those who gave evidence to the committee. Sam Kurtz hinted at it. There was some interesting, colourful evidence that came forward. I'm not quite sure that's the first time, though, we've heard swearing in the committee. It definitely is the first time we've heard it in a public session, and I'm sure there's a number of members of the committee who would then point to the private sessions saying I'm responsible for most of the language in the private sessions, but that's by the by.

I think, actually, now there's a strong and growing body of work on the foundational economy in Wales, because it's something we've been discussing for a very long time. It is playing a role in how we understand our economy, its weaknesses, but also as well its potential. But I think that common recognition amongst policy makers of a set of problems has, thus far, not led to a clear set of solutions. There's a broad agreement on the diagnosis, but less clarity on what to do about it. So, it's welcome that the Welsh Government has accepted the vast majority of the recommendations in this report.

Turning to the report itself, one of the important points raised was around how we actually measure progress. Sam Kurtz referenced it. Various stakeholders mentioned that it would be good to see a set of indicators and targets against which to measure that progress within the foundational economy, and I think this is a worthwhile pursuit. What I would say is that the conventional economic metrics, which we're quite tethered to as a society, are often at odds with what intervention in the foundational economy seeks to achieve. The be-all and end-all when it comes to assessing our economic health is typically benchmarked on GDP, which is a crude yardstick for assessing a nation's health and well-being. There are plenty of approaches around the world that are deprioritising GDP—the best-known alternatives probably being the index of sustainable economic welfare and the genuine progress indicator. I think we should actually be exploring alternatives as well. So, it's good to see, to an extent, that the Government has accepted recommendation 2 in principle, and that it's working to develop a number of key performance indicators to crystallise actually what it is we want to achieve within the foundational economy. I'll be keeping an eye, as will other Members, on how that work progresses.

But it's really important that, if we actually want to measure the success of the foundational economy, we find those key indicators that will allow us to measure it in the things that are important to it and not just default to some of those traditional ways of measuring. For example, I would actually like to see ownership featured among those key performance indicators. We know that there are currently not enough meaningfully owned Welsh resources, institutions or businesses in Wales to begin to turn the tide. Addressing that should inform, I think, the Government's work within the foundational economy.

Well, we started talking about this 10 years ago. It was one of the first things we did when we were first elected in 2016—I say 'we'; there was a few of us. All the others are in Government now.

And you should be, Hefin.

Oh, thanks, Mike. One of the things we said in our debate back in, it was, 12 January 2017 was recognising that the sectors in the foundational economy are more resilient to external economic shocks and have considerable potential to generate greater local value from the provision of localised goods and services. That's the key point that we were making, and I'm now going do something called 'an Isherwood' and quote myself from 10 years ago, from 16 November 2016. I said this:

‘Why would any sensible owner-manager choose to employ...when there are cheaper, more accessible, trusted alternatives? A great many owner-managers have reliable sources of support available to them at least in the medium term. They may be in the form of strong ties to family and friends who will help in the running of the business, but over time the manager will form relationships with other business associates who provide mutually dependable support that goes well beyond a transactional relationship. Access to this social capital is vital for the early development and growth of the firm. So perhaps instead of seeking economic salvation from our small firms sector we should look instead at what small firms actually do—things that are fundamental to our daily lives.’

That is exactly what we are about. We are about taking this resilient sector and ensuring that that resilience continues and is expanded upon. I don't think it's ever going to be something that is transformational to the economy, but it is an ongoing engine of the economy. I often hear Members use this word, this term, for small firms, the 'lifeblood' of the economy. Well, they exist. I still haven't let it go, Hannah, even after 10 years.

So, I'm looking at recommendation 3, and I think that's what this is about. Recommendation 3 is exactly about that. Small firms don't compete with each—. Well, microfirms don't compete with each other. They work together. They interact with each other. I interviewed, for some research many years ago, a man who serviced hospital equipment, and was great with the technical aspects of the hospital equipment, but some of the internal electronics were unfamiliar to him. So, he got a friend who had an electronics company to come and work with him on a project, and they shared that money out. That's how procurement needs to work, ensuring that firms across the foundational sector are able to collaborate and bid for projects.

I think it was in recommendation 7 that the Welsh Government needs to outline how it will upscale best practice with regard to public sector procurement opportunities, and I'm glad to say the Cabinet Secretary has accepted recommendation 7 in full and has examined some of those difficulties in her response. I would say that one of the people recommended to me as a sector leader in the area of procurement, and I saw this with the Welsh housing quality standard procurement process, was Liz Lucas of Caerphilly County Borough Council. I would say to the Cabinet Secretary, if you haven't already spoken to Liz, and I imagine you have—yes—she's a leading star in the area of procurement and ensuring the foundational sectors are able to collaborate in order to achieve critical mass and gain from public sector procurement in a way that is not typical of how we expect procurement to work in that competitive way. In the foundational sector, it often doesn't.

I was one of the people who went to Preston, along with Lee Waters, to actually see Preston in practice. So, I think that, actually, there is a lot to be said about what Preston has done because it really has transformed what was quite a depressed community across Lancashire, and Preston is pretty much the capital of Lancashire. That doesn't detract at all from the excellent work that's been going on in Blaenau Ffestiniog, which was pump primed from the European Union work that we benefited from when we were a member.

I'd like to congratulate the Welsh Government on the work that it has done on revising its mission statement, co-produced after discussion and co-production with stakeholders, because I actually think it's a better definition, having looked at it, than the one we endeavoured to put into our report. I think it's clearer and easier to read. So, the foundational economy definitely refers to the sectors of the economy that provide the goods and services that underpin everyday life. End of sentence.

I absolutely welcome the fact that the Welsh Government is focused on the organisation and people in the foundational economy, as well as the quality and accessibility of goods and services, and also the citizens' sense of control and belonging in their community. That's something that we didn't particularly look at in this inquiry, but is certainly one we've looked at in the Equality and Social Justice Committee in our work on community cohesion, which is for another day.

Having visited Preston, I do think it is also not just about all these important things. It is also about retaining as much as possible of the Welsh pound in Wales. Most of the sectors listed in your mission statement, Cabinet Secretary, are doing just that. So, for example, care and health services, including social care and childcare, social housing, public transport particularly is going to be enhanced by the bus re-regulation Bill. But it starts to get more complicated once we get a bit further down, to talking about the construction of residential and commercial buildings, energy and utilities. We've just had a discussion about water, which we can leave for another day.

But, today, UK house builders have had to offer to pay £100 million at the end of a competition probe, where the Competition and Markets Authority have unearthed evidence that price information was shared between companies. So, I think one of the things we have to learn from that is we do need to build more social housing to prevent families having to live in private rented sector accommodation, because it really is so disruptive for children. And the sorts of prices that these house builders have been charging are completely out of range of the financial possibilities of the average family. So, we absolutely need to ensure that we have co-operative and social housing solutions to our housing problems.

Thank you, temporary Presiding Officer. I welcome this opportunity to take part in this debate.

I've got a little bit on the current Chair because I did join the committee part way through this inquiry, but I was keen to be part of it because, for me, as we've heard here already, the foundational economy is not an abstract concept, although, as we've heard, it can be difficult to define sometimes. But it is about the things that really matter to people in our communities, the services and jobs that keep those communities going, and it's about making the economy work as well as it can for as many people as possible.

So, I very much welcome this report and I think it rightly places fair work, community value and local supply chains at the heart of what a truly inclusive economy should look like, but I also think we can build on this and go further. The report shines a light on sectors that have all too often been undervalued or overlooked, things like care, cleaning, catering, construction. They're roles that keep our country going during the most difficult times, yet too often are characterised by low pay, poor conditions and insecure contracts.

So, that's why I'm particularly pleased to see the report call on the Welsh Government to do more to drive fair work across the foundational economy in recommendation 10, which calls for set requirements for public bodies to improve pay and working conditions, and working with social partners to develop and agree common minimum standards for pay and working conditions in the devolved public sector. And, of course, the Employment Rights Bill, which is currently making its way through the UK Parliament, could be able to underpin and uplift all of that. I think we also need to make a concerted effort to ensure that these standards are not just encouraged, but expected, because good work is the baseline, not the bonus.

One of the most interesting pieces for me for the time I was part of the inquiry was the evidence we heard about the concept of grow your own workforce: recruiting locally, investing in apprenticeships and giving people the opportunity to build a career closer to home. So, I think that demonstrates what the foundational economy can be about in action: creating local jobs, local pride and long-term investment in both people and places as well. And I think it's something that we need to think about, and Welsh Government needs to think about, how it can be and should be replicated elsewhere, whether that's in health, care, construction or catering. And we've heard today how anchor institutions have a vital role to play, and I think the recommendation in this report helps to put that into focus as well.

I'm particularly supportive of the report's recommendations around procurement. The Cabinet Secretary has heard me say more than once in this Chamber and the previous one that I actually find procurement really exciting, so I probably need to get out more. But it is one of the things that has the real potential to drive the outcomes that we've talked about in this Chamber today, and previously discussed, in terms of the social value and moving away from the pound having primacy in terms of actually how we do public spending and procurement. We've made progress with the Social Partnership and Public Procurement (Wales) Act, which I'm a little bit familiar with, but we need to make sure it makes a difference in practice now. So, I think, around recommendations 7 and 8, to call for that stronger, more transparent mechanism to prioritise local, ethical and social-value-led suppliers.

I now call on the Cabinet Secretary for Economy, Energy and Planning, Rebecca Evans.

The foundational economy is integral to our economic mission, so I really do welcome the committee's work and the debate that we're having today. As the committee and other colleagues have noted, nurturing the foundational economy is central to sustaining and creating fair work and to growing and retaining wealth within our communities right across Wales.

The foundational economy is a programme for government commitment, as it provides the goods and services that are essential for all of us to live fulfilled lives. It's no small part of the economy. As we have heard, 60 per cent of all businesses in Wales are operating in the foundational economy. This comprises 51 per cent of the Welsh workforce and it accounts for 47 per cent of overall turnover in Wales. So, our foundational economy approaches have made a difference to businesses, people and communities across Wales. Between 2019 and 2023, the number of foundational economy businesses increased by 4 per cent, and the number of employees has grown by 1 per cent and turnover has gone up by 5 per cent.

So, to give some examples of the work we have been doing, we have supported housing contractors to attain accreditations to deliver energy efficient retrofit work. Those contractors have reported that this will lead to the creation of over 350 new jobs. This additional capacity then will accelerate housing retrofit projects, it will improve household liveability, reduce energy costs, leading to greater residual income, and it will improve environmental performance.

Through a food accreditation scheme, 73 Welsh firms have reported that this has helped them to retain 1,100 jobs. These firms will strengthen our food security through building local supply chains and also increasing the supply of Welsh food to our schools and our hospitals.

The construction sector has told me that attracting new talent is a real challenge. So, we've supported the provision of net-zero, low-carbon, on-site work placement programmes for 120 young trainees in construction, 80 per cent of whom have gone on to secure an apprenticeship or some form of employment within the sector. So, we're facilitating collaboration in the housing sector to produce standardised house designs for the most commonly built homes. These homes will be built using timber and increasingly Welsh timber from short, strong and sustainable supply chains.

We are promoting that NHS Wales 'grow your own' local workforce programme to support local people into good jobs. Since 2022, Hywel Dda health board has recruited 128 healthcare support workers from the local population, including 15 completed apprenticeships. We are working with NHS colleagues to spread this best practice. Earlier this week, officials met with the partnership council to consider how the local government sector can support local employment, and it used that meeting to raise awareness of the NHS 'grow your own' approach amongst colleagues within local government.

I now call on Andrew R.T. Davies to reply to the debate.

Thank you, acting Presiding Officer, and thank you to everyone who contributed in the debate today. I think all committee members contributed, so it shows the interest that the committee did show in this genuine piece of work that, hopefully, assists the Government in some of the work that they are undertaking on the foundational economy.

Sam Kurtz, in his opening remarks, pointed to how many people actually do realise that they are in the foundational economy, and is it that lack of understanding of the role of the foundational economy that hinders many people's take on what is required. He said that this report, hopefully, will move things beyond warm words into a reality. I do genuinely believe that the Minister and the Government, with its programme for government commitment, do want to see that and make that happen. He also talked about the grants being very prescriptive, and maybe the grants needed to be a little bit more flexible so that there could be greater uptake of those grants to facilitate an expansion in the foundational economy.

Luke Fletcher touched on the point that there's broad agreement about what the problems are. There's not necessarily broad agreement on what the solution should be. I think that is a fair comment. He touched on how we do not necessarily need the conventional matrices to measure progress in the foundational economy, and ownership was one point that he highlighted, which could be used as a definition of some of the progress in the foundational economy reaching to the overall Welsh economy.

Hefin David touched on the point that he spoke in this Chamber in 2016. I did think my colleague Mark had rejoined us. But we didn't have to go back to 2003—it was only 2016 for Hefin. But it's an 'action this day' call, without a shadow of a doubt, because I have no doubt that, in the next Senedd term, the foundational economy will take people's workload to new levels and will occupy the minds of the new committee or successor committee in looking at the progress that the new Government will take when it delivers on its foundational economy commitments.

Jenny touched on the Preston model and how the committee had looked at the Preston model, and the Blaenau Ffestiniog experience as well, and the sense of belonging that communities need. But the other point she made was on the development of supermarkets in particular, and the way that they had wiped out, with the planning process, many high streets, which were the bedrock of foundational economies in many communities. I think many of us can recognise that in our own communities.

On the point that Hefin made about businesses depending on each other, I just think of conversations I have on my own farmyard when an electrician comes to fix something. It's very often, 'I know someone who can do it.' So, the electrician can do one part of it, the person who comes off his black phone index will do the middle part of it, and then maybe even a third person will come in and conclude the job. So, three businesses are benefiting from that, and that really is the integrational nature of the foundational economy.

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

We'll move on now to item 9, which is the Plaid Cymru debate on the UK Government. I call on Rhun ap Iorwerth to move the motion.

Thank you very much, acting Dirprwy Lywydd.

As the UK marked one year of a Labour Government last Friday, the overwhelming sense was one of real disappointment. Yes, unsurprisingly, that may well be my own judgment, but remember that poll after poll tells us clearly that this is the prevailing mood among a significant number of those who voted Labour into power, as well as the sentiment of many backbench Labour Members too, both in this Chamber and at Westminster—a party that fought and won the election on a platform of change, with that change ending up manifesting itself only in the Prime Minister changing his mind on one major policy announcement after another.

It's difficult to remember a period when such a large majority felt so fractious and fragile, with the governing party limping from one poor headline to the next. For Wales, the much-lauded 'partnership in power' rings hollow. Compare that with what I want to see: the power of partnership. The former serves only to celebrate Labour hegemony, while the latter cements the contract between a Government and the people it serves.

The previous First Minister and current Cabinet Secretary for finance expressed his confidence that a UK Labour Government would provide the investment that we need in our public services, and that a Starmer-led UK Government would be guided by a burning sense that the party's mission is not to tinker at the edges, not to offer some mild amelioration, but to eradicate poverty. Similarly, his successor proclaimed that a new UK Labour Government would be standing up for the future of Wales, for fair funding and for fair consequentials. And, of course, the current First Minister has spoken effusively about her relationship with and confidence in the Prime Minister, this beleaguered Prime Minister.

Twelve months on since the general election, the glaring hollowness of that promise is plain for all to see here in Wales. The signs were pretty ominous, weren't they, for some time prior to polling day. Growing the economy and ending the chaos, whilst admirable statements of intent after 14 years of Tory austerity, left a vacuum, which has now been filled on the backs of the poor and on the backs of the disadvantaged.

And somewhere in this equation lay Wales—a nation reminded time and time again that we are better together, and better still with two Labour Governments working together. Long-held commitments on devolving justice and policing were diluted beyond recognition, while the rhetoric on HS2 consequentials—so vocal even from the Secretary of State for Wales herself when Labour were in opposition—was suddenly dialled down to a conspicuous silence. We were even told on one occasion by that Secretary of State herself that HS2 no longer existed anymore. Well, it does, and so does the injustice, and the people of Wales know that.

In all, the trickle of disappointment soon became a flood of disillusionment. We had the withdrawal of the winter fuel allowance, which could have pushed thousands of pensioners already living well below the minimum wage into poverty and could have led to an additional 4,000 deaths in Wales alone, according to the older people's commissioner. They backed down because of pressure, not because of political instinct. Every single Welsh Labour MP at Westminster lining up to vote against devolving the Crown Estate, thereby denying us the opportunity to profit from the wealth of our own natural resources here in Wales. Talking the talk where it suits, not walking the walk when those votes could matter at Westminster.

There's the blatant double standards when it came to the UK Government's attitude towards the steel industry, which has left Wales, and Port Talbot in particular, the losers of the green transition. The pursuit of cuts to the welfare system so deep that it shamed a significant number of Labour Members of Parliament into action. An added tax on Wales of £72 million as a result of the fundamental injustice—the Cabinet Secretary for finance's words, not mine—in allocating reimbursements for employer national insurance contribution costs in the core public sector. A spending review that provides Wales with the worst real-terms growth in its day-to-day spending outside of the immediate austerity years. And a contracting capital budget—capital spending in Wales going down, where it's going up in Scotland and Northern Ireland. Yet it's a triumph, says Labour in Wales. The complete refusal to replace the outdated Barnett formula with a fair funding model that reflects the needs of our population. The list goes on.

And you don't need to take my word for it. Just listen to what the Labour Senedd Member for Llanelli said recently about the UK party being on the wrong side of history when it comes to rail investment and the case for devolving the Crown Estate, or what the Labour Senedd Member for Pontypridd has said about progress on further Welsh devolution not simply being non-existent under the current UK Government but actually deteriorating in several key areas. And I quote their words not with glee, but with a genuine sense of concern, which all of us should share, that Wales has been played. Wales has been played by a political project devoid of any compassion and lacking in an understanding of the real-world struggles of those who voted them into power and that is totally ambivalent to the needs, specifically, of the people of Wales.

Will you take an intervention?

Of course.

I'd like to know how you're going to justify, through the independence that you stand for, which somehow you don't mention at all in this speech, the £7,000 per person that's going to be needed to pay for your independence. That's what I'd like to know, and how you think that won't put people into depths of despair and poverty.

Back-of-a-fag-packet sums will not help in the debate on how we build a better future for Wales today. I will always make the case, and so should Labour Members here, that the current status quo of the United Kingdom is letting Wales down week after week, month after month, year after year, and if we haven't seen that from the actions of a Labour Government over the past 12 months, when will people learn?

I would like to hear the contribution from the leader of Plaid Cymru, and I can't, because there's so much noise going on elsewhere.

The noise is getting louder, isn't it, on our needs as a nation not being fulfilled by a UK Government, be it a current Labour Government or former Labour and Conservative Governments that completely fail to grasp the needs of our nation and the need to stand up and fight day in, day out for addressing those needs, and, yes, making the case for how we can reach our potential as a nation.

Now, the tap end is getting hotter; Welsh Labour might get burned. That was Lee Waters's warning, or clarion call—it depends on your perspective. If only there was a clear red water tap that could be turned on. If only the First Minister could live up to the claim that she has more influence over the Prime Minister than I will ever have. We see more clearly every day that her influence is negligible, and Wales pays the price for that. So, as Labour's electoral prospects drown in a deluge of their own doing, it is left to Plaid Cymru to offer the hope that the people of Wales so desperately seek, and I urge Members to cast their verdict on the UK Government and support our motion today.

I have selected the amendment, and I call on the Counsel General and Minister for Delivery to move amendment 1, tabled in the name of Jane Hutt.

Formally.

I'm pleased to be taking part in this debate today and confirming that the Welsh Conservatives will support the initial motion today, because it's true, isn't it, that this UK Labour Government, led by Keir Starmer, has let down those that it put into power. I think it's important to start with the inheritance that they had from the previous Conservative Government: the fastest growing economy in the G7, 700 jobs being created every single day, and inflation down to the target of 2 per cent. And yet in just a year, all that and more has completely vanished. Their most notable promise in the election was that they wouldn't raise taxes on working people—only to do the exact opposite and hike up national insurance tax. That decision has had the disastrous consequence of seeing unemployment rise across the country. They promised that they would keep that inflation figure at 2 per cent, but because the Chancellor has lost control of the economy, inflation has nearly doubled. That means that people's everyday bills get more expensive, and public services get more expensive to deliver too.

They promised that they would smash the gangs when it came to illegal boat crossings into this country. Then they oversaw the largest number ever of illegal crossings into this country, in the very first year. This Government has been smashed by the gangs. They promised our farmers that they would have their backs, but instead, they have threatened to put them out of business with their unfair family farm tax. They said that they would get more people back into work and off benefits, and then literally chickened out, causing the already massive benefits bill in this country to further increase over the coming years. They promised our older people that they would stand up for them, and the first thing that they did was remove the winter fuel allowance, leaving them frozen last winter.

And now, what's on the horizon? Well, that's the one thing that is clear: more tax rises. The Chancellor lost control of the economy, the Home Secretary lost control of our borders, and the Prime Minister has lost control of the country and of his party, and it is ordinary British people who are paying the price.

But why has that happened? Why have we reached this low point? It is because we have a Prime Minister who doesn't know what he actually wants to do or wants to achieve. When Kemi Badenoch asked the Prime Minister what he stands for, he literally had to look in his file to find the answer. Doesn't that say it all about the current occupant of 10 Downing Street?

During the election, we saw the empty one-word slogan of 'change'. But now we know that that did not mean anything, because the only thing that this Prime Minister is known for are his u-turns. He's been led by events rather than leading the country, and now he has seemed to hand over the leadership of his party to his backbenchers.

Would you like to take an intervention?

Of course.

I just want to ask, when we are talking about beliefs, whether you believed, when you supported the cuts that we suffered for 14 years, that that was the right way—to decimate our public services, including the NHS; to put people out of work; to make people poorer? I wonder if you believed in all of that, and I can hear your colleague, and I will ask him the same question too. Did you think that that was the way to go?

Well, let me tell you what I didn't believe in, and that was your party's decision, in this Senedd, to cut the NHS budget twice. The only part of the UK that has ever done it, and that is a decision that you lot made. But of course, we've got an occupant, haven't we, in No. 10, who doesn't believe in anything. And that stuff matters.

Look, I'd be the first person to admit that the last Conservative Government didn't achieve everything that it should have done, particularly towards the end of its last term. But that's why I'm pleased that my party is currently engaged in a process of renewal—doing the homework now, so that we don't end up in the position in the future that this current Government is in, where we don't know what we want to do or how to do it: diagnosing the problems, finding solutions that we can deliver and building a proper plan; being clear about what we, as Conservatives, stand for, and not just what we don't; making our country stronger again, not just for ourselves but for our children and our grandchildren too.

But that critique of the Labour Party applies to Reform too. They are excellent at identifying issues, but simply incapable of delivering any solutions. And there's no doubt that people have started paying attention to them. But they're increasingly finding, the more they look to Reform for answers, that the cupboard is bare. Take immigration as an example. Seventy-six days ago, Farage promised that he would set out a detailed deportation strategy, as to how he would plan to deport foreign criminals and illegal migrants within three to four weeks. Seventy-six days on, he still hasn't delivered it.

Meanwhile, the Conservatives have set out a detailed plan, presented to Parliament, with clear measures, asks and deliverables—voted down by the Labour Government, but ready to go on day one of the next Conservative one. Reform, meanwhile, simply haven't done their homework. To deliver change, you need to know what you'd do, and how you'd enact it.

We see that Labour have failed because they don't know what they stand for, and Reform will fail because they won't do the hard work to work out how to change Britain. Only a changed Conservative Party can deliver the change that Wales—

Tom, you need to end now, please.

—and Britain needs, both in Cardiff Bay and in Westminster. That's the only way we'll fix Wales, and then we'll fix Britain.

For over 14 years of the last Westminster Government, those who needed the most support in our communities bore instead the brunt of a flawed economic policy that punished the vulnerable for the failures of the rich. The Tories sold austerity as necessary fiscal medicine, a bitter pill we all had to swallow, with Cameron insisting that we're all in it together. But not everyone felt the effects of austerity equally. In Wales we have been among those who have paid the highest price for Westminster's wilful and deliberate neglect of our people. And these were the people who were promised change last year by Labour. They were promised fairness. They were told that a new day was dawning after a long, dark night. But a year into this so-called partnership between Welsh and UK Labour, what do the people of Wales truly have to show for it? Broken promises and more people being pushed into poverty and hardship.

Nothing crystallises the cold and calculated callousness of austerity politics like the two-child limit and benefit cap. It's a shameful policy. A deliberate political choice to deny support to some of the poorest in our society, the poorest children in our society, simply because of how many siblings they have. The consequences are devastating and disastrous for Wales. This policy doesn't save money, it deepens already unacceptably high levels of poverty, and it has no place in any society that claims to care about fairness or the well-being of children. But now, with their colleagues in power in Westminster keeping this cruel policy, knowingly locking over 65,000 Welsh children into poverty, what we hear from the Welsh Government are tempered calls, instead of the strong words we used to hear directed to the Tories, those that used to pepper Labour's speeches in this place—words like 'appalling', 'inhumane'—only a year ago.

Last winter Welsh pensioners were left in the cold as the winter fuel payment was scrapped for most. Oh, yes, there's been a u-turn, of course, but only after bad local election results in England forced Starmer and Reeves's hand. It was literally one of the first things the UK Labour Government reached for to fill their fiscal holes. While the non-doms saw the new measures announced, so they paid more of their fair share, adjusted and softened, we know that Welsh pensioners were amongst the hardest hit last winter. They felt bewildered, they felt betrayed. And then the cuts to welfare. It's almost too painful to list all these shameful decisions that have been taken in just one year of Labour in power in Westminster.

A decision was made to target and degrade disabled and long-term sick people to meet an artificial budget line. When enough Labour MPs, many in marginal seats, saw the writing on the wall, they acted. But the disgraceful way that the lives of those hundreds of thousands of disabled people in Wales were treated by Labour politicians in the ensuing chaos was absolutely horrifying. And now, even in its new form, the UN, no less, has warned of the damage that the proposed reform Bill will inflict on disabled people and their rights. The pressure placed on those who a Labour Government should be protecting is despicable, especially to those with fluctuating or invisible conditions who now face a more punitive system under a Government that promised compassion. Welsh Labour, whatever that is, cannot sit back and pretend they bear no responsibility. All now are seemingly comfortable to support the cuts passed for new claimants of the universal credit health payment. Although Disability Wales has said, for disabled people in Wales already experiencing some of the highest poverty rates in the UK, facing long NHS waits, inaccessible workplaces, daily discrimination and spiralling costs of living, these plans are nothing short of an assault.

You need to conclude now, please, Sioned.

In the 1920s, the American poet and social activist Langston Hughes warned:

‘Hold fast to dreams / For if dreams die / Life is a broken-winged bird / That cannot fly.’

Hope is being extinguished, and that has consequences for our society. The legacy of this continued austerity is one which Wales cannot countenance. It must be meaningfully challenged—

Sioned, conclude now, please.

—and empty, contradictory slogans just don't do the job.

Well, that—[Interruption.] And I will, because Plaid does talk a good talk, but I want to know where their plans are. But I know what their plans are: endless debates on the one hand about independence, and asking the UK Treasury for more money on the other hand. They refused to support the Welsh budget, risking £600 million extra for the NHS—[Interruption.]—and politics instead of care—in a minute—for patients. Obviously, you're excited already, but I'll give you an intervention in a short time.

You also refused to support a budget that was the first budget in 14 years that gave more money to Wales than it has ever had before. I don't understand how you could do that when you hadn't actually voted against the reduced budgets year on year that the Tories thought were good enough. So, it's—[Interruption.] I know there is a lot of excitement going on, but I'm going to continue, because I let you carry on, and I'm going to do the same.

So, the point is—. It's pretty clear that you don't like the facts, but these are the facts. You did vote against the largest budget we've had in 14 years, but you failed to object to the others. You didn't bring anything to the table, either—no plans, nothing. But, week in and week out, you ask for more money for something that you haven't costed. Llyr.

Thank you. You berate us for voting against the Government's budget, and, in doing so, you suggest that we've denied Wales money. Of course, your Labour colleagues in Westminster for 14 years voted against a Tory budget at Westminster. Were they also denying money coming to Wales as a consequence?

I think you've got a little bit confused about the voting pattern, because you were asked to vote on the Welsh budget, which actually gave you extra money, and you voted against it. You obviously don't recognise either, when you talk about what that money might deliver—. So, I'll give you some facts. Forty per cent of the people in my area work in local government. If we had gone along and that budget had failed—

But it didn't.

Because you relied on other people to do your job, and your job is to make sure people have some work. That's why, because you thought you could get away with it, and then you thought you could come back here and tell us about how good you are. Well, I'm going to tell you that, if that budget had failed, and 40 per cent of people in my area, in rural Wales, which you are claiming you care about, large numbers of those people, would have done two things: first of all lost their job, and, secondly, lost their services. That's what you were—

It doesn't make sense.

—quite happy to do. No, you don't make sense. I'm glad you pointed that out. [Laughter.]

So, you didn't care about allowing that to happen, because you wanted to make some political point. I don't know what that political point was, but I'm going to make the point that, if you get independence, I don't know where you think people are going to find £7,000 each per year to pay for your independence—£7,000 per year per person. Those aren't my figures; those are figures that have been well established by many, many groups—not by the UK Government, by independent bodies—about the true cost of independence, and, I have to say, you've suddenly forgotten to tell people about that, so I feel it's my duty to remind them on your behalf. You live in a land of fantasy politics. You are quite happy to bankrupt this country.

Will the Member allow an intervention?

Not just now. Obviously, I've engendered some debate, because that's four interventions that I've been asked for, and yet I sat through listening to your fantasy politics quietly.

But the point here is—[Interruption.] The point here is—[Interruption.] Once, yes. The point here is, if you get your hands on power here and you somehow manage to dupe people into believing you've forgotten independence, they're going to find out very quickly the true cost of it, and they won't be able to afford it either.

Yes, it's interesting isn't it? Labour in Westminster for years vote against the UK Government budget, and somehow they're standing up for their electors. Labour in Scotland vote against the Scottish Government budget, and again they're standing up for their electors. Plaid Cymru in Wales, of course, votes against the Welsh Government budget, and somehow we're denying Wales money. I mean, you couldn't make it up, Joyce Watson. This is ridiculous. How inconsistent an argument could that be? Now, we were promised change 12 months ago by the UK Government.

Wales was promised change, and change has come. But, as we've heard, it's not change for the better. I want to focus particularly on the impact that has on some of our rural communities, because those of us who know about this appreciate how vulnerable the agricultural economy is here in Wales. The most prominent changes, I would say, over the next 12 months are the changes proposed to inheritance tax. Those have far-reaching implications for farming families in Wales.

We know, don't we, that Wales isn't a nation of lavish-living millionaire farmers; our family farms operate on tight margins. They live a hand-to-mouth existence and many of them, of course, carry significant debts as well. That's not me saying this—this is the Welsh Government's own farm business income statistics. Welsh farmers don't have the capital to shoulder this additional tax burden. Now, we know, as a consequence, it'll force families to sell off land and that will cut further into people's livelihoods, making their farms less viable for future generations. Of course, that's utterly counterproductive at a time when we should be really focusing on food security and the resilience of our primary food producers, not actively undermining their viability for the future.

Now, yes, we do need to get to grips with those multimillionaires who intentionally buy up land for tax avoidance purposes, and there are plenty of ways that that could be done. The clawback system has been outlined here by myself and others many times, where, if land is subsequently sold then, yes, of course that can be taxed. In fact, the research that I've seen suggests that would generate greater revenue for the Treasury at the end of the day.

We've seen an independent report recently published by CBI Economics, and it shows that the reduction in business activity as a consequence of this proposal will lead to a loss in gross value added of £14.8 billion over the next five years. That's over 200,000 full-time jobs, and while the Exchequer expects to raise £1.8 billion in tax revenue by 2030, we see that the cost of the policy will be much more than what it will generate.

So, our working family farms shouldn't get caught up in the crossfire on this one. The economic, the environmental, the social, the cultural collateral damage that that will cause to us here in Wales is too high a price to pay, but that's what Labour policy is from the UK Government that's being foisted upon us here in Wales.

The economic context, of course, has hit the agricultural industry hard, like every other industry. We've seen that—input costs have gone up in recent years, and the cost-of-living crisis not only impacts farming families directly, but also the choices made by customers too as they purchase our Welsh produce. The destabilisation as a result of Brexit, of course, the impact that that has had on the bureaucratic burden around exports, along with new trade agreements, which run the risk of undermining the domestic market, have all had a negative impact. We've moved from seven years of financial certainty under the common agricultural policy to going from year to year.

Now, much of that, of course, emerges from decisions taken by the previous UK Government. We were promised not a penny less—I've made this point in the past—and what Welsh farmers got, of course, was £0.25 billion less. But Labour have gone a step further in the next 12 months by moving to using the Barnett formula on agricultural funding. Agricultural support used to, of course, reflect the size and comparative nature of farming in Wales, and the allocation of resources was much fairer, but now, of course, we are back to a system where it relies on population size, and that's going to reduce the funding available to us. Now, if there was a real partnership in power, then the Welsh Government would have ensured that that was not the case.

Eluned Morgan, the First Minister, herself has said that she's concerned about that. Well, if she's worried, then imagine how the sector itself feels and the concern felt there about another four years of what we have seen over the past 12 months. But what I can assure you is that Plaid Cymru will stand up for our rural communities and stand up for communities in all parts of Wales.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. And let's not sugar coat it: the UK Labour Government is failing Wales. And by what I've heard from Plaid Cymru, there's not much to see there either. Labour promised us stability, but what have we got? Chaos, confusion and excuses, where families, farmers and businesses across Wales are left picking up the bill.

Labour promised they'd respect devolution. Instead, they've dumped the costs of national insurance rises onto Wales, forcing charities, doctors, dentists and care homes across our country to pick up the costs. They said they'd tackle the cost-of-living crisis, but inflation is biting, mortgages are up, energy bills remain high and Welsh families are poorer under Labour. They said they'd look after pensioners, then they tried to scrap the winter fuel allowance in the middle of a cost-of-living crisis, before panicking and doing a u-turn. Even now, thousands of pensioners are left out in the cold while Labour Ministers in London claim they're doing them a favour. I say: shame on them.

They told us they'd manage the economy, but they've blown billions on u-turns, and now we're hearing that they'll hike taxes this autumn to pay for their chaos, hitting workers, savers and businesses across Wales. Because it is the socialist way. The only way they know to get their way out of chaos is to keep taxing working people, because they're very, very good at spending other people's money.

And let's talk about immigration. Labour promised to get a grip on illegal channel crossings. The reality: they've hit record highs. Nearly 20,000 people have crossed illegally this year alone—a 48 per cent increase. Labour have no credible plans to stop it and Plaid Cymru would have no plans at all. While Labour tears up previous plans, makes speeches, the gangs continue to profit. Our borders remain porous and public services, our housing and our healthcare and our schools are under strain. Labour is failing and it's communities across Wales who are paying the price for their failure.

And now Labour is turning its back on hard-working family businesses across Wales and across the United Kingdom. They're gutting business property relief, hitting family businesses that employ people in manufacturing, construction, logistics—those businesses that have been built up over generations, businesses that pay their taxes, support our communities and give people good jobs and solid employment. Labour sees those businesses as a cash cow to pay for their spiralling spending while they push that globalist agenda that props up big corporations and the stock markets instead of the local family businesses that drive our economy here across Wales. Those are the businesses that sponsor our local rugby teams, provide apprenticeships, give young people their first pay packet. Yet Labour is punishing them—punishing them for being successful—while turning a blind eye to big corporations across the country. You can't claim to stand up for working people while you punish the businesses that employ them.

James, conclude now, please.

—is the Conservative and Unionist Party.

Deputy Presiding Officer, two of the few specific commitments made to Wales a year ago were in the field of justice, to review probation, including exploring the devolution of services, and to consider the devolution of youth justice. There was hopeful talk of partnership where there had been paternalism. What has come of those commitments tells us a lot about the state of our democracy. The probation review's terms of reference were filed in the Commons Library last October, then effectively sealed from public scrutiny. No call for evidence, no interim findings, no timeline. If this is partnership, then it's partnership by stealth.

Last week, the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice spoke of positive conversations and preparation for devolution. Yet when pressed for details and for substance, we are offered the familiar liturgy of Westminster evasion, no date for devolution, no draft Bill, no heads of agreement. And yet the UK Labour Government can claim they're not breaking their promises because 'consider', 'explore', 'review', as anyone who's ever written a manifesto will know, is the political vocabulary of infinite delay.

Seven hundred million pounds has been announced for the probation service; 1,300 new recruits are to be trained—welcome developments. But there's silence on one key question: who shall decide how these resources will be used in Wales? And resources alone will not solve the crisis. The chief inspector of probation himself has warned that expanding community sentences without fixing the probation service would be catastrophic for public safety. Yet Wales, with its potential integrated approach to health, education, housing and justice, is barred from offering solutions. This is not an administrative question. Yes, it is a constitutional question, but it's also a question of life or life in prison for offenders. It's a question of life or death for their possible victims.

The Cabinet Secretary talked about the progress made in Wales with the youth justice blueprint in reducing youth custody, albeit with the limited influence we have. That progress flowed from the application of a distinctively Welsh approach, child-focused, trauma-informed, integrated, rooted in the understanding that justice without compassion is merely vengeance dressed in legal robes.

But our success is constrained by the constitutional cage in which we operate. When Parc's young offender institution reaches capacity, Welsh children are still dispatched across the border, severed from family, from their culture, from the very roots of their own rehabilitation. Picture a 16-year-old from Wales, troubled and afraid, transported to a prison in another country, where maybe no-one speaks his language, where almost certainly no-one understands the community that shaped him. This is not an inconvenience. This is the systematic crushing of hope. This is not justice. This is exile as punishment. Every commission—Silk, Thomas—has reached the same conclusion. Justice powers must align with devolved services. Scotland governs its own justice system with distinction. Northern Ireland shapes its own path with pride. Wales alone is told to wait.

It was a huge relief when Labour won the UK Government election last year. If the Conservatives had continued on the same trajectory, we would have been £6 billion worse off. Councils across the UK were already on the brink of bankruptcy. Teachers, doctors, rail workers and bus drivers were striking, and the public services we rely on for a decent life were on their knees, at breaking point. The Conservatives took over a successful economy in 2010 and crashed it. Our public services are one of our biggest employers in Wales, bringing wealth and health to our communities, investing in people. The UK Labour Government, working with Welsh Labour Government, unlocked a £21 billion record settlement in Wales, which is being invested in these.

Carolyn, would you just take a little intervention? Are you aware that Liam Byrne left a note saying, 'There's no money left'?

I believe it was a joke.

There's no money left. None.

It was a joke. People want to see clean streets, health appointments when needed, decent housing and pothole-free roads. Public sector pay rises were awarded, strikes averted, work was able to continue. Funding has gone into the NHS, waiting lists are coming down, and we finally have capital funding for building orthopaedic units, specialist care provision, new technologies for schools and housing, and repairing the road network. The UK Government have set up trade deals with the US and India, and, thankfully, are rebuilding relations with the EU, our nearest neighbours.

Much of the Prime Minister's time has been spent on diplomacy in a world that is so fragile. There have been four interest rate cuts, thousands of jobs have been created, and wages have grown more than in the last 10 years of Tory Government. The minimum wage has increased. There's investment in renewable energy and green jobs, which will eventually give energy security and drive down costs, helping with the cost-of-living crisis.

Then, following Wales's lead, which is great for our neighbours, they have expanded free school meals to 0.5 million children and opened up free breakfast clubs. As I said, following Wales's lead. They are rebuilding council houses, we have free bus passes from 60 years of age, and there is a petition now in England to reduce it from pensionable age. They are nationalising the rail service and reforming bus services too, like us.

The First Minister says there have been 34 inter-governmental meetings since September, and I remember before that devolved Governments were left out, they were treated without respect as a minor Government. If funding wasn't transparent from the UK Government Treasury, it was often found down the back of a sofa for their priorities when we asked where was our share. They were purposefully running Wales down to try to make the Welsh Labour Government fail. The poor got poorer and the rich got richer under them, and we don't want to go back to that.

Neither do we want privately educated, millionaire-banker and Thatcher-lover Nigel Farage in charge of policy and budgets, which he tends to make up as he goes along. The harm would be devastating for Wales. What does he know about fairness, communities and social justice? He helped cause Brexit then disappeared, became an MP and then went to America. He doesn't care about the cost-of-living crisis, voted against the workers' rights Bill, has talked about an insurance-based healthcare system and, like the Tories, believes in cutting public services further, which will impact on everybody's health and well-being.

A lot has been done and there's still a lot to do with the two Labour Governments working together. We can already see the benefits, with improvements to the cost of living, our economy, wages and our public services, but it will take the next few years to see the full impact and fruition of the significant investment of the UK Labour Government, which has only been in place for one year. Thank you.

What is the purpose of having power? I wonder if that question ever troubles the minds of those in the UK Cabinet—individuals who seem motivated, for all the world, by the desire to be able to do things, rather than necessarily the desire to do good. Blair himself had said that power without principle is barren, a bitterly ironic statement now when we can see the arid Ozymandian state of his outlook. But the past year has aged the Labour Party.

I'm put in mind of the words of the American poet and humanitarian Samuel Ullman, that nobody grows old merely by living a number of years. We grow old by deserting our ideals. Years may wrinkle the skin, but to give up enthusiasm wrinkles the soul. How this year has twisted and shrivelled the soul of that once mighty party. When we look at the contours of the profile they present to the world, what do we see? A party that prioritises figures caught in a spreadsheet, rather than figures caught in crisis; one obsessed with sticking to the arbitrary fiscal rules of Tory Governments gone by, instead of charting its own course for justice.

Too often, today's Labour Party in Westminster guards its own power jealously instead of using it for good. It is a party that has abandoned its moral core. As we've heard, one of the first acts of this Labour Government was to suspend its MPs who voted to remove the cruel two-child benefits cap, and one of the latest acts has been to cling to cuts for the sick and disabled, cuts on which they only compromised in any way when it became clear they were going to lose a vote—losing a vote, that is, not because they feared they'd lost their soul. So, they decided to inflict the greatest pain on those people who will become disabled in the future; out of their immediate sight, out of their minds, thus treating those future disabled people as the collateral needed to win a vote in Westminster.

No, this is not the face of Dorian Gray they present, a visage pretending to be moralistic and true. This is the face they were meant to keep locked away, presented in all its macabre apathy; a face that wears the scars of each discarded ideal, that is warped and wrinkled by every moral failure; a face that's being etched and lined anew with every cruelty endured, every chance to change things that is missed.

Labour was meant to be different. That's why these cuts cut so deeply, because instead of them using their majority as an excuse to lead, they've chosen to follow the crooked orthodoxy of what's gone before, redefining themselves as not the party of workers, but of work, and letting those self-imposed fiscal rules act as a straitjacket on any progressive policy. It seems that constraint has become Labour doctrine.

In the weeks leading up to the election a year ago, commentators had likened Keir Starmer's predicament to that of a man carrying a Ming vase over a highly polished floor, using the Roy Jenkins analogy. They saw him as a man whose focus was fated to be on widening neither hope nor vision, but on narrowing it, on being as tame and constrained as possible, promising little so as not to spook the voters or the markets. Now they have that power, now they've moved that vase across the polished floor, they don't seem capable of repressing that suppression, of shaking off the shackles of constraint. Time and again, Labour appear paralysed either by indecision or a lack of vision and have forgotten it is precisely when no central agent propels you forward that things truly fall apart, that the mask slips, exposing the gnarled and brutish vacuum beneath.

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

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd, and thank you very much for the chance to respond to this debate today, because, of course, it's another welcome opportunity to celebrate the Labour gains made at the general election just over a year ago, especially in Wales, where there are no longer any Conservative Members of Parliament, something I like to remind the Members when they are putting forward their fantasy politics on the benches opposite. It's another opportunity to welcome a Labour Government in Westminster that can work with our Labour Government here in Cardiff—a Government that is interested in advancing the interests of the people of Wales and of devolution itself; so very different to the omnichaos of the Conservative Governments over the previous 14 years, which worked so very hard to turn back the clock on Wales and devolution—a Government, might I remind you, that repeatedly breached the Sewel convention, including twice in the dying days of the last Parliament.

This is an opportunity to celebrate everything the UK Labour Government has achieved over the past 12 months and that will make a real difference to people in Wales and across the UK. So, in the spirit of marking the first anniversary of a UK Labour Government, I offer you the following examples of how it is benefiting people in Wales: an increased national minimum wage, a national living wage for around 160,000 workers in Wales, which would not have happened under the previous Conservative Government; reforming workers' rights for the better through the Employment Rights Bill, something we very much welcome after the devastating attack on workers' rights by the previous Conservative Government; upgrading mobile coverage in rural parts of Wales, something appallingly neglected by the previous Conservative Government; improving Welsh military housing in the strategic defence review, shamefully neglected by the previous Tory Government; recruiting 150 neighbourhood police officers; embedding domestic abuse specialists in 999 control rooms; working with the Welsh Government to clean up the River Wye; a personal favourite of mine, decriminalising rough sleeping after 200 years, a welcome move that we should all be celebrating; investing in flood defences across north Wales; introducing a new law to create a smoke-free generation and ban the sale of vapes to under-18s; transferring the investment reserve fund in the mineworkers' pension scheme to the scheme's trustees at long last, shamefully neglected by the Conservative Government; and of course, last but not least in this particular list—others are available—together with the Welsh Government, investing in coal tip safety.

And this, of course, is in addition to the UK autumn budget and the spending review, because despite the ongoing difficult global financial circumstances, Wales received welcome uplifts in revenue and capital at both of those fiscal events—funding that, because of the progressive budget we were able to pass despite Plaid, is making a real difference today in Wales. It's cutting waiting times, it's helping to raise standards in classrooms, it's creating more jobs, it's helping to build more homes and it's bringing lovely new trains to people across Wales.

Will you take an intervention?

—very, very different to Plaid. Of course.

Thank you very much. We've discussed many times the shortfall in terms of the amount of money Wales received because of the Barnettisation of the national insurance contributions. When questioned on this by Llinos Medi today, the Secretary of State for Wales said she was unaware of a shortfall. If the Secretary of State for Wales is not aware of the shortfall with national insurance contributions, how are we supposed to believe that there is a partnership in power?

One of the things that you are unable to grasp, it seems to me, is that we've only had 12 months of a Labour Government, and in 12 months, no Government can fix everything. It is a stark contrast to a party who has been in power for a long time, who knows how to be both realistic and optimistic. You think that in a single bound, anyone, any Government of any colour, could have recovered from the deep wounds inflicted by 14 years of Tory chaos all at once. One budget and a single spending review will not reverse the deep Tory cuts and restore all the services that disappeared during the long and painful years of unnecessary austerity. One year of a Labour Government won't magically get rid of foodbanks or end our dependence on them. The damage caused by the Governments of Cameron, May, Johnson, Truss and Sunak—goodness me, they got through Prime Ministers—will now take time to heal. And as an aside, Dirprwy Lywydd, I see that—

Before we go any further, please, I do like to listen to contributions from each Member, including the Government Ministers, and I can't hear the contribution because of the noise in the Chamber. I would be grateful if Members can allow the contribution to be made in a bit of quiet.

Would you take an intervention, please, Cabinet Secretary?

Certainly.

You said that you can't fix everything in 12 months and you can't magic away foodbanks, but do you recognise what Trussell have said, that the actions of this UK Labour Government are actually going to make dependency on foodbanks more intense, make it worse?

But the point is they've only been in power for a year, and already in that year they have made huge strides. They are already conducting a review of the system. You need to wait to see what that review will produce. No-one can fix the damage caused by the Governments of Cameron, May, Johnson, Truss and Sunak, I'll repeat.

But I also wanted to say, as an aside, Dirprwy Lywydd, that I see today that Mr Sunak has taken a second job in Goldman Sachs, one that he has been told is a conflict of interest. I'm sure the poor man is really hard up; he has held on to his job as an MP at the same time. I'm sure the people he represents are really delighted.

There will be ups and downs on the way of any Government, each magnified and amplified in the headlines of the day, but Dirprwy Lywydd, let me be clear, Wales is definitely better off for having a Labour Government in Westminster. That Government gives us a solid platform for positive and progressive change that has already benefited people in Wales, to improve the everyday services on which people rely—[Interruption.] I've finished now, sorry—to strengthen the economy, to create a brighter future for everyone, to be a beacon of hope in an otherwise bleak landscape.

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

Thank you. Let me start with a statement of the obvious: the first year of Labour in Government has been a disappointment—a deep disappointment. I say that as someone who didn't vote for Labour in that election, because I could see that we needed Plaid Cymru to be a voice for Wales. But yes, I did agree that we needed change at that time. But we have to remember why we needed change: not in terms of curiosity or to see fresh faces, but to have a new direction, to ensure that there was new hope offered to people, to take the pressure away from the most vulnerable, and, for me as a Welsh person, to see whether there could be new answers to some of the problems being faced by our communities.

But it was disappointment after disappointment after disappointment that we had. That's undermined Labour, without a doubt. We see that. That's clear. But, it's also undermined trust in politics. As speaker after speaker on the Plaid Cymru benches has said, we in Plaid Cymru are ready to try to restore some of that trust here in Wales, in order to carry on with the work of rebuilding a better future for Wales.

I note that the only intervention from the Labour benches during my opening comments was to tell us what Wales cannot do, how poor we are. Well, I'm not interested in the politics of throwing the towel in. I and my Plaid Cymru colleagues believe in Wales, and we believe in the potential that we have as a nation. The same Member chose to emphasise the sheer entitlement of Labour, thinking that all they have to do is put forward any budget, no matter what is in it, no matter how they wish to share out that budget, and it is up to opposition parties to vote for it. I can't believe I'm having to tell this to Joyce Watson, but that is not how politics works. We were putting the partnership in power to the test. We had been told that these two Governments would work hand in glove, but all we have, day after day, is the pulling of punches.

I don't know which universe you're living in, or which planet you're going to arrive at, but what I do know is this: you had an opportunity to come to the table with a budget and ask for something that you wanted. You didn't want to do it. You wanted to play politics with people's lives. That's what you wanted to do. That's what you did.

She's made that point before, as have many of her colleagues. I fail to understand when Joyce Watson will understand that the job of an opposition party is to hold a Government to account, and we were doing it over the budget that was put forward then. The Minister spoke also on the same issue—[Interruption.]

I said it for the Minister, and I'll say it for the leader of Plaid Cymru, who is responding to the debate: I like to hear the contributions, and I can't when you're all making such a noise. Please allow the contribution to be made.

The Minister made the same bizarre accusation, and the Minister also fell into that trap again of turning fire on Plaid Cymru rather than turning fire on the injustices that Wales continues to face by this Labour Government, as under previous Conservative Governments. She chose to stand here to celebrate Labour gains in that election, the gains made by Labour politicians, rather than choose to talk about the interests of the people of Wales. I think that, again, says a lot about the entitlement of this Labour Government.

I thank the leader of Plaid Cymru for giving way. I've listened to the debate, but I can't help feeling this overwhelming feeling of hypocrisy coming from Plaid Cymru. You have propped up Labour here in Wales for so long. If you fundamentally disagree, as you've laid out, with Labour's policies, will you rule your party out of doing any future deals with the Labour Party beyond 2026 and way into the future?

I fail to comprehend the hypocrisy of the Tories, full stop—and I'll leave it there.

What we had from the Minister was a declaration that Labour had only been in power for 12 months and that things could not all be fixed in 12 months. Things have got worse in that 12 months—that is the point. People have witnessed problems that were dragging down our communities being multiplied by the actions of that UK Government. Labour don't get it.

As Heledd Fychan said, we had a Secretary of State for Wales say in Westminster today that she wasn't even aware of the assessment showing that Wales was £70 million down because of the way the UK Government had shared out money to make up for the impact of national insurance changes on the public sector. It is appalling that we have a Secretary of State for Wales that chooses to not understand the issues that we face day to day at that fundamental level. And it is appalling, frankly, that we have Labour Cabinet Members here looking down, and not looking in real concern at me, when the fact is that their Labour colleague in Westminster is failing to understand the issues that they are having to grapple with in Welsh Government.

I'll conclude my comments, Deputy Llywydd. Wales and the people of Wales have been disappointed. They have been let down by this Labour UK Government. Let us collectively—and that is an appeal to Labour Members here too, as well as Members of all political parties—here keep up the pressure on that UK Government, rather than celebrate a tedious list of things that we were saying the Labour UK Government had failed the people of Wales on. We have a Labour Government here celebrating that. Let's keep up the pressure on them, to demand what is right for the people of Wales. Plaid Cymru will always do that. And let's look ahead to what Wales can achieve under new Plaid Cymru leadership from May next year. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

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

And that brings us to voting time. Unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, I will proceed directly to voting time.

The first vote is on item 6, debate on the Standards of Conduct Committee report, 'Twenty first report to the Sixth Senedd under Standing Order 22.9'. I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Hannah Blythyn. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 50, no abstentions, none against. Therefore, the motion is agreed.

The next vote will be on item 9, the Plaid Cymru debate on the UK Government. I call for a vote on the motion without amendment, tabled in the name of Heledd Fychan. If the proposal is not agreed, we will vote on the amendment tabled to the motion. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 24, no abstentions, 26 against. Therefore, the motion is not agreed.

I therefore call for a vote on amendment 1, tabled in the name of Jane Hutt. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 26, no abstentions, 24 against. Therefore, amendment 1 is agreed.

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

Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 26, no abstentions, 24 against. Therefore, the motion as amended is agreed.

Item 11 is next, the short debate. We'll move now to today's short debate, and I call on Janet Finch-Saunders.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I will be giving Joyce Watson, Carolyn Thomas, Sam Rowlands, Tom Giffard, Sam Kurtz and James Evans a minute.

I wish to place on record my thanks to those who have corresponded with me about bottom trawling, including Wildlife Trusts Wales, WWF Cymru, RSPB Cymru, Rewilding Britain and the Marine Conservation Society. There's no better place to anchor this debate than with the comments of our national treasure, Sir David Attenborough:

'A modern industrial bottom trawler scours the ocean floor with a chain or metal beam, forcing anything it disturbs into the net behind. It smashes its way across the sea bed, destroying nearly everything in its path, often on the hunt for just a single species. Almost everything else is discarded. Over three quarters of a trawler's catch may be thrown away. It is hard to imagine a more wasteful way to catch fish.'

And I have to say, I agree with Sir David Attenborough. It is a national disgrace that this Welsh Government is allowing such destructive and wasteful practices to take place here in Wales. Up to 80 per cent of the fish indiscriminately caught in the nets of trawlers are merely discarded or destroyed. As many colleagues will be aware, bottom trawling is a collective term for a group of discarded or destroyed fish. As many colleagues will be aware too, they drag heavy nets across the sea floor and can be defined by the modifications, as some have metal teeth that penetrate the sea bed or metal beams to keep the nets open. The types of bottom trawling gear include, but are not limited to, beam trawls, otter trawls, pair trawls, fly seining and dredges.

Now, as described by Sir David Attenborough, these practices effectively bulldoze through and destroy sea bed habitats. They release high levels of stored carbon and they catch untargeted marine life. Marine protected areas are meant to be sanctuaries for marine life, but this trawling is only excluded from less than 1 per cent of the Welsh seas that are within an MPA.

Skomer marine conservation zone is just one of 139 Welsh MPAs. Clearly, this method of destructive fishing is not compatible with MPAs. Clarity as to why you've allowed such a fishing method in MPAs, Cabinet Secretary, would be extremely helpful, and a commitment to sink such a destructive policy warmly welcomed.

I fear that the answer in this is that Welsh Government has left marine policy rudderless. Look at the evidence our own climate committee here presented in our report on progress towards the 30x30 target. Wales Environment Link, WWF Cymru and the Marine Conservation Society highlighted that we have been waiting over a decade for new marine conservation zones. RSPB Cymru explained the Welsh Government had written to the marine conservation zone task and finish group in October 2024 to advise that formal consultation would not take place until after the next Senedd election. As all of us on the committee concluded in that report earlier this year, and I quote, the repeated delays on consulting on MCZs risk undermining confidence, and based on the evidence we have received again and again, send a concerning signal to stakeholders about the priority afforded to marine conservation.

Stopping this wicked trawling in MPAs would be one of the most impactful steps that this Welsh Government could take in meeting nature and climate commitments for protecting and effectively managing 30 per cent of our sea by 2030. I mentioned that I'm giving a minute to my colleague Joyce Watson, because I know for years she's had very strong feelings on this matter, and has also worked hard to bring this matter forward for change.

I want to thank Janet Finch-Saunders, my colleague, for bringing an incredibly important subject to the Chamber to be debated today, and you can see that by the number of people who've stayed behind. She said, and it's true, that I've spoken on this subject on a number of occasions over many years, and particularly with regard to the impact of scallop dredging in the special area of conservation in Cardigan bay. Scallop dredging, like other forms of dredging, is an incredibly destructive fishing practice. The entire structure of the sea bed is damaged, as rakes are dragged along to collect scallops in chainmail baskets. Many marine experts have said that the damage inflicted on the ecosystem from this activity is not anywhere near proportionate to the catch, and Janet's already alluded to that.

This form of fishing, of course, was halted in Cardigan bay in 2009, but reintroduced in certain areas at specific times of the year in 2016. I was personally concerned about that at the time, and I remain equally concerned now. When it was reintroduced, the Welsh Government said they were committed to monitoring the impact on the area annually by conducting a habitats regulatory assessment before each season. So, therefore, Cabinet Secretary, I would be grateful if we could have an update on those findings, because I'm really keen to know what impact scallop dredging has had on the marine life and habitats in Cardigan bay since it was reintroduced 11 years ago.

I'd also like to thank Janet for tabling this short debate. I too watched Ocean with Sir David Attenborough, with my son, and I was shocked seeing the images of true devastation on the ocean bed with bottom trawling. Like you said, 80 per cent of the animals, the beautiful sea creatures, are just discarded and wasted as well, and the impact on the biodiversity—it was horrific watching it. But it did say that there was hope that, if bottom trawling ended, it could recover—the ecosystems, the biodiversity could soon recover. And if you create this marine protection zone, then the outer edge also will recover for fishing—not bottom trawling, but for local fishing, which is what we want, and that's the business here in Wales. And by doing this—and I plead with Welsh Government as well—it will help us reach our targets, 30x30 targets. Thank you.

I'm grateful to Janet Finch-Saunders for tabling this debate here today on bottom trawling. I think it first of all shows the breadth of the issues that we have to consider in this place as Members of the Senedd. But I think what Janet Finch-Saunders has shared with us also this evening is some of the tension that we also experience in recognising some of the environmental impacts of some activity that takes place. But also we have to ensure we have affordable food security for people in Wales and across the UK as well. So, I wonder—. In the Cabinet Secretary's response, I'd be interested to hear how that tension is managed appropriately. Because what I recognise is the importance of seafood in our diets as well, and that being affordable for people, because we know the health benefits of seafood—high in omega 3, high in protein, high in minerals—and we can't—. We're told, actually, that twice a week we should be eating some sort of seafood to maintain a healthy diet. So, we can't allow that healthy diet to just become the privilege of the middle classes. So, there has to be a real balance between how we get affordable seafood to people whilst addressing some of the environmental concerns that you've rightly highlighted. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Thank you to Janet Finch-Saunders for bringing forward this debate today, because this debate is about bottom trawling, but it's also about the protection of our sea beds across Wales. There's nowhere in Wales, I think, that cares more about its sea bed than north Gower, in Penclawdd, where people have been picking cockles in Penclawdd for, well, I was going to say for generations, but, actually, since Roman times people have been picking there, and they've become a Swansea delicacy that is known across the world. Now, that has happened for centuries, collected by local people who care about the sea bed and the future viability of the cockles. But recent legislative changes by the Welsh Government have meant that people have descended upon Penclawdd to pick cockles, and haven't restored the sea bed in the same way that people who have done it historically, locally, have done previously. So, I'd appreciate it if the Cabinet Secretary, in his response—or, if he doesn't have it in response, I'm happy for him to write to me—would explain some of the legislative changes and why they've taken place. Because I was in Penclawdd recently and someone had driven from Liverpool, as a consequence of the recent legislative changes, just to pick cockles there. Residents are very worried that the sea bed is not being protected and the future viability of cockles in Penclawdd is not being protected either.

A very short contribution from myself. I thank Janet Finch-Saunders for allowing me a minute on bottom trawling. Developing on the extractive nature of that, and on Tom Giffard's point, Deputy First Minister, you'll be aware that I wrote to you earlier this year, on 12 May—you replied to me—with regard to the concerns around the harvesting of razor clams in Saundersfoot. And while that area isn't eligible for commercial collection of razor clams, what was concerning was the photo of the amount of people who are going there for, quote unquote, 'personal use'. So, that extractive nature does have an impact. And I met with someone at a surgery in Saundersfoot very recently who asked that a pause is put on the eligibility of Saundersfoot as somewhere to collect, just so that proper evidence can be collected as to the impact of this, to ensure that no damage is being done. Diolch i chi.

Even though I represent a landlocked constituency, I care deeply about our oceans and our seas. And I don't tend to disagree with my colleague Janet Finch-Saunders very often, but I think we do need to have a balanced approach here. I do worry sometimes about banning things or overregulation, the simple reason being that a lot of our fishermen make a living out of the sea. We need to make sure that we do balance the environmental contributions against those economic impacts of banning something as well. Because we do need to make sure—. The people who are making a living off the sea have also got to feed their families and look after their communities as well. So, I would be quite interested to hear from the Cabinet Secretary what balanced approach the Welsh Government is taking in this to make sure that we protect our environment, but also protect our fishermen as well.

Yes. Well said.

I now call on the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs to reply to the debate. Huw Irranca-Davies.

Diolch yn fawr iawn. Thank you to everybody who has contributed to this debate; it's been a really good one. Let me just begin by describing our fisheries in Wales relevant to this debate. And I'll just begin by repeating what I often say: for Wales, do not read England, in the fisheries. Fishing in Wales is largely carried out by a small inshore fleet, targeting shellfish. The use of bottom-towed fishing gears, such as trawls and dredges, in our inshore waters out to 12 nautical miles, is limited. The most prevalent use of such gears is our 60-year-old scallop fishery, for which we recently published a fisheries management plan, which I'll come on to shortly. In the wider Welsh zone, there's activity from European Union vessels in the Celtic sea, who target nephrops and demersal fish.

So, how do we manage and govern this? The joint fisheries statement, the JFS—not the Janet Finch-Saunders—[Laughter.]—published in November 2022, sets out our shared ambition across the UK to work together to support a vibrant, profitable, sustainable fishing and aquaculture sector, supported by a healthy marine environment that is resilient to climate change. The JFS also describes what use the UK fisheries policy authorities, including Wales, will make of fisheries management plans—sorry, there's a lot of abbreviations in this—FMPs, and sets out timelines for their delivery by 2028. Those FMPs are designed to maintain stocks at, or restore them to, sustainable levels. To achieve this, each plan provides a road map to systematically improve the management of each stock or group of stocks for six years after the FMP publication.

As part of the production and the implementation of each FMP, the fisheries policy authorities will seek to identify and mitigate any negative impact these fisheries may have on the environment. This will include consideration of any potential adverse effect on marine protected areas and their features. Each FMP will be implemented in a way that meets the eight Fisheries Act 2020 objectives. One of these—the ecosystem objective—aims to ensure any negative impacts of fishing on marine ecosystems are minimised and, where possible, reversed.

Now, I mentioned the king scallop fishery in Wales, which is over 60 years old, and it's already very tightly controlled. The Welsh Government authorises around 20 to 30 vessels to fish for king scallops with dredgers each year. And before permits are issued, the Welsh Government conducts a habitats regulation assessment to ensure the fishery will have no adverse effects on the protected features of European marine sites. But we are not complacent in this, and further management improvements are planned as part of the implementation of the king scallop FMP—fisheries management plan—which was published in 2023. So, my officials have been working with a range of stakeholders in Wales to develop proposals for a new framework of measures to enable adaptive management of this fishery, which will be subject to public consultation in this Senedd term. Now, in parallel with the stakeholder consultation, we've commissioned Bangor University to investigate sea bed sensitivity and benthic ecosystem integrity in those areas of scallop fishing to inform our future management.

Any management measures for other bottom-towed gears in Wales will be developed and implemented as part of other FMPs, namely the Irish sea demersal FMP and the Celtic sea and western channel demersal FMP, which are due to be published in 2026. Now the Welsh Government are joint authorities in the production of these FMPs, which are being prepared with a wide range of stakeholders and, again, will be subject to public consultation before publication. Delivery of the FMP programme remains a top priority for this Government. It's a key mechanism for systematically improving the management of specific fisheries and the use of specific fishing gears, such as bottom-towed gears, either within marine protected areas or, indeed, the wider marine environment as well.

Now I understand that there are some specific concerns about our marine protected areas, and I'd like to address that directly. We have a wide network of marine protected areas in Wales, which cover 69 per cent of the inshore area and 50 per cent of all Welsh waters. Our MPA network in Wales is highly complex, with 139 sites in total. Some of those sites are very large and include protection for both mobile species and benthic sea bed habitat features. However, individual benthic habitat features typically only occupy part of each site and, additionally, some sites are only designated for mobile sea bird or cetacean species features and contain no designated benthic features whatsoever.

Natural Resources Wales have recently published the first complete set of condition assessments, covering a staggering 84 features of European marine sites that are wholly within Wales. And firstly, and for the record, I want to extend my thanks and appreciation to all those involved in this vital piece of work, which gives us a baseline that we will work from, something we've not had before. But, most importantly, I want to highlight some of the initial findings of those assessments. They have found that no assessed habitat or species within the marine protected area network in Wales were found to be in an unfavourable condition due to impacts caused by fishing. That is very important. I think this is critically important when considering any further restrictions on bottom-towed gears in the Welsh MPA network. Any future decisions we make must be based on robust evidence.

So, with regard to marine conservation zones or MCZs, Skomer is currently Wales's only MCZ, and was established to conserve species and habitats of national and international importance, and this includes grey seal and pink sea fan. The seas within Skomer MCZ are subject to specific fishery by-laws, which prohibit the use of bottom-contact mobile fishing gear, specifically dredges and beam trawls. The area is also protected under the Scallop Fishing (Wales) (No. 2) Order 2010, whereby the use of a scallop dredge is prohibited. Therefore, no permittable beam trawling or dredging activity should occur within the MCZ. And more widely, you'll be aware of the Welsh Government's intention to designate further MCZs in Wales. This forms part of the MPA network completion programme, which aims to ensure that our network is coherent, it's well connected and resilient. And part of this work is seeking areas within Welsh waters for potential MCZs to cover shortfalls identified in a report published in 2018. I think it's important to mention this work here, because I want to assure Members that we will take a proportionate, balanced, consistent, evidence-led approach, as we have done before, when considering the need for any potential management measures, in particular, how such measures may impact as well the livelihoods of the fishing sector and the coastal communities that they support.

I thank the Deputy First Minister. And that brings today's proceedings to a close.