Plenary

The next item will be the business statement and announcement, and I call on the Trefnydd to make that statement. Jane Hutt.

Thank you very much, Llywydd. There are no changes to this week's business. Business for the next three weeks is shown on the business statement, which is available to Members electronically.

Trefnydd, I'd like to request a statement from the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs regarding water quality here in Wales. I recently met with a local environment specialist who had tested two streams at Broadhaven in my constituency, and those tests found, amongst other things, traces of E. coli. Of course, there are very serious public health implications regarding these results, and so it's absolutely vital that Natural Resources Wales undertakes urgent testing so that this issue can be dealt with as quickly as possible. Water quality should be a priority for the Welsh Government and resources should be made available to Natural Resources Wales so that they can facilitate urgent water testing when evidence of harmful bacteria is actually presented to them.

Now, I appreciate that the Deputy First Minister made a statement on water quality in June, but, clearly, things have now moved on, and so therefore I'd be grateful if we could have a statement from the Welsh Government so that we can be confident that Natural Resources Wales has the resources it needs to robustly manage our water sources and ensure that they are as safe as possible.

Diolch yn fawr, Paul Davies, and, as you say, the Deputy First Minister is very engaged in water quality and gave a statement back in June. It is a priority for this Welsh Government and I'm sure he will want to update the Senedd on developments in relation to our levers and our responsibilities. But I think it would be timely, and of course you can also ask the questions to him at his oral Senedd questions. But I will raise this with him as an opportunity to update on water quality in Wales.

Trefnydd, I would welcome a statement, please, reaffirming support for former miners who still await pension justice. Former mineworkers have lost out on billions of pounds in pension payments, and Government after Government in Westminster have refused to right this wrong. The last budget finally announced that members of the mineworkers pension scheme would receive extra cash that they're owed, but there was no mention of the British Coal staff superannuation scheme, which also includes ex-miners. These workers earned this money. Many have lived with poisoned lungs and critical conditions as a result of their work. We can't afford for more miners to die before this happens.

Now, I was in a public meeting last week where one former miner, who was 90 years old and who had suffered a stroke, asked in tears what the best possible outcome could be. He needs this money. He deserves this money. Surely this Government has to put pressure on the UK Government to give all those workers enrolled in the scheme the money they're owed. So, can we have a statement please, and can it be before the UK budget?

Diolch yn fawr, Delyth Jewell. Yes, I very clearly recognise that it is absolutely essential that our miners do get that compensation. I'm glad that you welcomed that announcement by the UK Government in the budget in terms of that compensation scheme. Clearly, there were issues raised—you've drawn attention to them—in terms of those who were not eligible in terms of that announcement. I'll certainly get an update in terms of where the UK Government are, what they envisage and how they're responding to those who weren't included in that very welcome miners’ compensation announcement.

I would like to ask for two Government statements. Firstly, can I declare an interest as a member of the Co-operative Party and chair of the Senedd’s Co-operative Party group? I'm asking for a statement on the development of the co-operative sector in Wales, this statement to include support for social businesses, social business growth and the development of co-operative housing in Wales, building prosperity by growing social and co-operative businesses, strengthening community ownership and local assets, empowering community-led health and well-being services, and expanding co-operative social care models. What are the intentions of the Government to provide further support for the co-operative sector and promote it? I'm looking forward to that statement.

Secondly, will the Welsh Government make a statement on the Christian Aid event that was held in the Senedd last week? I welcome the Welsh Government statement of support for the Palestinian people. Children in Gaza need aid desperately. What action can the Welsh Government take to support humanitarian aid and to get Egypt to open the Rafah border crossing for humanitarian aid?

Diolch yn fawr, Mike Hedges, and thank you for drawing attention to the co-operative sector, which is so important to us in Wales. Thank you for your leadership in that respect as well. It is important that we look to the fact, and recognise the fact, that the Welsh Government is committed to building a fairer, more prosperous Wales by championing the growth of social and co-operative businesses at the heart of our communities—very essential to our vision for a resilient economy, ensuring that wealth generated in Wales stays in Wales. Growing the social economy is central to our mission of building prosperity with purpose, putting people and communities before profit, which, of course, is at the heart of the co-operative mission and sector. So, thank you for the opportunity for me to restate those points, and I'm sure we will be able to do more in terms of follow-up to your question.

Also, I'm grateful for the fact that you drew attention to the very important Christian Aid event, which many of us across this Chamber joined. It was an opportunity for us to come together—Christian Aid Wales, in collaboration with the Church in Wales, Quakers and other faith groups. It did coincide as well with the UN World Peace Day, as well as us recognising and publicly witnessing for peace in response to the ongoing conflict in Gaza and the middle east, of course calling for peace, a ceasefire, humanitarian access—a visible show of solidarity. Of course, this is something now that we hope can be taken forward. We hope a negotiation will take place to ensure that we can move forward to save those children, to stop the horrors of the onslaught onto Gaza that has taken place. So, thank you for drawing attention to the Christian Aid event last week, where we reflected together.

Business Minister, can I please request a Government statement following the Supreme Court's ruling earlier this year that a woman is defined by biological sex? This landmark ruling is a victory for women and girls all across Wales. The Welsh Government has said on several occasions that it would work through the implications of the Supreme Court's ruling. Frankly, I think that Labour Ministers still can't quite work out how to define a woman, which in my view is a shocking state of affairs.

We are fast approaching the six-months mark since the Supreme Court verdict, and we have yet to hear a peep from the Welsh Government. Scottish Ministers have declared in recent days that the country's schools must provide separate toilets for boys and girls, and that they must be available on the basis of biological sex, yet it appears that the Welsh Government continues to drag its heels. So, Cabinet Secretary, I feel that it is imperative that the Welsh Government stops the dither and delay and issues clear guidance for our schools immediately, because girls need the clarity and the protection that they deserve, and parents rightfully deserve their peace of mind. Therefore, an urgent statement from the Government in the Senedd is absolutely essential at this time. Thank you so much.

Thank you for that. This is a question where we are awaiting the outcome of the Equality and Human Rights Commission consultation, as you know. The outcome of that consultation has resulted in a draft code of practice, which is now being considered by the UK Government, and, of course, it will be considered by the UK Parliament as well. I have spent my time listening to those groups who are affected by the Supreme Court judgment. We've clearly stated that all duty bearers should follow the Supreme Court ruling and should take appropriate legal advice. But we do await the discussions that will take place in Westminster as to the updated code of practice to the UK Government's Minister for Women and Equalities, and we await their comments. Just to say also, for the Senedd to know, that, once the UK Government approves the draft, it will lay the draft code before the Parliament for their review, and the Parliament will then have 40 days to review the code.

So, we are reviewing Welsh Government policy and guidance to identify areas that may be impacted by the Supreme Court judgment and the forthcoming EHRC code of practice. But can I say, as I always say when this is raised, that Lord Hodge, giving the judgment, noted that the judgment was not a triumph of one or more groups in our society at the expense of another, and we do believe that decisions on participation in any part of society should come from a starting point of inclusion of all people?

I very much welcome your statement, Trefnydd, on Fairtrade Fortnight 2025, which is currently running until 5 October. I am very proud that Wales was the world's first Fairtrade Nation back in 2008, which was driven forward by our former First Minister Rhodri Morgan. I am also very proud that Wrexham became the first fair-trade county borough in Wales around the same time. I am sure you agree with me that it was fitting that Jenipher Sambazi from Mbale has returned to Wales to tell us her story, which is very inspirational, of how she became a fair-trade producer and what it absolutely means to her, and to remind us all to reiterate our commitment to fair trade.

Thank you very much, Lesley Griffiths, and I do remember myself and recall the day when Rhodri Morgan made that statement, that decision, in 2008, for Wales to make history as the world's first Fairtrade Nation. And I hope that's a legacy that we're proud to uphold across this Chamber today. We are firmly committed to supporting fair trade and ethical consumption, empowering producers across the globe, helping to safeguard the future of our favourite foods, essential products and the planet. So, I know that, last week, Ministers and Members of the Senedd, from all sides of the Siambr, did meet with Fair Trade Wales to learn about the updated Fairtrade Nation criteria, and the real world impact of choosing fair-trade producers around the world.

But can I also welcome Jenipher Sambazi from Jenipher’s Coffi back to Wales? Many of you have met her. She's been in the canteen with us. She had an event in Porthcawl last Sunday, Noson Uganda Night. 'Do it Fair', of course, is the theme for fair trade, and in terms of Jenipher’s Coffi, the coffee sector has long been male dominated, with women historically having less access to land, credit or technical assistance. I'm inspired that we are helping her through our Wales and Africa programme, to ensure that Jenipher, who's a true inspiration, is leading the way for women and communities in this field. And I know she's visiting Ferrari's roastery in Bridgend, where her coffee is roasted and packaged for public sale, for contracts with organisations including the Welsh Government, the Royal Mint, Companies House and the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency.

I’d like to raise concerns around the future of building control services in Wales. Building control teams are at the forefront of public safety, responding to dangerous structures like loose slates, collapsing roofs and unsafe derelict buildings. They’re often on site within 24 hours, yet their role is misunderstood, under-resourced and is in crisis.

Since the Hackitt report and the Welsh Government’s rapid introduction of the new licensing requirements, we have seen an exodus of experienced officers, difficulty recruiting replacements, and mental health implications of the additional stress. Local teams across all local authorities are being forced to meet the same regulatory burdens as high-rise cities, despite the very different risk profiles in more rural areas like Denbighshire. So, clearly, there are issues with the one-size-fits-all approach and building control officers are looking for an update to the legislation.

I’d be grateful, therefore, for a statement from the Cabinet Secretary for Housing and Local Government addressing some of the issues within the existing Welsh Government licensing requirements on building control professionals, and on how an update will address those issues.

Thank you for that question, Gareth Davies. Of course, this is a very important responsibility of local government, working in partnership with Welsh Government in relation to the regulations, to make sure that building control is fit for purpose. And I know local authorities take their responsibilities very seriously. And, again, if you want to raise these questions with the Cabinet Secretary for Housing and Local Government, I know she’ll be able to give you more feedback and respond to your particular and specific examples, I hope, of the pressures that you have identified today.

I’d like to ask for two statements from the Government today, please. On Saturday, I had the pleasure of attending the Black History 365 event at St Fagans, hosted by Race Council Cymru. And I know the Trefnydd also went to this event. I thought it was a wonderful event, and a great way to recognise and celebrate the diversity of Wales. So, would the Trefnydd agree to make a statement about how Wales as a whole is celebrating black history, and the contributions that all people make to Wales?

And then, secondly, I’d like to ask for a statement from the appropriate Cabinet Secretary regarding the worrying rhetoric coming out of America regarding scientific research—Trump’s war on science—and how this could impact the vital work that is happening here in Wales and in the UK. In Wales, and across the UK, we have an important scientific research base, with breakthroughs being made all the time. And the most recent one, of course, is the treatment for Huntington's disease. And of course that is linked as we have, in Cardiff University, the Advanced Neurotherapies Centre, one of the few places in the world with the capability of performing gene therapy. So, could we have a statement on how this groundbreaking research is being affected by Trump's war on science?

Thank you very much for both those questions, very important questions, Julie Morgan. I was also very glad to attend the launch of Black History Cymru 365 on Saturday at the St Fagans National Museum of History, which of course was a very public event because there were thousands of people coming in and seeing the celebrations that took place. Can I again use the opportunity to say that the Welsh Government is fully committed to becoming an anti-racist nation by 2030? This commitment is underpinned by the 'Anti-racist Wales Action Plan', co-produced with black, Asian and minoritised people in Wales and refreshed back in November 2024. I think this is a time when we must commit ourselves and publicly state that commitment once more to our 'Anti-racist Wales Action Plan', moving from words to action. But I do also just want to say what was so great about the event on Saturday was the joyous music that we heard, the speeches, the food we enjoyed. The 2025-26 theme is Black Futures, Welsh Futures. Now, that's something let's hold on to: Black Futures, Welsh Futures. It reflects our shared ambition.

Can I say we're proud to be also supporting work to ensure that every child in Wales should grow up understanding that black history is Welsh history? That was made mandatory. We have a statue of Betty Campbell down in the centre of Cardiff, where she is the expression of—. It was her call for so many years that black history should be taught in our schools. We're proud to be supporting this initiative through grant funding for the Black History Cymru 365 project, including funding for a Black History Cymru head of communications and marketing, a Black History Cymru administrator, and a Black History Cymru social media officer. I'm proud that we are funding those posts to ensure that we can make black history Welsh history in our schools.

I think we must all recognise, and I'm glad I've got the opportunity to recognise, the statement by our chief medical officer in response to the Trump misinformation that came out in terms of the use of effective pain relief during pregnancy. The chief medical officer, Isabel Oliver, posted this message on X and Facebook on the false paracetamol claims. She said:

'Paracetamol is a safe and effective medication for pain relief and fever during pregnancy when taken as directed.

'There's no evidence that taking paracetamol during pregnancy causes autism in children but untreated pain and fever can pose a risk to pregnant women and the foetus.

'Pregnant women should continue to follow existing NHS advice, taking paracetamol only when needed and always in accordance with the advice on the label.

'If you have questions about any medication in pregnancy, please speak with your doctor or pharmacist.'

I call for an oral statement on employment support for disabled people in Wales to be on a Plenary agenda as soon as possible. Although the UK Government is planning to cut disability benefits that support more disabled people into work, it closed the Work and Health programme to new referrals a year ago today, which supported disabled people and people with health conditions to find and sustain employment in Wales. This programme received 24,000 referrals in Wales until 30 September last year, but nothing since. The UK Government's successor Connect to Work programme has been devolved to local authorities. Although it's supposed to be offered in Wales from January 2026, the experienced external providers have heard nothing and are having to make redundant the staff with the expertise needed. In contrast, local authorities in England are contracting on a regional basis. I also understand that the referral numbers given to local authorities by the Department for Work and Pensions are not as high as those received by the Work and Health programme. Will local authorities in Wales instead deliver the programme themselves, without the expertise to both find and sustain employment, and with the risk that each local authority will then be contacting the same employers separately? How will this be monitored and evaluated? I call for an urgent oral statement on the Plenary agenda accordingly.

Thank you very much, Mark Isherwood, and thank you for raising these issues in the Chamber this afternoon. Of course, I will take these issues back to raise them with the UK Government. Sir Stephen Timms, I met with him in the summer, because he is the Minister responsible for disabled people and indeed the wider benefits, such as universal credit and disabled people's benefits. What was very important was that Sir Stephen Timms met with disabled people, people who form part of our disability equality forum and our disability rights taskforce. He met with them, without me there, so that they could raise their clients' concerns and issues about the review that he is now undertaking in terms of personal independence payments. Then, I met with him shortly afterwards, with also disabled people themselves and disabled people's organisations.

I think it's important that we put this on record today, that he said that the review would not be based on making cuts to personal independence payments. He said he would be looking openly and wanting to engage, as we asked of him, with Wales, because of our experience of co-production of our disabled people's rights plan. I hope that gives you some assurance in terms of us influencing the UK Government. Also, I am very proud, as you know, that for many years we've employed disabled people's employment champions, who work with employers throughout Wales. But thank you for raising the issues about the Work and Health programme referrals to DWP. I will take that up and be able to report back to the Senedd on the outcome of my discussions and outreach to the UK Government.

Trefnydd, even though this is a UK Government matter, the First Minister has today shown a strong commitment in siding with the UK Government on forcing ID cards on the people of Wales, with her and Plaid having very strong concerns about what flag is on the ID card. We in Reform are most concerned about the erosion of civil liberties it presents and how much of an intrusion it could be. It could put people at risk, as well as impinge on the freedoms of law-abiding citizens. The Orwellian overreach of this policy is awful and it needs to be scrapped. The strength of feeling on this can't be denied, with the petition on the digital ID already amassing 2.5 million signatures. Therefore, I deem it necessary for the First Minister to make an oral statement to this Chamber, outlining why she thinks ID cards would be beneficial to the people of Wales and why she is supporting the UK Government in pushing this unpopular, intrusive Orwellian initiative on the people here in Wales. I would appreciate it if we could either have that or, in fact, a full debate on the floor of this Senedd, please, Trefnydd. I'm sure it would be of much interest to everyone in Wales. Diolch.

I am a bit astonished by the views from our single Reform Member here, given the misinformation and disinformation coming from your party and from your leader in terms of people's rights and entitlements. I am horrified, in fact, by the misinformation and disinformation from Nigel Farage and from Reform. We've heard this afternoon, haven't we, about the candidate in the Caerphilly by-election who worked for Nathan Gill, who has now been proven guilty in terms of fraud and engagement with Russia. So, I have no time for your question, except to say, clearly, this is something that is a UK Government policy, and I am sure everyone will give their views about it.

We did hear earlier about the conviction of the pleading guilty of the former Reform leader in Wales to taking money from Putin and undermining the people of Ukraine. This Senedd, this Parliament, has been four-square behind the people of Ukraine, and it is appalling that a public figure is using a public position, paid for by Putin, to undermine the people of Ukraine. But he was also a Member here. So, I would like to have a statement from the Llywydd to ensure that we can all be sure in this place that no public resource has been used by Reform to support Putin, that no public resource has been taken whilst this person was a Member here to support the Russian fascist agenda in Ukraine, and that we are able to be absolutely certain in our own minds that no use of public resource has been made by Reform to support Putin.

At the same time, I'd like to ask the business manager to make a full statement on the nation of sanctuary policy because many of us have supported the people of Ukraine—I and Mick Antoniw are going to Ukraine again next month with another mission to provide aid to the people of Ukraine—and to ensure that people understand that the nation of sanctuary is a policy that supports refugees from Ukraine, people who have escaped the war in Ukraine, people who are living in our communities, and people who have come here for real sanctuary.

You need to conclude now, Alun, please.

And all of us who have heard the air raid warnings of Kyiv understand what sanctuary means.

Diolch yn fawr, Alun Davies. Thank you for your very pertinent point and question regarding the former Member of this Senedd, the former leader of Reform in this Senedd, and the question about no public resource being used in terms of the fact, as you say, that he has pleaded guilty in terms of the allegations that were put to him. Now he has pleaded guilty, and we need to ensure that that is followed up.

For my responsibility, I thank you for your second point about the question about our nation of sanctuary. I would be very happy to issue a statement about what our nation of sanctuary means. And I'm very glad that we had a lot of support for our nation of sanctuary on this side of the Chamber, the Senedd, last week. As a Welsh Government, we have a vision of Wales as a nation of sanctuary. We're not a nation of sanctuary yet. We seek, we aspire to be a nation of sanctuary. We seek to ensure sanctuary seekers have access to advice services, information about rights, responsibilities and entitlements, and integration services, so that they can fully contribute to Welsh community life.

Since 2022, around 8,000 Ukrainians have been welcomed to Wales, many of whom are now contributing to their communities. And we've met, very recently, with Ukrainians who are telling us how sad they have been made in the last week by the ways in which—and I have to say I'm very sad that we heard this from the Welsh Conservatives—there was not a recognition that the nation of sanctuary has been an approach that welcomed them, those 8,000 Ukrainians, to Wales. And they are working, they're volunteering and they're enriching local life. But I do seek to put the record straight in terms of the nation of sanctuary, and I will issue a statement. Can I just say that the budget spent on our support for Ukrainians in 2022-24 represents 82 per cent of the Welsh Government's nation of sanctuary budget over six years from 2019-25? And so, I'm very sad indeed that Darren Millar, as the leader of the Welsh Conservatives, called for the scrapping of the nation of sanctuary policy. I don't know if you realise how hurtful that has been to those we have welcomed here, particularly those 8,000 Ukrainians, but also many, many more of the people that Julie Morgan and I met on Saturday at the Race Council Cymru event and also at many events where we meet so many who have integrated into Wales and become Welsh citizens and welcomed through the nation of sanctuary.

And finally, Sam Rowlands.

Trefnydd—[Interruption.] I think that there is a need for a statement from the Welsh Government regarding the potential roll-out of the mandatory digital ID system in Wales, not necessarily for the reasons outlined by others in this Chamber, but certainly to understand the impact of the implementation of such a system on devolved competencies and also to understand what discussions, if any, the Welsh Government has had with the UK Government prior to that surprise announcement made by Keir Starmer last week. Over 30,000 of my constituents in Wrexham, Flintshire and north Wales have signed a petition opposing the introduction of the mandatory digital ID, and many of them have genuine concerns. So, I'd ask for a statement from the Welsh Government on its position, understanding the impact on any devolved competencies, and to understand what discussions had been held with the UK Government prior to that announcement. Thank you.

Thank you, Sam Rowlands. I'm sure that there will be plenty of time for that kind of discussion and feedback for a proposal that, obviously, is a proposal by the UK Government. I'm sure we will have the opportunity to engage with that proposal as it’s taken forward.

Thank you, Trefnydd.

Item 3 this afternoon is a statement by the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs on the Prohibition of Greyhound Racing (Wales) Bill. I call on the Deputy First Minister, Huw Irranca-Davies.

Today, I am introducing the Prohibition of Greyhound Racing (Wales) Bill. This is a landmark piece of legislation that reflects our commitment to animal welfare and the evolving values of Welsh society.

If passed, this Bill will ban greyhound racing in Wales, reflecting growing recognition that it is incompatible with modern animal welfare standards and those evolving societal values, too. The introduction of this Bill follows strong public support, including a petition with over 35,000 signatures calling for an end to greyhound racing in Wales. This public mandate was reinforced by the Senedd Petitions Committee report, 'The Final Bend?', which concluded that greyhound racing presents significant and ongoing harm and recommended that a ban be consulted on. In the subsequent public consultation on the licensing of animal welfare establishments, activities and exhibits, we sought views on licensing racing greyhound owners, keepers and trainers, as well as seeking opinions and evidence on a phased ban. The response was clear: over 1,100 people provided their views, with nearly 65 per cent in support of a ban, demonstrating strong public concern. The evidence submitted has helped show that the long-standing risks associated with greyhound racing remain.

Public sentiment on this issue cannot be overstated. Campaigns led by animal welfare groups have mobilised thousands of voices in support of reform. These testimonies have helped shape this legislative response. We have engaged with industry stakeholders and acknowledge the efforts made to improve welfare, including improving track safety and implementing rehoming policies. However, the risks of injury, fatality and poor post-racing outcomes remain. This Government has listened. We have carefully considered the evidence, we've heard the voices of campaigners, we have noted the views of Senedd Members and acknowledge the efforts made by industry, and the conclusion is clear: the harm from greyhound racing can no longer be justified in a modern, compassionate Wales. Globally, attitudes are shifting. For example, New Zealand has announced plans to ban greyhound racing, while Scotland's private Member's Bill prohibiting greyhound racing reflects increasing concern there. This Bill takes a proactive approach, ending current racing and preventing future harm by ensuring no new tracks or racing operations can be established here in Wales.

The Animal Welfare Act 2006 provides general protections for all animals, but Wales currently lacks specific legislation for racing greyhounds. This gap leaves them vulnerable. So, the Bill introduces two new offences. Firstly, it will be an offence to operate a stadium or a similar venue in Wales and knowingly permit its use for greyhound racing. Secondly, it will be an offence to organise a greyhound race anywhere in Wales. The definition of 'greyhound racing' includes any event where greyhounds are set to run after a mechanical lure around a track. That includes racing, training and trialling activities.

The Bill, should it become law, will be enforced by local authority inspectors. I expect breaches in its provisions, either by contravening the ban or by intentionally obstructing an inspector in exercising their duty, to be rare. I expect the operators of racetracks and organisers of racing to comply with the provisions of the legislation. The Bill provides for an implementation period to help support a smooth transition for greyhounds and their owners, for welfare organisations, for the industry and local communities. It ensures that everyone has the opportunity to adjust and prepare for these important changes. The Bill will directly prohibit greyhound racing in Wales, significantly reducing the risk of injury and fatality, tackling preventable harm at its source. It will lead to the winding down of the industry here and sends a clear message that animal welfare is a priority for Wales.

Now, I've outlined what the Bill will do; it's important I am clear about what the Bill will not do. It will not prevent individuals from owning or training racing greyhounds away from a track, nor will it prohibit the breeding or the import and export of racing greyhounds. But these activities must comply with existing animal welfare, breeding and transport regulations. By taking this step, we send a clear message that Wales does not support the use of greyhounds for entertainment. The impact on local communities and economies is a key consideration, and we will utilise our existing support schemes to provide help and advice where it is needed. The Welsh Government has established an implementation group to guide this transition. The group includes stakeholders from the racing industry, animal welfare organisations and local authorities. Their role is to ensure that the ban is implemented fairly, with support for affected individuals and communities.

Now, in February, I set out my intent to move towards a ban on greyhound racing. Today, I am delivering on that commitment. This topic has been a campaigning focus for many Members of this Senedd, across parties, for many years, and I want to thank colleagues for that work. I'm very keen to continue in that spirit of constructive and collaborative working as the Bill proceeds through scrutiny.

Dirprwy Lywydd, I urge Members to support this Bill and help us make history by ending the harm caused by greyhound racing in Wales. I look forward to working with Members and Senedd committees to ensure that the Bill is passed and put on the statute book. Thank you very much.

Can I thank the Cabinet Secretary for the statement? This is a subject that attracts strong, often deeply held views on both sides of the debate. As you said in your statement, campaigns led by animal welfare groups have mobilised thousands of voices in support of reform, with petitions and consultations showing significant support for a ban. Many people believe passionately that this step is essential to improving animal welfare in Wales. Others, however, see this as an end of a sport that has had a long and historic tradition, one which, for some communities, has been part of their local culture for decades. Both perspectives deserve to be heard respectfully and considered seriously by the Senedd.

For many, this will be a matter of conscience, so knowing all the facts is paramount to each one of us being able to make an informed decision, especially as this legislation comes not from a manifesto commitment of the Government, nor from their programme for government, but rather from a deal to ensure the budget passed. Before any vote takes place further down the line, there clearly are a number of important questions that I believe the Welsh Government must address. First is the question of legality. This proposal would make Wales the first UK nation to introduce a full ban on greyhound racing. As you explained, it will become an offence to operate a stadium or to organise a race here in Wales. But given that the UK Government has not taken the same position, we need absolute clarity that this legislation falls squarely within devolved competence. So, I ask you, Cabinet Secretary, are there any legal implications to the operation of a sport where only one nation has imposed a ban? I know that the LJC committee will explore this in detail, but clarity from you today would be helpful.

Second, the economic dimension. You mentioned that an implementation group has been established to support communities and industry through this transition, but the Welsh Government has not yet published its explanatory memorandum or the regulatory impact assessment for the Bill. Until these are available, it is very hard to have a fully informed debate. So, Cabinet Secretary, how soon will these documents be published?

Turning to the sole location left in Wales, the Valley Greyhound Stadium in Ystrad Mynach, you referred in your statement to risks that remain despite industry improvements, but this venue only became fully licensed by GBGB in 2023 after a £2 million upgrade to meet the standards set by the Greyhound Board of Great Britain. Has enough time passed to collect proper data on the impact of those changes? Before we close the door on any sporting venue, particularly one with such a long history, we must know whether it could be repurposed, redeveloped or supported in some other way. As Hefin David often pointed out, simply legislating for closure without a clear plan risks leaving a physical and economic void in this community. So, Cabinet Secretary, if this ban does go ahead, what happens to this site? What becomes of the staff employed there, or the local businesses that benefit from spectators? Is there a detailed economic plan for its future use?

Sam, thank you very much indeed. Let me answer directly your questions. First of all, the reason we are bringing this ban, in addition to the opening remarks I made in my statement. The data published by GBGB in June 2025 provides data up to and including 2024. It shows that from 355,682 dog runs in 2024 at licensed GBGB tracks in England and Wales, there were 3,809 injuries and 123 track-related fatalities.

We actually welcomed the licensing of Valley stadium since November 2023, but as you will know, campaigners have continued to raise concerns that licensing has led to an increase in racing activity at that track, which we understand it has, which of course then increases the propensity for fatalities and for injuries, particularly running round the bends on those tracks. It means that more dogs are being subjected to racing, so the animal welfare groups and the campaign groups' opinion has not shifted—far from it. They are concerned that the increase in racing could lead to more fatalities and injuries.

Just to confirm for you, Sam, Wales indeed has the legislative competence for the ban as described. Yes, we do publish the environmental impact assessment and other assessments, and the explanatory memorandum. They were published yesterday. If you haven't spotted them yet, I'm more than happy to ping them to you separately, but they're out there already.

Repurposing of the site is very much on our mind. You are absolutely right, our late colleague Hefin was very focused on that. That's why the implementation group, which has met three times already, actually has local authority presence on it, and also the track itself. The ones who’ve declined to be part of that group are GBGB themselves, but there are Valley track representatives on it. Because it is vital, Sam, that the implementation group looks at, in this transition, the future use of that facility.

And, Sam, just to say, there are no other sports whatsoever caught within this. It's a complete red herring. This is very much focused, for the reasons I laid out in my opening statement, on greyhound racing. That's it. But thank you for your questions.

Can I say, first of all, Deputy First Minister, this isn't the way to do it, is it? Even some people who are in favour of the ban are a bit uncomfortable at the fact that the only reason this is happening now is because of a political fix. That said, I clearly appreciate the weight of support for action from Members of the Senedd, across parties, including my own.

But it really doesn't sit comfortably with me that I've been sitting in the Chamber listening to the Government tell me, time and time again, that there's absolutely no time and absolutely no capacity to do anything over and above the existing programme for government and the legislative programme that was originally proposed for the Senedd, but then, at the drop of a hat, you find the time and capacity for this Bill to come before us.

As I said, I accept where the political consensus is on this, and my priority, therefore, now, is to try and be constructive in my scrutiny of the Bill, and to make it a Bill that does what it says on the tin, that is effective, but is also pragmatic, and is mindful of its impacts not only on the welfare of dogs, but also on the people involved in the sector, which I'm sure is something that you share as well.

The elephant in the room here, of course, is the judicial review. I can see that you're having problems. No, okay. The judicial review is a bit of an elephant in the room. It may be difficult for you to comment, but I really do feel that we need to understand what assessment the Government might have made of any potential impacts of the review on the timetable of the legislation, but also whether it could delay or obstruct the implementation of the ban. I'd ask you whether you'd provide a public statement clarifying the Government's position on the judicial review, because I'm not aware that we've heard anything formally from you on that.

Secondly, you've outlined in the Bill a specific window for transition, between 2027 and 2030, for the implementation of a ban. I'd just like to hear a bit more from you about the rationale for that, because, clearly, there have been references to the experience in New Zealand and some issues that arose there. And also we hear from the Wales greyhound partnership that there is capacity for rehoming. So it would be interesting just to understand why you've gone for that maybe longer period of transition.

Also, what consideration did you give to strengthening the penalties that are being proposed in the Bill? Why not unlimited fines or custodial sentences, to be a real deterrent for illegal racing? You may want to elaborate a bit on the enforcement as well, because any ban is only as effective as the power of enforcement that is there.

Clearly, there are many, many more questions. You say that this is a ban on greyhound racing, but actually it's not, is it? It's a ban on greyhound racing on a track behind a mechanical lure. I'd be really interested in understanding what your definition of 'track' is, because, clearly, unless it's a recognised track, then potentially it's not a ban. But I'm not sure. Maybe we can interrogate that in committee. But we do need to study the explanatory memorandum and the regulatory impact assessment as well. So, if you could address those points initially, I'd be grateful, but clearly there'll be more opportunity for us to scrutinise in greater detail as we move on with the Bill on its journey through the Senedd. Diolch.

Thank you, Llyr. Indeed, some of these questions we can explore in more detail as the Bill progresses. But just to turn to your last question first, the policy objective of this Bill is very specific. It's to prohibit greyhound racing in Wales. In order to achieve this, there will be two new offences. The first makes it an offence to operate a stadium or a similar venue in Wales and to use it or knowingly permit it to be used for greyhound racing. The second makes it an offence to be involved in organising greyhound racing in Wales. You'll see, in the explanatory memorandum and the Bill itself, that it describes that quite specifically in terms of a mechanical lure et cetera. So, it's very clear and specific, but Llyr, we can explore this more when we get into the detail on the Bill.

Let me just turn to the issue of judicial review. I'm aware that a judicial review claim has been issued, seeking to challenge the ministerial announcement proposing to introduce a Senedd ban on greyhound racing in Wales, and we've responded to the claim. There's a limit to what I can say about this, Llyr, of course, because it is a judicial review. We're awaiting the court's decision on whether the claim will be granted permission to proceed to a full hearing. We can't predict when a decision will be made—it's a matter for the courts, of course. There's a limit to what we can say on this. We don't know when a hearing date, if it is granted, would take place, but you could anticipate that spring of next year would be logical as the earliest date. But as this is now the subject of live litigation, it's not appropriate for me as a Welsh Government Minister to comment further on it at this stage.

In terms of the timescale, which is as early as 2027 and no later than 2030, that's deliberately in there in order to be informed by the implementation group, because the implementation group is looking at some key things, not only the future use of the track, not only reskilling with Welsh Government support and retraining for those people who currently work at the track as well, but also the rehoming of greyhounds. I'm very pleased that the animal welfare charities and the rehoming charities have said they're really willing to step up to the mark on it, but that's exactly the sort of consideration that the implementation group are looking at. You will remember that when I made my statement back in February, I made clear that I want to see the ban as soon as practically possible. That still remains my intent, but I want this to be led by the considerations of that implementation group.

On enforcement, as I said in my opening remarks, Llyr, because of the clarity of what this legislation does and the fact it'll be enforced by local authority officers, we do not expect to see non-compliance—people suddenly opening up new tracks or allowing or permitting racing to take place with mechanical lures and so on. It would be fairly obvious, I have to say, if that were taking place. So, on enforcement, we will work with local authorities as this Bill progresses, to work through those issues, but we are quite clear that the enforcement should be able to be delivered with this, and it'll be clear when an offence under those two offences that we laid out is taking place.

Can I thank the Cabinet Secretary for bringing forward this vital piece of legislation, which builds on our proud record of leading the way on animal welfare? The Bill also demonstrates the power of our Senedd petitions process, with 35,000 people across Wales calling for an end to this cruel sport—an industry where there's a lot of wastage. Also, the cross-party working that we've had. We've also had two debates on this: the Senedd petition debate, and we've had a short debate on it. So, it's been cross-party working together.

The Cut the Chase coalition are keen to see the ban coming into effect as quickly as possible. The longer it's allowed to continue, the more dogs will be harmed or killed. Members of the coalition are working already with others from the welfare sector, actively preparing to rehome dogs that are currently racing. They want to know whether you will consider shortening that transition period, as 2030 is a long time away. More dogs will be getting injured in the process while we're waiting. The penalties need to be relevant to the legislation and act as enough of a deterrent to prevent racing from continuing on an illegal basis, while minimising the risk of any potential repeat offences. Thank you.

First of all, thank you very much, the Petitions Committee but also across parties here, for the support that's been demonstrated for this, including, as you've said, within two debates, as well as the petitioners from around Wales. There is clearly a mood within this Senedd, but also wider within Wales.

The reason that we've put in that timeline—bearing in mind we have to pass the legislation, go through the Committee Stage and so on—is so that the implementation group could well choose to say, 'We think this can be done quite soon.' That's fine, because it says no later than 2030, but as early as 2027.

I'm really pleased that the animal welfare charities and rehoming charities have stepped up to the mark already and said, 'We can help with this.' We want to make sure that the welfare of the greyhounds isn't jeopardised by moving too pre-emptively, and we certainly don't want to see anything happening, for example, with euthanising greyhounds on the back of this as well. So, I think that's where the implementation group have got a real part to play. It's up and running, it's had three meetings, it will have more to come as well, and I think its consideration will guide us as the legislation goes through.

But thank you for your support, and I think this is a pivotal day, marking again the long commitment of this Senedd and this Welsh Government to animal welfare.

I've got two declarations of interest. The first is that I'm the owner of a former greyhound who raced, and, obviously, we lost Arthur, who was particularly damaged and we know was hurt through greyhound racing. My second declaration of interest is that I was the one who did the political fix, and I'm proud of that. And Llyr, Plaid Cymru did lots of political fixes when you had the three years as part of the deal. So, please, it really is unreasonable for you to say that, and I'm sorry you're not in the Siambr in order for me to say that to you directly.

But the point is this: there is significant evidence that dogs die and dogs get injured, and I've got my own personal stories, and it is emotional, because if you're a dog owner, it's emotional. So, I make no excuses or apology that it's emotional for me. But the second issue is that I'm the chair of the gambling-related harms cross-party group, and online gambling—which is what greyhound racing is now all about; hardly anybody goes to the track to see it—actually gets people addicted, and we know, sadly, can mean that people lose lots of money.

So, my question to you is this: going back to the timescales, we are concerned about the length of time. So, I just wonder if you'd clarify the criteria that the group could look at in order to reduce the timeline. Thank you very much.

Yes, indeed. Thank you very much. And Jane, can I just acknowledge that you've been an exceptionally strong advocate? But also can I say as well, we've also had some really, over the years, many strong advocates from right across the Chamber, from all parties, and that builds upon the Senedd debates, the 35,000 petitioners, the 65 per cent in the public consultation that said we should move to a ban and so on and so forth? But, yes, the roles you and others have played have been significant in this, but I think it does reflect that wider Welsh societal shift as well: what does a modern Wales look like that really cares about animal welfare, and in this situation, greyhound welfare as well.

I'm glad you've picked up again on the issue of the timescale. As we've made clear, it's as early as 2027, subject to the deliberations of the implementation group who are an expert-led group. I think the chair is excellent, the membership is really excellent, and it's a wide-ranging membership as well that can consider things such as the future use of the track, the welfare and well-being of the individuals who currently work there in reskilling and retraining, not leaving that track derelict—there need to be future uses for it as well—the greyhounds' rehoming, and all those other aspects set out in their terms of reference. Now, if they do come back and say, 'Our feeling is we can move rapidly towards a ban and we can bring all those considerations into play', then it will satisfy what I laid out in February this year, which is 'as soon as practically possible'. I think it's right that they work through this and bring forward, then, their proposals of how to do it. So, it doesn't have to be 2030, it could be a lot sooner, but I want to give them the freedom and the independence to actually work through this and say how we can do it.

Do bear in mind as well that in the approach taken in other countries, they haven't gone overnight to a ban, because they've gone through the same considerations. They've taken time to actually work through it, so we don't end up, for example, in negative welfare implications for the greyhounds that are currently racing or being trained and so on. So, we just need to get this right, but as soon as practically possible is still my intent, and I know that the implementation group understand that as well.

A Cut the Chase campaign e-mail supporting an end to greyhound racing in Wales states that the industry's own figures evidence the risks, with 359 dogs involved in racing at stadiums regulated by the Greyhound Board of Great Britain, GBGB, dying in 2023, and more than 4,000 injured over the same period. However, the same figures show that 99.97 per cent did not die and 98.93 per cent were not injured, that the track injury rate fell to 1.07 per cent in 2024, the lowest ever, and the fatality rate halved to 0.03 per cent between 2020 and 2024. So, if you believe in evidence-led policy rather than policy-led evidence, what consideration have you therefore given to these facts or to the statistical reality, for example, that domestic pet dogs are just as likely to be injured on UK roads and in dog-on-dog attacks, and that the domestic pet dog fatality rates, for example, from dog-on-dog attacks, at 0.47 per cent are much higher than the 0.03 per cent fatality rate on the tracks? Presumably, you're not proposing to ban domestic pet dogs.

And finally, you made a brief reference to the judicial review issued by GBGB in Wales. I appreciate you can't share Welsh Government's legal advice or position on this, but can you advise whether that claim has been accepted, and whether the action is going ahead?

So, the latter question you have is a matter for the courts to determine, and we await their determination on whether it will proceed or not, and there's a limit, Mark, to what I can say further on that.

Just to say, your input to this debate, which I respect, reflects that there are different views within the Senedd. You say 99-point-something per cent do not result in injuries or fatalities. But you began by saying that, indeed, the data published by GBGB itself in June 2025, which provides data up to and including 2024, shows that out of the dog runs in 2024 at their licensed tracks in England and Wales, there were 3,809 reported injuries and 123 track-related fatalities.

So, that, on top of the consensus, the complete consensus, across animal welfare, rehoming charities and others that has grown over the years, the evidence internationally as well, the change in societal mood, suggests that those statistics are unacceptable in a nation that actually wants to do the right thing on animal welfare. I respect different opinions within this Chamber, but the statistics simply do not lie.

Before we move on, we've had two questions on the judicial review, and the Deputy First Minister has clearly stated he cannot comment upon it because of legal reasons. I just ask Members to think about that before they ask any further questions on the judicial review. Lesley Griffiths.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and, Cabinet Secretary, I'm very pleased to see the publication of this long-awaited and much-needed legislation. Greyhound racing is cruel, and it has no place in Wales where we're very proud of our high animal health and welfare standards. As is often the case when it comes to animal welfare, my inbox has been very, very full, with constituents in support of this ban, like many colleagues, I'm sure, across the Chamber. There was an opportunity for Wales to lead the way here, and as we've done so often with progressive legislation, it is vital that this Bill now proceeds at pace so that we're not lagging behind other countries in allowing this inhumane practice to continue in Wales.

The Welsh Government consulted widely, and the public response showed deep concern for how many greyhounds were injured and killed and also how they were treated in post-race life. I started this work when I was your predecessor, and I'm very proud of that. I don't see it as a political fix, and I, too, would like to pay tribute to the work of Jane Dodds, but I wish she wouldn't mention Arthur in the Chamber. You've done an amazing amount of work on this policy.

I did note that the implementation group that you've brought together, and you mentioned it's already met three times, and also around the criteria, in answer I think it was to Jane, about how they would decide whether a ban could be implemented in 2030 or it could be by as early as 2027—

You need to ask a question now, please.

I would like to know from the Cabinet Secretary if he could expand on what work he anticipates the group will focus on to ensure it's placed on the statute book in this sixth Senedd.

Yes, indeed. If we take this legislation through, then we are on a course to ban greyhound racing in Wales, as I've described it within the legislation. Can I just say, once again, 'thank you' for your support for this and the work that had been done prior to my appointment in terms of the consultation as well, and the engagement with many organisations outside? It is worth saying that those organisations include people like Blue Cross, Dogs Trust, Greyhound Rescue Wales, Hope Rescue in my own patch, the Royal Society for the Protection of Cruelty to Animals and many, many others, and their focus wasn’t on illicit greyhound racing, it was on licensed greyhound racing. Whilst acknowledging the steps forward that had been taken at many tracks, they pointed at the fatalities and the injuries that were increasing. I mentioned the fatalities earlier on, Dirprwy Lywydd—there were 123 in 2024, and it was 109 the year before, so the fatalities have increased.

So, yes, in terms of the implementation group, what that is looking at, as I said in response earlier, is things like the welfare of the dogs themselves, and support for the owners is a consideration so that those dogs can transition away from racing as well, because this doesn’t ban keeping greyhounds, just to make clear—it doesn’t ban healthy lives for greyhounds in Wales, it bans the racing of those greyhounds in Wales. But they also need to consider, as our late friend and colleague Hefin would say, those local communities, the transition of the workers and the future use of the site as well. All of those things come together, but as I say, there’s a very good reason why, if this legislation is supported, there is then a timescale that says as early as 2027, which I think is realistic, or no later than 2030, and let’s see where the implementation group comes in. I’m picking up strongly from the Chamber today—and I’m sure that the implementation group will be hearing as well—that if all things can be pulled together, there’s a preference from those who are supportive of the ban for it to be earlier rather than later. That might be possible, if they can pull together the strands, but I really want them to do the thinking with this, including with those people who are employed at the track, because we’ve got an obligation to them to make sure that they can transition into alternative careers. We’ve got a good track record in Wales of that with our training, our ReAct training and others—we need to do that as well, and be on their side as we transition away from greyhound racing into whatever the future might hold.

Can I say 'thank you', Deputy First Minister, Cabinet Secretary, for this area of responsibility and for doing what you are doing? And I thank you, Lesley Griffiths, for the work you did on it. It’s taken a long time to even get to here and I’ve listened to so many charities—. And when people write in to me, I listen avidly to what they have to say and I have to say that it’s been overwhelming, the number of people who have actually responded to calls for their opinions. And thank you, Jane, you’ve been steadfast on this particular issue. And I don’t agree with my colleagues on that. But there should be times in this legislature when we’re able to speak from our hearts, and it’s not about what we need to do—I wouldn’t say that it’s a vital Bill coming through—but it’s about actually honouring what our constituents want across Wales, and it’s also about what we can do. So many animals are suffering here. There were more greyhound deaths at Greyhound Board of Great Britain licensed tracks last year than in any year since 2020. Thousands of dogs suffering as a result of—. And just listen to the figures on this: 123 fatalities—

You need to ask a question, Janet, please.

—3,809, and 35,000 have experienced injuries. I genuinely believe that this Bill will make Wales the first nation to actually ban the practice. Leading up to this Bill, there have been consultations—

A question, please, Janet.

Do you agree with me, Cabinet Secretary, that the welfare of these beautiful animals should be at the heart of this Bill? Will you, in seeing this through—judicial review or not—once it's through, encourage other nations to introduce the ban? And can we please get this sorted before the end of this legislative term? Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Thank you, Janet. With your support and other Members across parties here, we will have this ban proceed into legislation, into the statute book, during this Senedd term and then we can take forward the actions needed to actually bring forward this ban, and do it in a way that works with those people who are currently working there and looks at the future use of the site, that works with the greyhounds and rehoming. We noticed that there are examples, for example, Swindon, where there's been pressure on animal welfare charities. So, we need to think this through and make sure that doesn't happen, that we really plan this through and manage it. But, yes, with your support, and with others across this Chamber, then we can put the ban in place, work with all those affected as well, and then this will be a massive step forward for animal welfare, and particularly for greyhound welfare in Wales.

And, yes, just as we are looking across different nations, including New Zealand, who've brought forward proposals, so other nations are looking at us. And I'm pleased to see the progress that's being made in Scotland as well, and I think they're very interested in our progress here. So, I hope the Senedd, on a cross-party basis, will support this legislation.

I'm looking forward to the scrutiny as well. There are some important things to consider to get this right, but then we move ahead with it together, and this Senedd sends out a strong message that we're on the side of greyhound welfare, and on the side, as we've always been, of progress on animal welfare.

Cabinet Secretary, I would like to join others in very much welcoming this Bill, which is so important for animal welfare in Wales, and continues, I think, a very good track record for the Senedd and Welsh Government in terms of animal welfare, which, as others have mentioned, really does matter to people and communities in Wales, and all Members here will be familiar with that from their own post bags.

Whenever you go out walking in a park or a recreational area where there are many dog walkers, you will meet people who have greyhounds that are rescue dogs, and, very often, when you stop and speak to them, they will tell you some appalling facts about the history of those dogs and the suffering that they’ve endured. So, this really is a significant problem, and not something that should be dismissed lightly by any Member here, or anyone else. And I’d like to pay tribute to the Cut the Chase coalition for all the work that they've done, along with Members here who’ve championed the cause.

In terms of that possible 12-month implementation period, Cabinet Secretary, which others have raised—and I know the coalition supporting an end to greyhound racing in Wales are very keen to see as 12 months and not longer—will you make sure that that implementation group is properly organised and resourced? Because I know it’s up to the group in many respects, but, obviously, Welsh Government has to ensure that that group can work quickly and in a timely manner and have everything that’s necessary to support them in doing that.

Diolch, John. And I join you in paying tribute to those organisations who have campaigned long and hard on this, many of them across Wales, but also those individuals—Jane Dodds included—and, actually, many people who work with charities like Hope Rescue in my constituency, who step forward to actually rehome greyhounds themselves and be that loving family around them.

In terms of the group, yes, we are more than adequately resourcing it. It’s up and running. It’s met three times. We’re anticipating that the initial report that they’ll bring forward will be due later this autumn, but we’re asking them to bring forward regular reports as well, so I will be able to update Members and the Senedd about the progress that we’re making there as well.

So, yes, we’re making sure that they’re adequately resourced, they can do their work, and it’s great to see that, on there, we’ve got animal welfare charities that track themselves, Caerphilly council, and others—everybody who needs to work through the detail of how we take this forward. And, as I say, it remains that commitment I made in February, which is that I would like to see this as soon as practically possible. But keep bearing in mind that phrase, 'practically possible'—let’s get it right for the people who work there, for the future of the site, for the welfare of the greyhounds as well. Get it all right, and learn from where others, perhaps, have made missteps. Let’s get it absolutely right. I think that’s what we would all want to see.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. When the debate arose back in February, I thought, 'Well, I don’t know much about this sport; I need to go and have a look for myself.' So, I still remain neutral, and I reserve my position, but I want to feed back what I saw when I went and visited the Valley stadium, because it was nothing like I’d been led to believe by charities, by individuals, and I actually saw something totally different to what I’m hearing described. I'm not trying to take it away that there aren't bad things happening, or that have happened, within the greyhound community over many years. However, what I saw was a stadium with well-cared-for animals, families who love their animals, veterinary surgeons looking and checking over. I saw where the dogs were rested after. I was looking for things to find wrong. Then I went and looked at the track, and the bends and the nature of the surface they ran on, and all of these things. And I sat down afterwards and I thought I couldn't find much wrong with that track and what was happening and the part it was playing within that community.

So, like I say, I'm still neutral. But I thought it was important, because it doesn't seem that many Members of this Senedd have actually seen it and visited. And I would ask—

You need to ask your question now, Peter, please.

On that point then, I would ask—. Recognising you've said several times, Cabinet Secretary, that you want to work with all those who are affected, can I encourage you yourself or your colleagues to go and actually visit and talk to the people, so that transition period can be carried out in the best interests of all of those communities there? But I thought it important, Dirprwy Lywydd, to share what I saw, and encourage others to see it.

Indeed. Peter, can I just say, first of all, that it's good that we have different views being expressed? I understand you're saying that you retain a neutral position, so keep an eye on this as this progresses. Look, we do recognise that GBGB operates two welfare schemes: they have an injury recovery scheme, they have a greyhound retirement scheme. And in some of those, they've worked with animal welfare charities. But we can't walk away from the hard statistics, including an increase in fatalities across tracks, and that the Valley stadium itself, now that it's gone down the licensing route, which, in some ways, is welcome, means that there are more racing events taking place there, which, logically, means that the propensity for injuries and fatalities increases, as it has done in other tracks. We've got no reason to doubt that there'd be a different ratio of races to injuries and fatalities than elsewhere in licensed tracks.

But, in terms of visiting, yes. Look, first of all, my officials have visited the track previously. I've recently been invited. I'm actually quite keen to visit the Valley stadium and see what's there in light of what we are now doing, which is moving towards a ban on greyhound racing, but actually working with the people there to make sure that we have good future use of that site, retraining, reskilling, and it isn't left empty and derelict and so on, that there is a good future use. It may be appropriate, for example, for me to go along at some time when members of the implementation group are also available to visit. So, I'm quite keen to visit in order to see how we can make this transition now to a ban.

And finally, James Evans.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I want to put on record my total opposition to the Bill that has been presented to the Senedd. I have opposition to it mainly on principle, but mainly because of how this legislation has come about. There was no engagement with the industry in the run-up to this ban. There were no visits to the site from yourself as the Cabinet Secretary. You say you're going now, which is a positive—it feels a bit cart before the horse. Considering that Senedd Members and Government Ministers were having selfies outside this Senedd with anti-racing bodies and didn't speak to GBGB directly, that is not the way you legislate. You consult properly beforehand with the industry, with all the people involved, with owners, with trainers, with veterinary surgeons who work there, then you come up with a position.

Unfortunately, this has been done with a backroom deal with Jane Dodds to get the budget through. I've got total opposition to it. I do not think this is the right way to legislate. The track should have been given plenty of time. They have made the changes there, made the investment, and I think there's an improvement to what we've had before. I think, Deputy First Minister, this is a huge mistake that the Welsh Government are making. The communities and the people who live there feel that the politicians here are neglecting them yet again. Is it any wonder why they're deserting the mainstream parties and going elsewhere, when they feel that way? So, I ask you, Deputy First Minister, can you please release all the information that the Welsh Government have got about engagement with GBGB, with the track, and any visits with officials, prior to this announcement being made, before the deal was struck with Jane Dodds?

Just to clarify, James, and counter to what you were saying, my team of officials have been engaged with GBGB before and after the consultations. And just to say to you, the reason this has come about is because there has been substantial support for a ban on greyhound racing on welfare grounds, and to avoid the exploitation and commodification of greyhounds.

There are also, by the way, wider ethical and moral considerations. Many individuals, organisations, and, indeed, Members of this Senedd, as you've heard, believe that racing greyhounds is simply unacceptable and outdated. Public support from campaign groups, responses to the 2023 petition and the 2024 consultation have influenced this decision. And it's not specific to Wales. Evidence from other countries, such as Scotland and New Zealand, offer valuable insight into the wider issues associated with greyhound racing. This has been considered alongside our own evidence, including the consultation responses and GBGB data, which has been referred to several times on the floor here today, about injuries and fatalities on licensed tracks. All of that has informed our understanding and approach.

So, we've listened to the views expressed and now we are acting. We're not alone; New Zealand has formally agreed to end greyhound racing by 2026, following multiple reviews that the industry could not meet the required animal welfare standards. [Interruption.]

You've had an opportunity to ask the questions to the Cabinet Secretary. I would welcome no sedentary commentary, because I want to listen to the response, which I'd have thought you would want to do as well. Cabinet Secretary.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I could hear the chuntering, but I was trying to respond to James in a respectful way, recognising there are differences of opinion.

Just to recap, the matter has been discussed and debated here in this Senedd. There is clear cross-party support, which was shown on 12 February 2025 during the debate. This cross-party support has also been taken into account by me. I'm very grateful for that. I've taken this and the views of the public and campaign groups into account in coming to this decision.

In 2022, as we said, the Senedd Petitions Committee had reviewed the 'Ban greyhound racing in Wales' petition, which had over 35,000 signatures to that petition. Nearly 65 per cent of the respondents, James, to the 'Licensing of animal welfare establishments, activities and exhibits' consultation supported that phased ban on greyhound racing, showing the strength of public feeling. And we can't ignore, of course, those campaigns that have been led by people like Blue Cross, Dogs Trust, Greyhound Rescue Wales, Hope Rescue, RSPCA.

So, all of those factors, James, have brought us to the position that we're in today, where we are taking the step to ban greyhound racing in Wales. I respect you have a different opinion, but I would simply say to you: don't try and double guess my reasons for bringing this forward; Wales has a proud reputation in animal welfare, and we intend to build on it.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary.

Item 4 is a statement by the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Welsh Language, priorities for Welsh place names. I call on the Cabinet Secretary to make the statement—Mark Drakeford.

Thank you very much, Dirprwy Lywydd. Place names matter. They anchor us in a changing world, they connect us to our past, and they help tell the story of our journey to the present day. In Wales, they matter especially, because of the way all of this is conveyed through the language that we speak.

Some Members here will recall the Bill presented to the Senedd in 2017 by Dr Dai Lloyd. It was motivated by an anxiety that historic place names in the Welsh language were being lost, and that action was needed to reverse that trend.

The same concern lay behind the research commissioned by this Government, research on current trends in relation to changes to place names in Wales. That research reflected the commitment in our programme for government to act to protect Welsh language place names, and that was reinforced again in the co-operation agreement. I am grateful, once again, for the constructive engagement in this work by the two Plaid Cymru designated Members.

The research report was published in June, and today I aim to set out the next steps that we plan to take in response to its findings, particularly those that focus on the built environment. One of the report’s key conclusions is that most changes to property names don’t involve a change in language at all. When the language does change, properties across Wales are at least three times more likely to be renamed from English to Welsh than vice versa.

Based on the report, we’ve identified four priority areas for action. First, Dirprwy Lywydd, the overall position is positive, and we can strengthen it further through clearer and more practical guidance to support organisations responsible for place names. And this includes: template letters and advice for local authority officers dealing with property name change applications; a set of guidelines on how to record name changes; and further encouraging the establishment of forums to share best practice, building on our place names forum with officials from Arfor local authorities.

We already provide advice to businesses and charities on their use of Welsh through our free Helo Blod service. We’re also working with Business Wales and Visit Wales to raise awareness of the value of Welsh language place names and the contribution that they make to our unique Welsh offer and sense of place. This will include developing guidance on the way that brown tourist signs are used, as mapping agencies use the visual environment as evidence of local naming practice. With Eryri and Bannau Brycheiniog national parks leading the way in prioritising Welsh names, other organisations have been asking how best to incorporate Welsh names in their materials. We’ve trialled a set of guidelines that will be published online and promoted widely in the coming weeks.

Secondly, recording and data collection are essential if names are to be safeguarded for future generations. Recently, I spoke to the curator of the list of historic place names, a statutory resource that is funded by the Welsh Government and maintained by the Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Wales. It’s a hugely valuable resource for public authorities, developers and members of the public when naming and renaming places and properties. With over 700,000 entries, the list continues to grow. During the last year, over 5,000 names from Eryri alone have been added to the list.

We’re also promoting other place name collection projects around Cymru, working with partners such as Mapio Cymru, OpenStreetMap and Welsh Wikipedia to increase the number of Welsh names on digital maps. The more evidence that exists to demonstrate the continuing use of Welsh names, the less likely they are to be displaced. To bolster collection activity such as this, we’ve launched a place names recording tool through DataMapWales, so that anyone can record Welsh and historic names that don’t appear on online maps. You can contribute names for places and features of all kinds, and we’ll share the data widely.

As the UK’s main mapping agency, Ordnance Survey is central in identifying and sharing place names. The research report suggests an occasional lack of clarity behind decisions about Welsh names, and we'll explore with Ordnance Survey and the Welsh Language Commissioner possibilities for improving processes in relation to Welsh naming practices.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for your statement this afternoon. As Welsh Conservatives, we are supportive of the Welsh Government's commitment to retain our cultural heritage by promoting Welsh place names. I want to start by expressing my full support for this new initiative, which provides an excellent opportunity for communities across Wales to engage with their history, their landscapes and the stories that are rooted in the names of our fields, hills, streets and homes. It's wonderful to see an approach that encourages everyone to participate, recognising that it's often local people who have the best information to keep these traditions alive.

Place names form a major part of our identity. They tell us not only where we are, but who we are, reflecting centuries of language, culture and life experience. So, I am pleased that the Government sees that protecting Welsh place names is crucial in order to keep the language and our heritage for future generations.

But simultaneously, it's important to note that we must respect the choices made by individual people and communities as to how they use the language in using place names. Although the Welsh language has a central place in our national identity, appropriately, we must remember that many people live in bilingual communities or speak English only, and we should respect decisions on the naming of places in these contexts too. So, I'd be grateful if the Cabinet Secretary could explain a little as to how this programme will work on a practical basis.

First of all, it's an excellent idea to give the public an opportunity to contribute to names, phonetic spellings and to provide sound recordings, but how will the Government ensure that those things that are presented are accurate, are properly checked and respect local traditions? Will there be some process to check the information without preventing people from participating? Also, I would like to know how the Government is going to strike a balance between encouraging the use of Welsh place names as well as respecting the rights of owners or communities who would prefer to keep English names or use bilingual signs. How will you ensure that this doesn't become something that is enforced on everyone, rather than supporting the choices of local people?

Also, it's crucially important to include young people if we want this work to continue in the long term. So, can the Cabinet Secretary share with me how the Government intends to make this resource accessible and attractive to young people? How will you encourage them to participate and ensure that their views and identities are included and appreciated?

We know that place names can occasionally lead to tensions between authorities and local communities, particularly where names have emotional or historical echoes. How does the Government intend to deal with any such conflict in a way that respects local traditions? Once again, we praise the Government for building on the work that's already been done with projects such as Mapio Cymru, which you mentioned, and the list of historic place names by the royal commission. Collaboration is crucially important, and it would be good to have further information as to how the Government will work with public bodies, local authorities and community initiatives in order to ensure that this programme is successful and builds on what's already been done.

Thank you very much to Tom Giffard for what he said and for his general support for what we are seeking to do to safeguard place names, and what he said about what local names demonstrate to us about who we are, as Tom Giffard said.

To turn to the questions that he asked, may I say clearly that, as a Government, we do respect people's individual choices? We don't currently want to follow the path of legislating in this area, because we're gaining ground without doing that. Naturally, people generally and across Wales want to safeguard place names.

In the research, the people undertaking that research had asked people in areas of Wales where Welsh isn't used on a daily basis about their views, and a great many people who don't speak Welsh at all said that they appreciated seeing, for example, new streets with Welsh names, because it demonstrated to them something about the unique individual places where they lived. When we’re lucky to maintain goodwill towards the Welsh language, we can work in that way to do more to help people, to do more to support people, but without saying to people who want to use the English language or who want to use bilingual language that they will have to do something that other people want them to do.

On the issues that Tom Giffard raised about how people can provide assistance through sound clips and so on, I don't want to create some kind of overly bureaucratic system. We know that the way that people say things changes from one village to the next in Wales, so I want people to just contribute, to be confident if they some say something in some way that they can share it in that way in the contribution that they make. That is part of the rich nature of the language that we have. And in terms of young people, of course we want to draw young people into this. They are the people who are going to be using these terms in future. We can do that through the agencies that they use and that we use, for example through the mentrau iaith.

Tom Giffard asked about how we can do more to work with local authorities. I said in the statement, Dirprwy Lywydd, that we want to do more with more local authorities. We've had a particularly good experience with the local authorities that have come together already in a forum to discuss matters like this. Now we want to do more with the other local authorities. There will be a meeting Thursday of this week with my officials and every local authority to speak to them about what they're doing already, what else they can do, and to bring them together with other people who have experience and an interest in this field.

In the questions that Tom Giffard asked, I think that he was referring to the importance of collaboration to bring people into the discussion, to help people to be part of the journey that I've tried to outline this afternoon, and I agree entirely with what he said in that regard.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for this afternoon's statement. Thank you too for recognising the role of Plaid Cymru through the co-operation agreement and for referring, of course, to Dr Dai Lloyd. Although I wasn't here the time of that vote, I do recall seeing very lively clips of Dr Dai speaking on this topic. I think it's also important to remind everyone that it was a Bill to safeguard historical place names in Wales. That's what Dai Lloyd brought forward, and it covered a range of languages in Wales at the time. He was keen to cover the historical place names, be they Norwegian, Latin or whatever language they were in, because of course we do have an interesting history and the loss of place names does mean a loss of identity. This is crucially important, and I'm also pleased to see the work done under the co-operation agreement.

I do have a few questions just in terms of how we can take this forward. Of course, I welcome the place name recording tool, but there will be no legal requirement to protect the names on the list. So could I ask you why you've come to the view that legislation is not an option to take this forward? Because likewise you say in your statement about community campaigning having an influence on decisions and sometimes changing people's decisions on place names. But why do we always have to fight for the Welsh language? Why can't we safeguard our historic place names so that these aren't lost? It's one thing to make them available on a list, but having them protected is something that I would like to see.

You mentioned the further work with the topographical names, and I truly welcome that. Can you outline the timetable for that work? Likewise, you mentioned the work with the Ordnance Survey and the Welsh Language Commissioner. What is the timetable in relation to that?

I too had the privilege recently of meeting the curator of historic place names, who is doing incredible work. I think it's important to note that it's one individual doing that work. As we scrutinised the work of the royal commission recently, we noted that they could be doing so much more, even. We appreciate the resource, but how much assurance can you provide that that resource will continue?

One of the things that emerged from scrutiny was, of course, the potential of this work in terms of changes as a result of the new curriculum, particularly in terms of cynefin. There is so much more that we could be doing, not only to get these lists up and running, but to ensure that we use these to bring history to life. Can I ask you whether there have been any discussions with the Cabinet Secretary for Education to consider how we can make that connection between this work and the changes to the curriculum?

I wanted to give one example of why place names are so important. Perhaps some of you will have visited Llys Llywelyn at St Fagans, which is based on Llys Rhosyr near Newborough, the court that exists from the times of the princes of Gwynedd, the only existing example. For many years, Llys Rhosyr was lost. Nobody knew where it was, but you do know what the field's name was where it was located? It was called Cae Llys, so the clue was in the name of the field, and that's where Llys Rhosyr was discovered, which is now Llys Llywelyn at St Fagans. So, there are clues out there, aren't there, in these names, and it was only in the 1990s that Llys Rhosyr was discovered.

Thank you very much to Heledd Fychan for what she said, and the constructive manner in which she made her contribution today. I agree entirely with what she said at the end of her contribution—that names are more than just names. They give clues to us about what has happened in places across Wales.

When I had the opportunity to speak to Dr James about the work that he's done—and I acknowledge the fact that he's the only one working on this, but there are many people volunteering alongside him too—he referred to the fact that when you speak to older people now, they remember conversations that they had with their grandparents. They remember back to not the last century, but the century before that. So, it goes back into our history and the names show us things about what has happened in our communities over that time.

I am confident that we have funding to continue with the work to add names to the statutory list. We are the only nation in the United Kingdom with a statutory list where local authorities have to use the list when they're thinking about naming new streets, and so on. I'm confident that that work will continue.

Back to the point that Heledd Fychan raised at the beginning in terms of legislation. I understand what she says, that the reason why some people want legislation is to protect certain things. The reason that I haven't been persuaded so far is that we are doing that, and there's more that we can do, without legislating. Legislating in this area is quite complex. There are some things that we can't do at all. So, business names for example—that isn't one of the responsibilities that has been devolved. So, we can legislate, but we can't do anything in that particular area. If anybody wants to change the name of their home, if the home has a number, then they can call the house whatever they want.

There's nothing that we can do in law to change that. We can try to persuade people, but we can't make it compulsory for them to do it. So, for several reasons, the only reasons that came up—. I remember the debate on the floor of the Senedd with Dr Lloyd, and he was hugely enthusiastic. He acknowledged, as I remember, that there are some things in terms of human rights that are involved here. So, I can see us spending a great deal of energy and spending a great deal of time legislating where we're not quite sure whether that will have the impact that we want to see, whilst there are things that we can continue to do now, with that spirit of goodwill that we have, to safeguard and protect local place names and to build on what we've already done.

I agree with Heledd Fychan about the important role that local authorities have to play, and that's why we want to do more with them. But there's more that we can do with others too. We do want to do more with the Ordnance Survey, and my officials have a meeting with the Ordnance Survey's officials next week, just to ask them how they make certain decisions, what resources do they use, and can we help them make decisions that are of greater assistance to us in safeguarding and protecting Welsh place names.

I warmly welcome the initiatives the Welsh Government and its partners have made to provide practical steps to preserve place names, especially the crowdsourcing initiative through the website, to find people with folk tales and memories of pieces of land. I think that's excellent. We know how important names are to people's sense of identity from the finance Minister's own bardic name, Mark Pengwern. Those who have seen the excellent S4C series Cyfrinachau'r Llyfrgell, which I highly recommend, will know that the scene of Mark Drakeford going to the library and seeing the old maps with this name that meant so much to him and his family lineage is genuinely inspiring and heartwarming. That just goes to show that this goes beyond rational attachment; these are strong, deep emotional and cultural links as well.

I just want to ask a little bit about the research the finance Minister quoted that houses are three times more likely to change their names to Welsh names than English names. Do we know the granularity of that? For example, will we be having lots of Tŷ Bach Twts around Wales, or charming names that are not particularly vernacular to the area, at the expense of names that do have a strong local lineage, or does the research tell us that, actually, the names that people are changing to have a strong local connection? Because I'm struck by the now infamous and egregious example of Llyn Bochlwyd in Eryri, which was changed to Lake Australia. When we are losing names that mean something to trivial names, that is a great damage to the area, and that is not compensated for by people changing their names to charming folksy names that have no local connection.

Well, I thank the Member for what he said about the programme about the national library, which is such a fantastic resource. He is right, there is an emotional component to all of this. The fact that the library had the bill of sale in the Boar's Head in Carmarthen in 1920 of a piece of land that I used to be taken so regularly to visit as a child was a remarkable moment, and it does tell you why some of these debates and some of the work that people do locally does have such a charge behind it. People do it not just out of a sense of history, but out of a sense of identity as well.

The research is very clear in its overall findings that most place names don't change; most house names don't change. But where they do, it is much more likely that an English name will change to a Welsh name than the other way around. I don't believe there is evidence in there that the names that people choose as a result of making that switch are trivial names, but there are things that we can definitely do to help people in making those choices, so that there is a local authority in Wales that every time somebody notifies them of an intent to change contacts them directly and makes sure that they have some resources that they can draw on to make that choice.

There's another example where work is being done to see whether as part of the conveyancing arrangement people can be put in touch with resources that they will be able to draw on to make a choice that would not be of the sort that Lee Waters suggested, but would have some local resonance and meaning. In the forum that will come together on Thursday of this week, I want to explore with local authorities whether there is more help that can be offered to people who are making these switches so that they do at least consider names that would have a genuine connection with that locality, and then, where they want to, to recover that and to make sure that the name that they choose has some resonance and some meaning.

Thank you very much for your statement this afternoon, finance and Welsh language Cabinet Secretary. I'm pleased that this has been raised today, as I did mention it in culture committee last week. Something I have been keen to raise is road names, which in parallel can be very effective. We've seen good examples in my constituency where, in Rhyl, for example, on the new estates, they've been named in Welsh after some veterans—Llys Walsh, for example, is just one of those examples. But what we do seem to see is local variants across local authorities. Wrexham, for example, have bilingual road signs across the whole county, whereas others are English only. Some of them are Welsh only. So, you have touched on it briefly in answers to other contributions, but I'm just seeking some more answers about what guidance and what advice can be given to local authorities to harmonise that ambition better and get more fluidity across the system through local levels as well.

Thank you for that interesting question. Look, the law is clear that, over time, what should happen is the public representation of names should be bilingual, with the Welsh first and the English below it. That doesn't require names that are already there to be taken down and replaced. It's something that is going to evolve over time. But as time goes on, more and more names will appear in that way, and certainly any new names, streets that are newly being named, need to conform to what the law already requires.

I thank the Member for what he said about newly named streets. That was one of the questions that was specifically asked of people in north-east and south-east Wales as part of the research. People who didn't speak Welsh at all: what did they think of streets around them—new streets—being named in Welsh? And overwhelmingly, the answer was that people really liked it. Because, again, it conveys that sense of place and purpose, doesn't it? So, it's very good to know that we are going with the grain of what people would prefer to see in their localities. And as I've said in answer to some earlier Members, I think, while we've got the wind in our sails in that way, the measures that I've outlined this afternoon, the additional work we will do with our local authorities, with other important bodies in this field, the investment we will make in further research on topographical names, the work already being carried out through the royal commission and so on—I think those are measures that will allow us to go with the grain of what people would like to see here in Wales, and make sure that, to those young people that Tom Giffard referred to in his contribution, we hand on to them a really lively, well-informed and meaningful set of work in this area.

And finally, Siân Gwenllian.

Thank you very much. I must confess that I never understood exactly why the Government was opposed to legislating to protect Welsh place names from being replaced by English names—names in the built landscape and in the topographic landscape. Legislating is the only way to ensure that map makers, for example, use the original Welsh place names on maps in future.

I do thank you for all of the research and recording work that has been done, but I am concerned that all of this could have been in vain, bearing in mind that the stance of one party, which could play a prominent role in the next Senedd, namely Reform, is one that devalues the Welsh language and culture. So, there is a need for more than just guidance, template letters, encouragement to establish forums, raising awareness, gathering data and recording forms—all of these are important, but there is a need to do more to safeguard the Welsh language for the future, particularly in the current political climate. In other words, we need to legislate. We can't depend on goodwill alone.

So, with all of that in mind, will you commit the current Government to at least consider what could be included in draft legislation—things that are within the competence of the Senedd to be scrutinised by the next Senedd?

I thank Siân Gwenllian, not only for the comments that she's made this afternoon, but also for all the work that she and Cefin Campbell did in this area when we were co-operating as two parties. I hear Siân's comments on other parties outside of this Senedd. One of the things that I'm pleased to see here is that every party in the current Senedd is supportive of the Welsh language. When other parties are attacking the Welsh language, I think they lose ground rather than gain ground, because people in the areas where they're campaigning—. They too, we know, are supportive of the Welsh language.

Now, as I've already said, in the programme that I've set out this afternoon, we are not moving to legislation, but I haven't closed the door on legislation either. I don't think that we will have time over the next six months remaining to us to bring forward a draft Bill, but I am more than happy to follow the evidence. The evidence at the moment suggests to me that we are gaining ground and that there is more that we can do without legislation. If the evidence shows us that legislation is the only way to protect things and to safeguard the ground that we've already gained, well the argument would then change.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary.

Item 5 today is a statement by the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs on the future of the Crown Estate in Wales. I call on the Deputy First Minister to make the statement—Huw Irranca-Davies.

Thank you very much, Dirprwy Lywydd. Today I wish to provide Members with an update on our proposed approach for the remainder of this parliamentary term for pressing the case for the devolution of the Crown Estate to Wales.

We are clear that the Crown Estate should be the responsibility of the devolved Government in Wales. Indeed, this was one of the recommendations of the Independent Commission on the Constitutional Future of Wales. The Welsh Government accepted this recommendation and the Senedd has also endorsed the commission's findings. And as Members will know, all 22—all 22—local authorities across Wales have now passed motions calling for the devolution of the Crown Estate. In short, there is a growing consensus that the Crown Estate should be devolved to Wales. We will continue to press the case at every opportunity.

Our party has a proud record of campaigning for and delivering devolution. This is one of a number of areas where we will continue pushing for the people of Wales to be able to take more decisions closer to home. Now, this is not, to be clear, a matter of constitutional navel-gazing, as some in this Chamber have claimed in previous debates on this matter. Devolution of the Crown Estate would be consistent with the wider powers that have already been devolved, including those relating to land and sea bed management and planning. It would enable the Welsh Government to build on our ambitious plans for net-zero energy. It is important that the Welsh Government have the powers to pursue net zero in a way that retains wealth in Wales, where Welsh communities have a say and can feel the benefits. Management of Crown Estate assets would be an important contribution to this goal.

To be absolutely clear, a devolved Crown Estate would not threaten in any way the activity that is now under way by the Crown Estate around Wales. We understand that some remain concerned about these points, and we want to be crystal clear that a thriving renewables industry in Wales is key to a greener, fairer future, where we tackle climate change and we create those high-quality, secure jobs along the way.

We as a Welsh Government want to work with the Crown Estate to be as successful as possible and deliver maximum benefit to Wales. We fully support the development of a marine delivery route-map, we want to accelerate the deployment of marine renewables, and we want to use land in Wales for nature restoration and for conservation.

Now, throughout this parliamentary term, a number of Welsh Government Ministers have made this case to respective UK Ministers. We will continue to do so. And it is also worth us all remembering that devolution of the Crown Estate in Scotland did not happen overnight. Multiple, substantive, evidence-based reports were produced assessing the case for devolution of the Crown Estate, from a multitude of different sources, including local authorities, Scottish and UK parliamentary committees and others. That took many years to put together. We are learning from this experience in Scotland and making the case ourselves. We are pushing for greater transparency and information sharing.

So, whilst we welcome the annual report that the Crown Estate publishes for Wales, they do not currently provide data of a similar quality that is easy to compare across the different nations of the UK, and it makes it harder to judge their relative performance. So, we have contacted the Crown Estate and the UK Government, asking them to share the information that they have, justifying their claims of the benefits to Wales, and they have indicated that next year's annual report will now have a greater degree of Wales-specific information. And whilst we welcome this, we will maintain our pressure to ensure that the information provided is at the specificity required to reassure the Welsh public of the benefits that they are getting a fair deal.

In order to build a similar evidence base for Wales, I am pleased to announce today that we are now creating the Welsh group on the Crown Estate, the expert panel as recommended by our Independent Commission on the Constitutional Future of Wales. This panel will bring together experts to consider how best to devolve the Crown Estate to Wales. It will consider the practical consequences of devolution, including the importance of the financial and governance implications for Wales and how best to proceed. It will consider those opportunities to enhance governance and accountability structures for the Crown Estate. And it will look, crucially, at how we can maximise the economic and the social benefits for the people of Wales in a way that builds stronger public trust in the institution. The panel members of the group will be selected based on their technocratic experience in the private sector or constitutional expertise from across relevant sectors, including law, finance, local government and regional economic development.

Now, it is our hope that this report will provide that solid evidence base for this Senedd, for the UK Parliament and the people of Wales that will help to progress the pathway to devolution in the future. And this assessment will also make an important contribution through realistic consideration of the benefits that will come from devolving the Crown Estate. We would like the group to have cross-party support, sending a very clear message that Wales does not believe that the current structures are working for the people and they need to be reformed.

The establishment of this group marks an important moment in our journey towards the devolution of the Crown Estate. I will keep Members informed of the progress of the group as this work continues. Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd.

I think it's fair to say, Cabinet Secretary, you know that I speak on behalf of the Welsh Conservative group, and I don't agree with your moves at all on this. Under the Welsh Labour Government, supported by Plaid, over 26 years we have seen such failings in our education, the lowest Programme for International Student Assessment results in UK. We're now at a space where we've got 38,374 patients dying whilst on a health waiting list for treatment. Wales has the lowest employment rate in the UK. We have some of the worst roads and pavements in the UK. All you seem to be obsessed about—. And I feel you're doing this, actually, to appease Plaid Cymru, more than actually doing it for the need of it to be done.

The additional powers granted to allow the devolution of the Crown Estate to Wales will just fail to utilise existing devolved powers. There's no denying there have been colossal numbers of failures. Why on earth do—? And I think this is why, it's fair to say, people are turning against Plaid Cymru and Labour as we approach the next election, because you're not listening to people. They don't want further devolution. They don't want you to have in your hands further powers, and neither do I. There is no denying the failures that you have been responsible for. Why on earth would you devolve the Crown Estate?

We're already leading the world with offshore wind, through the UK Conservative Government I might add, and that 14 years that you decry. Well, let's just face reality here, and all the good that the UK Conservative Government did. Why would you take a gamble on devolving the Crown Estate? RenewableUK, the Offshore Wind Industry Council, the Crown Estate and Crown Estate Scotland themselves have warned the world has woken up to the success we're pioneering in the UK, and the global pipeline of offshore wind projects has more than doubled since 2022.

He's not here, but my colleague Andrew Davies summed it up in one the other day when he said that, with the Barnett formula consequentials and how they work, it will not bring any extra money into Wales. Globally, 120 nations have committed to trebling renewable capacity by the end of this decade. Do you actually acknowledge that the energy of this Parliament should now be focused on addressing the fact that we are too over-reliant on important key components for renewable energy projects? You've just passed—although it's subject to judicial review—the Alaw Môn scheme, where we're going to see a lot of our agricultural land absolutely blighted by so many solar panels.

Despite increasing competition from nations globally, Plaid Cymru and Labour in this Senedd think it's wise to go right back to the beginning and look at devolving the Crown Estate. One of the principal reasons you have, Plaid Cymru, for wanting the devolution of the Crown Estate is because of the potential of the floating offshore wind. And I believe it's because you don't like anything with the word 'crown' on it. [Laughter.] Strange but true. What you fail to acknowledge is that, thanks to the Crown Estate, the UK is the second most successful windfarm market in the world. Wales is now on the cusp of being global leaders in this sector. It would be foolish to put that at risk by causing uncertainty through devolution to this Labour Government that's been propped up by Plaid over the last 26 years. The Welsh Government, you should want to work with the Crown Estate Wales and put what is best for the interests of the people from Wales. As we know already with—. I must ask you, Cabinet Secretary: how much is this thinktank, this panel, going to be costing our Welsh taxpayers? I'd be interested if you would put that figure out here in the Senedd this afternoon.

Can you conclude now, please?

Yes, I always do. [Laughter.] Whether the—. Only when he—. Yes, the Dirprwy Lywydd is there. The thing is, it's not the wisest concept that you could be coming up with now. If you were stood there now, or the First Minister, saying how you're going to improve our health waiting treatment times, then I could agree with what you're saying. Diolch.

There we are. Janet, thank you very much. I think we disagree on pretty much everything that you've said, but I'm glad to see the First Minister is here. Of course, this isn't a health debate, but the driving down of the longest waiting times in Wales, consistently now over the last month after month after month after month is a real tribute to the investment that has gone in, and the fact that we are focusing, actually, on those issues.

But let me turn to the substance. I'll deal with the one specific question that you asked there, which is: how much will this cost? The cost of establishing this group and taking forward the work will be the inordinate sum of around—. We've budgeted for around £20,000. So, for that £20,000, if we can actually establish, based on sharing of data and transparency, the gains that Wales can get from the devolution of the Crown Estate—bear in mind that none of the members of this group are being paid, they will only have their expenses to attend the meetings; they'll be giving of their expertise in order to drive this work forward and gather the evidence—that'll be £20,000 very well spent indeed.

I'll come back to why in a moment, but just to squash the scaremongering for a moment in terms of renewables and our work with the Crown Estate, we continue to work very effectively with the Crown Estate. In fact, Wales has led the way in offshore wind. We had the first fixed projects in north Wales, of course, as you know very well, to the first commercial-scale floating wind that will appear in the Celtic sea. We've got a pipeline of over 15 GW of offshore wind projects, a huge opportunity for our economy and exports, and including the work that we're doing with our ports as well and the supply chain. So, we launched the offshore wind task and finish group action plan to maximise the economic and social value for Wales. We're doing that now, Janet. We know that Wales has a key role to play in driving forward clean power and energy security, and that task and finish group action plan sets out our very strong vision for the economy and the regeneration of many of our communities.

Just to say, offshore wind in the Celtic sea has now moved from planning into actual delivery. It's a major milestone for Wales. We have two successful bidders, which will deliver over 3 GW of clean energy, and the Crown Estate, working with us, has committed to the full 4.5 GW. So, none of this will disrupt any of this work whatsoever. This is the beginning of billions of potential investment and thousands of new jobs in Wales under this Welsh Labour Government.

But let me turn to the substance of this, because you went off on the normal line there of saying, 'Well, should we be bothering our little heads here in Wales with this? This isn't important whatsoever.' Let me just say, throughout this Parliament, Welsh Government has consistently called for devolution of the Crown Estate for very good reason. We believe that decisions about Wales should be made in Wales. Scotland already has control over the Crown Estate; Wales deserves exactly the same. We’re not asking for more; we’re asking for the same—control over our resources. There is no good reason, Janet, why Wales should be treated any differently from Scotland. Every argument for why the Crown Estate was devolved in Scotland applies equally to Wales; we should receive the same deal.

Thank you to the Cabinet Secretary for the statement. The Senedd Record here, as well as Hansard in Parliament, will show that Plaid Cymru has led the debate on the devolution of the Crown Estate to Wales for a decade and more. Our belief that the people and communities of Wales, not the Treasury and the monarchy, should benefit from Welsh resources, is not a new idea in any way whatsoever. But, without doubt, it's been good to see the argument gather momentum in recent years. As we heard, every local authority in Wales is now calling for the devolution of the Crown Estate, and prior to that a majority of Senedd Members here had voted in favour of a Plaid Cymru motion back in the summer of 2023. And if it was difficult to understand the fierce opposition of Westminster to this very simple principle before that, it's even more difficult now, given that the will of the Senedd and local authorities in Wales has been so steadfast. It's difficult to understand the opposition. So, what I want to know is what the Government here has been doing in terms of recent conversations with the Westminster Government to remind them specifically of the will expressed in this place.

I certainly agree with the Cabinet Secretary that we need to build a consensus—that's what we've sought to do over recent years, in bringing forward debates and motions here in the Senedd and campaigning on the ground too. But the block, of course, here is Labour in Westminster now. We expect no better from the Conservatives, and Janet Finch-Saunders came very close to opposing the principle of devolution itself in her contribution this afternoon, and that is no surprise to us. But we see the messaging from Westminster: 'No commercial sense' was the judgment made by the Labour Treasury Minister, James Murray, back in February in response to a request from Plaid Cymru in the Commons to devolve the Crown Estate.

That sentence, ‘No commercial sense’, betrays, doesn't it, Westminster's main motivation for clinging onto control of the value of the Crown Estate in Wales. Because it's a tale as old as time that what may make commercial sense to the UK Treasury so often comes at the detriment of Wales and our communities: the outdated and unfair Barnett formula, the refusal to give Wales our share of HS2 funding. But Scotland doesn't have to put up with this, of course. Scotland does receive consequentials from HS2, the Crown Estate is devolved to Scotland, because Scotland, of course, has a Government that is ready, always, to stand up and fight for it.

So, again, I welcome all moves towards ensuring that we will see the devolution of the Crown Estate realised. And to that extent, of course, we'll support the work of this Welsh group. But one can't help feeling at the same time, 'Is this it? And why only now?' The elephant in the room is, as I say, that the obstacle isn't in this Senedd; it lies with the ranks of Labour MPs from Wales and their UK Labour colleagues, and resistance to devolving the Crown Estate is political, and it reflects where Labour's power base really sits.

And a simple question, I think, at the end. The Cabinet Secretary says that the UK Government will play ball and will support the panel to obtain the information, i.e. they will facilitate the work of the panel. But if it will support that work, why doesn't it just support the devolution of the Crown Estate? That's what we are really after. We don't need any more blocks.

Rhun, diolch yn fawr iawn. Thank you for a range of thoughts and some questions there. First of all, you are right: there is gathering momentum, and that is helpful. When you have 22 local authorities of all different political perspectives, every local authority in Wales, saying, 'We need the devolution of this', it's because they are living with the day-to-day practical reality, and they see the potential of this. They are not simply looking at Scotland. They are looking at other parts of the UK and saying, 'Well, why don't we grab the benefits for our communities?' That's really helpful to us in our arguments, going forward.

I'm keen to build that consensus. We have heard the Conservatives' position laid out, which I am disappointed with. It would be great if this whole Senedd could say, on the principle of what is good enough for Scotland in this thing, and the benefits that they have accrued—. There have been analyses of what the economic benefits are for Scotland, and they have shown what those benefits are. But there is a principle as well, about control within a devolved Government to actually make those decisions better. There is nothing here about knocking off kilter what we are trying to do with renewables. We are leading the way in Wales here. We will continue to lead the way. But we need to build that consensus strongly, and I hope that at some point the Conservatives will see the light and will say that this is what we should be doing together.

The question in San Steffan is an interesting one. We have had constructive engagement, still ongoing, about the work of the group that we are now setting up. We have already had, as I said in my opening remarks there, a commitment to provide more transparency, but we need to see it being as transparent as it is elsewhere, in Scotland and in other parts of the UK. We need to have that data. But we would really welcome the engagement—the positive engagement, proactive engagement, in one way or another—with the work of this group that we're establishing, and I think that we'll get that in terms of data and information and evidence. I think that one of our challenges to the UK Government would be to say, 'If you feel that there is not a compelling case for this, whether that's economically or whatever, put that evidence forward so that we can see it, we can work, we can look at it, we can explore it, among all the other evidence going.' We want them to be a partner in this exploration.

Just to say very clearly as well what this group will be doing: it will look at the performance of the Crown Estate in delivering for the people of Wales. I would argue, by the way, that our engagement with the Crown Estate is very good, and that we are getting it delivering for the people of Wales, even in this—what we would say—sub-optimal way of working. It will look at those practical implications. Because we really, as a serious Government, need to work through what the practical implications of devolution are, including the governance and the financial aspects, but also what options are there right now to improve the accountability and the delivery of the Crown Estate within Wales that are short of devolution as well. Let's look at the whole gamut there. So, we will continue to work with the UK Government so that they can positively contribute to the work of this group.

It is very disappointing that the Welsh Tories do not want the wealth of Wales to be shared among the people of Wales. It is rash of them—of anybody, in fact—to be in denial about the unanimous view of all 22 local authorities, who are there at the grass roots, listening to communities. We need to ensure that we are not repeating history. We all know what happened with Tryweryn, and the resentment that caused. And it isn't just our role in really leading the way on transforming our carbon-dominated energy system. In the future, we may well have such a change of climate that we're going to have to look again at the way in which we husband our most precious resource, which is water. So, I think it's really disappointing that the UK Government is ignoring the report they commissioned by Gordon Brown to advise on the future governance of the UK, where he clearly stated that there was no reason why any responsibilities devolved to Scotland should not be devolved to Wales.

So, how will this expert group go about changing the mindset of the UK Treasury, who are the principal opponents, that things cannot be effectively governed from Westminster and Whitehall, and that all the nations and regions of Britain need to be involved in delivering the services that our communities need within their own communities?

Thank you, Jenny. You're so right. I would invite, once again, our Conservative colleagues here to rethink this and to actually support, because the investment and the control that we could have of the resources here in Wales could benefit directly coastal communities, high streets, public services. And, again, I come back to the point: if it's good enough for Scotland, why isn't it good enough for Wales?

You ask the absolute right question: what does this group now add to it? We've never been shy in coming forward and building the case for devolution over many, many years, both within this Senedd, but also in Government, and also within our party as well, and I think this is part of it. With broad consensus around this, including from local authorities to at least two, possibly three, I think, of the parties here within the Senedd, we now need to grind through the practical considerations for how the Crown Estate should be devolved by pulling together this group. And that builds the case then, including the invitation to UK Government—and we're having good engagement with them on this—on how they can contribute to this group, including engaging them within it, so that we get to the point where the argument for devolution of the Crown Estate is well grounded, well articulated and practical considerations have been taken on. We've worked through the issues of finance. We've worked through the issues of governance. We've worked out how we use this to boost our investment in renewables, boost our investment in nature conservation and so on. We've done all the hard work. And that gives us then the argument to say, 'Right, let's move now, we need to actually devolve.'

The other thing this group will look at, as I mentioned in my answer to Rhun, is, short of devolution, what can be done right here, right now. So, for example, we are very keen—and we're actively engaging with the UK Government on the role of this place and Welsh Government in the appointment of the commissioner. We feel that it should be equal. We should be equal in partnership in that, so at least the commissioner then, we have a role within that. It's not simply from Westminster and so on. But there are other aspects we can look at right here, right now about how we get more data, so we can see the full level of granulation of what the Crown Estate is delivering in Wales, and also how we engage further with the Crown Estate.

Although I have to say, just to reassure Janet once again, as the straw man is put up about derailing investment, we will continue full pelt at working with the Crown Estate, with the Celtic Freeport and with others to actually deliver that investment in renewables. We are doing exceptionally well, and we'll keep on doing that, as well as this.

In June, the Labour MP for Cardiff East, Jo Stevens, who happens to be the Secretary of State for Wales, told the UK Parliament, and I quote, 'Even if it'—the devolution of the Crown Estate—

'could be done without risking the revenues, that would not automatically lead to more money for the Welsh Government, because any revenues they retained would likely be offset through reductions to the block grant, as is the case in Scotland.'

Was she right?

Mark, this is exactly why we've set up the group, to work through the financial, the governance and all other practical considerations. But I would say to you, Mark, the work that's been done in Scotland to analyse the economic benefits that have come to Scotland has shown compelling evidence of the benefits that have come to Scotland. We now need to do the same piece of work for Wales. That's what this is about. I would hope that you and the Conservative Party would welcome grinding out the evidence and engaging with it, rather than being oppositional to what, both in terms of the work of the group and the principle of people in Wales having control over the resources in Wales, would be something you would support. This is a devolved Senedd. We are a devolved Government. Why would you not support this in principle, as well as the practical work we are now going to carry out?

I have to say, actually, the contribution by Janet Finch-Saunders sounded very similar to the answers that the First Minister gave to Rhun ap Iorwerth in FMQs around focusing too much on constitutional issues rather than the everyday problems. But I hope the First Minister was listening to the Deputy First Minister as he set out very clearly why constitutional issues are important to those everyday matters, especially when we consider the Crown Estate.

Now, turning to the statement, of course I support the establishment of this group, but I'm also not going to stand here and say that this is progress on the issue of devolving the Crown Estate. I think this is a standstill position at best, of course accepting that the report by the Independent Commission on the Constitutional Future of Wales recommended this.

Looking through the statement, there’s a lot to agree with right at the start, right? I think there's a lot of common ground between me and the Deputy First Minister, but I think where this falls down is in those final few paragraphs of the statement, for example—Rhun ap Iorwerth picked up on it—

'We have discussed the panel with UK Government Ministers and they have committed to engage with the group'.

That's not a commitment to devolve the Crown Estate, and right off the bat you're seeing where we can trip up here in terms of making that case to the Crown Estate. If the UK Government don't want it, well, it's simply not going to happen.

The other point:

'it is our hope that this report will provide that solid evidence base for this Senedd, for the UK Parliament and the people of Wales'.

I don't think we can stand here and seriously say that there's no evidence base for devolving the Crown Estate as things currently stand. Are you meaning to tell me that 22 local authorities voting in favour of devolving the Crown Estate did so based on a gut feeling? So, what I would be hoping is that the Deputy First Minister can provide some assurances that, when this work is undertaken, we're not going over the same old ground yet again.

And just one final point from me, Llywydd, and these stood out to me as massive red flags: the words 'technocratic' and 'realistic'. Because, in my view, 'technocratic' and 'realistic' are the enemy of ambition. And from sitting in this Chamber and listening to Government statements time and time again, often these words are associated with simply just tinkering around the edges. We've seen part of that with the commissioner for the Crown Estate being established, and that being waved around as some massive victory. But what assurances can the Deputy First Minister give us now that this isn't simply going to be an exercise in technocratic experience and realistic proposals? And what assurances can he give me—? Or how, actually, can he reconcile the ambition that he set out at the start of his statement with those words, which completely undermine that ambition, in my view?

Listen, don't pull one word out of a statement and make that the enemy of the overall good here. You need some people with good technocratic understanding to make this thing work, but I also stress finance, legal, governance and a range of other constitutional experts as well. Also, it's important to note that we're not doing this into the long, long grass of the distance. We are hoping that we will have an interim report from this group in the early spring of next year, okay? So, before we go into elections, we want to see some results coming forward.

And you are right: there is evidence out there already. But what we're setting this group up to do—. It's based on, by the way, exactly as you said, the recommendation back in early 2024 of the independent constitutional group, which was to set this expert group up, and that is exactly what we're doing. And we are committing them to grind through the detail, work with what's there already, but engage with others. And I would put this challenge out. For those who would say there is no benefit in devolving the Crown Estate, let them put forward their arguments and their evidence and let them put forward their data. Because what we know about Scotland is that it works. What we know about other countries where they've set up similar models and set up things like sovereign wealth funds based on it, we've seen the compelling evidence for how that works and the investment that can lead to.

So, I say this not in an adversarial way, but if there are others who feel that it's not worth the candle to do this, let them put forward the arguments and the evidence, because we believe that the case is there, strong already, but we want this group now to bring forward its clear findings on the case for devolution. And also what we can do even short of devolution, right here right now, to make a stronger case for the way that we work with the Crown Estate. And as I say, our steer to the group will be that we would like to see something in the early spring as an interim report, not the final one.

Dirprwy Brif Weinidog, I've no doubt that you and others in the Welsh Government are pressing the case for the devolution of the Crown Estate. But as we've heard from quotes earlier this year, the UK Government isn't listening. 'No commercial sense' is as much of a resounding 'no' as you can get. You and any future Welsh Government have a lot of persuading to do. There are very strong arguments to devolve the Crown Estate, but I can't see at the moment what can happen to shift the view of the UK Government.

Certainly, an expert panel is not going to shift the view of the UK Government, because we've been here before. The UK Government engaged with the Commission on Justice in Wales report. That was an expert panel report on the devolution of justice, a strong argument in favour of devolution of justice. What did the UK Government do after it reported? Nothing. No real engagement at all afterwards.

Professor Roger Scully told me once that commissioning reports is a national sport in Wales. What we don't need in Wales is another expert report gathering dust, and that is my concern. You mentioned that you will have some views in the spring of next year. When will that work take place? Because, of course, we might have some very loud voices in the Senedd after next May who oppose any further devolution at all. Quite frankly, they want to reverse devolution. Diolch.

Thank you very much for that. The history of this institution and successive Government of Wales Acts is that every step along the way we've had to make a compelling case, and we have not stood still in doing that. We build the evidence, we bring the people together and we bang at those doors until they are knocked down or knocked open. That is part of this. Just to say, this is not a Welsh Government deciding we will do this out of the blue sky. This was a direct recommendation of that independent constitutional commission. We accepted all of the recommendations. This is the one we are now putting into place and we want to proceed with that work.

You are right, we've got a job of work to persuade the UK Government, but that's exactly what we are doing. We build the case, we build it compellingly, and we have succeeded before where we have had devolution. We are very engaged in a different area at the moment on that very aspect of devolution of justice, not least around probation and youth justice. We have constructive engagement going on. Myself, Jane Hutt, Julie Morgan, Mark Drakeford and others are all pushing the case there, and we have good engagement going on. That is how we do it. We engage, we do the hard graft, in order to actually persuade people, and that's what this is all about. I sense some scepticism, but devolution was never easily won.

I thank the Deputy First Minister.

Item 6 is the next item, and it's a statement by the Minister for Mental Health and Well-being on the NHS Wales app. Sarah Murphy will be making that statement.

Diolch, Llywydd. I am very pleased to bring this statement to Plenary today to talk more about the development of one, perhaps, of the most significant digital innovations in Wales from the public's point of view—the NHS Wales app. This isn't just an app that allows us to check a few basic facts and figures about health services, or our own health data. This is a useful and powerful platform with a huge potential to change the way we all use and interact with our health service. It represents a fundamental shift in how we empower people to engage with their healthcare and health services. It is perfectly placed to evolve into the digital front door of the NHS, capable of directing us to the right service for our needs. That is the vision for the near future and the ongoing development of the NHS Wales app.

Since its beta launch in April 2023, the NHS Wales app has been downloaded by more than 0.5 million people. That's equivalent to one in five adults in Wales having the app on their phone in their pocket. And its use is steadily growing, with more than 9 million log-ins, 2.3 million repeat prescriptions ordered through the app, and 2,000 people have completed their organ donation registration on the app, too. Feedback from users and healthcare professionals about the app has been overwhelmingly positive. This is a clear signal people are ready and willing to embrace digital health services.

The NHS Wales app is available to everyone who is 16 and over and registered with a GP in Wales. Thanks to the development of the Welsh identity verification service, even those who do not have a photo ID can access it, ensuring that no-one is left behind. The current version of the app enables people to order repeat prescriptions, book some primary care appointments, view health records, send secure messages, manage organ donation choices, and access trusted NHS services, from 111 to screening.

This is the result of concerted collaboration across the Welsh Government, NHS Wales, Digital Health and Care Wales, and our delivery partners. Every GP practice is now on board, and we’re working closely with clinicians, digital teams and patient groups to ensure the NHS Wales app reflects the realities of front-line care. But we know that adoption alone isn’t enough. We are learning from NHS England’s experience: adopting what works, avoiding what doesn’t, and ensuring our approach is inclusive and sustainable.

The next challenge lies in delivering functionality that is consistent, equitable and meaningful across Wales. We have delivered the first phase of services in the app, and there is more to do to deliver increased functionality and to realise the full potential of the app. We will do this by working with all of our partners with transparency, urgency, and a relentless focus on delivery.

The next set of updates coming this autumn will build on the successful pilot in the Hywel Dda University Health Board area, which has enabled information about waiting lists for general surgery and appointment messages to be shared via the app. Other features like proxy access for carers, nominating a pharmacy for your prescriptions, waiting list status and hospital appointment tracking across all health boards are either already available or in the advanced stages of roll-out.

On the road map for roll-out in spring 2026 are test results, the ability for people to feed back their own experience of care—what the NHS calls 'patient-reported outcomes'—and an 'about me' feature that addresses the most important information people want to share with professionals in health and social care, in any situation. Allowing people to record the information they want to share that is essential to their direct care needs is at the heart of their care and well-being and gives them more control over their healthcare.

These are all positive developments, but I do want to be clear: the development of the NHS Wales app doesn’t just depend on updating the technology that underpins the app. The app is part of a wider and complex health and social care system. Its updates often depend on streamlining processes and improving data integrity elsewhere in the NHS, to ensure that seamless patient experience. If we are to realise its full potential as the digital front door to the NHS, people do need to have that trust in the app and see the benefits from its use.

Llywydd, as we look forward, our priorities for the NHS app include expanding secondary care features, including making all waiting lists visible so all appointments can be managed, and integrating commercial platforms such as the Swansea Bay patient portal to improve that interoperability, but only where it adds value. The NHS app in England has made significant strides, and it now supports appointment management across 102 acute trusts and six specialist trusts; prescriptions tracking with expanded pharmacy integration; messaging via third-party platforms; and GP record access. This is impressive, but this isn’t a race between two countries; this is an opportunity for us to learn from one another.

Our ambition is to match the functionality of the English app and then to go further. We are building an app that is bilingual by design, reflecting our national identity; equitable to access, with inclusive verification and proxy features; and integrated across systems, including commercial platforms. We want the NHS Wales app to become the digital front door to health and care services in Wales. This means consistent service across all primary and secondary care, and continued investment in features that matter most to people. This is a national commitment to improve access, equity, and, ultimately, outcomes. Our success hinges on that collaboration, transparency, and an unwavering focus on delivery, so that together we can transform healthcare for all. Diolch.

Innovations in digital access to healthcare have been a proven transformation around the world. They've improved how patients interact with health services, make care more responsive, and empower people to take more control over their health. So, I'm very pleased to see this app coming forward. Here in the United Kingdom, though, it was the Conservative UK Government that recognised this potential early on. Under the leadership of the then health Secretary, Jeremy Hunt, he laid out eight clear challenges to ensure that the NHS app in England would meet the real needs of its users. It's something that I'm proud of, and I'm sure Janet Finch-Saunders, who's next to me, and others, are proud of, because it's set in motion a genuinely patient-led approach to digital healthcare.

This is why my Welsh Conservative colleagues and I do find the Welsh Labour Government's handling of the NHS Wales app so frustrating, and frankly sometimes disappointing. When the NHS Wales app launched a beta version in April 2023, the NHS app in England had already been available at that level for nearly nine years. And while Ministers now talk optimistically about the digital front door to the NHS, patients across Wales are still unable to do basic things like check their hospital appointment dates, see their place on a waiting list, or receive their test results. English patients already take this for granted, so we need to move faster in that space. I'd like to know from you, Minister, when those things are going to become available.

You did point to the pilot project in Hywel Dda University Health Board, and promised that the national roll-out of this is on the way. But what does that mean for patients today? I think it means that some can see their GP appointments, while others can't. It means that some can nominate a pharmacy, while others are stuck on those paper repeat slips, which is something we need to get away from. And it does mean that if you live in one health board, you might receive test results electronically, but if you're in a neighbouring one, in the next county, you'll receive them via the post. I don't think that's equity; that's a postcode lottery, and we need to remove that element across Wales.

I'd like to hear a bit more from you on that, about the delivery deadlines and when they're going to be met, because we need to make sure that if they're not met, the health boards are held accountable for not providing the data. You did mention that this does rely on good data, that digital transformation does need joined-up system and service reform, but that all requires the health boards to give them to you. So, I would just be interested to hear how you're holding them accountable to make sure this is being delivered.

I do welcome the introduction of the Welsh identity verification service, which allows the user to do it without photo ID. I think that's really positive. They might have to have photo ID in the future if Keir Starmer has his way, but we'll see. But the real question is how are we making sure that the app is truly inclusive for older people as well, and people who live in those rural areas with poor connectivities, for carers and patients who need the support managing their care digitally.

Thank you so much, James Evans. I share your enthusiasm about the incredible difference that this can make and the future potential. As I mentioned, already you've got the NHS England app announcing more that they're going to do going forward. And of course, the code for the NHS England app was given to Wales for us to be able to base the app on that. But as I said, we are committed to then providing a bilingual app. Also, it is more inclusive in terms of people can go in and show their paper ID and they can make sure that they can access it, regardless of if they have digital ID or not.

When I came into this role about a year ago, that was actually something that we were a little bit stuck over. In order to break through that and try and find the most equitable way, we did have the programme through the patient and public assurance group, and they actively collaborated with a wide range of groups. This comes to your question about how we're ensuring that we're getting the patient voice and feedback from everyone. That included RNIB, RNID, Age Cymru, Macmillan, Mind, Diverse Cymru, Carers Trust, and many, many others—disability groups, for example, voluntary groups—to make sure that we were doing what they needed and that they asked us to do. This was actually a big part of it. These groups have been central to shaping the app's accessibility and usability. Again, I feel like that's showing a Welsh way that we do things through the NHS Wales app.

One of the other key things that the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care, the Minister for social care and I have done, because it's definitely a huge collaboration here, is that we've absolutely worked together to ensure that we have the right governance in place. So, you were asking then about how do we make sure that this is going to be delivered. So, in May I made an announcement at the digital conference that set out the next 12 months' road map, which was to deliver everything that you have said. On that day we also reinstated the DDaT board, so the data, digital and technology board. And on that, then, we have the highest level representatives from each of the health boards, representing the Welsh Local Government Association, representing artificial intelligence, representing many different groups, everybody who we need around the table, a huge table, the chief medical officer, the chief nursing officer, to make sure, now, that they meet on a really regular basis, a monthly basis, since we launched it, so that they're all coming together, to make sure that everything, simply, is switched on at the right times in the right areas. And that's what it comes down to, that's as simple as it is. But it's not easy co-ordinating all of those different GPs and all of the health boards. So, just to say that we have those structures in place now, the 'once for Wales' strategy that we have, as you said, ensuring that we're providing that consistent offer, that consistent digital front door.

Thank you to the Minister for the statement. It should go without saying that any statement on progress in this area is to be welcomed, of course. Digitising in the NHS should be a central aim of the Government, and it's a matter of regret that the Government has not given the due attention to this matter to date. Done right, it will not only ultimately save money, but it will improve efficiency and improve outcomes for patients, which is what the objective should be, of course. The truth is that far too many of our health services continue to rely on twentieth-century systems, be it paperwork or technology like the fax. And the unfortunate truth is that, while statements have been made several times over the past few years, there's been precious little progress to date.

There are very positive developments to be seen here today, like the fact that I'll be able to make an appointment to see my GP through the app, which is an important and a major step forward. Now, the fact that GPs are now able to do some of these fundamental things is positive. But, of course, the health service is supposed to be integrated, from primary care through to secondary, and then on to the care service. But when it comes to digital services, the system is a mess, with DHCW responsible for GP services, while the health boards are developing their own systems, independently, and then the care service coming under the auspices of local authorities. We heard the Minister speaking about this 'once for Wales' concept, but the truth is that it is, to date, not working. So, I'm fairly sure that this app won't be able to tie into clinical information from hospitals, not to mention our county council systems. But if the app is to successfully fulfil its potential, then this is what will need to happen. The long-standing problem of independent health boards failing to collaborate with other independent systems, and digital systems being developed independently that aren't compatible, must be solved.

By the same token, as James Evans mentioned, we're aware that a number of the services that we have in Wales are commissioned over the border in England. Yet there'll be a record held by some systems in England that won't be compatible with systems here in Wales. So, when are we going to genuinely tackle this question of solving the problem that the systems in Wales don't speak together, once and for all?

Not only that, but we must ensure that the app is compatible with pharmacy systems. I see immediately today, for example, that medicine prescribed by the pharmacist is not shown on the app. If all of the pharmacies aren't part of this, and if all of the medicines that are prescribed in the pharmacies aren't included, then that could pose a risk to the patient. Are you therefore going to ensure that every pharmacy is part of the system, without these current glitches, perhaps, that are within it?

Thank you so much for all of those questions. Just to start by saying that I thank you for welcoming the progress, because there has been a tremendous amount just in the last six months, and, as I said, when I came into this role around about a year ago, I'll be honest with you, things had maybe got a little bit stuck. I said when I spoke at the digital conference in May that it was absolutely imperative to restate and re-enthuse, honestly, all of the people who were in the system about what 'once for Wales' is and why it is so important that we are providing that consistent and fair and equitable offer as a digital front door across Wales. So, I'll be honest with you, the last year has not been easy. But I will also say that Welsh Government officials behind the scenes, from across many, many portfolios, all came together to really try and throw out as many solutions to some of the problems that we had hit. And we have pushed through every single one of them, and I am very confident that we have this road map. And along with the board—the governance board, now—with everybody around the table having to come together on a regular basis to present where they are and where they've got stuck has made a huge difference in unblocking some of those challenges that we had.

I absolutely agree with you as well, though, and as I said in my speech about the digitisation of the whole of our health and social care, it's absolutely fundamental. So, just to say that we have our digital priority investment fund, and even though the NHS app is a key priority for me, and was a key priority that came through for the First Minister when she went out and met with our communities the summer before last, and she came to me and said, 'The NHS app has to be a priority and we have to get this done', we do also have, then, other things, such as AI diagnostics and remote monitoring platforms. We've got e-prescribing being rolled out. We have laboratory information management systems. We have our radiology informatics system being rolled out. I'm also overseeing the roll-out of the digital maternity app, which will be done by the end of this Senedd term. We have the Welsh nursing care record. And then you pointed to a couple of those much larger, long-term commitments that we have.

So, Connecting Care is a huge project that we have, and that is the one where you're connecting all of the local authorities, all 22 of them, all together, and they're working fantastically well together with the help of the WLGA, and then linking that to secondary care, so working with all of the health boards and being able to link up all of that data. Primarily at the moment it will be used in social care, I will say, but, again, just having that link between the data is going to be absolutely invaluable. So, it's a huge project that's going on at the moment that people are really working hard to do.

Thank you, Minister. I'm a fan of the app. I regularly use it to order prescriptions. It is easy to use, it does the job well. I just wonder, though, listening to your broader comments, in terms of the strategy we're taking as a nation, whether or not we're trying to do too much. There's a trade-off between the very big table that you mentioned, where everybody gets a seat and gets a veto, and the speed and pace of delivery. We heard this afternoon the Prime Minister announce that NHS online England is going to become a completely digital NHS trust, with millions of appointments and, through your own account, we are struggling to keep up the delivery of the multiple commitments that we have made. Most of those large projects you mentioned are off track. Digital Health and Care Wales has been in special measures; and I'd be grateful for an update on where we're at with that. They have 1,000 staff, they have a budget of £186 million. This is an institution with capacity, but really struggling with delivery. And I worry about the pace of change, both in the private marketplace, which is moving at a dizzying pace, and across the border in England, whether or not our aim for perfection is leaving us behind, and there's a danger that that then leaves a citizen losing faith and not getting the benefits that digital has to offer.

I know that you're very passionate about digital inclusion and being able to make people's lives easier, and it's really good to hear that you are using the app. I feel the same, but I want it to do more. I really want it to do more, and I think the theme from everybody's questions today is: are people actually going to see a difference? And like I said, we've committed to this road map in the next 12 months, and all of these extra things then with the app will be rolled out. And I think that people being able to see where they are on waiting lists will make a huge difference. It's one of the main things that—. GP surgeries tell me people pop in. They pop in to say, 'Am I still on the waiting list? Can you ring them? Can you check?' So, having that connection with secondary care is going to make a huge difference. Those things, I think, will really transform people's connection with the NHS in Wales, honestly.

But just to say, we have the data, digital and technology board, and we have everybody around the table. But, to be very clear, and I was very clear when I chaired the first board, there is no veto. They report to us, you know, and we've set out that this is the strategy in Wales. And everybody comes around to report back on the objectives that we have set for the NHS in Wales, based on what we have been told by the public they want and they need from their health and social care now and going far into the future. It is then chaired by the director general of the NHS in Wales.

And like I said, I think, in many cases, it was some parts were struggling, honestly, in the system, and kind of just didn't want to say that they were maybe struggling. And I think that having everyone around the table now and that transparency and being able to talk through some of the challenges has been incredibly useful. But we set a remit for DHCW, myself and the Cabinet Secretary for health, earlier in the year, setting out all of these projects that need to be completed.

You are right, some of them are very big projects, and internationally—. You know, I'm always looking around trying to see what other countries are doing and how they're doing it. We do have quite a different landscape in Wales, like I said, with the different health boards, the many different local authorities and also a lot of legacy systems and also needing it to be bilingual and inclusive. So, it's slightly different, but we're not going to be able to get away from needing that electronic health record, we're not going to be able to get away from needing the interoperability of a national architecture, and we're going to need somewhere, which is the national data resource, which is where we're going to be able to have all of that data eventually so that we can see things in real time.

Wales has been well behind the curve on rolling out and developing the app, but I'm grateful today for the update; it's good to hear the progress being made.

James Evans and others asked questions about the cross-border nature of the app, and I wanted to give you the opportunity to go into a little bit more detail about that, because thousands of people across Wales will access their treatment from NHS England and hospitals in England. So, from your perspective, will the app work as just as effectively for Welsh patients who are receiving their treatment in England, in terms of booking out-patient appointments and accessing data, as for a patient from Wales receiving treatment from within Wales? And if not, what are the obstacles that exist that need to be overcome to make that NHS app function just as well whether you're accessing treatment in England or Wales?

Thank you very much. Like I said, it will very much come down to that electronic health record. That's what then enables me to go into a hospital in Betsi and for them to be able to put up my records, and also then if I was to cross over into England. Probably the biggest—. And that's absolutely the goal, so let me be very clear on that. Probably the biggest I wouldn't say 'obstacle', but the challenge that we will have to overcome is around the GDPR and will be around that kind of data sharing. But, at the end of the day, I'm a big believer—as you know from my time on the Health and Social Care Committee with you, and we used to talk an awful lot about health data—that I'm the patient, it's my data, and if I give permission and consent then I'm happy for that to be seen wherever it needs to be seen. So, that's absolutely the ethos and where we're coming from.

Obviously, then, NHS England are on their own journey when it comes to the electronic health record, so it'll be a case of where they get to, where we get to, and being able to link up the two. Now, in terms of the electronic health record, we have in Wales prioritised the electronic mental health record, and we've prioritised that then even further within the Betsi and Cwm Taf Morgannwg health boards. So, they're working very, very closely now, so that we can roll out the electronic health record specifically for mental health records. Once we've done that, it's much easier then to roll it out to other health boards, and that's the digitisation that we're looking for that people have mentioned. And then that's really the stepping stone to be doing the electronic health record alongside it. That will have an absolutely—. That will make a huge, huge difference.

In terms of other nations, we're quite ahead on that, honestly. We want to make sure that patients have a say in it and that it's, again, very collaborative and inclusive, and it takes into account safeguarding as well, which is very important. So, yes, to be honest, it's just in terms of when both nations will be in a position to move forward with the electronic health record, the interoperability, and probably some legalities around consent.

Thank you, Minister.

I've been struggling to get into the NHS Wales app, and, as if by magic, during that statement, the security code did come through on my mobile phone, and I've managed to order my repeat prescription during your statement.

You did mention it to me—. You did mention it to me 20 minutes ago, Llywydd. So, you know, I work very quickly, I do. [Laughter.]

Thank you all very much. Thank you very much—[Interruption.] Yes. Thank you all very much for that statement, and that brings today's proceedings to a close.