Plenary

The next item will be the questions to the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care. The first question [OQ63165] has been withdrawn. Question 2 will therefore be first today. Mike Hedges.

Artificial intelligence is being used in NHS Wales within diagnostics, including medical image analysis. On the administrative side, AI-powered note taking is being tested and rolled out in use in Wales. Guidance for AI adoption is being provided with active plans over the coming months to increase our national support.

Thank you for that answer. Across the world, artificial intelligence is being used to analyse images such as x-rays, magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography scans. These tools can be used to identify anomalies that can be missed by human radiologists. AI can be used to detect tumours and other critical conditions, improving outcomes via early intervention, and it's fast. Results can be produced faster, and that benefits patients.

Artificial intelligence can also be used in patient monitoring and management to monitor patients' vital signs and health data in real time, alerting health professionals to changes that require immediate attention, which is very important in critical care settings.

These are just two areas where AI can improve productivity and outcomes for patients, and I think that sometimes we talk too much about putting more money in rather than increasing productivity within the health service. What progress is the Welsh health service making?

I agree with the Member that we need to look at all ways to increase the efficiency of the service we can deliver, increase the capacity of the Welsh NHS to meet the needs of the people of Wales, and to always be pushing at that innovation, both to support patients and our workforce to deliver the very best service that they wish to do. There are already very, very good examples of the use of AI in some of the diagnostic applications that the Member was referring to in his question. So, in stroke, in cancer, in ophthalmology in particular, there's very good evidence in the NHS in Wales that AI can make a real difference in supporting the work of clinicians to recognise earlier the signs that can be responded to to avoid deterioration in people's condition. So, there is clear evidence that it can make a difference.

I would also say that there are some ambient voice technologies that can support more broadly based administrative and clinical activities. We've completed a desktop exercise recently around some of the potential for the safe introduction of some of these AVTs, as they're called, to understand some of the technical and care-setting factors that we would need to take into account to be able to expand the use of AI in a way that commands confidence and consent, both from a patient and a staff point of view.

I also think it's worth noting that this is an area where we're already working with the workforce partnership council, for example, to understand what we need to do across the NHS to ensure an ethical and responsible use of AI, and to make sure, as Mike Hedges was, I think, inferring in his question, that what this can do is support clinicians, support the wider healthcare workforce, in being able to do even more with the precious hours that they commit to the NHS in Wales.

I welcome the roll-out of AI in the Welsh NHS, which can be transformative in diagnostics, analysing images and data with far greater accuracy and speed. Unfortunately, however, the delivery of AI-enabled tools has so far been abysmal. Digital Health and Care Wales is responsible for major digital programmes, including AI-enabled tools, and was escalated to enhanced monitoring in March 2025 due to concerns over delivery capacity, largely due to serious concerns over its ability to deliver major programmes, including its AI-enabled tools.

The creation, roll-out and further development of the NHS Wales app has also been botched, with the app coming in four years after the NHS app in England, and it's still patchy in some practices, where bookings still aren't available through the app. Many have sadly lost confidence in the Welsh Government's ability to deliver new digital technologies within our health service. So, with regard to AI in the NHS, how will the Cabinet Secretary ensure that DHCW are properly equipped to handle the implementation of AI-enabled tools within the health service? Thank you.

Well, the Member should know, if he doesn't, that DHCW provides one part of the digital service for the NHS in Wales. I'm sure he'll appreciate that AI is a much broader, much richer agenda than one organisation's responsibilities. But I think it is important to note the work that the Government is doing with the NHS—all parts of the NHS—on some absolutely critical activities, so we can make sure that AI is used in the best possible ways in the NHS, but also in other parts of the Welsh public sector. That involves developing training, developing best practice standards.

We're also working with the Centre for Digital Public Services to run public-service-wide literacy and awareness sessions, exploring some of the basics of AI, so that there's an increasing understanding and an improved skill base in how to best deploy AI. There are also quite complex and nuanced questions around managing bias in AI, the kinds of things you'd need to consider when you're procuring AI, and I think he was touching on some of those points in his question. So, there is good work happening in the Welsh Government and in the Centre for Digital Public Services, and right across the NHS in Wales.

We have already made significant improvements, and last year alone—supported through the 50-day winter challenge that she may remember—we achieved a 17 per cent reduction in discharge delays against a 15 per cent target. This year, we are building on that momentum with a further £30 million specifically to local authorities to support services that can help people leave hospital safely when they're ready.

Diolch, Cabinet Secretary, and I'm really pleased to support that £30 million extra funding that is going to local authorities. And, of course, it's going to help with hospital discharge and also then, the other side, deliver community-based social care services, and it is positive for patients. We know that getting people home as soon as they're clinically fit to do so benefits their physical and also their mental well-being. The other side of that, of course, is preventing admissions by caring for people closer to home is equally beneficial to reducing any hospital waiting times, and using up space that really is needed elsewhere. So, do you anticipate that this funding will have a knock-on effect of helping reduce those waiting times as more hospital beds are going to be available, and more patients will be discharged in a timely manner?

I'm grateful to the Member for putting the question in the way that she did. Very often, the discussion is around the impact on the capacity of the health service—and that is absolutely essential, of course—but there's a human dimension to this as well, isn't there? As she was making clear in her question, people who are safe and ready to go home, but who are in a hospital bed, very often experience what we call deconditioning, which is not good for them. And so, actually the principal objective is to make sure that people are discharged for their own health and well-being.

The funding that's gone into the system this year is greater than the sum we put in last year, so we've seen an increase in that budget. We have already seen, in fact, this year—. The most recent data that I've seen was the data for August, which shows us that this year compared to last year, we had 257 fewer delayed discharges in August, and over 20,000 fewer total days delayed than the same time last year. So, we are already seeing not just seasonal improvement, but year-on-year improvement, but there is still a task ahead of us. There are still too many people waiting to go home not yet ready to do that.

I just want to emphasise the point the Member made in relation to the importance of prevention, as well as responding to people who are discharged. Some of the work under way in readiness for winter this year is focusing on how we can support people without the need for admission, with breathlessness, in relation to falls and frailty, the sorts of things that we know people very often get admitted for and absolutely don't need to be. So, I absolutely endorse the point the Member's making about the importance of support for discharge, but also support for prevention in the first place.

If we're going to get on top of hospital discharges and, ultimately, some of the other problems in the NHS, whether it be ambulance response times, waiting lists and so on, community hospitals, I think, will be absolutely fundamental in helping the NHS achieve that. But that seems to fly in the face of the decision recently taken by Swansea Bay University Health Board to downgrade Gorseinion Hospital and move its discharge beds out of that community hospital. Gorseinon Hospital is a much-loved hospital, based in the heart of the community of Gorseinon, and people don't want to see this planned downgrade and removal of beds. That's why hundreds of local people have signed my petition to call on Swansea Bay University Health Board to reverse these changes. What discussions are you having with the health board to ensure that community hospitals, like the one in Gorseinon, are a fundamental part of the continuing work that is being done by the NHS to reduce these discharges?

I agree with him that community hospitals, as he describes them, absolutely have a role to play. I understand that the changes proposed for Gorseinon Hospital are temporary changes, for very specific reasons. But I think the point that Joyce Watson was making in her question is how can we prevent people having to be admitted to hospital at all, how can we make sure that people have services available even closer to them—at home very often. That's the challenge and that's the innovation, I think, that we see in the system. That's why I'm confident that the additional funding we've put in this year will support both local authorities and health boards in that innovation journey, to make sure those services are there to support people when and where they need them.

Questions now from the party spokespeople. The Welsh Conservatives spokesperson first of all, James Evans.

Diolch, Llywydd. Good afternoon, Cabinet Secretary. Male infertility and lower sperm counts are becoming more and more common due to a number of environmental and lifestyle factors. It's something that we don't talk enough about in this Chamber, so I want to highlight it today. Given that some fertility treatments crucial for men's infertility, such as intracytoplasmic sperm injection—or ICSI, as it's known—as far as I'm aware, are only available in Cardiff and Vale University Health Board, or at Neath, this creates a postcode lottery to accessing those services for people right the way across Wales. What steps will the Welsh Government take to ensure that men have equal access to fertility treatments right the way across the country? Because referral pathways into this treatment can be lengthy and difficult to access, and delays starting this treatment can put people off altogether.

I think the Member makes an important point. I think he put it in the terms that we don't talk about this enough. I think that is absolutely true. I don't think that male infertility sometimes gets the attention in public discourse that it certainly merits. He will be aware that there are a range of different ways in which fertility treatments are provided in and for the NHS in Wales. Some are provided by health boards directly and others are commissioned as specialist services by the joint commissioning committee. Without going into the detail of it, in general terms, there are steps that are taken at a health board level before patients qualify for specialist support. The specialist support is available on a consistent basis, because there are criteria for how people are eligible for it, but there is a level of variability in the services that health boards provide, and that's for a range of different reasons. We are doing a piece of work to identify what that looks like across health boards, from a pre-IVF fertility stage to the kinds of services delivered locally. I think it is fair to say there is a geographic dimension to it. Some services are delivered in particular parts of Wales. That is, I'm afraid, often the way with some specialist services, just because the level of demand on those services may not always merit that geographic distribution—though I do understand that can cause challenges.

It has emerged, Cabinet Secretary, that some health boards have removed the priority referral pathway for men with fertility problems, potentially forcing male patients to wait even longer for specialist help. If you're in the north of the country, for example, that can be extremely distressing, along with those people who are waiting. Given that national policy allows clinically justified cases of male infertility to be expedited, will the Minister now review this practice across all health boards, to make sure that it is happening, to ensure that men with fertility issues can access timely specialist care where appropriate? Will you write to all the health boards to ensure that this expedited route is put back in place as soon as possible? Because with these issues in men, if it's not picked up sooner, the sperm count of the man goes down and down as the length of time goes on.

I appreciate why the Member is asking the question; it is a reasonable question to ask. I'm not sure I'd put it in quite that way. He is right to say that, generally, patients should be seen in the order that they were placed on a waiting list for treatment. However, as he says, patients can be expedited for treatment or intervention where there is a clinical justification for doing that. So, it's important that that's a clinical justification for doing it. And then clinics need to have a robust documented process for expediting the treatment in the case of that individual. For non-specialist services, there are NICE guidelines, which health boards are required to comply with. There is a piece of work I mentioned earlier, which is already under way, identifying where those guidelines may be applied differently in different parts of Wales.

And finally on this point, Cabinet Secretary, I think one thing that is often overlooked in this area is the mental health implications. I know you're not the Minister responsible for mental health, but it does create severe mental trauma for some of the males who go through this treatment. A lot of the mental health support programmes tend to be more catered to supporting the female who is going through the treatment, and not the male, and it is seen that the man has got to support the woman, but there's nothing there to help the man. I know there are certain organisations out there that do help, but I think it would be a good positive step if the Government could put some policies in place on how health boards can support men through their fertility journey, because I find, more often than not, that they are left on their own to suffer and tend to get forgotten about.

The Member is right to say that infertility, but also waiting for treatment more broadly, can have a significant impact on people's mental health and on their well-being, and it is right that all services are provided to patients to reflect the needs of that particular patient. It is already the case that all fertility clinics used by the NHS in Wales are required to offer access to a counsellor before treatment starts, so that's already a requirement in the system. Anyone who needs further counselling or follow-up support should also then request that via their GP. But I will look to see what is the outcome of the work that is already under way to understand the picture in terms of the potential variability of the offer in different parts of Wales, and reflect in light of that what further support and steps might be needed.

Plaid Cymru spokesperson now, Mabon ap Gwynfor.

Thank you, Llywydd. The situation in our emergency departments is critical. Not my words, but the words of the chair of Betsi Cadwaladr, which have also been echoed by Helen Whyley of the Royal College of Nursing, who have called the situation dire.

One of the main factors contributing to this problem is the failure to release patients—the delayed discharge, as we heard referred to in an earlier question. Last November, the Cabinet Secretary launched the 50-day challenge, and that was supported by the regional integration fund, worth £146 million, as well as £19 million in additional funding, and we've heard of an additional £30 million again this year. But almost a year since that challenge was launched, are the people of north Wales in a better place?

In November of last year, the numbers waiting for transfers of care, or delayed discharge, in Betsi Cadwaladr were 286. Today, that figure is 318. So, based on these figures, can we come to the conclusion that the Government's actions to tackle delayed transfers of care have failed the people of north Wales. Why is north Wales unique in these failures as compared to the rest of Wales?

I don't think that that is a complete explanation of the situation. As I said, across the system in Wales, we have far fewer people waiting for those discharges and less time being spent in that process. We have seen collaboration and co-operation across the north Wales region. We have a situation that is unique in terms of Betsi Cadwaladr in that there are six local authorities working with the health board. That is unusual in terms of regions in Wales. And what that means is that there is more variance in terms of individual council processes than is the case in other parts of Wales, for reasons that are partly geographical.

It is clear to me that the situation in terms of the accident and emergency departments in north Wales is unacceptable. I also heard the comments made by the chair of the board. There is a need for significant improvement. We have seen, despite that, fewer hours being lost in terms of handover from ambulances. So, there is a need for improvement. What's important is that every part of Wales, including north Wales, improves and seeks good practice and spreads that in a more purposeful manner and more swiftly. In doing that, I think we are going to see the progress that we want to see in all parts of Wales.

Part of the problem when it comes to this Government’s inability to demonstrate the experience and stability that we desperately need to see after years of chaotic personnel churn, strategic mismanagement and failing standards is its alarmingly loose grasp of crucial details. For example, last week, the First Minister accused us of supplying incorrect figures on the change in two-year waits between March and June of this year. Can the Cabinet Secretary confirm that the net difference in two-year waits during this period was, indeed, 942 as we initially quoted, and that the net difference compared to March now stands at an even less impressive 384? If so, why does the Cabinet Secretary think that his leader is so badly misinformed on progress in delivering one of her purported key priorities?

The Member is seeking to get me to confirm a premise of the question that I'm not prepared to accept, I’m afraid. I’m not often blamed for an alarming weakness in grasp of detail, but I’m not a human calculator, so I’m not going to be able to make that judgment in real time, I’m afraid. But I’m very happy to make sure that he has the correct numbers.

The larger question that patients in Wales will want to know is that the Government has a plan that is funded and working in order to make sure, as we all want to see, that those two-year waits are coming down, and to meet the commitment that I have made that we won’t have anybody in that position at the end of this Senedd term, as well as, of course, the commitment in relation to the size of the waiting list, which is also important, and the timely access to diagnostics.

We’ve been very clear in our expectations of health boards in delivering this. We’ve provided the funding. I have a weekly meeting that looks, in very great granularity, at the performance of each health board in relation to each particular specialty. So, we are able to see, in the published statistics and also in the management information, which we are now also making available, real levels of increased activity right across the NHS in Wales, which is, quarter by quarter, driving down the numbers of people waiting and the waits that they are facing.

I want to see faster progress, obviously, but I think there is good progress in the system, and I’m confident that we have the plans in place that will enable us to get to where we need to be by the end of the Senedd term.

Thank you for that response. And finally, to continue on this theme of experience and stability, the Cabinet Secretary will be aware that the role of chief allied health professions adviser has been vacant for almost four months. As far as I can see, there is no sign of any new appointment being made in order to take on this crucial role.

In the absence of the chief adviser, there is a lack of leadership in the area. For example, recently, an oversight panel was established for maternity and newborn services, but nobody from the allied professions is on this panel. I’m sure that you would agree that this is a serious problem given the importance of these professions in this area. It’s difficult to believe that this ever would have occurred if the chief adviser was in place. When can we expect this role to be filled?

These things happen on occasion. Recruitment cycles aren't in the hands of Ministers; that's a matter for the civil service, as the Member will be aware. I'll ensure that an update is provided in terms of our hopes to fill that vacancy as soon as possible.

Health boards in Wales are responsible for ensuring the provision of safe and timely access to good-quality clinical services for their local population. We continue to support health boards to make improvements with additional finance, direct intervention and support from NHS Wales Performance and Improvement.

Cabinet Secretary, yesterday a local palliative care centre in my constituency made the difficult decision to close its doors. In a public statement, Shalom House hospice in St David's said that ongoing financial difficulties and a lack of sustainable funding meant it had no alternative but to close at the end of October this year.

Cabinet Secretary, I'm sure you'll agree with me that this is deeply disappointing and worrying news. Shalom House has delivered fantastic specialist palliative support to patients and their relatives over the years. Despite their fundraising efforts and the generous support of the community, they have been unable to find a way forward.

There are many small charities like Shalom House that desperately need support. So, Cabinet Secretary, can you tell us what the Welsh Government is doing to help these organisations, given the important work they do in supporting people with life-limiting illnesses? What is the Welsh Government's strategy regarding supporting palliative care centres and hospices, because we can't see essential and vital services like these close in our communities, going forward?

Well, I'm sorry to hear that news. I would absolutely agree with the Member that the services in centres like the one he's referring to in his constituency—and there will be others right across Wales—provide an absolutely essential service to people in very difficult circumstances. We know just how important good palliative care is to people.

He asked me what the Government is doing to support palliative care more broadly in the sector specifically. We've increased our investment to over £16 million annually, and improving the quality of palliative care remains a key programme for government commitment. Over the course of this Senedd term, that investment has increased quite significantly, and there have been additional injections of funding at particular points where there have been particular challenges in relation to rising costs and other pressures.

The strategy, as he mentioned in his question, has included a range of interventions by the Government and by the NHS more broadly. We have a quality statement for palliative and end-of-life care. We've been developing a national service specification for a range of elements of palliative care. There's been work under way through HEIW to develop a framework to improve skills levels across the sector. The JCC has put in place arrangements to standardise commissioning arrangements. There's also been good work to strengthen advanced care planning. And the implementation of the national bereavement framework as well has had a bearing on some of the work that the sector provides. So, there is a wide range of activity under way, a commitment to increase that funding, but I do recognise the point that he makes, that it is a sector that often feels financial pressures. Clearly, the example he's given today is very regrettable. What we are doing is seeking to put the sector on a more sustainable footing through procurement, through commissioning and through funding.

Quality and safety of services is one of the Government’s top priorities. We are supporting the Grange through the creation of a new discharge lounge, extension of the emergency department, and, absolutely crucially, the employment of six new emergency medicine consultants to improve senior decision making.

Diolch yn fawr, and that's good to hear. I want to highlight, though, the normalisation of corridor care that has become a feature of some Welsh hospitals. I received the following account from a pensioner who has cancer and has had to go back and forth to the Grange hospital in Cwmbran for medical complications as a result of that cancer. The following are his words, and I warn the Chamber of the frankness of the quote:

'Back in the Grange, feeling crap after one night on a chair. The staff are fantastic, but the system definitely isn't. The only reason I had a bed at last was because I staggered to the loo and collapsed on the floor. Had to get three nurses to pick me up and plonk me in a chair. Think they realised that I should get a bed. Some people are spending two nights in a chair. It's bloody inhumane. Thank you, Welsh Government.'

That's the end of the quote. I know from speaking to members of staff earlier this year that the hospital was allowing triple boarding, which meant that three patients are sometimes close together in one corridor, often with serious conditions. This anecdotal case has been backed up by RCN Cymru and BMA Cymru, who have teamed up to launch a petition to try and get the Government to sort the matter out for the sake of patients, and staff who never signed up to provide care in such circumstances. Cabinet Secretary, what progress is the Government making in eliminating corridor care, and are you as concerned as I am to hear about the elderly constituent's recent experience at the Grange?

Yes, I am as concerned as you are, and it's upsetting to hear that. I'm very sorry for the experience your constituent has had, which clearly is not acceptable. I don't think any of us would regard that as acceptable, obviously, and I'm sure everybody working in the hospital would say the same, and everybody in the health board would agree with that. The question is: what are we doing about it? I've met with the RCN a number of times to discuss the issue of corridor care, and there is a recognition, I think, that it is a complex question. However, I wouldn't accept the idea of normalisation. I certainly don't think it is normal and it shouldn't be normal, but there is far too much of it happening in hospitals right across the UK.

What we've seen in the health board is, in fact, a reduction in the number of patients awaiting discharge from the hospital. Now, why that's relevant in the context of corridor care is because it is often a symptom of the inability of a hospital to manage the flow of patients through the hospital in an acceptable way. So, what we are seeing at the Grange are signs of improvement. We are seeing patients being handed over more quickly. We all know that's been a challenge in the past, but the data is showing us there are fewer hours being lost. We are also seeing patients being discharged more quickly than they have in the past. I'm not suggesting that is the complete answer, obviously it's not, and your constituent's experience suggests that, but there is good progress happening. As I mentioned in my answer to Mabon ap Gwynfor earlier, what I want to see is faster progress happening.

Cabinet Secretary, thank you so much for answering the question from my colleague Peredur Owen Griffiths, because it's something that I can relate to as well. The Grange hospital is struggling to cope with demands. That can't come as a surprise to you, and I'm sure it's not at all a reflection of the hospital's dedicated staff in any way, shape or form. The hospital has been plagued with problems since opening only a few years ago, and this was highlighted earlier this year by Healthcare Inspectorate Wales, which found ongoing systematic challenges affecting the consistent delivery of safe care.

Throughout the summer, I was out in Newport talking to constituents about the challenges facing our health service, and several of them mentioned the need for the A&E department to be reopened at the Royal Gwent Hospital. Following these conversations, I decided to launch a survey to gauge further views from residents, and the overwhelming majority of respondents believed that the Royal Gwent should have an A&E department again. Those who responded felt that the needs of Newport residents, as well as those in surrounding areas, were not being met at the moment, and that having an A&E back in the city centre would help alleviate pressures on the Grange. So, Cabinet Secretary, will you give the people of Newport what they want and put their needs first by relooking at and reopening the A&E department in the Royal Gwent Hospital? Thank you.

Well, I think what the health board has done is to be able to achieve something which evidence internationally demonstrates is the best way of ensuring that emergency care is provided appropriately and also that elective planned care is provided appropriately. As she knows, the Grange is mainly an acute site, and what that has meant is the health board has been able to use its enhanced local general hospitals to conduct elective surgery and out-patients without being impacted by, as we call them, unscheduled care pressures. What that means is that you're able to maintain the availability of NHS services for those people who, as we would all recognise, have been waiting too long for treatments, whilst also seeking to improve on the emergency care delivered.

I have already answered a question that set out the steps that we are taking with the health board to improve emergency care provision at the Grange. And the evidence that we are starting to see is that it is having a positive outcome. I don't pretend there's not a long way to go; there is. But we are already seeing signs of improvement, and I am clear that that is because the health hoard is implementing a model that people across the world are trying to implement, which is to separate emergency from elective care. We know from evidence everywhere that's the best way of improving services overall.

Following on from the Member's question, it would be good to have a review of that massive reorganisation, that centralisation, to see if it actually has worked. But does the Cabinet Secretary regret rushing people into the Grange hospital whilst it wasn't fit for purpose, with the classic example of this being an A&E where patients, constituents of mine, have suffered unnecessarily ever since, with appalling waiting lists—we all have stories of those—whilst suffering in a small room where people are often standing or sitting? Now, Cabinet Secretary, the new A&E is being built, as you've just outlined, and it will be very welcome, especially the new consultants and the new staff that that will bring with it, but it is long overdue now. And I'm just wondering if you could update us on when we will see that new A&E department open, because that will have a direct impact on the standards of care that my constituents are receiving. Diolch.

What I do regret is that if the Member's party was in Government, we wouldn't have a discussion about free access to healthcare of any sort. We'd all be paying privately for insurance premiums, because her party's been absolutely clear: they wouldn't have an NHS funded from general taxation.

A huge amount of work is being undertaken to improve equitable access across Wales to stroke services, and equitable access to outcomes for people following a stroke. This is being guided by the expectations set out in our stroke quality statement.

Health Secretary, you'll be aware of proposals from Hywel Dda health board to transfer stroke recovery services from Bronglais Hospital, which serves large parts of mid Wales, to hospitals in Llanelli or to Withybush. That would mean a four- to six-hour round trip by car for a family member to visit a loved one recovering from a stroke, or up to a nine-hour round trip if that relative did not have access to a car, and that's using towns such as Llanidloes or Machynlleth as a marker to travel to Llanelli or Withybush. Now, given the proven role of family support in the recovery of those suffering from a stroke, and poor transport links as well, do you find it acceptable that you could reach London from here in Cardiff quicker and with more ease than these family members would be able to visit a loved one? Are you satisfied with the proposals from Hywel Dda health board in this regard?

Well, they're not proposals, they're issues that are out for consultation. [Interruption.] The Member will be aware that no decision has been taken, so there is no proposal at present. I can't quite hear, Llywydd, because of contributions from the front bench.

Not from the front bench, from the opposition bench.

Front bench of the opposition, I meant. Sorry, forgive me—the opposition front bench.

You have been cheered, on occasion, from that side this afternoon, which must be an unusual thing for you.

Diolch, Llywydd. The Member is aware that there isn't a proposal in the way that he outlines, and he will also know that they have been matters out for consultation. So, I do think it's important that we describe what's being considered in the right way, because, as his question is clear, people will become anxious otherwise.

I think what's also challenging—. And I accept the point that he makes about the inconvenience of travel, so I think that is understood. But I know that when he, I'm sure, has spoken to the Stroke Association, and others, there is a clear consensus from the Stroke Association, from clinicians like the Royal College of Physicians, for example, that if one sets as one's priority for stroke, as I'm sure we all want to do, to make sure that people recover as quickly as possible from their experience of stroke, and that we minimise the incidence of stroke, the evidence tells us that delivering that on a regional basis is the best way of ensuring outcomes for patients. That is absolutely what I'm sure is our top priority. So, there is a challenge in balancing the point that the Member makes, which is the distances that people may have to travel, with the fact that the reorganisation, which has clinical support, has Stroke Association support—I mean, the general principle of reorganisation—is the best way of ensuring better patient outcomes, and that, at the end of the day, is what we all want to see.

As the Member is aware, health boards are responsible for delivering general medical services. The Welsh Government holds regular meetings with each health board, including Aneurin Bevan University Health Board, to discuss the breadth of primary care delivery. I'm aware of the concerns that have been expressed in relation to the surgeries the Member refers to, and work is under way to understand what actions may be needed to alleviate such concerns in future.

Thank you for that. Well, earlier this year, as you know, there was a lot of press coverage of this story. Three GP surgeries in my region are still managed by the private company eHarley Street—those are Gelligaer, Pontypool and Lliswerry. The company made headlines months ago because doctors hadn't been paid and patients were finding it almost impossible to get appointments. I know one GP is still owed more than £4,000 and a court-imposed payment plan has been defaulted on. Now another GP has said they're owed £40,000 from fees relating to a building and equipment. The health board took back the contracts for other surgeries that the company had been managing many months ago. I'd ask why these three surgeries have been left with them. If there were questions about competence or management, why is the health board content with its management of these remaining surgeries, or had the private company asked the health board to take back the other contracts, and if so, why? Patients and doctors deserve answers on this. Now, I'd appreciate knowing more about any recent discussions you've had with the health board about this matter. And could we have a meeting, please, to discuss my constituents' concerns?

Yes, of course. I mean, some of the points that she made are detailed questions for the health board themselves, as she will anticipate. But from the discussions that my officials have with the health board, the following things are clear: eHarley practices are now under enhanced monitoring arrangements with the health board. There's a meeting every two weeks with the divisional director for primary care, community services and complex and long-term care, the deputy medical director and the finance business partner accountant. And those are assurance meetings that regularly discuss the sorts of points the Member has been asking about, so staffing matters, payment matters, debt management, His Majesty's Revenue and Customs payment questions—the range of issues that she's alluding to in her question. The health board have confirmed to us that they've seen evidence of payment plans in place, though I note the Member refers to a default on one of those. So, if she would like to draw the detail of that to my attention, I would be interested. In addition, there are weekly operational escalation meetings with the head of primary care, where those sorts of issues are also considered. The practices themselves are undertaking staff surveys of well-being and have offered to share those with the health boards; I'm sure that will be providing important information.

Two further things, if I may? The contracting mechanisms provide for contract-assurance visit arrangements, which now are taking place regularly and run alongside the other panoply of assurance arrangements that I've just referred to. And following the experience that the health board and patients, most importantly, have had with some of the eHarley practices and the outcome of the health board's own lessons-learnt exercise, I've been undertaking an internal review about what might be required in future to ensure that similar concerns aren't raised; that's involved some element of external advice. And I'm hopeful to be able to provide an update to health boards in relation to that in the coming weeks.

The Welsh Government and NHS Wales Performance and Improvement are working with health boards to reduce neurodivergence assessment delays, eliminating all three-year waits for children across Wales. Betsi Cadwaladr have been allocated £2.7 million additional funds in 2025/26 and have a clear delivery plan to eliminate three-year waits by March of next year.

There are 7,273 children and young people waiting for assessments in the Betsi Cadwaladr health board area. Let us reflect on that figure for a moment—over 7,000 on a waiting list. And this, of course, is a cause of great concern for families across the region, not to mention the detrimental impact on the children themselves.

As you say, the board has received £2.7 million from the Government to help with this issue and there is more funding on the way, I believe, leading to a total spend of £5.6 million. Yet, there is no sign to date, at least, that the situation is improving in north Wales. Will you therefore demand that Betsi Cadwaladr health board prioritises the publication of that action plan—the one that you call a 'clear action plan'? Well, let us see that action plan, which will outline how this additional funding, which is a significant amount of funding, will be used for the express purpose of providing fair play to the children of north Wales.

Well, I'm happy to provide some of those details to the Member now. In this financial year, some £2.7 million, as I said, has been allocated to the health board, and some 107,000 further assessments will be completed within that budget between now and next March. Some 904 children in north Wales are waiting over three years at the moment. We do believe that the health board's plans will enable those to be seen, so that forecast is something that we are familiar with. We can see that the money can be spent in a way that will eliminate those waits by next year, and the current trajectory in terms of the assessments going through the system is on target to deliver that.

Finally, question 9, Darren Millar.

Performance at emergency departments in north Wales is not where I, the public nor staff expect it to be. We are working closely with the health board with assistance from the national improvement programmes and clinical networks and have set clear expectations for improvement.

Thank you for that answer. According to the chair of the Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board, emergency care in north Wales is in, and I quote, 'a crisis situation', 'letting people down' and 'people are waiting in ambulances for extreme lengths of time'. The situation is 'desperate', 'dire' and they are 'failing' their citizens. I would agree with that analysis. I receive, unfortunately, postbags that are full of complaints about the emergency care experience of patients in north Wales—people waiting up to four days on chairs in their 90s while they are waiting for a bed, people who are on ambulances outside these emergency departments for many hours, sometimes over a day, before they can get admitted into those hospitals. It is unacceptable.

Now, one of the things that we know that would alleviate these pressures is access to more beds, but, of course, previous Welsh Governments have closed local hospitals in the region over the years, and you don't seem to be able to get your finger out to be able to build new hospitals with extra bed capacity to take pressure off these emergency departments. The Royal College of Nursing has said that we need to end corridor care because it's unsafe and undignified. The Royal College of Emergency Medicine has said that the problem is about beds. When are you going to deliver the beds that you have promised the people of north Wales, especially at the Royal Alexandra Hospital site in Rhyl?

Well, I'm not sure if the Member heard the answer I gave to Mabon ap Gwynfor in relation to a similar question earlier, but I was clear to him as well, and I repeat it to you, that it is unacceptable. I heard the comments of the chair of the health board as well, which recognised the need for a much better service and experience for patients in north Wales who are attending emergency departments. I also read a discussion at the board that recognises the challenges that we are setting to the board as a Government, the expectations that we have, the visibility that there will be of performance against those expectations. This is about our duty to patients at the end of the day, and the health board's duty to patients. I think there was an important recognition in the discussion that it wasn't simply about funding, that it was also about improving the way services are delivered.

The Member is repeating from a sedentary position the word 'beds'. I was about to come on to answer that part of his question, if he bears with me for one second longer. The discussion that we were having earlier—I'm not sure if the Member was in his place at the time—was in relation to the importance of flow in the hospital in order to improve access to emergency provision, but also to avoid corridor care. I want to see more progress happening in north Wales in relation to that rapid discharge of people who are ready to go home. We all want to see that. We are seeing it in other parts of Wales. What we want to make sure is that all health boards are learning from the best of each other, so that we can tackle emergency department performance, we can tackle corridor care, we can tackle that improved flow. We are already seeing fewer lost hours in ambulance handover, more rapid handover, people waiting less time in emergency departments, people being discharged safely more quickly. We want to see that happening in all parts of Wales.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary.

The topical questions are next. There is just one question today. That question is to be answered by the Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs, and is to be asked by Samuel Kurtz.

Diolch, Sam. In line with our bluetongue control strategy, four premises in Wales where bluetongue has been confirmed have been placed under restrictions. Further investigations into the source and the spread of the disease are ongoing. Appropriate disease control zones will be declared if required. Compensation will be paid for animals culled for disease control purposes.

Thank you very much, Cabinet Secretary, and I'm grateful to the Llywydd for selecting this topical question today. And since I've submitted, as you alluded to, Cabinet Secretary, two further cases of bluetongue have sadly been confirmed here in Wales. This is a serious concern for our farming industry, and I'm sure Members will join me in extending our best wishes to those farmers and their families currently subject to restrictions. I will join you, Cabinet Secretary, in urging all farmers to speak to their vets and vaccinate. But as there is a cost to this, I ask: is the Welsh Government making any support available to assist farmers in vaccinating?

I would also ask how the confirmation of these cases changes the Welsh Government's approach to restrictions, and how you expect those measures to evolve in the weeks ahead, because the impacts of the current restrictions have already been felt financially. The effect on livestock markets has been stark, with many reporting huge drops in turnover almost overnight, with cattle movements across the border dropping from thousands to only a few hundred. These marts are far more than trading venues, they are central to the rural economy, and when their viability is undermined, the ripple effect extends across farm businesses and the wider communities that rely upon them.

Could you also confirm whether any targeted support will be made available both to livestock markets whose viability is under threat? You mentioned compensation—could you outline how that compensation is determined for those who are required to slaughter animals? Is that off the same basis as bovine TB compensation or is there a new metric that you're using to determine compensation for those required to cull infected bluetongue animals?

And finally, can you update Members on discussions with the UK Government and vaccine manufacturers regarding the supply of vaccines? Farmers need confidence that long-term solutions are being actively pursued, that there is a constant supply of vaccine, so that we can move from containing the disease towards building genuine resilience in the future. Diolch.

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Sam, and thank you for bringing this question, and also, Llywydd, for granting it as well. We discussed this in quite some detail today on the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee as well, but it's good to have it here on the floor of the Senedd.

In response to your queries, on vaccination we're pursuing the same approach that is being pursued across the border in England, indeed, where it's a decision for the farmers as to whether to vaccinate, but I would join you in exactly what you've said, which is: if you are one of the farmers within proximity of one of these incidents currently, you should be having a discussion with your vet immediately about vaccination. And in fact, across Wales, we are encouraging farmers to have those conversations, because we know that this can be transmitted by midges, and we're hoping to keep it out of the midge population, but also it can be transmitted, as we are seeing in those areas within England now, where it's gone beyond the two counties and gone into the west of England and the south-west as well—. Vaccination is the thing we need to get ahead of this, very much.

I would just highlight the costs of not vaccinating, because those could really be significant if we don't get ahead of this, and I want to spell that out very, very clearly. We know that, in other areas, not just within the UK but on the continent, where vaccination has been after the event, trying to catch up with it, the severity of this disease, has been significant: reproductive losses, milk drop and the financial and psychological costs that you allude to as well, on the welfare of the farmers as well, as well as the welfare of the animals. They have been significant, and the economic costs have been borne by those farmers. So, I really would join with you in saying, please, please speak to your vets. Discuss, right now, vaccination.

In terms of the supply, we know that the decision they took in England to snap out the border to the whole of England has meant that the disease has spread rapidly across parts of England where it wasn't before. Some of this has been due to cattle movements; others have been to do with midge-borne disease. One of the things we've been able to do, right up to now, as we go from September into October in Wales, is to keep this disease locked out right up until these incidents, and our approach now, Sam, is to control and contain these and turn this back, because we will get to the point where we move into the low vector part of this season, and the weather and the climate might well assist us in driving this disease back out. But we don't know. We're doing our best to do it. But in buying that time for farmers, what we've also done is built the time for the supply chain of vaccinations to build up, so we can give confidence now to farmers that that vaccine is available, that they should speak to their vets, and then, if the veterinary advice is to vaccinate, then they can go ahead, because the supply chain is there to do it. We do, with my chief veterinary officer and the other CVOs across the UK, and with the Animal and Plant Health Agency, keep regularly in touch with the supply chain as well to make sure that there is confidence within the supply chain.

May I thank the Cabinet Secretary and the chief veterinary officer for the briefing that we received yesterday, which was very beneficial? But, of course, this is the news we were all dreading, and while the focus on keeping the disease out of Wales remains, we now, of course, have to focus on limiting and managing the disease within the Welsh borders. And I just want to know if that will now change the Government's approach or focus in any way in the battle against bluetongue. For example, are you considering keeping the same national arrangements in place, or are you considering perhaps developing more localised arrangements where cases have arisen? I'd be grateful if you could just enlighten us as to where we are going from here, with more and more cases emerging.

It would also be good to hear more about the local surveillance and containment plans that you're now hoping to put in place, and I'm thinking of within the immediate vicinity of these sites where cases have been confirmed. Is there any additional support being provided for farms in that immediate vicinity? Are you targeting a vaccination drive, for example, in those areas? I noted in your previous answer that you said that you'd be encouraging those farmers to have conversations with their vets. Well, is that sufficient? Surely the Welsh Government should be a bit more proactive in making things happen along those lines, even if that doesn't extend to subsidising vaccination costs for those farms. I'd like to understand how you're stepping up your game in those particular areas.

I appreciate as well, of course, that veterinary and epidemiological investigations can take time when we find these cases—sampling and testing and movement investigations, et cetera, are all required. So, whilst I'm sure that can be done swiftly and thoroughly when we see isolated cases, as we have done this week, are you confident that the capacity is there, both within Welsh Government and the APHA, to deal with, potentially, a much heavier workload if we do see a steep increase in cases?

And finally from me, Llywydd, the BTV-8 strain of bluetongue, of course, has now been confirmed in Cornwall. That's the first time it's been confirmed in the UK. So, what can you tell us about how the Welsh Government is preparing for that particular strain of bluetongue, should it arrive, of course, in Wales over the coming months? Diolch.

Thank you very much, Llyr, indeed, and, yes, this is the news that we were dreading, but we were also, in some ways, anticipating. And our control measures and containment measures were ready for this and are in place, and you do mention—.

Just to say, on the BTV-8, we're aware of that. My CVO is in discussion with CVOs across the UK about how we respond to that and tackle that, should that actually make progress across parts of England and towards us as well. So, we're very aware of that.

You ask about local control measures. Yes, in my immediate response to Sam's question, I said that appropriate disease-control zones will be declared, if required. We wait to see if that is necessary. And if we do need to take those measures, we will. So, that is in our mind, but a decision has not been arrived at yet. The investigation is taking place locally within the area to see whether that is required or not.

Just to say as well—you mentioned about how we go forward from this—I am not making any assumptions either way here in terms of what the disease will do, and particularly as we go into the autumn and winter. I think we've had—. And it's thanks to the effort on the ground, I've got to say as well, both in terms of vigilance of vets and the farming community, but also, I have to say, the Welsh Government-funded work that's been going on through APHA on the ground to keep a close eye on these incidents occurring. We are funding that work and we'll continue to do so in addition to our regular disease controls.

But, in line with the commitment I made originally when we set out the bluetongue strategy, we have indeed, Llyr, adapted and updated our policy as we've gone along to take account of industry feedback and in the light of new and emerging information since July. We've taken through those round-table meetings and the CVO-led working groups. We've collaborated with industry to develop a risk-based approach, and we have indeed on three occasions now brought in changes to the restrictions that balance trade facilitation with maintaining the disease control and mitigation measures. And as we go forward and as we move into the low disease transmission period proper, and it will be determined by the Pirbright Institute when we hit that—normally, within any year, it tends to be December, January, that middle of the midwinter season—we will reconsider our animal movement restrictions in line with this commitment to keep the policy under review, based on new and emerging evidence.

You also raised, Llyr, the issue of other measures and monitoring on the ground. Well, yes, it is Welsh Government that is funding not insignificant funding going into the APHA monitoring, the surveillance, the disease investigations now and throughout the year. This could evolve, based on the advice of the CVO, into additional monitoring, not just within these localised areas, but in wider areas as well, to make sure that we're picking this up very early indeed, and, ultimately, our focus remains on protecting livestock, but also the livelihoods of those employed in the sector. And as I say, there are some people out there, Llywydd, who are saying, 'Well, this is mild. Let this disease rip.' The experience in other parts of Europe, but also with the speed it's now moving around England, suggests that this may not be the case, and we really have to get ahead of this with vaccination. So, I once again repeat: the biggest, the biggest thing we can do here working together is for farmers to have that discussion.

Some Ministers choose to answer only one of a long list of questions asked of them. You choose to answer every single one of the long list of questions asked.

I try.

So, can we have shorter questions, and shorter answers, so I can select the three remaining speakers on this item? Joyce Watson.

I was thinking just the same, Llywydd. [Laughter.] So, I agree with you. One of the questions that hasn't been asked and therefore answered was on the control measures that currently exist. We have good control measures already to try and reduce TB. They're well-known, well-documented and well-followed and understood by those who have, unfortunately, to use them. So, my question is: will you be revisiting those structures that are already in place, the good practice that's already in place, so that we're not reinventing the wheel, because time is pretty critical here?

The other question that I wanted to ask is: it is a distressing disease for animals, but also for the farmers, or those involved in looking after the animals. So, will you be urging individuals to seek support from experts in the field if they are feeling overwhelmed and also distressed?

'Yes', and 'yes'.

Excellent. [Laughter.]

Can I just expand?

Yes, of course.

First of all, you are right, we've put in control measures, some of which have been criticised by some in the sector, but I have to say have the complete, universal consensus of the veterinary and animal welfare organisations behind them entirely. So, we will keep those under review, as I've said, and we will move with the evidence and with stakeholder feedback.

And your important point, on the second point: this is a strain on the farming community, and there is an impact economically on auctioneers and the wider supply chain as well. But it is as nothing to the strain of letting this disease rip across the whole of Wales and having some of the worst severity. So, I would strongly suggest, yes, those excellent mental health and well-being support charities out there, some of which work with Welsh Government support as well—I would highly commend that anybody who is feeling the stress and strain of this on top of everything else contact them, speak to people. There are good organisations out there that will help you and will speak to you.

Thank you for your update, Deputy First Minister. You talked about localised zoning, and I know a lot of these cases are actually coming in my constituency. So, if, we'll say, hypothetically, you were to put my constituency into a zoning area, what would the movement restrictions be on those farmers? Would they be able then to sell into England and bring those stock home, similar to how all zoning works in England? Just so I can get an understanding, because, if it is going to happen, farmers in my constituency then would be very limited in where they could sell their livestock.

Indeed. If you'll excuse me, but this is for good reason, let me not deal in hypotheticals. We need to deal in what we're doing right here, right now. If we choose to move to a localised control zone, then I will indeed bring forward a statement to the Senedd, and I will contact you as well to explain that to you, in the same way that we've done with briefings on our current situation. To deal in hypotheticals I'm afraid might set all sort of hares running on this. So, let's deal with what we've got, what we're doing right now. But we are thinking through the implications of what would happen if we did need to introduce control zones. And if we do in your area, or anybody else's, rest assured, we'll be in touch with you so you can communicate to your farmers.

Finally, Laura Anne Jones.

Diolch. I too am glad that we've had this topical question on this today, due to its importance. It was devastating to learn of bluetongue presenting itself in my home county in Chepstow, and of course the one in Powys and the other two you've mentioned today. I urge you, Cabinet Secretary, to take the action needed to protect our farming industry, and, this time, as you've already hinted at, to remember that we have soft borders, not hard ones, and some farm businesses, especially in my area, of course, work cross-border, like the Monmouthshire livestock market, and we need to protect those businesses. It is right that we urge farmers to be vigilant and report the suspected cases immediately, and it's essential this Government step up and support our farmers and rural businesses with urgent financial support, because they're already getting battered at both ends of the M4.

Vaccination is key, as you've said, but it's obviously costly, as has been outlined today, when farmers can least afford it. So, will you commit to financially supporting vaccination costs for farmers, especially in those key areas that you outlined, because, if not, isn't that going to hinder the stopping of the spread? And if you are going to do it, when will that package of support be available to our farmers and industry?

Following on from what you said, I'm glad that you said you will update us going forward, because it's important that we all have a role to play in reassuring our farmers and protecting our industry during this critical time, especially when our farmers, as Joyce Watson said, are feeling overwhelmed. Diolch.

Thank you very much. Just to say, in terms of compensation for culled animals, in terms of the investment in APHA for surveillance and vigilance, and that the costs for vaccination fall upon farmers, it's exactly the same route that is being followed in England as well. I would just re-emphasise once again the costs of not getting ahead of this disease for a farmer, when the cost of vaccination and the supply chain is there, are far more significant than not vaccinating. So, we call upon farmers to have that discussion with their vets and consider vaccination if it's right for them.

The other two things I think I would stress are vigilance and also compliance: compliance by farmers with the rules that we have in place; compliance by auctioneers in facilitating those rules; compliance by vets in ensuring that their farmers know what the rules are and that they comply with them. The way we keep this disease locked out, even with these four incidents, is to double down on the fact that everybody needs to play by the same rules to protect every farmer here in Wales. Diolch.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary.

The next item will be the 90-second statements. The first statement this afternoon is from Jenny Rathbone.

Diolch yn fawr. Irene Steer was the first Welsh woman to win an Olympic gold medal. Irene was born in 1889 in Guildford Crescent, right next to the first public baths in Cardiff. When the family moved to Ty Draw Road, it was a short walk to Roath park lake, where Irene trained to become such an outstanding swimmer. From 1907 until 1913, she held the Welsh championship title every year, for seven years. Contemporary press coverage described her as a beautiful, neat and most graceful swimmer.

It was 1912 that was the first year that women were allowed to compete in the Olympic Games. There were fewer than 50 women amongst the 2,500 athletes taking part in Stockholm. The British freestyle relay swimming team was a shoo-in as they'd already beaten the world record the previous year. They had none of the back-up that today's Olympiads get. The British freestyle relay competitors were accompanied by a chaperone, not a trainer, and Irene's family had to pay for her silk swimming costume, cap and badge, as well as her travel costs to Stockholm. Irene Steer swam last, as the anchor swimmer, to secure the gold medal and maintain their world record.

Wales had to wait 96 years for another female from Wales to win an Olympic gold medal, when Nicole Cooke won a cycling gold in 2008. Remarkably, Irene's grandchildren knew that she was a massive Cardiff City fan, but nothing of her achievements, when they were growing up, nor, to be fair, did many people outside the sporting world. That was rectified last month with the unveiling of a purple plaque to Irene Steer at Roath park lake, the latest of the placiau porffor to remarkable Welsh women.

Every year, the Marine Conservation Society runs the Great British Beach Clean as part of their Beachwatch programme. Last Friday, I had the pleasure of taking part in a clean on Talacre beach in my region. Every plastic bottle, crisp packet and piece of netting that my group and I picked up will form part of the findings of the Marine Conservation Society's 2025 'State of our Beaches' report. That's the power of these events, isn't it? They go further than just cleaning up our marine environment. Recording what we've found means that we can use citizen science to create effective, informed policy to find solutions to prevent marine litter at its source. It turns a day at the beach into hard evidence for change, and change, of course, is what we so desperately need.

In 2024, the Marine Conservation Society recorded a 4 per cent increase in the average amount of litter on Welsh beaches. Drinks-related litter was found to be polluting 99 per cent of our beaches here in Wales, with glass bottles found on nearly half of these. Glass shards, as we know, pose a real risk to people, to wildlife and to pets, and it's a reminder of why it's important that we address all manner of pollution, not just plastic. That's why we need to see a deposit-return scheme inclusive of plastic, aluminium and glass, making sure that these alarming statistics don't become the norm in years to come.

We collected 1,000 pieces of litter during our short session at Talacre. If the volunteers there are anything to go by, the passion for change on the ground is undeniable. We must match that energy with effective policy, reinforcing those efforts on our beaches and turning the tide on litter.

I thank you both.

Next is a motion to elect a Member to a committee. I call on a member of the Business Committee to move the motion formally. Jane Hutt.

Move.

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

We now move to a motion to elect a Member to the Senedd Commission. I call on a member of the Business Committee to move the motion. Jane Hutt.

Move.

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

Item 5 today is a debate on a Member's legislative proposal: a Bill on fly-tipping. I call on Mick Antoniw to move the motion.

Diolch yn fawr, Dirprwy Lywydd. I'm grateful to Janet Finch-Saunders, Jane Dodds and Carolyn Thomas for co-sponsoring this Member's legislative proposal. And I'm also grateful to the Members and individual supporters of the cross-party group on littering, fly-tipping and waste reduction, which I chair, for helping to shape this legislative proposal.

Today, like every day in Wales, 115 illegal fly-tips will take place. That's an average of five for every hour of every day. On country lanes, outside business premises, on highways, along riverbanks, in urban areas, at farm-gate entrances, in Wales right now it's open season for fly-tipping. The 42,000 fly-tipping instances in Wales during 2023-24 was a 20 per cent increase on pre-pandemic levels, and a massive 31 per cent increase on 10 years ago.

In 2015, the Welsh Government responded by publishing its fly-tipping strategy, which aimed to deliver

'a future for Wales that is free from the unacceptable social, economic and environmental harm caused by fly-tipping.'

And as we reach the tenth anniversary of the report, we can probably agree that it has not had the impact everyone had hoped for. A decade later, it appears that the number of fly-tipping instances isn't the only metric going in the wrong direction. The prosecution rate, already minuscule in 2015, has fallen from 0.3 per cent to below 0.25 per cent. Research also suggests that fly-tipping events are underreported, with only a third—36 per cent of people—who have spotted fly-tipping saying that they had reported it. In fact, almost a quarter of people in the UK don't know that fly-tipping is actually a crime.

In summary, in Wales, you are very unlikely to be reported for fly-tipping, and almost guaranteed not to be prosecuted. This means that fly-tippers act with near impunity. Overwhelmed by the number of offences, local authorities are forced to put more and more resources into the clean-up, often at the expense of enforcement and investigation activity, which perpetuates the downward spiral. This is very clearly illustrated when you speak to local authorities. As I've previously reported, one local authority told me that they'd reported 400 fly-tipping events every month, and although closed-circuit television footage of many of these offences was available, there was simply insufficient resource to examine the evidence and pursue prosecutions.

Fly-tipping is the common term to describe waste illegally deposited on land. The offence of fly-tipping, and additional offences of 'knowingly caused' or 'knowingly permitted' fly-tipping, are set out in the Environmental Protection Act 1990. Some householders fly-tip, and that is often a result of avoiding inconvenience. These people are acting illegally and without respect for the environment or their community. Nevertheless, more consideration needs to be made of how we make it easier for households, particularly those without transport, to dispose of bulky items responsibly.

Education is also an important issue, and this is recognised in the Welsh Government's 2015 strategy. For example, research shows that many householders are unaware that they have a legal duty of care to check that anyone they use to take away and dispose of their domestic waste is registered.

The great majority of fly-tipping incidents, however, are a result of deliberate criminality by rogue businesses, who are becoming increasingly well organised. Whether the offender is a commercial fly-tipper, who fly-tips to avoid disposal fees, or an organised criminal fly-tipper who fly-tips for financial reward, such as charging people for disposing of waste that they then dump, the offender is making a simple cost-benefit calculation: what is the chance of getting caught, and if I am caught, can a financial implication be accommodated? The steep rise in fly-tipping incidents suggests that, increasingly, fly-tipping represents a good commercial option. It's quite clear that there is no credible deterrent in place, and until we address this, fly-tipping will continue to increase.

What is also very clear is that fly-tipping matters to people. There is rarely a day that goes by without a report of a community being blighted by fly-tipping making headlines in the national press. And Members will have noticed that communities in Wales feature very regularly. In a survey I commissioned earlier this year, 86 per cent of people in Wales said that fly-tipping should be a high priority for the Welsh Government, and 83 per cent reported that fly-tipping is getting worse, or at least no better, in their community. In the same survey, two thirds of people said that the current deterrents are too lenient, and a similar number supported the introduction of tougher penalties.

This Member’s legislative proposal focuses primarily on how we can enhance current deterrents to make them fit for purpose. Firstly, the proposal asks for the polluter-pays principle to be applied to fly-tipping. This would mean that the offender would be responsible for meeting all the costs of either the local authority or Natural Resources Wales, including investigation, clear-up and legal expenses. We need to shape a system whereby deterring and prosecuting fly-tipping is at least cost-neutral for the local authority or NRW. Building on this, local authorities could be incentivised to invest in their fly-tipping prevention operations, with incentives linked to reduced fly-tipping incidences and successful prosecutions.

I believe this would represent a major deterrent, and would, for very many rogue commercial operators, shift the cost-benefit dial in the right direction. But this does not mean that other penalties shouldn’t be applied. Fixed-penalty notices, for example, have a role to play, particularly in respect of small-scale fly-tipping, such as leaving black bin bags next to a litter bin—an issue that the First Minister drew attention to last week. However, the number of fixed-penalty notices for fly-tipping is falling—down 8 per cent—and the maximum penalty stands at just £400, as opposed to £1,000 in England. On average, local authorities issue just one fixed-penalty notice a week.

The courts currently have a range of significant deterrents at their disposal, but they are rarely used to their full extent. For example, unlimited fines are available, but 70 per cent of prosecutions attract no fine at all. Of the fines that are imposed, the average penalty is a little over £500. As I’ve reported to colleagues previously, in the local authority area where the most prosecutions take place, the largest fine imposed was just £2,000. Courts have the authority to confiscate vehicles. The number of vehicle seizures is not collated centrally, but from information I’ve received from individual local authorities, this appears to happen very rarely. For rouge commercial operators, vehicle confiscation is not only a financial penalty, but a significant disruption to their operations. That’s why this legislative proposal asks that where fly-tipping is proven, there is a presumption that the vehicle will be confiscated.

We also need to seek powers for the extension of penalty points to be applied where people use or allow their vehicles to be used for fly-tipping. A number of the supporting organisations represented on the cross-party group tell me that—

Mick, you have used your opening and closing time already. So, you will need to—

Can I just say that I happily look forward to the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary's response to this? I think he understands the gist of the need to have legislation in place—focused legislation—and perhaps I can be given half a minute to respond, with your generosity, Dirprwy Lywydd.

I'll give you a full minute to respond, Mick, don't worry. Janet Finch-Saunders.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. Mick, can I thank you for actually pursuing this? It’s an honour to be a member of your cross-party group and I know you’ve worked really hard with others, including Keep Wales Tidy and other organisations, because I think we’re all sick and tired and fed up of seeing our countryside, our urban areas, where people just dump old settees, mattresses—stuff that, really, if they can drive to these spots, they can drive to where the council will legitimately take them.

So, as Mick has already said, there were 40,000 fly-tipping incidents in Wales just last year, £2 million for clean-up costs, and 102 prosecutions in a year. One hundred and two prosecutions for that number of fly-tipping incidents is nowhere near enough.

There is a clear need for urgent reform when it comes to fly-tipping. This proposed Bill will ensure that polluters pay for the clean-up costs, and so they should, as the £2 million currently being spent could be freed up and redirected into other essential services. But we need to strengthen deterrents.

A mindset shift is essential if we are to see real change. Too often these days there is not the same emphasis on personal responsibility, on ensuring that we do not litter and that we take our rubbish home, as there was in the past. I've said this a few times with the smacking Bill—call it what you like, the reasonable punishment Bill—I would have had a smack on my legs if I'd have dropped an ice lolly wrapper. Society needs to do better than this now. We need to return to that way of discipline and that way of thinking.

I did a beach clean the other week and this lovely family were on the beach asking me what we were doing, a few of us gathering up the black bags and everything, and she told us, 'You're doing a really good job'. I returned half an hour later, they'd left, and they'd left all their rubbish too. You think, if that's adults, and I'm asking them nicely—and I had so many helpers helping. I just don't know how people can be so hard-faced.

We definitely need far greater pressure on the councils to enforce, and make sure that they're not out of pocket. Because we keep asking local authorities to do things, but often they can't afford to, they haven't got the resources. We need to ensure that we have practical incentives such as bins being regularly emptied. Too often, we see dog poo bins overfull. People carry on filling the litter bins that the council provide, despite the fact they could simply take their own rubbish home.

We need to get into schools and advertise to our children, because, as I say, I was frightened of dropping any litter. It just wouldn't happen. You put it in your pocket and you took it home. We need to be providing better and appropriate training to magistrates to improve their full understanding of the impact of fly-tipping on communities. It probably does not, in the scale of things, with all that's going on in today's society, seem to be that important—well, it is.

Janet, you need to conclude now. It's a three-minute allocation.

Oh, I beg your pardon. Yes, okay. Cabinet Secretary, will you agree with me that the stronger deterrents set out in this proposal will certainly help to address the challenge of fly-tipping and tidy up our local communities?

I'd like to start by thanking Mick for the exceptionally important work that he has done on this matter, with the cross-party group as well. It is an issue that is so very important. I realise now that I haven't brought the right piece of paper in with me, so I'll find it on my screen here.

There are a number of fly-tipping incidents that have caused an awful lot of anger for people locally. A number of my constituents have written to me to draw my attention to how fly-tipping seems to be an ongoing problem in many areas, particularly in Caerphilly. On the Gelligaer and Merthyr common, a public spaces protection order to restrict vehicle access has been put on the Cefn Brithdir area of that common. It will run for three years. This common often has problems with illegal waste being dumped on the mountain. I've seen the mounds of rubbish there myself with one of the rangers. A lot of the waste is commercial, which means people are probably being paid to pollute our mountainsides.

I've had a complaint too from a constituent about the rubbish that is being dumped on Eglwysilan common. That constituent is a mountain biker. They often have to stop riding their bike because the wheels have become entangled in the rubbish. This deluge of litter can be seen right over the common. Many litter picks have been held by residents, but the rubbish is back within days. The council has, I understand, put signs up to suggest that the mountain is being monitored. Evidently, though, more needs to be done to tackle the root causes of this behaviour.

Litter picking groups do a wonderful thing, of course. I've paid tribute here before to the Penpedairheol Pickers, who go out once a month. I've been out with them a number of times. That one is run by Councillor Haydn Pritchard. They're a brilliant group of people. Again, they shouldn't have to do this. It's incredibly frustrating to understand why these behaviours persist.

Of course, you have the commercial scale of this, as we've heard. With some of what's seen in Gelligaer and Merthyr common, it's just the industrial scale of the waste, but that starts with when people, as Janet was pointing out, just leave a little bit of rubbish on the beach or something like that. Sometimes, you see someone who is is within walking distance of a bin—it could be where that pillar is from me—and yet they still throw it on the floor. So, obviously, a lot needs to be done here in education as well, and we've discussed this in the cross-party group.

But I do wonder, Cabinet Secretary, in terms of strengthening deterrents, what more could be done to make polluters pay for what they're doing. Mick's motion here has put forward a number of actions that could help. I think it does deserve to be taken forward by the Government.

Thank you, once again, to Mick for everything that he has been doing on this matter.

I'd also like to thank Mick Antoniw for bringing forward this important debate today, and for his continued work chairing the cross-party group, of which I'm a member as well, whose recent report, 'Which Wales Do We Want to See?', could not be more timely. It warns that we're reaching a tipping point. Fly-tipping and littering are reaching epidemic levels, blighting our communities, destroying wildlife, and harming our health and well-being. Dumping rubbish poses a real and lasting threat to nature. It can leach toxic chemicals into our soil and waterways, disrupting fragile ecosystems. Plastic and metal waste can trap or injure wildlife, while hazardous materials, such as asbestos or oil, can poison the very habitats we're trying to protect. Every time rubbish is dumped, it's our biodiversity that pays the price.

Since 2020, Wales has seen a 20 per cent rise in reported fly-tipping incidents, yet an 8 per cent fall in fixed-penalty notices. That mismatch suggests not only that the problem is growing, but that enforcement is struggling to keep pace, emboldening those who think they can dump rubbish and get away with it. This is certainly disheartening to learn, but highlights that something needs to change. Current penalties are often too lenient and inconsistent to deter offenders. Mandatory vehicle confiscation would send a very clear message: if you use your van or truck to dump rubbish, you will lose it. This measure strikes at the very heart of the problem, targeting unlicensed waste operators who profit from environmental crime.

Local authorities are struggling with cuts and they don't have the resources or spare capacity to send litter pickers out into our communities and beyond town centres. A requirement that offenders meet the full costs of their investigations and clear-ups would be very welcome. Due to existing pressures, local authorities have made it clear that they cannot take on additional statutory duties without proper funding. So, if we are to place a statutory requirement on councils to investigate every instance of fly-tipping, it must come with the necessary financial support from the Welsh Government to ensure it's workable in practice. This proposal represents a real opportunity to clean up our streets, protect our countryside and send a clear message to offenders that fly-tipping will not be tolerated.

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

Thank you very much, Dirprwy Lywydd. First, I'd like to thank Mick for bringing forward this important debate today, and thank other Members for their valuable contributions.

Fly-tipping, I think we can agree, is a pernicious issue and it damages communities. There is more that we can and we should do, so I welcome the debate. Yet it is a very complex issue and securing, as has been said, successful enforcement outcomes can be really challenging. It does require co-ordinated enforcement action, intelligence sharing, and all needs to be underpinned by public awareness raising, and, yes, indeed, individual responsibility messages as well. The Welsh Government has sought to remove some of the complexity, as I'm sure you'll recognise.

We're funding Fly-tipping Action Wales. It's a programme managed by National Resources Wales, which seeks to create that partnership network that co-ordinates action across Wales. In this financial year alone, we've provided another £400,000 to Fly-tipping Action Wales, which builds upon the £1.2 million we provided over the previous three years. What this has done is allowed local authorities to have access to expert legal advice, sharing best practice through Wales, trialling enforcement initiatives, and even loaning equipment to help with their investigations.

The funding has allowed Fly-tipping Action Wales to employ enforcement officers on the ground in north and south-east Wales. These officers provide enforcement support to local authorities, such as really practical stuff—searching fly-tips, organising joint operations for waste carriers, and stop checks, as well. The Fly-tipping Action Wales programme also seeks to prevent fly-tipping occurring in the first place through those awareness-raising and communication campaigns. It's important that we keep on pumping those messages out about the role we all have—every single citizen of Wales—in disposing of our waste responsibly, especially when we pay others to do it for us. Everybody has responsibility.

This joint working, funded and led by the Welsh Government, is unparalleled in other parts of the UK; we are leading the way. However, I recognise that the debate that's being led today is to highlight some of the challenges that are still faced by regulators and others, to explore potential solutions and to try and influence, I think, as well, both this and future Governments' agendas. I'd be very keen, by the way, to meet with the chair of the cross-party group to pick up some of these points and to explore the potential in some of these proposals.

Some of the proposals we have today express frustration with the criminal justice system. I sympathise with this and, indeed, I welcome any opportunity to seek improvements, but there is a balancing act to be had here, as the chair, with his legal background as well, will understand, I'm sure. For example, the strident calls to require magistrates to seize and destroy vehicles for all fly-tipping convictions. There's a balance here between potentially undermining the independence of a court when handing out proportionate sentences—do we override or constrain that independence? But we should explore this.

I call on Mick Antoniw to reply to the debate.

I will be very brief, Chair, and I'm grateful for the extra bit of time. I will certainly welcome the opportunity to meet with you on this. I, of course, won't be standing in the next elections and I'm under no illusion in terms of the reality of legislation. The purpose of this proposal is to bring together all existing relevant legislation, to consolidate it, to amend it and to strengthen it, and to give a clear legislative focus for the benefit of local authorities, citizens and the judiciaries. My hope is that we'll be able to work so that this is a matter that is non-contentious, that is cross-party, but that will provide the basis for legislation into the next Senedd. And to that purpose, on 29 January, the cross-party group is going to hold a briefing, not just for Senedd Members, but for all those who may put themselves forward as candidates. So, there's a briefing to prepare that ground, and I agree, there's considerable work. This is a complex area, but I'm sure that we can prepare the ground for legislation for the next Senedd. Diolch yn fawr.

The proposal is to note the proposal. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes. Therefore, I will defer voting under this item until voting time.

Item 6 today is a debate on petition P-06-1489, 'Legislate to ensure swift bricks are installed in all new buildings in Wales'. I call on the Chair of the Petitions Committee to move the motion—Carolyn Thomas.

Diolch, Deputy Presiding Officer. On behalf of the Petitions Committee, thank you for the opportunity to introduce this debate today. Swifts are amazing. They are the fastest birds in level flight on the planet, capable of moving at more than 100 km an hour. They sleep, eat, drink and mate on the wing. But swifts are also Wales's fastest declining birds. The latest breeding bird survey figures for Wales show that the decline is now at more than 76 per cent since 1995, even worse than since the petition was submitted, and there has been a 56 per cent decline in just the last 10 years. Across the UK, there were 59,000 breeding pairs at the last official count, and experts fear that that could now be as low as 40,000 this summer.

Swifts are red-listed as birds of conservation concern, and one of the main causes of this alarming decline is loss of nesting sites, which is why campaigners have been arguing for the installation of swift bricks in all new houses. A swift brick is a hollow brick that slots into the brickwork of new or old homes, providing a space where swifts can nest. Swift bricks are easy to install. They don't need maintenance or replacement, and are made by brick manufacturers large and small. They typically cost only about £35, and swift bricks do not allow swifts to enter buildings. There is only one exit and entry point.

The petition was submitted by Julia Barrell with 10,934 signatures. The petition and its goal are supported by RSPB Cymru, Wildlife Trusts Wales and citizen community groups from villages and towns across the nation, including representatives from the Welsh Wildlife Trusts youth forum. And the text reads:

'Legislate to ensure swift bricks are installed in all new buildings in Wales

'Swifts are the fastest birds in level flight and can sleep, eat, drink and mate on the wing. Their cries define Welsh summers. Sadly, they are rapidly declining—down 72% in the last 30 yrs. Swifts nest in holes in buildings. Renovation makes them homeless, and new-builds currently offer no cavities. Without more nesting options, swifts will disappear. Incorporating swift bricks into all new developments would help swifts (and other struggling birds like house martins and sparrows) to recover.'

Due to the scale of Welsh decline and the ongoing destruction of their unprotected nest sites, campaigners argue that only a mandatory approach to installing swift bricks will provide enough nest spaces to allow swifts to recover to anything like former levels. Regulatory or legislative change is needed for this.

In addition to supporting swifts, the bricks have also been found to help other cavity nesting birds, including the rapidly declining red-listed house martin, the house sparrow and starling. Blue tits, great tits, nuthatches and wrens will also nest in the bricks.

The Senedd Petitions Committee has engaged with a number of Ministers before bringing this debate. Responsibilities for biodiversity, planning and housing sit with different Ministers. While there is widespread concern for the plight of swifts and a universal desire to ensure that they are able to thrive, there are concerns about imposing a new duty on house builders and potential unintended consequences for wider biodiversity targets.

We know that while swift bricks are necessary, alone they won't be enough. We also need to encourage growth in the range of small flying insects that swifts feed off. They, too, have been in decline. To encourage habitat for insects we need messy gardens, amenity spaces, no-mow verges and other wildlife corridors. That’s a job for all of us, as well as for public bodies, to create those biodiversity friendly wildlife spaces. I hope that today’s debate will allow us to explore the things that are already being done and the barriers to further action.

Given where we are in the life of this Senedd, with an election just months away, I understand that it may not be possible to have legislation on swift bricks in this term, but this debate today gives us an opportunity to put the issue on the radar of all parties as we all put together manifestos for 2026.

This petition argues that swift bricks are a simple, low-cost way of supporting our vulnerable species. The rapid decline in species numbers means that time is running out for them. I look forward to today’s debate and hearing ideas that will enable swift numbers to stabilise and return to previous levels. Diolch.

Unfortunately, not all Members that wish to speak will be called. We will see how things progress. Joel James.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. I fully support action to improve biodiversity and welcome initiatives that help struggling species, such as the swift. Unfortunately, the swift population has been rapidly declining, and the number in the UK has decreased by nearly 60 per cent since 1995. Like many other birds, such as the house martin, as has already been mentioned, swifts joined the red list for the first time in 2021. Something must be done.

Swift bricks have been demonstrated to provide a vital habitat for these birds and are relatively inexpensive. They can be placed into the outer walls of buildings with relative ease. Whilst I am very supportive of these bricks being placed into buildings where people want to help swifts and similar birds to nest, I'm conscious of a few things.

Firstly, my experience of these birds is that they're very messy. I've stayed in houses with swift nests under the eaves, and the wall and the floor directly under them have been absolutely covered in their mess. Although this may not be a problem for some people who welcome the birds, I can see potential health issues and flash points where some people might not welcome them.

Secondly, when we are talking about new buildings in Wales, while the odd new house here and there is not going to cause an issue, new housing estates will have large numbers of swift bricks installed in a concentrated area, and this could potentially lead to several unintended problems. Touching again upon the mess they can leave, I worry that many people will end up just covering these bricks up. But more importantly is the fact that concentrated populations of swifts may impact other species who compete for the same habitat and food source.

Finally, there are also the potential planning issues that could arise further down the line. If you have nesting birds in your home, you can't just turf them out if you want to build an extension or do maintenance work. For new builds, this won't immediately cause an issue, but in 10, 15-years' time, this could be a problem. Ultimately, houses are going to have to have clauses regarding nesting birds, and this could put off potential buyers and ultimately impact house-building targets.

I'm very supportive of swift bricks, but I think enforcing builders to put them into every new build will be a mistake. What I would prefer to see would be a national plan of ensuring that appropriate numbers of swift bricks are available in certain geographical areas, closer working with builders to identify potentially good nesting sites and a programme to help builders install them in sites with minimal impact. This could even be purposefully built bird towers located strategically on new estates instead of directly put into people's homes.

I'd like to thank the Petitions Committee for its work on this issue and to those who signed the petition. Their commitment to the need to safeguard the swift is to be applauded, because the swift is not only a bird, it is a symbol of our summers. When we hear the song of the swift, we know that the summer has arrived. They're part of our heritage, and we should be proud of them. But they are quickly disappearing. Since 1995, the swift in Wales has reduced by almost 76 per cent. We must therefore act, and we must create a space so that they can prosper once again. This decline that we have seen should cause concern to us all.

Now, when I talk about creating a space, well, there is quite a literal way of doing that. Swift bricks can be of great assistance. They offer a cosy, safe home for the swift. I would like to know if the Government would be willing to consider what could be done. I understand that there won’t be time, perhaps, for new legislation in this Senedd, but what could be done to encourage this within the industry? We shouldn't see this as a burden, if we're looking at building regulations and so on, but rather as a practical step that could be taken in order to assist one of our iconic species. Our swifts have been part of our summers for generations and we must ensure that that continues.

Delyth Jewell reminds us today of the song of the swift. People used to ask, ‘Have you heard the swift yet this year?’, as a sign that the summer had reached us. Of course, that is not to be heard as often these days.

I also thank the petitioner and the supporters. As the Chair has said, this is one easy, practical and cheap way to help nature in Wales, and it works.

Trials in the Duchy estate found that these bricks have been a huge success, seeing a 96 per cent occupancy rate. The swift is a classic bird in these islands, and the return of a number can only help in rebalancing our ecosystems. I'm sure people in the new builds, from a comfort point of view, will be happy to have the birds there, because they'll be able to eat mosquitos, aphids and other pests that might cause discomfort in the evenings.

Now, swift bricks have been an option for many years. Their inclusion in new-build estates will help biodiversity goals, and as we've already heard from the Chair, will also assist other native birds. I agree with my colleague on the committee, Joel James. We need to fully consider the unintended consequences, and as the Chair has already mentioned, there will be time to fully consider that. We are not going to see rushed legislation with regard to this, so we will be able to consider any unintended consequences. But as we see better insulation rolled out, as we see nests removed, making swift bricks compulsory in new builds will mitigate the loss we've seen over the years.

We will once again in Wales hear more often the song of the swift to tell us that the summer has arrived. Thank you.

As the swift champion in the Senedd, I thank Julia for her petition, and I'm sorry that I'm such a useless champion in the sense that we haven't been able to reverse the species decline. It is seriously depressing that we are still seeing this decline, and I was pretty disappointed at the contribution of Joel James, that it creates mess, because actually I don't think that's the case with swifts. I think you may be confusing them with swallows or house martins. It's such an amazing bird, and it's the iconic cry on a summer's evening that is tragically all too rare.

There's a swift tower on the barrage, which emits the sound that nesting swifts make in order to try and attract swifts, but to my knowledge we've never had a swift go and nest there. Because it's difficult, isn't it? Swifts are relying on their historical memory and they will go back to where they went the previous year, just like many other migrating birds. The only place I absolutely know is hosting swifts in the summer is the area of Ely, because they have relatively high buildings and are an established community, long before similar communities were built in my constituency.

We're never going to be putting swift bricks into bungalows, because swifts are never going to want to nest in a bungalow, because it's far too low. These are aerial birds. I do know that one of my local churches with a very tall spire, which is a Victorian church, has indeed taken the trouble to install swift bricks, but I have yet to have reported to me that there are any swifts nesting there. So, it's a really complicated problem. We need to ensure that, when a building comes down that had swifts nesting in it, it's always, if it's going to replaced, always mandatory that they have to put swift bricks there. It's so easy to do, and they cost as little as £25. The constructors are up there anyway. Nobody else is ever going to go up there, so even if there was a bit of guano around the nest, this is not an area that anybody in their right mind is going to be going to. They require no maintenance, they give no access to the roof space—as Carolyn said, they're a one-way trip; you have to go out the way you came in.

The University of Sheffield study found that 75 per cent of bird and bat boxes as a condition of planning permission fail to materialise. So, I'd like to hear from the Cabinet Secretary how we could enforce the mandatory requirement that buildings over a certain height are expected to install swift bricks, unless there is a very good reason why they shouldn't be there. But this should be the local authority imposing the conditions that they have put to the development.

We can't go on like this, otherwise we will never have any swifts, and our grandchildren will never be able to hear them. It's an absolute tragedy, and we need to do more now to preserve and help this noble bird to multiply.

Do you know, I have to confess I love swifts and swallows, and sometimes I don't know which is which? But what we do know is that there has—

You're not the only one. [Laughter.]

Oh right, good. We do know that there has been a 76 per cent drop in the Welsh population of swifts since 1995. They're on the red list of bird species in the most serious decline. That's according to North Wales Wildlife Trust. This is the fastest-declining species in Wales. The average lifespan of a swift is nine years, but there is a record of one that lived until a record age of 21. These wonderful birds are currently, as I mentioned, red-listed as a bird of conservation concern.

One of the main reported reasons for their decline is the loss of suitable nesting sites. They are simply struggling to find appropriate spaces to build their nests, as they are becoming scarce. The petition—. Thank you to all the petitioners, and thank you to the Chair of our Petitions Committee. We are duty bound, as far as I'm concerned, now that we've got—. We've enhanced the Petitions Committee over the years; we're duty bound to listen to our concerned residents. And I have no hesitation in supporting, maintaining support, for swift bricks going in. It's not a lot of money for a house to be built with swift bricks in.

The petition highlights that many new builds currently offer no cavities suitable for nesting. This, along with the destruction of unprotected nesting sites, does raise serious concerns about the long-term survival of swifts in Wales and across the UK. They want to include swift bricks. These bricks are BSI standardised, affordable, sustainable, easy to install, and they don't require any maintenance. By building in these swift bricks, I think it'll be great for children. We see it with house martins when we go abroad. How often have we seen house martins nesting? And actually, now that our climate's going a little bit warmer, we see them in our country, and children are fascinated with them. And I think it teaches children about animal welfare and about being a compassionate individual.

We are facing a nature crisis. Taking steps like this will help address part of the problem. I've got to thank Julian from the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds for his dedication and ongoing work. He's one of my constituents. He's written a number of books on birds and about species decline, and he's just a credit to the RSPB. So, Cabinet Secretary, would you agree with me that urgent action does need to be taken to address the decline in nature, including the decline of swifts?

Thank you to those who have signed this petition for drawing attention to a simple but effective method that could be used in new builds in order to safeguard the swift. This is certainly worth looking into further. There are a number in the Arfon constituency who've contacted me on this issue, and this is what one constituent from Bangor had to say, and I quote him in the original language:

'I've placed a swift nest box on my house and succeeded in attracting a nesting pair this year, but inserting a swift brick in new-build housing has minimal cost and is much safer than tottering up a ladder with a box under your arm. UK Government recently rejected this idea in the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, claiming there are other ways. I'm not sure how safe Ministers feel up a ladder. This is a chance for Wales to show the way again on environmental issues—a small brick in the wall, you could say.'

Thank you.

The Cabinet Secretary for Economy, Energy and Planning to contribute to the debate— Rebecca Evans.

Thank you very much, and thank you to the Petitions Committee, and also to colleagues for some really passionate contributions in the debate this afternoon and for the chance to respond.

I commend the petitioner in seeking measures to secure the recovery of nature, and I just want to be really clear at the outset that the petitioner's intentions very closely match our own. Indeed, the Welsh Government is currently taking a new Bill through the Senedd to bolster our response to halting the decline of nature. The new Bill will require Welsh Ministers to set statutory domestic biodiversity targets. The Welsh Government's priority areas of safeguarding and recovering species and ecosystem resilience offer the potential for further action to support swift populations. And equally, the actions that we're currently taking to meet the United Nations global biodiversity framework, such as the 30x30 targets, will, over time, also deliver benefits for bird populations, including swifts. And whilst I can agree with the petition that a swift brick can certainly be an effective solution to help nature in some circumstances, my concern is that having too narrow a focus on one type of bird or intervention can have some unintended consequences. I want to avoid a situation where overall outcomes for biodiversity fall short of what we're already seeking as part of our legislative and policy frameworks.

Planning policy is already in place to ensure that new developments provide a net benefit for biodiversity, and this means leaving nature in a better state than before. This is achievable through our place-based approach in 'Planning Policy Wales', which allows us to get the right solution in the right place. Perhaps the most important point here is that a focus on the installation of swift bricks as the only contribution to securing a net benefit for biodiversity might mean that developers avoid doing wider and potentially more impactful work, such as providing pollinator-friendly planting, pond creation, hedgerow planting, or restoring degraded habitats.

Cabinet Secretary, will you take an intervention? I cannot see why something costing £25 that can be done in one movement by a bricklayer is going to deter them from doing other things like planting hedgerows. I really contest the argument you are making. We need action on swifts because they are in such catastrophic decline. That's why they're on the red list.

So, the argument I'm making is set within the legislative and policy framework that exists, and that is about ensuring that new developments provide a net benefit for biodiversity. So, you could find yourself in a situation where a developer will argue that the £25 swift brick will meet their obligations underneath the biodiversity targets, which would be a situation, then, where we're not maximising the impact that we really want to ask from developers. It would be wonderful if developers agreed to do this voluntarily and signed up to a charter to do it, and it would be wonderful if households decide to do that anyway. But the point here is that one single response isn't going to give us those wider net benefits for biodiversity overall.

Obtaining those wider benefits overall does need some upfront and thoughtful action as part of designing developments, rather than that single action, which would still be dependent on the effective discharge of a planning condition at the end of a design and build process. So, a swift brick is a measure that can be provided now in the right circumstances, and, whilst we don't dispute at all that they can be an important part of the mix of conservation measures, there is a real danger that the emphasis on one solution could impede securing more desirable overall outcomes. We do want development to play its part in reversing the decline of nature and the way that it can do it can vary hugely. But the real benefits do come from bespoke outcomes that reflect the needs and the ecology in particular areas, and which are shaped by professional ecological input.

We know seeking biodiversity outcomes through the planning process is increasingly challenging, but we can't be deflected from obtaining the most desirable measures. And the reality is that it's much easier to pursue a single conservation measure than to take wider and more beneficial actions. And the danger is that a single measure could detract from, rather than complement, net benefit efforts and, as a result, swift bricks might become the only outcome. Nature is complex, and what I don't want is for us to paint ourselves into a corner where a single solution is mandated above all others and this becomes the only way of delivering that net benefit for biodiversity, because the overall outcomes for nature and our environment will be less.

But, nonetheless, I absolutely welcome the passion of the people who have supported this petition, and I think that we genuinely do share that real desire to support biodiversity and nature recovery, and we do recognise that swift bricks can be an important part of that, but it's not the entire solution.

The Chair of the committee now to reply to the debate. Carolyn Thomas.

Diolch, Llywydd. I'd like to thank Members for their contributions. Joel worried about the unintended consequences and Delyth spoke about how swifts are the sound of summer. Jenny spoke about the iconic sound we can hear when we go across the barrage. Delyth also asked about what can, actually, practically be done now. I was interested to hear from Rhys about the example of 96 per cent occupancy on the Duchy estate. So, that actually shows it does work, putting in these swift bricks.

Jenny, the swift champion—it was a really good point you raised that, if an old building is removed, then we need to make sure that there is mitigation so that those swifts have got somewhere to go. We do that for bats; we need to make sure we do it for swifts as well. Siân said that swift bricks are just so easy to input as part of a build—much easier than climbing up a ladder to try and put a box in later. And they're affordable as well, so, why can't we do that? And Janet also mentioned that, and she also said that we are in a nature emergency and we need to do everything we possibly can.

I'd like to thank the Cabinet Secretary for her response. I hear what you say about that new developments have to provide net biodiversity and this could be one element. I think, from that, we need to lobby developers so that they understand the importance of swift bricks going forward.

I thank Julia Barrell and other campaigners; a few are here today, listening in to this debate. Thank you for coming today. We've had campaigners from a range of wildlife and bird organisations, so, thank you very much for all your efforts. A huge number of people—you know, signatures—have been collected for this debate.

I hope that today's debate has served to underline how urgent the crisis is for swifts and the need for greater action, whether it's continued lobbying or in our manifestos, going forward. Some of those actions we can take as individuals, though: have those messy gardens, create habitat—some in our communities and others at a national level. A summer without the sound of swifts would be a sadder summer for all of us. Thank you.

The proposal is to note the committee's report. Does any Member object? There is no objection. Therefore, the motion is agreed.

Item 7 is the Welsh Conservatives debate, on the economy. The motion today is to be moved by Samuel Kurtz.

Diolch, Llywydd. I'm pleased to open today's debate, tabled in the name of Paul Davies, because the state of the Welsh economy is deeply concerning. The latest Office for National Statistics figures are stark. Wales has the lowest employment rate in the United Kingdom, the lowest wages and the highest rate of economic inactivity in Great Britain. After 26 years of Labour in Cardiff Bay, and just 15 months of a UK Labour Government, the Welsh economy is simply not delivering.

And let us be clear what that means in practice: families here are taking home smaller pay packets than their counterparts in England or Scotland. Businesses are struggling under the heaviest business rates in Britain. Young people see fewer opportunities to build a career, and too often feel forced to leave the communities where they grew up. Instead of tackling these challenges, Welsh Labour presses ahead with policies that make life harder: a tourism tax that risks damaging a vital industry; the most punishing business rates in the United Kingdom; and a blanket 20 mph speed limit—some may call it 'not a blanket'—costing tens of millions to implement, estimated to drain up to £9 billion from the economy, and opposed by nearly 0.5 million people, the largest petition that this Senedd has ever seen.

This is not a recipe for growth; it is an economy being held back. And, Llywydd, the wider UK economic picture only adds to the concern. Both the Welsh and UK economies are stuck in the mud. As we approach the autumn budget, households and businesses in Wales face deepening uncertainty, with the Labour Chancellor poised to raise taxes yet again. Inflation remains stubbornly high, nearly double the target. This eats into savings, drives up the cost of a weekly shop for our constituents and erodes economic confidence.

And we know what follows, because as night follows day, Labour's economic mismanagement runs the same course time and time again: higher taxes, higher unemployment, and an economy that leaves people and businesses worse off. The facts bear this out. Thirty-year gilt yields are at the highest in a generation. The Office for Budget Responsibility is preparing to downgrade growth and productivity forecasts. And there is now a £50 billion black hole. All achieved in just 15 months of a Labour Government. That means less investment, fewer opportunities and even greater pressure on households and businesses here in Wales. And remember Sir Keir's promise to slash energy bills by £300? Since entering No. 10, they have gone up by nearly £200. And let us not forget the Chancellor's changes to agricultural property relief and business property relief, hitting family farms and family firms across Wales, undermining the very foundations of our rural and business communities.

Contrast all this with the vision that the Welsh Conservatives will set out here today. We want Wales open for business, with a clear plan to put money back into the people's pockets and to unleash growth. First, we would cut the basic rate of income tax by 1p in the pound, giving 1.7 million people a tax cut and leaving the average working family £450 better off each year. Second, we would scrap business rates for small firms, the backbone of our economy—245,000 businesses employing over 0.5 million people. Third, we would axe Labour's tourism tax before it does any lasting damage to a sector worth billions and so vital to communities in Wales. Fourth, we would level up the whole of Wales, ensuring investment reaches every corner, leaving no community behind. Fifth, we would call on the UK Government to scrap Labour's hike in employers' national insurance, a direct tax on jobs that makes it more expensive to employ people. And finally, we would replace the 20 mph limit with a common-sense approach, keeping lower limits where they are needed, but letting the rest of Wales to get moving once again.

I have selected the amendments to the motion, and if amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 will be deselected. Amendment 1 now, therefore, moved by the Cabinet Secretary formally.

Moved.

I see that it is moved. Luke Fletcher now to move amendment 2.

Diolch, Llywydd, and I move the amendment in the name of Heledd Fychan. The Welsh economy should work for the people of Wales, not the other way around. That's a really simple principle, but one, I think, that actually seems to get lost far too often in our discussions on the economy. We all know that Wales has long-standing economic vulnerabilities across a number of metrics—wealth, value added, productivity, employment, income. Wales continues to perform poorly, both in relative terms and absolute. There is broad agreement there. But there is, I think, actually, a fundamental problem that goes beyond just simply wanting to tinker with a tax system, and at the centre of this problem is the ownership gap.

The reality is that there are too few Welsh businesses, assets and institutions that are meaningfully Welsh owned. That limits investment, it slows business growth and it reduces the quality and availability of jobs. It also means that innovation struggles to take hold, and far too much profit leaves our communities. We need to change that. We need a Wales where communities, workers and businesses all benefit from the wealth that we create here. That's why, for example, we need a new national development agency, independent from Government, with a clear mandate to support Welsh-owned businesses, attract the right kind of investment and provide a single, easy-to-navigate point of support for businesses in every corner of Wales.

We also urgently need a new outlook on Wales's business support ecosystem. Now, by any measure, the current system is failing to deliver the kind of sustainable growth that our businesses, communities and people deserve. For too long, support has been fragmented, confusing and difficult for businesses to navigate, meaning that opportunities are being missed and Welsh enterprises are left without the guidance or investment that they need to thrive. Vital to this is the need to consolidate and rationalise business support in Wales, creating that one-stop shop that the Development Bank of Wales was intended to be from the very beginning. By unifying the services offered by Business Wales with those of the development bank, we can create then a streamlined, coherent and effective system that genuinely supports Welsh businesses to grow and innovate, but crucially remain rooted in our communities.

Of course, we all know how vital small and medium-sized enterprises are to our economy, and I will actually say it was encouraging to see the Cabinet Secretary for finance introduce plans to cut business rates for smaller retail shops back in May. Many of us in this Chamber are eagerly awaiting the publication of the consultation responses, but while this is a step in the right direction, it is far from enough. In the absence of action to curb absentee landlords, support local hospitality businesses or even reimagine high streets beyond retail undermines the impact of these plans. The exclusion of hospitality businesses in particular risks triggering a fresh wave of closures from April next year.

Wales deserves better. After 26 years of Labour in charge of our economy, what do we see? The lowest employment rate in Great Britain, the lowest wages, the highest economic inactivity, and a country where too many are held back and too few are getting on. The late Norman Tebbit once said his father got on his bike to find work when times were tough. That spirit of aspiration, of hard work, of self-resilience, of wanting to get on, is still alive in Wales today. But the sad truth is that our people have been held back by Labour policies that are there to block their paths at every turn. Labour, supported by their friends in Plaid Cymru and the Liberal Democrats, have saddled Wales with the highest business rates in Great Britain. And what has this socialist coalition delivered us? They've slapped on a tourism tax that will hammer rural communities. They've forced through a default 20 mph speed limit, costing our economy billions. This is not the agenda of a Government that wants people to succeed. It's the agenda of a Government that wants Wales to stand still and decline.

And now, Llywydd, what do we see Labour in Westminster preparing to do? They want to strangle Welsh family firms and farms with changes to inheritance tax reliefs. The reforms to agriculture and business property relief will hit hardest here in Wales. But don't just take it from us; take it from Family Business UK, the voice of family-owned businesses that employ 15 million people across the UK. They have made it crystal clear that these reforms will discourage investment, saddle family firms with unpayable tax bills and threaten succession planning. Their research shows that 208,000 jobs are at risk with £14 billion wiped off our economy, at a net fiscal loss to the Treasury of £1.9 billion. Llywydd, that is madness. This is Labour ideology trumping over economic reality, and it is the people here in Wales that will have to pay the price.

Family Business UK warns of the practical dangers too. Family firms that are asset rich, but cash poor, are being forced to sell land or take on debt just to pay the tax bill. Trustees are being asked to carry out complex business valuations. Trusts used for succession or charitable purposes are becoming so tangled in red tape that they may no longer be viable. Even the so-called £1 million allowance is a mirage as delayed indexing means inflation will erode its value before that even comes into force. This is not a policy designed to strengthen our economy; it's a policy designed to weaken it and punishes the very businesses that are the backbone of our Welsh economy—family firms, family farms and the small businesses that are rooted in our communities.

But on these benches, Llywydd, we say enough is enough. We are unapologetically the party that believes in aspiration, in rewarding hard work and in giving people a chance to get on. That is why we would cut income tax by 1p, putting £450 back in the pockets of working people. We would abolish business rates for small firms, unleashing the power of entrepreneurs in every community across the country. And we would axe the tourism tax before it decimates rural jobs. And we would scrap that 20 mph default limit to get Wales moving again. And we will always stand up for our farmers and our small family businesses against Labour's addiction to tax.

The Conservatives' economic strategy is to cut the Welsh Government's income whilst increasing expenditure. This would be more credible if it produced a balanced budget. If you look at countries with low tax and those with high tax, I'd ask you to compare South Sudan with Sweden. South Sudan has one of the lowest tax rates in the world, Sweden has one of the highest. Whose economy is doing best?

The Welsh economy has problems, many of them structural. The Welsh economy is performing poorly versus the rest of Great Britain, and has done for many years. GVA per head in Wales is 74 per cent of the UK figure, the second lowest of the UK countries and English regions. London has the highest GVA, followed by the south-east of England. Why don't you compare Cardiff against Cambridge in terms of economic development? Regions like the north-east and Northern Ireland were closer to Wales. This highlights the economic disparity between the different regions and nations of the UK, with London and the south-east being much wealthier than the other parts.

The economic difference between the regions such as those observed in the UK GVA per head can be attributed to a wide variety of factors. The first one is industrial structure. As people are well aware, we were metal making, metal bashing and coal mining for long periods of our history, and now we're not. That structure has not been replaced by one that I would like to see: pharmaceuticals, ICT and other high-value industries.

Finance and technology are prevalent in London. They're the ones driving the London economy. We have a greater proportion of lower value industries. The Conservatives talk about tourism. Name me a country, and I'll let you do it, that has become rich on tourism.

Spain.

Malta.

New Zealand.

I think that there's a complete lack of economic understanding on the Conservative benches, if nothing else.

Regions may specialise in different industries, with some focusing on high-value sectors like finance and technology, which are prevalent in London. Higher levels of investment in infrastructure, education and business can lead to great economic growth. London, for example, benefits from significant investment. Workforce skills—areas with a more skilled workforce tend to attract higher paying jobs, which contribute to higher GVA. Economic policy—Government policies can affect regional development through investment in local services.

Geographical factors. It used to be proximity to markets, and fast trains and fast roads. That's no longer true. The development of fast broadband reduces the need for proximity to markets. Just to help some of my friends on the Conservative benches, it has not stopped Dundee developing a computer games industry that is incredibly successful, despite the fact it's a long way from markets and a long way from London.

Historical factors. Industrial bases can shape the current economic landscape. These factors interplay in complex ways to create the economic landscape, leading to disparities in wealth and development across different regions. Understanding these can help in formulating policies aimed at reducing economic and regional disparities.

Wales has a greater portion of its population working in manufacturing, public administration, health and social services, and agriculture. Where Wales is weak is in areas such as ICT, real estate activities, administrative and support services, professional, scientific and technical services, arts and entertainment, more so than the rest of the UK. These are industries that pay high wages. There's a shortage of employment in higher paid sectors, and that is one of the problems we have in terms of our GVA.

Successful economies have a mixture of inward investment from international companies and locally developed companies. Major universities are very important to developing the economy—just look at Palo Alto. The key growth areas of life science and ICT are important to successful economies. Continuing having a search for the golden bullet of economic development has not worked. There have been successes and failures with each strategy, but not enough successes, apart from the relocation of Government departments and agencies. We need to learn from successes such as Admiral in Wales and successes in other parts of Europe. Building advanced factories, even giving them a new name like technium, does not work.

Five key actions: produce a strategy to increase ICT employment in Wales via inward investment and growing Welsh firms; produce a strategy to increase life science employment in Wales via inward investment and growing Welsh firms; negotiate with the Westminster Government the relocation of Westminster Government services with employment at all levels to Wales; hold a summit followed by an action plan with universities in Wales to develop companies from university research; set a target that each year Welsh GDP will increase by 1 per cent compared with the UK and plan accordingly. We need to have a successful economy. We need to know how we're going to do it, and quite frankly, what the Conservatives said will not work.

I've listened intently, so far, to the contributions of colleagues around this Chamber, and what strikes me, as a summary of where we're up to at the moment, is that Labour simply don't understand the economy. They don’t understand business. They don't understand the transformative power that a well-run business can have on an individual, their family or their communities. Labour think that they know best and don't trust people with their own money.

This is transparent through the make-up of the UK Government's Cabinet. Not one member of that Cabinet of the Labour UK Government has any business experience. They don't understand how business works. They don't understand how the economy works. This became all the more clear just a few years ago when the then economy Minister, an alumni of the Welsh Government, said this:

'For 20 years we've pretended we know what we're doing on the economy—and the truth is we don't really know what we're doing on the economy. Nobody knows what they're doing on the economy. Everybody is making it up as we go along'.

[Interruption.] Talking of which, I'll take the intervention.

You say that having business experience is key to understanding business. I would just like your observations on the use of that business experience and the abuse of public money linked to a company run by Baroness Mone.

Thank you for the intervention from Joyce Watson. It is worth remembering that the Conservatives, in their 14 years of Government, created 4 million new jobs here in the UK, and we doubled the personal allowance for people's income tax from £6,500 up to £12,500. We trust people with their money; we trust people to spend it well.

The then Labour economy Minister went on to say that:

'Everybody is making it up as we go along—and let's just be honest about that'.

We're grateful for that honesty from the Labour economy Minister in the Welsh Government at the time. But I'm sure that the economy Minister here today is not as despairing as the then economy Minister, because Labour will say they have a plan, and, of course, they do have a plan. Their plan is to tax the economy to death. They are taxing working people through the national insurance contributions. They're taxing our farmers through the family farm tax, impacting farms and rural communities up and down Wales. They're taxing those tourism businesses that we've already heard about through the visitor levy, the tourism tax and through the unreasonable 182-day rule for self-catering accommodation. They're taxing our family firms with the highest business rates that we know of in Great Britain. And we now hear that Labour are looking to tax pensioners by raiding their pension pots in the November budget because of the £50 billion black hole that Sam Kurtz referred to earlier on.

As Conservatives, we know that they can't just keep taxing the economy to bring about any sort of life; you have to unleash the power of business and unleash that transformative power that businesses can have on individuals, families and on their communities. We need to invest in important infrastructure—something that the Welsh Government has pulled away from, disinvesting in roads here in Wales when actually those roads can unleash our economy up and down the country. We need to invest in those skills that enable people to climb that ladder into work, invest in apprenticeships, which, again, Welsh Labour have not been doing at the rate of other parts of the UK.

The Welsh Conservatives will put money back into people's pockets by cutting those taxes that erode people's personal responsibility. We support small businesses, protecting vital industries and investing across all of Wales and making smart transport decisions—the reverse of what Welsh Labour have done here in Wales. Wales deserves an economy that works for everyone and the Conservatives will deliver that. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Heledd Fychan.

I'm not down to speak.

You are on my list.

Apologies.

Gareth Davies.

Thank you very much. I'm always prepared to speak. People across Wales want to see our economy firing on all cylinders, but currently, the engine isn't turning over. After 26 years of Labour, propped up by their Plaid Cymru sidekicks, Wales is stagnating. We have the lowest employment rate, the lowest wages and the highest economic inactivity in Great Britain. Families and businesses in north Wales feel this failure every single day.

And yet what does the Welsh Government offer? Higher business rates, punitive taxes, and policies that drive investment away rather than bringing it in. The tourist tax, perhaps, is the clearest example of Labour and Plaid's anti-business agenda. This Welsh Labour Government is out of ideas, and Plaid Cymru are no better, with a plan for the economy that involves a wealth tax on what little wealth is created in Wales, and, of course, more demands for even greater funding from Westminster. That's not a sensible economic plan.

The most important sector to north Wales, Dirprwy Lywydd, is the tourism sector, which is already struggling and is now being hammered through the tourism tax, with the knock-on effect to hospitality being enormous. We are already seeing more than one pub closing every day in Wales, and we can expect this to rise further.

In north Wales, tourism sustains tens of thousands of jobs. It brings in billions of pounds, supporting pubs, shops, restaurants and small suppliers in every corner of the region. Yet Labour has forced through a new levy of £1.30 per person per night, with councils free to hike it even higher. Their own figures predict up to £576 million of economic damage over the next decade, and hundreds of job losses each year.

Deputy Llywydd, you don't need to be an economist to see the impact that this will have. Families already counting the pennies will be put off visiting, businesses will suffer, and the people of north Wales will pay the price. And at a time when our economy is already fragile, Labour is determined to hammer one of our most successful sectors, punishing the very businesses that keep rural and coastal Wales alive.

The Welsh Conservatives, by comparison, are calling for changes that will have a meaningful impact on the economy and, thus, people's lives. There will be no wealth for progressive politicians to redistribute if it is aggressively taxed before it is even created. And now, Rachel Reeves is refusing to rule out VAT rises, which means that people are expecting more pain to come.

The Labour Party's ideological attack on the landed population, which began in the 1990s by mounting an attack on hereditary peers, has continued with suffocating farming through regulation, and now culminates in an inheritance tax that will affect up to 70,000 farms and will be a huge hit to the Welsh economy. But the Welsh public are well aware that the Welsh Labour Government puts ideology before economic sense, which they've seen with the wildly unpopular default 20 mph policy, which is due to cost the Welsh economy £8.9 billion.

Would you give way?

Of course, Mark. Yes.

Before the Labour Welsh Government brought in the default 20 mph limits—supported by Plaid Cymru, of course—I warned that switching 30 mph limits to 20 mph limits would transfer the share of road casualties from one to the other, while also displacing drivers and, therefore, road casualties onto the wider road network.

The data for the first six months after this was introduced show that overall numbers of people killed or seriously injured on our roads were up 10 per cent, and the latest police recorded road casualties for January to March this year, published in August, showed that road casualties were 6 per cent higher than the same quarter in 2024. Do you share my concern that they ignored my warnings?

Absolutely, Mark, and that's a fantastic stat that you've quoted there. It's something that is very eye-opening, and I'm sure that the people of Wales will want to know those statistics before heading into the elections next year. If we're serious about saving lives, we need to invest that money into the health service and invest in our front-line staff—more doctors and nurses and not more politicians.

We are calling for the toxic tourist tax to be scrapped before it has a chance to wreak havoc on our communities. We would abolish business rates for small businesses, giving a vital lifeline to the micro and family businesses that make up over 99 per cent of Welsh enterprises. And we would cut the basic rate of income tax by 1p, putting £450 back into the pockets of the average Welsh family, as Sam has already mentioned—money that they could choose to spend supporting local businesses and north Wales beyond.

Wales doesn't need more barriers, more tax and more bureaucracy. It needs Government to get off their backs, allowing them to thrive. [Interruption.] Yes, Cefin.

I've just been watching the Conservatives deliver some pretence about understanding the economy, and the rest of us here are aghast at the hypocrisy. Don't you feel the same sense of embarrassment that the rest of us feel when we look at you, knowing that Liz Truss trashed the economy, and the effect that that had on people across Wales and the United Kingdom? Do you feel now, after all of that, that you have lost all confidence as a party as the guardians of the economy? That reputation has been trashed. Do you agree with me?

No, I don't—surprise, surprise. Sorry, Cefin, the hypocrisy is felt on these benches to the Plaid benches in return, really. You've propped up Labour here for 26 years. You've supported Government. When Lee Waters said that they don't know what they're doing with the economy, Plaid should have washed their hands with Labour. They should have said, 'We don't want anything to do with you', but yet, they got straight back into bed with them in 2021. And when I made an intervention to your party leader, he said that he couldn't rule out doing a deal with Labour in the future. So, it goes to show that you vote Plaid, get Labour, and vice versa. And that's why, under the Welsh Conservatives, Wales would be open for business and we would kick-start the Welsh economy.

So, in closing, Deputy Llywydd, I would like to urge Members to vote with our motion. And if the Welsh Government takes anything away from this debate, I hope that it is the harmful consequences that are about to befall north Wales from the toxic tourist tax, which I urge them to scrap before it's implemented.

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

Thank you very much for the opportunity to speak in this debate. It really does give me a chance to be very clear about how this Welsh Government is delivering for the people of Wales. We're investing in skills and backing our talent, including through our young person’s guarantee. We're backing future industries, such as semiconductors and gaming, with targeted investment and job creation. With our partners, we are decentralising economic development, giving our regions more control over employment, skills and investment. We're backing small and medium-sized enterprises, through Business Wales and the Development Bank of Wales, providing extensive support for start-ups, innovation, growth, exports and sustainability. We're driving innovation, partnership and collaboration, for example, at M-SParc in Anglesey, to foster collaboration between academia and industry. We're reforming infrastructure planning, particularly for renewable energy projects, reducing the decision-making times by up to 12 weeks. And we're investing in transport, housing and digital infrastructure, such as the south Wales metro, which builds social mobility to support economic growth.

So, what is the result of our investment and our work? Well, Wales is outperforming the UK average on employment. According to the annual population survey, our unemployment rate was 3.5 per cent—

Will you take an intervention?

I will in a moment. It was 3.5 per cent in the year ending March 2025, compared to 3.8 per cent across the UK. The employment rate gap between Wales and the UK has narrowed significantly.

Thank you for taking the intervention. How many new houses have you built in the last 12 months?

I will check the figures with our housing Minister and write to you on that particular point.

We do continue to see an increase here in Wales in paid employees since 2021. Under the latest figure, early estimates for August 2025 indicate the number of paid employees in Wales increased in that month by over 100 to 1.31 million. At a UK level, for that same period, it showed a monthly decrease of 7,700.

So, as a Labour Government committed to ensuring that our economy benefits from everyone's talents, we know that support to help those people who need it to become members of the workforce should be tailored, and that's why I'm really proud of the programmes that we offer: Working Wales, Jobs Growth Wales, ReAct+, Communities for Work Plus and, most recently, our groundbreaking inactivity trailblazer pilots, which were launched in Blaenau Gwent, Denbighshire and Neath Port Talbot, and they're already helping people take meaningful steps towards employment, improving life outcomes for those who are currently furthest from the labour market. [Interruption.] Yes.

Of those programmes that you've mentioned, how many people have meaningfully been employed in full-time employment?

So, again, I will get those figures. I know that the Conservatives are very interested in figures this afternoon, so let me share this particular one with them. The Conservative motion calls for cuts to the basic rate of income tax by 1p. Now, that would cost £299 million, and that's 8 per cent of all Welsh rates of income tax income. And they tell us also to scrap business rates for small businesses, which would cost up to £370 million. All of this without even beginning to tell us how they would pay for it, and the level of cuts that they would have to implement would be huge. They would have to cut the entire transport revenue budget, and in fact, they'd still have change. And the Tories tell us, of course, to axe the visitor levy before it has even been introduced, depriving local authorities of the option to increase resources and investment. And whilst the Tories are busy making unfunded promises, we're busy working with partners to deliver the First Minister's priority of jobs and growth across Wales, urban and rural.

Green jobs in Wales are growing rapidly, driven by the Welsh Government's commitment to net zero. Projects like Morlais tidal energy and Celtic sea offshore wind are expected to create thousands of jobs. By 2035 renewables could deliver 8,000 skilled jobs and nearly £7 billion in GVA.

So, we are delivering. Welsh and UK Labour Governments are working together to deliver growth and to invest back in our industry and our talent. We're investing in city and growth deals, free ports, investment zones, a local innovation partnership, a defence cluster for Wales, and we're working to maximise opportunities across the national wealth fund and the British Business Bank. These will create quality jobs, will grow our supply chains and bring opportunity to people across Wales.

We have so much to be proud of, and it is really miserable to hear the opposition talking Wales down. This December, the Wales investment summit will bring global industry leaders and investors to Newport. We will showcase Wales as the dynamic economy and world-class investment destination that it is. We will present incredible local, regional and sector-based opportunities designed to unlock new opportunities and create well-paid, sustainable jobs for people in Wales. And that's the confidence and the pride that we will continue to bring to this, and we will continue to deliver for our economy in Wales. [Interruption.] I can expand at the end. I was finished.

On the investment summit, would you release the list of RSVP'd companies who have confirmed that they're attending the investment summit?

I certainly wouldn't be intending to do that at the moment, but I will say that we have had incredible interest from right across the globe in our investment summit. We have had huge, huge interest from across the globe, and particularly in the sectors that we're particularly keen to grow: compound semiconductors, tech and digital, clean energy, life sciences, advanced manufacturing and defence. All of those sectors are very keen to explore the opportunities that we have to grow those sectors with them here in Wales, but also very interested in our capital investment prospectus as well.

I call on Tom Giffard to reply to the debate.

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Dirprwy Lywydd, and thank you to everybody that has taken part in today's Welsh Conservative debate on the economy. It's clear from listening to all of the contributions today that it is only the Welsh Conservatives that have a plan to turn the Welsh economy around. Week after week, month after month, we hear Senedd Members rightly asking for greater funding to fix the broken education system in Wales, to turn around the longest NHS waiting lists in the UK, to clean up some of the most polluted waterways in the country, or to improve the transport system. But it is clearly only the Welsh Conservatives that realise we need to grow our economy to be able to pay for any of it.

Will you take an intervention?

Yes.

Did you hear my five key action points?

I always listen very intently, Mike, to the things that you have to say.

All those calls are ultimately futile unless a party has a plan to grow the Welsh economy. And we've seen, haven't we, that Labour simply don't have that plan. They are economically illiterate. Trust the Labour Party not to foresee that increasing national insurance would make employing staff ever more expensive, would lead to a jump in unemployment, would reduce the number of vacancies too. Only an economically illiterate Labour Party could not have foreseen that happening.

And even those fortunate enough to be in work are finding everyday things more and more expensive too. Before the election, the last Conservative Government reduced inflation down to the target of 2 per cent, but because Labour have lost control of the economy, it has now nearly doubled. And let's not think of inflation as some abstract economic measure divorced from the lives of ordinary people. Inflation impacts us all. It's the cost of the weekly shop going up once you reach the checkout, it's the price of putting fuel in the car to commute to work every day, and it's the increasing cost of paying the heating bill as winter draws ever closer. Because Labour have lost control of the economy and, in turn, inflation, far from delivering for working people, they're making life ever more difficult for working people, and I'm always struck by the human impact that that has. People are telling me they're cutting back both on the necessities and the nice-to-have things, the occasional takeaway, the weekend away with the family, the even longer bath. [Interruption.] I will take an intervention shortly. I want to live in a country where people can afford these things that give them joy, and that they're not taken away by a Government that can't control inflation or stolen in higher taxes. And that is the perfect time to give you the floor, Joyce Watson.

I'm just curious now how you try to square your management, because according to the figures—these are not mine—there are over 400,000 people in Wales, 30 per cent of all employees, in the public sector in Wales. And yet you stood by when investment in the public sector was being reduced, slashed, in Wales. You stood by the mismanagement of a previous Government who clearly didn't understand that the public sector was the biggest employer in Wales and that those people who were made unemployed, who couldn't afford to live—. You were actually impacting on every single community in Wales—every single community.

Let me tell you about the achievements of the last Conservative Government.: 4 million more people in a job since 2010, and in the public sector, 39,200 more doctors and 55,000 more nurses. I think that's a Conservative Government delivering.

But I want, as Joyce says, to live in a country that can invest in those public services, but the elephant in the room is that we simply can't do that because we're spending far too much money on debt interest. In fact, we're spending more on just servicing the nation's debt than we are on the schools or police combined. Unless we get serious about our debt problem by cutting welfare and getting people back to work, by making sure that we never pay people more not to work than they would in work, we will end up in a perpetual debt doom loop. [Interruption.] I'm happy to give the floor to the leader of Plaid Cymru if he wants to come in. There we are.

We've failed to cut spending and wasted a load of money, which means we need to borrow more to pay for it. Then the more we borrow, the more the markets lose confidence in our ability to pay it back, so they charge us more the next time. So, we have to raise taxes to cover that, only to waste more money, fail to cut spending and start the loop all over again.

It's clearer than ever that we need a plan to get us out of Labour's doom loop. And if you think Labour are bad, Llywydd, Reform might be even worse—a party that wants to spend even more on welfare. And the fact that they had nothing to say in this debate shows that they have nothing they want to say on how they want to grow our economy too. Nigel Farage, instead of putting forward serious plans to cut debt and, in turn, reduce taxes, plans to put working people under even more pressure by having to increase taxes through his billions of pounds of unfunded spending commitments.

The problem with trying to tell everyone everything that they want to hear is that eventually those sums start to add up. The Institute for Fiscal Studies estimates that Reform's plans and commitments so far add up to a whopping £141 billion in extra spending, with very limited plans on any ability to pay for it. In other words, as the IFS put it, the sums do not add up. No wonder they seem to want to privatise the NHS to cover that black hole, and it will only hurt ordinary Britons up and down the country—more unfunded spending, more debt, more borrowing, higher taxes, and round and round in that same loop we go. Put simply, Reform will hurt people in their wallets.

What we need is a party that will cut the deficit, encourage work, lower taxes and grow our economy, and most of all, a plan to do it. That's the role we as Conservatives have always played. When Labour ran to the International Monetary Fund in the 1970s for a bail-out, it was Margaret Thatcher's Conservative Party that modernised our economy, turned the country around and rescued Britain. And when the last Labour Government left a note behind after their last term in office that said there is no money left, it was David Cameron's Conservative Government that cut the deficit, created 400 new jobs every day and made sure that we had the money we needed when the pandemic hit. And when this tired Labour Government leaves office next year, having spent 26 years delivering the weakest economy in the UK, it will be Darren Millar's Welsh Conservative Party that will be there to get serious about the challenges our country faces, with our plan to cut income tax, to scrap business rates completely for small businesses, and growing our economy again. And that, Dirprwy Lywydd, is how we will fix Wales.

The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is objection. Therefore, I will defer voting under this item until voting time.

Item 8 today is the Plaid Cymru debate, on child poverty. I call on Sioned Williams to move the motion.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I could spend all of my opening speech in this debate quoting the shocking evidence we see in report after report on the level and effect of the scandalous levels of child poverty in Wales, reiterate the fact it's going to get worse, with Wales predicted to have the highest child poverty rate in the UK, and I could, as I've done so many times before—too many times before—illustrate what this means to the everyday lives of Welsh families, and what it means to the future of our nation socially, educationally, economically and morally. But I'm not going to do that today, because I know how this debate is going to go.

As our motion suggests, Plaid Cymru believe we need more action on child poverty, and we'll hear why the action we've seen from the Welsh Government isn't sufficient, and what solutions we propose. The Tories will try to skirt over the role their party had in deepening those poverty levels by, as their amendment suggests, deleting mention of one of those solutions, the direct child payment. Because we know Tories are fundamentally opposed to ensuring the most vulnerable people are adequately supported through the social security system, so they'll talk about something their Government proposed instead. And the Welsh Government, yes, they'll do their thing again of defending their record, even though the evidence points to the contrary, while simultaneously claiming that Wales doesn't have the power it needs, even though their own party in Westminster could change that, if needed. And, of course, let's not forget we'll probably have an accusation somewhere along the lines of 'fantasy politics' and 'unseriousness' lobbed against Plaid Cymru to justify that position. It's Welsh Labour's current go-to when faced with the ambition and radicalism of Plaid Cymru.

And I'm sick of it, to tell you the truth. I'm sick of standing up here and talking about this issue, because we owe it, all of us, to the people we represent to do better. We need to see bold steps, the courage to act and even to try and fail, rather than tinker with non-binding strategies, non-measurable policies and shrinking from accountability, while mocking voices who say, 'Enough is enough', with tired tropes and slurs from Labour Members and Ministers in this Chamber and beyond—yes, even in the Labour Party conference in Liverpool—from the two women who should be fighting for those children. I've heard them again accuse Plaid Cymru of not being serious, often comparing our calls to student politics. Students—of whom too many again this year in Wales are not from low-income households—students have a loud and proud history of being agents of change, of speaking truth to power, of shaking the establishment in pursuit of fairness and justice, and I'm proud Plaid Cymru is a party that stands firmly in that tradition, and absolutely reject the patronising, paternalistic put-downs of an establishment party that have failed to change the dial on—and, in fact, have worsened—the degree of child poverty. We are meant to simply accept without protest, without consternation.

I have selected the amendments to the motion. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 will be deselected. I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice to move amendment 1, tabled in her own name.

Formally.

Thank you. I call on Altaf Hussain to move amendment 2, tabled in the name of Paul Davies.

I do. Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I thank Plaid for bringing forward this important debate. The Welsh Conservative group share Plaid's dismay over the fact that a third of Welsh children live in relative poverty. However, we don't agree that their so-called transformational plan will help tackle child poverty. Rather than focusing on tackling the root causes of child poverty, Plaid have decided to opt for headline-catching gimmicks. And it's not even their own idea. Once again, the Welsh nationalists are copying the Scottish nationalists, but they're stealing the ideas that have not even worked.

The Scottish child payment—[Interruption.] I'm coming to this, if you'll hear from me, please. The Scottish child payment is now nearly three times higher than when it was introduced. The SNP Government has spent £114.6 million between April and June this year alone, yet missed their legally binding target of fewer than 18 per cent of children living in poverty by 2025. Please, go ahead.

I'm grateful to you for taking an intervention, but is the Member aware that Scotland is currently the only part of the UK where it is expected, because of the measures being taken, that we're going to be seeing a drop in child poverty levels?

Sioned, do you want to say something else?

That's exactly what I was going to say. The proof is there. We know that Scotland, by taking this intervention—and it's a proven intervention; it works—is the only place where the child poverty levels are going to come down in the UK. And experts have said—in the child poverty area—that this is why.

That's why I said that you're copying Scottish nationalists, and yet you've seen that they've spent already £114.6 million in a few months and they don't know whether they will keeping their promise that they have made that they will eliminate child poverty by the end of 2025. This is the policy Plaid wants to replicate in Wales, but they fail to tell us how they will fund it, or even where they will pilot it.

If Plaid are serious about tackling child poverty, their time would be better spent avoiding gimmicks and stopping supporting Welsh Labour budgets, which over the past 26 years have helped perpetuate poverty in Wales. Plaid have supported 99 per cent of Welsh Government's budgets. They were part of a Welsh Government that abandoned any pretence of economic targets. They had a chance to tackle the root cause of child poverty, namely economic inactivity, yet they chose to focus on constitutional matters instead. They now come up with gimmicks without telling the Welsh public what they will cut to fund their transformational plan.

As for Labour, we only have to look at the podium in Liverpool to realise that things will only get worse. Rachel Reeves has made it clear that more tax rises are coming. She was right in one regard: the country can't afford to spend £1 in every £10 on servicing debt interest, which is why the UK Government has so far ruled out scrapping the two-child limit, with its £3.5 billion price tag.

The Welsh Conservatives believe the path to eliminate child poverty is through work. We have to improve the economy and make the path to work easier, particularly for parents. The inadequate childcare support on offer to Welsh parents has helped the cost of childcare to soar in Wales, putting it beyond the reach of many families. This is a huge barrier to work and freedom from poverty for many parents with new or younger children. Unless the Welsh Government adopts more generous childcare, on offer across the Welsh nation, then child poverty in Wales will continue to grow.

I also urge the Welsh Cabinet to introduce statutory and measurable targets for eradicating child poverty. We have to make work the route out of poverty and help families to become economically active. Diolch yn fawr.

I would just say, in response to the speech that we've just heard, yes, we are looking to learn from Scotland—unashamedly so. That is the point. An idea doesn't have to be new in order to be good or effective.

I would ask when this Government decided that child poverty was too tricky a problem for it to solve. Was it when even the target to end child poverty was scrapped, or was it when it became too awkward to disagree too openly with UK Labour's decision to continue with policies that keep so many children poor? In Caerphilly, in Merthyr Tydfil, in Blaenau Gwent and Rhymney, some of the highest figures for child poverty across the whole of Wales are to be found—Valleys communities where children's life chances are curtailed from when they're born; communities where young people find it difficult to focus in lessons because their stomachs are empty.

Now, I welcomed the policy Plaid was able to introduce, working with the Government, on free school meals. That is something tangible that will make a difference. It was interesting to see the First Minister claiming that as a Labour win at their conference, of course, when it would never have happened were it not for Plaid Cymru. But we should all be proud of it. There were too many votes and wasted opportunities, when it could have been introduced more quickly, of course. How many wasted votes, I wonder, and wasted chances, will we have to go through before a Government in Wales recognises the need to implement another Plaid policy—that of the direct child payment. It's something, yes, we have seen work in Scotland. It is baffling to see so much performative scepticism that surrounds this still. And, yes, we also agree that there should be a wealth tax to help end child poverty. But when will the Government here insist that their colleagues in London agree to it? What more convincing do they need?

There is more this Government could and should be doing to end child poverty, because if nothing changes, by 2029 Wales could have the highest levels of child poverty in the UK. That is a glaring warning. In the twenty-first century, in a part of the world that prides itself on being rich, how can it be right that any child should have to go to bed hungry or cold? What sort of future can children in Wales look forward to when so many of them have a start in life that is so unnecessarily and so cruelly constrained by a poverty that shouldn't exist?

Earlier this week, I attended a meeting with representatives of Patriotic Millionaires UK. The billboard greeting passengers outside Lime Street station in Liverpool had a clear message: tax wealth, not work. Eighty per cent of high-net-worth individuals support a tax on wealth, because they want to live in an inclusive country. Why is the UK so reluctant to act? Because billionaires dominate the airwaves and most of the newspapers that are read in this country. So, I hope that the Chancellor of the Exchequer will act on the desire of millionaires to live in an inclusive country. They're knocking on an open door.

But now turning to what the Welsh Government can do, the Bevan Foundation commissioned Policy in Practice to look at six actions that could reduce child poverty. One of them was the Welsh child payment, which has just been discussed by earlier speakers. I wonder how easy that would be to do, given that we still don't have control over welfare benefits administration, because I recall that when we introduced the universal basic income for care leavers, the UK Government decided to remove the benefits that those young people were entitled to. That effectively nullified the impact of the policy, which was a pretty disgraceful way of testing a new policy to ensure that care leavers have better outcomes.

Thank you for taking the intervention, and you're quite right, of course, that there are challenges in taking measures like this, because we don't have the powers that we believe we should have in Wales. We believe we have found a way of introducing such a direct payment. But I would like to note that I have asked the First Minister here to press on the Treasury to allow us in Wales to take these measures without penalising. Its silence that came in response.

Well, there's a long list of things that we need to have a better approach to by the UK Treasury, which is obviously run by control freaks who literally want to control everything that's going on in this country from Whitehall. It's a ridiculous way of proceeding, and it's one of the contributory factors to the discord in our society, frankly. I won't go any further on that at the moment.

Full-time work is obviously the best route out of poverty. As I used to run a Sure Start programme, I can assure you that that's absolutely the case, but it's extremely difficult for people with small children to take full-time work because the cost of the childcare outweighs whatever they're earning from their wage. So, as we're dealing here with child poverty, I think we should be focusing on improving the ability of parents to take part-time work, so that they can box and cox on the childcare arrangements.

Obviously, we have the Flying Start programme and the nursery education for two-year-olds, but that on its own won't enable people to work, because the timing is just not sufficient to enable you to get to work and back. So, I think that is certainly something we need to do more of, to make it easy, because when somebody's thinking about going back to work, they are going to be analysing, 'How long is it going to take me to get from the childcare to the place of work and back again, so that I can calculate exactly how much I'm going to have to pay over and above what I'm eligible for?'

Obviously, once children get older, it all becomes a lot easier, because things like the universal primary school breakfast is a huge benefit to working parents, because many of them don't necessarily need the breakfast in order to feed their children; they need it in order to be able to get to work on time. And, equally, after-school clubs are also another way that supports parents in work.

So, those things are things that we've done really well on, and we've been leading on what the UK Government is now spreading to England as well. But I think that the removal of the two-child limit is obviously the biggest way in which we will eliminate the largest amount of child poverty, and we just have to hope that the Chancellor will tackle it. It simply isn't good enough to say, 'Oh, we'll just remove it for the third child', because it's the right of the child, whether you're the fourth, fifth or sixth child, it is your right to have the support that the first and second children had. So, I absolutely don't buy that, and that is what we should expect from the UK Government, because in the sixth-largest economy in the world, we should be focusing on the needs of children. This is something that the Welsh Government can do, but it has to be done in collaboration with the UK Government.

As we've heard already, there is an urgent need for a new approach and for new solutions to the problem of child poverty the length and breadth of Wales, because, staggeringly, 25 per cent or more of children are living in poverty in 94 per cent of our constituencies. That is shocking: in almost every constituency in Wales around a quarter of children are living in poverty, so it's a problem across Wales.

However, the solutions are not the same in every part of the country. We know, for example, that the factors that cause poverty as well as the consequences of poverty in rural areas are different to those in urban areas. In most cases, rural poverty remains difficult to identify and is often ignored or downplayed, including those living in poverty.

We also know from various studies that rural poverty is a multidimensional and complex phenomenon. According to the Bevan Foundation, rural families face a triple squeeze, with rapidly rising living costs, low wages, and insufficient support from the state, including unreliable public services. And as a result, many parents are being forced to make the cruel, exceptionally difficult choice between heating their homes or feeding their children.

We know that failures of policy in different areas have a greater impact on families in rural communities and contribute to worse than average poverty levels. These include poor public transport links, a lack of affordable housing, higher energy costs, piecemeal childcare provision, patchy digital access, limited access to training and barriers to further education, and of course fewer well-paid job opportunities.

Added to this is the uncertainty facing the farming sector in light of the current changes to agricultural payments, which is exacerbating the matter, and as we know, family farms are the backbone of Wales's rural economy. A recent report on rural poverty by the Bevan Foundation showed that rates of pay for workers in rural areas are comparatively low. For example, a worker in Arfon is about £1,000 per annum worse off than a comparable worker in other parts of Wales, and about £3,000 poorer than the equivalent worker in the rest of the United Kingdom.

The effects of poverty can last a lifetime. It impacts children’s health, well-being, confidence and education. All of this can make it harder for young people to stay in their communities and build a future close to home. Barnardo’s Cymru, in their manifesto launch today in the Senedd, shared data from a poll they carried out with the Bevan Foundation that showed that 43 per cent of parents thought their children’s opportunities at the age of 18 would be worse than their own. Forty-three per cent. This clearly shows how the negative impact of poverty blights life opportunities and erodes confidence and hope amongst young people. There is nothing worse for people living in dire hardship than the absence of hope.

That’s why we need a clear, targeted approach to tackle child poverty, including a particular focus on rural areas. Policies must address the specific challenges these communities face whilst also creating real economic opportunities for young people. Last year, I put forward a rural poverty strategy that included a proposal, as we've heard already—referenced by many in Plaid Cymru—for a child payment, similar to the one in Scotland. The evidence is clear that giving direct financial support to families is one of the most effective ways to reduce poverty and improve outcomes for children, and this is something that Plaid Cymru will do in Government. Finally, I also proposed entrenching the process of rural-proofing across all areas of Government policy, through the creation of a statutory duty.

So, finally, the Welsh Government has an opportunity to support these proposals and make a real difference for families across the country. It’s time to act in a way that gives every child the chance to thrive, no matter where they live, and to remove the dreadfully ingrained stigma and struggle associated with poverty.

I stand here this afternoon having listened to the debate that we had on the economy, and it's difficult to decouple what we heard earlier from this debate, because those links are so clear. What angers me is the lack of awareness from the Tories of the poverty that has been created here in Wales and that things got worse, because we are all duty-bound, aren't we? Why is any of us here? What made you want to become a Member of the Senedd? Well, I would hope, when I'm asked that question in schools, as you are, that it's because we wanted to make a difference, because we wanted to improve things in our communities. I very much hope that none of you, when you're asked that question, as I am, respond by saying that you want to make things worse for people, because that's not why we're here. We are duty-bound.

Unless we can resolve this—poverty—and give every child in Wales the best possible start, then why are we here? Yes, we can blame things that happen elsewhere, but we have to take responsibility too for the fact that it's political decisions that lead to poverty, which means that political decisions can resolve the issue of poverty too. So, we can blame each other, but we are also duty-bound to look at alternative ideas, to look internationally at things that do work and where that evidence exists, to have that confidence to introduce those policies.

And that's what we have here today: a serious motion for a critical situation in relation to poverty in Wales. After all, we have a future generations Act in Wales, something that I'm very proud of, but for a child in Wales who may go to bed hungry, who has an ill-fitting uniform, who can't go on that school trip, and who sometimes can't even go to school because their parents can't afford the bus fare—and that's happening here in Wales now, in the communities that I represent—can we really truly turn to them and say that we are there for them and for future generations, that we are doing everything within our ability for future generations? No, we can't. So, we are duty bound not just to talk about what we do, but to transform people's lives.

Because at a time when some people seem to have plentiful resources, to have more money than they could ever dream of spending—and thank you, Jenny, for reminding us of our wealth as a nation—some people are getting wealthier, but more and more people are getting poorer. The fact that foodbanks have become so normalised in our communities is something that is disgraceful. It's something that people will study in the future and think how shameful it is that we didn't take action. And I would like, again, to ask the Welsh Government to say in their response: how are we going to stop the need for foodbanks to exist? Because the latest report by Trussell around hunger in Wales should shame all of us—shame all of us—that this is the reality in Wales today. Too many children are currently being failed and they're being punished because of inaction. If we don't get to grips with child poverty, have these targeted plans and actually start to see improvements, then I don't think we should be going across the world talking about our future generations Act, if we're not improving the lives of children here in Wales.

Casework is something that all of us take extremely seriously, and poverty is something that strikes me as something that no-one should have to live with. Visiting our foodbanks and seeing the fantastic work being done by charities, third sector organisations and volunteers, all of that can be at risk as well, with some of the national insurance contribution rises. I don’t want to see us talking about child poverty and all these plans and so on, I want to see action. So, I urge every Member here: ask yourselves today why you are here. And when you're voting for the motion, support the need for a child payment, which is proven to work. We need to see action, not action plans.

Walk through any community in Wales, and you'll see what is a simple truth: health outcomes are not distributed evenly. In some postcodes, people live well into their nineties; in others, chronic illness begins in their fifties and lives are cut short decades too soon. The strongest determinant of those outcomes is poverty. Poverty shapes whether a family can afford healthy food, whether their home is warm and safe, whether work or play damages their lungs, and whether they can access medical care when something goes wrong. The gap in healthy life expectancy between the most and least deprived parts of Wales is nearly 17 years for women and over 13 years for men. In plain terms, where you live determines how long and how well you live.

The inequalities begin before a child is even born. The first 1,000 days of life from conception to age 2 are the most critical period for physical growth, brain development and emotional well-being. Yet children growing up in poverty are much more likely to face risks, even in those earliest days. Higher rates of smoking in pregnancy, lower rates of breastfeeding and greater likelihood of infant mortality. By 18 months, income-related gaps in language development and school readiness are already visible. That means disadvantage is built in before a child has even reached the school gates.

Persistent poverty in early life increases the risk of obesity and long-term health conditions later on. Chronic stress in these first years affects brain development, undermining mental health, emotional regulation and cognitive skills. The evidence is overwhelming: poverty in the first 1,000 days leaves a lasting mark.

As children grow, these inequalities widen. Cancer survival rates are nearly 20 percentage points lower in our poorest communities, compared with the wealthiest. Respiratory illness is more than twice as likely to be fatal in deprived areas, and obesity remains a pressing concern. Over a quarter of children aged four to five carry an unhealthy weight. In some areas, obesity when a child starts at school is as low as 9 per cent, but in more deprived areas, like Neath Port Talbot, it rises to 14 per cent or even up to 16 per cent. Severe obesity affects around 3.1 per cent of children, with almost double the rate in our poorest compared to our wealthiest areas.

The same inequality is clear in mental health. In 2023, one in five children aged eight to 16 in England were identified with a probable mental disorder, with rates higher among those growing up in poverty. Families struggling to get by are least able to afford the extra-curricular activities, safe housing and healthy food that support well-being.

If we are serious about tackling cancer, heart disease, mental illness, respiratory illness and far more, then tackling poverty can't be treated as someone else's responsibility. Tackling poverty is a health policy. It's prevention. It's resilience. It's fairness. Every pound that we invest in reducing deprivation is a pound invested in longer lives, healthier communities and a stronger, more resilient NHS. Poverty shortens lives. Tackling it will save them.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice and Trefnydd—Jane Hutt.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. I'd like to thank Plaid Cymru for tabling this motion today.

We know that there are far too many children living in poverty. Our own statistics for the three years to 2024 show that 31 per cent of children are living in relative income poverty. The Joseph Rowntree Foundation is predicting this to be 32 per cent this year. There can be no hiding from these statistics. They're stark. They continue to show the scale of the challenge that children are facing every day.

This debate does give me the opportunity to reaffirm the Welsh Government's commitment to tackling child poverty as an absolute priority, using all the levers that we currently have at our disposal. Our child poverty strategy for Wales sets out the actions that we've been taking as a Welsh Government, signalling clearly our ambitions for the longer term. It outlines how we're working across Government, and with partners, to maximise the impact of the levers available to us to tackle child poverty.

I'll be publishing our report in early December on the delivery of the child poverty strategy. This will include our monitoring framework and evidence that we've gathered from those with lived experience of poverty. Between 2022 and 2026, we've invested over £7 billion in interventions that reduce costs and maximise the incomes of families, and keep money in the pockets of Welsh citizens, in line with objective 1 of our child poverty strategy.

As has been said in this debate, childcare is key to enabling parents to work. That, again, is identified in the Policy in Practice paper as key to tackling child poverty. Our childcare offer provides up to 30 hours of Welsh Government-funded nursery education and childcare for 48 weeks a year for eligible families.

We need to grow the workforce. We've increased the hourly rate to £6.40 for the childcare offer, and—as has been said and acknowledged—we're expanding our Flying Start childcare for two-year-olds in Wales, bringing Wales a step closer to the universal provision of childcare for all two-year-olds. This we agree on, and we seek to take forward together.

The Welsh Government is committed to ensuring that no child goes hungry. There is so much that we can agree on, and can agree on in this debate and in this motion, in how we tackle child poverty. Yes, we were the first UK nation to offer free school meals to all primary learners and, yes, it was as a result of our co-operation agreement with Plaid Cymru.

Our universal offer, alongside our school milk scheme and long-standing free school breakfasts in primary schools, means that Wales has the most generous food-in-school offer in the UK. It's important to put that on the record again for us today, making strides together. In 2021, the Bevan Foundation estimated that a free school meal was worth an average of £764 a year per child, and that averages to a financial contribution per child of just under £15 a week, getting money into the pockets of families for those children. I think this demonstrates the Welsh Government making a difference when we work together with the powers that we have. Our school essentials grant is providing £125 per eligible learner for all year groups up to year 11, with £200 for eligible learners in year 7, enabling children from low-income families to attend school and take part in activities at the same level as their peers.

I'm glad you'll take the intervention. You've given us a list again of the things that you've done—some of which we've done in partnership, and we're proud of that—but we know, as Delyth Jewell said, that we have a glaring warning showing us that Wales is going to see the highest rate of child poverty by 2029. So, why do you think the things that you've done over the last 26 years haven't resulted in a reduction in child poverty?

I think the strongest action that can be taken to making an impact on child poverty levels today is through social security policies, and that comes over very clearly in all the evidence, and, indeed, in the Policy in Practice report. That's why I've consistently raised with this UK Government, through the four-nation engagement on the UK child poverty strategy. Along with the First Minister and the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Welsh Language, I've consistently called, and we've debated it this afternoon, for an end to the benefit cap and to the two-child limit. It was heartening to see the headlines, wasn't it, yesterday? Rachel Reeves is to lift the two-child benefit cap in the November budget. That is good news, and we've called for that. I know that will have the biggest impact in terms of social security policies on the child—[Interruption.] Yes, I'm just finishing my sentence, thank you, Deputy Llywydd. Thank you, Sioned.

Just a point of clarification on that, and I'm grateful to you for taking a further intervention. You're saying you're calling for an end of the two-child cap. Do you agree with the End Child Poverty coalition, for example, that that should be a full cap lifted for all? Is that what you're calling on Rachel Reeves to do in the November budget—a full lifting of it?

We've certainly called for that full lift in the two-child benefit cap, without reservation.

It is important, again, as I said, that we look at that child poverty review that the UK Government has done. I'm pleased that we can work with a Government, unlike the former Conservative Government, that is prepared to have a child poverty strategy, that is prepared to work across the four nations, that is prepared to hear me speak up as a Welsh Labour Minister, right from the word go, saying, 'This is the biggest impact you could have on tackling child poverty.'

I do want to acknowledge what Gordon Brown said last week, in 'Labour Works: Local Action on Child Poverty'. He said, 'The child poverty review is the time to show that as a society we are richer when we care for the poor, more secure when we come to the aid of the insecure, and when the strong help the weak, it makes us all stronger.'

Just returning to the specific point in the debate, I think it's important that we address the issue about the Scottish child payment. As Members are well aware, and we've discussed it, we simply don't have the devolved powers to legislate for a scheme along the lines of the Scottish child payment, but we recognise the progress that the Scottish Government has made with the child payment. We have actually committed to working with the Scottish Government to better understand the legislative, fiscal and other resources that would be required for us in Wales to make a payment at this time. We are doing research, as you know, to explore the infrastructure required to devolve the administration of welfare—I remember John Griffiths calling for this many moons back in his local government review—and identify those elements of the reserved social security system the Welsh Government could administer.

So, diolch yn fawr, Dirprwy Lywydd. I think this is a very important debate today and I thank you for tabling it. My final point is that we are focusing our budget, our resources, our efforts and our powers on making the difference today to the children and families that need it most. And we can and will work together to make this change to tackle child poverty in Wales. Diolch yn fawr.

I call on Sioned Williams to reply to the debate.

Thank you, and thank you to everyone who's participated. It was disappointing to hear the Conservatives' response, as Delyth said, not believing that any idea that is effective is worth looking at in terms of Wales. And I was very disappointed with Altaf Hussain's contribution, I have to say. He didn't offer any ideas of his own, just talked down the ideas that we know work. It didn't make any sense, truth be told.

Delyth's emphasis on Valleys communities was entirely right, and she drew attention to that clear warning in terms of 2029 and the risk that Wales will have the highest child poverty rates in the UK if we don't do something differently.

Jenny, I really appreciate your contribution, and absolutely agree with you on the wealth tax. We have 1 per cent of people in this country who have more wealth than 70 per cent combined, and 16 million people live in poverty. And as you said, many of them—they call themselves the patriotic millionaires—are open to this tax. So, why aren't we acting? And I think you've put your finger on it. There are vested interests who control Governments and the press and the media in this country, and we need to change the narrative on that. Also, I think you were right to talk about the importance of control over welfare powers, so we can chart our own course in this country with our own values, also drawing attention to the disjointed and unaffordable nature of childcare provision in Wales and the effect that that has on poverty.

Cefin then talked about rural areas. It's so important that we know that there is a need for us not to have a one-size-fits-all approach. Communities have different characteristics and different challenges, and there's a specific dimension to poverty in rural areas. There’s that frightening, sobering statistic that a quarter, 25 per cent, of children are living in poverty in 94 per cent of our constituencies, the constituencies, as Heledd told us, we all represent, and we have a duty to serve children in those communities.

Heledd spoke about taking responsibility and how political decisions create poverty, but that it's also political decisions that will solve poverty. And I share the concern in terms of poverty, foodbanks, and so on, being normalised.

Mabon, you're so right to point out that the health, both physical and mental, outcomes are not distributed evenly in Wales. We know that the strongest determinant of those outcomes is poverty, and how those first 1,000 days—because we're talking about child poverty here, aren't we—leave that lasting mark.

Cabinet Secretary, I'm grateful for your response. We did again, as I said, hear that list of things that you have been doing. All, of course, are welcome, and, as I said, some of those we've done in partnership. You say that the strongest—you made that emphasis, didn't you—things that we could do here to shift the dial are not currently devolved, and that's social security policy. You said that work is ongoing on that, but you did again make reference even to one of your own Members many moons ago calling for this. I've been in this place four years. I've been calling for it for over four years and people who've been here since 1999, both on these benches and other benches, have been calling for those powers. Now that we have a Labour Government in the UK, after all those years of destruction and austerity and misery under the Tories, why isn't this happening? Why isn't it happening faster? We could have asked for it when—you referenced Gordon Brown—Gordon Brown was in power with Tony Blair. Why didn't it happen then?

Anyway, I'd like to just end by taking us back, actually, to the last Senedd election. We in this Chamber are very focused now on the next one, but just before the last Senedd election, the then First Minister, who is now, obviously, the finance Minister, was asked by Adam Price what answer he would give to the question of what should his Government have done better, looking back at his time in office. He didn't reference doing better on child poverty, but then, when he was asked a more hypothetical, philosophical question—as Adam is wont to do—as to what powers would he choose to leave in Westminster's hands, given at that time the possibility of further years of Tory rule, the First Minister then replied, and I quote,

'There are many things we could debate as to which matters would be left at a UK level. The key thing for my party is that all those things would be agreed, that we are a voluntary association of four nations...A voluntary association of four nations means that we agree the things that we choose to operate at a UK level. It's in our hands, not in the hands of Westminster to determine it.'

But, as the Government's motion makes clear, that's not true, is it? You may say you don't agree with the two-child cap, but the decision is in the hands of Westminster, by now Labour hands, and, in four years' time, welfare could be in the hands of far less progressive forces. You haven't asked for the powers that you say we need to make a vital difference now, or to safeguard our nation's children's futures.

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

Rhun ap Iorwerth, did you want to raise a point of order?

It's all right. I'll write to you.

Okay. Thank you.

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

Before I move on to the votes, there is a Member whose voting seems to be from his car and, therefore, I will not be accepting that vote, in accordance with guidance that has been issued.

The first vote this evening is on item 5, debate on a Member's legislative proposal. I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Mick Antoniw. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 34, 15 abstentions and none against. Therefore, the motion is agreed.

The next vote is on item 7, the Welsh Conservatives' debate on the economy. I call for a vote on the motion without amendment, tabled in the name of Paul Davies. If the motion is not agreed, we will vote on the amendments tabled to the motion. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 13, no abstentions, 36 against. Therefore, the motion is not agreed.

I now call for a vote on amendment 1, tabled in the name of Jane Hutt. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 will be deselected. Open the vote. Close the vote.

My apologies. I've got to do some calculations as to how I work the screen out, because it was tied, but I have to take one vote away, so it's not tied. So, I've got to try and sort my screen out.

In favour 24, no abstentions, 25 against. Therefore, amendment 1 is not agreed.

I now call for a vote on amendment 2, tabled in the name of Heledd Fychan. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 11, no abstentions, 38 against. Therefore, amendment 2 is not agreed.

As the Senedd has not agreed the motion without amendment and has not agreed the amendments tabled to the motion, the motion is therefore not agreed.

The final vote this evening will be on item 8, the Plaid Cymru debate on child poverty. I call for a vote on the motion without amendment, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. If the motion is not agreed, we will vote on the amendments tabled to the motion. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 11, no abstentions, 38 against. Therefore, the motion is not agreed.

I call for a vote on amendment 1 tabled in the name of Jane Hutt. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 will be deselected. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 24, 1 abstention, 24 against. Therefore, the vote is tied. As required under Standing Order 6.20, I exercise my casting vote against amendment 1. So, amendment 1 is not agreed.

I call for a vote on amendment 2 tabled in the name of Paul Davies. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 13, 12 abstentions, 24 against. Therefore, amendment 2 is not agreed.

As the Senedd has not agreed the motion without amendment and has not agreed the amendments tabled to the motion, the motion is therefore not agreed.

And that concludes voting for today.

We will now move to the short debate, and I call on Joyce Watson to speak to the topic that she has chosen.

Please leave quietly.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. It's my pleasure to bring forward this evening's short debate. I'm delighted to give some of my time to Carolyn Thomas. I would like to thank the Wildlife Trusts Wales, for whom I'm honoured to be beaver champion, for their support in helping pull this debate together.

It's been some time since I had an opportunity to table a short debate, and with next year's election on the horizon, I reflected on the topics that I've used this platform to highlight over the nearly 20 years that I've represented Mid and West Wales—surface water flooding, blue-green recovery, rewilding—and today's debate touches on many of the themes that have interested and inspired me throughout my time as a Senedd Member. Indeed, I recall first learning about the feasibility studies on wild beaver release when campaigning for my first election soon after the Wildlife Trusts Wales began their beaver project in 2005. So, this is a debate long in the making. But it's also very current, with Government support here and in Westminster, and two decades of environmental campaigning and fieldwork coalescing to make now the time to deliver for beavers in Wales.

As I said, the Welsh beaver project has been investigating the feasibility of bringing wild beavers back to Wales since 2005. The main studies were undertaken between 2009 and 2012, investigating a range of topics, including beaver ecology, stakeholder opinion and beaver management. Ecological surveys undertaken to identify habitat suitability determined that there is abundant habitat, and that beaver reintroduction to Wales is both ecologically feasible and desirable. Six river catchments were selected as potential sites, and the project is currently focused on the Dyfi catchment, where a small number of beavers are living wild.

So, why should we introduce beavers to Wales? Primarily because, at a time when our rivers are under threat, they could be critical to improving water quality and reducing flood risk. Beavers are amazing eco engineers, innate wetland managers, restoring habitats, increasing biodiversity, preventing flooding and providing all manner of ecosystem services. They build dams only where needed, creating lush, diverse environments. They coppice trees, opening up the canopy to the benefit of smaller plants and wildlife and increase woodland health, riverbank stability and water quality.

I read an excellent account of how a farmer in Cornwall is using beavers to stop flooding. Since releasing a couple into an enclosure on his land in 2017, he says they've saved it from drought, prevented flooding in the nearby village, boosted the local economy and even improved oyster beds in Falmouth bay. And all the while, his farm is as economically productive as it was before. In short, re-establishing sustainable populations could breathe new life into our water system for the benefit of both wildlife and people.

But of course, any change in land management brings challenges. Some conflicts could arise from the presence of beavers, like localised flooding, crop damage and felling ornamental trees. Fish migration is a concern too, though, overall, beavers do have a positive effect on river health and therefore fish population. They have their innate diseases, but the parasites they carry are similar to other rodents, like rats and water voles. So, they're not bringing anything new into that ecosystem.

But we have to acknowledge and plan to mitigate these interactions, and the key to that is effective management. Crucially, beavers can be managed easily and at relatively low cost. We can learn on international models. Many European countries have developed robust beaver management systems. Bavaria has a 30-year history of beaver reintroduction, and it provides the best template for how conflict management can lead to the evolution of a system that encourages successful and sustainable co-existence between beaver and land user.

At the end of the last term, I hosted a Senedd screening of a new nature documentary that explores those particular issues. Produced by the Beaver Trust and wonderfully narrated by Dame Joanna Lumley, Balancing the Scales examines the relationship between beavers, fish and our river ecosystem.

And in recess, Carolyn, my colleague, and I joined the Welsh beaver project team at Cors Dyfi, where an enclosure supports a family of beavers. In fact, it's one beaver now. We discussed proposals pending approval by Natural Resources Wales to introduce a few more at the site and to improve the genetic health, and also a new enclosure near Tregaron where the organisation is working with the landowner on lots of exciting and innovative conservation work.

I would like to thank my colleague Joyce Watson for tabling this short debate and for giving me a minute of her time. According to legend, beaver taught salmon to jump—calling to mind images of salmon leaping over beaver dams. Beaver dams benefit a multitude of other species, including otters, trout and salmon. Some birds nest on top of their lodges. Beaver ponds store cool water in summer and create habitat. They are an important part of ecosystems. They improve water quality. They help prevent flooding and save land from drought. They don't eat fish. They are herbivores, living on leaves, grasses and some aquatic plants. They eat the inner bark of trees when the others are in short supply. They stay near their habitat. They don't overbreed, managing the population themselves. They are an important part of ecosystems, and I support the licensed reintroduction here in Wales, along with the species champion, Joyce Watson.

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

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Dirprwy Lywydd. Prynhawn da. Good afternoon, everyone. It's a real pleasure to be here today to speak on a topic that, as Joyce said in her opening remarks, is both timely and potentially transformative for our natural environment, namely the managed reintroduction of the European beaver in Wales. I'd like to take this opportunity to thank Joyce Watson MS, who is the dedicated species champion, nominated by Wales Environment Link for the European beaver, for her continued momentum and passion, which, I've got to say, has been vital in keeping this important conversation moving forward, and also for the work of Carolyn and others as well in support.

Now, as part of our broader commitment to tackling the climate and the nature emergencies, Welsh Government is proud to support this initiative. It's one that does reconnect us with a species that once played such a vital role in shaping our landscapes. Beavers, as has been remarked, are often called nature's engineers, and it's for good reason. They were native to Wales before being hunted to extinction centuries ago. So, their return would be not just symbolic, but actually, from a Welsh Government policy perspective, strategic too. Beavers are a keystone species, which means their presence has a disproportionately positive impact on biodiversity, and on the overall health of our ecosystems. As you've remarked already, we can take just one example, which is our water.

Water is one of our most fundamental resources, for people and for nature. We know that we have to clean up our rivers. At the water quality summit only last week, I stressed how the current state of our waterways in Wales is rightly a cause for concern for people up and down the country. Too many of our rivers are too polluted, and that can't continue. And the dam building activities of beavers, nature's engineers, create wetlands that store water, helping to mitigate flood risks further downstream. They filter pollutants, improving water quality in our rivers, and they support biodiversity because they provide those habitats for countless species, from amphibians to birds, to aquatic native plants. In short, beavers can help us build climate resilience and naturally restore our ecological balance. So, that's why, indeed, as has been remarked, last year we announced our support for managed reintroduction, and since then we've been working very closely with Natural Resources Wales and a wide range of stakeholders to shape a responsible path forward. So, today, I'm very pleased to announce that we will take forward legislation to recognise beavers as a native species and give them the important legal protection as a European protected species. This means it will be an offence to deliberately harm beavers or to damage their habitats. Indeed, earlier this year we undertook a targeted engagement exercise to gather views on the proposed amendments to legislation around beavers, and the decision announced today following that engagement will bring Wales now into line with that legislation that's in place in England and in Scotland.

Can I just ask, please: will that be done in this legislative programme, this particular year, before we dissolve as a Parliament?

Thank you, Joyce, for that intervention. Yes, I can absolutely confirm the legislation will be brought forward in this Senedd term before we get to this election by this Welsh Labour Government, and we'll do it proudly.

I'd like to thank all those who took part in the stakeholder engagement for providing a really well-balanced and constructive view of both the benefits and some of the concerns as well. Whilst the response was largely positive, we also fully acknowledge the legitimate concerns raised by stakeholders, including those within the fisheries sector. Now, look, as salmon species champion, which I still am, I'm especially mindful of the need to protect our native salmon populations and the wider aquatic ecosystems they rely on. That's why, in taking this forward, we're committed to ensuring that robust management plans are in place—we will do this very carefully—and that further evidence is gathered wherever there are uncertainties. Natural Resources Wales will retain the requirement for licences for any release into the wild, and they will have the authority to issue management licences to mitigate adverse impacts.

Now, our support for reintroduction, as I say, is not without very careful consideration. This needs to be a managed process guided by evidence and collaboration. Natural Resources Wales has conducted a comprehensive review, and we will work closely with all those key stakeholders, landowners and, importantly, local communities, to ensure that all those voices are heard.

This is why I'm also announcing today that we are establishing the Wales beaver forum, which will meet in November, to ensure that collaborative, evidence-led approach to managing those concerns. This is about co-existence, not about conflict. Working together, we know that we need to go further than we have before, we need to challenge each other more than we have before, but we need to move quickly to make real improvements. The managed reintroduction of beavers aligns with our nature recovery action plan and our commitment to halt and reverse nature's decline. The managed reintroduction of beavers is just one example that shows our tangible, demonstrable commitment to delivering the ambition of the Environment (Principles, Governance and Biodiversity Targets) (Wales) Bill. It is a tangible step towards meeting future statutory biodiversity targets to reduce extinction risk of native species and effectively manage our ecosystems. Extending the legal protection to beavers not only supports our ambition to halt and reverse nature's decline, but it will also contribute to climate adaptation and help fulfil our international obligation for species recovery.

So, I'm very pleased, Dirprwy Lywydd, to make this beaver dam good announcement today—'dam', Dirprwy Lywydd. This is evidence of our further steps towards a Wales where nature is not just protected, but actively restored. Thank you for introducing this debate. I'm pleased to give that response, and thank you for all the supporters of managed reintroduction and the legal protection of beavers.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, and thank you, all. That brings today's proceedings to a close.