Plenary

The next questions will be those to the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice, and the first question is from Peredur Owen Griffiths.

Diolch yn fawr. Llywydd, I understand that you've given your permission to group questions 1 and 2. The Welsh Government is working to combat poverty across Wales, including in South Wales East, as a priority. Since 2022, we've invested over £7 billion in interventions that reduce costs, maximise the incomes of families and keep money in the pockets of Welsh citizens. In February, the first baby bundles will be delivered to eligible families.

Thank you for that response.

I welcome the announcement of the UK Labour Government on scrapping the two-child limit on benefits. Like many, I'm wondering why it took your party colleagues so long to shelve such a callous and cruel policy. Thousands of families across Wales have been pushed into poverty, or deeper into poverty, as a result of this policy since its introduction in 2017. The Bevan Foundation have demonstrated in their research that increasing access to funded childcare and the introduction of a child payment for families that most need it would be crucial components in this fight. Both policies are commitments of Plaid Cymru in the event that we win the next Senedd election. Do you regret that your Government has not implemented such policies and made inroads into reducing the unacceptable poverty levels across the country?

Diolch yn fawr, Peredur. The Welsh Government very much welcome and called for the Chancellor's action in the budget, that the two-child limit will be removed, and it's important we can again say that today. It's simply not right that children have been forced to live in poverty as a direct result of the decisions taken by the previous UK Government. I'm sure colleagues across the Chamber will want to know that, according to the UK Government, the announcement will bring relief to 69,000 children in Wales who have been denied financial support from the UK benefit system. In South Wales East, and we're looking at that particularly, around 5,900 children are currently excluded from their parents' universal credit claim because of the two-child limit. But, from April, that changes. For the first time, parents and guardians will be entitled to have a child element for these children included in the calculation of the universal credit maximum award. The child element is worth £303.94 per month for each child, and I think also it's important just to put into perspective that a parent in South Wales East with four children, two of whom were born after April 2017, could see their monthly universal credit award increase by £607.88—a significant boost to their household income. So, I'm grateful I can put that on the record.

Of course, as you know and as I've already reported, we don't have the powers to introduce or implement a child payment in Wales, but we are looking closely at the arrangements in Scotland in terms of their powers and what would be needed—the work that we're doing in terms of devolving the administration of benefits in Wales, which would give that power.

But I think it is very important, in relation to childcare, that we do look at the Flying Start £25-million expansion—the further expansion of Flying Start childcare—and the £120 million for childcare availability. But, again, back to welcoming that real boost for families in terms of removing the two-child limit.

Thank you for your answer, Cabinet Secretary. I was listening intently. Early intervention and prevention is key to tackling the root cause of poverty. As Newport City Council's own anti-poverty strategy states, and I quote,

'It is important that the Council, other public bodies, and organisations can identify, and provide the necessary early intervention to prevent people from reaching a crisis point and falling into poverty.'

However, the Newport-based charity called Sparkle, which supports hundreds of Gwent children and young people with complex needs and their families, preventing them from hitting a crisis point, includes poverty as well. They have been facing a precarious financial position in recent times. Sparkle runs a £200,000 deficit year on year and relies on large unplanned-for donations to bail them out, which by their very nature are unpredictable and do not ensure the long-term sustainability of the charity. Many parents, carers and families say that Sparkle is a lifeline they could not do without, and the charity's waiting list continues to grow rapidly. So, I would like to know, Cabinet Secretary, when will the Welsh Government deliver on the rhetoric of early intervention and truly support our charities and third sector bodies to combat poverty across south-east Wales once and for all? Thank you.

Thank you very much, Natasha Asghar. Also, I'd say I am also very aware of the great work done by Sparkle and, of course, the work I know Jayne Bryant and John Griffiths, as Newport representatives, have drawn attention to. I would like to look again at ways in which not only Newport council, as an authority, but also the Welsh Government can look at the needs of Sparkle as a charity and, clearly, the access to grants available locally, nationally and through trust funding. So, that our third sector colleagues and officials also will look at that I think will be the next step.

Cabinet Secretary, one important way to tackle poverty is to help people move into work. When families have parents in work, it's transformative for those families in terms of their standard of living and prospects. In Wales, I think to address economic inactivity requires the Welsh Government's employability programmes to work very closely with the UK Government's Jobcentre Plus and, indeed, welfare policy. What would you say about that working relationship, Cabinet Secretary, in terms of how it can be strengthened to ensure that that necessary joint working really does help address and tackle economic inactivity in Wales?

Thank you for that question, John Griffiths. This is where I think there are other announcements, not just the lifting of the two-child limit, for which I've given the very welcome information about the numbers of children who will benefit in your constituency. And can I just say that what is important, as well, in terms of those figures is the number of children who are predicted to come out of poverty—a key call from the Bevan Foundation? I know that you would welcome, as well, the UK Government's commitment to make work pay through increases in the national living wage and the national minimum wage. This is also important to encourage people back into the workforce, as you say. And what's good about the rises in the national living wage and the national minimum wage is that they're based on the independent Low Pay Commission's recommendations, looking at cost-of-living needs and also labour market stability. But we are working on the Trailblazer programme and that's very much led by Jack Sargeant, embedding learning in our own Welsh Government employability support programmes, as well.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. There has been—. I'm a little confused, I was supposed to be after Peredur. It is about child poverty that I'll be asking, and then, as spokesperson, two questions. Is that right, Presiding Officer?

I called you for a supplementary. It's okay for you to ask a supplementary at this point—

So, shall I start the spokesperson questions?

No, you can ask your supplementary now, if you wish, and I'll call you for three during your—

Two.

No, I've made the mistake at this point. I'm confusing myself rather than anybody else. Do you want to ask a supplementary, or shall I leave it until we go on to the spokespeople?

That's right. I'll go to the child poverty first.

In the south-east?

Yes.

Yes, you carry on with that and I'll think about—[Laughter.]

Thank you very much. Cabinet Secretary, the UK Government's child poverty strategy has committed to ensuring that children do not grow up living in bed-and-breakfast accommodation. Sadly, far too many children in South Wales East and across the whole of Wales spent Christmas living in what is supposed to be temporary accommodation. Will the Welsh Government follow the UK Government's example and ensure that no child is forced to spend more than a week or two in temporary accommodation? Thank you.

Thank you very much indeed, Altaf Hussain. It is the UK Government child poverty strategy that we engaged with, all four nations engaged with. I think the input that we had, which did directly lead to the removal of the child limit, which your party and your previous Government introduced, and your party haven't supported, very much regrettably—. But we are absolutely key, as a Welsh Government, in making preventing homelessness a priority for children. It is very key to our child poverty strategy, as well as the UK Government's child poverty strategy. And I will just say, obviously, for my colleague Jane Bryant, preventing homelessness is a crucial priority to, for example, reduce the flow of people needing temporary accommodation. We are investing almost £220 million in homelessness prevention and housing support this year alone. I think we must look now to the new Homelessness and Social Housing Allocation (Wales) Bill in terms of transforming the response to those who are homeless in Wales, and particularly looking at this from the perspective of children and their families, and focusing on early intervention and prevention.

Before I call Rhianon Passmore on a supplementary to this question, just to confirm to Altaf Hussain that you will have two questions on your spokespeople questions. I'm implementing new guidance on questions today, and I've managed to confuse myself thoroughly on that guidance. So, for clarity, it will be two questions, Altaf Hussain. Rhianon Passmore.

Thank you. Diolch, Llywydd. I was both pleased and delighted to hear from the Cabinet Secretary that the very first baby bundles are set to be delivered to eligible families across Wales from February, and that, given the current weather, they will now also include clothing and warm blankets. Can the Cabinet Secretary today give any further information about how midwives will support in the delivery of this highly valuable and hugely practical initiative for our most vulnerable?

Thank you very much, Rhianon Passmore. I'm delighted that we can, and I hope all Members across the Chamber will be—. We're ensuring that there is a real awareness now of this new initiative, which is directly going to tackle child poverty, because we're offering now a baby bundle to many families across Wales. A baby bundle will include items such as a warm blanket and clothing, helpful information on where to turn for further support, and also midwives now are supporting eligible families to complete registrations. That started on 25 November, at 25 to 28-week antenatal appointments.

I think the Minister for Children and Social Care will also say more about this at the beginning of February, to mark the delivery of the first baby bundle. I also wanted to say, in terms of South Wales East, I'm sure Members will be pleased to hear that Elite Clothing Solutions, based in Ebbw Vale, have manufactured the bibs, the hats, the hooded towels, the reusable breast pads. Merthyr Tydfil Institute for the Blind are responsible for the assembly and fulfilment of the bundles, and Case-UK are the chosen call centre partners. So, I do hope there will be increased interest as a result of the questions today about the benefits and the contribution of our new baby bundle scheme here in Wales.

Questions now from the party spokespeople. First of all, the Welsh Conservatives spokesperson, Altaf Hussain.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Cabinet Secretary, last month, INQUEST, the charity that investigates state-related deaths, released their report into self-harm and suicides among the female prisoner population. Alarmingly, over a third of deaths in prison have been due to suicide, and incidents of self-harm among female prisoners have reached the highest level on record. INQUEST highlighted a number of cases where warning signs were ignored, including one instance where multiple suicide notes were disregarded. Sadly, the notes' author succeeded in taking her life. Whilst criminal justice is not devolved, the Welsh Government has a duty to protect the health and well-being of Welsh prisoners. What steps are your Government taking to protect these vulnerable female prisoners?

Thank you very much for that very sobering and important question to me this afternoon. As you say, whilst justice is currently a reserved matter, many of the services that are essential to operate both adult and youth justice, the secure estate and the probation service are devolved to us. Thank you for drawing attention to that report, which I will take forward in terms of discussions with His Majesty's Prison and Probation Service officials. I will also take the opportunity to raise this with Lord James Timpson; I have a meeting with him in the coming weeks. So, I’m particularly concerned, in my meeting with him, to raise the issue of women and justice. He chairs the women's justice board, and I hope that will be meeting imminently, and that I will get an update on progress with the residential women’s centre.

We know that so many women who are in prison are there because of circumstances in their lives—domestic abuse, poverty—and that he himself has said that those women, many of those women, should not be in prison and have been caught up in the criminal justice system. That’s certainly my view when I have visited prisons—HM Parc particularly—and I know the committee, the Equality and Social Justice Committee, has done good work on this.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. The Ministry of Justice called these deaths a tragic example of how the prison system is not working for most women. It certainly is not working for Welsh women forced to serve these sentences outside Wales, often hundreds of miles away from home. This is despite your Government's trauma-informed approach, favouring community-based alternatives to shorten prison sentences. It is also nearly two decades after the Corston report recommended replacing women's prisons with small secure units. Therefore, Cabinet Secretary, can we have an update on the residential women's centre in Swansea? Are we likely to see this 12-bed centre during 2026?

Thank you for that. I think I did respond to that earlier on when I made my contribution in terms of the forthcoming meeting I'm having with Lord Timpson. But also, I met before Christmas with Dr Rob Jones, who produced a really important fact file, particularly looking at the imprisonment of women in Wales. We are going to have a round-table with Dr Rob Jones, and those who are involved in the criminal justice system in Wales, particularly from a social justice perspective. This is about social justice and our vision for justice, which we are seeking, as you know, to devolve, is for a preventative trauma-informed approach.

We do work to realise this vision through pursuing the case for the devolution of policing and justice. And we want to also see the good work, which we will discuss when we have this round-table, that is taking place to keep women out of prison, to enable women to access day centres as well, which we have in Wales, as well as pursuing the case and the progress of the residential women's centre.

Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Sioned Williams.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Cabinet Secretary, I’d like to ask you about the concerning report published by the Equality and Human Rights Commission shortly before Christmas. The report concludes that, under this Welsh Government, human rights are at risk, and that Wales is falling short of several of its international human rights commitments.

One of the clearest areas of failure identified is in relation to the rights of disabled people. Those findings are echoed by disabled people themselves across recent surveys undertaken by Disability Wales. Disabled people in Wales have consistently raised deep concerns about the lack of enforcement of their rights. The EHRC also highlights the urgent need for the Welsh Government to improve disabled people’s access to health services. Now, while, of course, I welcome the publication of the disabled people’s rights plan, concerns remain, in particular around the lack of clear, measurable targets, and additional resources to support its aims. We also cannot ignore, of course, the impact of the continued failure to implement the UNCRPD, despite the Government’s commitment to do so.

So, Cabinet Secretary, in light of the EHRC’s findings, and the message from disabled people themselves, can you set out how you’re going to respond to this report? Diolch.

Diolch, Sioned Williams. I’m really pleased that you did refer to the disabled people’s rights plan, which we launched on 15 December. And that was launched in collaboration with disabled people who helped bring that plan together—members of the disability equality forum and the disability rights taskforce. And you know the history of this, that this was established in direct response to the 'Locked out' report, reflecting our commitment to working with disabled people to challenge inequalities. And I think the recommendations that have come out now informed our disabled people's rights plan, which includes a whole range of issues, including health and social care. The plan is all underpinned by the United Nations convention on the rights of disabled people—the right to independent living, social protection, and also a proper standard of living without discrimination. It is a cross-Government plan, it's a 10-year ambition. I know when we all met with Disability Wales, it is part of their manifesto to all political parties that they will commit themselves to implementing the disabled people's rights plan, and I hope that will be the case for the next Government so that disabled people can thrive in Welsh society.

I also think that it was very valuable for us all to attend, cross-party, the launch of 'Access to Politics: Charter for Political Parties' yesterday, because what we need to do is ensure that disabled people are actively engaged in our Senedd and in politics. That is up to all of us across this Chamber.

Diolch. Engagement with policy making is key, isn't it? And last year, of course, was a desperately worrying year for disabled people, with the UK Government targeting them for cuts to support that they rely upon. The ongoing Timms review into welfare continues to cause widespread anxiety, with any future proposals likely to disproportionately impact disabled people here. While Welsh disabled people's organisations are now, at long last, being consulted, there are still serious concerns about the quality of that engagement and the exclusion of disabled people, particularly in north Wales, from meaningful involvement.

When I last raised these issues, Cabinet Secretary, you said that you would be closely monitoring this review to ensure that any changes are fair and just and shaped by disabled people themselves. So, in light of the ongoing concerns raised by disabled people's organisations, can you set out how you're going to ensure that the Labour UK Government are meaningfully involving disabled people across all parts of Wales in their decision making? How often are you meeting with the Minister and his officials? And what action will you take to ensure that the outcome of the review is not to the detriment of disabled people in Wales?

Well, I'm grateful for that question, because it gives me the opportunity, again, to reassure you and Members across the Chamber that I'm closely involved in monitoring the developments in and the progress with the review of the personal independent payment. I am involved with the Minister directly—Sir Stephen Timms. I'm very glad that he took the opportunity to not only meet with me in the summer—last summer 2025, when this was launched—but also to meet with Disability Wales, to meet with the disability equality forum, which he met with me, and also to open up his review team to applications from disabled people in Wales.

Now, what has been made very clear through these meetings is that we want Welsh people represented on that review team. He has said to us that the UK Government and his officials have learnt from Wales about the way that we've approached co-production, the social model of disability, which is something where we feel that disabled people have had a huge influence on the way forward. And I will be monitoring it very carefully, and I am glad for the scrutiny as well today.

Diolch. We are now, of course, in the depths of winter and have just experienced a snap of very cold weather, which will have exacerbated the effect of fuel poverty, which we know disproportionately impacts disabled people. For disabled people, the consequences of struggling to heat their homes can be very severe. Many disabilities require people to keep warm in order to manage pain, mobility and overall health. When heating becomes unaffordable, health can deteriorate rapidly, quality of life is reduced and, in some serious cases, it can, of course, be life-threatening.

The Welsh Government's tackling fuel poverty plan was published in 2021. And you published an update on the plan's progress in June, under new actions, listing the need to introduce energy efficiency-based interim targets, stating that the revised fuel poverty estimates, which of course were published in October, would be used to develop these targets. There is growing concern that these targets may not be introduced before the end of the Senedd term. So, Cabinet Secretary, can you give a clear answer on whether it remains your Government's intention to introduce interim fuel poverty targets within this Senedd term? Diolch.

That is also a really important question, following up your focus on disabled people in these winter months and tackling fuel poverty. Of course, we have made tackling fuel poverty an absolute priority, investing in targeted programmes, and I do want to take the opportunity of again publicising the fact that we identified the scope for a targeted one-off cash payment to be made to a number of low-income disabled households. That's going to provide support to that particular cohort, for people in the council tax disabled band reduction scheme who also claim council tax reduction. That's a £100 cost-of-living payment. It's a Welsh Government payment, and this just shows how Wales can act directly to meet these needs. But, of course, we are now discussing, particularly with our fuel poverty advisory group, the issues of responding to the very worrying figures and estimates that have come out in terms of households, 25 per cent of households, being in fuel poverty, in terms of estimates back in October 2024, and I look forward to saying more about that as we work through those consultations.

Thank you very much, Peter. My oral statement of 7 October on keeping people warm this winter outlined our multipronged approach to help householders stay warm. Official figures released in August estimate that 25 per cent of households in Wales were living in fuel poverty, and we are committed to supporting those households affected by the global energy crisis.

Thank you for the response, Cabinet Secretary. The sad fact is that an estimated quarter of people in Wales are living in fuel poverty, affecting not only people's financial state, but also their health, as prolonged exposure to the cold can have incredibly detrimental impacts. It is therefore extremely concerning that the Welsh Government has failed to update its tackling fuel poverty plan for almost three years. The fact is that official estimates on the number of households living in fuel poverty were last calculated in 2021, I believe, and are now several years out of date. If the Welsh Government does not collect data efficiently, then we are not going to be able to get to the bottom of the crisis and begin to effectively tackle it. It is obviously far too late to call for the introduction of a new plan, with only months left of this Government, so will the Cabinet Secretary outline why the Welsh Government has failed to effectively act to tackle this important issue?

Thank you, Peter, for that follow-up question. You are aware, of course, that many of the root causes of fuel poverty are out of the Welsh Government's control, but I did, as I referred to my oral statement back in October, outline the cross-Government approach we're taking to help householders stay warm. I've just also again reported on this Welsh Government payment that we are making this winter, the £100 cost-of-living payment in relation to disabled people. We did announce a revised tackling fuel poverty plan in June. It included priority actions for the next two years. Now we're reviewing the plan, as I said in response to the earlier question. We're reviewing the plan following the release of the latest fuel poverty estimates, and the actions contained in the plan are all the more important in the context of the latest estimates.

Thank you, Carolyn Thomas. Our 10-year disabled people's rights plan sets out practical actions and long-term goals to tackle barriers across employment, transport, education, healthcare, housing, digital access and public services. We're making a £100 cost-of-living payment for people in the council tax disabled band reduction scheme who also claim council tax reduction.

Thank you for the answer, Cabinet Secretary, and for your commitment to ensuring that disabled people in Wales are able to access the support that they need and are entitled to. I know the Welsh Government has just launched a new initiative to proactively identify people in Wales who are missing out on £2 billion-worth of unclaimed benefits. Please could you outline how this campaign will directly benefit disabled people in Wales?

Thank you, Carolyn Thomas. We're delivering this winter our sixth 'Claim what's yours' national benefit take-up campaign. Accessible and creative messages are being delivered through all major channels—I hope you will have seen them—including tv, radio and social media. Please encourage people to respond, because they focus on all of the benefits that are available, particularly, in terms of your first question, to disabled people and their carers. People can contact our Advicelink Cymru service. It is not just a one-off burst of activity during the winter months; this is an ongoing activity. But we are focusing particularly on those people who need this most.

Just to give you some feedback, between 2020 and 2025, almost half of the people accessing services identified as a disabled person or a person with a long-term health condition. But all our income maximisation work is about putting money into people's pockets, money that they're entitled to, money that will also benefit the local community and economy, helping families pay household bills, avoid debt and improve their financial well-being.

Although, when you published the final 'Disabled people's rights plan 2025 to 2035' on 15 December, you stated that to secure meaningful progress for disabled people it is crucial that

'we and future administrations are held to account for delivering clear, measurable actions and outcomes that improve equality for disabled people in Wales',

and the plan itself states that it sets out its intention to deliver real, measurable change across a range of policy areas that affect the everyday lives of disabled people in Wales, the detail on this is still missing. How, therefore, does the published plan address the preceding statements by the Equality and Human Rights Commission that the draft plan lacked clear, measurable outcomes, time-bound actions and accountability mechanisms, and by disabled people's organisations represented on your disability rights taskforce that, without funding and clear, robust targets to implement the plan, it is very difficult to see how the plan will make a difference to disabled people in Wales?

Well, thank you very much, Mark Isherwood, and thank you for chairing the cross-party group on disabled people, which I regularly attend. You are referring to comments about the draft plan from the Equality and Human Rights Commission. Great progress has been made. That's why you have consultation following draft plans. Great progress was made to finally publish the full disabled people's rights plan, which I launched with disabled people. As I said, this is a 10-year plan. What's really important, and I have the opportunity to reassure colleagues across the Chamber, is that disabled people want to monitor how this plan is being implemented. That includes cross-Government, and it obviously includes financial commitments that have been made, and you saw that in my oral statement on the international day for disabled people. So, we are setting up an external independent advisory board to play a critical role in shaping the direction, monitoring progress and maximising the impact of the plan. That board is going to be set up before the end of this administration, so it will have a key part in terms of future Government engagement, in terms of delivering on the 10-year plan.

Thank you for the question. Immigration, asylum and border control are reserved matters for the UK Government. The Welsh Government doesn't decide who enters or the routes taken. Once people are placed in Wales, our focus is on essential support and community cohesion, helping those already placed here to settle and participate safely.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for your answer, but the actions of some councils across Wales are a responsibility, partly, of this Welsh Government. The Liberal Democrat and Labour-led Powys County Council have expressed an interest in a Home Office pilot in which homes will be built or acquired with public funding then be leased back to the Home Office for up to 10 years to house asylum seekers. While the council claims this will not affect those on housing waiting lists, I'm being contacted by local people who are sofa surfing and in temporary accommodation who are desperate for housing now and feel they've been overlooked for people arriving at this country illegally seeking asylum. Cabinet Secretary, can you explain how offering guaranteed accommodation in this way does not risk acting as a pull factor for people entering the UK illegally via different routes? Does she accept that many will see this as unfair at a time when local families are still waiting for a home? Cabinet Secretary, will you instruct councils across Wales not to enter this scheme, because I think it will be to the detriment of local people in my community?

I'm very pleased that I'm co-chairing, in fact, this week a nation of sanctuary oversight board. I co-chair that with the leader of Monmouthshire council, Councillor Mary Ann Brocklesby. It's a really important meeting, an oversight board on the way that we are working together to deliver on our aspiration for Wales to be a nation of sanctuary. Of course, the nation of sanctuary approach is designed to facilitate the integration of people arriving in Wales, enabling them to make meaningful contributions to Welsh communities.

I will go back to—. I don't know if you listened to my answer to the question, but I did say that immigration, asylum and border control are reserved matters for the UK Government. We don't decide who enters or the routes taken, and, indeed, of course, in terms of asylum accommodation, that is the case. But we are very pleased to work with the UK Government in terms of the Home Office and the Ministry of Justice, who also play a part in our nation of sanctuary oversight board in terms of asylum accommodation.

We advocate, as do the Welsh Local Government Association and our colleagues, for a proportionate dispersal model in Wales in collaboration with our partners in local government. Let's also look at the answer I made. This is about community cohesion. This is about securing support and safeguarding, meeting basic needs, fostering community cohesion for all those who are dispersed or resettled here. We strongly condemn criminal exploitation, and I know that you would agree with this, and unsafe migration routes. What is important is that the UK Government is testing a range of approaches to asylum accommodation and support pilot models, and we are engaging in this work, as are Welsh local authorities. I've encouraged that. Participation allows local authorities to see the benefits of effective asylum dispersal, and how integrating refugees can enrich communities.

Diolch, James, for raising this issue, because it goes to the heart of public confidence. Of course Wales should be compassionate, but compassion without control is not a policy, it's an invitation. The Welsh Government cannot pretend that its rhetoric and decisions have no impact, and we certainly can't pretend, like Plaid, that there is no such thing as immigration. Your virtue-signalling nation of sanctuary policy is effectively holding a neon sign over Wales saying, 'Come on in.' If we had a surplus of housing—we don't—if our NHS waiting lists were short—they're not—then fine. But Wales is on its knees, our public services are stretched to the max, thanks to Labour and Plaid's rule over the last 26 years. So, don't you think, Welsh Government, it's about time that you put Welsh families first? We need to look after our veterans, our vulnerable and our homeless, before we start inviting more people to this country.

Well, I presume—I would quite imagine—that Laura Anne Jones didn't take the opportunity, like many of us did in this Chamber, to meet Sanctuary Coalition Cymru. I think colleagues will remember we met with them before Christmas and what the message was—and I'm proud that the Welsh Government funds the Welsh Refugee Council—from Sanctuary Coalition Cymru is that sanctuary works for Wales. As they shared with us, why does it work for Wales? Why does it work for everyone? It works for communities, honest, respectful leadership, building trust between neighbours, reducing tensions, creating safer, more united places to live. It works for the economy, countering misinformation, avoiding unnecessary fear that can deter investment, deter tourism and community development. It works for public safety, reducing the spread of hate, which undermines extremist recruitment and lowers the risk of violence or disorder. It works for Government and leaders, it demonstrates integrity, it strengthens public confidence, and, of course, we can't afford to keep talented, willing workers on the sidelines. Strength, national pride, is what the nation of sanctuary is about.

Firstly, Cabinet Secretary, would you agree that asylum seekers are not taking the decision to come to this country lightly? They're not risking their lives, leaving family members behind and making dangerous journeys here, just simply because we are a nation of sanctuary. I think asylum seekers and refugees contribute to our society so much here in Wales, including the professional jobs, especially in the health service, and I think that's really important to remember when we talk about scarce resources. Social care as well: health and social care are staffed, in many ways, by people who have sought sanctuary here. And they also bring wonderful cultural traditions that we all celebrate and enjoy. So, shouldn't we continue to build on our nation of sanctuary, welcoming and supporting asylum seekers and refugees to all our benefit, individually and for Wales as a nation?

Julie Morgan, thank you for those important points. And how many of us in this Chamber have shared together so many of those important cultural events—cultural events throughout the whole of the year? And there will be more forthcoming in the coming weeks.

But can I also just particularly pay tribute to the Afghan and Ukrainian people who've come to live in Wales, escaping that violence, that conflict, of which they had no part, no say, no choice? They escaped, and the UK Government and the previous UK Conservative Government backed those resettlement schemes, and we're committed to building on our successful role in our welcome centres across Wales in refugee resettlement and asylum dispersal. I was very privileged to have a visit on 27 December from some Ukrainians who came to sing carols outside my house in our community. And the wonderful contribution that is being made by the Ukrainian people who are working in social care, who are working in education, working in our schools, working in our businesses, and now our Afghan citizens who've come to Wales, escaping that conflict. We do need safe and legal resettlement schemes, and that's the message I'm making to the UK Government, and I hope that this Chamber will support that.

Thank you, Rhianon Passmore. Over the last five years, Islwyn has received a total of £2.4 million in lottery funding. This includes £1.5 million from the National Lottery Community Fund, £367,000 from the National Lottery Heritage Fund, £190,000 from the Arts Council of Wales and £332,000 from Sport Wales.

The National Lottery has recently informed me after an inquiry that from April to August in 2025, the National Lottery awarded just £137,892 to community projects in Islwyn during that timescale. The Welsh Government will be cognisant that Islwyn is made up of several Gwent mining towns and villages that suffered from the industrial dismantling instigated by Margaret Thatcher's Conservative Government. How can the Welsh Government ensure that the National Lottery is reaching out to the people of Islwyn to drive awareness of the funding criteria—[Interruption.] Sorry, can I just continue? There's so much noise.

How can we ensure that the National Lottery is reaching out to the people of Islwyn to drive awareness of the funding criteria and that applicants are supported in how to apply for much-needed National Lottery funding? And crucially, Cabinet Secretary, how does this meagre amount during that period compare to other Welsh community projects across Wales?

Thank you very much, Rhianon Passmore. I have outlined the investment that does take place, and it's important that that's on the record. You'll know that Welsh Government has an influence on the National Lottery Community Fund. We set the policy directions and we're very clear about those priorities, conditions that must be strengthened for stronger, safer and more cohesive communities, enhancing social justice, mitigating the effect of poverty. But I also want to say that, in terms of the National Lottery Community Fund, it's committed to awarding more than 50 per cent of grants by volume to communities facing the highest levels of deprivation, as you've identified in your constituency, by the end of the corporate plan period 2024-27.

Diolch yn fawr, Adam Price. The Welsh Government is committed to ensuring that everyone in Wales has access to healthy, sustainable food. We are delivering this through the Welsh Government food forum, our community food strategy, local food partnerships and robust support for the food industry.

Cabinet Secretary, international human rights law already recognises a right to adequate food, including in the international covenant on economic, social and cultural rights. Wales has shown that we can embed United Nations treaty rights in devolved law, as we've done with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, albeit in a limited way. Given that the key levers are devolved—public health, schools, social care and much of food policy—will you support legislating for a right to food in Wales, either through a Welsh human rights Bill or a stand-alone right to food Bill, with clear duties on Ministers to prevent and reduce food insecurity and annual reporting to the Senedd on progress? Isn't this another opportunity for this Senedd and for Wales to lead the way on a matter that is of such vital importance to our people?

It is vitally important that our people in Wales, and indeed our food industry, benefit from the policies that I have outlined. We do believe, at this stage, in terms of what we do now, that meaningful progress on access to food is best achieved through practical, targeted interventions that support producers, protect the environment and address health inequalities. This is very much a cross-Government responsibility, which I share with the Deputy First Minister, strengthening local food partnerships and systems. And I do encourage you, Adam Price, and all Members to meet with their local food partnerships, which we are funding. In fact, I was looking back and there were debates on this, on the right to food, back in 2022. It's important that you've brought this back for us to look at in terms of what's happened since then. We have spent over £29 million since 2019 to support community food organisations. We've got the new community food strategy, the local food partnerships, so we don't feel that there's a current need to incorporate the right to food into Welsh law because of our existing measures, but we do need to, obviously, look at this in terms of the ambitions that we have to ensure that we do deliver in terms of food justice, which I believe is the overall goal and aim of this Government.

And finally question 8, Russell George.

Thank you, Russell George. The Welsh Government provides capital support for community facilities across Wales through our community facilities programme and our community asset loan fund. In addition, the Third Sector Support Wales infrastructure provides help and advice on sustainable funding, good governance, safeguarding and volunteer management to all voluntary sector organisations in Wales.

Thank you for your answer, Cabinet Secretary. The Minerva Arts Centre in Llanidloes is a valued facility. Sadly, it recently suffered a significant leak above the main gallery. What is positive is that, as an organisation, they were granted grant funding recently by the National Lottery Heritage Fund, which is of course positive news, but this recent damage causes some difficulties in being able to continue with the projects that were planned. As a charity, and along with the Quilt Association that is based at the centre, they've arranged fundraising events, to begin with a Raise the Roof event on 7 February to raise the £20,000 that's required. As well as encouraging people to help with the fundraising efforts, what other advice can be given or how can the Welsh Government support such an organisation and charity to raise the necessary funds?

Thank you very much for that question. I will ask my officials to engage directly with you in terms of support for the Minerva Arts Centre. It is interesting that they've got National Lottery heritage funding, because often that actually opens the door to other funding, and I would particularly draw attention to the community facilities programme. I've mentioned it. It provides grants of up to £25,000 and up to £300,000. That's a direct grant from the Welsh Government. It's particularly focused at capital, but I'm sure that—. And indeed we will engage with PAVO, the Powys Association of Voluntary Organisations, to see if we can find a way forward to support this organisation.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary.

The next item is questions to the Senedd Commission. The questions will be answered by the Llywydd. Question 1, Hannah Blythyn.

The Commission has no specific policy on non-disclosure agreements. When a member of Commission staff leaves the organisation, the expectation is that both sides keep confidential details of the employment of individual workers.

Thank you for that response, Llywydd.

It's a shame I can't actually see you at the moment in this Chamber. [Laughter.]

I appreciate that. Members here will be familiar that the original purpose of NDAs was to protect intellectual property or other commercial and sensitive information, but sadly they've become more commonly used to stop people from speaking out about really horrific experiences, often within the workplace. We've all seen and heard a number of high-profile cases in recent years around the globe, particularly in connection with things like the #MeToo movement. Personally, I've never used an NDA, nor do I ever foresee a circumstance within which I would wish to, and I very much welcome recent changes in UK employment rights legislation that will ban the use of NDAs to silence employees who have been subjected to harassment and abuse.

So, what I wanted to ask today, with that in mind, is: what consideration is the Commission giving to any guidance to sit alongside that new legislation? Also, is there any information that holds us to account in terms of any parameters in which Members would be able to use NDAs and have used NDAs? And do you agree with me, potentially, in looking at the work we're doing as a Senedd to strengthen this place, that we should go beyond the letter of that new law and the Senedd should take the position that NDAs should also not be used in cases such as workplace bullying? Diolch.

Well, that legislation is now in place and guides all Members and guides the Commission on what it can and cannot do. Any Member who seeks advice from the Commission and from our Member support service on employment agreements will be given that advice in accordance with the law. Sometimes, unfortunately, employment and settlement agreements are necessary, and confidentiality clauses in those settlement agreements are important for both the employer and the employee. But the point that Hannah Blythyn makes from beyond this pillar is an important point for all of us to remember, and the Commission as well: that we operate within the law and we always need to take the best possible legal advice on complying with that law and ensuring that we treat all our staff as individual Members, and Commission staff, fairly and appropriately and legally, in all our work.

Again, another Member beyond the pillar for me.

The rules for the operation of cross-party groups agreed by the Standards of Conduct Committee set out the support that the Commission provides to CPGs. CPGs have access to Senedd facilities and resources, including room bookings and associated meeting arrangements and the provision of interpretation. The rules for the operation of CPGs are administered by the Table Office, which is always available to advise Members if they have any queries. But it's important to remember, of course, that Members lead and facilitate the CPGs, not the Commission.

Thank you very much for your answer, Llywydd. I'd like some guidance from you on whether a CPG can take monetary sponsorship from an outside body to enable Members to go on trips or to help facilitate with transport costs or hotel costs. Because what we do see sometimes is that if Members want to go on trips associated with CPG visits, sometimes we're not allowed to do that or claim them back, even though it's sometimes associated with our work as Members of the Senedd. So, I'd just be interested to hear from you whether you could provide some updated guidance on what monetary sponsorship can be provided by outside bodies to CPGs.

As I said in my answer, advice to Members on CPGs is best sought from the Table Office or, in the context of financial support, from the Members' business service. Some of that work, as you've noted, may well be to undertake parliamentary duties within the context of a CPG, and the determination, of course, will guide on whether that is something that can be funded.

On external financial support by third parties, of course, that is something that cross-party group members can avail themselves of, but they would need to seek advice from the Table Office in order to ensure that that complies with all declared interests and is reported as part of the CPG reporting and transparency guidance. So, there is advice available to Members. As is often the case, I'm not the best person to give that advice. There are people who can do that directly to you. I'd point you in the direction of the determination and Member support and the Table Office.

Thank you, Llywydd.

Item 4 is the topical questions. There is one question today, from Siân Gwenllian.

We're in contact with the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero and Ofgem to ensure that households impacted by the ECO closure receive quality retrofit projects, including those whose initial installers are no longer trading. Alongside our partners, Jobcentre Plus, Working Wales, local authorities and TUC Cymru, we will support CES staff through this difficult time.

Thank you very much. Nearly 300 people have lost their jobs, without any notice, following the news that Consumer Energy Solutions has entered administration. This is extremely difficult news for the workers and their families, and I really do hope, as you said, that every form of support is being provided to them during this very difficult and concerning time.

The news is also extremely worrying for those households that have been suddenly left with work that is half-finished or with work that is substandard. They want to know how they can rectify those problems now that the company is no longer available. My fellow Member in Westminster, Liz Saville Roberts, is dealing with a great number of cases of this kind in her constituency. So, what discussions are you having with the UK Government about how to ensure that the work that was started by CES will be completed, that the remedial work that some homes need will be undertaken, or that people will receive the compensation that they deserve?

There are entirely unacceptable examples of people living without heat or without water, and we must remember that these are some of the most vulnerable people in our society. So, what can the Welsh Government do to support individuals and families who have been affected? Plaid Cymru is calling for an inquiry into the whole situation. Is the Welsh Government considering holding an inquiry, or could you press for an investigation by a body such as the National Audit Office?

ECO4 coming to an end without the assurance of alternative plans puts huge pressure on every business in this area as well. So, how are you going to rebuild confidence in the business community and among the public so that there is investment still happening in developing the skills and the local supply chains that are needed to deliver the Welsh Government's retrofit programmes?

Clearly, this will be a really concerning and worrying time for the almost 300 staff who have been made redundant by Consumer Energy Solutions on Friday. We have put steps in place already to support them in finding alternative employment or retraining opportunities. As I mentioned, we do work really closely with partners, including Jobcentre Plus, the local authorities, Working Wales, and TUC Cymru to make sure that people have all the information, advice, support and guidance that they need about what's available to them.

Officials in the Welsh Government have directly contacted the appointed administrators, KR8 Advisory Ltd, to arrange for details of our support to be made available to the individual staff members. Welsh Government officials have also met with the directors of City Energy Group. Yesterday, they confirmed that almost all of the affected staff are based in the Swansea area. For the approximately 60 staff employed in that contact centre, we will be working with Cnect Cymru to find alternative opportunities for them.

We are also really aware of all of the quality issues that have been drawn to our attention. Actually, there was an audit in 2025, and the audit of solid wall insulation works carried out through the ECO scheme highlighted extremely high levels of poor workmanship. The UK Government did take some immediate action. They suspended some of the worst performing installers and offered every household a survey of their property to identify any issues that needed rectifying. Installers are required to carry out that work at their own cost.

We don't have details at the moment of the level of complaints or remediation works associated with CES, but given the size of the activity under ECO, we do expect that there will be outstanding complaints. We have heard some examples, and many of us will have read about those examples also in the press. We know that there are cases where the work has not been resolved. We have raised specific cases with the UK Government and with Ofgem, and we are waiting for confirmation now of the scale involved and any proactive communications that are being undertaken with those households.

All ECO4 work and Great British Insulation Scheme work should be covered by a guarantee. Whilst most refer to the scenario where the installer has ceased to trade, some do allow for failure to rectify, and impacted households should approach the relevant guarantee provider for support within the bounds of the policy. Also, just to add, all measures installed under the current ECO scheme are covered by a guarantee, and those guarantee providers are reviewed and approved by the financial protection panel.

My heart obviously goes out to all those people in CES who have lost their jobs. Cabinet Secretary, I have a constituent who has been without water now, or heating, for two weeks. That work is still ongoing. It is not work that has been completed, so I'm not quite sure how this assurance scheme is going to help her. She is extremely short of money, hence why she accessed this scheme. What work is the Welsh Government doing, talking to the UK Government, to make sure that some financial assistance is put in place for all our constituents who are going to be affected by this problem?

My colleagues Jayne Bryant and Jane Hutt have together been raising this directly with the UK Government. They have been making the case that the implication for households in Wales is disproportionate given the level of ECO activity that was being undertaken here, precisely for the reasons that have been set out in terms of more households being in need of that work.

We have made it clear to the UK Government that they and Ofgem need to consider and communicate how households in the variety of situations will be supported, and how they can reach out for that support. Our officials have been in touch with UK Government officials and have agreed to share the various scenarios that colleagues have been raising with us. We need to receive a response that we can share across teams and also with our Nest advice service providers, so that we can address any of those specific concerns that are being raised.

Consumer Energy Solutions entering administration has come as a great shock to their employees. There is a Swansea firm, fortunately, that is interested in employing some of the staff. Working with the local MPs, I have made the jobcentre aware of the firm and the skills mix they are looking for. I have also written to you, Cabinet Secretary, at least twice, asking what support the Government is able to provide to those who are not going to be picked up by the firm who are interested in employing people from there. Can you provide an update on the support that is able to be provided for the staff who aren't going to be employed by the other local firm that is interested, but who are seriously concerned about their futures?

I did mention that, of the 300 staff, around 60 are employed in the contact centre. We're working with Cnect Cymru to try and find those individuals alternative employment—Cnect Cymru being the employer forum representing pan-industry contact centres, having done so for 20 years. They'll be really important partners for those 60 members of staff.

For the approximately 40 surveyors and 200 installers, we're collecting further details on specific roles and skills so that they can then be matched with local employers—thank you very much for sharing that information about the local employer that you're familiar with—including employers in the social housing sector and businesses in the retrofit sector. Officials are organising an event to bring impacted staff members together with potential employers. Of course, we'll update local Members when that has been arranged.

While the ECO scheme, of course, is not within the responsibility of the Welsh Government, its work, as you've identified, to reduce fuel poverty is most certainly impacted by the scrapping of this scheme. Following the announcement of the decision in November's budget, I raised this several times with the Welsh Government—with your colleagues the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice and the Cabinet Secretary for housing—about the risk of the loss of jobs, of the loss of funding, which has been, to all extents and purposes, subsidising the level of investment made by the Welsh Government into its own fuel poverty schemes. Of course, there's the loss of vital skills that are needed into the future to support the tackling fuel poverty plan and the Warm Homes programme. I asked them whether they could confirm whether an impact assessment had been carried out about what that decision would mean for the Welsh Government's activities, but they were unable to confirm that. Is the Welsh Government now going to review the effectiveness of the Warm Homes programme and the levels of investment in it in the light of the closure of the ECO scheme?

I also have been contacted by constituents who are facing difficulties, of course, as a result of the sudden closure of Consumer Energy Solutions in Llansamlet. They're trying desperately to sort out the issues, with work carried out right in the middle of a cold snap. One constituent's heat pump stopped working over a week ago. They said that they were really surprised and concerned that this announcement in November had not allowed this company to formulate a timely exit strategy, which would have left fewer people—customers, staff and subcontractors—facing the difficulties we're discussing this afternoon.

Do you agree that the publication of the UK's Warm Homes plan, which has been pushed from late 2025 to early 2026—we're still waiting for it—has created this uncertainty for home owners and installers alike, and is causing job losses and disrupting supply chains? What action are you taking with your colleagues in Cabinet and in Westminster to mitigate this?

The Cabinet Secretary for Housing and Local Government and the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice have both been liaising with the UK Government, and they've been really clear with them that the experience on the ground is that work has just stopped in people's houses. There are so many unresolved complaints, incomplete certificates, outstanding remediation jobs and contracts that haven't even yet started. They've been really clear that this has left so many households—many of which do have vulnerable residents—really stressed and anxious. We've been asking the UK Government to be more clear about the support that's available to those households and how and when they will be contacted, so that they can understand what the next steps are and what their rights are under the terms of the scheme.

Also, one of the important points we've been raising with the UK Government is about what actions Ofgem is being asked to take to regulate the businesses involved in ECO to ensure that they are delivering work of acceptable quality and not exiting the market with large profits, leaving a trail of unfinished work and households in limbo and distress behind them. Again, that's something that my colleagues are raising directly with Ofgem, as well as through the UK Government.

In terms of our own support, clearly, we are concerned about fuel poverty here in Wales. One of the things that we are trying to do, of course, is maximising incomes and putting money back into people's pockets. That's a priority for us. Colleagues will be familiar with the work to support energy initiatives, including the £13 million a year in the Warm Homes Nest scheme, but also the £7 million to the Fuel Bank Foundation, which we have given since 2022, helping prepayment customers who are at risk of disconnection. So, in terms of that wider question around fuel poverty, we're encouraging people to contact Advicelink Cymru, to make sure that they're getting all of the support that they need, and that they are then able to be signposted to potential ongoing support through the energy poverty alleviation schemes.

And Heledd Fychan.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I appreciate the fact that you've mentioned today that you're not sure of the scale of the problem, so my question is how you're ascertaining the scale of the problem. Because I've had constituents contact me, and they're still contacting me at the moment—for instance, a 66-year-old constituent with health problems with no heating for a week. A lot of people are still not aware that the work done was related to the scheme. Many people are not on social media, or may not have seen the news, to know where to turn to. These are often the most vulnerable people in our communities. So, I appreciate what you've said about the workforce, and I would like further details in terms of how you're supporting them, but with those constituents in mind, which we've heard many examples of today, there are so many more out there that I'm concerned are not being represented or supported. So, how can we ensure that everybody who's facing difficulties because of the collapse of this scheme, and specifically what's happening, leaving them without heating at this point in time—? How are we ensuring that they're getting that support as quickly as possible, and that everybody affected—that we know who they are?

Thank you. On that point about understanding the potential scale of the impact on households and businesses, officials have been doing work with the UK Government on that, understanding the number of households who have accessed the eco-installations. We understand that it is well above our population share, if you like, of installations, given what I said earlier about the relative level of need here in Wales. So, we are understanding that. But one of the things that my colleagues are pursuing with the UK Government is how they are, and what their plans are for, engaging directly with each of those individual households that have been affected, so that they understand the route that's available to them, but also what their rights are as well. I think that information needs to be provided in a user-friendly kind of way as well, because this is a complex area, and people wouldn't have been expecting to have to deal with guarantees and so on when they agreed for this work to be done.

We're also concerned about the wider impact on subcontractors and suppliers. So, we will make every effort to contact those businesses once we're clear about where the supply chains are and what they look like. There are the two warehouses—in Treorchy and, of course, up in Bangor. We know that there are fewer than 10 employees in each of those locations, but officials will be alerting those staff members also about the support that's on offer.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary.

Item 5 is the 90-second statements. I call on John Griffiths.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. This week marks Less Survivable Cancers Awareness Week here in Wales, highlighting a long-standing and urgent challenge in our cancer outcomes. Cancers of the brain, lung, liver, oesophagus, pancreas and stomach account for around 40 per cent of all common cancer deaths, yet they receive less than one-fifth of Government-funded cancer research in the UK. In Wales the impact of this imbalance is stark. More than half of people diagnosed with a less survivable cancer will die within a year of diagnosis. Insufficient research investment contributes to later diagnosis, fewer treatment options and limited access to clinical trials, creating a cycle that continues to cost lives. That is why addressing the research funding gap for less survivable cancers is essential if we are serious about improving survival and outcomes for patients in Wales. It is crucial that we do all we can to allow this vital research to happen and consider what further action might be taken by the Welsh Government, working with UK partners, to help close this gap and save lives.

Item 6 today is a debate on petition P-06-1555, 'To review all guidance on Home to School Transport for all of Wales. Free access to an education'. And I call on the Chair of the committee to move the motion—Carolyn Thomas.

Diolch. Petition P-06-1555, 'To review all guidance on Home to School Transport for all of Wales. Free access to an education'. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. On behalf of the Petitions Committee, I'd like to thank you for the opportunity to introduce this debate today. This petition was submitted by Tina Collins, having collected a total of 11,790 signatures. The petitioners have been campaigning to raise awareness of problems with school transport in Rhondda Cynon Taf, but this is an issue affecting school students and families across Wales. I therefore welcome the Business Committee deciding to extend the time allocated to this debate to an hour, to allow sufficient time for Members across the Siambr to contribute to it.

The text of petition reads:

'All Children attending an education should be able to attend a school or college without any struggle.

'Our streets are no longer safe to walk on their own, especially those who are under 19 years of age.

'With NO direct transport for an education for those who even HAVE to attend until their last day in year 11. These students struggle through underlying illness, hidden illness, or even undiagnosed.

'The students who live in poverty and struggle to even travel on a public bus.'

The petitioners stress the importance of home-to-school transport, or learner travel, as it is described in the legislation, for children preparing for their GCSEs and A-levels.

They gave the example of a year 8 student whose journey on foot was an hour and 10 minutes each way:

'He has no underlying illnesses and plays sport after school. Carrying 6kg in his backpack and coat.

'After this journey he complained of sore feet, his shoulders hurt and felt exhausted.

'This is before a 6 hour day and in cool dry weather conditions.

'There is no storage for spare clothes or even a dry room to dry clothes.'

The petitioners say absenteeism will rise, noting that improving school attendance is a key priority of the Welsh Government. They highlight the negative impact of more cars on the roads, and the pressures on parents and carers to get their children to and from school by private transport when there is a lack of, or inadequate, public transport. That is only a realistic option for parents who have access to a vehicle, can transport all their children to their various schools, and are able to take the time necessary without it impacting on working hours, employment and family income. Although the petitioners welcome the £1 bus fare, they have also highlighted some issues with inconsistent implementation.

Safety concerns were also raised a lot in the results of a survey of students and parents that were provided to us by the campaigners—both road safety and personal safety—not least due to the unique geography of Wales, but also for many other reasons. It is often the case that the only alternative to a school bus is to walk.

The petitioners highlight the particular difficulties for students with additional learning needs and those struggling with anxiety.

Affordability is a key issue here. The impact on people in deprived areas of Wales struggling with the cost of living is particularly important to recognise. That is set against the financial challenges for local authorities of trying to provide adequate school transport provision. The petitioners' survey showed an expectation of 90 per cent of the 565 students wanting a direct bus to education.

The petition was considered by the committee alongside a second petition, which is petition P-06-1533, 'Review and update Provisions 2-10 of The Learner Travel Measure (Wales) 2008', which was submitted by Rebecca Smart and collected 2,185 signatures. And that petition states:

'We, the undersigned, request the Welsh Government to review and update provisions 2-10 of the Learner Travel Measure (Wales) 2008. Namely, local authorities’ duty to assess learner travel needs and transport arrangements, including travel limits. Post-16 and nursery education travel. Equality in travel arrangements and promotion of the Welsh Language.

'In 2021, Welsh ministers committed to reviewing the Measure, highlighting the issues; however, it remains unchanged.'

In discussing both petitions, the Petitions Committee acknowledged the strong feelings surrounding the issue, particularly its impact on faith schools, Welsh-medium schools and pupils from low-income families. Members noted that, although the matter has previously been examined by the Children, Young People and Education Committee, and was raised during a short debate last October led by Heledd Fychan, concerns remain. Recognising the significance of this issue for families, the committee agreed to request today’s debate.

We know that the Cabinet Secretary for Education is fully aware of the strength of feeling about learner travel, and her response highlighted the work that has been going on to review and revise the guidance, including the consultation that ran from last June until the end of November to help inform the process and the learner travel summit that was held with representative bodies last May to discuss the challenges and practical solutions for improving learner travel in Wales.

The Cabinet Secretary’s response included the report of the travel summit, outlining work streams established to take forward recommendations, and the Cabinet Secretary also noted her commitment to a follow-up event early this year. In addition to the concerns raised by the petitioners themselves, the summit report also raised issues around the financial challenges and high costs associated with school transport.

Lack of consistency seems to be a big theme: inconsistency in policy and practice between local authorities; inconsistency in transport provider costs and fares; a disproportionate impact for refugees and asylum seekers and those travelling further to access Welsh-medium education. The fact that problems with school transport are affecting student choices for post-16 study is another big area of concern. The report highlights the need for much better partnership working between local authorities and also identifies opportunities to make improvements, with case studies of effective actions and interventions.

The Cabinet Secretary wanted to reassure the committee that she is listening, and sees this as a priority area for increasing partnership working between all delivery partners, including our local authorities, which are responsible for delivering learner transport provision to eligible learners.

Now, in responding to the Cabinet Secretary’s response, the petitioners argue:

'The current consultation on guidance suggests that it is reasonable for a 5 to 10 year old to walk 45 minutes one way to school, so potentially 90 minutes a day to and from school, and for a 11 to 19 year old to walk 75 minutes one way, so a total of 150 minutes a day to and from school. This is absurd, especially in winter when it is dark both in the mornings and evenings and also in wet weather. Many of the routes deemed safe are not safe in the eyes of pupils nor their parents, and it is clear—we would not expect adults to walk such distances and such routes to reach a place of work.'

It is important that we recognise the concerns that are being raised, including by the Children's Commissioner for Wales, and I look forward to Members' contributions today. I also look forward to then hearing more from the Cabinet Secretary about the work being done to improve matters. Thank you.

I am here today to speak in support of this petition, and, more importantly, in support of our children—children whose right to education has been undermined by this disastrous removal of home-to-school transport. Education should never be something that a child has to fight to access, yet that is exactly what we are asking them to do.

Across Wales, recent changes to home-to-school transport policies have had far-reaching consequences for attendance, well-being, equality and opportunity. Surveys consistently show that transport is one of the most common barriers to regular school attendance. In fact, around two-thirds of parents who have reported difficulties with attendance cite problems getting their children to and from school. The Children's Commissioner for Wales herself has warned that this burden is directly linked to lower attendance, and we have already seen the consequences.

In Rhondda Cynon Taf, parents last year described the new bus arrangements as 'absolute carnage'. Buses were overcrowded, children were late, and there were a number of accidents and safety concerns. The stress of this has even led some to experience anxiety and even panic attacks during their commute. These are not isolated complaints, but they are warning signs that reduced transport provision undermines children's ability to attend school consistently.

Attendance, however, is only part of the picture. Student well-being, both physical and mental, is also at stake. A critical issue is safety. While the bus journey itself may be risk assessed, the walk or cycle route to school is not. Many children will take what they perceive as being the quickest route, but this will not always be the safest. There have been reports of children walking down busy roads and traffic in poor weather conditions, and sometimes in the dark.

Will the Member give way?

Yes.

Sorry, I can't see you from over here. The petition mentions that they think under-19s walking to school is unsafe. I'd be interested in what evidence you might have to support that contention, because the crime rates don't reflect that. People may not want to walk to school, they may not like to walk in the weather if they're not used to it, but the perception of it being unsafe is not backed up by any evidence I'm aware of.

As someone who has walked the routes that the children are expected to walk, I can vouch that there are unsafe routes. It's not about criminality, it's about speeding traffic, it's about the lack of pavements. [Interruption.] Go on.

Thank you for giving way. Will the Member agree with me that there is lots of evidence out there from a lot of parents who have written to, I'm sure, every single Member in this Chamber about unsafe routes to school? It doesn't mean—. You're implying that some sort of crime is going to happen on the way to school. We're talking about road safety in lots of different versions. Wouldn't you agree?

Yes, I agree wholeheartedly with the Member's comments here. I think you will have to have a strong foundation in yourself I think if you go to a parent when they express concerns and you say to them, 'Prove it.' I think that's not what we're here to do. We're here to support them.

Parents fear increased road danger, and rightly so. When school buses are removed, parents drive. That means more congestion, higher emissions and greater risk of road accidents involving children. Whilst there is an argument for encouraging walking and cycling in terms of health, greater confidence and creating cleaner air around schools, we have to recognise that this is simply not going to be possible across the whole of Wales. Urban and rural areas face very different challenges, and it's just not realistic to expect everyone to be able to do this. Encouraging active travel cannot mean forcing children to walk unreasonably long distances without proper assessment or support. For families, especially those on low incomes, the loss of free transport can be devastating. Up to 41 per cent of young people aged 16 to 24 in Wales identified transport as the biggest barrier to education or work. When support ends at GCSE level, it is the young people in poverty who are hit the hardest. I admit that the Welsh Government has taken positive steps. The £1 bus fare pilot for young people has helped many afford travel, and grants exist for post-16 learners. These measures are welcome, but they do not replace guaranteed, reliable transport for school-age children.

Transport reform is often framed around climate goals. Cheaper fares and integrated bus networks can reduce carbon emissions and modernise fleets. Encouraging fewer car journeys can improve air quality and road safety. But the truth is that cutting school bus eligibility risks doing the opposite. When free transport disappears, parents drive and congestion increases. Emissions consequently rise, and the environmental benefits are lost.

Parents and learners have spoken loudly. Thousands have signed this petition. Families are not protesting for convenience. They are protesting for safety, fairness and access to education. The message, Dirprwy Lywydd, is clear: transport is fundamental to education access, and people are fed up with the changes that have been proposed.

The years leading up to GCSEs and A-levels are the most critical in a young person's life. These are the years that shape confidence, opportunity and future prospects. Students should be focusing on learning, on lessons, exams and ambition, not on whether they can physically make it to school or not. With that in mind, Dirprwy Lywydd, I would hope everyone here supports this petition. Thank you.

I'm really pleased that the Petitions Committee has brought forward this debate, and I'm also really pleased that these petitions were put forward by both petitioners, because it's very, very clear that school transport is not working currently in Wales. And it's not me saying this; it is constituents who can see how it's being put into practice. One of the petitioners is a constituent of mine, Tina Collins. I'm glad to see her here today, watching this debate. I'm sure she'd like to be here talking about the points herself, but she has been supported by a fantastic group of parents and learners, and has been instrumental in coordinating the 'Save the home to school transport' campaign in RCT.

They've collected a huge body of evidence and they were trying, of course, to stop RCT council from changing the provisions to be in line with statutory guidance for secondary school and college learners, but, as we know, the changes did go ahead. And it's clear from the evidence they've collated since the changes came into effect last September, and from evidence we've heard elsewhere a number of times in this Chamber over the past few years, that there are problems with the statutory thresholds and the guidance itself. So, how do we know this? Well, it's because we know that there are children and young people who are struggling to access education because of the system currently in place, and there are parents having to give up work or reduce their hours at work in order to support their children to access education.

I know Carolyn Thomas listed a number of points earlier, but I would like to go through the list that was shared with me of the concerns of constituents and learners. We've heard of learners having to leave Welsh-medium education, leaving behind lifelong friends, or parents making the choice early on not to send their child to a Welsh-medium school, because they know they won't be able to access free transport in the future, so making that choice in terms of language based on the availability of transport, because why wouldn't you choose to be able to walk to the nearest school, rather than having to walk maybe 2.9 miles to a school that is Welsh-medium, or having to pay, or for your parents to take you?

We've heard numerous examples of learners arriving in school drenched and having to sit through lessons in wet clothes and with their school books ruined. This is something teachers have told me is happening time and time again. We've seen the frequency of storms as well, and also of roads being flooded, so pupils having to walk through flooded water, which is also dirty. This is not right and it's not conducive to learning. We've heard of learners arriving exhausted after walking for well over an hour—that is not reasonable—parents having to restrict the number of days their child goes to school because they can't afford the daily cost of public transport. I've raised this a number of times over the past few years, and, yes, this is still the case.

We've heard of learners refusing to go to school when the weather is bad, or when it is dark, due to fears over their safety. I would like to respond to Lee Waters's point specifically on this, because maybe the data doesn't show it in terms of people being attacked, but, as a woman walking in the dark, you can be scared. How many women are fearful, and you hold your car keys, if you have them, just walking a short distance to your car. But having to walk for over an hour in the dark—. We do hear of people having comments, young girls having comments, from drivers passing by and so on. So, it is about how you feel. You may not be attacked, but that fear of being attacked, or having to put up with men leering over you or catcalling and so on is very real. And that's not captured in the data, but that's the evidence we're hearing. So, I would urge anyone who thinks that's reasonable to please walk with a young girl by herself in the dark and tell her that it is safe, because she won't feel safe, and I think that's something that gets lost in this argument sometimes. In terms of the mental health of learners suffering and an increase in anxiety, especially amongst learners with additional learning needs, these are all things we've heard; learners having to stop taking part in music lessons or other activities because they can't carry that instrument for up to three miles or carry that equipment.

Thank you very much to the petitioner for this petition and for her assistance in preparing my speech this afternoon. I have to say from the very outset I'm very fortunate to be able to walk my five-year-old daughter to school along a safe route, or, to be entirely correct, to run after her as she cycles ahead of me to school. And this is a huge step forward for Welsh-medium education in Cardiff, because I was on the bus for over an hour to go to my primary school back in the 1990s. It's fair to say that this issue has been raised regularly in this place, and I recognise that it's not a simple issue. The costs are great and you have to draw the line somewhere, and that line is going to leave some content and others not happy. [Interruption.]

Sorry, I thought that was an intervention.

Now, the Welsh Government launched a review of learner travel arrangements back in 2019, there was an opposition party debate here in 2021, a White Paper in 2023, another opposition debate in 2023, and then the Children, Young People and Education Committee published a report in 2024 on access to education. Last year, this was raised in a short debate in this place. The latest is that we are waiting to see the responses to the consultation undertaken in June and November 2025. So, the consistency with which these issues are raised clearly demonstrates that there is a problem; this is highlighted by the fact, as Carolyn Thomas has said, that the children's commissioner's referred to this, the Welsh Language Commissioner's referred to this regularly, and, today, we have a petition that has almost 12,000 signatures. That isn't something that happens that often, that feelings are so strong that they have 12,000 signatures.

But the strongest argument, in my view, is the evidence of the young people themselves. Here are just a few of the 500 responses from children in RCT, some as young as year 1. This is one of them: 'My father is in trouble at work because he has to leave early to pick me up and then work from home, which is far from ideal, and my mother doesn't drive.' What a pressure for a young person, that his father is in trouble at work. Another: 'I'm afraid that I will have to walk to Ponty in the dark. There are people taking drugs'—and that relates to Lee Waters's point and the point made by Heledd Fychan. Another: 'There is no pavement on the highway.' Even these three voices prove just how broad this problem is and also how challenging the solutions to it are.

Now, understandably, questions arise about school hours and how they actually align with work hours. Like all Members, I'm sure we all know of the wonderful work that schools, including my daughter's school, do with breakfast clubs and after-school clubs. But very often it's very difficult to get places in these clubs. Could we do more, perhaps, to help our schools? We need to continue to collaborate with the police—I think that was Joel's point. Clearly, the schools have an important role in working with the police, as my daughter's school did recently, by telling the police that there is an antisocial behaviour problem in such and such a place. And then the police can go to that location during those hours when children and young people are walking back and forth to school.

Also, I don't understand why parents can't pay for a place on a bus when there is a vacant place on that bus. It makes no sense to me that parents can't pay for that space on a bus when it's available.

Thank you for extending this debate so that we can actually discuss the issues that have been raised here. I note the additional information provided by the petitioners. It raises several issues for me, but it enhances the information I received yesterday, when I visited one of the secondary schools in my constituency, as I was trying to use it as an opportunity to talk to year 11 pupils about the importance of using their vote in May. There's no point in us giving people the vote, if they don't then use it.

I was astonished to learn that several pupils aged 16 were still being ferried to school by car. Will that family member still be taking them to work in future? What are we doing to our young people to infantilise them in this way? We need to make it easy for them to make choices about how they get to school. I want to speak up for the rights of young people to be able to get to school independently, so they can choose who to walk or cycle with and what time they want to get there. Do they want to get there in time for the breakfast club or not, and most importantly for secondary school pupils, what time do they want to leave? Do they want to attend after-school clubs or are they always going to be dependent on the time that the school bus takes them back to the area where they live?

I want to also speak up for the urgency to reform the routes taken by buses in cities like Cardiff, so that if a pupil is carrying 6 kg of books on a particular day, or is carrying a musical instrument, as mentioned by another Member, there is a bus available to lighten the load. But I also think that there’s a message here for schools: do children really need to be carrying 6 kg of books? That is a lot.

I think that the information provided by the petitioner about this young person who had to walk 3 miles, and it took him an hour and 10 minutes—that’s less than 3 miles. That indicates somebody who doesn't normally walk. Schools ought to be thinking about, 'Do my pupils—?'

I know for some of the routes, and I’m sure you’ll understand, that some of them are up very steep hillsides. They're not flat, so it does take longer in terms of those circumstances, obviously with further equipment and so on, and some of the routes are not direct. It is just under that 3 miles, but I’m sure you’ll understand that it’s slower when you’re going uphill and up and down, and not on a flat surface as well.

I acknowledge that. There are some highlands in my constituency too—it’s one of the less flat parts of my constituency. I’m not suggesting that they are going to get a door-to-door service necessarily, but they can hop on a bus and then hop on another one, if they are carrying excessive goods. I also think that there’s a challenge for schools. Do they really need to be carrying 6 kg of books, or is there a locker where they can leave their books and only take home the ones they need for their homework?

Will the Member give way?

Yes.

Just quickly on that, I know you’re trying to justify some of the things that have been said, but my son is 15 years old and sometimes he’s unable to get a locker in school and he does have to carry an enormous bag with an awful lot of books at GCSE age. So, I have to say that there are instances where it’s not possible to carry less.

Okay, that's a very useful intervention, but I think that is a challenge for schools. Should we really be expecting people to carry 6 kg of potatoes every single day to school, or is it in special circumstances? I think schools need to look at their locker policies, plus also the method by which they impart the information that’s needed for homework, because a lot of this work is done online these days—homework is carried out online.

I'm very glad to see both the Cabinet Secretary for Education and the Cabinet Secretary for transport here, because I think this is a problem that you jointly need to work on together, because the system isn't working at the moment. The amount of money we spend on school transport is absolutely eye-watering, and I've heard that there's been an absolutely massive increase in the charges since COVID. We're spending £1,200 per pupil, I believe; that's what somebody told me, and no doubt the Cabinet Secretary can confirm that.

In Cardiff alone, the council is spending £18.7 million on its mainstream school transport budget. Out of a delegated school budget of £330 million, it is only a small percentage. Nevertheless, £19 million buys you a lot of teachers, teaching assistants or curriculum enrichment. And as I mentioned in Stage 4 of the Bus Services (Wales) Bill, the special education transport budget of £11.1 million almost exceeds the total amount spent on pupils attending special schools. That should be a challenge for us all. This cannot go on like that. We have to find a more sustainable way of getting pupils to and from school.

Of course, there are special needs and those needs to be attended to on an individual case basis, and for some children, it is not safe for them to travel by public transport, I agree, particularly where there are contested court cases and the like. They need to go by taxi in those particular circumstances. But I think we absolutely need to be challenging how we are delivering this particular public service, because it is not value for money.

I just want to thank the petitioner and those who've spoken in favour of that petition to date. This obviously is calling for a review of existing legislation to ensure that all children are able to attend school or college without unnecessary difficulty, particularly through improved access to transport. Twelve thousand signatures have been highlighted, and that is a lot of public concern. The Government have to take notice of this.

The most recent review, conducted in 2021, found that 109,000 pupils in Wales travelled to school by vehicle each day. Sixty-five per cent of these had access to school transport. That means 35 per cent did not have access. Of the 9,288 pupils with additional learning needs, 3,500 relied on a dedicated school bus. As Jenny pointed out, which I do agree with, we have too many children coming to schools in individual taxis. There has to be a better way than that.

As has been pointed out about the review in 2021, several local authorities across Wales have made even further cuts to school transport provision. We've talked for hours in here about school absenteeism, and trying to get our children into school in a safe and practical manner. That's all this petition is asking. I know, Jenny, you used your reference of Cardiff, but I represent a constituency where I have farms. This three-mile business drives me insane because I've had people say, 'We've been told it's as the crow flies.' I've been told it's measuring it if you drive there. And the thing is, I've even had parents taking tape measures out and doing the route. Some of these children, actually—[Interruption.] Yes, I'll give way.

Thank you very much. I can tell you that headteachers regularly do the route because they have to decide which pupils live closest to the gate, and who gets in and who doesn't. So, that science is definitely well established. The point is, if you are in secondary school, you ought to be able to buy a bike if you are coming from a farm. Three miles is nothing. If I can do it, so can this young person.

Some of these farm tracks, from the farm gate to the main road, can be two or three miles sometimes themselves, and they're not—. They're dark. Would you really—? As a child, would you like to have walked home in the dark from a farm gate? I just find the argument that anyone—. There’s nobody in this Chamber can defend the current situation as it is.

We, as a group, recognise the vital role that safe, reliable and accessible school transport plays in supporting pupils' health. And whilst I get it, Jenny, that you want people riding and walking, it isn't safe for some pupils—not all, but it isn’t safe. And for me, as a mother and a grandmother, I would not want my children—. And we are Members here, so why should we expect other children to be—? Why should we put that pressure on the father, who can't take his son to school or is late getting into work after taking their child to school? It should be one of the fundamental must dos for this Welsh Labour Government to ensure—[Interruption.] No, I'm sorry, I can't take any more. Sorry.

We need to be able to prepare our children for the future academically, and the skills base, but we've got to provide them with a much-needed social space as well, where they can learn to interact with people from all aspects of society. The petition highlights the experience, a shocking experience, and I believe it. It's not far-fetched. I have these numerous times, Dirprwy Lywydd, where I challenge my local authority and it's just, 'Oh, our hands are tied, we haven't got the money.' It's not a good enough excuse. And this about children reporting sore feet, shoulder pain, extreme exhaustion; they do, and that affects their school performance. It affects the situation at home as well. We've got to try and keep our families together with as little stress as possible. Too often families now split up and, like it or not, it can be for a precious cause, by bringing children up now, in this day and age.

As elected officials, we regularly hear from parents who are struggling to secure a place for their child on a free school bus. It's just a nightmare. There are also issues of public safety, I believe, in these children. I used to walk to school every day, but I was able to. But we do have some very isolated, dark, rural lanes that are just not suitable whatsoever.

As far as I'm concerned, I'm asking the Government now to support this petitioner, support all 12,000 people who have actually signed this petition. It's obviously affecting them, but I've always said, for every one person affected by something, there are usually hundreds.

You need to conclude now, please, Janet.

Yes. I call on the Cabinet Secretary now to work with our education Secretary, to work with our local authorities, and to somehow, I don't care how you do it, find a way of providing safe and practical transport for all our children in Wales. Diolch.

As everyone else has done as well, I'd like to thank the petitioners and everyone else that has signed. All of us have heard from constituents about home-to-school transport, parents who are worried, young people who are exhausted, and families who feel that the system is working against them rather than for them.

Education is not a privilege, it's a right, and yet under the current learner travel guidance for Wales, too many children are being quietly but consistently blocked from accessing the education they deserve. For some learners, as we've already heard from many speakers already, getting to school means walking long distances every day in all weather—rain, snow, darkness—and sometimes facing real hazards. And believe you me, we've heard the perspective from urban communities, but believe you me, in rural parts of Wales, pavements are not a given. Street lighting can be patchy or non-existent. Roads are narrow, fast and unforgiving. Children are walking along busy routes early in the morning when it's dark, not because it's safe or sensible, but because the guidance leaves them with no other option.

These journeys take a real toll. We see more children getting unwell, more days missed at school, and young people arriving in the classroom already tired before lessons have even begun, and often having to sit for hours in wet clothes. And, as ever, it is children from lower income households who feel this most: families who can't afford daily bus fares, who don't have access to a car, and who are left with very little choice.

Today, Dirprwy Lywydd, I want to focus specifically on how these guidelines create barriers for Welsh-medium education. Heledd has made reference to a number of the points that I want to raise, so I'll be concise.

Very often, we talk with pride in this Chamber about the language, its future and our ambition to create at least 1 million Welsh speakers by 2050. Indeed, that ambition was delivered through legislation when we passed unanimously the Welsh language Bill in this place. We want to see every child in Wales become a confident Welsh speaker, but this legislation alone is not enough.

Across Wales, parents tell us time and again that they want to send their children to Welsh-medium institutions, but the journey to the local closest Welsh school is not practical. As a result, too many families feel that they are pushed to choose English-medium education, not because that's what their desire is, but that's the only realistic option that's available to them under the circumstances that they find themselves in.

That's not a proper choice, but it's a restriction on the choice of parents. And if we're serious about strengthening the Welsh language, then access to Welsh-medium education has to work in practice, not just on paper. A system that promotes the Welsh language system on the one hand, but withdrawing transport from Welsh-medium education on the other hand, doesn't make any sense at all. That's why we need to review this guidance.

These guidelines need to reflect the reality of families and the reality of Wales, our geography, our rural communities, our national ambition for the Welsh language. We have to accept that Welsh-medium education is not an additional option, but rather a central option for the future of this nation. If we don't get rid of these transport barriers, we won't be able to support those families that want to raise their children through the medium of Welsh, and, ultimately, we'll fail to deliver our ambition in terms of creating 1 million Welsh speakers.

To close, Dirprwy Lywydd, education should open doors, it shouldn't impose barriers. It's time for our learner transport system to do the same thing.

I'm speaking today, of course, in total support of this petition. I'd like to also say 'diolch' to everybody who has been involved in bringing forward this petition to the Senedd today. It's great to see them in the gallery. We welcome them here. And well done to everyone, of course, who signed the petition—12,000 signatures is a great show.

Nothing is more important than ensuring our children and young people's safety, and we should be doing everything that we can to ensure that they get to school in a safe and timely manner. School transport is a vital issue affecting families right across my region of South Wales East and also Wales. I've actually lost count of how many times we've talked about this in the Chamber since I've been here—on all the issues that have been discussed today. Yet nothing has changed, really. I hear from parents across my region of Wales every week about the stress and financial burden of getting their children to school safely and on time. It's time we address this head on and had some real commonsense solutions.

This week, I was made aware of a family with three children outside of my patch who travel to Ysgol Ysbyty Ifan in Conwy—[Interruption.]—thank you—where two of the children there, boys, get free transport to school—actually, down a very long farm lane, as it happens—but the young daughter, who's just started education at this school, is unable to get that transport, which is absolutely crazy. It means that the parent has to follow the bus to school with her, because it is too unsafe for her to walk to school. We are seeing nonsensical things like this happen right across Wales.

There are many, many examples in my patch, too, where one side of the street are able to get free education, and literally the other side of the street—free transport to school, sorry—and the other side of the street have to pay hundreds and hundreds of pounds to get to school every year. I just don't understand it. It's completely nonsensical. It should be done on a case-by-case basis.

Under current Welsh law, the Learner Travel (Wales) Measure 2008, local authorities must provide free transport to the nearest suitable school if it's more than 2 miles away for primary schools or 3 miles away for secondary schools. But here's the reality: many schools are cutting back on discretionary support due to budget pressures stemming from the Welsh Labour Government pushing directives on councils and not following them with the money. In areas such as Monmouthshire and Rhondda Cynon Taf, families are losing dedicated school buses, forcing children onto overcrowded public transport or long walks in the weather, as we've heard—

Will the Member give way?

Yes, I will give way.

Thank you. This is a difficult issue. Nigel Farage has said that too much money is spent on school transport. In Kent County Council, he said it beggars belief the amount of money that's being spent on school transport and he said that their department of government efficiency would cut it. And when asked who should provide school transport, he said:

'There are things called parents who for as long as modern times remember have had the aggravation of getting their kids to school'.

So, you're keen to support this petition for more money into school transport, but the reality is that when your party does get power, it does the opposite.

In Wales, we—which you're not recognising today at all with any of your interventions—live in a very rural country. A very rural country with very real worries about children getting to school. It might be a different issue; he might be talking about a specific issue—who knows? But in Wales, there are things that you need to understand, which you clearly don't, as a Member—

You're a hypocrite—that's what I understand.

You're not allowed to say that. Point of order.

—about what happens in rural Wales—[Interruption.]

A few words, okay?

Sorry. I can't see you.

Do you want to make a point of order?

A point of order. 'Hypocrite' is not—. You can say, 'I'm accusing you of hypocrisy'; you cannot say 'hypocrite' in this Chamber.

I've got to be honest, Janet, I didn't hear anything, okay?

You didn't hear it? Well, check the record. You'll see that he has just called a female Member of our Chamber—

I will check the record, Janet, but I haven't heard it, okay? I'll check the record. Laura.

What losing dedicated school buses means is forcing people onto public transport or to walk in all sorts of weather. The buses, as constituents often tell me, are unreliable and sometimes don't turn up at all, and they're forced onto walk routes that aren't safe. It would be wonderful if we lived in a world where all walk routes were safe, they didn't have potholes and everyone could just get on a bike down a lane. Unfortunately, that is not the reality in 2026 of where we are after 26 years of your Government in power.

The situation is not okay in rural areas. Young girls on their own, on cold, dark mornings and evenings, on a public bus or walking alone is not acceptable. It is not okay for those young children suffering with some form of additional learning needs or disabilities, or, indeed, anxiety. And many bus stops, particularly in rural areas, aren't suitable for those with a disability, with safe drop-offs, with many in my own home constituency where you are dropped off in literally a hedge on a busy road. That's not okay. Children are left to walk unacceptable distances, at risk of getting hurt from oncoming traffic, as the petition outlines. Some are getting to school exhausted, wet or cold. Jenny Rathbone, you said, 'Get on a bike', but as I said before, potholes, dark days, rural areas, ages of children, sex of children, disabilities, there are lots of things—

Could I just remind us that we are only talking about people who live fewer than 3 miles from the school? Anybody who lives more than 3 miles from the school is entitled to free transport, and there is no proposal to change that.

We are very aware of that, Jenny, but if you live in a rural area, I welcome you to come—

There will not be a conversation between Members. You have had the intervention and it is up to the Member to respond.

I would love to welcome the Member to my part of Monmouthshire, where I will show her a very real situation of a constituency case I currently have where that 3 miles or 2 miles is completely different to walking in Cardiff, where the Member lives.

Also, when children get to school ridiculously early and the school is closed, they have to wait outside in the rain for unacceptable amounts of time before and after school, my son being one of them. Parents are also left picking up the tab sometimes, paying for buses, taxis, even driving themselves, as I have said, while others in different postcodes get free provision. This creates unacceptable disparities across Wales, as well. One family might pay nothing because their child qualifies under the strict rules, whilst their neighbour forks out hundreds of pounds a year. It's unfair, it's inconsistent and hitting hard-working families hardest, especially those on lower incomes who can't afford the extra costs.

Poor transport links, as we have heard, are directly linked to absenteeism and it is also putting young people off post-16 education. Parents shouldn't face a postcode lottery when it comes to their child's education. We also need to do more to increase access to Welsh-medium schools. The Welsh Government talks a big game about promoting the Welsh language—

You need to conclude now, Laura, please.

I did take a couple of interventions—

I've given you two minutes of additional time for those interventions.

But barriers like transport costs are putting parents off. Many families want their children to learn Welsh, and it's a proud part of our heritage, but these costs are putting people off, and that shouldn't be the case. Diolch.

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

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I'd like to thank all Members for their contributions to today's debate, and in particular the Petitions Committee for bringing forward these important petitions. I'd also like to acknowledge the hard work of campaigners and local groups, whose voices have helped to bring these issues to the forefront of our national conversation. The strength of feeling on learner travel is very clear indeed, and rightly so—this is an issue that touches on the lives of families, young people and communities across Wales.

We've heard today about challenges faced by learners and their families, and I'd like to assure all Members and the petitioners that the Welsh Government is listening. The petitions before us call for a review of school transport guidance and legislation, and I recognise the concerns and aspirations that have been raised. I've been clear that our approach must be collaborative, right across Government. Ministers are working very closely together here in the Welsh Government to find solutions, but it also requires cross-party work. Crucially, it requires work with our delivery partners in councils, schools and transport providers. There are no easy answers, but by working together, we can continue to make progress.

Over the course of this Senedd term, we've taken steps to address some of the challenges of learner travel, and although they may not answer the calls of the petitions, I do think it's important to recognise the work that has taken place. We've undertaken an internal review of the learner travel Measure, and I hear that there are some in and out of this Siambr who think this review didn't go far enough, but we must remember the financial context that we are working within.

Last year, I held a travel summit for learners, bringing together key partners for the first time to discuss practical solutions, and I'm committed to setting up work streams to take forward priority actions. We've also consulted on revised operational guidance. This is the first update in over a decade to this important document. And I was delighted to introduce the £1 bus fare for all young people, a national first in Wales. So far, over 36,000 young people have now signed up to the MyTravelPass, making education, training and employment more accessible and affordable.

Furthermore, over the course of this Senedd term, we've invested heavily to make school journeys safer and more sustainable. The safe routes in communities grant enhances walking, wheeling and cycling routes to schools alongside the active travel journeys programme and the walk to school programme. Together, these infrastructure improvements and behaviour change initiatives are creating safer streets and supporting sustainable travel options for school journeys—so too 20 mph hour around schools.

Will you take an intervention?

Yes.

I wonder if you're aware of the work of the bike bus movement, because in Cardiff, they are excellent at getting young people, primary school children, to learn how to safely cycle together to school. It's certainly over a mile, down hilly roads. And because of the way in which they're marshalled, it is entirely safe.

I am very aware of those schemes. They're schemes that the Welsh Government supports. I've participated in walking bus schemes as well in my own constituency, which are proving to be very popular with young people.

Also, I have to say, Dirprwy Lywydd, that my Cabinet colleagues have increased the household income threshold for the education maintenance allowance, providing support to an additional 3,500 students and invested £6.5 million this year alone in family engagement officers to help boost attendance.

We collectively worked together to improve the bus Bill across this Chamber. I'd like to thank those of you who helped put travelling to education front and centre in the legislation. This wasn't just a policy tweak. It's a bold commitment to make sure Wales's new bus service model can deliver for schools, colleges and universities. We're not just talking about change, we're making it happen, ensuring that accessible, reliable transport is a reality for all learners.

As part of our commitment to continuous improvement, I'm pleased to update you on some of the dedicated work streams established following the learner travel summit. I'll shortly be publishing the summary report following the consultation on the revised guidance. We aim to publish the final guidance by the end of this Senedd term.

Additionally, working in partnership with the Welsh Local Government Association, we're convening a series of structured sessions, both in person and online, focused on three challenge areas: post-16 transport, transport for learners with additional learning needs, and Welsh-medium learner transport. These sessions will bring together local authority representatives with all key delivery partners.

Will the Member give way? Thank you. I really appreciate that, Cabinet Secretary. I just wanted to ask you a question, really. I recently visited Ysgol Gymraeg Gwynllyw in Torfaen in my area, and it's a Welsh-medium education facility, and to get there from the three surrounding constituencies, every single pupil from each different one were paying different fees to get there. Some were paying double the amount of another one. How is that fair? Are you working with the local government association to address that? Diolch.

Yes, we're working with councils across Wales and with providers of transport to make sure that anomalies are ironed out, and there's a consistent approach. It would probably be worth taking your own leader there, as he, as Lee Waters has identified, is promising to cut support for school transport. He's called it an incredible waste of money, and I think if he were to get in charge of more councils in England, we'd see more cuts there through his DOGE enterprise.

Now, the outcomes of the work will be for consideration by the next Government to ensure that the voices and expertise of all partners inform the next steps in our learner travel strategy, and central to our approach—[Interruption.] Yes.

Can I ask where the experience of learners and their parents are, as part of these work streams? Because, clearly, some of the responses I've seen from Welsh Government and then from local authority—local authorities seem to blame Welsh Government; Welsh Government are blaming how things are implemented by local authorities. So, when can we see that collaboration actually involving parents and pupils who are actually experiencing the reality on the ground?

Well, I'm pleased to say that we have engaged directly with young people, both through the Youth Parliament and through fora such as Citizens Cymru Wales. I'm determined to make sure that at future events, following the first learner travel summit, young people are fully represented, and their parents as well. So, I can assure the Member that the voice and lived experience of young people and their parents are being considered as part of changes that are being made. Their ideas have already shaped our policies, for example the introduction of the £1 fare scheme for young people and the ongoing refresh of the travel behaviour code, as well as, of course, the youth panel that we've set up within Transport for Wales. Young people on that panel are providing lived experience and ideas and solutions for the problems that they face, and we are implementing whatever we can.

And just talking about the Citizens Cymru Wales group, I met with them recently, and, yes, they did advocate—passionately, I have to say—for a reduction of the mileage threshold for secondary school children. But they also understood the practical and financial challenges involved in such a decision. It was fantastic to hear how much they'd benefited from our investment to ensure that we could deliver the £1 fare scheme, encouraging more young people to choose to use public transport because it's more affordable.

Costs have been raised by a number of Members today. Costs annually now exceed £205 million, and I understand that if we were to implement a policy of 2 miles instead of the 3-mile threshold, that would amount to an additional £80 million. This is money that should be spent on education. This is coming from education budgets. This is depriving young people of teachers, of enhanced education opportunities. [Interruption.] I'll take the intervention.

Thank you. I'm sure you've seen the breakdown, as I have, on how that is spent, and a lot of that money is spent on private transfer, i.e. taxis, not on actual buses. Has the assessment been made—because of the changes, how much is actually having to be spent because the buses are not there, to transfer via taxi, and had there been a provision, if that would be a saving? I just want to understand, and be clear: all of that is not spent on buses, which we're specifically looking at here.

No. A huge amount of money is being spent on taxis, and one of the problems that we've got is that the market is not sufficient to be able to generate competitive prices, so it's driving up the overall costs. But if you reduce the threshold, then you're actually going to be increasing the number of people that will be using the taxis. The amount of buses that will be required, and not just the buses, the bus infrastructure around schools is prohibitive as well. These are all challenges that we were wrestling over at the learner travel summit and which we'll continue to work on.

There are no simple solutions. Janet, I know that you called for, by whatever means, getting the problem sorted, but there is no single solution to this. It's multifaceted, and that's why we're working together collaboratively across Governments and with service providers.

Now, I would like to acknowledge the vital role that councils play in delivering learner transport. We recognise the huge pressures they face, including financial constraints and the need to balance local and national priorities, and that's why we're supporting the sharing of best practice, collaboration and innovation to help to manage costs and improve provision. We continue to support the WLGA and the Association of Transport Co-ordinating Officers to share this best practice and resources, so that local authorities that are successfully delivering school transport to over 92,000 learners on a daily basis can learn from each other. I know that local authorities are continually trying to improve the services they deliver. I was really heartened to hear that some councils have been working closely with Cardiff University to see whether research that's being undertaken can help to support and improve their learner travel services, and I'm looking forward to seeing how this work progresses.

To those who have petitioned for change, I say this: your voices are being listened to. This Government's internal review of the Learner Travel (Wales) Measure has already led to a published recommendations report and we are acting on its key proposals. The updated guidance will reflect the latest legislation and the latest best practice and we are committed to ongoing dialogue with campaigners, councils and all interested parties. While we don't have the resources to do all that you'd like us to do, I have committed to meeting with the RCT campaign group to carry on this conversation.

In closing, I'd just like to reiterate my commitment and that of the Welsh Government to reduce barriers to education and ensure that no learner is left behind because of transport difficulties.

I call on Carolyn Thomas to reply to the debate.

I'd like to thank all Members for their contributions and I'd like to thank the petitioners as well for collecting a huge number for their petition and for being here today. Starting off, there was a discussion about fear. So, some routes that might be deemed not hazardous don't actually capture the fear of parents and pupils who are having to walk to school. It's a big issue. How do we overcome that and take that into consideration? There was also a discussion about parents having to give up work so that they can transport their children to school, and that has a financial impact.

Learners are not being able to access Welsh-medium education because they have to have transport to the nearest school, which might not be Welsh-medium but English-medium. But I do know that some schools do keep that as a policy, so there is inconsistency across local authorities, where they will transport pupils to the nearest Welsh-medium school. So, perhaps that's something to be considered, going forward.

Pupils arrive drenched, with books, and Jenny mentioned these heavy bags—6 kg. Perhaps, working with schools, something could be done to make sure that a child has a locker or some provision to store their books as well. And if they go to after-school clubs as well, children should be able to access the after-school clubs and have music lessons. At one time, schools used to provide after-school transport as well, but because of cuts and financial constraints, that has impacted on that. I would like to declare that I used to be a cabinet member in charge of transport, including school transport, so I have experience of this.

Rhys talked about his children being able to walk in Cardiff, and I've seen children being able to walk and scoot in Cardiff on safe routes, which is wonderful to see, and those cycle routes. And I'm glad that the Government is investing also where children are able to do that. I visited a school in Rhyl, where there was an issue with cars parking outside schools and it was really dangerous. So, they've implemented a walking and cycling route with funding from Welsh Government and working with active travel as well, which is really good to see, if that can happen, and safe places. But we understand that geography needs to be taken into consideration, because in some areas it's just too hilly. I know that, in RCT, it's been discussed, that change from 2.5 miles to 3 miles, but it's a very hilly area, especially with walking.

Rhys also mentioned why can't pupils purchase a seat on an empty bus. I know that that's something that one local authority did, and I asked about that. It was £350 a year, which is a lot of money, but I was told that that was actually subsidised. At the time, it cost £700 per pupil to transport them to school. And I know from being a member of the Local Government and Housing Committee that, since COVID, it's increased by 40 per cent to about an average of £1,200 per pupil per year to transport them to school. Laura Anne, I know that you mentioned that everybody should have access to transport, but there is a cost implication, and if there isn't the funding, because school transport is very often funded through the education transport budget, and it's very often 25 per cent of the budget, which is something that's been considered as well, so—.

Thank you for taking that intervention. I'm really pleased that you have outlined it so clearly, and it's great to see that the Petitions Committee is engaging with campaigners. I think it's just that lack of progress over this whole Senedd term at the moment, and the fact that it's being left to the next Government. I wonder if there are things that we can give as commitments today.

One issue I haven't been able to raise, or we haven't heard, is about some pupils and learners being punished for arriving to school late, so if buses don't arrive, getting negative points or receiving detention. Are there some things we can do immediately to ensure that children aren't punished because there's no access to education, or if a road is flooded and they can't go their usual route and so on? There are some things where they're being penalised at the moment through no fault of their own, and they're trying desperately to access education.

The Cabinet Secretary for Education is here today and listening to this whole debate, and this is something we could pick up as well. Thank you for the intervention.

As I said, there are no easy answers. We're working with partners. Hopefully—. We need to consider the views of children and parents. To sum up, I just want to quote what Cefin said earlier, that 'education should open doors', but transport should not be a barrier. Thank you.

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

Before we move on to the next item, Janet Finch-Saunders raised a point of order during the debate. We have checked the record and broadcasting, and even though I didn't hear it, it is recorded as being a comment referring to a member as a 'hypocrite'. That is not appropriate language in this Chamber, for any Member to call another Member a hypocrite. Each of us has our own opinions, and those opinions sometimes are not necessarily the same as the opinions of the party they represent. Therefore, there is no such thing as a hypocrite; you make your own positions. Therefore, I will ask the Member who made the comment to withdraw the comment, please, to ensure that that is correct, proper process.

Chair, I consider saying one thing and doing another to be the definition of a hypocrite, but I hear what you say about decorum in this Chamber, and I would be happy to withdraw the language.

Thank you.

Item 7 today is the Welsh Conservatives' debate on the land transaction tax. I call on Joel James to move the motion.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. I'm pleased to open this debate in the name of my Welsh Conservative colleague Paul Davies.

We have to be honest about the reality facing far too many people in Wales today. Too many people are living in homes that simply don't suit their needs anymore, and they stay in these homes not because they want to, but because moving has become too difficult, too expensive and, frankly, too daunting. There's a real psychological barrier here. People look at the cost of moving and decide it's not worth it. Property taxes, like the land transaction tax, push up the upfront costs of moving home, and this actively discourages people from making changes that they would otherwise make.

When it costs thousands and even tens of thousands of pounds just to move, people stay put. Older people remain in large family homes long after their children have moved out, which costs disproportionately more to heat and maintain. Families who need more space can't find it, and people won't even relocate for work, even when the opportunity is there. The result is a housing system that is clogged up: homes in the wrong hands, in the wrong places and at the wrong time.

Evidence shows that if we remove these barriers, things start to move again—literally. Research looking at the equivalent tax in England suggests that scrapping property transaction tax could increase home owner mobility by more than 50 per cent. That means tens of thousands more homes coming on to the market every year, it unlocks properties that are currently stuck, boosts resale activity, and encourages new homes to be built as well. A housing market that moves more freely also helps people move to where the jobs are, improving productivity and opportunity across the economy. [Interruption.] Let me just carry on a little bit, and then I'll bring you in.

Dirprwy Lywydd, I and my party believe that this matters for growth. Transaction taxes act like sand in the gears of the housing system. They discourage turnover and trap people in homes that no longer work for them. Remove that friction and you free up supply. Developers have more confidence to build, people are more willing to move, and the wider economy benefits. Research on stamp duty in England suggests that abolishing it could boost economic activity up to £20 billion a year through construction, consumer spending and labour mobility. The numbers may differ here in Wales, but the basic mechanics are exactly the same. From a pure economics point of view, these taxes are also widely seen as inefficient, that they create what economists call 'deadweight loss', in other words, economic damage that's bigger than the revenue that they raise, because they stop sensible, mutually beneficial transactions from happening. Compared with taxes on income or spending, property transaction taxes are among some of the most damaging to economic efficiency.

There's also a fairness issue. Land transaction tax has to be paid up front. That means buyers need a lot more cash on the day they complete. For first-time buyers and younger households without big savings, that's a huge barrier. It can trap people in homes, neighbourhoods and even jobs that no longer fit their lives.

We have to be realistic. Abolishing land transaction tax wouldn't fix every affordability problem, but it would remove one of the biggest cash-flow hurdles people face when trying to move. And beyond the economics, the system itself breeds resentment and confusion. People don't just dislike paying the tax—they often struggle to understand it. Even high-profile politicians have fallen foul of these rules. The former Labour Deputy Prime Minister, Angela Rayner, for example, was found to have underpaid stamp duty by a whopping £40,000. This just goes to show how complex and unforgiving the system truly is.

Land transaction tax relies on self-assessment, multiple reliefs and intricate rules that are easy to get wrong and costly to challenge. Scrapping it would simplify the tax system, reduce disputes and administrative costs, and make buying and selling a home far more transparent and predictable for ordinary people. Lower transaction costs would also bring wider social benefits. They'd make it easier for people to relocate for work and support a more flexible labour market. They'd make it easier for older homeowners to downsize, freeing up larger homes for families and make better use of the housing stock we already have.

I have selected the amendment to the motion, and I call on Heledd Fychan to move amendment 1, tabled in her own name.

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Dirprwy Lywydd. Well, obviously, from that contribution, the Tory party's approach to policy making in Wales is, 'For Wales, see England', because all the evidence I heard there was based on assessments in England, not here in Wales, where the thresholds are different, where average house prices are different, and I would like to see the Conservative Party actually base their policies on the actual reality here in Wales. James Evans was on Sharp End last night accusing people of fantasy economics. Well, this is fantasy policy making, based on no reality and no substance here. [Interruption.] No, I won't, because you will have your contributions, and the first speaker refused to take my intervention where I wanted to make these points. You will have your opportunity—it's your debate. And unlike—[Interruption.] No. Unlike last night, where you tried to dominate Sharp End, I am not going to accept that intervention. Perhaps you would like to listen to what I have to say, because what this motion clearly outlines is that you're not a serious opposition. You are not a serious opposition. And you're not serious about governing, because when you are advocating a substantial and unfunded tax cut, based on figures in England, not here in Wales, it proves that you are not serious. And it's not the only tax cut you've called for in recent months, which would have led to over £860 million taken out of the Welsh budget at a time when public services remain under considerable pressure.

And apart from betraying the people of Ukraine and playing into Putin's hands by saying that they will scrap the nation of sanctuary programme, which, let's not forget, represents 0.01 per cent of the total Welsh budget, and is incidentally a programme even the leader of the Conservatives used to say he was a supporter of, they haven't explained where they'll find the money. Meanwhile, they are conspicuously quiet about the millions of pounds of Welsh taxpayer money still being spent to manage the red tape and business-killing bureaucracy of their Brexit vanity project, and it shows, for all their bluster about cutting waste, they simply haven't got a leg to stand on. Look at where you are in the polls. That shows what people think of you as a party and as an opposition.

Heledd, wait a minute. I want to listen to the Member's contribution, and I can't hear because of the noise coming from the benches on my right. So, please allow the contribution to be heard so that we can all enjoy it.

They obviously don't want to listen to facts, which is why they're shouting. So, it may be a new year, but it's the same old Tories recklessly gambling with our public finances, and thank goodness the people of Wales are able to see through them.

So, this isn't to say that the principle of scrapping or at least reforming land transaction tax is not without merit. Indeed, there is widespread consensus amongst economists that taxes of this kind can be inefficient, creating a distortionary impact on housing and job markets alike, and in this respect there is a strong argument against taxing transactions, and thus the efficient allocation of resources, and better targeting wealth and assets as sources of Government revenue, particularly as we know that many of these assets do not positively contribute to economic activity. But the solution to this problem isn't the unfeasible cuts proposed today and the 'pay tomorrow' approach being advocated by the Tories, but rather putting in place viable alternatives so that we can replace the lost revenue sustainably without placing our public services at risk. So, one potential alternative that should be explored further is a land value tax, and I look forward to hearing more about the feasibility studies on the introduction on such a tax in Wales during next week's conference at Sophia Gardens.

And beyond this, we also need to see renewed action from the so-called partnership in power to reform our outdated and underpowered fiscal architecture. And this should include equipping Wales with parity of taxation powers with Scotland as a bare minimum so we can finally realise the potential of our income tax levers and design a system that more fairly reflects the nature of our tax base. We also need to see long-overdue progress in devolving new taxes, such as the vacant land tax, and the Cabinet Secretary was previously confident that this power would be in the hands of the Senedd before the end of this current term, so I would welcome an update from him when he responds to the debate.

With those words, I will close my contribution. But I hope, in closing the debate, the Conservatives can perhaps offer their reflection on the points I've raised and explain why they also oppose Wales securing parity of taxation powers with Scotland as a bare minimum if they are serious about reforming the tax system here in Wales. But they've shown, haven't they, even in this contribution today, that they are not a serious party and not serious about offering anything to the Welsh electorate.

I wish Plaid wouldn't be so angry all the time. You don't need to be angry. This is a debate. I would suggest that people actually listen to what Joel James said, because he very articulately put in place some of the issues around land transaction tax. And it wasn't aggressive, it was very clear, and made some cogent arguments about why it's currently wrong.

Because there's no doubt about it, it's certainly a repressive tax. It does nothing but hold back aspiration, acting as yet another barrier for people across Wales—whether it is a young family trying to buy their first home or an older couple hoping to downsize. Unfortunately, land transaction tax is just one of those many obstacles facing home owners in Wales. The reality is that our nation is in the midst of a housing crisis driven by successive Labour Governments failing, sadly, to build the homes that are so desperately needed.

At the same time, Wales is approaching a tipping point for the wider economy. For more than 25 years, Labour Governments, supported by Plaid, have stifled growth and severely damaged our long-term economic prospects. For nearly two years now, we have seen the same failed approach repeated at Westminster—reckless tax-and-spend policies that have maxed out the nation's credit card and left working families to pay the price through higher taxes, rising unemployment and weaker public services.

What Wales needs instead is a real boost for hard-working families—policies that restore hope and put more money into people's pockets. Yet young people continue to be disadvantaged simply for choosing to live here. Take, for example, a young couple with a child living in Chepstow, compared with a family just a few miles down the road—well, even a mile down the road—in England. In Wales, they face a lack of meaningful support for first-time buyers and no equivalent childcare support during the crucial early years. Now, as a result, based on an average house price in our area of circa £350,000 for a home, the very same property could cost a first-time buyer up to £5,000 more in tax alone here in Wales. On top of that, if the couple have a child, they could end up paying more than £4,000 extra each year in childcare costs compared with counterparts in England just a few miles away. How I come to that is that the childcare is based on a two-year-old, part time, at 25 hours a week. In England, that's £66 a week; it's £146 a week in Wales. Now, that's over £9,000 that that young couple will have to pay simply for living in Wales—another clear example of how the aspirations of young families are being smothered.

One thing we've certainly learned yet again is that the Conservatives dislike taxation. What we also know is that what they dislike most are those taxes such as council tax, commercial rates and land transaction tax that are very difficult to avoid legally.

The draft budget maintains current rates for Welsh income tax and land transaction tax, changes the land transaction tax multiple dwelling relief, and increases the standard rate of landfill disposals tax for 2026-27. Land transaction tax was one of the taxes, alongside the Welsh rate of income tax and the landfill disposals tax, that were devolved to the Welsh Government. The reason they were devolved was that they were easier to identify in a geographical area. Although with some cross-border properties and land, we know the local authorities that collect the council tax, and if it has to be shared, the formula for doing so.

Whilst there is a need to split the tax between geographical locations for large business transactions that occur in Wales and other parts of the UK, that was previously true when the transaction occurred in properties in the UK and abroad. Land transaction tax replaced stamp duty land tax in Wales from 1 April 2018. The Welsh Revenue Authority collects and manages the tax for the Welsh Government. The land transaction tax is payable on the purchase or lease of a building or land over a certain price. The land transaction tax taxation, when introduced, was broadly consistent with the existing stamp duty land tax structure in England and Northern Ireland. The changes initially introduced were designed to make the tax fairer, improve taxation effectiveness, and enable a focus on Welsh needs and priorities. Under the current land transaction tax system, a surcharge applies to all transactions involving the purchase of an additional property. Additional property types include buy-to-let investments and second homes.

What would abolishing land transaction tax achieve? I don't believe it would reduce the cost of buying a house. When ordinary people, not rich people, enter the process of buying a house, they factor in legal fees, surveys and land transaction tax. This gives them the money they have available to purchase the property. What will happen if it is abolished is that the equivalent money will be added to the sale price. The change would reduce Government income and provide a small windfall to the seller of the properties. It would reduce the Government's capacity to spend—[Interruption.] Can I just finish this bit? It would reduce the Government's capacity to spend, because it would have less income. Would the Conservatives like to explain where they want the cuts to occur?

Thank you for taking the intervention, Mike. I notice you claimed there that the market value of a property would rise. I'm just curious as to what evidence you have to suggest that that would be the case.

Well, welcome to the world of us ordinary people. When we go out to try and buy a house, we work out how much we can afford. We put in land transaction tax, we put in stamp duty or land transaction tax, we put in the amount we're going to have to pay to the solicitors. Having worked all that out, we then know how much money we can borrow and pay.

There is no actual value of a house; it's the amount the purchaser can raise and the amount the seller will accept. When you provide more money to the purchaser, either using Help to Buy or abolishing land transaction tax, what happens is house prices will inevitably increase. You are distorting the current system, but the only gainers are the sellers of the more expensive properties.

On taxation, you can tax income, wealth or spending. Land transaction tax taxes expenditure. Like all taxes that are difficult to avoid, they're disliked by the rich. Land transaction tax is estimated by the Welsh Government to raise £401 million in 2026-27. The threshold at which land transaction tax becomes payable is £225,000, above the average price in Wales of £217,000, and well above the average for first-time buyers of £188,000. Six out of 10 transactions of a main home in Wales pay no tax at all. In the draft budget, the rates are set to remain the same.

Two changes are proposed in the draft budget to the multiple dwelling relief scheme: a new equalisation rule, which will improve fairness for taxpayers who purchase more than one dwelling in the same transaction or in linked transactions, and an increase in the current minimum rate for relief from 1 per cent to 3 per cent. It's also intended to introduce a new refund of the higher residential rate of land transaction tax where a taxpayer buys a dwelling and leases it to a local authority through Leasing Scheme Wales.

It's a highly volatile tax and very dependent on the economic situation. The amount raised from the sale of commercial land and property, one big shopping centre, can actually raise a quarter or a fifth of the total amount of land transaction tax in Wales.

Turning to Plaid Cymru's amendment,

'explore further reforms to the tax system as a means of eventually replacing land transaction tax in a sustainable manner',

everybody wants to find a more sustainable manner of raising taxes, but we also want to find taxation that people cannot avoid.

Land value tax, which people talk about, what does that mean in practice? It means you'll never see social housing, you'll never see council housing in any of the more expensive land areas in Wales. I think that we really want to go better than, 'We want change, please support us.'

I'm pleased to take part in this debate today in favour of abolishing the land transaction tax, Wales's version of stamp duty basically, because this tax is holding our country back, trapping young people out of home ownership, penalising families who need space, and making it harder for older people to downsize and free up homes in our communities.

Like many things in this country, the housing market is broken and we can't continue as if nothing is wrong. In 1991, approximately 67 per cent of 25 to 34-year-olds in the UK owned their homes, but fast forward to 2023 and that number stands at just 39 per cent. Home ownership is becoming a distant dream rather than an achievable aspiration. [Interruption.] I will. I'll just finish this particular remark. This is heartbreaking for Britain, where home ownership should always be a key part of British life.

I'd like to ask: which Government was in power during the time up until 2023?

Thank you for that short, sharp intervention, but it's a cumulative effect over many years, Mike. If you take the time gap between 1991 and 2023, there were 13 years of a Labour Government within that, and then indeed within a devolved context, we are now 26 years into a Labour Government for which housing is purely devolved.

We always want our children to have more opportunities than our own generation, but that's sadly not the case. We are leaving them a worse country with fewer opportunities, and the inability to purchase a property is very symbolic of that decline. Young couples are stuck in a cycle of rented properties, parents are unable to move closer to schools or work, and older residents want to downsize but cannot justify the cost of moving. We should be clear that, in Wales, housing is devolved, and Labour, along with their mates in Plaid Cymru, could have turned this around, but instead they stepped off the gas and allowed our property market to stall: a growing population coupled with rising house prices and a failure to build enough houses to satisfy the demand.

A clear and decisive way that we could break with the old model would be to abolish the land transaction tax. This tax raises around £147 million a year from primary residences. That may sound like a large figure, but it represents just half of 1 per cent of the Welsh Government's overall budget, and, crucially, the money to fund the abolition is there. The finance Minister left funding unallocated in this year's budget, yet Labour and Plaid chose not to use it in order to help ordinary people onto the housing ladder. Instead, they chose more waste, more bureaucracy and more of the same failed priorities.

Stamp duty is widely recognised as a bad tax. The Institute for Fiscal Studies has called it the most economically damaging tax in England, and the Treasury Select Committee said it should be a priority for reform. Independent tax experts have said that it distorts the housing market, reduces labour mobility and holds back economic growth. If that's true in England, then it's undoubtedly true here in Wales.

Look at the evidence: house building in Wales is falling, not rising. Last year, over 4,600 new homes were completed, a 3 per cent drop on the previous year and one of the lowest figures on record. Housing starts are down by more than a quarter, and the Welsh Government is set to miss out on its own social housing target by thousands of homes. And, at the same time, the average age of the first-time buyer continues to creep up. This is not accidental. It's the result of bad decisions.

Before I start to talk about land transaction tax, I would just like to start by saying, Michael, Heledd, your Labour-Plaid Cymru co-operation agreement lasting three years has seen the economic prospects of Wales dive like at no other time that I know of. We have the lowest median wage here compared to England. You make a point about—[Interruption]. Yes, first time.

Three years? I'm sorry, I thought Peter Fox said 25.

I'm talking now about your disastrous three years.

Oh, right. Peter Fox did say 25 years. 'Plaid Cymru and Labour have been in control for 25 years.' He was wrong.

He's not wrong, it's actually nearly 27. He's only wrong that it's nearly 27 years. [Interruption.] Hold on a minute. Hold on a minute. You've been in Government for one term. You've always latched on to Labour in every term since the Assembly has been—the Senedd, I should say. But it has.

I mean, you just love your tax. It's your left-wing ideology. Tourism tax. You've actually damaged the prospects of economic prosperity. You go after our businesses. You do not support those who want to get on in Wales with ambition, aspiration. You just—. It’s so frustrating to be a Member and to see how we have dived over the past five years, and three of those years, you and your group are fully—[Interruption.] I'll just get on a bit—are fully responsible for. And I make no apology for pointing out the very obvious. [Interruption.]

It is becoming increasingly harder to buy in Wales, especially as a first-time buyer in Wales. I know from my own constituency, a young family will buy their first home, a young couple will buy their first home, then they have a family, then they want to go bigger. You’re just putting all the blocks in their way to do that. The cost of living in Wales now and the economic strains that have been caused by now the UK and Welsh Labour Governments; they have absolutely tricked and lied to the people of the UK.

Now, £147 million a year in Wales is raised by land transaction tax. Look at all the wasted spend on Cardiff Airport. So, 4,631 new homes were completed in Wales, down from 4,771. It's the second lowest figure on record and yet we're meant to be having all these 20,000 new homes. Where are they? Three thousand eight hundred dwellings were started in 2024-25, a 20 per cent decrease. These are serious failings when trying to look how you build up the economy of a nation such as Wales.

We know as the Welsh Conservatives the importance of home ownership, because with it it brings stability. Being able to get on to the housing ladder is an ambition for many. We will make no apology for wanting to abolish land transaction tax for primary residences. Our leader of the Conservative Party in the UK, Kemi Badenoch, has already announced that a future Conservative Government will abolish stamp duty, which is the equivalent in England. Our housing market is in despair, and it needs to be fixed. Too many of our young people are currently renting. Working parents are penalised if they want more space to raise a family. Currently, the average age for a first-time buyer in Wales is 31. More needs to be done to ensure that you are building the houses, but hopefully it'll be 'we' that will be building the houses after May.

Will you take an intervention, Janet?

Yes, go on then.

Thank you very much. Would you agree with me that the last time that Wales truly had a Conservative Government, in the 1980s, it was the late, great Margaret Thatcher, who was the best Prime Minister this country has ever had, who invested in people's futures by letting people own their own homes and giving them the freedom that they deserve? Would you agree with me on that remark?

I would. And I'll let you now, the Welsh Conservatives will always want to support—. The right to buy was a good scheme. Every house sold built three houses. How is that bad economics? [Interruption.] That is true—oh, yes it is. [Interruption.] Panto season has finished, yes. As well as ensuring that young people are supported—

You've taken some interventions and you've listened to voices off as well. I'll allow you 30 seconds now to conclude your contribution.

Thank you. Diolch. We will achieve this through a strong Conservative plan. We will deliver a stronger economy, a stronger country and a stronger housing market. Under the leadership of Darren Millar, we can achieve this.

The Cabinet Secretary for finance to contribute.

Thank you very much, Llywydd. I've listened with interest to contributions in this debate, but it's important to say at the outset that taxation funds public services and key infrastructure for our communities. The revenue from taxation is used to ensure that our society in general can operate and prosper. This includes affordable homes, teachers, nurses, roads, public transport and supporting vulnerable groups. Tax revenue also helps businesses in Wales to grow and develop, providing conditions for success. The Welsh Government has core principles that are the basis of our work on taxation. The purpose of these is to make our general taxation system consistent and clear by ensuring that Welsh taxes raise revenue fairly and that they support broader policies, that they are clear, stable and simple, that they encourage broad engagement and help to create a more equal Wales for future generations.

Llywydd, I did listen very carefully to the opening speaker in the debate. I heard another Member say that it had been a thoughtful contribution, and I agree that it was. It was downhill rapidly after that on the Conservative benches. The reason why the opening contribution was thoughtful was because the mover of the motion anticipated the weaknesses of it so very clearly.

Here are four reasons why the Government will oppose the motion. First of all, this commitment is entirely unfunded. I too have seen the views of some economists who believe there to be better alternatives to land transaction tax, and I agree that we should think carefully about those alternatives. But it is a very rare voice indeed that argues that the revenues produced through land transaction tax should simply be given up altogether—no alternative, just abolish it. Well, that unlikely band is today swollen by the Welsh Conservative Party.

Maybe there will be little surprise at this, because they come, of course, with previous form in this area. Not only are they prepared to do without the £176 million raised by LTT, but they have already announced that they would cut Welsh rates of income tax by 1p in the pound. That will cost £299 million. They've also said that they would abolish business rates for small businesses and restore reliefs for retail, leisure and hospitality. That's another £300 million in lost revenue.

I heard the leader of the Conservative Party claiming, when Heledd Fychan pointed to the cumulative impact of these pledges, that what she said wasn't true, but if you simply add up those three pledges, that's a cool £0.75 billion lost to Welsh public services, with not a penny to be raised elsewhere. These policies have three things in common. Each one of them lacks credibility. Each one of them could have been implemented during the long 14 years of Conservative Government, and not a single one of them actually happened.

Here's a second reason why we must reject the motion: the proposal is internally full of problems and contradictions. It fails to grasp the basic mechanisms of the tax and how the tax is structured. The Conservative plan would introduce a subjective concept of primary residence that would apply on the day the property is purchased. What happens if the primary residence is changed on the day after the purchase, or the day after that? Would every purchase of a home to be used as a primary residence be exempt even if a former primary residence was still in the ownership of that same purpose? How would the Welsh Revenue Authority, charged with implementing the new system, be able to identify any of that?

Will you take an intervention?

Of course.

Just very quickly, because it's an important point. I accept the issue that you have raised, but that is exactly an issue that is already tested at the moment, is it not, for all sorts of other purposes by the Government, in terms of council tax premiums, for example, in terms of other forms of taxation: somebody's primary or main residence versus if they have a second or third property.

Llywydd, that's exactly right, but that's because there is a book of rules and your proposal has no rules at all. I've just asked you how would you know. There is nothing in what you have said or published that would answer the simple questions I have just asked you. You have a proposal and you have no—[Interruption.] It's no use the leader of the opposition pointing to the fact that people have solved other problems; I'm asking you how you're going to solve this problem, and the truth of the matter is that you have no answers to those questions. You want to—[Interruption.]

You said at the start of your contribution that you've listened to the debate, and what I outlined in my contribution was the remarks of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, who said that, in economic terms, it's a damaging tax. And that was the view that the Treasury Committee came to within Parliament. So, are you deliberately ignoring those, or do you acknowledge those remarks and are you in a position to factor those into your views on the matter?

I've already said that there are serious critiques of land transaction tax. What I'm saying is that the policy you propose entirely lacks credibility, because you're not able to answer even the most simple, practical questions about the way in which your policy would actually operate on the ground. It is a recipe for administrative confusion and taxpayer error, and in the current state of its development, it simply won't work.

Let me make a great imaginative leap, and assume for a moment that those practical hurdles can be overcome. The policy runs then into the third objection, in that it just won't do what its supporters here claim. One of the things on which most experts are agreed is that in the post-Thatcher era, too few houses have been built across the United Kingdom. In a seller's market, any reduction in land transaction tax, as Mike Hedges explained, operates to the advantage not of the person trying to buy a house, but the person selling. The tax will go down, the price will go up. The difference will be pocketed by the seller, the buyer will be no better off. It really is as simple as that. The taxpayer will have provided a £176 million bonus to those who are already asset rich—

Will you take an intervention?

Of course.

Again, an interesting point that you have made, but don't you accept that most people who are buying a house are actually selling one as well? So, actually, the net benefit is the fact that there's the wonderful introduction and freeing up of cash that happens when people move property and move home with all of those tradespeople, all of the money that's spent on new kitchens, bathrooms, carpets, furniture stores on local high streets that benefit. So, when you say only the sellers will benefit—. I don't accept that it's only the sellers that benefit, but the sellers are often the purchasers as well, in the majority of cases.

And they're now buying houses that are more expensive than they would have been due to the fact that your policy had been introduced. It's not a benefit. The policy does not benefit buyers, and it certainly doesn't benefit first-time buyers, a point that so many of your Members have tried to emphasise this afternoon.

This brings me to the final and most significant objection to the policy. Most people in Wales do not pay land transaction tax at all. Six out of 10 purchasers do not pay LTT, because the progressive nature of our policy, quite different to the one in England, means that we have always kept the threshold at which the tax begins above the cost of an average house price in Wales, and well above the average price paid by a first-time buyer.

Before Christmas, the Senedd debated the merits of a wealth tax. All parties other than the Welsh Conservatives agreed that those who had the most should be asked to contribute the most, and that's what LTT does in Wales. The more wealth you have at your disposal, the more expensive an asset you are able to buy, the more you are expected to contribute in land transaction tax. A simple example of the progressive approach in action.

Here again, Llywydd, we must take an imaginative leap into the world of policy make-believe where this policy actually acts to the benefit of buyers. What sort of buyers would be helped by this policy? By definition, those who have the greatest resources already. Resources in excess of the £225,000 at which the tax starts to be taken in Wales, and well above the £181,000 that is paid by the average first-time buyer. In other words, this is a tax cut that by definition only helps those who already have the most. The more you have, the more this policy would help you. It is the exact opposite of the policy approach taken by successive Welsh Governments. It takes money from those services that need it the most and gives it in bucketfuls to those who need it the least. So, what the Senedd is being asked to endorse today is a policy of which the kindest thing that could be said is that it would not work, because if it did work, it would quite clearly do even more harm. I ask colleagues to vote against it.

Sam Rowlands to reply to the debate.

Thank you, Llywydd. I'm grateful to all Members who have contributed in this debate here this afternoon, including the Cabinet Secretary for his contribution in response to the debate here today. The Cabinet Secretary opened up by describing the debate as moving downhill pretty rapidly. I do feel, though, he did bring us to the depths of despair with his contribution, walking us through the socialist love of taxation and why it's such a wonderful thing for the people of Wales.

The Cabinet Secretary's position throughout his contribution was one that assumed that land transaction tax, or stamp duty in England, has always existed and should never, ever be considered for removal, that it's something that is sacred and has every right to remain there forever and a day. But what Joel James, in his opening, actually did was point out that this is not just about the tax itself; it's about opportunity and putting power back into the hands of families here in Wales, because, as Conservatives, he pointed out, we believe that owning your own home gives you a real stake in your society and roots in your community. A nation of homeowners is a nation of stakeholders.

And it's not just about home ownership, though, as something that should be within the reach of young people up and down Wales, giving them stability and security, but it's also something that allows older homeowners to downsize if they wish. But, under this Welsh Labour Government, propped up by their friends in Plaid Cymru, this is increasingly impossible, and that's absolutely objectively true. Our housing market is not working as well as it should today. Young people are trapped renting, working parents are penalised is they want more space to raise a family, and there are obstacles for pensioners who want to downsize. This makes our economy weaker, and a number of contributors commented on the economics of this, and it's economists across the spectrum who describe stamp duty as one of the most economically damaging taxes that we have, and are nearly unanimous on this point.

I heard colleagues point to the study by the Institute for Fiscal Studies that describes stamp duty as an economic nonsense, because it rewards people for staying put and punishes them for moving. The OECD have highlighted how this tax acts as a roadblock for labour mobility, when the cost of moving is artificially inflated by thousands of pounds of tax, and the Mirrlees review suggests that stamp duty is one of the most damaging taxes, far more harmful than VAT or income tax—quite literally, a tax on someone trying to improve their life.

So, by removing this barrier, we don't just make houses cheaper, we make the entire economy more mobile, efficient and dynamic. And it was Peter Fox who pointed to the fact that the Welsh Labour Government and Plaid Cymru don't really understand the economy still, even after all these years, nearly 27 years into governing here directly in Wales. They're not acknowledging the real economic opportunities in front of them, with things like scrapping the land transaction tax—further evidence they don't really know what they're doing on the economy. They have made home ownership more difficult and less affordable, while creating a system that traps older people in homes too large for their needs. They've delivered a stagnant housing market, blocked mobility, and have a weaker Welsh economy as a result.

And Plaid's cosy deal with Labour means more spending on their own vanity projects, rather than putting money into the pockets of hardworking families, or releasing the housing market to work for the people of Wales. It's not just a tax cut; it's a kickstart for the economy, a chance to make housing more affordable, and a way to unlock the Welsh housing market, millions of pounds currently tied up in a tax that blocks families from buying, selling and moving freely. That is money that can be put to work, growing our economy, supporting businesses and allowing families to spend more in their communities. Of course, Plaid Cymru and Welsh Labour claim they care about young people, yet, under their watch, the average age of first-time buyers, as Gareth Davies pointed out, has again increased. New home building, as Janet Finch-Saunders has pointed out, has fallen year on year, and the target for low-carbon social housing is set to be missed again.

The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There are objections. We will therefore defer voting.

We will move to item 8, the Plaid Cymru debate on the Senedd election. I call on Rhun ap Iorwerth to move the motion.

Thank you, Llywydd. I'm pleased to open Plaid Cymru's first debate in 2026, a year that promises to be very significant in the history of the politics of our nation amid the real belief that a change of direction is possible in May. And we do trust in the people of Wales to make the right choice. Yes, the opinion polls do tell a story. They give us a taste of the public's opinion at present, but while I am not taking anything for granted, what we do have is a story about how eager people are for a positive change and how ready they are to turn their backs on the Labour status quo, and there are such clear signs that they are ready to support Plaid Cymru's vision as a Government that is determined to stand up for the interests of Wales, without any conditions. And as Plaid Cymru's motion sets out today, between the failures in our public services and the absence of innovative policies to tackle the challenges within our communities and the continuous unwillingness to stand up to Keir Starmer, it's not surprising that the people of Wales have lost trust in Labour leadership.

Everywhere you look now, whether it's in the health system, in our economy, in our schools, in society more broadly, we are a long way from where we want to be as a nation: our precious NHS on an unsustainable footing, creaking under the pressure of a waiting list backlog that has grown by approximately 200,000 since the last election alone; a stagnant economy for too long that ranks among the worst performing in the UK on employment, on productivity and on wage growth; a third of children living in poverty; a cost-of-living crisis still biting, of course, and showing little sign of easing; pupil attainment—those levels deteriorating to the extent that Wales recently recorded its worst-ever PISA scores, and a fifth of Welsh children are classified as functionally illiterate by the time they reach secondary school.

And the journey of Welsh devolution was not only stopped in its tracks by the Government's so-called partners in power, denying us the opportunity to control our own destiny on issues such as justice and the Crown Estate, but actively reversed in several areas, as 11 Labour Members were right to point out at the end of last year. [Interruption.] Just give me a few moments, if you could, Gareth. This is Labour's record that will be judged in May's election, and it makes for grim reading. Gareth Davies.

I thank the leader of Plaid Cymru for giving way. You very ably pointed out the failure of the Labour Party over 26 years, but given your complicity within that, in supporting Labour over the years, do you take any degree of responsibility for some of those, given that you were in Government with Labour between 2007 and 2011, three years of a co-operation agreement and bit-parts of support here, there and everywhere between 1999 and the present day?

Of course, you refer to days when you were probably still at school. I'm very proud of having influenced Government to do things from opposition, and I look at the Conservative Party here and I see a party that has succeeded in doing precisely nothing in 26 years of devolution, and I'm confident they will still be able to offer precisely nothing after May's election.

Now, the Government's amendment—[Interruption.] I'll make some—[Interruption.] I'll make some progress, if I may. The Government's amendment is absent in both self-reflection and any sense of a change of direction. It speaks of having the most generous student support package in the UK, as if Scotland's free university tuition policy doesn't exist. It's a selective take on NHS performance, which takes no account of countless missed targets and failing health boards, and of a new era of investment, despite a spending review that will deliver the lowest real-terms growth in day-to-day spending for the Welsh budget outside the immediate austerity years, let alone the insulting settlement on rail that we had a few months ago.

We've not only endured years of mismanagement, but years of missed opportunity, too. [Interruption.] And who'd have thought—

Rhun, two seconds, please. There's a lot of noise going on in the Chamber, and it's actually forcing the Member speaking to actually speak louder than he needs to speak. So, can we have some decorum within the Chamber, please? [Interruption.] Afterwards, all right. Afterwards, okay. So, can we all have some decorum so that we can hear what's being said, and the Members do not have to raise their voices unnecessarily?

I appreciate your support, Dirprwy Lywydd. We have not only endured years of mismanagement, but years of missed opportunity, too, and who would have thought that Labour winning that election on a UK level in 2024 would have made things worse?

Now, I'm an optimist by nature, and I believe we can win a new Wales, so we can really nurture hope of a better tomorrow—and, goodness me, do we need that hope. On the one hand, we have the divisive, grievance-fuelled and Putin-appeasing politics of Reform, propped up by more and more of their friends in the Conservative Party. It's a dumping ground, isn't it, for failed Tories, whose fingerprints are all over the disasters of Brexit and the Liz Truss mini-budget that tanked our economy, sent living standards tumbling, and turbocharged the cost-of-living crisis—the party that's more attuned to the interests of London and Washington—I could throw Moscow in there, too—than of Welsh communities.

And on the other hand, there is the choice of positive, progressive new leadership under whom making Wales the priority isn't just a matter of electoral convenience; it's literally our reason for being as a party—unstinting and unapologetic that we will never take a backward step when the interests of the people of Wales are in the balance. Now, as Labour's own election strategy summed it up so succinctly: Reform define the anger; Plaid Cymru define the hope. But we don't just define hope. We're ready—[Interruption.] Please, I'll make some progress. But we don't just define hope. We're ready to deliver it, as today's motion clearly demonstrates.

A Plaid Cymru Government will begin the transformation of our beleaguered NHS to get it back to its rightful place as a real pride of our nation. It's in our bold waiting list plan, delivering state-of-the-art elective care hubs across Wales, but it's also—more importantly, arguably—in our new approach to sustainable health and care, and our attitude on preventative healthcare. We will introduce the most generous childcare offer in the United Kingdom, worth more than £30,000 for every child. A new literacy and numeracy strategy will provide a firmer foundation for every child's learning. And we will incentivise new teachers who we know will motivate our pupils. We'll drive economic renewal by establishing a new development agency, domestically supporting our business community and supporting Wales’s global business brand. The status quo has failed, and Wales is falling further behind because of it. [Interruption.] James Evans.

You were highlighting earlier about parties and where they accept their funding from. Do you accept and take some responsibility and apologise to the people that Plaid Cymru took money from Colonel Gaddafi?

Everything we have endured are things that have held us back as a nation. And what matters most is what comes next. And in the argument and ideas I've set out today lies the hope of renewal and the rewards of a different outcome. Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd.

I have selected the amendments to the motion. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 will be deselected. I call on Darren Miller to move amendment 1, tabled in the name of Paul Davies.

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. I move the amendment that has been tabled in the name of Paul Davies.

I have to say I was not impressed with the age discrimination that took place in this Chamber during the contribution of the leader of Plaid Cymru in this debate. Ageism is not acceptable. Age is a protected characteristic, and when you dismiss people's views because of their age, which is what the leader of Plaid Cymru did, that is not acceptable in this Chamber or in any Parliament or in any workplace in the United Kingdom. And I'd be grateful, Deputy Llywydd, for your view and ruling on this matter, given that the Equality Act 2010 says that you should not discriminate against people on the basis of their age. I can see them laughing and cackling, as they often do when contributions are made in this Chamber, but this is an important thing and I'd appreciate your ruling before I go any further.

Do you raise a point of order?

Yes.

We will look at the record and we will review what was said, and I'll come back to you.

Thank you very much indeed. Now, if I can turn to the rest of this debate, Plaid's motion clearly states, quite rightly, that the election that is coming up in May is an opportunity for real change, a change of direction. But we're never going to get that change of direction if Plaid do well in that election, are we? Because at the end of the day, you are equally responsible for the failures that we have seen in Wales in recent years.

The reality is you've backed the appalling legislation we've seen in this Senedd over the years. You've backed the dreadful budgets that we have seen in Wales over these years: the plans for more politicians, the plans for more bureaucrats, the extra foreign aid that we're giving away overseas, the overseas offices, the ridiculous reduction in the default speed limit from 30 mph to 20 mph, the more trees in Uganda, the spending on wasteful and unnecessary projects like the nation of sanctuary plan. [Interruption.] And that is why the people of Wales, when they are exposed to these truths—

Darren.

—when they are exposed to these truths, will wake up and smell the coffee.

Will you take an intervention?

Before you ask for an intervention, for the leader of Plaid Cymru, I did ask for decorum in the Chamber, so we could hear him without him having to raise his voice. I ask for the same decorum for the leader of the Conservative Party in the Chamber, so that I can hear him without him having to raise his voice.

Thank you very much indeed, Deputy Presiding Officer. I'll take an intervention in a few moments. I'll take an intervention in a few moments. I know that they're truths that they don't like the public to be able to hear, but when you look at the state of the Welsh economy and our health service and our education system, you've been equally responsible for the damage that has been done. That is why Wales is broken, and it needs to be fixed. You're a person, as a leader of a party, that does not even believe that there's any such thing as illegal immigration. It's absolutely ridiculous. And when people look at your plans, your so-called hope for the future, it is based on the fantasy that independence would be a good thing for Wales, divorcing ourselves from the rest of the United Kingdom, which would cost taxpayers in this country thousands and thousands of pounds, billions of pounds to our economy. It would jeopardise the pensions that are paid to our pensioners, potentially drawing a border, a slate curtain across the Welsh border with England, causing all sorts of problems for our economy. And the billions that it would cost would deliver the sort of shock tax rises—many of which you've touched on—enormous tax rises, in order to sustain the current levels of expenditure on our public services. It's just not a credible plan.

But the situation is that you are part of the pantomime horses that have been running Wales for years, right? I don't know which end you are of that pantomime horse, the front or the back, but it's the same stuff that comes out of each as far as we are concerned—the same sort of rubbish that comes out of each end, and that is something that you have to explain to the public. If you want to defend your record, if you want to defend those budgets, if you want to defend that waste, if you want to defend the performance of the economy, if you want to defend the performance of the education system and defend the performance of the NHS, then that is a matter for you. But as soon as people begin to wake up and understand that you don't represent change, you represent more of the same, we're not going to see any real difference in Wales.

That sounded like the point where you were going to take the intervention. I think it's very, very important that political leaders are consistent. So, in attacking specifically the nation of sanctuary issue, how can you pretend to be a champion of the far right as you did on the nation of sanctuary, in a black and white way, when your own website says that you have always taken pride in being a nation of sanctuary?

You're actually misquoting. Can I just put the record straight? I'm a Conservative, right? I am not a far right person in any way, shape or form. I'm glad you take a great deal of interest in my website. Pay more attention to it, because you might learn something if you actually read a little bit further on. Wales has always been, as has the United Kingdom, a place where people have sought sanctuary. But we do not need to be wasting tens of millions of pounds on a nation of sanctuary plan when we are not responsible in Wales for immigration and we are not responsible for those matters. They are not devolved matters. I know you want responsibility for everything. [Interruption.] I won't take another intervention. We've heard enough claptrap from you. [Interruption.] Yes.

Darren, despite the noise in the Chamber, you and I have always agreed on certain things. I was proud to visit Kyiv with you last year, and I was proud to see you standing up for the investment that's been made by this Government and by the United Kingdom Government of all colours in supporting the people of Ukraine. The money that you've just condemned has been spent on supporting the people of Ukraine.

The UK Government is responsible for immigration matters in this country, and they should continue to be responsible for those immigration matters. And of course I support Ukraine and identify myself with those that support that nation against the illegal occupation of that country and the invasion that has taken place.

But let's get back to the situation that we're presented with. Plaid offer no positive change for Wales. They offer more of the same—the same pantomime horse that's been running Wales for the past 27 years: left, left, left, when what we really need is a proper change of direction, with some credible policies to fix the broken Wales that people experience day in, day out, and address the challenges that they have. And we certainly don't need the sort of discrimination that we've seen in this Chamber today with a leader like that.

I call on the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs to move amendment 2, tabled in the name of Jane Hutt.

Move formally.

Wales, along with the rest of the UK, has always taken pride in being a nation of sanctuary for those who have fled conflict, persecution and violence.

'Annie, Zaina, Niloha and Almas from Kenya, Syria, Venezuela and Iraq respectively, shared their powerful stories with me and it makes me all the more determined to help those in similar situations.

'It is vital that we are able to offer people fleeing danger the refuge, the sanctuary, love and care that they need.'

That's a quote from Darren Miller, incidentally, and I support and agree with that quote.

A few weeks ago, I spoke with a constituent who has been waiting three years for a hip replacement. For over 1,000 days, her world has shrunk to the four walls of her living room. She told me she feels like her life has been put on permanent pause while she waits for a phone call that never comes. That's the human face of a record-breaking backlog. She isn't a pathway nor a statistic, she is one of the 800,000 people in Wales currently trapped in a system that has stalled. That is one in five of our population. These delays have become the hallmark of Labour's stewardship. They encapsulate 26 years of Government by inertia, leaving our nation in limbo.

Since the last election, Labour has spent £1.5 billion to clean up the backlog, only to see it grow by nearly 200,000 extra pathways. That's £375 million a year—enough to pay the starting salaries of 6,000 nurses—fritted away, making a bad situation worse. This isn't about individual shortcomings, it's a feature of Welsh Labour's DNA. On the benches opposite sit five former health Ministers who failed to get a grip on this crisis. The goalposts move, the personnel changes, but the record of failure remains consistent. For the NHS in Wales, it's now irrefutable—the Labour Party is the problem and a change in Government is the cure.

Plaid Cymru is ready to break the mould of sticking-plaster solutions. We'll establish elective care hubs to drive down backlogs and create centres of excellence. We'll introduce executive triage to lift the administrative burden from overstretched GPs and we'll use legislation to embed collaboration between health boards and end the postcode lottery of care. But these are just the first steps. A Plaid Cymru Government will look beyond the hospital gates to the real cause of ill health. We know that the greatest drivers of sickness in Wales aren't just biological, they're social. They're found in poor housing, in the damp on a child's bedroom wall and in the grinding stress of poverty. We'll mainstream an understanding of these determinants into every Government department. We'll also stop burying our heads in the sand about the demographic changes coming down the line. Age is our greatest determinant of health, yet we lack the dedicated infrastructure to meet it. We'll build the foundations for world-class specialisms in geriatric care and rural health, ensuring that growing older and living in a rural community doesn't mean being cut off from specialist support.

I'm glad Plaid Cymru have put forward part of their economic policy. I await the second half, in which they show where additional money is to be raised and the areas of the cuts to pay for the additional expenditure.

Plaid Cymru often ignore that Wales is financially a net beneficiary of the union. We know that because David Phillips of the Institute for Fiscal Studies has estimated that Wales is a net beneficiary of the union by between £12 billion and £15 billion. If Wales keeps its revenues, funds its own public spending and then makes a population-based contribution to the UK-wide situation, at least, as it stands, that will lead to a large fiscal deficit for Wales. Also according to David Phillips of the IFS, the most recent estimate from the Office for National Statistics suggests that public expenditure in Wales is about 10 per cent higher than it is across the UK as a whole—this is despite raising substantially less money per person. Estimates have been produced showing Wales raises approximately 75 per cent per head of the United Kingdom's average tax revenues. I'm in favour of devolving the Crown Estate, but it would produce no extra money for the Welsh Government.

The Welsh Government agreed a fiscal framework with the UK Government that sets out the Welsh Government's funding arrangements to support its devolved fiscal powers. This includes a block grant adjustment model for determining how the Welsh block grant is adjusted to take into account the devolution of Welsh taxes. This, despite Plaid Cymru's frequent assertions to the contrary, means that the next financial benefit of withdrawing any tax to Wales is removed from the block grant, meaning that Wales does not get any extra money. When income tax was partially devolved or when stamp duty was fully devolved, the block grant was adjusted accordingly.

I do not believe there is a Senedd Member who does not want a sustainable NHS, ensuring patients are not left waiting years in pain for treatment. The question is, how do we improve the health of people in Wales? We've got a serious overweight and obesity problem, and people who are overweight and obese compared to those of a healthy weight are at an increased risk of many serious diseases and health conditions: high blood pressure, heart disease, stroke, type 2 diabetes, many types of cancer and osteoarthritis. We need a weight-loss plan and a willingness to provide weight-loss tablets. There's also strong scientific evidence that being physically active can help you lead a healthier and happier life. Exercise can reduce your risk of major illnesses such as coronary heart disease, stroke, type 2 diabetes and cancer, and lowers the risk of early death by 30 per cent. The challenge is to improve the health of people in Wales. We need to support social prescribing that allows healthcare professionals to refer patients to community activities.

On 7 May this year, the people of Wales will go to the polls in what will be the most consequential Senedd election since devolution began. It will not simply be a choice between parties, but a choice about the future direction of our country, our economy and our place within the United Kingdom. This motion claims the election offers new leadership for Wales. On that, at least, I agree. After 26 years, Wales desperately needs a change. But let's be absolutely clear: replacing Labour failure with Plaid Cymru ideology is not renewal, it's regression, as they are Labour but worse.

Recent polling shows a real prospect of a hard left Plaid Cymru-Green coalition. That should concern every working family, every pensioner, every business owner and every farmer in every part of Wales, because such a coalition would not focus on fixing what is broken, it would push Wales down a dangerous constitutional and economic path towards independence. Because Plaid Cymru's central project is independence—not better hospitals, not higher wages, not safer communities, independence. And they would fund that ideology obsession by taxing Welsh people more, borrowing more and tying Wales ever tighter to Cardiff Bay bureaucracy while all the same ripping us out of the United Kingdom, our biggest trading partner and our strongest economic safety net. [Interruption.] I will, Gareth, yes.

Thank you very much for taking the intervention. Something I raised previously, because, in my constituency, I represent west Rhyl, and some Plaid Cymru politicians are very happy to march through the poorest ward in the whole of Wales with Yes Cymru to make that point—would you agree with me that it would be those communities that are in poverty who would feel the negative economic consequences of independence more than anybody else?

Yes, I would, Gareth, because we all know the economic facts. Independence would make Wales poorer, and that's what they would do to our country. So, let's look at the record of this Government. One in four people in Wales are on an NHS waiting list. Over 8,700 pathways are waiting more than two years for treatment. That's not compassionate governance—it's institutional failure. Wales has the second lowest disposable income per head in the UK. Our young people are leaving, our businesses are struggling, our productivity lags behind, and yet Plaid Cymru's answer is, 'Yes, let's push an independence agenda that would make us poorer.'

On education, Wales's literacy and numeracy scores are the lowest they have ever been since the Programme for International Student Assessment began. Five times running we're bottom of the UK league tables, and yet instead of focusing on relentless standards, discipline and outcomes for pupils, what do we offer today? Vague strategies and central plans that will never, ever reach the classrooms.

And the same applies to child care. Welsh families face some of the highest costs for childcare provision in Great Britain. Parents want to go back to work. They want flexibility, they want practical support, not grand schemes that sound good but deliver nothing to those people.

And then there's the constitutional point, isn't there? Plaid Cymru call for a new Wales Bill to unlock Wales's potential. But let me say this plainly: Wales does not lack powers; it lacks competence. Scotland has more powers and still runs deficits—failing ferries, collapsing public services. More devolution without reform will not fix Wales's problems.

And Deputy Presiding Officer, the truth is this. Wales is poorer not because we're part of the United Kingdom. It's because we have been poorly governed for 26 years. Labour have failed Wales, and Plaid Cymru have enabled that failure to continue. And now they want more of the same, wrapped up in the language of national destiny, of hope. They're not selling hope. They're selling false promises to the people of Wales.

That is why those of us who believe in our United Kingdom must recognise what is at stake. We may not agree on everything, but we should agree on this: that Wales's future is stronger, safer and more prosperous within the United Kingdom. And I believe that future is worth defending, and together we can defend it.

This election must be about the things that matter to the people across Wales—fixing our NHS, raising wages, restoring standards in education, supporting families, building an economy that rewards work and not sitting at home. If we leave it to chance, what would we have? A hard left Plaid Cymru Government, which would lead to higher taxes, weaker services, and more time spent arguing about independence, not improving the lives of the people of Wales. [Interruption.] I will take an intervention.

Thank you for taking an intervention. I appreciate that. We can agree to disagree on the constitutional stuff, but do you not accept a modicum of responsibility for the state of Wales today, given that your party governed on a UK level for 14 years?

I will take no lessons on responsibility from Plaid Cymru, which has aided and abetted keeping Welsh Labour in power for 26 years. You've been in Government. You've been in co-operation agreements. You've sat on your hands and passed budgets that have destroyed Wales. You should apologise to the people of Wales and not sell them false hope, because Wales deserves better. It deserves leadership that is focused, responsible—

Conclude now please, James.

—and keeps serious Government at its heart. And we need leadership that puts working people first and keeps Wales strong within the United Kingdom. I believe in the United Kingdom. I believe in Wales. And we're better together.

Of course, this debate is about what the next Welsh Government could achieve and do for the people of Wales. And I always have a good chuckle to myself when I hear people saying that Plaid Cymru are obsessed with independence, because the only people who have been obsessed with independence in this debate, quite frankly, are the Conservatives and Labour. They're talking about independence and Plaid's support of independence as if it's a massive secret. We've never, ever kept that a secret. The people of Wales know that already.

And, Mike, you talk about the damage, the economic damage, that independence would do to Wales, but I think it's actually worth reminding ourselves about the current economic situation that we find ourselves in in Wales. We have here in Wales one in three children living in poverty. We have the highest proportion of young people not in work, education or training of any UK nation or region. Productivity, wealth and incomes remain low, while economic inactivity remains high. Now, that doesn't look like an appealing picture to me. That doesn't look like an economy that is thriving, that is fair for the people of Wales, so forgive me if I'm actually looking at other alternatives that might provide us an opportunity to improve the lives of people in Wales. So, I make no apology for that, and I'll give way to Mike Hedges.

Why do you think Wales will do better with £12 billion to £15 billion less?

I've always found it really interesting, Mike, listening to your contributions and this fervent defence of a system right now that has kept people in Wales in poverty for the best part not of the 26 years that we've had devolution in Wales, but the best part of a century, if we're going to be quite frank. In the best part of a century we've seen wealth and profit filtered out of Wales into places in London, not for the benefit of the people of Wales, but for the benefit of the people sitting in London. So, fair play to you, Mike. Fair play to you. It's a contribution a number of times full of contradictions, if I do say so myself.

But, look, I think actually every single one of us in here can agree on one thing: we do need to see a reset of the Government's direction on the economy. And I'm actually quite proud to say that we've gone some way to doing that with the publication of our economy strategy. Now, in that strategy, we set out our intention, among other things, to establish a new development agency for Wales, as this motion sets out—now, not a carbon copy of the previous, because there was a lot wrong with the previous iteration of the Welsh Development Agency, but one that is actually fit for the present, that's learnt the lessons of the previous WDA and strives to develop Welsh businesses as a core part of its remit. [Interruption.] Of course.

Thank you very much. Will you recall that restoring parts of the WDA was actually a Welsh Conservative policy that was in the 2021 manifesto? Can you make any assurances that you haven't copied and pasted that from one of our previous ideas?

Thanks for your support.

Yes, thanks for your support on the policy on the WDA. I expect to see you vote in favour of our motion.

Of course, we heard it yesterday, actually, from the Cabinet Secretary for the economy—the establishment of a WDA is a very Plaid answer, a typical Plaid answer to every single problem that we have: set up a new quango, set up a new development agency. But, actually, I think it's quite important to remind the Chamber that this is not just something that Plaid are calling for, as we've already heard, but it's also something that many different people have agreed on. The case for a successor to the WDA has been outlined by the OECD, among others. It's an idea that's supported by businesses. There's been broad consensus that economic development in Wales has suffered since the dissolution of the WDA, and that, since then, the business support ecosystem has lacked coherence and unity of purpose. Cwmpas and the Federation of Small Businesses have highlighted, for example, the need for dedicated specialist support for small and medium-sized enterprises and social businesses. Cwmpas’s social business mapping report shows that start-up businesses are the most likely to see value in this type of support. So that's why we'll establish a new development agency for Wales, not because it's a typical Plaid Cymru answer, but because it's being raised time and time again, that need for a one-stop shop, that concierge for business.

And of course, the Government is already halfway there to agreeing with us, by the way. The Cabinet Secretary had this to say in presenting the findings of the business review to the Chamber:

‘the review also identifies areas where we can improve. The business support ecosystem in Wales is complex, involving a multitude of partners at national, regional, local and private sector levels. UK Government policies and funding streams, often designed with England in mind, add further complexity and do not always address the specific needs of Wales. The result is a fragmented landscape, with businesses having to navigate a confusing array of separate initiatives.’

Those were the words of the Cabinet Secretary when presenting the findings of the business review. I couldn't agree more. We've presented an option to deal with that, so when will the Government?

I did welcome today's debate in order to remind the people of Wales that there's a very important Welsh general election coming along in May, and I think it's also really important to remind them of the connection in how they vote and who they have representing them. The amendment that's been brought forward in this debate by the Welsh Government includes just a few of Welsh Labour's achievements, but of course there are many more, and I'd just like to focus on a couple of areas in my contribution.

Animal health and welfare has always been at the heart of Welsh Labour's policies, legislation and achievements. It's very clear to me that Wales is a country of animal lovers, and I'm sure I'm not the only Member here that has a significant postbag on animal health and welfare, and constituents often tell me they prefer their animals to human beings. There is no party represented in this Chamber, or who aspires to be represented in this Chamber, who cares more about animal health and welfare than Welsh Labour. And if you look at the achievements over this last term of Government, there are many: new licensing regimes to protect our animals; Welsh Government-funded Animal Licensing Wales scheme; an enforcement project led by local authorities; a new national model introduced for the regulation of animal welfare; important and much needed work on responsible dog breeding and ownership, ensuring that there's collaboration between our local authorities, police and the third sector, and also, importantly, campaigners; an animal health and welfare framework, which has set out continuing and lasting improvements for our kept animals. Wales led the way across the UK by being the first country to ban snares and glue traps. The introduction of mandatory CCTV in all Welsh slaughter houses—regulations that were widely welcomed. And before the end of this parliamentary session, I hope this Senedd will vote to ban greyhound racing, a cruel and outdated practice that has no place in a modern Wales.

Would you take an intervention?

Yes.

Just on that point—and I absolutely agree with you—there's history here with Adam Price, when he voted in Parliament in 2002 against banning hunting with dogs. Just to set the record straight. I think it's only fair that we do that.

Thank you, Joyce. Well, as I say, I do hope that across the Chamber—I certainly think there is cross-party support to vote to ban greyhound racing.

But, of course, improving animal health doesn't just impact on animals, it has a massive impact on our public health, and this Welsh Government continues to lead the way on a 'one health' approach, ensuring that we have integration of human, animal, plant and ecosystem health. There are so many global challenges that threaten our health, and the interconnection of those four pillars is vital. We sadly experienced that very starkly during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Welsh Government has also been at the fore with the policy of reducing antibiotic misuse in our animals.

Just on a different topic, one achievement I do want to highlight, because I think it is really important to recognise this, because this has been over the entire 27 years of devolution, and that's our recycling rates. Back in 1999, when devolution began, we were next to bottom in the world recycling rates. Now, during this last term of Government, we are second in the world. This would not have happened, of course, without the people of Wales recognising they can play their part in mitigating climate change by recycling and reusing materials. It wouldn't have happened without local authorities across Wales introducing the blueprint and staffing the many excellent household recycling centres we have. But it definitely would not have happened without the leadership and, very importantly, without the millions and millions of pounds from the Welsh Government, which they ensured was there year on year, even during all the years of austerity.

So, the next election, as somebody from Plaid Cymru said in one of their contributions, is about what will happen in the future, and I look forward to the Welsh Labour manifesto being put before the people of Wales and what policies will be on offer. Diolch.

I welcome the opportunity to speak in this debate and respond directly to Plaid Cymru's motion and the amendments before us. Because although this debate is framed as being about the next Senedd election, in truth it's about Plaid nursing their own egos and trying to hoodwink the Welsh public.

After 26 years of Labour Government in Wales propped up by Plaid, year upon year, the people of Wales are angry, they're poorer and they're waiting longer. Yet they're being told by those in power that everything is improving. Plaid's motion talks about change, but Plaid cannot present itself as the alternative when it has been the enabler. You cannot repeatedly vote Labour into power, back their budgets, back their priorities, back their legislation, and then pretend to bear no responsibility for the outcomes. You need to own that you were the enabler, and the outcomes are plain to see. Waiting lists remain out of control, unemployment is through the roof, educational outcomes are the lowest in the UK, businesses are struggling, rural Wales feels ignored, and that's not an accident: it's the product of 26 years of political decisions supported consistently by Plaid Cymru.

Plaid wants voters to believe that independence is the answer to Wales's problems, but independence would not free Wales from failure; it would hardwire it. Some sources estimate that an independent Wales would inherit around £130 billion of debt, which is roughly £42,000 for every man, woman and child in Wales. No wonder you're trying to hide it from the electorate. It is your raison d'être, and people need to be reminded of it, and trust me, between now and May, we will be reminding them of that. At the same time—[Interruption.] I won’t if that's all right. At the same time, if Plaid took Wales to independence, they would rejoin the European Union at an estimated cost of £10 billion, directly contradicting the democratic decision by the Welsh people, including most of the people who voted you in, including the Member for Blaenau Gwent, who is often very vocal about this point. But that is not a plan for renewal, that's a plan for economic recklessness.

Plaid's leader has said openly that he does not believe that there's an immigration problem. Many communities across Wales would profoundly disagree with you, Rhun. Plaid supports open borders in practice, whilst refusing to acknowledge the pressures this places on housing—

Will you take an intervention?

No, sorry.

—services and community cohesion in Wales. They want to break Wales away from the United Kingdom, while denying the very real challenges that people are raising on the doorsteps today. People do not want constitutional navel gazing.

From a Brexiteer.

Your raison d'être is based in cloud-cuckoo-land and nowhere is this failure of the Labour and Plaid partnership clearer than in our NHS. After 26 years, patients are waiting too long, staff are burnt out and money is being swallowed by layers of bureaucracy. Reform would reform the NHS, but it would also keep it free at the point of delivery. Now, we talk about the spreading of lies this week—[Interruption.] We talk about the spreading of lies this week, Joyce Watson, yet every party in this Chamber has spread the lie that Reform would privatise the NHS in Wales—[Interruption.] It is just not true. Reform would cut unnecessary management, put resources back on the front line—[Interruption.] Deputy Presiding Officer, are you going to ask everyone to be quiet?

I think they've quietened down themselves.

Thank you very much. I appreciate that.

Reform would cut that unnecessary management, put resources back on the front line and focus on retaining and valuing our NHS staff. [Interruption.] We would keep prescriptions free. We would put patients before ideology. While Plaid talks about plans, people talk about the bills they cannot afford or pay. Whilst Plaid talks about values, people talk about their lives getting harder. And whilst the Conservatives now say many of the right things, the trust there has been broken—

Will you take an intervention?

I won't, I'm afraid.

People remember being let down across the whole of the UK, and that's why this election matters. Wales does not need more managed decline dressed up as progress; it needs real change. Reform would scrap the 20 mph speed limit where it's not needed and get Wales moving again, because you cannot grow an economy that is permanently stuck in traffic. We will deliver vital infrastructure, including the M4 relief road, after Labour and Plaid wasted hundreds of millions on reports and indecision. We will scrap the unrealistic net-zero policies imposed by Labour-Plaid that drive up energy bills that punish ordinary families. We'll invest in affordable, reliable energy, so that people are not choosing between heating and eating and with that, we will produce jobs. We will stand up for farmers, putting food production at the centre and the heart of our policies, tackle TB head on, and support our rural communities—[Interruption.] You will see soon. We will crack down on unlicensed houses in multiple occupation that may house illegal immigrants—

Laura, you need to conclude now, please.

—and enforce the law properly and protect communities that feel ignored and overwhelmed.

Members across the Chamber—for the benefit of the people at home—are asking me when our policies will be produced. Now, let me just make this absolutely clear: the detail behind what I'm just announcing now will come very soon, but we are preparing to be in Government. Unlike people around this Chamber who can say anything, we're preparing to be in Government now.

Laura, you need to conclude, please.

The money spent here on Welsh—. This election is not about slogans or virtue signalling, it's about responsibility. Labour broke Wales, Plaid enabled it, the Conservatives failed the UK, Reform is here to end the nonsense. We will not—

Laura, I've asked three times that you conclude and I will have to switch the microphone off if you don't.

We will not be supporting this motion today.

We've heard a lot of people say that we're not dealing with the things—. I think James Evans said that this election should be about things that matter to the people of Wales. Well, that's literally what's in our motion. Literally what's in the motion. So, perhaps we'll have a debate on the motion. And I want to talk about one of the things in the motion, which is to do with inequality.

The foundations of inequality are laid early. When we fail children in those early years, we pay the price later, socially, economically and morally. And, you know, we're talking about values, Laura Anne Jones, yes, they're an old nuisance, aren't they, values? But values are what politics should be built on. That's why one of the first policies Plaid Cymru announced that we'd enact should we be in Government was to pilot a direct payment to support our poorest children, following the lead of the SNP Government in Scotland, who only yesterday in their budget announced that they would build on the success of that method to tackle child poverty by increasing payments for the youngest children to £40. They're showing ambition. We want to show the same ambition.

It's why we would invest in a new childcare offer for Wales, because enabling access to childcare and early years education is one of the most powerful tools any Government has to tackle poverty—[Interruption.] No, I'm going to make some progress—reduce inequality and transform life chances across generations. Yes, it's expensive, but investment in childcare and early years education is consistently identified as one of the highest return investments a Government can make. The global evidence is overwhelming. Every pound invested in high-quality early years provision delivers a return of around 13 per cent over the long term. It more than pays for itself through better educational outcomes, higher lifetime earnings, improved health and reduced pressure on public services, lowering costs for families, increasing their access to higher incomes. For many families, childcare costs are more than their rent or their mortgage.

In a recent report on tackling poverty by improving childcare, the Bevan Foundation pointed out, for example, that a female worker with a child aged under two working full time at the twenty-fifth percentile of earnings must currently spend nearly 60 per cent of her weekly earnings on the cost of childcare. That's not just unfair, it's economically irrational. Oxfam Cymru tells us that 92 per cent of parents and guardians believe childcare costs are too high relative to their income. Seventy per cent say they have no surplus income or savings at all after paying for childcare. That's not a system that supports families, it's a system that denies them.

As with Lesley Griffiths when she spoke earlier, I was very pleased when I saw the title to this debate, because I thought we might be discussing the important and radical reforms that we've made to this Welsh Parliament, to this Senedd, which are about improving the ability and capacity to legislate, to develop policy and to improve our democracy. Instead, on reading the motion, it is little more than a scattergun trailer for the Plaid Cymru manifesto, and I think that is a bit of a missed opportunity.

I'm going to start by focusing on the importance of the elections themselves. Can I begin by saying how disappointed I am that we will not be able to ensure that everyone in Wales is automatically on the electoral register? Nevertheless, I understand the reasons and the complications, and that this will be implemented soon. It is a groundbreaking electoral reform in the UK of which we should be very, very proud. Despite this, the May 2026 elections will be the most democratic elections of any Parliament in the United Kingdom. The franchise and the proportional voting system will ensure that the outcome of the election will represent the genuine choices of the Welsh people and that every vote will count.

Whether I like the outcome or not is irrelevant; what is important is that there is a genuine democratic mandate. We see from around the world—just looking at the situation, for example, in the United States of America, but other countries also—what happens when the outcome of elections becomes more important than the democratic process. So, let's start by recognising the importance of the changes that we have made as part of the process of re-engaging with the people of Wales and all those who have either fallen off the electoral register or the growing army of people who don't think that voting can make a difference to their lives.

When people disengage, the door opens to those for whom power is the sole objective, those who would manipulate the system, who through misinformation and deceit would distort the debates, and those who would use hate and division to divide people and communities to gain political advantage or opportunity. We've seen so many examples of this recently, haven't we? People prepared to discard their principles and beliefs for the sake of some illusory power or the offer of power. Democracy and the rule of law are the foundations of freedom, and by increasing our capacity to hold Government to account by the reforms that we have made and by improving our electoral democracy, we are taking some of the first steps to restoring trust and accountability. We should take pride that we have taken the lead in Wales.

Mick, you need to conclude as well, please.

Dirprwy Lywydd, I was going to go on about the £2.4 billion that's been invested—

You've used your time elsewhere.

I'll take that. Can I just finish on one thing? In the important political debates that are going to take place over the coming months—the posturing and hyperbole that will be—let us not forget that we have made enormous achievements and we are achieving, and we still have a lot to achieve. And that's why I'll be supporting the next Labour Welsh Government.

One of the fundamental duties of any government should be to ensure a better future for future generations and to give them the basic skills that they need for personal development, job security and better life opportunities.

Unfortunately, on this crucial metric, there is no doubt that Labour over the past 26 years has failed our children and young people dreadfully and, in turn, they have wasted the huge potential of our nation. The latest PISA results, which show Wales at its lowest ever level in terms of attainment in numeracy and literacy, should be seen as a cause of national shame and a damning reflection of Labour's mismanagement of this key sector.

That is only one sign of broader problems. We have a teacher recruitment crisis in Wales that continues without ceasing—a situation that has got worse because of a lack of a clear strategy from the Government. The historic maintenance costs in our schools have reached horrific levels with far too many educational buildings across the country in an appalling state. Our universities are facing an existential financial crisis due to the lack of planning from Government to encourage more Welsh students to study here in Wales.

It is about time that we change direction and turn the page after a quarter of a century and more of Labour failings. Plaid Cymru is leading the way to a brighter future for our young people through our transformational strategy to restore educational standards. We will be developing a fundamental literacy and numeracy plan that will establish national benchmarks, targeted support, high-quality teaching and transparent progress tracking.

We will provide a library in every primary school in Wales in order to nurture bilingualism and a lifelong love of reading among our children. We will also promote literacy across the curriculum, incorporating literacy in all subjects in our secondary schools. We will also be supporting pupils during that crucial transition period from primary to secondary education. A Plaid Cymru Government will invest in the educational future of Wales by offering fair and competitive benefits to attract and retain the teachers that we need in our schools, closing the gap with England gradually by ensuring that trainee teachers in Wales are not under any financial disadvantage if they choose to study and work here in Wales.

These are not temporary measures, as we have grown used to under Labour, but we want to lay the first foundations in creating an education system that is more sustainable, that provides opportunities for our children and young people to prosper and to deliver their full potential. Only a Plaid Cymru-led Government can offer this hope to this current generation of children. Thank you.

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

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Dirprwy Lywydd. From the debate this afternoon, one thing is crystal clear: we all recognise that the Senedd election on 7 May 2026 is a pivotal moment for Wales. But it's also clear that we have yet another motion from the perpetual doomscrollers of Welsh politics on the Plaid Cymru benches. Plaid Cymru are once again choosing to talk Wales down, as are the Tories too. They may be happy to do that, but that will never be Welsh Labour's way, because we know we have more to do, but we also believe in Wales and the people of Wales, and the potential of Wales too.

What is striking about Plaid Cymru's motion is not what it includes, but what it ignores. It totally ignores the political and the economic context that this and past recent Labour Governments have been operating in. Over the last decade and more, we saw the UK Tory Government reigning over swingeing cuts and chaos. They slashed public services, crashed the economy, sent interest rates soaring, they made it dramatically harder and more expensive to build homes, invest in infrastructure or to support the essential services that we all rely on.

Against the backdrop of Tory cuts and chaos, Welsh Labour has provided serious and stable government, standing up for Wales and defending Wales from the worst harms of Tory mayhem. Welsh Labour stepped in to put more PCSOs on our streets when the UK Tory Government was cutting police. We provided and protected free prescriptions and hospital parking. When austerity made children's lives bleaker, we provided free school breakfasts to make sure that children were fed and ready to learn. With local government colleagues, we kept core services running against the relentless Tory attacks. And for over a decade, we defended people as best we could from the cuts being imposed on them from the Tory shires and squires. [Interruption.] I believe there was an intervention.

You've succeeded today in really crashing Plaid's good reputation, which they believe they have. But if they are so bad, why do you, each term, go into partnership with them or coalition or a co-operation agreement with them? Why did you do it, up until 18 months ago?

Let me focus on Labour records. Because even against that backdrop of Tory chaos and cuts, we chose to invest, to deliver and to stand by our pledges.

Let me start with housing. The past few years have been the toughest environment for house building in a generation, but even so, we've invested over £2 billion in social housing. It is the highest level since the dawn of devolution. We made a pledge: 20,000 new social homes for rent. And even in the shadow of the Tories' economic crash, with soaring construction costs, we will deliver that target by the end of this year. That's more homes for people who really need them, more children with somewhere safe and warm to do their homework, more people living somewhere secure and with the opportunity to flourish. This didn't happen because conditions were easy, it happened because this Government—this Labour Government—chose to prioritise housing when others would have walked away, because we know it matters.

We also know that being secure in well-paid employment is the very best way out of poverty and how to improve people's lives, and that's why we have focused on growing the economy. Through targeted investment, we've directly supported over 46,000 jobs across Wales in advanced manufacturing, defence, life sciences, innovation, the circular economy and in our vital local industries.

On health, Plaid Cymru have called for a waiting list plan to clear the current backlog. Well, Dirprwy Lywydd, they've obviously missed the £120 million plan that has been providing more appointments, more tests and more operations for the last nine months. It's a plan—[Interruption.] I'll come to you in a moment. It's a plan that will have delivered almost 100,000 extra out-patient appointments across Wales by the end of December. It will have provided an extra 20,000 cataract operations by the end of March 2026. That's more, by the way, than the whole of 2024-25. And it's a plan that has delivered another fall in the overall waiting lists in October, with further reductions in the overall waiting lists and longest waits expected in November. I will give way to somebody behind me.

Thank you. The contrast is quite stark, isn't it? The Conservatives, when they were in Government in the UK, promised to electrify the railway line to Swansea and broke their promise in a devolved area. What did we do? We delivered a modern metro system, investing in railway infrastructure, which was not our responsibility, to improve the lives of the people we represent. That's the difference.

Absolutely, and credit to previous Ministers, because if you look at transport, the £1 billion transformation of the core Valleys lines is one of the most significant infrastructure projects Wales has ever seen—reconnecting communities, unlocking economic opportunity. We've delivered free bus fares for over-60s, £1 bus fares for young people, we've put more money through that back in people's pockets, supporting people to get to work, education and training, and we'll go further in the future. And with the Bus Services (Wales) Bill, soon to be an Act, we are reshaping bus services around people, not profit, taking away that disastrous Tory deregulation of buses as well.

Let me turn to the environment, Dirprwy Lywydd, my own portfolio. We've made changes that will benefit our nation for decades—

I've had requests from two people for interventions. Do you wish to take any?

I'll take them when I'm ready.

Gareth and Joyce.

When I'm ready, Dirprwy Lywydd.

When you're ready. When he's ready.

On the environment, Dirprwy Lywydd—my own portfolio—we've made changes that will benefit our nation for decades to come, like the new national forest, which now stretches over 90,000 hectares of Wales, 38 estate woodlands, 72 new sites added since 2023. And let's not forget we've taken the decisive action to keep our communities safe with the Disused Mine and Quarry Tips (Wales) Act 2025 and the investment behind it as well.

Dirprwy Lywydd, we have used every lever available to us to build a fairer future, including for children in Wales. Nearly 60 million free school meals delivered, because no child should struggle to learn because they are hungry. And we are committed to improving our education system. We've delivered, let's not forget, the biggest school building programme in the UK since the 1960s. And the latest statistics on attainment in reading and numeracy show progress. We've got more to do, but attainment was higher for all year groups in English reading compared to 2022-23. We know there's more to do. We're determined to keep going, because every young person should have that opportunity. Welsh Labour in Government has provided the most progressive and generous student support offer in the UK, meaning that household income doesn't decide where you go to university. Now, some other parties want to change this, to create a two-tier system where your family's income would limit your ambition. That's what I would personally not call 'progressive' in any shape or form.

Now, we have always, Dirprwy Lywydd, argued that we've got more to do. No Government is perfect. But, Dirprwy Lywydd, we're proud of this Welsh Labour Government's achievements for the people of Wales. These were never inevitable. These were the outcomes of serious political choices. And the work isn't over. People in Wales are still facing daily challenges, and there's much more for us to do. And we're looking ahead to a new chapter and building a fairer future. After more than a decade of shielding Wales from Tory chaos and cuts, we can now turn the page, we can go further. We can create new growth and new opportunity here at home.

Since Eluned Morgan became First Minister, £16 billion of business funding has been announced following the Wales investment summit—£16 billion. An AI growth zone in south Wales, a clean energy powerhouse in the north, a drive behind producing renewable energy, building on the foundations we've already laid to create jobs and apprenticeships in every part of Wales. [Interruption.] I've taken a couple of interventions—

I'm giving you the time for those interventions.

Indeed. We have the largest budget in the history of devolution, meaning a massive boost of funding to tackle waiting lists, to give our NHS a pay rise, to pay for new treatments and invest in life-saving research.

And we've already transformed rail travel, brought buses back into public hands. We will go further, with a £2 fare cap on single bus journeys and 100 new bus routes—

And you've had that time.

So, finally, Dirprwy Lywydd, this Senedd term, and previous terms, we protected Wales from Tory cuts and chaos, and we laid the foundations for the future. Now Wales is ready not just for an election, but for the next chapter of Labour leadership, standing for and with the people of Wales.

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

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd, and let me thank everyone who has taken part in the debate today.

I'll start by reflecting again on the motion that Plaid Cymru has brought forward this afternoon, because it does set out the choice that will face the people of Wales in less than four months. On the one hand, we have a list here that crystallises the record of the current Government—the NHS on its knees, an education system that is failing our young people, an economy underperforming, and that very one-sided relationship with the UK Government that allows them to undermine devolution at every opportunity.

On the other hand, what we have here is an offer, or a taste of Plaid Cymru's ambitious offer to the people of Wales, innovative policies ready to be put in place—a childcare offer, as we heard, which is the most generous one in the UK, changing lives, giving families opportunities; a waiting list plan to tackle the NHS backlog; a development agency to develop businesses in Wales; a fundamental literacy and numeracy plan to raise education standards; and a new Bill to ensure parity of devolution with Scotland and to start unlocking the potential of our nation.

Now, we all see it, on the ground—

Will you take an intervention?

Cyn i mi gario ymlaen, ie.

When do you think you'll be able to introduce the childcare plan, because it would be welcome, but we have to build the workforce first, and the facilities? So, when do you think that might happen?

The beginning of that work begins in our 100-day plan. It begins immediately.

We see, don't we, on the doorstep—all of us, dare I say, from whichever party—we see it in opinion polls: more and more people are turning to Plaid Cymru's vision to secure the new leadership that Wales needs. We all see that people want change. That's the clear message from the people of Wales. But you wouldn't believe that on reading the Government's amendment today or on hearing the contributions from Labour Members.

Labour's amendment this afternoon, I think, and so many contributions from Labour Members epitomise why this Government's time must come to an end: a failure to admit mistakes, a failure to recognise people's frustrations and a complete failure to offer any hope that they're the party with the ideas to turn Wales's fortunes around. And the Deputy First Minister accusing Plaid Cymru of doomscrolling—what's doomscrolling about offering families a future through a new childcare plan? What's doomscrolling about offering opportunities for new jobs and better wages through a development agency for Wales? What's doomscrolling about that? And it must be the case that the Deputy First Minister didn't get the internal Labour Party memo. That internal Labour Party memo—

Would you like to take an intervention?

—said very, very clearly that Plaid Cymru is now the party that represents hope for Wales.

Are you taking my intervention, or have you—?

Yes.

You do exactly what you've just said you don't do. And what you've failed to do—there are two things you've failed to do—is that you've costed none of your wish list—none of it, none of it—and you've failed to recognise absolutely the advantage of having a two Labour Governments. There's been a big announcement today about Welsh windfarms winning funding, with an expected 7,000 job bonus. You've failed to mention that the UK Labour Government gave Wales the biggest ever devolution settlement of all time. You've failed to mention any investment whatsoever that's come from—

Joyce, it's an intervention.

I think it's only fair that you recognise those things, so I ask you to do it when you wind up.

I'd suggest that the Member puts her name down to speak in a debate if she has so many points to make. This is all costed—that's the whole point. This is a Government-in-waiting ready to go.

And I despair—[Interruption.]—I despair if the Member believes that the evidence shows that, since July 2024, the partnership in power between Labour in Cardiff and Labour in London is delivering for Wales. All the evidence points to the contrary, and that is why people's faith in Labour has been undermined to such an extent.

I've nothing, really, to say about the contribution of the Reform Member because Reform and she have nothing to say for Wales at all. I will turn to the party becoming more and more their little helpers, propping up Reform—more and more you can't see the line between them and the Conservatives. In reflecting on their contributions and, indeed—[Interruption.] I'll make progress—Mike Hedges from Labour too, I'll address them both together because they were, essentially, the same views from the Labour and Conservative benches: the lack of belief in our nation, in what Wales can be, and their willingness to keep the communities that they represent in poverty, to starve them of aspiration come what may, is something that means they deserve to be walloped at the ballot box in the election on 7 May, because Wales deserves better than that.

A vote for Plaid Cymru's motion today is a vote to back what more and more people in Wales suggest they want right now. The people of Wales want a Government that will be unrelenting in realising Wales's enormous potential, a Government for whom ambition isn't something to be feared or something to be overlooked but to be embraced at every turn, with the ideas to turn Wales around and with the energy to deliver, and a Government that never, under any circumstances, has to defer to party bosses in London at the expense of standing up for our nation and for the people of Wales. And as today's motion demonstrates, it is only Plaid Cymru now, clearly, that stands ready to translate hope into real outcomes, and I encourage you all to support the motion before us.

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

Before we do go to voting, the leader of the Conservative group in the Senedd raised a point of order. I have reviewed the record, and I want to make this following point, that when speaking in the Chamber, all Members must be conscious of referencing or being interpreted to reference another Member's age at any point in time. Such contributions could be interpreted as a criticism of a Member purely due to his or her age, even at another period in time. Therefore, I would ask the leader of Plaid Cymru, at the time, to reflect on his opening contribution in relation to that point.

I will respond in saying that I was referring to how long ago it was, not to his age.

I appreciate that. [Interruption.] I appreciate that, but, as I said, how it could be interpreted is important as well.

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

The first vote this evening is on item 7, the Welsh Conservatives' debate. I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Paul Davies. If the proposal is not agreed, we will vote on the amendment tabled to the motion. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 12, no abstentions, 39 against. Therefore, the motion is not agreed.

I now call for a vote on amendment 1, tabled in the name of Heledd Fychan. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 13, no abstentions, 38 against. Therefore, amendment 1 is not agreed.

As the Senedd has not agreed the motion without amendment, nor has it agreed the amendment tabled to the motion, the motion is therefore not agreed.

The next vote is on item 8, the Plaid Cymru debate on the Senedd election. I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Heledd Fychan. If the proposal is not agreed, we will vote on the amendments tabled to the motion. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 13, no abstentions, 38 against. Therefore, the motion is not agreed.

I call for a vote on amendment 1, tabled in the name of Paul Davies. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 will be deselected. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 12, one abstention, 38 against. Therefore, amendment 1 is not agreed.

I now call for a vote on amendment 2, tabled in the name of Jane Hutt. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 26, no abstentions, 25 against. Therefore, amendment 2 is agreed.

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

Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 26, no abstentions, 25 against. Therefore, the motion as amended is agreed.

I see Members leaving. Please remember this doesn't end the business today. There will be a Stage 3 and Stage 4 process later.

The next item on the agenda is the short debate. I call on Adam Price to speak.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. In Wales today, a child can be held criminally responsible from the age of 10. A child still in primary school can be arrested, questioned under caution, prosecuted, convicted and marked, sometimes for years, by an encounter with the criminal courts. I believe we should raise the age of criminal responsibility to 14. That's not to be soft on crime, as some would see it, it's to be smart on crime, clear-eyed, with a hard-headed focus on what the evidence tells us. Because the most serious duty of any justice system is public protection, and public protection is not served by policies that feel tough but increase the chances of harm repeating later. If we want fewer victims next year and the year after that, we have to ask a practical question: what actually reduces reoffending among children? The evidence is all in one direction: criminalising 10, 11, 12 and 13-year-olds is to create a conveyor belt of future crime, pulling children deeper into the system, widening the net, turning one incident into the beginning of a longer offending career.

Children are different to adults—most people understand that instinctively—and in any other policy area it is clearly recognised. Children are still developing, they're more impulsive, more easily led, more likely to take risks for status or belonging, less able to think through what comes next. None of that excuses wrongdoing, but it should change how we think about responsibility and about what works. The age of criminal responsibility is not just a number, it's a line that determines whether we treat a child primarily as a child who needs help or as an offender to be processed.

We haven't always been as crude about this as we are now. For a long time, the law recognised that children between 10 and 13 shouldn't automatically be treated as fully responsible. There was a safeguard—doli incapax; you had to prove additional understanding by the child before the criminal law could be invoked. That safeguard was swept away in the late 1990s; nothing better replaced it. So, now we have the worst of both worlds—a very low threshold with none of the old protections, and a system that then tries, sometimes heroically, to soften the effects through diversion. That's not coherent and it's not fair.

Wales has in many ways been moving in a better direction, through the youth justice blueprint. We've built a more prevention-led approach to youth justice, focused on diversion, on early help, on working across agencies, on addressing what drives harm. That shift has helped keep children out of deeper trouble. It's the right instinct: step in early but do it in ways that change behaviour rather than just punishing. But as long as the legal age for criminal responsibility stays at 10, that low age creates a constant pull towards court, when what a child actually needs is something else: protection, support, supervision, help with mental health, and, where necessary, secure care.

Some people say we need a low age of criminal responsibility so we can intervene early. That sounds reasonable until you think about it. Early intervention doesn't require early criminalisation. Most of what actually prevents reoffending in children has nothing to do with courts—it's school, family stability, mental health support, tackling substance misuse, dealing with trauma, protecting children from exploitation. None of that depends on branding a 10-year-old a criminal.

There's something else that gets missed in public debate. Many children who come into contact with the justice system have speech, language and communication difficulties, often unidentified, often unsupported. Think about what that means. It affects whether a child understands the police caution, whether they can tell their story clearly, whether they can follow what's happening in court, take instructions, understand consequences, or engage with anything designed to change their behaviour. So, it's not just about whether a child knew it was wrong, it's about whether they can take part meaningfully in a process that can label them, punish them and shape their future. If we care about justice, we should care about that.

This is not an argument for doing nothing, it's an argument for doing the right thing. And I want to deal directly with the hardest question: what about serious offences? What about victims? What about public confidence? Victims deserve recognition, support and truth. Communities deserve safety. Children who cause harm must face consequences. But raising the age of criminal responsibility doesn't mean harm is ignored, it means that for under 14-year-olds, the first response isn't criminal law. It's an age-appropriate system that can still be firm, can still be swift and still protect the public through intensive supervision, structured programmes, restorative work where it fits, and secure placements when risk demands it. And sometimes, the most serious harm by children is tangled up with exploitation. Children can be groomed into offending, coerced, threatened, controlled by older criminals. When that happens, a purely punitive response misses the point. It treats the exploited child as the problem rather than as a child in danger. Seeing it through a child protection lens isn't weakness, it's accuracy.

There's a practical argument too. A very low age of criminal responsibility brings a risk that rarely makes headlines—net widening, as it's called. If you criminalise younger children, you pull more of them into formal processing for behaviour that might otherwise be dealt with informally, restoratively or through support. Once a child has a record, they get treated differently by schools, by professionals, sometimes by themselves. Minor behaviour starts to look like a pattern. The label 'persistent' gets attached. The system starts responding to the record rather than to the child. And what began as a single incident becomes the first step on an escalator. That's not speculation. It's well understood. The earlier you criminalise, the greater the risk you entrench.

The Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice now to reply to the debate—Jane Hutt.

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. I want to thank Adam Price for taking the opportunity to raise this important topic in his short debate. Of course, as the Member is clearly aware, justice isn't currently devolved to Wales and the age of criminal responsibility is therefore reserved to the UK Government. I just want to again recall that Wales was the first UK nation to incorporate the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child into law, and it is and should be the basis of all our policies for children. In keeping with a trauma-informed, evidence-based, child-first—and that's the key point—approach, it is right that we not only consider but also support calls to raise the age of criminal responsibility.

I am grateful to the Member for tabling this debate at this time when this issue is being considered more widely. I'm very conscious of the extensive evidence in favour of raising the age of criminal responsibility. I've also noted the view of Lady Hale that prosecuting children under 14 is wrong. When top judges call for England and Wales to raise the age of criminal responsibility to 14, as is the case in most European countries, as you've outlined, we are keen to hear the views of the Senedd in this debate.

But, Llywydd, in our child rights approach, and focusing on this discussion and points you've made, Adam, I just want to say our focus has been on sustaining and strengthening preventative measures that stop children formally entering the criminal justice system whilst planning and preparing for these longer term reforms that are achievable and evidence based, and thank you for referring to the Thomas commission in terms of those recommendations and evidence. The Welsh Government's vision for criminal justice is to address the underlying causes of offending and to support people at risk of offending towards fulfilling, crime-free lives, and this approach can prevent crime from happening in the first place.

We're committed to the fair and equal provision of devolved services, so everyone in the criminal justice system has the support they need to live successful crime-free lives. And coupled with ensuring the justice system works in Wales, the Welsh Government is committed to working with our reserved partners to improve the justice system and to promote a distinctly Welsh version of criminal justice. This work improves outcomes for the often very vulnerable young people and children involved who are then caught up in the justice system. It helps to keep people in Wales safe and those involved in the justice system to desist from crime.

I'm glad to have the opportunity that this debate provides to reflect on the achievements of youth justice in Wales, of our pathways that we've taken forward. This has resulted in a sharp and sustained decline in first-time entrants over the last 15 years, which is a testament to the effectiveness of a preventative approach. It's also a reflection of the commitment, the resilience and the compassion of our youth justice professionals—let's think of them today—who work tirelessly to improve outcomes for children who may be in conflict with the law. Youth justice services are now engaging with far fewer children subject to statutory court orders, with most of their efforts focused on prevention and, as you've identified, diversionary interventions. It is welcome that there are also fewer 10 to 14-year-olds receiving cautions and convictions. Current data shows that 75 per cent are aged 15 to 17 years old.

We do recognise the needs and the vulnerabilities children in the justice system face, with many children formally entering the criminal justice system because of the problems that have arisen outside of it. There's evidence that preventing children from formally entering the criminal justice system in the first place is likely to reduce the likelihood that they will become involved in further criminal behaviour. It's therefore clear that providing that early intervention and support, understanding and meeting their needs, addressing their vulnerabilities and systematically responding to prevent and protect them and others from harm delivers positive outcomes. From prevention and early intervention to resettlement from custody, as I've said, we adopt a trauma-informed approach. Many children, as you've identified, are themselves victims with adverse childhood experiences, and this should be given recognition. Indeed, our own legislation reflects this, and I'm glad to draw attention, of course, and to remind us of the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014 and the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015, which set out further requirements to ensure local services are provided to prevent children from offending and to promote their future welfare.

Llywydd, in 2011 we incorporated the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child into Welsh law under the Rights of Children and Young Persons (Wales) Measure 2011. This is a clear statement of our enduring commitment to children's rights, and I'm fully aware that the UN committee recommends that the minimum age of criminal responsibility is at least 14 years. Supported by this legislative landscape, Welsh Government is committed to taking a preventative approach to children in or at risk of entering the justice system. It's assuming a child-first approach to youth justice, ensuring that we centre the individual needs of children in or at risk of entering the justice system, rather than assuming a service-focused approach, providing children with the right help and support, building on their strengths and capabilities, enabling them to make a positive contribution to society, creating safer communities and fewer victims.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary.

The next item will be the Stage 3 proceedings on the Mental Health Review Tribunal for Wales (Membership) Bill.

Group 1 of amendments relates to training for non-practising medical members. The lead amendment in the group is amendment 2, and I call on Adam Price to move and speak to the lead amendment.

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. I move the amendments in this group in my name. The first amendment, amendment 1, is a facilitative amendment to change the long title. It doesn't alter the substance of the Bill. It simply replaces the specific wording with the standard formulation for connected purposes, principally so that the Bill can properly accommodate the substantive amendment.

That substantive amendment is amendment 2, which creates a new duty on Welsh Ministers to carry out a review of the training arrangements maintained by the president of Welsh Tribunals for medical members of the Mental Health Review Tribunal for Wales who do not hold a licence to practice, and to publish a report within 12 months of commencement. The logic for the amendment really mirrors the argument that I set out in our earlier proceedings on Stage 2, because the Bill removes the need for a current licence to practice. We understand the urgency behind that, but, in doing so, it's important still to reassure patients and families that hearings are informed by up-to-date clinical expertise. So, that's the focus, really, for this amendment.

We shared the earlier amendment with stakeholders, and there was unanimous support in terms of the spirit of the solution, that this was a problem that needed a solution. What is clear in terms of necessity is that what we need is a safeguard in terms of ensuring that the level of knowledge is kept current for those who are no longer practising. That's why we've brought forward this amendment at Stage 3.

During our Stage 2 discussions, and subsequently, we became aware that the proposal at Stage 2, which was to put a duty directly on the president of the Welsh Tribunals, was problematical because the president of the Welsh Tribunals—this may come as a surprise to some people—is, for these purposes, treated as a reserved authority. That means that, if we were to confer a duty on the president of the Welsh Tribunals, as things currently stand, we need Crown ministerial consent from the Westminster Government. And obviously, in the context of an emergency legislation, that is quite difficult, and it would potentially mean a significant delay to receiving Royal Assent. Given the risk that that represents, potentially, in terms of the tribunal, as we heard, meeting its statutory responsibilities, we felt that that was not a risk that was acceptable in this context. So, we explored other options, placing a duty, for example, on the president of the Mental Health Review Tribunal for Wales itself, but that office holder doesn't currently have the kind of defined statutory functions that make it easy to attach a new explicit training duty within the narrow scope and tight timetable of this Bill.

Now, both of those problems that I've just outlined are the kinds of problems that will be solved by the tribunals Bill, because the tribunals Bill will actually make the president of the Welsh Tribunals what they clearly should be, which is a devolved office holder, but we're not there at this time. So, the interim solution we've crafted, Llywydd, is, as I said, to introduce a duty on Welsh Ministers to review the principal matter here, the training arrangements, the ones that already exist and what's in place in terms of non-practising medical members, and to publish the outcome so that we can have a transparent assessment of whether those training arrangements are adequate for the cohort that are, obviously, quite important in terms of this Bill and in terms of the functioning of the tribunal. And that creates then, I think, a public line of sight, if you like, which will allow us to move from an emergency or interim solution to a more durable solution. So, I hope the Welsh Government is able to support these two amendments.

The Counsel General.

Diolch, Llywydd. Clearly, as with any piece of legislation, it's important that we get it right, and, even in emergency circumstances, the process by which the legislature reviews and seeks to amend legislation is a vital one. So, I'm very grateful to the Member for the co-operative way in which he has approached the debate and for the spirit in which the amendments have been tabled. I'm also very grateful to Adam Price for the discussions we have had today around amendments aimed at strengthening arrangements for the training of medical members without a licence to practice.

Llywydd, I should put on record that I do not think the concerns he raises in theory are necessarily ones that are borne out in practice. I know how seriously the president of Welsh Tribunals takes his duty to provide adequate training for all members of all tribunals and the care that is taken by the individual tribunal presidents in ensuring that their members are and remain fully capable of meeting their responsibilities.

We've also talked before about the extensive qualifications that all medical members must have and the rigorous procedures and processes they undertake before they become members of the tribunal. Nonetheless, in recognition of the theoretical risk that Adam Price has noted and the conversations that both he and the Welsh Government have had with the likes of Mind Cymru and Adferiad, I am happy to support the amendment tabled to the Bill under his name.

As he has set out, the amendment seeks to meet the concerns raised by committing Welsh Ministers to review the training regime for the members in question. That review is to be carried out no later than 12 months after the Act comes into force, which is, of course, timely, as it will allow any outcomes of the review to be considered by the Senedd in the light of a tribunals Bill, assuming, Llywydd, as I very much like to do, that any new Government will take such a Bill forward. This amendment therefore meets the desire to ensure that we have absolutely the right training regime for this particular category of member in light of their essential duties, while not interfering with the Bill's primary function, which is to restore the capacity of the tribunal as quickly as it's possible to do so.

Llywydd, I'd also want to address the other area where an amendment was debated at Stage 2 and which the Member did not move to the vote at my request, which was medical members who might be suspended or the subject of conditions or undertakings. As I said earlier, we agreed with much of the intention behind Adam Price's earlier amendment. I know that he looked to table that amendment and it has been unfortunately found to be outside the scope of the Bill, but I want to put on record for him now that we are happy to do what that amendment would have mandated us to do. So, let me set that out clearly. The Medical Act 1983 includes provision whereby the General Medical Council is required to notify certain persons, for example, the Welsh Ministers and the person's employers, of an investigation by them of a medical practitioner's fitness to practise. That requirement should in principle extend to the GMC notifying the tribunal, but we cannot be certain that this is happening in all cases, as it is not an explicit requirement for them to do so. We consider it important to have robust governance arrangements in place, so my undertaking is that we will put in place a process to ensure that when the Welsh Ministers are notified by the GMC, acting as the health service, that a practitioner who is a medical member of the Mental Health Review Tribunal for Wales is the subject of an investigation, the Welsh Ministers will in turn notify the president of the tribunal.

Adam Price to respond.

I am very grateful to the Counsel General and to the Welsh Government for supporting these amendments and, indeed, for the further commitments that she has just given in relation to the amendment that we were not able to table at this stage.

Just to say a little bit about what we learned in a matter of hours through that process, it related to this matter of keeping up to date with GMC-registered members' status. What we have established is that the position is far from simple. Suspension, perhaps, is relatively clear. If a doctor's GMC registration is suspended, they would ordinarily no longer count as fully registered and therefore could not sit as a member of the tribunal or continue to do so. But conditions and undertakings, to use the technical terms, are more complex. Some are negative and restrictive in that sense, but others can be positive. So, a blunt statutory disqualification relating to a condition could therefore be over-broad, because it could unintentionally reduce tribunal capacity, cutting across the purpose of the Bill.

I think it does raise a question about why the Judicial Appointments Commission uses this phrase of 'unconditional registration', which does not seem to have a statutory basis anywhere that we are able to find, for the reasons that I have just outlined, because it seems contradictory. So, there is some further work that needs to be done there and some conversations that need to be had. But we do need to find some mechanism for information flow and oversight in order to keep current the knowledge of the tribunal of a medical member's regulatory status. I think the commitments that have been given by the Counsel General and, indeed, by the president of the tribunal have been very helpful in this regard.

Can I therefore move the amendments? I think that we have proven that the Senedd is able to move at pace when we need to.

If amendment 2 is not agreed, amendment 1 falls. The question is that amendment 2 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Amendment 2 is therefore agreed.

We have heard Adam Price say that he is moving amendment 1. The question is that amendment 1 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Amendment 1 is also agreed.

That means that we have reached the end of our Stage 3 consideration of the Mental Health Review Tribunal for Wales (Membership) Bill and I declare that all sections of the Bill are deemed agreed. In accordance with Standing Order 26.50A, I can confirm that, in my view, the provisions of the Mental Health Review Tribunal for Wales (Membership) Bill do not relate to a protected subject matter.

Item 12 is the Stage 4 debate on the Mental Health Review Tribunal for Wales (Membership) Bill. I call on the Counsel General to move this motion. Julie James.

Diolch, Llywydd. Over the last two days, we've worked to what is, I think, the fastest ever timetable by which this Senedd has ever considered a Bill. Yesterday—was it only yesterday—I made the case for why this Bill is so urgent and why it is so important that its passage through the Senedd is as swift as possible. Since then, we have discussed the real-world consequences for vulnerable people should we fail to rectify the technical issue that the Bill sets out to address. We've discussed and debated how this situation has arisen, why it was not noticed until now and whether it should have been noticed sooner and by whom. I'm grateful to other Members of the Senedd who have participated in the debate and shared their views, particularly Adam Price, with whom I feel I have shared a positive and constructive dialogue about potential amendments. We have made one amendment to the Bill as a result of this dialogue, and have given a further undertaking on a related issue, which I set out only moments ago.

At the end of the day, the situation before us has been a simple one. There is an important issue that needs to be addressed, and whoever caused it, it is us who must address it. We need to restore the Mental Health Review Tribunal for Wales to its full operating capacity. If we do not, we risk considerable harm to individuals when they are at their most vulnerable. The Government has acted as quickly as it possibly could following the president's decision that she could no longer allow medical members who do not have a licence to practice to sit on tribunals. I am extremely grateful as well to the Llywydd and to the Senedd Commission staff, whose constructive engagement and significant work has allowed us to bring this legislation forward as quickly as we have.

Following this vote, I hope very much to be very grateful to this Senedd for passing the legislation. Subject to the passing of the Bill by the Senedd, the Attorney General has the right to refer the legislation to the Supreme Court. I also have that right myself, which I will not be exercising. The Secretary of State for Wales also has a power, in certain circumstances, to make an order preventing the Bill proceeding to Royal Assent. I have written to both the Attorney General and the Secretary of State for Wales to ensure that we all make clear our intention not to exercise those powers and to allow the Bill to pass immediately to Royal Assent. My intention is to ensure that this Bill comes into effect at the earliest possible opportunity, and I am very grateful indeed to everyone involved for recognising its urgency and importance. Diolch.

I'd like to thank the Counsel General for bringing this Bill forward and Adam Price for bringing forward amendments, which I do think strengthen this Bill, and I'm sure Members will be very pleased to hear that my comments on this Bill are: I refer Members to the comments I made on it yesterday. [Laughter.]

Llywydd, Plaid Cymru will support this Bill at Stage 4, and I want to begin with thanks. I want to thank the Counsel General for her positive engagement with us at pace, both in the Chamber and in the conversations we were able to have between stages. I also want to put on record our appreciation for the Senedd clerks and Commission staff and for the Welsh Government's legislative and policy teams and Plaid Cymru group staff, who have all worked under significant pressure to move emergency legislation through properly. In an accelerated process, the professionalism of these teams matters.

We also want to thank stakeholders who engaged at speed and in good faith, particularly Mind Cymru, Adferiad and the Royal College of Psychiatrists in Wales. Their input helped sharpen what was missing from the Bill as first introduced. I'm pleased that we have been able to secure an agreed amendment that directly addresses their shared concern that patients and families need reassurance that hearings will remain informed by up-to-date clinical expertise. That training amendment we agreed today is a practical step in that direction, and in an emergency Bill with compressed scrutiny, that kind of transparency and follow-through is really important.

I'll get a cheer at this point when I say, 'finally'. [Laughter.] Oh, you're so predictable, but there we are. [Laughter.] I love you too, Lee Waters. [Laughter.]

I don't want to dampen the high spirits now, but I do think it is important: learning is the key to any democracy, isn't it? So, I think the Welsh Government should commission the Welsh Tribunals Unit to carry out a short, focused review of how we got here, because as I was able to say at Stage 2, we've been told that the tribunal was told about this many years ago. In fact, I've now been told that that information was shared directly with the former president of the Mental Health Review Tribunal for Wales herself. So, that needs to be properly investigated and looked at. How was that warning handled? When was it received? How was it logged? What action, if any, was taken? Because it's incumbent upon us, isn't it, and I think that we worked well under pressure to produce this emergency legislation and solve the problem, but we shouldn't really be in this position. So, can we have that learning, can we have that review, to find out what happened, what didn't happen, so that we're not in this position again?

Does the Counsel General want to say more?

Diolch, Llywydd. Before we vote, I just want to thank, once more, all Senedd Members for their consideration and support for the Bill. Over the last two days, you've heard the case for this legislation and why it needs to be passed at speed. By passing this Bill, we will be restoring the Mental Health Review Tribunal for Wales to its full operational capacity and ensuring it is able to meet its statutory duties on behalf of some of the most vulnerable people in Wales. Llywydd, I therefore commend this Bill to the Senedd.

In accordance with Standing Order 26.50C, a recorded vote must be taken on Stage 4 motions, as you will know. So, unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, I will proceed directly to that vote on the Stage 4 proceedings. I call for a vote to approve the Mental Health Review Tribunal for Wales (Membership) Bill. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 50, no abstentions and none against. And therefore, the Stage 4 motion is approved.

Thank you all, and good evening.