Plenary

Fair play, that's a fair answer, finance Minister, and thank you for giving so much information. One thing is critical: what was shown in the draft budget was that there was little dialogue of meaningful consequence with the other political parties, and hence the budget never passed. Can you confirm today whether you've begun those discussions with the political parties, or are you just in exclusive talks with a particular group in this Senedd? I appreciate the discussions are confidential, but I think it's a matter of public interest to understand exactly which parties the Government will work with and those parties you won't.

I'm not sure whether I will always welcome a question from Andrew R.T. Davies as Cabinet Minister for Finance, but today in particular, it was particularly useful for me to see that your question, constructed in this manner, allowed me to outline some of my thoughts on how I see the future of budget discussions. And, yes, we are keen, as the First Minister has said, to have discussions with all political parties. We are very conscious of the fact that we are a minority Government. If that supplementary budget vote was useful in anything, it was useful in reminding us, as a Government, that we need to command a majority to pass any budget in this place.

So, I look to all Members here to consider our roles in a different way perhaps to how we have considered our roles and participation in budgets of the past. In fact, the Welsh Conservatives have an advantage over all other political parties here. You're almost the continuity party in this Senedd, because you are an opposition party and you've played—[Interruption.] You're consistently an opposition party; I do not prejudge the future. But Reform is a new party in this Senedd, Labour is a party in opposition for the first time and Plaid Cymru is a party in Government, and there are new roles for all of us to play in that. But I hope that as we continue discussions over the next few weeks and months—. And those discussions are happening, and I want now to use pace and to think about how we can have those discussions across political parties and individuals in this Chamber to bring ideas into this big melting pot that is the annual budget. So, I hope that we can do that in a more meaningful way than we have done coming out of the election before the summer. And I think that's a challenge that all of us have to rise to, and me, in particular, as the finance Minister.

During the supplementary budget process, we, at Reform, were clear that one of our key red lines was the removal of Wales's international spending commitments. Now, the finance Minister today has spoken about the challenges that lie ahead with the budget, and, over the weekend, she said that there may well be some cuts in some areas of budget, when speaking to the media. Given that cuts are clearly on the table, will the finance Minister commit today to cutting Government spending in foreign countries before she considers cutting spending in Wales?

I take no red lines into this budgetary process, genuinely, in terms of the work that I'm doing within Government and the need, as I outlined in my initial statement, for this Government to be disciplined in how our Ministers are looking at their portfolios. A 0.7 per cent real-terms decrease in the budget is a real challenge for the Ministers in the exercise of their portfolios. So, I take no red lines into my discussions across all budget areas. But, obviously, there are manifesto commitments and ideas that this party, Plaid Cymru, brings into Government, and I am sure, as we discuss with Members and parties across the Chamber, that we can have a frank discussion about what is possible and where our common priorities lie. So, no red lines, but an open door for discussions.

One of the most common things I've heard since being elected is the difficulties the public sector and third sector are facing with short-term and single-year funding. It's clear that throwing money at an issue isn't going to solve the root cause of it, and, for a long time, it felt like that was the case. After 26 years of the previous Labour administration, as we know, one in three children are still living in poverty, our waiting lists are at their highest and there's been little behavioural change in walking and cycling rates, despite the promotion of active travel—all issues that we've inherited from Labour. So, does the Cabinet Minister agree that genuine, lasting change is more likely to be delivered through long-term, sustainable funding, with clear accountability for results?

Yes, I certainly agree that, in looking at budgets, we need not just to look at those spending lines as they are drafted on a spreadsheet, but we need to look properly at where our outcomes can be improved, and you've listed some of the areas where we need, as Wales, to be doing better, and, certainly, as a Government, we're committed to doing so. So, looking at outcomes, effectiveness and value for money all go hand in hand as we seek, as a new Government in place, in advance of making our own budget and putting it together, as we are looking at efficiencies within Government and outcomes of where we want to prioritise our funding. That piece of work is being undertaken as a budgetary process, but especially in light of our appointment of a Minister with exact responsibility for effectiveness and outcomes of Government action. And that lasting change, of course, that you spoke of, does require something that is more agile and meaningful than annual budgets—so, a commitment to looking to a multi-year budget, but, of course, within the spending review of the allocations to us as a Government. Looking to a multi-year budget is something that I'm looking to propose as part of our budget processes here.

Thank you very much for calling me. I didn't know I was down for this, but—[Laughter.]—that will not stop me making some comments. I think that when we look at budgets and we look at where we are, then it's all about priorities, isn't it? You and I have different priorities. My priority is additional learning needs for children. Yours is to have a Welsh broadcasting authority. You've every right to have those different priorities, but do you understand why we have a different one?

I don't think we have different priorities, Mike; I think we share that priority of needing to spend more on additional learning needs. We were prepared and we voted for that in the supplementary budget. I don't think these are competing positions. We need to strike that note and work on the balances of where we can land this together. So, let's not polarise this in question No. 1 to me at the start of a budget process. Let's see if we can work together on this.

The Wales tourism investment fund, and other initiatives, invest almost £60 million directly in Wales. Many businesses receive non-domestic rates relief or they will benefit from the expanded lower multiplier from 2027 onwards, as I announced yesterday. We are also consulting on potential changes to the 182-day threshold for self-catering properties.

Cabinet Minister, yesterday's announcement of a 30 per cent cut in business rates for some of the smallest hospitality accommodation and leisure venues is certainly a welcome step forward. However, there is plenty more that the Welsh Government can do to support the tourism industry in Ceredigion Penfro, including reducing the devastating 182-day occupancy threshold for self-catering businesses. Now, I appreciate that the Welsh Government's consulting on this, but the consultation states that there will be a limit to the extent of any reduction in the threshold, arguing that a substantial decrease in the threshold could incentivise an oversupply of self-catering properties. In light of this, can you clarify what the Welsh Government considers to be the minimum viable occupancy threshold? And in the interests of transparency, will you commit to publishing the evidence underpinning that position, so that business owners can understand the parameters that the Welsh Government is considering in this important consultation?

Well, it's always been something that's been a topic of debate in this Senedd, and within Plaid Cymru too, in terms of what is that point where you're striking the balance in the housing market between the housing stock available for people to live in and also the housing stock available for the tourism and self-catering sector, and striking that balance, so that one doesn't have a negative impact on the other, getting that balance right, is important. And that is what we hope to deliver through consulting on this.

I've already had discussions with representatives of the self-catering sector, who, clearly, do believe that the balance is at a lower point than the 152 days in the consultation, and you perhaps feel the same. Now, I am open to having that discussion. I sense that the response to the consultation will demonstrate that the sector itself, and those within the sector, do believe that we need to go deeper than what's contained within the consultation, but the Government does want to strike the right balance. We don't want to create further problems for ourselves by setting this threshold too low. But I am eager that we reach a position where this system that impacts our housing sector, but also our self-catering and tourism sectors, reaches a point where it can be a permanent solution in this area. So, I'm open to discuss this with you too in terms of how we get the outcome to this consultation to reach a point that has majority support in this place.

Minister, what financial support will you prioritise to attract visitors to Ceredigion and Pembrokeshire outside of the summer months, so that tourism can sustain year-round jobs and give young people greater opportunities to work locally?

A year-round tourism economy is something that I definitely want to see, both for the constituency that we both represent, but also for Wales generally. I think we've seen significant progress on that over the last few years, but there is more to do still on that. We have our investment priorities, and looking at how we can attract tourists for an extended period of the year is part of the criteria in how we invest in that. Also, we need to make sure that the business rates system that we have, and other taxation aspects, are also ensuring that those businesses that support the hospitality sector are able to be all year round. There's no point having businesses that are only open for a particular part of the year. We need businesses that are open all year long, so that they can provide the opportunity for tourists to benefit, but also, what benefits tourists also benefits the communities they serve. So, I'm particularly hopeful that the positive sign that the Government was able to give yesterday for such a wide array of businesses that do support the tourism sector, of a 30 per cent reduction in business rates from next April, is a positive sign for the tourism sector generally that this Government backs it.

Diolch, Ddirprwy Lywydd. Last weekend, on BBC Politics Wales, you said you were, quote, 'quite shocked' by the financial pressures facing the Welsh Government and the reality of the Welsh budget when you came into the role of finance Minister. So, Minister, what specifically about the state of the Welsh finances came as a surprise to you after taking office?

There are two aspects to this; I've spoken, actually, twice on the politics show on both of them. One was the in-year challenges that the Welsh Government inherited as a result of the budget that was laid last year and passed last year. The pressures in particular from within the NHS are considerable, and they were considerably more than I expected them to be. They are a challenge within the financial year that I'm trying to manage as we speak. But also, in a world where—and we've heard it again today—the inflationary pressures in our wider society and economy mean that the budget next year, at the moment, is 0.7 per cent less in real terms, that is very challenging in the context of the wage inflation that is within our public services as well. So, those were two aspects that were particularly challenging for public services in Wales.

I don't understand how that was a shock when you became finance Minister, because it was already known that there would be a reduction, unless you just didn't do your research before becoming finance Minister.

Anyway, Plaid Cymru went into the Senedd election saying that their manifesto was fully costed. Given these shocks you now have, can you confirm to us that your manifesto would not be labelled 'fully costed' if you had the information you have today?

It was fully costed, but the job of work that we have to do as a Government, and I've alluded to it already, is the discipline now that Ministers have to face in allocating within their priorities how they marry the priorities that a governing party brings into Government with the day-to-day running of public services.

I spoke of the three components of the budget as I see them: the effective running of public services in Wales and how we fund those in the budget settlement that we have as a Senedd and Government; and then the priorities that the Plaid Cymru Government, as voted for by the people of Wales, bring into that; as well as then, of course, the ability that other political parties will want to influence that budget as a third component part of it. So, putting all of that together in one blended melting pot is what we're doing as we speak. Doing that at a time of more financial flexibility would have made it an easier and more constructive piece of work to undertake. It is going to be a challenging piece of work. As I've hopefully set out today, I hope that we're all up for that challenge as a Senedd together.

Thank you. You've spoken about cuts, but not taxes. However, actions speak louder than words. From April, the Welsh Government has introduced a higher business rates multiplier for larger premises. Is this the direction that you think this Government is going to go towards in dealing with the financial issues? Are you considering other tax rises, including income tax?

I accept that there is a higher ask of those businesses across the business rates portfolio that have the higher rateable values. The bit you didn't mention in your question was those up to 20,000 businesses that will benefit from lower taxes as a result of the announcement yesterday and the support for retail premises as well. I think the premise of your question is, though, that this is not just about how we allocate the public funding that's available to us, but how we also use our taxation system to ensure, yes, that we're using it to fund public services, because taxation is what enables public services to be run, but also how we get that balance right in terms of supporting our economy. All of those together, again, are part of the considerations when we need to think about where we strike this balance.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. I'm afraid that Cai Parry-Jones has been copying my homework, because I too was going to ask about your comments on Politics Wales. It came as a surprise to me too to hear of your shock in looking at the pressures facing the Welsh Government.

Cai has made reference to some of the commentary around the pressures facing Welsh Government in its next budget. The IFS, the Institute for Fiscal Studies, warned in the election campaign about the extremely challenging fiscal outlook facing the next Government, and yet your own party leader assured voters that Plaid Cymru had a fully costed programme for government. It does start to feel now like these were simply making promises without preparing for the consequences. I don't want to repeat Cai's question, so let me ask, therefore: if the Government faces a choice between funding its manifesto promises or making cuts to core public services and projects, how will it decide?

I think that that question is a truly interesting one, and is truly a question that faces us as a Government, who are in Government for the first time. We've inherited budgets that have been planned by other parties and previous Governments, although we as a party did support aspects of those budgets. It is true to say that we as a Government and Ministers within that Government are looking across all the Government budgets at present to see what's working effectively, what needs to change, and where there are cuts. By the way, you'll get to know this, I'm not a Minister for finance who is afraid to use the word 'cuts'. In some places, cuts are a good thing. In other places, they're not. But I'm not going to avoid using that term.

I'm not going to be one of those Ministers who avoids the term 'cuts' at all times and tries to say 'efficiencies' or other ways of describing it.

So, all of these factors are in the melting pot, as I see it, at this time. That overview of the whole budget of Government is currently a disciplined process that the Ministers are looking at, so that we reprioritise spend in terms of some of the priorities that Plaid Cymru has brought in to Government, but also that we look to see which budget areas are properly delivering the outcomes that another Member spoke of earlier. Because we really have to look at where the outcomes are best achieved, rather than just looking at headings on budget lines at all times.

Diolch, Weinidog. I'm sure you would concede that difficult budget decisions and cuts are rarely felt equally. Women, disabled people, minority ethnic communities, children and those already experiencing poverty are often placed most at risk when public spending is constrained. Under the previous Welsh Labour Government, there was the budget improvement and impact advisory group, bringing organisations representing those communities directly into the budget-setting process. We've now been told by equality stakeholders that the group has not met under this Plaid Cymru Welsh Government and they've had no assurance about its future.

Will you commit, Minister, to re-establish this group and also commit to meaningful engagement with equalities organisations when planning your budget, and not to simply consult once the major decisions have been made?

I am willing to commit to look at this issue. It's not an issue that I'm completely familiar with. I do see the value in it and I am aware that my fellow Ministers are very aware that the impact of any budgetary changes need to be assessed and need to be viewed through that lens you're talking about. We don't want to see the most disadvantaged or needy people suffering as a result of any budgetary changes. So, that's something we want to regard as a key factor in terms of how we undertake these budgetary assessments. So, I'll look specifically at the group that you just mentioned to see how we can progress that discussion with those experts.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Cabinet Minister, how do you ensure that taxpayers' money is not wasted?

Well, I think, by doing the job of work that I outlined just earlier. We're a new Government, we have a new lens and, hopefully, a new energy into wanting to make the best use of the Welsh pound and to make sure that we are outcomes led in how we take our financial decisions. I recognise that we have a particular opportunity to do that in our first annual budget, and therefore there is considerable impetus from me, and from my Cabinet colleague on effectiveness of Government delivery, to be looking at how we ensure that the budgets that we will put to this Senedd are as outcomes focused as they can be and, as I've spoken of already, that they're not just lines on a spreadsheet, but they're actually meaningful in terms of what they will be delivering.

Well, thank you for your response, Cabinet Minister. Last week, the Cabinet Minister for Enterprise, Connectivity and Energy released a written statement informing Members that the Welsh Government is going to write off £684,000 in unpaid rent owed by P.V. France Limited, a significant amount of taxpayers' money. There may be some specific reasons why that business went into difficulty, but what concerns me is how that debt of nearly £700,000 was allowed to reach such an extraordinary level in the first place. The Welsh Government, we understand, agreed to multiple payment plans, yet the arrears continued to build time after time. The company eventually entered administration, was dissolved, and now that money, nearly £700,000, seemingly cannot be recovered.

At a time when we're being told that the public finances are incredibly tight, as I'm sure they are, how can the Government justify allowing almost £700,000 of taxpayers' money to be lost in this way? And as the Minister responsible for holding those purse strings, how will you prevent this from happening again in the future?

Well, it concerns me too that that level of debt was allowed to accrue without the Government being able to monitor it in an effective way, and I'm aware from cases in the past, not particularly this one, that this can happen. Government is always about investing properly in economic development and in running public services. Sometimes, that investment needs to happen in a context where there is risk, and Ministers need to balance that risk. But making sure that we have the right financial controls in place in a risky situation or not—. We need to make sure that those financial control measures are in place, because £700,000 is, as you could describe, or I could describe, money that would have been better spent elsewhere.

Thank you. Within the Welsh Government, responsibility for local government lies with my colleague the Cabinet Minister for Local Government, Housing and Planning. Working with local government, we have delivered our 100-day commitment to commission a review of the local government funding formula.

Thank you for that answer, Cabinet Minister. In the wake of the announcement that the Welsh Government was going to review the local government funding formula, I know that you and the local government Minister received a letter from the leader of Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council, and this firmly made the case that any review should not have a detrimental impact upon that council or the residents and communities that it serves. So, Cabinet Minister, I'm seeking similar assurances today that any review won't negatively affect either Merthyr Tydfil council or Rhondda Cynon Taf County Borough Council in view of the demographic challenges specifically that they face, and also that all councils will be fully involved in the process as it develops.

Yes, I can certainly give you the complete confidence that local government is a key partner in the work that we're doing on this review through its existing mechanisms, so that we do look properly at all aspects of work that need to feature in a review of this nature. And that does reflect on, and needs to reflect on, the patterns of need that we have throughout our communities and also the costs of delivering services across communities as well. So, it is a joint piece of work. I see it as a joint piece of work with local government. We want to be, as you were previously, a Government in partnership—working in partnership with local government. They are key to the delivery of public services in Wales. They're not key to it, they do it—they do the delivery of public services in Wales, and we need to make sure that they are funded in a way that enables that work to happen as effectively as possible in every community in Wales.

Minister, Plaid's inability to pass the budget has left councils in limbo. Local authorities needs as much time as possible to budget for the upcoming financial year. Audit Wales said that the Welsh Government's handling of restricted grants makes it hard for councils to plan. Audit Wales also found that £1.5 billion was allocated to councils in March 2025—the final month of the 2024-25 financial year. That represents 20 per cent of the annual total of this funding grant. So, Minister, what is the Welsh Government doing to give councils more certainty when setting their budgets, instead of leaving it to the last minute?

I agree 100 per cent with the need for us to be able to present a budget and to pass a budget in this place in as early as possible a way in order to provide that security and that lead-in time for planning and effective delivery of services by local authorities. We have a UK Government budget that happens at the end of October, and we are hoping to be able to pass a Senedd budget in the early part of January or February next year. I'm not going to miss the opportunity to say that the best way of giving certainty to local authorities, NHS, public services, public bodies, businesses in Wales, is that we can find a way of ensuring that a budget in this place has a majority to enable it to pass. Anything that stifles that process over the next few weeks and months will ultimately end in local authorities in Wales not having the ability to pass their own budgets in time.

I thank the Member for asking the question. The numerous small grants that are allocated to local authorities from year to year create real challenges in terms of advanced planning. By reforming the revenue support grant to make it fairer and more transparent, we can ensure that more money reaches front-line services. Now, I'm sure the Minister doesn't want to make any assumptions about any review, but does the Minister believe that simplifying the way that local government is funded could improve the current situation?

Well, yes, I think those points are valuable for local authorities as they think about funding those programmes and services that they deliver. And it's that lens that we want to apply as to how the local government settlement could work more effectively, but also how the funding model could work more comprehensively too.

Providing that freedom to local government to decide on their own priorities is part of devolution within Wales of course, and, therefore, if we can deliver what we want to achieve by empowering local government to lead on how to develop and deliver services in their own areas, then we as a Government would be very pleased to hear of any ideas coming from local government, and coming from this Senedd, of course, so that we can ensure that the most effective package of funding is provided to local government, because, as I've said already, they deliver services, and they need those tools and those powers to do that effectively.

I'm aware of the extensive impacts of the wildfires on commoners and farmers. And if appropriate, we will allow exemptions to planning conditions in order to help farmers that have been affected. Further consideration is given to how to support the resilience of the sector given the extensive pressures of this summer.

Thank you very much for that, Cabinet Minister. The affected commoners in my constituency have already incurred almost £50,000 in direct costs and loss of earnings, with a further £20,000 needed for replacement fodder, and estimates for restoration work reaching around £89,000. In total, costs now exceed well over £100,000, with some family farms questioning their long-term liability. I've already written to your colleague the Cabinet Minister for rural resilience, looking for more support. And he came back and said pretty well that there wouldn't be any additional money because it was implied that sheep could just simply graze somewhere else, which I don't think were his words, but somebody had written on his behalf. And I'm sure he will disagree with that. I took great concern at that, as did many of the farming unions. However, we need a longer term solution to these issues. And given the scale of these losses—and across Wales—and the reality that these extreme events are likely to happen more often in the future, are you, Cabinet Minister, having discussions with ministerial colleagues about establishing a dedicated emergency fund designed to support farming businesses with managing short-term crises and financial challenges—not just a one-off, but a long-term fund?

Thank you for the supplementary question, and I'm sure it must have been a terrible summer for those farmers and commoners in your area and elsewhere in Wales where they faced these fires with very real consequences on how they did their farming and livestock farming.

I have had discussions, and they continue, with the rural resilience Minister about the financial implications of both the direct fires and also such a difficult summer in terms of harvest and growing that the drought led to here in Wales. So, we'll continue those discussions. I'll discuss that particular letter with him as well.

But also, to the point you make about the longer term implications of what we face as a country, as a world, in terms of the different challenges that have really struck home this year, I think, in a way, that we've seen bits of it in the past, over the past few years where we've had some intense periods of heat and wildfire consequences, but we've never seen it in such a sustained way over such a long period of time. And so, this asks questions of our sustainable farming scheme. Of course, we've made the long-term financial commitment, multi-year, of £1 billion on that scheme, but we do need to look at the content of that scheme, going forward, in order to meet some of the challenges that were discussed yesterday, actually, in this Senedd over how we manage our uplands and mountain areas in particular.

Minister, a fortnight ago, I attended the defence security and resilience conference in Newport, something rather naively described by opponents as an arms fair. It wasn't an arms fair. Resilience was a really key part of it, and some of these discussions we've had featured there highly in terms of flooding and wildfires. The First Minister yesterday quite rightly referred to resilience several times in his statement regarding the wildfires, and, indeed, we have a Cabinet member that has that word in the description. So, my question is, really: looking as to when these events occur in the future, and we do need to build into our land management more resilience—things like firebreaks and ponds, and so on—is the Minister prepared to talk about the financial impacts of the sustainable farming scheme, in particular, in terms of working into that scheme how we can build more resilience into our system so that we can prevent the extent of these fires in future?

Yes, I agree, and I'm sure this summer has brought it home to the Minister, just as much as it has to farmers, how we manage land. Farmers knew this already, by the way. They were telling Ministers, I think, over the years about how some of the changes in support schemes are having effects on our uplands. But this year has brought to the forefront how there is a very direct relationship with how we farm our uplands and what happens in those uplands, both in terms of wildlife and regeneration of wildlife, but also in how we manage the uplands both in order to prevent floods downstream and also to ensure that we have adequate measures for limiting wildfires in these excessive heat situations that we have.

We are facing and we are likely to have to plan for these events to become possibly even annual events. We know that our climate is changing, and we as a Government and as a Senedd need to own up to that fact and to take the measures that we need to in order to make Wales resilient in the nature of the climate change that we are seeing in our society.

Minister, as I mentioned to the First Minister yesterday, the devastating fire in Pantside clearly demonstrated how the risk of wildfires has changed. Homes there were destroyed and, frankly, we were very fortunate that no lives were lost. The firefighters that I've spoken to through the FBU are clear that these incidents are increasing in terms of scale, complexity and the resources required to respond to them. Therefore, alongside the support for commoners and farmers who have suffered losses, what assessment have you made of the wider financial implications of this summer's fires?

Thank you for that question and thank you for reminding us of those terrible scenes that we saw in Pantside in your own constituency, with the fires affecting that community showing that property and homes are also at risk in scenarios such as this. The Minister for local government has already agreed to open the emergency financial assistance scheme and, therefore, that is available for local authorities and fire authorities in order to assess the scale of additional expenditure that they faced during this summer, and how they can, if necessary, use that programme. We accept that the work that they did as firefighters and local authorities and local communities is extremely important for our communities, and we are grateful for that work done over the summer. Therefore, we are willing to look, along with the appropriate authorities, as to the funding of any moneys that they require. We will be working with them on that.

Yesterday, I was pleased to announce new non-domestic rates support for hospitality and leisure businesses, which are central to our ambition to regenerate town centres. From 1 April 2027 onwards, eligible businesses will benefit from a permanent 30 per cent reduction in their rates bills.

Thank you. I welcome the Cabinet Minister's announcement of a 30 per cent cut to business rates for hospitality and leisure businesses. This will be a vital lifeline to small hospitality and leisure businesses and has already been welcomed by businesses in Ceredigion Penfro. These small businesses play essential roles in our rural and coastal communities, protecting local jobs, strengthening local economies and building lasting prosperity. I'm happy to see that this announcement extends beyond just pubs, clubs and live music venues, like in England, to support visitor accommodation and leisure businesses like hotels, cinemas, theatres, museums and gyms. With this in mind, can the Minister explain what she anticipates now will be the practical impact of these measures for towns and high streets across Wales, as well as in our constituency of Ceredigion Penfro?

Thank you. I was nudged by the Deputy Presiding Officer to keep my answers shorter, so I'll make an effort to do that. I won't repeat what I said yesterday in the Senedd when we were discussing this rate reduction of 30 per cent. But I do hope that it achieves two things. I hope that it makes a real difference to these businesses that will benefit from this, and that they will feel that it will enable them to plan more effectively for the future because this is a permanent cut. But also I hope that it delivers a message of support from this Government, and this Senedd if everyone agrees to the regulations, that we are serious about seeing this sector being supported and benefiting and developing in those communities across Wales that will benefit—not just those in coastal areas in our constituency, but also those town centres and suburbia too in our cities, towns and post-industrial communities.

I appreciate this question may appear similar, on the face of it, to a similar question, but it is slightly different.

Within the Welsh Government, responsibility for local government lies with my colleague the Cabinet Minister for Local Government, Housing and Planning, but we are aware across the Government that there is financial pressure on local authorities as they deliver important public services.

Diolch. Cabinet Minister, councils across Wales are at breaking point. Council tax rises this year have already added around £104 on average to band D bills across Powys, Neath Port Talbot and indeed Swansea, yet people are still paying more whilst roads crumble and front-line services disappear too. And now we are losing our primary schools. Cradoc primary school, for instance, in a nearby village to me, has already closed. When a primary school is closed, it's ripping out the heart of our communities. And clearly, under this Plaid Government, more school closures are coming too. My main question is this: as you have now commissioned a review of the funding formula, including rurality and sparsity, will you now admit that the current system is failing, and will you guarantee fairer funding, so taxpayers aren't continually asked to pay more for less, while our communities lose their services and more children lose their primary schools too? Diolch.

I represent a rural community, and have done over the years, so I'm very familiar with the fact that there are many factors that are at play in designing and deciding on the future of rural schools. It is not just the availability of public funding. Rural communities and aspects within those rural communities are a challenge, especially when we think about the depopulation, especially of our younger population, from many of our rural communities. How we look across Government as to how we can support that, not just in terms of money, but in how we are designing support, housing and economic opportunity for our rural areas, is important.

The important piece of work that this Government has started, though, is how we design a local government formula that meets the complexity of needs that our local authorities have. You rightly identified two of them in rurality and sparsity and the difficulty and expensive nature of delivering services across rural and sparse areas. We had reference made earlier to other priorities as well in terms of socioeconomic deprivation. Making sure that we strike a better balance in how we can deliver services effectively to all our communities in Wales is the journey that this Government has commenced in this piece of work, and hopefully all of us can involve ourselves in that.

The outlook for the Welsh budget remains extremely challenging. The expectation is that resource funding will fall 0.7 per cent in real terms in 2027-28 and that capital budgets will decline over the next three years, in contrast to the average real-terms growth of 3.5 per cent per year seen since the start of the decade.

It's always interesting when you decide where you want to start something, because if you started in 2011, you'd have seen an entirely different figure. But let's not argue over that. Whilst every organisation believes it needs more money, fairness is important. What we know is that in devolved areas, Wales gets 20 per cent more than England for the same service. A commission led by Gerry Holtham calculated that Wales needs 15 per cent more than England for the same service. Wales has a Barnett floor set at that 15 per cent level. What evidence does the Minister have that the Holtham commission was wrong?

I don't dispute the Holtham commission. I don't dispute the point you made at the start that wherever you start your analysis of any data, you can assess that. I'm trying to think of how we think about public service delivery now in the post-COVID period. That's why I was identifying this decade only. But you and I were in Senedds of the past where those austerity years of public finance in Wales, under a different political regime at a UK level, were particularly difficult at that time as well. So, I'm not pitching one difficult time against another. We have faced many of them in this place. I actually go back long enough to remember a time of plenty as well in this place, but that was another decade, almost in another century.

On the point you make, though, about needing to properly now assess where we are in terms of fiscal equality and meeting the economic and social needs of Wales through the Barnett formula as it is currently, our view as a Government is that the Barnett formula needs review. My immediate view on that—and it's something that I shared with the previous finance Minister—is that the Barnett formula especially needs its operational aspects to be strengthened. So, we need greater transparency on the Barnett formula as it exists, as well as independent oversight of the Barnett formula, so that we never ever again have to deal with the fiasco as it was of the decision on HS2 and how that has underfunded us as a country. And on that, if not on any other issue, I hope that we can all unite.

On Saturday, I was pleased to attend the official launch of the Football Museum of Wales and Wrexham Museum. As a member for Fflint Wrecsam, it was a real pleasure to be part of such an important occasion for the area and to join with colleagues in seeing the Cabinet Minister cut the ribbon on the museum.

The launch was a fantastic opportunity to celebrate the heritage of Wrexham and the history of Welsh football, and to see the new galleries and the stories they have to tell. I'm sure many of us agree that football is such an important part of communities across Wales. It brings people together, sometimes drives them apart, but creates shared opportunities and is a huge part of our national identity. The Football Museum of Wales provides a fantastic opportunity to preserve that history and share it with future generations.

The Wrexham Museum also plays an important role in celebrating the city, its people and its heritage. I was particularly pleased to meet those involved in making these museums a reality and to see the pride and enthusiasm surrounding the launch. These museums have huge potential to attract visitors, support the local economy and showcase Wrexham to people from across Wales and beyond. I hope the Welsh Government will recognise that potential and continue to work with and support both museums as they establish themselves and grow. They are important cultural assets for Wrexham and for Wales and deserve every opportunity to succeed.

I would like to pay tribute to the work of the RSPCA during the summer hot weather and the work that they do to safeguard our pets and animals, especially dogs. Dogs can struggle badly in hot weather because they cool themselves mainly by panting, not sweating like humans. That means that even a warm day can become dangerous, especially for flat-faced breeds such as pugs and bulldogs, older dogs, overweight dogs and those with heart or breathing problems.

Owners should always make sure that dogs have constant access to fresh water, shade and a cool place to rest indoors or outside. Walks should be planned for the early morning or late evening when the ground and air are cooler. Hot pavements and asphalt can burn paws quickly, so it is wise to test the surface before going out. Dogs should never be left in a parked car, conservatory or other enclosed hot space, even for a few minutes, because temperatures can rise to fatal levels very fast. Grooming can also help in summer, but dogs should not usually be shaved without veterinary advice, as their coats can protect them from both sun and overheating.

It is also important to know the signs of heatstroke: heavy panting, drooling, weakness, vomiting, confusion and collapse, which are all warning signs that need urgent veterinary attention. If a dog seems overheated, move it to a cooler area, offer water and contact a vet immediately. The RSPCA in Wales deserves real praise for promoting practical, compassionate advice on dog welfare during hot weather. Its guidance is clear, accessible and focused on prevention, helping owners to understand simple but life-saving steps. By raising awareness about heatstroke, hot cars and safe summer care, the RSPCA continues to play an important role in protecting dogs across Wales.

Sir Billy Boston, who passed away last month at the age of 92, was one of rugby league's greatest ever players, an inspiration from Butetown in Cardiff, and I'm sure the whole Chamber will want to share our condolences with the Boston family.

Born on Angelina Street, just a stone's throw from this building, he first played rugby for Cardiff Internationals Athletic Club, and it's great to see the CIACs still going to this day. Billy dreamed of representing Cardiff and Wales through rugby union, yet despite his talent, he was overlooked by his hometown club and nation. As my predecessor Vaughan Gething said,

'It's hard to believe this was simply down to a scouting system failure and nothing to do with the colour of his skin.'

After being spotted during national service, he joined Wigan rugby league where he became a sporting legend. His remarkable achievements for Wigan, Great Britain and the game itself secured his place amongst rugby league's all-time greats. Last year, he became the first rugby league player to be knighted. Last week, Wigan renamed their central square in his honour.

I was immensely proud to work with members of the Butetown community, sports figures and local businesspeople to secure a lasting tribute to Billy and the other code breakers from Cardiff in the statue that was unveiled in Cardiff Bay. We were particularly delighted that we were able to achieve that during Billy's lifetime and have him there with us as we unveiled the statue to him, Clive Sullivan and Gus Risman, a fitting tribute to all the code breakers achieved and all they overcame. Rest in peace, Sir Billy Boston.

My daughter had a family that would have done anything for her. For a long time, she did not ask us; she was ashamed. The shame belonged entirely to the man who harmed her, but knowing that as a parent does not mean that you can make your child feel it as well. Abusers use shame to silence people. Fear and manipulation make asking for help impossible. She had somewhere to turn, even when she could not bring herself to turn there. Ask yourselves what happens to a young person who feels that she has nowhere.

And this is not only a question about historic abuse. On 3 August this year, five defendants were convicted at Caernarfon Crown Court of more than 40 offences, following a North Wales Police investigation. The case concerned the exploitation and abuse of three girls aged 14 to 16 in Rhyl and the surrounding areas between April 2022 and March 2024. Those young women deserve recognition for their courage. The officers who secured those convictions deserve the credit. But successful prosecutions must also prompt us to ask whether opportunities to protect children earlier were missed. We should establish the answer through evidence without prejudging the findings.

The independent inquiry into grooming gangs covers England and Wales. In the first investigations, they are Oldham, Bradford, Keighley and London. Further areas will be selected. No Welsh area is in that initial group, but that does not mean that Wales has been excluded. But families deserve clarity about how Welsh institutional failures will be examined.

There is another question that Ministers should pursue. In June, the National Crime Agency reported that Operation Beaconport had identified closed cases in eight police areas with potentially viable lines of inquiry. Forces were directed to reopen those cases to determine the next steps. So, what is the position in Wales? How many qualifying cases have our forces referred? Have Welsh cases been returned for further action? Ministers should seek that information and publish what can properly be disclosed whilst protecting survivors and investigations.

We must also be precise about this Chamber's responsibilities. Policing and criminal justice, as we know, are not devolved. However, health, education and social services are. This Senedd legislates and scrutinises spending in those areas. Welsh Ministers set safeguarding policies and must answer for their effectiveness. We cannot direct every criminal investigation. We can demand that services around a child recognise abuse, share concerns and act. We can insist that information is recorded consistently so repeated warnings are recognised. We can scrutinise whether survivors receive support through the process and after the verdict. The responsibilities are substantial and they must be exercised.

Investigators must also follow the evidence where it leads. I've heard the excuses before, when not to look, that the numbers in Wales are far lower than elsewhere and that most abuse here is committed by home-grown perpetrators. Both of these things may be true, but neither of them is an answer. A comparison of numbers is not a safeguarding policy. No child was ever protected by the observation that a different kind of offender is more common. And a victim hears that argument exactly the way that it is meant. She hears that her case was small, that she was a rounding error in somebody else's statistic. I'm not asking this Chamber to inflate the scale of anything, I'm asking for Members to stop using scale as a reason not to look. Baroness Casey's audit identified examples of organisations avoiding questions about ethnicity for fear of appearing racist or increasing community tensions. No offender's background, regardless of colour, should place them above scrutiny. The test is the individual, not the community he came from. The standard must be the same. Follow the evidence and protect the child.

Yesterday, in answering my colleague Claire Archibald, the Deputy Minister for Social Care, Mental Health and Women's Health spoke about the importance of women being heard and not ignored. I agree with her and I intend to hold her to that principle, because that principle must apply here too. The victims we're talking about today are often girls who are frightened, manipulated and ashamed, girls who may not have the confidence, the words or the power to insist that somebody listens. A girl of 14 is not yet a woman. She should not have to become one before her voice matters. And being heard cannot simply mean somebody listened. It must mean that concerns are recorded, the warning signs are recognised, that referrals are made, information is shared and, when the evidence demands it, that action follows, because a child should not have to keep telling adults that something is wrong until somebody finally believes her.

That is what being heard must mean in safeguarding, and that is the standard to which I intend to hold this Government. So, I ask Ministers for three things. First, publish the substantive correspondence with the Home Office and the inquiry, with necessary protections for confidential information. Let this Chamber see what has been requested and what remains unresolved. Secondly, bring together evidence from safeguarding boards, police and survivors, and make a formal case for examining Welsh institutional failures. Thirdly, if those failures are not adequately examined by the national inquiry, will Ministers establish a Wales-specific statutory inquiry into devolved services? Welsh families deserve a clear answer.

Members of the Chamber, I cannot give my daughter back those three years, nobody here can, but every Member can bring the same seriousness to another family's child that they would bring to their own. The next child in Fishguard, Haverfordwest, Pembroke or anywhere here in Wales—before accepting assurance, think about the child waiting for someone to act. If this were a child you love, what answers would be good enough? Diolch yn fawr.

I formally move.

Diolch, Lywydd. I welcome the motion that's been tabled today by Reform, and I move the amendment tabled in the name of my colleague Paul Davies. I want to thank Paul Marr for the measured way in which he opened this debate and spoke so powerfully about his daughter's personal experience of sexual abuse.

This is an issue that should cut completely across party political barriers. We shouldn't shy away from discussing it, no matter how difficult it might be or how uncomfortable the subject matter is, because there should be no division amongst any of us in this Chamber when it comes to protecting children from rape and sexual exploitation. There shouldn't be any division when it comes to supporting victims who've been robbed of their innocence, and there should be no division on the need to investigate why authorities fail to protect some of the vulnerable children in our society from horrific abuse by paedophiles, no matter what the ethnicity of the perpetrators might be.

Now, grooming gang activity has been a serious problem in the UK, and that includes here in Wales. As many people will know, I first raised this matter here in this Senedd Chamber back in January of 2025, and I called at that time for the then First Minister to support a UK inquiry into grooming gangs. She didn't support one. So, I then called on her, as the First Minister of the Welsh Government, to establish a Wales-wide inquiry. She didn't support one. In response, I was told by the then First Minister that there was no widespread evidence of grooming gang activity here in Wales, and that I should substantiate the serious claims that I had made about brave Welsh victims who'd spoken about their experiences—young girls who'd already spoken out publicly about what had happened to them and the failure of the authorities to protect them; individuals like Emily Vaughn, recruited by a grooming gang here in Wales, trafficked to other parts of the UK. She'd spoken out about being strangled, threatened with a knife, the perpetrators of those crimes then threatening to conduct an arson attack on her home to harm members of her family. She was raped over a thousand times. She lost count of the number of men who abused her and her body. And it's not just Emily, that brave individual who has spoken powerfully about her experiences. As has been said, there's been evidence of exploitation by grooming gangs of children in Swansea, and there's been the recent series of convictions in Rhyl, my own constituency, a case on my own doorstep. Absolutely appalling abuse. Teenagers, young children in our communities given drugs, enticed and abused by men.

Now, the ongoing Operation Oak, of course, has led to some further arrests in Gwent, where there have been 34 offences that people have been charged with, including multiple counts of rapes. And let me tell you, it was speaking to Emily Vaughn and it was reading the accounts of victims that made me all the more determined to make sure that we do everything we can to ensure that these things are not happening in our communities. Every single one of us in this Chamber has a moral obligation to leave no stone unturned in trying to tackle these heinous crimes.

That is why I fully support the motion before the Chamber today. It's also why we have tabled an amendment to that motion, calling for the Welsh Government to conduct its own inquiry, for there to be an inquiry commissioned into the areas of devolved competence too. Because I'm afraid that, just like the COVID inquiry that we've seen at a UK level, we don't want Wales to be a footnote. We want to make sure that young children here can be assured that the protections are in place as far as our social service departments are concerned, those family departments are concerned, the community safety aspects, some of which are completely devolved to Wales and the Welsh Government—that every single one of those services is acting in unison and sharing information properly, to ensure that we protect vulnerable young children. That's the motivation behind the amendment that we have tabled.

And I would say this to the Deputy Minister today: I know that she shares our passion about wanting to protect children and particularly young girls from this horrific abuse. What I would urge you to do is to consider the response of your party to the UK COVID inquiry: you still called for a Wales-specific inquiry into COVID, to ensure that a proper spotlight was shone on the situation here in Wales. I would urge you as a Government to please do the same to protect these innocent victims in our country and to hold those perpetrators to account for their actions.

For many years now, I have tried at every opportunity to support and advocate for victims of sexual exploitation and grooming. It is something we should all take very seriously. Sexual grooming is something that, unfortunately, far too many of us have experienced during our formative years. Be it perpetrated by groups or by individuals, it's an insidious crime that leaves victims with a lifetime of shame, guilt and self-blame. That shame, of course, is not for the victims to carry. That shame should change sides.

Abusers are both clever and controlling. Grooming behaviours can be very hard to spot and perpetrators can be exceptionally skilled at hiding their motives. A high-profile investigation into a case of grooming in my constituency revealed that a victim, a schoolgirl, had Googled, 'Is this grooming?', as she tried to understand what was happening to her. Children should never have to rely on a search engine to protect them from the calculating behaviour of a ruthless abuser. That's why I'm so proud that Plaid Cymru has committed to helping children and young people recognise the signs of grooming through the relationships and sexuality education. This is one of the many reasons why RSE is so important. Every child and young person in school has equal access to a vital education that can help keep them safe. It can help them understand and recognise positive, healthy relationships, and, equally, it can alert them to the behaviour of an abuser.

Plaid Cymru stands with each and every victim and survivor of sexual abuse. If you were groomed by a family member, we stand with you. If you were groomed by a person in a position of trust, we stand with you. And if you were groomed by a group of abusers, we stand with you. Sexual abuse steals childhoods, it shatters futures, it pushes victims to the very edge of what they feel they can endure. But I'll tell you what sexual abuse isn't. It is not a political football, it is not clickbait content and it is not culture-war fodder. These are real children, real survivors and real lives, not pawns in someone else's cynical point-scoring game.

I look forward to supporting the actions that will be taken by this Government under the 10-year national strategy for preventing and responding to child sexual abuse, published earlier this year. I look forward to seeing our manifesto commitments at work, which include strengthening the voice of children within safeguarding arrangements and introducing a duty to report child sexual abuse. I look forward to supporting the work that will be done by this Government to strengthen RSE, which is a vital educational tool to help keep children safe. I look forward to seeing the results of the statutory independent inquiry into grooming gangs, and supporting this Government's response to any recommendations relating to Wales. I absolutely want to reinforce my support for the victims and survivors of the vile crimes of grooming gangs, as well as my support for all victims and survivors of grooming and sexual exploitation in Wales and beyond. Diolch.

The last time I stood in this Chamber to speak the uncomfortable truth about the safety of women and girls, Members walked out. So, a trigger warning before I begin. When I stood for election, I promised to stand unapologetically for the safety of women and girls. I intend to keep that promise, and I make no apology for that.

Before entering politics, I served in policing domestically and internationally and I saw first-hand the human reality of trafficking. Once you've seen what human beings are capable of doing to other human beings, you cannot unsee it. Once you have seen institutions from the inside, you develop a very low tolerance for institutional failure.

When the independent inquiry into grooming gangs was announced, I wrote to Baroness Longfield, because the previous independent inquiry into child sexual abuse examined Swansea as its only Welsh case study. I wanted reassurance that Wales would not once again become a footnote, as my colleague has previously said. I received her response. Well, I am not reassured.

Yes, this is a statutory inquiry, Wales is technically within its scope, and, yes, it can compel evidence and witnesses. Its terms of reference examine institutional failure and possible cover-ups. But there's still no guarantee of a dedicated investigation into Wales. I am told the inquiry will visit Wales, meet victims and survivors and establish an office here; Welsh areas may be considered for investigation later. But, Llywydd, an office in Wales is not an investigation of Wales. Listening to Welsh victims is not the same as investigating who failed them.

That matters because this Welsh Government has made integration and community cohesion central to its nation of sanctuary policy. It tells us that its approach helps people integrate with host communities and strengthens community cohesion. Fine. Then let us test that confidence against the evidence. Where evidence shows that culture, ethnicity and religion influenced offending, the targeting of victims, or an institution's willingness to intervene, we must examine it. The inquiry's own terms of reference expressly require those very questions to be examined. This is not prejudice. This is safeguarding. And after some of the comments made in the last 24 hours, perhaps that distinction needs stating particularly clearly.

We have been told that challenging the nation of sanctuary creates division, that Reform is interested in opposition and headlines, and that minorities must not be scapegoated or dehumanised. On one thing, I agree completely: nobody should be dehumanised. But neither should uncomfortable evidence be sanitised because examining it makes politicians uncomfortable. Asking whether children were sexually exploited is not scapegoating, and is most certainly not clickbait. Asking whether institutions failed them is not division, and examining culture, ethnicity or religion where the evidence warrants it is not dehumanising anyone. If scrutiny itself is now to be characterised as division, then institutional failure has found the safest hiding place here. If demanding answers for sexually exploited children generates headlines, perhaps we should ask why the failures did not generate enough headlines in the first place. Because we know the scenario, we know the cycle: reviews, inquiries, recommendations for lessons learned and then other reviews to learn why the lessons were not learnt. Victims deserve better than the carousel of institutional regret. So, my demand is straightforward: guarantee a dedicated Welsh local area investigation under the existing statutory inquiry with its full statutory powers. If that guarantee cannot be given, then Wales must have a dedicated statutory inquiry of its own. This is not duplication; it is accountability.

This Welsh Government tells us that nation of sanctuary policies strengthen integration and community cohesion. Then demonstrate your confidence in them: open the books, open the records and welcome the scrutiny. Plaid Cymru speak endlessly about Wales exercising the powers of a nation—then accept the responsibilities of one. Do not demand the powers of a nation whilst outsourcing the accountability of one, and do not tell Welsh victims that being somewhere within the scope of an England and Wales inquiry is good enough. It isn't. Wales must be investigated and, if others will not look, we will.

Can I start by expressing my thanks to Paul Marr for sharing his family's deeply personal experiences and for setting the tone for this debate so well? I will try and continue in that vein. Can I also thank the charity Action for Children for an incredibly helpful briefing that they shared in advance of this debate?

Let me be clear: child sexual exploitation is abhorrent. It destroys childhoods, damages families and leaves victims and survivors carrying the consequences for decades. Let me be clear again: whilst victims and survivors deserve justice, they deserve our support and they deserve the opportunity to have their experience heard. There can be no complacency. If women or children are being abused, we must know about it and we must act to stop it.

Wales is already within the scope of the statutory independent inquiry into grooming gangs. The published terms of reference state explicitly that the inquiry will cover England and Wales. So, the question is not whether Wales is included—Wales is included, and that is right. It must be the case that Welsh victims are heard. Where necessary, Welsh institutions must be held to account, and the inquiry's findings must lead to meaningful action. The amendment we're supporting puts victims and survivors first. It recognises that people need not only justice but support. It acknowledges the existing scope of the statutory inquiry that holds Welsh Government to account over their commitment to consider carefully any findings and recommendations relating to Wales, taking forward whatever action is necessary, and this place will hold them to account.

This is a sensitive issue. Whenever we discuss it, our focus must be on the experiences and concerns of victims. I don't think this is the place for political point-scoring, because, as Darren said, I think this is an issue on which there is broad consensus. Baroness Casey herself warned about the reluctance of some local areas to face up to the fact that victims had not been treated properly. We must not repeat that failure. We must confront institutional failings wherever they occurred, regardless of the organisation, location or individuals involved, no matter how uncomfortable that may be, and we should also recognise that Wales has already taken significant action.

The last Welsh Government legislated through the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014. That legislation places safeguarding duties on relevant agencies. Where an agency, including the police, probation services or another local authority, has reasonable cause to suspect that a child or an adult with care and support needs is at risk of abuse, neglect or other harm, there is a legal duty to inform the relevant local authority. But, of course, legislation alone is not enough. Duties must be understood, followed and properly monitored, and, where they have not been followed, there must be accountability. That is why we welcomed Baroness Casey's audit and remain committed to engaging fully with its recommendations.

We also recognise work already undertaken through the independent inquiry into child sexual abuse, chaired by Professor Alexis Jay. Organisations, including the Children's Commissioner for Wales and police and crime commissioners, have rightly emphasised the need to implement its recommendations. That work must continue. And the Welsh Government's 10-year strategy for preventing and responding to child sexual abuse in Wales, published in March this year, builds on that foundation. It covers all forms of child sexual abuse, including sexual exploitation, and sets out action on prevention, protection, effective responses and long-term support for adult victim survivors.

This issue cuts across devolved and reserved responsibilities. Safeguarding, social services, health and education are central Welsh responsibilities, whilst policing, prosecution, court, probation and prisons are reserved to the UK Government. That is why I support the approach currently being taken, and that approach must also be evidence led. A rise in convictions is important and must be understood, but convictions alone do not tell us the full scale or nature of abuse. We must collect and examine all relevant data, including data on the ethnicity of perpetrators. Abuse is abuse and must always be condemned. That does not mean stigmatising entire communities or allowing evidence to be replaced by assumptions.

Victims and survivors have waited too long for justice. They do not need an incorrect suggestion that Wales has been excluded from the inquiry. They need the inquiry to proceed urgently, transparently and with proper attention to Welsh cases. Thank you.

Can I start by thanking all of the Members who have shared their powerful stories so far in this debate, especially Paul? Thank you for your deeply moving contribution. The horrors perpetrated by grooming gangs have been seen first-hand in Clwyd, as mentioned by Darren and Paul already. Three teenage girls in Rhyl and the surrounding area were exploited and abused for nearly two years. The court has heard evidence of drug supply, attempts to obstruct justice, rape, sexual assault, child exploitation and modern-day slavery. Individuals aged between 14 and 16 were subjected to these horrific crimes in cars, residential addresses and at a business.

I must commend North Wales Police for catching these vile people. I'm sure the whole Chamber will join with me in condemning them, namely Sarah, Mustafa, Mohamed, Ziaullah and Jaswinder, for the evil that they have undertaken. Not only did they subject the victims to lifelong trauma by taking advantage of their vulnerabilities and seeking to manipulate and control them for their own gain, but by denying the charges, they forced them to relive their ordeal through a lengthy trial.

As the senior investigating officer at North Wales Police explained, and I quote:

'Rather than accepting responsibility for the appalling harm they caused, they forced these young women to endure the additional trauma of a lengthy trial, requiring them to relive their experiences in a courtroom.

'I hope today’s outcome sends a clear message that those who seek to groom and exploit vulnerable children will be relentlessly pursued.'

That is what is required and that is what is not happening here in Wales. Evidence of that is clear from the case that I've just mentioned. One of the individuals who was convicted of conspiracy to traffic and supply drugs was housed by the council in temporary housing, exposing him to other vulnerable people housed at that location and in nearby locations. The local authority's own risk assessment didn't flag any allegations. It didn't flag the police investigation or the arrest. That is alarming, Members. How many other people under investigation have been placed in inappropriate housing? There appears to have been a significant flaw in information sharing between the police and local authority in this case, likely meaning that the local authority inadvertently placed other people and children at risk.

As I made clear over the summer, the UK statutory independent inquiry into grooming gangs in its current form is not the best solution for children and victims in Wales. Whilst the inquiry is undertaking local investigations in Bradford and Keighley, Oldham and London, it doesn't have a single location here in Wales. That fact is incredible when you consider that addressing this evil in our society cannot just be done by the police alone. Instead, it requires a joined-up approach with so many other public services, including housing, local authorities, social services, the health service and our schools, all of which are devolved in Wales. As such, the experience of how these public sector bodies play their part in tackling grooming gangs could be fundamentally different in England than in Wales. Welsh victims and children deserve better. We need Wales's voice to be heard. Welsh victims need to be heard directly.

Members, I urge you to support this motion. It is only through such action that we will pursue grooming gangs relentlessly in Wales.

I too thank Paul Marr for the way he set this debate. That was really important. Because every victim of sexual exploitation, as we've heard, deserves justice. These are some of the most appalling crimes imaginable, and my heart—all of our hearts—goes out to everyone who has been a victim. And that is why this debate is so important.

The recent rise in convictions in Wales should serve as a reminder that this is not an issue that can simply be dismissed or something that happens elsewhere. Recent cases in Wales demonstrate that child sexual exploitation has occurred here in our communities, and that serious questions must continue to be asked about whether agencies always acted as they should have.

We welcome the UK Government's decision to establish a statutory independent inquiry into grooming gangs. It is an important step forward, and one that survivors have campaigned for over many years. But whilst that inquiry is welcome, it cannot be used as an excuse for inaction here in Wales.

Our amendment calls on the Welsh Government to commission a Wales-wide grooming gang inquiry into matters that fall within devolved competence. That is a reasonable request. Indeed, it's difficult to see how anyone could oppose it. Schools, social services, safeguarding arrangements, health services and local authorities are all devolved, as we've heard from previous speakers. If failures occurred within any of those systems, surely it's the responsibility of the Welsh Government and the Senedd to understand what happened, to learn from it, and to ensure that no child is ever failed in the same way again.

A Wales-wide inquiry would not duplicate the work of a UK inquiry; it would complement it by focusing specifically on Welsh institutions, Welsh services, Welsh safeguarding systems, and Welsh decision making. It would allow victims in Wales to have confidence that their experiences are being listened to and properly examined. Many survivors have spent years fighting to be heard. They have shown remarkable courage in speaking publicly about their experiences, and in demanding that institutions examine what went wrong. We owe it to them to pursue every avenue that can help uncover the truth and deliver meaningful change. If there were failures within devolved Welsh services, then those failures must be identified.

So, today, I urge Members from across the Chamber to support our amendment. We must send a clear message that, wherever these crimes occur, and whatever institutions may be involved, we will always put the pursuit of truth, justice and the protection of children first. Diolch.

There are some words and some subjects that are uncomfortable to discuss. There are words that our politicians and institutions would rather avoid—words like 'grooming gang'—and therein lies the problem. When the safety of children is at stake, discomfort cannot be an excuse for silence. So, in this debate, I want to speak about the organised sexual exploitation of children, which has commonly become known as the 'grooming gang scandal'.

These words should never be abstract. They are real, and there are real victims of it. Behind every report, every investigation, every statistic, is a child: a child who should have been protected; a child who should have been listened to; far too often, a child who was failed by the very institutions that were designed to keep them safe.

The independent inquiry into child sex abuse examined organised sexual exploitation across England and Wales. Wales was not absent from its findings, and in the new statutory inquiry, it does not automatically guarantee that a particular Welsh town or local authority will receive a full investigation.

In Swansea, the inquiry was initially told that there was no data suggesting sexual exploitation by networks of gang-related child abuse. In response to our freedom of information request in 2025, Gwent Police acknowledged that they only had the software available since 2017 to search the 6,683 sexual offences recorded, and they were not sure if ethnicity was recorded, and if it was, it would cost too much manpower and time to trawl through the data to search for grooming cases. Yet the inquiry found examples of exploitation by groups that should have been identified by the police. South Wales Police itself acknowledges the likelihood that organised criminal networks existed that had not been discovered. This is shameful. How do we protect our children from something that the authorities fail to identify? We cannot properly understand the threat if we refuse to collect the data to expose it.

The independent inquiry, therefore, made an extremely important recommendation: police forces and local authorities should collect specific information on known and suspected child sexual exploitation networks, including data on sex, ethnicity and disability of victims and perpetrators. And that is not prejudice, it's evidence. If patterns exist, we need to know about them. If particular vulnerabilities are being exploited, we need to know of them. Wherever offenders come from, their ethnicity, religion, background and status, the response should be exactly the same. Protect the child, investigate the crime, prosecute the offender for a long time, and do not let them out early. No excuses, no political sensitivities, no fear of embarrassment, and no institution protecting its reputation ahead of a vulnerable child. We value children above protecting the very systems that let them down.

And we should also remember something fundamental about grooming: children who are manipulated, coerced and exploited are the victims. They are not responsible for the crimes committed against them. A frightened teenager who has been groomed by adults does not need an institution finding reasons not to intervene. They need an adult to listen. They need professionals to recognise the warning signs, and they need the state to act. This means schools, social services, health professionals, local authorities and police sharing information effectively.

Let's narrow this down to Wales. So, where are the Welsh authorities targeted for investigation in the statutory review? So far, there aren't any. Are we to be pushed back again, not listening in Wales again? Are the victims ever going to get the justice that they deserve in Wales? In short, we want data accuracy; we want transparency; Welsh voices to be heard; and they must not be silenced ever again.

I wanted to address those who truly matter at the centre of this: the women and children who have survived group-based sexual exploitation. I want to speak to everyone who has been in a vulnerable position and let down by those in power who were meant to be there to protect them.

My mum was barely 15 when she went to her GP and told him she was pregnant. His only advice was, 'Go home and tell your parents.' She was alone, she was frightened, and she hid it. Her teachers watched and shook their heads as the gossip spread around school while she used a ribbon to extend her school skirt around her growing baby. And three weeks after turning 16, my mum gave birth, and that was the first time that she'd been properly cared for by those who should have protected her. Too often, girls like my mum are judged on their bad choices rather than seen as children who needed help. I want every survivor to know that I hear you, I see you, and I believe you. You deserve support, and you deserve justice.

Quite often, what we've heard in debates is Reform inciting fear in minority groups. What we want to do is focus on what we would do to improve lives in Wales. It's so important that that is our focus. We all wish to make sure that we treat women as equal in our society and equal in this Chamber. We wish to hear and listen to every voice.

Reform position themselves as 'outside of the establishment', which obscures its own role in maintaining the political culture where male violence flourishes. This culture starts with harmless banter and women being spoken over, but it can escalate into intimidation, harassment, abuse and sexual violence. Here in Wales, specialist violence against women, domestic abuse and sexual violence services have warned of rising demand and increasingly complex high-risk cases, reminding us that violence against women is not an abstract issue, but a daily reality for far too many.

The system is still, too often, failing to deliver justice and protection, and changing that should be our collective commitment. Safety is not a slogan, it's a priority. Group-based abusers do not respect borders. We've heard how survivors have been trafficked across the UK and into Wales and out of Wales, so it's vital that we hear from everybody who has been in our country. This ensures that perpetrators are held to account.

Plaid Cymru's amendment is the right course of action because it puts victims and survivors first. Rather than duplicating efforts with a separate inquiry, we can work within the existing statutory framework to focus on what actually makes a difference—delivering the actions of the national strategy for prevention and responding to child sexual abuse. This is how we ensure that women and girls get the justice and support that they deserve.

The victims of these appalling crimes and their families deserve the truth. I'll begin by paying tribute to my colleague Paul Marr for the powerful and courageous way in which he opened this debate. Every Member here present, and those that could not be, should imagine being the victim or the parent fighting for answers, only to be ignored or failed by the authorities that are meant to protect them.

Grooming gangs represent some of the most sickening organised criminality our country has witnessed. Unless we establish the full scale of what has happened and confront the failures that allowed it to happen, we cannot protect children going forward. Last year, the Welsh Government claimed there were no current widespread issues with grooming gangs in Wales. Let's have a look at the past 10 weeks alone.

On 10 July, Azad Ahmed and Wasee Shikel were imprisoned in Cardiff. On 15 July, eight men were charged across south Wales as part of Operation Oak. On 3 August, five people in Rhyl were convicted of grooming gang offences. That is why our motion calls on the UK Government to ensure that Wales is investigated at the earliest opportunity as part of the statutory independent inquiry into grooming gangs. Victims in Wales deserve the same truth, the same justice and the same accountability as victims elsewhere in the United Kingdom. Those cases demand answers. How can the Welsh Government confidently claim there is no widespread problem when serious gaps remain in the evidence?

Reports elsewhere in Britain have identified cases involving predominantly Pakistani-heritage Muslim men targeting white British girls. For years, legitimate questions about those patterns were avoided by the authorities, who seemed more concerned about causing offence than protecting children. We cannot allow political correctness or institutional cowardice to stand in the way of safeguarding.

If similar patterns exist in Wales, they must be exposed. Transparent data on offender ethnicity is essential to understanding the threat and preventing further abuse. The Welsh Government must also scrutinise every relevant policy, including its nation of sanctuary approach, to ensure proper safeguards prevent dangerous individuals from entering or remaining in our communities.

Will the Member take an intervention?

Go ahead.

Does the Reform UK Member agree that anyone found guilty of abuse towards women and girls, regardless of their skin colour, should face the full weight of the law?

An abuser is an abuser. Correct. Yes.

Compassion cannot mean naivety. Anyone who comes to this country must respect our laws, our culture, and the rights of women and girls. We need to know whether social services, police forces and local authorities failed in their duty of care, whether warning signs were ignored, and most importantly, what has changed. Victims have waited far too long. They deserve truth, justice and accountability, and this Senedd must not rest until they receive them.

That's the speech over, but I've got a few minutes, so I've got free reign, Llywydd, if you don't mind. Some of the voices here today have been brilliant, and they've got to the heart of the problem. We have an issue going on across our land, and we need to grasp that mantle and do whatever we need to do to ensure our future generations and our young children now are safe and kept safe. There have been some brilliant points made from across the parties. Beca, I agree with many of the points that you made. This should not be a political football; it's a shame you never got the memo.

Thank you, Llywydd. I'm grateful to all Members who have talked about their personal experiences this afternoon.

Thank you to all Members who've shared either their own experiences or family experiences. I would thank Paul for sharing the terrible—. Paul has gone out, but I will still put on the record the horrendous experience of his daughter, and the thoughts of everyone in the Chamber will of course be with her. I'm very grateful to him for sharing that.

This debate deals with some of the most serious harms, the most horrific harms a child can experience. Child sexual abuse and child sexual exploitation can have a profound and lifelong impact on every aspect of a person's life. These issues can affect education, relationships, employment, physical health, mental health and well-being of an individual well into adulthood. Those who commit these crimes must be held to account. All victims and survivors deserve justice and help.

Before I go further, Llywydd, I want to acknowledge the courage of victims and survivors whose experiences continue to shape our understanding of abuse and exploitation and drive improvements across our safeguarding systems. I am in awe of your bravery, and I am committed to ensuring that your voices are heard and that your experiences continue to drive change.

The motion before us notes the recent rise in convictions relating to sexual exploitation by grooming gangs in Wales and states that all Welsh victims deserve justice. On that principle, there should be no disagreement in this Chamber. I would counter that it is not enough. Justice usually means a moment in time where people who have done awful things are held to account. That is vitally important. But in and of itself, it is not a deliverance. Survivors need the right support at the right time throughout their life and more than just that moment. That is why our amendment has added that crucial component of support.

The Government amendment further recognises that Wales falls within the scope of the statutory independent inquiry into grooming gangs, which has been established on an England and Wales basis. This Government is committed to considering carefully any findings and recommendations relating to Wales, and to progressing any necessary action with the utmost urgency. The amendment also reaffirms this Government's commitment to addressing child sexual abuse through the national strategy for preventing and responding to child sexual abuse in Wales 2026-2036, published in March this year, including implementing actions set out in its delivery plan.

Vital work has been undertaken in this area, building on the foundations that were laid previously, and the Government is engaging proactively with the inquiry. I hear the concerns raised around the Chamber—I hear them. We are undertaking and continuing official engagement, but I also have a forthcoming meeting with Baroness Longfield, and I will be raising these points. The inquiry has begun announcing areas for local investigation, as we've heard, and we do expect further areas to be announced as its work progresses. Wales already falls within the scope of the statutory inquiry, which can undertake detailed local investigations where the evidence warrants it. Indeed, as I say, I will be reinforcing the need for Wales to be considered fully when I meet the Baroness.

In terms of the motion, there are things we needed to add, like that point I was making about the support as well as justice, and recognising what this Government is doing.

Participation in a wider England and Wales inquiry also provides an opportunity to identify the trends and patterns of abuse that do not respect national borders.

Learning lessons from this inquiry will be essential, but it's also very important that we respond to today's reality. The children who are at risk today can't wait for the conclusions of the inquiry. Alongside our work for the inquiry, we are doing a lot of work to strengthen safeguarding arrangements across Wales, and Members will hear more about that in the coming weeks. I look forward very much to bringing that forward.

The Welsh Conservatives have tabled an amendment calling for an all-Wales and separate inquiry for devolved issues. I understand the intention that is behind that proposal—I do understand that. It's important to clarify, as I've said, that the inquiry is for England and Wales, but Wales is a central part of its remit. The inquiry has the ability to conduct local investigations in Wales, and it recognises the responsibilities that are devolved and that are not devolved. You were talking about the COVID inquiry, and I think that's the big difference, because that related to the health service predominantly, and that comes under the Welsh Government's remit. That is the difference—[Interruption.] Darren wants to come in.

I'm very grateful to you for taking the intervention. There's a direct parallel here, isn't there? Your party stood alongside my party calling for a Wales-specific COVID inquiry, because even though the UK COVID inquiry was charged with investigating matters in Wales, we did not believe that it was going to pay sufficient regard to the decision-making processes in Wales and those devolved areas of competence. Exactly the same applies here.

You've already said that you've had communications with Baroness Longfield about the local inquiries. She has replied the same to me as she has to correspondence from others in this Chamber to say that there may be further future local inquiries where the evidence leads. We already know there have been problems in Wales, so the evidence is already there, and yet we've seen at the moment no local inquiries initiated.

Surely you must see the challenge in the argument that you present now versus the argument you presented when the COVID inquiry decisions were being made, because we know that there are safeguarding issues in health, in social care, in housing, in all sorts of areas of devolved competence that we need to make sure are properly examined. That's why I would urge you—really seriously urge you—just to consider the position on this, and not give an outright 'No'. Even if you say, 'We'll keep an open mind on this', I'd be grateful.

Llywydd, I hope you will keep in mind later that I did allow that lengthy intervention, which is, of course, something of fundamental importance here. The nuance here—and nuances are vitally important—is that the COVID inquiry, in terms of the focus of its attention, was going to be on devolved issues. A great deal of the focus here would be something outside of our control, and we want to make sure that this work is centred around not just the experiences of victims at the time, but the experiences of survivors today, and not re-traumatising them by duplicating work, which is why we don't want to—. But again, I fundamentally see the importance, the vital importance, that Wales is fully at the centre of this. It is a point that I will be reinforcing when I meet the Baroness.

If I can find where I was now.

Well, I will repeat, because this bears repetition, if I have already got to this point: child sexual exploitation does not stop at national borders. Understanding the full picture requires evidence to be examined across the range of agencies involved in safeguarding, education, health, policing and criminal justice too. Not all of those are, of course, devolved to us in Wales. What will, what must make children safer is acting on evidence, identifying risks earlier, strengthening safeguarding practice and ensuring that survivors receive the trauma-informed support that they need.

Now, the 'Strategy for Preventing and Responding to Child Sexual Abuse in Wales 2026-2036' explicitly includes action to prevent, identify and respond to group-based sexual exploitation, including grooming gangs. Together with its delivery plan, it sets out a clear ambition that all children in Wales should live free from the harm of child sexual abuse, and that everyone affected by abuse is protected and supported throughout their lives. That is the ambition. We must deliver it, because, collectively, we need to do more and do it better. That is on all of us.

We will need a whole-system approach, bringing public services, safeguarding partners, communities and survivors together. We will implement a national training framework, strengthen support for practitioners and survivors, and improve services across Wales.

In September alone, more than 400 professionals from all over Wales came together with partners and safeguarding experts to strengthen knowledge, improve practice and promote the implementation of the strategy. At the beginning of next year, an annual national awareness campaign will be launched to help people recognise the signs of abuse and to understand the steps that they can take.

Because safeguarding is everyone's business. Although policing and criminal justice remain reserved issues, we work closely with partners across public services to prevent harm, reduce crime and build safer communities across Wales. This work is also in line with our wider commitment to preventing violence, abuse and exploitation and to creating safer communities across Wales.

We will publish a new strategy on violence against women, domestic abuse and sexual violence during the summer of 2027.

Earlier this year, I shared my priorities with the Senedd. Strengthening safeguarding arrangements to protect children and adults who are at risk is still one of my main priorities. Children's voices must be central to safeguarding decisions, including where concerns exist but the child has not formally disclosed that.

We are committed to introducing new duties in terms of reporting child sexual abuse, strengthening safeguarding standards and ensuring that lessons from safeguarding concerns lead to improvements throughout Wales. During the next few weeks, Members will be able to hear more about how we intend to fulfil those commitments on the floor of the Senedd.

Llywydd, safeguarding is fundamental to the Wales we want to be. It will continue to be central to this Government's wider ambitions. The Government amendment recognises the seriousness, the terrible seriousness, of these crimes. It recognises that victims and survivors deserve justice and support. It recognises that Wales is within the scope of the statutory inquiry and it commits us—it commits us—to considering carefully any findings and recommendations relating to Wales, and progressing any necessary action.

But importantly, it also focuses on the actions needed to make children safer today. Recent cases we've seen in Wales demonstrate that the responsibility to improve safeguarding, to improve children's lives, begins now. That is why we're strengthening safeguarding arrangements across Wales. That is why safeguarding remains one of my central priorities as Deputy Minister. Because every child deserves to grow up safely. Every victim and survivor deserves to be heard, to be supported, to be treated with dignity. That is the Wales we want, a Wales where children are safer, where abuse is identified earlier, a Wales where survivors receive the support they need throughout their lives, a Wales where survivors receive what they need, where safeguarding arrangements are strong, are effective, are trusted. It is the Wales we must build together, and for those reasons, Llywydd, I ask Members to support the Government amendment.

Diolch, Lywydd. Can I start by thanking all Members who tried to contribute to the spirit of how we hoped today's debate would go? Paul, your bravery inspires us all. What you and your family went through, what you still go through, and to have the courage to walk in this Chamber today and share those experiences, to try to convince Members of the importance of voting for this motion, is a true inspiration to us all. Thank you so much.

Beca Brown, your contribution: I agreed with most of it until the political point-scoring decided to come out, but education is completely right. I agree with you. And there we can find common ground, but that's not enough. There are victims now who've already had these experiences, and what they want is to be heard, to be listened to, and their voices then can turn into action when people like us in this Chamber hear those experiences. There are people today in the gallery and watching this debate at home who are very keen on expressing their experiences in a safe environment, where it's not politicised, where they're listened to, and where action can be delivered. We can't undermine that.

Now, Darren, your motion today—on these benches, we do agree with you that Wales does need its own COVID inquiry, for the points made by several Members today. The reason we didn't include it in this motion is that we thought we could find consensus across the Chamber that there is currently an inquiry, which is called the England and Wales inquiry, which doesn't currently look at anywhere in this nation.

Now, Minister, I understand you said you're going to make the case for it, but I don't understand your amendment today. Can you imagine the power that we could have sent? You could have had a mandate from this very Chamber, uniting us. You would not have been walking in there as a Minister of a minority Government, you'd have walked through that door with a mandate from this Senedd that says, 'Wales should be included.' There should not be a policy here that we're going to learn from what's happening over in England. Is this now the policy of Plaid Cymru?

On Monday, you were sitting with separatists. Today, you're sitting here saying, 'For Wales, see England.' It's not right. Voices must be heard. And those victims have their own experiences—unique. And I'm sure across Wales they're just as unique in different areas. We couldn't pinpoint one area of Wales that has one experience. The contributions from Darren and Tom today, talking about their constituency—experiences there are horrific. But I'm sure it's unique to that area that has a right to be heard, just like Newport—different again. Let's encourage now together. Let's end this amendment. Let's vote together and give you a clear mandate. That's what these victims want, not point scoring. This isn't clickbait. My colleagues on these benches, like Cristiana, wrote herself to the Chair of the committee urging for this to happen; as Darren said, he's done too. We've written to the Home Secretary urging for Wales to be in there. We're looking to give you today the power to walk into that office with a mandate from this Chamber, this Senedd, the elected Members saying, 'Wales must be included.' So, I urge you to think again. Take this opportunity. Take this cross-party consensus. Let's stand up for the victims. Let's not be tribal in this. That's my offer to you today in voting with us for this motion.

It's so shocking that—. I've had letters back from the chair of this inquiry. How on earth can £65 million be allocated under the name of England and Wales and not one county at the moment looked at? Just the offer of 'maybe'—'maybe it could be'. That's unacceptable. Victims and survivors from other inquiries have said how important having their voices in those inquiries were, whether it's COVID, Hillsborough—the list goes on. Inquiries are an important part of recovery, and that's what we must start thinking about. Recovery—I'm glad Members have mentioned it today, and, Minister, I do agree with you—from mental health and physical trauma, and to those victims who have turned to, whether it's substance abuse, we must do better there to support them. And Sarah Rees, your contribution there, it was a really powerful one at the start. I'm sorry it went a little bit tribal then, but I'm glad you raised those issues, and thank you.

There is more that we must do—we know that in this Chamber. And there is a consensus here. So, when we go forward, looking to what's happening here, let's look at the victims, as Paul said, not as statistics, as human beings—someone's daughter or, in some cases, son, someone's child. That is the power of what we have in front of us today. Now, I know it's not legally binding, this motion in the Chamber, but it's a signal we can send, as a united Senedd, saying that victims across Wales will be and must be listened to, that there isn't anyone who can ignore them any longer, and any predator out there will know that this Senedd won't stand for it. Wales won't stand for it.

The £65 million is allocated by the UK Government. It's a strange scenario; the finance Minister here should be quite happy that Reform isn't asking her to spend any money from the Welsh budget today. We must be included in there, and I hope, when you do meet the chair of the inquiry and other members, that the case is made clearly. And we need to do it without anything else but seeking truth. I don't want anything else—slurs or racism or anything else. All I want in this—and where I agree with the Chair of the committee—is to follow the evidence. Let's empower the police to do what they must do. But we will be voting with the Conservatives on their amendment today, because I believe that there are other cases that we need to get to the bottom of in Wales, whichever layer of body that is.

Cristiana raised several points there that I think should be listened to, and she's raised this passionately time and time again. I hope, when we do leave this Chamber today, we can say that victims will not be ignored. I've heard it across the Chamber, but that isn't enough, us standing here saying it—me standing here saying it isn't. How we vote tonight is what matters. Action from this is what matters.

I heard a powerful story before this debate was tabled, by someone I'm going to call Jane. She's a survivor herself. She was ignored when she talked about her experiences. She was used as what she described as a sexual object, not a human being. From her experience, from what they were doing when they were drugging her—that addiction continued after. The way society labelled her, and what she was—as a drug addict, and a slur, Llywydd, that I will not say in the Chamber, but Members can imagine. Today she has found her way to speak out, to work for a charity helping other people. Her experience has helped more and more young women, women who have come to terms with being able to speak out, to come to terms with what happened and begin their recovery process. And she's watching now and I would like it on the record, which is why I'm saying it, her bravery and actions, and how she's turned a horrific, horrific crime that was made against her, into a positive and a better way of society should inspire us all. For me, it encouraged me to speak out today in this Chamber. And that's the power of speaking out. That's the power of one person speaking to me, to inspire me to speak out in this Chamber today. By letting those victims or survivors—however they wish to be referred to—into that inquiry to be heard is vital. It could inspire another generation, it could open up a lot of eyes into ways we've never considered, or maybe we've walked past blindly.

So, I urge Members, in closing today, to consider what the motion in front of them is. We're not trying to point score. We're not trying to politicise something. We have taken real experiences, listened to real voices and we're urging you today to send a clear signal to the chair of the inquiry: let Wales in. And if you vote to silence us today on that, we will be back, because these voices must be heard. Diolch yn fawr, Lywydd.

Formally.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. I move the amendment in the name of Paul Davies on the order paper today. I can see the Minister sitting on the Government bench. When this subject first came to this Chamber, you were on the opposition bench on this side of the Chamber, and colleagues of yours who represented the Cwm Taf area ranted at the then Labour health Minister for inaction and not doing anything to call this dispute to an end and put pressure on the health board.

Five months later, you're on the Government bench and you're not doing the work that your leader signed up to during the election campaign. We were out on the steps yesterday, and the health workers and their families were there, five months after this dispute started—not five weeks, when we were, back in March, in this Chamber, discussing this dispute. And the letter was signed in the election period, on 17 April. That's the letter, and your leader's signature is on the bottom in his capacity as leader. So, he signed for all your Members in this Chamber. And yet what do we have? We have health workers in the Cwm Taf health board still on strike, a health board not engaging and a Plaid Cymru Minister who fought a campaign that his leader signed up to bring it to an end. It does remind me of tuition fees and the Lib Dems, to be honest with you, in 2010. If you don't believe in something, you shouldn't sign up to it, Minister.

The argument here from the health workers is quite simple. They want to be recognised for their professional qualifications. This isn't saying, 'We want 10 per cent', this isn't saying, 'We want 5 per cent', this isn't saying, 'We want 3 per cent', this is the health workers saying that they want their professional qualifications recognised in the 'Agenda for Change' scheme at band 7 instead of band 6. It was done in Scotland in 2019, it can be done in Wales for this vital piece of the jigsaw that is the health family here in Wales. I call on you, Minister, to live up to the pledge that you made at the election, I call on you to live up to the pledges that your Members made in this Chamber back in March, and bring this dispute to an end. Recognise the dedication and commitment that those health workers and health visitors bring to the community of health workers that are so vital to our NHS, and instead of enjoying the power, exercise the responsibility, and use the responsibility that you have with the power that you have to get the health board round the table and get our key workers back to work so that families can be protected in the Cwm Taf health board area, and ultimately the professional qualifications that these dedicated workers have are recognised under the 'Agenda for Change' scheme and they get the band 7 banding that they deserve. Thank you.

Diolch, Lywydd. I formally move amendment 4.

We proposed our amendment as the original motion misses an important point, and that is the fundamental role that health visitors play in giving children the best start in life. So, I hope that Members across this Chamber will join us in supporting that amendment to recognise the role of those health visitors today. And for us, that cuts to the core of this matter and why it's so important that it's resolved. And it also echoes the views of those health visitors. They are desperate to get back to their important role, providing that universal safeguarding service, and that's in terms of infant development, perinatal mental health and picking up on those early warning signs when things go wrong.

Health visitors are often the first to identify additional learning needs and to have those crucial conversations about immunisation. Without health visitors, postnatal classes are not running in Cwm Taf Morgannwg and mental health support for parents is just not there. Indeed, since the dispute started, there should have been 23,000 routine appointments under the Healthy Child Wales programme across CTM, but only 900 have been provided. When health visitors are on strike, children and families are not getting the support they need. This must change.

Cabinet Minister, I know my colleague Sarah Murphy recently wrote to you about this, and in your reply you say that the Welsh Government does not have the powers to intervene and you cannot become involved in the dispute itself. That's not correct. Welsh Labour and Unite the Union believe Welsh Government needs to instruct CTM to pay health visitors at band 7, as determined by the independent pay evaluation process. [Interruption.] I haven't got long so I won't be able to, I'm sorry. Saying you urge parties to get back around the negotiating table is insufficient. There's nothing to negotiate on here. Band 7 pay has been determined by an independent pay evaluation process. And there are precedents too, as to how you could intervene. Vaughan Gething stepped in in Betsi Cadwaladr to resolve a shift pattern issue for nurses there; Eluned Morgan sacked non-executive members of the same health board when she wasn't happy with their work. So, we urge you to look at these precedents, listen to Unite and the health visitors they represent, use the powers you have under section 12 of the NHS Act, and not listen to those siren voices urging caution. Your immediate predecessor, Jeremy Miles, made a very clear instruction to CTM that they need to honour that job evaluation process. And as they've not done so, Cabinet Minister, you must step up. By saying you can't intervene, that it's not an issue for Government, you set a dangerous precedent for all NHS staff who come under 'Agenda for Change', from nurses to radiographers to porters to cleaners.

I've had so many e-mails from constituents about this issue. Many voted for your party, some perhaps swayed by the intervention of your party leader on this issue, not least in this letter referred to in the Conservative amendment. In that, your leader wrote, during the election campaign, that the current situation cannot be allowed to continue. He called for immediate action to bring this dispute to a close. Well, you are in power now, Cabinet Minister. The buck stops with you. We've all seen the open letter from Unite the Union deploring your Government's inaction. We in Welsh Labour have stood on the Senedd steps, alongside striking health visitors, each and every time they've demonstrated here, and we've seen their T-shirts bearing the slogan 'Plaid lied’, and heard that chant echo around our Parliament. The First Minister said the ongoing failure to reach a fair settlement is unacceptable—

—but now your Government's inaction is starting to look worse.

For many families, health visitors are a vital source of support during some of the most important and sometimes most difficult periods of their lives. This is highly skilled, highly responsible clinical work, and I am concerned that there are significant safeguarding risks posed by the fact that child and family health are not being prioritised by Cwm Taf Morgannwg University Health Board in some of the most deprived and vulnerable parts of Wales. The way in which the health visitors have been treated by the health board is utterly contemptible, and their recent social media post regarding the dispute is an example of the inflammatory and derogatory language they've used to describe the dispute.

Having met and spoken to the health visitors repeatedly throughout this dispute, I know that industrial action is not taken lightly. Strike action is a last resort—it always is. But, ultimately, responsibility for resolving this dispute lies with the health board. This is a dispute of its own making, and it is for the health board to engage meaningfully with its workforce and find a resolution, and that needs to happen now.

The Cabinet Minister for Health and Care has repeatedly urged the health board and Unite to come together to resolve this dispute and minimise the impact on babies, families and staff. There remains a clear commitment to encouraging positive partnership working at every level, and to seeing this dispute resolved through negotiation as soon as possible.

And I find it extraordinary that Reform has suddenly tried to position itself as the party of workers' rights. Where have they been until now? If Reform genuinely believe this issue is so important, they could have been listening to the workers themselves and hearing directly about their concerns from the start of this dispute. And I know for a fact that hasn't been the case. Little wonder, maybe, from a party whose boss wants to axe the Employment Rights Act 2025 and has little regard for equality, diversity and inclusion policies.

But I'll finish, Llywydd, by saying this: we stand firmly with our health visitors and we will continue to support them in this dispute. The message from us is clear: the health board must take responsibility for the situation it has created, engage meaningfully with its workforce and resolve this dispute.

In Rhondda and Ogmore, a health visitor is often the first to notice a baby not feeding, a mother not coping, a home not safe. I accept that the board is the employer and banding must follow NHS job evaluation—the Cabinet Minister cannot sign a payslip. But this dispute has outlasted three First Ministers, and the fourth signed the demand himself—a joint open letter, on 17 April, calling for band 7. Health visitors have now publicly called on him to honour that support. Unite said the board's grading matched the roles to band 7. The board says its revaluation contains band 6. Publish the date, job descriptions, evaluation, records, scores and review rights; explain the differences. That is where a fair offer starts.

Amendment 4 replaces a call for immediate action with recognition of negotiations and the Chief Nursing Officer for Wales's review. In August, the health unions refused to take part in that job description work. Their reason: social partnership has broken down.

My freedom of information request asked whether maternity staff were deployed into health visiting between 23 February and 4 August, when Tirion's suspension was announced. The board's 8 September response did not address that question. My 9 September follow-up requested an answer by 23 September.

Cabinet Minister, on 17 June, you told this Chamber you'd expect the parties to get back around the table. Three months later, what has your personal intervention achieved? What still prevents agreement? When will that review report? And what has this Government done in four months to act on the First Minister's own signature?

I ask for three commitments. First, within 14 days, publish the banding records and a resolution timetable naming who is accountable. Secondly, publish verified monthly figures for contacts due, completed and outstanding, alongside safeguarding referrals by council area and a recovery plan prioritising children at greatest risk. Thirdly, demonstrate that cover arrangements are safe, supervised and do not weaken other services. Families need to know when help will reach them. Staff need to know when their case will be decided. This Government needs to answer both. Diolch.

I have written and rewritten this contribution because I want to support health visitors as strongly and constructively as I can. I also want to make a declaration that I did work nationally for the NHS before coming into this post. Some are my constituents and all provide care, support and reassurance to families across the communities served by Cymru Taf Morgannwg University Health Board. At its heart, this dispute is about people: the health visitors who feel undervalued and unheard; the children and families who rely on their support; and the communities that depend on a strong, trusted and sustainable health visiting service.

The past few months have been deeply difficult. I know that decisions health visitors have faced have not been taken lightly. Some have contacted me directly, and I have spoken to others on the steps of the Senedd and followed what has been shared publicly. I have heard their frustration, I see the anger, and I recognise the pressure and the hurt this dispute has caused.

Nor is it lost on me that once again we find ourselves debating the value of highly skilled work carried out predominantly by women. Health visitors support new parents through some of the most challenging periods of their lives. They safeguard vulnerable children, identify concerns before they become crises, and provide vital reassurance when families need it most. That work deserves recognition and full respect.

As a first-time mother to twins during the pandemic, our health visitor was one of the very few people who met my children during the first half of the year they were born. At a time that was isolating and uncertain, she was an immense source of support, reassurance and practical guidance when we couldn't see many of our own family members. That experience showed me just how important health visiting services are. For many families, particularly those experiencing poverty, isolation and vulnerability, that early intervention and support can make a lifelong difference.

They are highly skilled professionals and that carries significant responsibility. They make difficult judgments every day and play a vital role in building strong and resilient communities, yet many see the value of that expertise not being fully recognised. I understand why this causes frustration. But these concerns are rooted in local circumstances and local decisions. A lasting resolution will come through meaningful negotiation, not an externally imposed settlement. Unite must continue to engage constructively and in good faith, but the primary responsibility for rebuilding trust and resolving this dispute rests with the health board.

Looking beyond the immediate dispute, we must remain open-minded about the future of health visiting services, including the case for progression to band 7 and band 8 nationally. But any such decision must be grounded in robust clinical evidence, and that is why I welcome the work commissioned by the chief nursing officer as an important first step. While this work continues, the priority must be a fair and durable resolution; one that recognises the value of health Ministers—sorry, 'health visitors'; it's been a long day—and that restores confidence for families. Diolch yn fawr.

Thank you, Llywydd. I welcome the opportunity to respond to this debate. I'll start by endorsing what has already been said about the vital role that health visitors have in supporting babies, children and families across Wales. Their work is often done with some of the most vulnerable families in our communities, and they make an invaluable contribution to improving outcomes and reducing inequality.

I also want to acknowledge the impact that this ongoing dispute has had on the health visitors themselves, on families who rely on their services and on colleagues working across the wider health and care system. I know that the decision to strike would not have been an easy decision for them. The Government understands the strength of feelings on this issue and the concern that has been expressed by Members across the Chamber.

However, it is important that this debate is based on facts. This dispute did not arise overnight. It predates the current Government and it's an issue that has been going on for several years. At the heart of the dispute is a disagreement between Unite and Cwm Taf Morgannwg University Health Board regarding the evaluation of the roles of health visitors and the appropriate pay band arrangements.

The Government amendment reflects the reality that this remains a local employment dispute between the health board as employer and Unite as the recognised trade union, and, as such, these matters must be resolved through the established employer, trade union and industrial relations processes.

That doesn't mean that the Welsh Government has been inactive. I've engaged directly with both Cwm Taf Morgannwg University Health Board and Unite since coming into Government and have repeatedly called on all parties to come together, engage constructively and work towards a resolution as quickly as possible. My focus has consistently been on minimising the impact on babies, families and staff, and from the outset I've placed clear expectations on Cwm Taf Morgannwg to bring forward credible solutions to this dispute. Andrew.

Thank you for that, Minister. One thing that seems to be disputed here is that, on the health board side, they seem to say that it hasn't been through an independent evaluation process, the banding from six to seven. The union says it has gone through an independent evaluation process that is recognised by the 'Agenda for Change' pay scale. Is it the Government's view that that independent evaluation process has been undertaken, and that the outcome—irrespective of the interpretation—is quite clear that these posts should be banded at band 7?

It's not up to me to decide on the process that the health board has taken. This is an issue for the health board to resolve. They created this situation, Unite are in dispute, and they now have to come together. That's the situation we're in. It's not up to me to resolve in that respect.

So, I have sought and received detailed assurances from the chair of the health board regarding the management of risks arising from the industrial action, including safeguarding arrangements and service resilience. The Welsh Government continues to keep the situation under close review and hold the health board robustly to account in this respect.

While we are as frustrated as anyone that this dispute is ongoing, it is also important to acknowledge recent developments that have taken place. In the space of a few months after coming into office, this Welsh Government's pressure on Cwm Taf resulted in the health board bringing forward a financial settlement to end the dispute. This represents a significant step change compared to the prolonged state of deadlock that existed prior to the election. While the offer was rejected, it shows how we are doing what we can to ensure that this impasse comes to an end. We fully respect Unite's decision to reject this offer, and unlike Reform, who want to tear up the hard-won rights of workers at the behest of their shady, unaccountable billionaire paymasters, we also fully respect the right of the health visitors to continue industrial action.

While the offer was ultimately rejected, I believe it represented an important step forward in the process of bringing this long-running dispute to a satisfactory conclusion. But this can only be achieved if both parties come around the table and talk. We continue to encourage both parties to engage constructively to achieve a resolution that supports children, families and staff. I would also urge both sides to engage in good faith on derogations and actions that could be taken during this dispute, so that critical services can still be provided during the period of industrial action.

Measures are also in place to mitigate the impact of the health visitors on strike. I've said it before and I'll say it again: nobody goes on strike for fun. It's not a decision that anyone takes lightly. Collective action demands their collective support, which is what Unite are doing in supporting their members during this period. And for that, I thank them for ensuring that the health visitors are supported during a difficult time.

As well as responding to the situation as it is, we must also consider the future of health visitor services. The Welsh Government remains fully committed to maintaining a secure and sustainable health visitor workforce across Wales. That's why the Chief Nursing Officer for Wales has commissioned work to review and consider the way in which health visitor services and wider arrangements for the workforce will be organised in the future, ensuring that they continue to meet the needs of children, families and communities in the years to come.

Llywydd, every single Member of this Senedd wants to see this dispute come to an end. We all want children and families to get the support that they need, and we want staff to feel that they are valued and supported. For those reasons, I encourage Members to support the Government's amendment that reflects the reality of the dispute and the steps that the Government has taken to encourage a solution, while continuing to protect services and support the future of the health visitor service in Wales. Thank you.

Diolch, Lywydd. And thank you very much, everyone, for taking part in the debate. It is great to see those people up in the gallery with us today, and thank you very much for coming to my office the other day. My tea-making skills can't be that bad because you are still with us, but thank you very much. I also want to pay tribute to you for the difficult choices that you have made to go out on strike. Often, it's not going to benefit you, but actually it will benefit the future workforce across Wales, and that is why people go on strike: it's not about the here and now. Because we have heard about the offers that have been made by the health board, but these people on strike are not interested in that; they're interested in long-term solutions to make that service sustainable into the future, and that's what this Government should be prioritising.

Our debate was opened by Ben—very well presented. He talked about how that collapse in service has happened right the way across the area as well. He also showed the Chamber that letter that was signed by the First Minister himself, making promises to those people across that part of the world, that 'We are going to make a difference.' Yet again, Plaid in action and Plaid in delivery are two very, very different things. He also said about how the current health Minister has gone 360 degrees from a letter that he sent, saying that Plaid would support them, that they would actually get this change in Government. I think I sat in a hustings with the health Minister where he said how disgraceful this was and how this needed to change. It seems to be that this hasn't actually changed at all.

Mr R.T. Davies stood up there and highlighted that this has happened in Scotland. It happened in 2007, and that the health Minister needs to step up and get on with it and actually make the changes that are necessary. This is something the Government are just dragging their heels over. They just need to move on and get it done, and Andrew did that in a way that only Andrew can.

And then we had Vikki coming to the same—. We will be supporting the Labour amendment today, because the points you raised about neonatal health are very important, about the 23,000 missed appointments and only 900 plus appointments being seen. There are a lot of people there not getting the support they need in their homes, and we need to make sure that is addressed. I will just quietly remind Vikki, though, that she and Ken Skates—who raised this in the Chamber at First Minister's questions—were in the Government when this pay dispute started. They could have done something much sooner than the dying days of the last Government, when they decided to send a letter to the health board to get this addressed, knowing full well that nothing would happen. But there we are. Hopefully you can put that to history now and move on and hopefully people will forget about it, but I don't think they will.

Sera, your passion came across very heavily during the debate, and I agree with you—the health board has been an absolute sham in the way that it has dealt with these people, the way they have talked to people, the press releases that have gone out, the social media content they've put out, demonising the people who are on strike because they're doing the right thing, and I think that is wrong. I hope that you can put that passion into supporting our motion today, because doing that will bring about the change we want to see. Hopefully you show the same passion towards the health Minister to see if you can get him to change his mind on this matter.

Steve, you asked for these commitments from the Government, and I hope the health minister was listening to that, because we need to see those commitments delivered. Too often, we ask Ministers the questions and they just push us to one side. They're not interested in what we've got to say. So hopefully he will answer what you've said. [Interruption.] You can intervene if you want, health Minister—you're chuntering away there from a sedentary position. I'm very happy to take an intervention.

Sara, thank you for your thoughtful contribution as well. I thought it was very powerful. As you said, these are hard decisions that these people have taken to go on strike. It's not something anybody wants to do. And there was your personal story of how health visitors helped you during the COVID-19 pandemic. I think that's one thing—they're a part of the health service that isn't really readily seen, but, actually, they do a huge job of going out and supporting people at the most vulnerable time of their lives. And it's those safeguarding referrals as well, making sure that if anything is being noted, they refer that to the appropriate agencies. That is something that gets missed, and that was something that was put in their job description, which, unfortunately, the health board don't seem to want to honour.

And then we move to the health Minister. I haven't really got much written down for you, health Minister, because I didn't think you said a great deal. You said this has been going on for years, but your amendment today is just passing the buck, isn't it? You have the power to intervene. We heard from Vikki Howells how Labour in their 27 years intervened twice, but they did intervene when they had to. We've seen the Minister send a letter to the health board, but why can't you do that? Why can't you get on and grasp the nettle and do it? We've had other people around this Chamber asking for you to do it. You've said all this in opposition: you were going to fix all the problems, it was going to be sorted, you were going to intervene. But you haven't done anything.

I do recognise that you did talk about the massive impact on babies and families. That needs to be addressed. But the only way to address that is actually getting on with the job that you're paid to do. It's intervening and making sure—[Interruption.] Yes, Llywydd, I can hear you coughing away. I will come to the conclusion very shortly. I've got two points I'd like to make and I'll be done.

You've promised as well to the health visitors that you would make a change. You promised them you would do this. You promised, the Cabinet Ministers promised, and the First Minister himself promised. You have lied to these people, and if you want to renege on the promises you made, you will suffer from that at future elections. People will not forgive when you lie to people, and hopefully this Government—[Interruption.] Yes, I will conclude now, Llywydd—

I withdraw that comment, but I don't think the people in the gallery will see it any differently. We will put this motion forward today and we hope that everybody across this Chamber supports our amendment, because we have to support our health visitors. We need to get this dispute done, and the sooner this Government gets on with it—[Interruption.] No, I don't need help from you, thank you, Mark. The sooner we get on with it, the better.

Thank you, Cai, for giving me a minute to speak. Twenty mph speed limits in Wales are uniquely unpopular with the people we represent, and they cost the economy millions of pounds a year. They were introduced to make roads safer, but we now have five years' worth of killed and seriously injured statistics for Wales from 2021 to 2025. Let me read them to you, bearing in mind that the 20 mph speed limit was introduced in September 2023: 2021, 1,011; 2022, 1,016; 2023, 1,126; 2024, 1,091; and 2025, 1,207. Like so many policies introduced by Labour and Plaid, it cost a fortune, it achieved the opposite of what was intended, and the people of Wales are paying the price. The public were right, Reform were right, Labour and Plaid were wrong.

The eastern bay link road shows exactly what happens when Government actually invests in road infrastructure. Fifty-seven million pounds was spent connecting Cardiff Bay directly to Rover Way. It improved connections, reduced journey times and helped to ease congestion. But the job was never finished. Rover Way remains a single-carriageway road, carrying significant traffic and freight, while the wider eastern bay link was never completed. When further improvements were considered, the priority was not encouraging capacity, but avoiding measures that might encourage greater car use. And that is the fundamental problem. For too long, Labour and Plaid Cymru's war on motorists has demonised everyday commuters rather than helped the very people they are trying to do to get to work, run businesses and support their families. Now, we see the same anti-driver thinking with the abandoned M4 relief road around Newport. Now, congestion is not inevitable; it's the consequence of political inaction and the wrong choices. South Wales desperately needs proper road infrastructure alongside better public transport. So, let's stop putting ideology before infrastructure, let's finish what we started, and let's get south Wales moving again. Diolch.

Thank you, Cai, for this opportunity to speak. I'm grateful that some of your colleagues have been brief, because I'm going to steal their time. Let me say this first: I love driving, I recognise that some people will always have to drive, and I want to see more roads built in Cardiff myself—namely, as you said, the eastern bay link. I've campaigned for that for over a decade now. But I also recognise the fact that if everyone in Cardiff who can drive did so, on top of the 100,000 drivers—some of them in this Chamber—who drive in every week day, no-one would get anywhere. Congestion already costs the city's economy over £100 million per year. We have to enable people to make alternative travel choices. So, why wouldn't we find ways to make walking and cycling safe, given the obesity crisis that the country is facing, let alone the climate one? Why wouldn't we build infrastructure to make buses faster and more reliable when 44 per cent of low-income households can't afford a car? And here's a plea to Plaid Cymru: can we match the £2 bus fare that Andy Burnham's introduced in England, please? Why wouldn't we want to build further on Welsh Labour's £1 billion investment into the south Wales metro, when the alternative is to see more vehicles drive into Cardiff from outside and polluting some of our poorest communities anywhere in Wales?

This all requires investment, and that's why I support the proposals put forward by Cardiff Council to introduce a workplace parking levy. My last visit as a council leader was to Nottingham, where we saw, having introduced a levy a decade ago, the infrastructure that levy has built, where we learnt how business has grown in that city as a result of that investment.

On 20 mph, I'll say two things—three things. Vast swathes of Cardiff were already 20 mph before the so-called 'blanket' introduction came into force. We, in Cardiff Labour, stood on a platform three times to introduce more 20 mph areas. We won three times. And when the council asked, consulted, on re-raising limits, there was not a single street where more than 10 residents living on it wanted their street to get faster. So, this is a good debate, but let's spend more time examining how we unlock the investment that we all acknowledge is needed to deliver the improvements that Cardiff needs. And if we can do that, then we can really get the economy of Wales moving. Thank you.

The economy of Wales moving, absolutely. We need the Cardiff and the wider Cardiff economy to surge, and we can't. It's not happening. We have a problem, and the biggest problem is Bristol. Let's look at some facts here. We have house prices in Bristol that are roughly a third higher than in Cardiff. We have average salaries in Bristol roughly 20 per cent higher than in Cardiff. In fact, I was quite surprised that it was only 20 per cent.

Cardiff has a congestion problem, but getting to Cardiff is an even bigger problem. We've only got to look over the border there and see what goes on in terms of the build around the M4 and the M5 and compare it over here, and there's not a lot, apart from some spots of Cardiff, such as not far from where we are now, where things are promising, but, in the main, we haven't built much this side of the bridge in over 25 years.

We've got to address car access. We've got to address the M4 relief road, and people like us are going to keep on about it, and we're going to keep on about it, because, until we sort that M4 out, there is a real limit to what we can achieve and what we should be achieving with the capital city of this country driving economic growth across south Wales and the whole of Wales.

Congestion in Cardiff is a real problem, and thank you, Cai, for raising this matter and giving me a minute to speak on it. It does not only affect motorists, but also public transport users and cyclists. Bus services are particularly susceptible to the effects of traffic congestion. Any delays can increase operating costs and lead to higher fares.

Congestion is a space-efficiency problem. We need to encourage the use of public transport, walking and cycling, but we need to make them the most convenient option first. Some people wish they could use public transport, but it is not available to them. I was speaking to one of our cleaning staff in the Senedd, this same building. They start work at 6 a.m. in the morning. The availability of public transport across Cardiff at that time of the morning is nearly non-existent, yet they are expected to arrive on time and have to use a car to fulfil their work obligations. A car is the only safe way for them to travel, especially as we head into darker mornings and worse weather over the winter period. I can also relate this scenario to shift workers, such as in our hospitals. Similarly, we know that more people will choose to walk and cycle short distances within the city if they feel safe from traffic.

These are issues I know are a concern to people within my constituency and across Cardiff, but I strongly suspect that there are issues across Wales that are impacted by a range of service issues. Congestion is an issue, but we should take a holistic look across Wales and make sure we understand the problems to overcome, but also where we have opportunities to exploit. Thank you.

I think, from my perspective, far too often, the debate about congestion focuses on what happens when motorists reach Cardiff, rather than the inadequate infrastructure and limited alternatives they face in getting here. For example, the A470 through my constituency of Brycheiniog Tawe Nedd is a vital artery that connects rural communities and businesses with Cardiff and the wider south Wales economy. Yet, whilst Welsh Government has spent years trying to discourage people from driving, the reality on our roads has moved in the opposite direction. Welsh road traffic rose another 2.3 per cent last year, to what I think was an astounding figure here, which is almost 31 billion vehicle kilometres in Wales alone—just for one year. Now, the demand is clearly there, but the infrastructure clearly hasn't kept pace.

So—. I've noticed that the Cabinet Minister is in his seat there; I was wondering if he would agree that the Welsh Government has been far too slow to respond to this reality and that, instead of simply managing congestion and restricting motorists, we urgently need investment in our road capacity, including improvements to the A470, alongside better public transport, to get Wales moving again. Thank you.

Thank you, Llywydd. I'm pleased to have the opportunity to contribute to this debate today. Congestion is an issue that many people in Cardiff and the surrounding area will be interested in.

This debate starts with a very straightforward question: how do we make journeys better? The motion quite rightly focuses on motorists in Cardiff and the surrounding region, and I think we should take that seriously. I take that seriously. Congestion is one of those issues that almost everyone has experienced. It affects commuters travelling to work, businesses making deliveries, parents taking their children to school and people attending appointments. It can increase costs, reduce productivity and create frustration for those who simply want to get to where they need to be on time. But I think it is important that we are honest about the nature of the challenge.

Cardiff is a major centre for employment, public services and economic activity in the south-east of the country. It attracts significant numbers of people every day from surrounding areas and further afield. That success brings economic opportunities for Cardiff and the wider region, but it also places significant pressures on the transport network. Cars and roads remain a vital part of that network. Any serious transport strategy must recognise that reality. That is why the Welsh Government's approach is focusing on improving connectivity across the whole network.

For me, there are three realities we need to recognise. The first is that we need to make better use of the roads we already have. There are practical things that we can do: better management of incidents and roadworks, better information for drivers, making sure junctions and traffic signals operate as effectively as possible and understanding where the real constraints are so that we target investment where it can make a genuine difference. If there is a problem with a network, we should be prepared to tackle it. Roads matter. They carry people, goods, emergency services and businesses. They are not an optional extra in our transport system and we should not pretend that they are, and I don't pretend that they are.

But the second reality is that we cannot build our way out of congestion. There will always be a temptation to respond to congestion by adding more road capacity; we've heard a bit of that already. Sometimes that will be the right thing to do, but it is not automatically the right thing to do and we should be wary of assuming that more road space will, by itself, solve the problem. More road space can attract more traffic, and, if we respond to every increase in traffic with another road building project, we can find ourselves spending more and more without ever really getting ahead of the problem.

This is not an argument against investment. It is an argument for being disciplined about where we invest, what we are trying to achieve, and whether the evidence tells us that an intervention will actually work. And that matters particularly when public money is under pressure. We have choices to make and we need to be able to explain why we are making them.

The third reality is probably the most important. If we want to make life better for motorists, which we do, we also need to make sure that not every journey is made by car. That may sound counterintuitive, but it isn't. If someone can make the journey by train, bus, bike or on foot, there is one less vehicle competing for the same limited road space. So, public transport is not anti-motorist. It is one of the ways we help the people who need to drive.

That is why the south Wales metro matters. It means better, more reliable and more frequent rail services between the Valleys and Cardiff. It is why our £70 million investment in Cardiff Central, and the new tramway between Cardiff Central and Cardiff Bay, matters. It's also why bus reform matters, and it is why bus priority, better interchanges, active travel and better regional connections all matter. Because giving people a genuine alternative to the car isn't about telling them what to do. It is about giving them a choice. Frankly, people are much more likely to leave the car at home when the alternative is good enough to make them want to.

This is the standard we should be aiming at: a bus that turns up, a train that people can rely on, a safe route to walk or cycle, and interchanges that actually work. A transport system that feels like one system, rather than a series of disconnected services. That's the ambition of one network, one timetable and one ticket. It is why regional planning actually matters. Because Cardiff's congestion is not simply a Cardiff problem. People travelling to Cardiff every day from Caerphilly, the Vale, Newport, Rhondda Cynon Taf, Bristol, and across the wider region, they don't stop being commuters when they cross the council boundary, and they certainly don't care which organisation is responsible for that particular stretch of road they are sitting on. They just want the journey to work.

So, our planning needs to reflect how people live and travel. The south-east Wales corporate joint committee provides an important framework for doing that. Because the transport network is a system. If we only look at individual roads, individual modes or individual local authority boundaries, we risk missing how the system actually behaves and how a problem in one place can quickly create a problem elsewhere.

That brings me to demand management. Cardiff Council is exploring the potential for a workplace parking levy. I recognise this is controversial, but I don't think it helps to reduce the debate to whether a workplace parking levy is simply good or bad. The proper questions are: what problem are we trying to solve? What would the intervention achieve? Who would pay? Who would benefit? What alternatives would people have? The current position is clear. There are no plans for the Welsh Government to bring forward the secondary legislation that would be required to enable a workplace parking levy in Wales. But I don't think that means we should stop thinking about the wider question. Our roads are under pressure, and we need to be willing to have an honest conversation about how we manage that pressure.

If proposals come forward in future, they would need to be evidence led, properly assessed, fair, and subject to the appropriate consultation and statutory processes. There is a simple principle I would apply: demand management should never be about making lives harder for the sake of it. If we ask people to change how they travel, we need to give them something better to travel on. That means better public transport, better active travel, better regional connectivity, and a road network that is properly managed for the people who still need to use it.

So, what would actually improve the lives of motorists? I think the answer is practical. It means more reliable journeys, fewer avoidable delays, better management of roadworks and incidents, and smarter use of the roads we already have. It also means helping more people to walk, wheel and cycle shorter everyday journeys so that road space is available. It also means providing alternatives that are good enough to take pressure off the roads. None of this is anti-motorist. In fact, I would argue exactly the opposite. If we can get more people onto reliable buses and trains, we create more space on the roads for the people who need to drive. If we make short journeys easier to walk and cycle, we take pressure off the network; if we manage incidents, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

But we should also be wary of the easy answer. There is no silver bullet for congestion, there is no one road scheme, one bus scheme or one policy that will solve everything. The answer is to understand the problem properly and then use the right combination of interventions to tackle it. Sometimes that will mean making better use of the road network that we already have. Sometimes it will mean investment in infrastructure. Sometimes it will mean better transport, and sometimes it may mean managing demand.

The important thing is that we start with the problem, not the intervention, because improving the lives of motorists is not about promising that every journey will be congestion free. That is not realistic. It's about making the network more reliable, making better use of capacity and dealing with problems. Ultimately, this is about people's time. Time spent in traffic is time people don't get back. It's time that could be spent working, with family, caring, or simply getting on with life.

So, the test for us should be whether the decisions we take make those everyday journeys more reliable, more predictable and less frustrating. That means the Welsh Government and Cardiff Council—the Government are here to help—working together with our regional partners, looking at the network as a whole, rather than a collection of separate responsibilities. It means being prepared to tackle difficult problems, but also being honest about what different interventions can and cannot achieve.

And crucially, it involves putting evidence ahead of easy answers because, ultimately, people are not asking us to win an argument about cars, they are asking us to make their lives easier. They want to know that when they leave home in the morning, they have a reasonable chance of getting where they need to be on time. They want a transport system that works. This is the ambition we should share, and I think we do, for motorists, for passengers, for businesses and for communities across Cardiff and the wider region. Not transport policy for its own sake, but a transport system that works better for everyday lives.

We must work together to make transport more accessible and more reliable. This is important to drivers, passengers, businesses and communities. Thank you.